Structural Stability 2

Structural Stability 2
SOLUTION
Problem 1.1a
Investigate the stability behavior of this asymmetric spring – bar model
P
ks
450
Solution
P
 L sin 
L (1  cos )
Lc
os
45
450
0
 Determine Δ
2
  L sin  cos 45o  L(1  cos ) cos 45o  sin   cos  1
2
 The strain energy
2
1 1  2 
U  k s 2  k s  Lsin   cos  1
2 2  2 
1
 2
U  k s L2 sin   cos   2sin   cos   2
4

1 1
U  k s L2 1  sin 2  2sin   cos   1  k s L2 sin 2  2sin   cos   2
4 4
 The potential energy
V   P B   PL1  cos 
The total potential energy
1
1
  U  V  k s L2 sin 2  2sin   cos   2  PL1  cos 
4
 For equilibrium
d 1
 0  k s L2 2 cos 2  2cos  sin    PL sin   0 (1)
d 4
 Fundamental path θ =0
The (1) satisfies itself P  0 ~ 
 Postbuckling equilibrium path
1
P k s Lcos 2  cos  sin  
2 sin 
For small deformation
sin   
 0
cos  1
Thus,
1 1
P  Pcr  k s L1  1     k s L
2 2
 For stability
d 2 1
2
 k s L2  2 sin 2  sin   cos   PL cos
d 2
d 2 1 1
 k s L2
 2 sin 2  sin   cos    k s Lcos 2  cos  sin  L cos
d 2 2 2 sin 
d 2 1  1
2
 k s L2  2 sin 2  sin   cos  cos 2  cos  sin  cos 
d 2  2 sin  
Establish the table to investigate the stability of the system
2
 P d2/d2 State of
 (ksL) the structure
-90 1.000 -0.500 Unstable
-80 1.065 -0.249 Unstable
-70 1.090 -0.029 Unstable
-68.529 1.090 0.000 ???
-60 1.077 0.144 Stable
-50 1.033 0.259 Stable
-40 0.961 0.310 Stable
-30 0.866 0.299 Stable
-20 0.754 0.233 Stable
-10 0.630 0.127 Stable
0 0.500 0.000 Bifurcation point
10 0.370 -0.127 Unstable
20 0.246 -0.233 Unstable
30 0.134 -0.299 Unstable
40 0.039 -0.310 Unstable
50 -0.033 -0.259 Unstable
60 -0.077 -0.144 Unstable
68.529 -0.090 0.000 ???
70 -0.090 0.029 Stable
80 -0.065 0.249 Stable
90 0.000 0.500 Stable
From the table we can conclude that

0 0
 -90 ≤ θ < -68.5 : the structure is unstable
0
 -68.5 < θ < 0 : the structure is stable
0
 0 < θ < 68.5 : the structure is unstable
0 0
 -68.5 < θ ≤ 90 : the structure is stable
3
Load P vs Rotation 
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
Load P (k sL)
0.4
0.2
0.0
-90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10
-0.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
Rotation  (degree)
2 2
d  /d vs Rotation 
0.6
0.4
0.2
d2 /d 2
0.0
-90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
Rotation  (degree)
4
Problem 2
The system shown below is composed of 2 rigid bars and 2 rotational springs with the
same spring constant ks
(1) Determine the buckling models and buckling shapes of the system
(2) If you can add one extra spring with the same spring constant to the system, where
will you install the spring to maximize the critical load? Explain your decision.
P
L
B
Solution
P
2
1
(1)
1 1 2
U  k s12  k s  2  1 
2 2
V   PL  L cos 2  L  L cos1    PL2  cos1  cos 2 
1 1 2
  U  V  k s12  k s  2  1   PL2  cos1  cos 2 
2 2
5
 For equilibrium
 d
 d  0
 1

 d  0
 d 2
k s1  k s  2  1   PLsin 1   0

k s  2  1   PLsin  2   0
sin   
 0
cos  1
Thus,
k s1  k s  2  1   PL1   0

k s  2  1   PL 2   0
2k s  PL 1  k s 2  0

 k s1  k s  PL  2  0
The matrix form of the above two equations
2k s  PL  k s  1  0
 k    (1)
 s k s  PL  2  0
 Fundamental path θ1 = θ2 =0; P  0 ~ 

 Postbuckling equilibrium path
For non-trivial solution, we need
2k s  PL  ks
0
 ks k s  PL
 2k s  PL k s  PL   k s2  0
 2k s2  3PLk s  P 2 L2  k s2  0
 P 2 L2  3PLk s  k s2  0
3 5
P ks
2L
The smallest value of P will be the critical load
3  5  ks  k 
Pcr     0.382 s 
2 L L
6
Determine the buckling modes

 The first mode
3  5  ks 
P1   
2 L
For θ1 = 1, the from (1) we have
 3  5  ks  
 2k s    L 1  k s 2  0
 2 L 

1 5
2   1.618(rad )
2
 The second mode
3  5  ks 
P1   
2 L
For θ1 = 1, the from (1) we have
 3  5  ks  
 2k s    L 1  k s 2  0
 2 L 

1 5
2   0.618(rad )
2
The two buckling modes are as following
P P
L
 2  1.618 B  2  0.618 B
1  1
L
1  1
A A
The first mode The second mode
(2)
(a) Case 1: add one spring at point A
7
P P
L
L
2
ks ks
L
1
L
2k s
2k s

1 1 2
U  2k s12  k s  2  1 
2 2
V   P L  L cos 2  L  L cos1    PL2  cos1  cos 2 
1 1 2
  U  V  2k s12  k s  2  1   PL2  cos1  cos 2 
2 2
 For equilibrium
 d
 d  0
 1

 d  0
 d 2
2k s1  k s  2  1   PLsin 1   0

k s  2  1   PLsin  2   0
sin   
 0
cos  1
Thus,
2k s1  k s  2  1   PL1   0

k s  2  1   PL 2   0
3k s  PL 1  k s 2  0

 k s1  k s  PL  2  0
8

3k s  PL  k s  1  0
 k   
 s k s  PL   2  0

3k s  PL  ks
0
 ks k s  PL
 3k s  PL k s  PL   k s2  0
 3k s2  4 PLk s  P 2 L2  k s2  0
 P 2 L2  4 PLk s  2k s2  0
k

P 2 2 s
L

k k
 L

Pcr  2  2 s  0.58 s
L
(2)
(b) Case 2: add one spring at point B
P P
L
L
2
2k s 2k s
L
1
L
ks ks

1 1 2
U  k s12  2k s  2  1 
2 2
1 1 2
  U  V  k s12  2k s  2  1   PL2  cos1  cos 2 
2 2
9
 For equilibrium
 d
 d  0
 1

 d  0
 d 2
k s1  2k s  2  1   PLsin 1   0

2k s  2  1   PLsin  2   0
sin   
 0
cos  1
Thus,
k s1  2k s  2  1   PL1   0

2k s  2  1   PL 2   0
3k s  PL 1  2k s 2  0

 2k s1  2k s  PL  2  0
3k s  PL  2k s  1  0
  2k   
 s 2k s  PL   2  0

3k s  PL  2k s
0
 2k s 2k s  PL
 3k s  PL 2k s  PL   4k s2  0
 6k s2  5PLk s  P 2 L2  4k s2  0
 P 2 L2  5PLk s  2k s2  0
5  17 k s
P
2 L
5  17 k s k
Pcr   0.438 s (3)
2 L L
From (2) and (3) we can see that adding one extra spring with the same spring constant
at the hinge A will maximize the critical load
k
Pcr  0.438 s
L
10
DISCUSSION
Problem 2
We will investigate two cases as following
a) Case 1: k s1  nk s 2 (n≥1)
P P
B 2
ks2  ks
1
A
k s1  nk s

1 1 2
U  nk s12  k s  2  1 
2 2
1 1 2
  U  V  nk s12  k s  2  1   PL2  cos1  cos 2 
2 2
 For equilibrium
 d
 d  0
 1

 d  0
 d 2
nk s1  k s  2  1   PLsin 1   0

k s  2  1   PLsin  2   0
sin   
 0
cos  1
Thus,
11
nk s1  k s  2  1   PL1   0


k s  2  1   PL 2   0
(n  1) k s  PL1  k s 2  0

 k s1  k s  PL  2  0
(n  1)k s  PL  k s  1  0
  k k  PL     0
 s s  2   

(n  1) k s  PL  ks
0
 ks k s  PL
 (n  1) k s  PL k s  PL   k s2  0
 (n  1)k s2  (n  2) PLk s  P 2 L2  k s2  0
 P 2 L2  ( n  2) PLk s  nk s2  0
( n  2)  n 2  4 k s
P
2 L
( n  2)  n 2  4 k s
 Pcr 
2 L
b) Case 2: k s 2  nk s1 (n≥1)
P P
B 2
k s 2  nk s
1
A
k s1  k s

1 1 2
U  k s12  nk s  2  1 
2 2
12

1 1 2
  U  V  k s12  nk s  2  1   PL2  cos1  cos 2 
2 2
 For equilibrium
 d
 d  0
 1

 d  0
 d 2
k s1  nk s  2  1   PLsin 1   0

nk s  2  1   PLsin  2   0
sin   
 0
cos  1
Thus,
k s1  nk s  2  1   PL1   0

nk s  2  1   PL 2   0
(n  1) k s  PL1  nk s 2  0

 nk s1  nk s  PL  2  0
(n  1)k s  PL  nk s  1  0
   
  nk s nk s  PL   2  0

(n  1) k s  PL  nk s
0
 nk s nk s  PL
 (n  1) k s  PLnk s  PL   n 2 k s2  0
 (n  1)nk s2  (2n  1) PLk s  P 2 L2  n 2 k s2  0
 P 2 L2  (2n  1) PLk s  nk s2  0
( 2n  1)  4n 2  1 k s
P
2 L
13
( 2n  1)  4n 2  1 k s
 Pcr 
2 L
The dependence of Pcr on n for each case is expressed as follows
n ks1 = nks2 ks2 = nks1

Pcr (ks/L) Pcr (ks/L)
1 0.382 0.382
1.5 0.500 0.419
2 0.586 0.438
2.5 0.649 0.450
3 0.697 0.459
3.5 0.734 0.464
4 0.764 0.469
4.5 0.788 0.472
5 0.807 0.475
5.5 0.824 0.477
6 0.838 0.479
6.5 0.850 0.481
7 0.860 0.482
7.5 0.869 0.483
8 0.877 0.484
8.5 0.884 0.485
9 0.890 0.486
9.5 0.896 0.487
10 0.901 0.488
14
The Critical Load Pcr vs n for Case 1
Critical Load P cr (ks/L) 1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
n
The Critical Load Pcr vs n for Case 2
0.6
Critical Load P cr (ks/L)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
n
From the above graphs, we can see that: when we increase n, the value of the critical
load Pcr for case 1 goes up more quickly than for case 2. Therefore, to obtain the higher
critical load Pcr, increase of spring constant at node A (at hinge) is more effective than
at node B. In practices, if we need to have higher critical load Pcr, we should raise the
spring constant at hinge
15

Structural Stability 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Stability 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Stability 2

Establish the table to investigate the stability of the system

From the table we can conclude that

 Fundamental path θ1 = θ2 =0; P  0 ~ 

Determine the buckling modes

The first mode The second mode

 The strain energy

The matrix form of the above two equations

For non-trivial solution, we need

 The strain energy

For non-trivial solution, we need

 The strain energy

nk s1  k s  2  1   PL1   0

For non-trivial solution, we need

 The strain energy

 The potential energy

For non-trivial solution, we need

The dependence of Pcr on n for each case is expressed as follows

n ks1 = nks2 ks2 = nks1

The Critical Load Pcr vs n for Case 1

Critical Load P cr (ks/L) 1.0

The Critical Load Pcr vs n for Case 2

You might also like