Matrix Analysis of Structures 2Nd Edition Kassimali Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Matrix Analysis of Structures 2nd
Edition Kassimali Solutions Manual

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankdeal.com/dow
nload/matrix-analysis-of-structures-2nd-edition-kassimali-solutions-manual/
CHAPTER 6
6.1
NDOF = 3, NR = 6
 0 
{P} =  0 

 −900 k - in.
131
© 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
6.2
NDOF = 3, NR = 6
 0 
{P} =  −150 kN ⋅ m 

 0 
132
6.3
NDOF = 2 ; NR = 7
0 
P= 
0 
133
6.4
NDOF = 2 ; NR = 7
0 
P= 
0 
134
6.5
NDOF = 6, NR = 6
30 k 
 0 
 
 0 
{P} =  
 0 
 0 
 
 0 
135
6.6
NDOF = 4, NR = 5
{P} = {0}
136
6.7 E = 29,000 ksi , A = 10.3 in.2 , I = 510 in .4
Member 1: L = 240 in .
1244.6 0 0 −1244.6 0 0 
 12.839 1540.6 0 −12.839 1540.6 
 
246500 0 −1540.6 123250 
[ k ]1 =  1244.6 0 0 
 (symmetric) 12.839 −1540.6 
 
 246500 
FAb = FAe = 0
FSb = FSe = 20 k
40 (120 )
3
FM b = − FM e = = 1200 k - in.
( 240 )
2
 0 
 20 
 
 1200 
{Q f }1 =  0 
 
 20 
 
 −1200 
Member 2: L = 360 in.
829.72 0 0 −829.72 0 0 
 3.804 684.72 0 −3.804 684.72 

 164333 0 −684.72 82167 
[ k ]2 =
829.72 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 3.804 −684.72 
 
 164333 
FAb = FAe = 0
0.125 ( 360 )
FSb = FSe = = 22.5 k
2
0.125 ( 360 )
2
FM b = − FM e = = 1350 k - in.
12
 0 
 22.5 
 
 1350 
{Q } f = 
 0 
2
 22.5 
 
 −1350 
137
6.8 E = 200 (106 ) kN/m 2 , A = 0.013 m 2 , I = 762 (10−6 ) m 4 .
Member 1: L = 10 m.
 260000 0 0 −260000 0 0 
 1828.8 9144 0 −1828.8 9144 
 
60960 0 −9144 30480 
[ k ]1 =  260000 0 0 
 1828.8 −9144 
 ( symmetric ) 
 60960 
FAb = FAe = 0; FSb = FSe =

( −125) = −62.5 kN
2
( −125)( 5 )
3
FM b = − FM e = = −156.25 kN ⋅ m
(10 )
2
 0 
 −62.5 
 
 −156.25
{Q f }1 =  0 
 
 −62.5 
 
 156.25 
Member 2: L = 12 m.
216667 0 0 −216667 0 0 
 1058.3 6350 0 −1058.3 6350 
 
50800 0 −6350 25400 
[ k ]2 =
 216667 0 0 
 1058.3 −6350 
 ( symmetric ) 
 50800 
FAb = FAe = 0
24 (12 )
FSb = FSe = = 144 kN
2
24 (12 )
2
FM b = − FM e = = 288 kN ⋅ m
12
 0 
 144 
 
 288 
{Q } f = 
 0 
2
 144 
 
 −288 
138
6.9 E = 10,000 ksi; A = 8.84 in.2; I = 170 in.4
409.26 0 0 − 409.26 0 0 
 2.0243 218.62 0 − 2.0243 218.62 

 31,481 0 − 218.62 15,741 
k1 =  
 409.26 0 0 
 (symmetric) 2.0243 − 218.62
 
 31,481 
 0 
 27 
FAb = FAe = 0  
 972 
FSb = FSe = 27 k Qf1 =  
0.25(216)2  0 
FM b = −FSe = = 972 k - in.  27 
12  
− 972
491.11 0 0 − 491.11 0 0 
 3.4979 314.81 0 − 3.4979 314.81 

 37,778 0 − 314.81 18,889 
k2 =  
 491.11 0 0 
 (symmetric) 3.4979 − 314.81
 
 37,778 
1 3   − 4.5 
FAb = FAe = −  15 = −4.5 k  6 
2 5   
1 4   270 
FSb = FSe =  15 = 6 k Qf 2 = 
2 5   − 4.5 
FM b = −FSe =
( 4 )15(90)
5
3
= 270 k-in.
 6 
 
− 270
( 180 )2
139
6.10 E = 200(106 ) kN/m 2; A = 0.016 m 2 ; I = 1186(10−6 ) m 4
Member 1: L = 16 m
200,000 0 0 − 200,000 0 0 
 694.92 5,559.4 0 − 694.92 5,559.4 

 59,300 0 − 5,559.4 29,650 
k1 =  
 200,000 0 0 
 (symmetric) 694.92 − 5,559.4
 
 59,300 
Qf1 = 0
Member 2: L = 25 m
128,000 0 0 − 128,000 0 0 
 182.17 2,277.1 0 − 182.17 2,277.1 

 37,952 0 − 2,277.1 18,976 
k2 =  
 128,000 0 0 
 (symmetric) 182.17 − 2,277.1
 
 37,952 
5.6(25)  70 
FAb = FAe = = 70 kN  −240 
2  
19.2(25)  −1000 
FSb = FSe = − = −240 kN Qf 2 =  
2  70 
19.2(25)2  −240 
FM b = −FSe = = −1000 kN ⋅ m  
12  1000 
140
6.11 E = 4500 ksi.
Members 1 and 3: A = 80 in.2 , I = 550 in.4 , L = 240 in .
1500 0 0 −1500 0 0 
 2.1484 257.81 0 −2.1484 257.81 

 41250 0 −257.81 20625 
[ k ]1 = [ k ]3 =
1500 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 2.1484 −257.81
 
 41250 
{Q } = {Q } = {0}
f 1 f 3
Member 2: A = 108 in.2 , I = 1300 in.4 , L = 300 in.
1620 0 0 −1620 0 0 
 2.6 390 0 −2.6 390 

 78000 0 −390 39000 
[ k ]2 =
1620 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 2.6 −390 
 
 78000 
2 ( 25 )
FAb = FAe = 0; FSb = FSe = = 25k
2
2 ( 25 )
2
FM b = − FM e = = 104.17 k- ft = 1250 k- in .
12
 0 
 25 
 
 1250 
{Q } f = 
 0 
2
 25 
 
 −1250 
141
6.12 E = 10000 ksi.
Member 1: A = 10.3 in.2 , I = 285 in.4 , L = 268.33 in .
383.86 0 0 −383.86 0 0 
 1.7702 237.5 0 −1.7702 237.5 

 42485 0 −237.5 21243 
[ k ]1 =  383.86 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 1.7702 −237.5
 
 42485 
1 268.33
FAb = FAe = ( sin 63.435° ) = 10 k
12 2
1 268.33
FSb = FSe = ( cos63.435° ) = 5k
12 2
( 268.33) = 223.61 k - in.
2
1
FM b = − FM e = ( cos63.435° )
12 12
 10 
 5 
 
 223.61 
{Q f }1 =  10 
 
 5 
 
 −223.61
Member 2: A = 9.12in .2 , I = 375in.4 , L = 300 in.

304 0 0 −304 0  0
 1.6667 250 0 −1.6667 250 

 50000 0 −250 25000 
[ k ]2 =
304 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 1.6667 −250 
 
 50000 
FAb = FAe = 0
1 2
FSb =  7 ( 25 )  + 3 ( 25 )  = 16.25 k
20 20
3
FSe = ( 25 ) − 16.25 = 21.25 k
2
1( 25 ) 2 ( 25 )
FM b = 3 ( 25 )  +  2 ( 25 )  = 72.917 k -ft = 875 k - in.
60 60 
25
FM e = 1{−2 ( 25 )} − 2 ( 25 )  + 16.25 ( 25 ) − 72.917 = −83.333 k -ft = −1000 k - in.
6  
142
 0 
 16.25 
 
 875 
{Q } f = 
 0 
2
 21.25 
 
 −1000 
143
6.13
0 ≤ x ≤ l1 Qa = − FAb
l1 ≤ x ≤ L Qa = − FAb + W
1 L
EA 0
uxe = Qa dx
1  l1
− FAb dx +  ( − FAb + W ) dx 
L
=

EA  0 l1 
1
=  − FAb l1 + ( − FAb L + WL ) − ( − FAb l1 + Wl1 ) 
EA 
1 1
=  − FAb L + W ( L − l1 )  = ( −FAb L + Wl2 )
EA EA
By setting, uxe = 0 , we obtain
1
( −FAb L + Wl2 ) = 0
EA
Wl2
FAb =
L
By applying the equation of equilibrium F x = 0 to the free body of the member,
we obtain
Wl2
− W + FAe = 0
L
Wl1
FAe =
L
144
6.14 E = 70 (106 ) k N /m 2 , A = 0.00457 m 2 , I = 34.5 (10−6 ) m 4 .
Member 1: L = 10 m.
31990 0 0 −31990 0 0 
 28.98 144.9 0 −28.98 144.9 

 966 0 −144.9 483 
[ k ]1 =  31990 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 28.98 −144.9 
 
 966 
{Q } = {0}
f 1
167.97 kN 
 −17.636 kN 
 
 −58.196 kN ⋅ m 
{Q}1 = [ k ]1 {u}1 + {Q f }1 =  
 −167.97 kN 
17.636 kN 
 
 −118.17 kN ⋅ m 
Equilibrium Check:
+ ↑  Fx = 0 167.97 − 167.97 = 0 checks
←  Fy = 0 − 17.636 + 17.636 = 0 checks

+
M = 0 − 58.196 − 118.17 + 17.636 (10 ) = −0.006 ≈ 0 checks
Member 2: L = 13 m.
24608 0 0 −24608 0 0 
 13.191 85.74 0 −13.191 85.74 

 743.08 0 −85.74 371.54 
[ k ]2 =
24608 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 13.191 −85.74 
 
 743.08 
15 (13)
FAb = FAe = 0; FSb = FSe = = 97.5 kN
2
145
15 (13 )
2
FM b = − FM e = = 211.25 kN ⋅ m
12
 0   228.58 kN 
 97.5  86.728 kN 
   
 211.25  118.17 kN ⋅ m 
{Q } =  {Q}2 = [ k ]2 {u}2 + Q f  =  
 −228.58 kN 
f
 0 
2 2
 97.5  108.27 kN 
   
 −211.25  −258.2 kN ⋅ m 
Equilibrium Check:
+   Fx = 0 228.58 − 228.58 = 0 checks
+   Fy = 0 86.728 − 15 (13 ) + 108.27 ≈ 0 checks
M (2) = 0 118.17 − 15 (13)( 6.5 ) − 258.2 + 108.27 (13) ≈ 0 checks
146
6.15 E = 29,000 ksi , A = 10.3 in.2 , I = 285 in.4
 2489.2 0 0 −2489.2 0 0 
 57.396 3443.8 0 −57.396 3443.8 

 275500 0 −3443.8 137750 
[ k ]1 =  
 2489.2 0 0 
 ( symmetric ) 57.396 −3443.8
 
 275500 
FAb = FAe = 0; FSb = 14 k; FSe = 6 k;

FM b = 240 k - in.; FM e = −160 k - in.
 0  128.12 k 
 14   −78.786 k 
   
 240   −5875 k - in. 
{Q f }1 =  0  {Q}1 = [ k ]1 {u}1 + {Q f }1 =  
   −128.12 k 
 6   98.786 k 
   
 −160   −5179.3 k - in.
Equilibrium Check:
+ ↑  Fx = 0 128.12 − 128.12 = 0 checks
+ 1
←  Fy = 0 − 78.786 − ( 0.33333)(120 ) + 98.786 = 0 checks
2
1
M  = 0 − 5875 −
2
( 0.33333)(120 )( 40 )
− 5179.3 + 98.786 (120 ) = 0.02 ≈ 0 checks
1914.7 0 0 −1914.7 0 0 
 26.125 2037.7 0 −26.125 2037.7 

 211923 0 −2037.7 105962 
[ k ]2 = 
 1914.7 0 0 
 ( Symmetric ) 26.125 −2037.7 
 
 211923 
FAb = FAe = −14.423k; FSb = FSe = −34.615k
FM b = − FMe = −1350 k - in.
147
 −14.423 111.62 k 
 −34.615 11.038 k 
   
 −1350  1942.5 k - in. 
{Q } =  {Q}2 = [ k ]2 {u}2 + {Q f }2 = 
 −14.423  −140.46 k 
f 2
 −34.615  −80.268 k 
   
 1350   5179.3 k - in.
Equilibrium Check:
+   Fx = 0 − 140.46 + 28.846 + 111.62 ≈ 0 checks
+   Fy = 0 − 80.268 + 69.231 + 11.038 ≈ 0 checks
 M = 0 5179.3 − 69.231( 78 ) + 1942.5 − 11.038 (156 ) ≈ 0 checks
Member 3: L = 204in .
1464.2 0 0 −1464.2 0 0 
 11.682 1191.6 0 −11.682 1191.6 
 
 162059 0 −1191.6 81029 
[ k ]3 =  
 1464.2 0 0 
 (Symmetric ) 11.682 −1191.6 
 
 162059 
{Q } = {0}
f 3
 −70.97 k 
 −20.192 k 
 
 −2176.6 k - in.
{Q}3 = [ k ]3 {u}3 = 
70.97 k 
20.192 k 
 
 −1942.5 k - in. 
Equilibrium Check:
+   Fx = 0 − 70.97 + 70.97 = 0 checks
+   Fy = 0 − 20.192 + 20.192 = 0 checks
 M = 0 − 2176.6 − 1942.5 + 20.192 ( 204 ) ≈ 0 checks
148
6.16 Member 1: cosθ = 0, sin θ = 1
 0 1 0 0 0 0
 −1 0 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]1 =  
 0 0 0 0 1 0
 0 0 0 −1 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1
Member 2: cosθ = 1, sin θ = 0
[T ]2 = [ I ]
149
6.17 Member 1: cosθ = −0.6, sin θ = 0.8
 −0.6 0.8 0 0 0 0
 −0.8 −0.6 0 0 0  0

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]1 =  
 0 0 0 −0.6 0.8 0 
 0 0 0 −0.8 −0.6 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
[T ]2 = [ I ]
150
6.18 Member 1: cosθ = 1, sinθ = 0
T1 = I
Member 2: cosθ = 0.8, sinθ = −0.6
 0.8 −0.6 0 0 0 0
 0.6 0.8 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
T2 =  
 0 0 0 0.8 −0.6 0 
 0 0 0 0.6 0.8 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
151
6.19 Member 1: cosθ = 0, sinθ = 1
 0 1 0 0 0 0
 −1 0 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
T1 =  
 0 0 0 0 1 0
 0 0 0 −1 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
Member 2: cosθ = −0.96, sinθ = 0.28
 −0.96 0.28 0 0 0
0
 −0.28 −0.96 0 0 0 
0

 0 0 1 0 0
0
T2 =  
 0 0 0 −0.96 0.28 0 
 0 0 0 −0.28 −0.96 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
152
6.20 Members 1 and 3: cosθ = 0, sin θ = 1
 0 1 0 0 0 0
 −1 0 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]1 = [T ]3 = 
 0 0 0 0 1 0
 0 0 0 −1 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1
[T ]2 = [ I ]
153
6.21 Member 1: cosθ = 0.44721, sin θ = 0.89443
 0.44721 0.89443 0 0 0 0
 −0.89443 0.44721 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]1 =  
 0 0 0 0.44721 0.89443 0 
 0 0 0 −0.89443 0.44721 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 

[T ]2 = [ I ]
154
 0 1 0 0 0 0
 −1 0 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]1 =  
 0 0 0 0 1 0
 0 0 0 −1 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1
From the solution of Problem 6.14, we obtain
167.97 kN 
 −17.636 kN 
 
 −58.196 kN ⋅ m 
{Q}1 =  
 −167.97 kN 
17.636 kN 
 
 −118.17 kN ⋅ m 
 0 
 0 
 
 0 
{v}1 = [T ]1 {u}1 = 
T

 0.012251m 
 −0.0052507 m 
 
 −0.12416 rad 
 17.636 kN 
 167.97 kN 
 
 −58.196 kN ⋅ m 
{F}1 = [T ]1 {Q}1 = 
T

 −17.636 kN 
 −167.97 kN 
 
 −118.17 kN ⋅ m 
Equilibrium Check:
+  FX = 0 17.636 − 17.636 = 0 checks
→
+ ↑  FY = 0 167.97 − 167.97 = 0 checks
 M = 0 − 58.196 − 118.17 + 17.636 (10 ) ≈ 0 checks
155
Member 2: cosθ = 0.92308, sin θ = 0.38462
 0.92308 0.38462 0 0 0 0
 −0.38462 0.92308 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]2 =
0 0 0 0.92308 0.38462 0 


 0 0 0 −0.38462 0.92308 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
228.58 kN   0.012251m 
86.728 kN   −0.0052507m 
   
118.17 kN ⋅ m   −0.12416 rad 
{Q}2 {v}2 = [T ]2 {u}2
T
=  = 
 −228.58 kN   0 
108.27 kN   0 
   
 −258.2 kN ⋅ m   0 
177.64 kN 
167.97 kN 
 
118.17 kN ⋅ m 
{F}2 = [T ]2 {Q}2
T
= 
 −252.64 kN 
12.026 kN 
 
 −258.2 kN ⋅ m 
Equilibrium Check:
 5
+  FX = 0 177.64 + 15 (13 )   − 252.64 = 0 checks
→
 13 
 12 
+ ↑  FY = 0 167.97 − 15 (13 )   + 12.026 ≈ 0 checks
 13 
 M = 0 118.17 − 15 (13)( 6.5 ) − 258.2 + 252.64 ( 5 ) + 12.026 (12 ) ≈ 0 checks
156
0 1 0 0 0 0
 −1 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]1 =  0 0 0 0 1 0


0 0 0 −1 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
128.12 k 
 −78.786 k 
 
 −5875 k - in. 
{Q}1 =  
 −128.12 k 
 98.786 k 
 
 −5179.3k - in.
 0 
 0 
 
 0 
{v}1 = [T ]1 {u}1 = 
T

 −2.0939in. 
 −0.05147in. 
 
 0.0079542 rad 
 78.786 k 
128.12 k 
 
 −5875k - in. 
{F}1 = [T ]1 {Q}1 = 
T

 −98.786 k 
 −128.12 k 
 
 −5179.3 k - in.
Equilibrium Check:
1
+  FX = 0 78.786 +
→
( 0.33333)(120 ) − 98.786 = 0 checks
2
+ ↑  FY = 0 128.12 − 128.12 = 0 checks
1
 M = 0 − 5875 − ( 0.33333)(120 )( 40 ) − 5179.3 + 98.786 (120 ) ≈ 0 checks
2
157
Member 2: cosθ = −0.92308 , sin θ = −0.38462
 −0.92308 −0.38462 0 0 0 0
 0.38462 −0.92308 0 0 0 0 

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]2 =
0 0 0 −0.92308 −0.38462 0 


 0 0 0 0.38462 −0.92308 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
111.62 k   −1.8078in. 
11.038 k   −0.90922 in. 
   
1942.5k - in.  0.0028882 rad 
{Q}2 {v}2 = [T ]2 {u}2
T
=  = 
 −140.46 k   −2.0939in. 
 −80.268 k   −0.05147 in. 
   
5179.3k - in. 0.0079542 rad 
 −98.786 k 
 −53.119 k 
 
1942.5 k - in. 
{F}2 = [T ]2 {Q}2
T
= 
98.786 k 
128.12 k 
 
5179.3 k - in.
Equilibrium Check:
  FX = 0 98.786 − 98.786 = 0 checks
+
+ ↑  FY = 0 128.12 − 75 − 53.119 ≈ 0 checks
 M = 0 5179.3 − 75 ( 72 ) + 1942.5 − 53.119 (144 ) + 98.786 ( 60 ) ≈ 0 checks
158
Member 3: cosθ = −0.47059 , sin θ = 0.88235
 −0.47059 0.88235 0 0 0 0
 −0.88235 −0.47059 0 0 0  0

 0 0 1 0 0 0
[T ]3 =
0 0 0 −0.47059 0.88235 0 


 0 0 0 −0.88235 −0.47059 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 1 
 −70.97 k   0 
 −20.192 k   0 
   
 −2176.6 k - in.  0 
{Q}3 {v}3 = [T ]3 {u}3
T
=  = 
70.97 k   −1.8078 in. 
20.192 k   −0.90922 in. 
   
 −1942.5 k - in.  0.0028882 rad 
51.214 k 
 −53.119 k 
 
 −2176.6 k - in.
{F}3 = [T ]3 {Q}3
T
= 
 −51.214 k 
53.119 k 
 
 −1942.5k - in. 
Equilibrium Check:
  FX = 0 51.214 − 51.214 = 0 checks
+
+ ↑  FY = 0 − 53.119 + 53.119 = 0 checks
 M = 0 − 2176.6 − 1942.5 + 51.214 (180 ) − 53.119 ( 96 ) ≈ 0 checks
159
6.24 E = 29,000 ksi , A = 10.3in.2 , I = 510in.4
Member 1: L = 240 in. , cosθ = 0 , sin θ = 1

12.839 0 −1540.6 −12.839 0 −1540.6 
 1244.6 0 0 −1244.6 0 

 246500 1540.6 0 123250 
[ K ]1 =  12.839 0 1540.6 


 ( symmetric ) 1244.6 0 
 
 246500 
FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = 20 k, FM b = − FM e = 1200 k- in.
 −20 
 0 
 
 1200 
{Ff }1 =  −20 
 
 0 
 
 −1200 
Member 2: L = 360 in. , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0.
829.72 0 0 −829.72 0 0 
 3.804 684.72 0 −3.804 684.72 

 164333 0 −684.72 82167 
[ K ]2 =
829.72 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 3.804 −684.72 
 
 164333 
FAb = FAe = 0
FSb = FSe = 22.5 k, FMb = − FM e = 1350 k- in.
 0 
 22.5 
 
 1350 
{F } f = 
 0 
2
 22.5 
 
 −1350 
160
6.25 E = 200 (106 ) kN/m 2 , A = 0.013m 2 , I = 762 (10 −6 ) m 4 .
Member 1: L = 10 m, cosθ = −0.6, sin θ = 0.8
94770 −123922 −7315.2 −94770 123922 −7315.2 

 167058 −5486.4 123922 −167058 −5486.4 

 60960 7315.2 5486.4 30480 
[ K ]1 =  94770 −123922 7315.2 


 ( symmetric ) 167058 5486.4 
 
 60960 
FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = −62.5 kN, FMb = − FM e = −156.25 kN ⋅ m
50 
37.5 
 
 −156.25
{Ff }1 = 50 
 
37.5 
 
156.25 
Member 2: L = 12 m , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0

216667 0 0 −216667 0 0 
 1058.3 6350 0 −1058.3 6350 

 50800 0 −6350 25400 
[ K ]2 =
216667 0 0 


 ( symmetric ) 1058.3 −6350 
 
 50800 
FAb = FAe = 0
FSb = FSe = 144 kN, FMb = − FM e = 288 kN ⋅ m
 0 
 144 
 
 288 
{F } f = 
 0 
2
 144 
 
 −288 
161
6.26 E = 10,000 ksi; A = 8.84 in.2 ; I = 170 in.4
Member 1: L = 216 in.; cosθ = 1, sinθ = 0
409.26 0 0 − 409.26 0 0 
 2.0243 218.62 0 − 2.0243 218.62 

 31,481 0 − 218.62 15,741 
K1 =  
 409.26 0 0 
 (symmetric) 2.0243 − 218.62
 
 31,481 
 0 
 27 
FAb = FAe = 0  
 972 
FSb = FSe = 27 k Ff 1 =  
FM b = −FSe = 972 k - in.  0 
 27 
 
− 972
Member 2: L = 180 in. ; cosθ = 0.8, sinθ = −0.6
315.57 − 234.05 188.89 − 315.57 234.05 188.89 

 179.04 251.85 234.05 − 179.04 251.85 

 37,778 − 188.89 − 251.85 18,889 
K2 =  
 315.57 − 234.05 − 188.89 
 (symmetric) 179.04 − 251.85
 
 37,778 
 0 
 7.5 
FAb = FAe = −4.5 k  
 270 
FSb = FSe = 6 k Ff 2 =  
FM b = −FSe = 270 k - in.  0 
 7.5 
 
− 270
162
6.27 E = 200(106 ) kN/m 2 ; A = 0.016 m 2 ; I = 1,186(10−6 ) m 4
Member 1: L = 16 m ; cosθ = 0, sinθ = 1
694.92 0 − 5,559.4 − 694.92 0 − 5,559.4

 200,000 0 0 − 200,000 0 
 
 59,300 5,559.4 0 29,650 
K1 =  
 694.92 0 5,559.4 
 (symmetric) 200,000 0 
 
 59,300 
Ff 1 = 0
Member 2: L = 25 m; cosθ = −0.96, sinθ = 0.28
117,980 − 34,357 − 637.59 − 117,980 34,357 − 637.59

 10,203 − 2,186 34,357 − 10,203 − 2,186 

 37,952 637.59 2,186 18,976 
K2 =  
 117,980 − 34,357 637.59 
 (symmetric) 10,203 2,186 
 
 37,952 
 0 
 250 
FAb = FAe = 70 kN  
− 1,000
FSb = FSe = −240 kN Ff 2 =  
FM b = −FSe = −1,000 kN ⋅ m  0 
 250 
 
 1,000 
163
6.28 E = 4500 ksi.
Members 1 and 3: A = 80 in.2 , I = 550 in 4 , L = 240 in. , cosθ = 0 , sin θ = 1.
2.1484 0 −257.81 −2.1484 0 −257.81

 1500 0 0 −1500 0 

 41250 257.81 0 20625 
[ K ]1 = [ K ]3 =
2.1484 0 257.81 


 ( Symmetric ) 1500 0 
 
 41250 
{F } = {F } = {0}
f 1 f 3
Member 2: A = 108 in.2 , I = 1300 in.4 , L = 300 in. , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0
1620 0 0 −1620 0 0 
 2.6 390 0 −2.6 390 

 78000 0 −390 39000 
[ K ]2 =
1620 0 0 


 ( Symmetric ) 2.6 −390 
 
 78000 
FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = 25 k, FM b = − FMe = 1250 k- in.
 0 
 25 
 
 1250 
{F } f = 
 0 
2
 25 
 
 −1250 
164
6.29 E = 10,000ksi.
Member 1: A = 10.3in.2 , I = 285in.4 , L = 268.33in. , cosθ = 0.44721 ,

sin θ = 0.89443
78.188 152.84 −212.43 −78.188 −152.84 −212.43
 307.44 106.21 −152.84 −307.44 106.21 

 42485 212.43 −106.21 21243 
[ K ]1 =  78.188 152.84 212.43 


 ( Symmetric ) 307.44 −106.21
 
 42485 
FAb = FAe = 10 k, FSb = FSe = 5 k
FM b = − FM e = 223.61k - in.
 0 
 11.18 
 
 223.61 
{Ff }1 =  0 
 
 11.18 
 
 −233.61
Member 2: A = 9.12 in 2 . , I = 375in.4 , L = 300 in. , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0
304 0 0 −304 0 0 
 1.6667 250 0 −1.6667 250 

 50000 0 −250 25000 
[ K ]2 =
304 0 0 


 ( Symmetric ) 1.6667 −250 
 
 50000 
FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = 16.25 k, FSe = 21.25 k, FM b = 875 k - in., FM e = −1000 k - in.
 0 
 16.25 
 
 875 
{F } f = 
 0 
2
 21.25 
 
 −1000 
165
6.30 E = 70 (106 ) kN/m 2 , A = 0.00457m 2 , I = 34.5 (10 −6 ) m 4
Member 1: L = 10 m , cosθ = 0 , sin θ = 1

28.98 0 −144.9 −28.98 0 −144.9 
 31990 0 0 −31990 0 

 966 144.9 0 483 
[ K ]1 =  28.98 0 144.9 


 ( Symmetric ) 31990 0 
 
 966 
{F } = {0}
f 1

 0  17.636 kN 
 0  167.97 kN 
   
 0   −58.196 kN ⋅ m 
{v}1 =   {F}1 = [ K ]1 {v}1 =  
 0.012251   −17.636 kN 
 −0.0052507   −167.97 kN 
   
 −0.12416   −118.17 kN ⋅ m 
Member 2: L = 13m , cosθ = 0.92308 , sin θ = 0.38462

20969 8731.8 −32.977 −20969 −8731.8 −32.977 
 3651.4 79.144 −8731.8 −3651.4 79.144 

 743.08 32.977 −79.144 371.54 
[ K ]2 =
20969 8731.8 32.977 


 ( Symmetric ) 3651.4 −79.144 
 
 743.08 
FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = 97.5 kN

FM b = − FM e = 211.25 kN ⋅ m
 −37.5 
 90 
 
 211.25 
{F } = 
 −37.5 
f 2
 90 
 
 −211.25
166
 0.012251 
 −0.0052507 
 
 −0.12416 
{v}2 = 
 0 
 0 
 
 0 
177.64 kN 
167.97 kN 
 
118.17 kN ⋅ m 
{F}2 = [ K ]2 {v}2 + {Ff }2 = 
 −252.64 kN 
12.026 kN 
 
 −258.2 kN ⋅ m 
Equilibrium Check:
The equilibrium equations check (see solution of Problem 6.22).
167
6.31 E = 29,000ksi, A = 10.3in.2 , I = 285in.4
Member 1: L = 120 in., cos θ = 0, sin θ = 1
57.396 0 −3443.8 −57.396 0 −3443.8 

 2489.2 0 0 −2489.2 0 

 275500 3443.8 0 137750 
[ K ]1 =  57.396 0 3443.8 


 ( Symmetric ) 2489.2 0 
 
 275500 
FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = 14 k, FSe = 6 k, FM b = 240 k- in., FMe = −160 k - in.

 −14 
 0 
 
 240 
{Ff }1 =  −6 
 
 0 
 
 −160 
 0 
 0 
 
 0 
{v}1 =  
 −2.0939 
 −0.05147 
 
 0.0079542 
78.786 k 
128.12 k 
 
 −5875 k - in. 
{F}1 = [ K ]1 {v}1 + {Ff }1 =  
 −98.786 k 
 −128.12 k 
 
 −5179.3k - in.
cosθ = −0.92308, sin θ = −0.38462
168
1635.4 670.52 783.74 −1635.4 −670.52 783.74 
 305.51 −1881 −670.52 −305.51 −1881 

 211923 −783.74 1881 105962 
[ K ]2 =
1635.4 670.52

−783.74 

 ( Symmetric ) 305.51 1881 
 
 211923 
FAb = FAe = −14.423 k, FSb = FSe = −34.615k, FMb = − FM e = −1350 k - in.
 0 
 37.5 
 
 −1350 
{F } f = 
 0 
2
 37.5 
 
 1350 
 −1.8078 
 −0.90922 
 
0.0028882 
{v}2 = 
 −2.0939 
 −0.05147 
 
0.0079542 
 −98.786 k 
 −53.119 k 
 
1942.5 k - in. 
{F}2 = [ K ]2 {v}2 + {Ff }2 = 
98.786 k 
128.12 k 
 
5179.3 k - in.
cosθ = −0.47059 , sin θ = 0.88235
333.35 −603.13 −1051.4 −333.35 603.13 −1051.4 
 1142.5 −560.76 603.13 −1142.5 −560.76 

 162059 1051.4 560.76 81029 
[ K ]3 =
333.35 −603.13 1051.4 


 ( Symmetric ) 1142.5 560.76 
 
 162059 
169
{F } = {0}
f 3

 0  51.214 k 
 0   −53.119 k 
   
 0   −2176.6 k - in.
{v}3 =   {F}3 = [ K ]3 {v}3 = 
 −1.8078   −51.214 k 
 −0.90922  53.119 k 
   
 0.0028882   −1942.5k - in. 
Equilibrium Check:
The equilibrium equations check (see solution of Problem 6.23).
170
6.32
NDOF = 3, NR = 6
The member [K] matrices and {Ff } vectors are given in the solution of Problem 6.24.
Member Code Numbers:

Member 1: 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3
Member 2: 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9
Structure Stiffness Matrix: (Units: kips and inches)
1 2 3
842.56 0 1540.6  1
[ S ] =  0 1248.4 684.72  2

1540.6 684.72 410833 3
Structure Fixed-Joint Force Vector and Equivalent Joint Loads:

 −20 k  1
{Pf } = − {Pe } = 22.5 k  2
150 k- in. 3
171
6.33
NDOF = 3, NR = 6
The member [K] matrices and {Ff } vectors are given in the solution of Problem 6.25.

Member 1: 1, 7, 2, 4, 5, 6
Member 2: 1, 7, 2, 8, 9, 3
Structure Stiffness Matrix: (Units: kN and meters)
1 2 3
 311437 −7315.2 0 1
[ S ] = −7315.2 111760 25400  2

 0 25400 50800  3

 50 kN 1
{Pf } = −{Pe } = 131.75 kN ⋅ m  2

 −288 kN ⋅ m  3
172
6.34
NDOF = 2 ; NR = 7
The member K matrices and Ff vectors are given in the solution of Problem 6.26.
Member 1: 3, 4, 5, 1, 6, 2
Member 2: 1, 6, 2, 7, 8, 9
1 2
724.83 188.89  1
S= 
188.89 69, 259  2
 0 1
Pf = −Pe =  
 −702 k-in. 2
173
6.35
NDOF = 2 ; NR = 7
The member K matrices and Ff vectors are given in the solution of Problem 6.27.
Member 1: 3, 4, 5, 6, 1, 2
Member 2: 6, 1, 2, 7, 8, 9
Structure Stiffness Matrix: (Units: kN and meters)
1 2
210,203 − 2,186 1
S= 
 − 2,186 97,252  2
 250 kN  1
Pf = −Pe =  
 −1,000 kN ⋅ m  2
174
6.36
NDOF = 6, NR = 6
The member [K] matrices and {Ff } vectors are given in the solution if Problem 6.28.

Member 1: 7, 8, 9, 1, 2, 3
Member 2: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Member 3: 10, 11, 12, 4, 5, 6
1 2 3 4 5 6
1622.1 0 257.81 −1620 0 0 1
 1502.6 390 0 −2.6 390  2

 119250 0 −390 39000  3
[S] =  1622.1 0

257.81  4

 (Symmetric) 1502.6 −390  5
 
 119250  6
 0 1
 25 k 2
 
 1250 k - in.  3
{Pf } = − {Pe } =  0  4
 
 25 k 5
 
 −1250 k - in. 6
175
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
of the biscuit warehouse was fitted up as an employees’ dining room.
In the middle of 1910 the board were called on to arbitrate in a case
where three of the blacksmiths employed by the Society had failed to
maintain themselves in membership of their trade union and had
been dismissed by the manager as a result. After considering the
case, the directors upheld the decision of the manager.
THE OLDEST SCOTTISH SOCIETY GOES
UNDER.
Until the year 1908 the oldest Co-operative society in Scotland and
probably in the world was located in Govan. Govan Old Victualling
Society kept painted over its doors while in business the statement:
“established 1777.” Doubtless, this statement was legendary and
would be difficult to prove, but it is certainly worthy of acceptance in
view of the fact that other Scottish societies are known to have
existed at a very early date. However, the society had fallen on evil
days, and in the beginning of 1907 sent a request to the directors of
the U.C.B.S. that its shares should be placed on the transfer list.
Towards the end of 1908 it was forced to go into liquidation, but an
unsuccessful attempt was made to carry on the business, in order
that the deficit of some £900 which the accounts showed might be
cleared off. Thus the last remaining link with the Co-operators of the
eighteenth century disappeared, after what was doubtless a very
useful career of one hundred and thirty years.
THE CO-OPERATIVE INSURANCE SOCIETY.
For many years after the formation of the Co-operative Insurance
Society the Baking Society had held aloof from it and refused to
become a member, but in later years more Co-operative councils
prevailed, and it had become affiliated. On the death of Mr Andrew
Miller, secretary of the S.C.W.S., who had been for many years a
Scottish representative on the C.I.S. board, Mr James H. Forsyth,
cashier of the Baking Society, was nominated and secured election,
retaining his office until the taking over of the C.I.S. by the two
Wholesale societies.
DEPARTMENTAL MANAGERS
1. WILLIAM MILLER,
Distributive Manager, Glasgow.
2. JOHN DAVIDSON,
Master of Works, Glasgow.
3. JOHN M‘PHAIL,
Delivery Manager, Glasgow.
4. JOHN TOWART,
Purveying Manager, Glasgow.
5. WILLIAM NINIAN,
Biscuit Production Manager, Glasgow.
6. MURDOCH RICHARD,
Bread and Pastry Production Manager,
Glasgow.
DEPARTMENTAL MANAGERS
1. JOHN REID,
Productive Manager, Clydebank.
2. ALLAN STEWART,
Distributive Manager, Clydebank.
3. MALCOLM M‘FARLANE,
Delivery Manager, Clydebank.
4. DUNCAN M‘INNES,
Branch Manager, Belfast.
5. WILLIAM BELL,
Productive Manager, Belfast.
6. DUNCAN GRAHAM,
Branch Cashier, Belfast.
THE SOCIETY’S PROGRESS.
Notwithstanding the difficulties which the depression of 1908–
09–10 had placed in the way of increased trade for the Society the
progress made was substantial, and the yearly turnover, which was
£480,000 at the beginning of 1906, had risen by the end of 1910 to
£564,000, while the membership had increased from 143 to 171. At
the beginning of the period the weekly turnover in sacks averaged
3,405, while by the end of the period it was 3,795. This was a much
smaller increase than in the preceding period, and it was also a
decrease of 125 sacks from the trade which was being done in 1907–
08, but in view of the labour conditions which prevailed in Glasgow
during the later years of the period it was very good indeed,
representing as it did an increase in turnover of 10,000 sacks a year.
CHAPTER XVII.
PROGRESS CONTINUES STEADY.
BISCUIT FACTORY REMODELLED—COVER-PLATE OVENS—

COMPLETION OF M‘NEIL STREET BAKERY—A SERIOUS
FIRE—A NEW VENTURE—SUCCESSFUL CONTRACTORS—
BLEACHED FLOUR—A BREAD TEST—ADVERTISING
WORK—FRESH OVERTURES TO C.W.S.—A TESTING
DEPARTMENT CONSIDERED—PROPOSED
SUPERANNUATION FUND—THE INTERNATIONAL CO-
OPERATIVE CONGRESS—THE HOLIDAY CAMP—THE
SOCIETY’S PROGRESS.
The new offices of the Society were ready to be occupied in 1910,

and in March of that year they were formally opened. In the course of
the same year, the remodelling and bringing thoroughly up to date of
the biscuit factory was commenced. This remodelling scheme had its
origin in the fact that the old engine which provided the power for
the biscuit-making machinery was wearing done; and after
considering the whole position the members of the board decided
that the interests of the business would be best served by
transferring from steam to electricity as a motive power. It was
therefore agreed that henceforth each machine in the factory should
be motor driven. The cost of installing twelve motors and controllers
was over £500; but it made for ease in working and also in
controlling the machinery.
COVER-PLATE OVENS.
About the same time a new type of bread baking oven was
installed. The ovens in the older part of the bakery were becoming
worn out, and that section of the bakery also required remodelling in
order to bring it into line with the newer ideas of the twentieth
century. But the ovens in the old bakery had been built on the Scotch
principle, and there was not sufficient space available to permit of
draw-plate ovens being installed without a reconstruction of the
premises which might have proved more costly than the provision of
an entirely new building. Just at this time they had submitted to
them for their consideration a new type of oven which seemed
specially designed to meet cases of reconstruction like theirs. This
type of oven, which has come to be known as the “cover-plate oven,”
had much the same features, so far as the actual baking was
concerned, as had the draw-plate oven, but it differed from the latter
in that, instead of requiring a large space in front of the oven to
permit of the oven sole being drawn out to receive the bread before
baking and to permit of its removal afterwards, it had a moveable
cover, which was raised to permit of the bread being placed on and
removed from the oven sole, and which was lowered to retain the
heat when the unbaked bread had all been deposited on the sole. The
first of these ovens was installed about the end of 1910, and so
satisfactory did the trial prove that first No. 5 bakehouse and then
No. 11 bakehouse were entirely remodelled and ovens of this new
type installed. Before deciding finally on the adoption of the new type
of oven, however, numerous experiments and tests were carried
through. The Bakery engineer (Mr Scott), the chief foreman baker
(Mr Richard), and the master of works (Mr Davidson) were all
requested to submit reports. These reports were eminently
satisfactory, particularly that of Mr Richard, who reported on the
saving in fuel and wages which was effected by the new oven.
At the time when the directors decided to install the first set of six
of the new pattern ovens, they also decided to install one complete
set of automatic baking machinery, manufactured by the same firm
of baking machinery manufacturers, the estimated cost of six ovens
and machinery being £4,000. This automatic machinery has proved
so effective in the various processes of dough making and bread
moulding that less than half the number of bakers are required to
perform the work where it is installed as are required where it is
absent. As indicated above, so effective did the combination of new
ovens and new plant prove that in little more than a year after the
first £4,000 had been spent on the installation it was decided to
extend it at an additional cost of £7,000. Since then, additions have
been made which bring the total number of this type of oven to
twenty.
At the same time as this improvement in their baking plant was
decided on, the committee also decided on extensive alterations in
connection with the oatcake factory. These included the removal of
the hot-plates from their former situation to the flat immediately
above the biscuit factory, at a cost, including structural alterations, of
over £2,000.
COMPLETION OF M‘NEIL STREET BAKERY.
No sooner were these alterations carried through successfully than
the committee turned their attention seriously to another project
which had been receiving consideration at intervals for some time.
This was the completion of the Govan Street, M‘Neil Street, Adelphi
Street, South York Street square by the erection of an entirely new
block on the site of the old buildings at the South York Street and
Adelphi Street corner—the north-west corner of the square; and at
the quarterly meeting held on 20th September 1913 they were
granted powers to proceed. The plans for the new building provided
for a workers’ dining room in the basement flat. The ground floor
was to form an extension of the biscuit factory, which had become
congested in recent years and was too small to enable the Society to
meet the demand for biscuits. The first floor was to be used as an
icing room, and the icing room then in use it was proposed to utilise
as a cake factory, building four Scotch ovens for that purpose. The
second flat was to be utilised as an extension of the biscuit-packing
warehouse; while the upper flat it was decided to fit up as a dressing
room for the female workers. The approximate cost was given as
£11,000.
The new building was commenced in the spring of 1914, but before
much had been done the outbreak of war began to hamper building
operations very seriously, and it was not until the summer of 1916
that the building was completed.
A SERIOUS FIRE.
In November 1913 a fire occurred in the top flat of the stables at
South York Street. In this flat 180 tons of hay were stored, and before
the fire could be subdued the whole of the hay was destroyed and the
roof had fallen in. Fortunately, the damage was covered by
insurance, and the sum of £543 was received from the insurance
company. It was exceedingly fortunate that the fire originated in the
upper flat, as otherwise many valuable horses might have been
destroyed.
A NEW VENTURE.
For the Christmas trade of 1910 a new branch of trade was started.
During the preceding two winters unemployment had been rife, and
as a result the trade done in Christmas goods had shown a tendency
to fall off, but by the end of 1910 business was getting back to normal
again, and in order that Co-operators might be able to take full
advantage of the facilities for the production of Christmas luxuries
which the Baking Society possessed, a range of Christmas hampers,
containing seasonable goods produced by both U.C.B.S. and
S.C.W.S., was placed on the market. To popularise these hampers
amongst the members of the various societies, contribution cards,
enabling the societies to form “hamper clubs,” were distributed. This
branch of business proved instantly successful, over 3,000 hampers
being sold. Altogether, at the cake show this year, 102 tons of cakes
were disposed of, as well as shortbread to the value of almost
£2,000.
The Society was now almost continuously successful in their
tenders for contracts on a large scale. On several occasions they had
supplied the provisions for the children entertained during the
summer months in the public parks by Glasgow Corporation, and
during this winter they were the successful tenderers for the
supplying of five centres for the feeding of necessitous children;
while in 1911 they obtained the Corporation contract to cater for
67,500 children at the Exhibition of that year, as well as the contracts
for the Coronation dinners in St Mungo Hall and Maryhill. The year
1911 must also have been a busy year for weddings, for it is recorded
in the minute of 7th July meeting that already that year 208
bridecakes had been made at M‘Neil Street. Tenders for supplying a
number of industrial schools were also accepted, and the contracts
for supplying a number of military camps with bread were received.
In the following year the contracts for supplying bread to a number
of the Territorial camps in Scotland were also secured, and these
contracts continued to be held by the Society until the outbreak of
war. In the autumn of 1912 a certificate was received from the War
Office for prompt and regular delivery of bread to the camps; and
this promptness and regularity of delivery had doubtless much to do
with the fact that for so many years in succession the contracts for
supplying these camps were held by the Society.
For the Christmas trade of 1912 136 tons of cakes were sold, while
80,000 children were supplied on Glasgow Corporation Children’s
Day.
BLEACHED FLOUR.
The validity of the bleaching of flour by chemical process was a
question which engaged the attention of many official Co-operators
during the spring and summer of 1912. Uddingston Society was
prosecuted for a contravention of the Food and Drugs Acts because
they had sold to a Food and Drugs inspector one pound of flour
which had been bleached or oxidised by artificial means. The case
was defended by the S.C.W.S., from whom the flour had been
purchased, and at whose Regent mills it had been milled. Almost all
the chemical and milling experts in the country gave evidence as
witnesses on one side or the other, and the Sheriff before whom the
case was heard was left with a mass of opposing technical evidence to
unravel such as he had seldom had to face. Ultimately he found the
case not proven and, contrary to expectation, the decision was not
appealed from. The U.C.B.S., like most of the other Co-operative
societies in Scotland, had been using a proportion of this chemically
whitened flour, but in November of 1911, shortly after the seizure of
the sample at Uddingston, they decided to write to the S.C.W.S. and
inform them that no further deliveries of bleached flour could be
accepted. Nothing further was heard of the controversy which had
raged so fiercely in Hamilton Sheriff Court, however, and so it may
be taken for granted that, whatever virtues or failings flour so treated
may have had, injury to health could not be proved.
A BREAD TEST.
Although the committee of the Baking Society and their experts
took every precaution and themselves made every test possible, so as
to ensure that only products of the highest quality were sent out from
the bakery, they did not always rest content with having done that,
and one of the occasions when they took steps to get the unbiassed
opinions of the customer societies arose shortly after the
introduction of the cover-plate ovens into the bakery. They sent out
samples of the bread produced by Scotch, draw-plate, and cover-
plate ovens to every society customer, with a request that the
societies should test the three different loaves and indicate their
preference. Altogether 634 samples were sent out and 439 replies
were received. Of these 47 per cent. favoured the bread baked in the
cover-plate oven, 34 per cent. favoured the draw-plate bread, and 19
per cent. the bread baked in the Scotch oven. At the same time
fourteen samples had been sent to a private firm at the request of the
firm, and the results there were somewhat similar. This test seemed
to establish the superiority of the cover-plate oven over either of the
other two forms.
ADVERTISING WORK.
When preparations were being made for the 1911 Glasgow
Exhibition, the Baking Society’s committee decided to approach the
boards of the S.C.W.S. and the P.C.M.S., with the object of having a
joint Co-operative stand. Later, a sub-committee of the S.C.W.S. was
interviewed, and an agreement was reached that a portion of the
space reserved for that federation should be placed at the disposal of
the Baking Society for the purpose of erecting a working exhibit. On
interviewing the manager of the Exhibition, however, it was found
that that gentleman would not sanction a working exhibit in that
section of the Exhibition, with the result that the Baking Society’s
committee decided to drop the proposal and thanked the S.C.W.S.
for their kindness. Meantime, however, advantage was taken of the
exhibition of Co-operative productions which was got up by the
S.C.W.S. in connection with the jubilee celebrations of St Rollox
Society, and there an exhibit which took the form of oatcake baking
by a number of alert and smartly dressed girls, together with
showcases filled with a tempting collection of the most toothsome
dainties produced by the Society, was shown. At the same time, a
similar exhibit was shown at Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Meantime, the engineering department of the Society undertook a
very important piece of work. This was the making of several
“Unitas” moulding machines for use in the bakery. The making of
these machines was placed in the hands of a Scottish firm on what
were deemed satisfactory terms.
About this time Enniskillen Society in Ireland was having a bad
time of it because of the unfair competition of the master bakers of
the town, and assistance in the form of an increased percentage on
bread was given by the Belfast Branch. The directors also lodged a
protest with the Irish Master Bakers’ Association. In the early weeks
of 1911, the Society carried out a test at Clydebank for the purpose of
ascertaining the comparative costs of gas and electricity for lighting
purposes. This test showed that the Society would save 9/ per week
by using electricity.
FRESH OVERTURES TO C.W.S.
At the beginning of 1911, a deputation from the board was visiting
Newcastle on business, and it was decided that advantage should be
taken of the opportunity to interview the Newcastle section of the
C.W.S. board again, with the object of having U.C.B.S. invoices to
English societies recognised by that federation. The interview was of
a most friendly nature, and the members of the Newcastle section of
the board promised to bring the suggestions made before the full
board of the C.W.S., and give them full consideration and an early
decision. This was done, but, unfortunately, with the same result as
on previous occasions; the C.W.S. refused to recognise U.C.B.S.
invoices.
An interesting sidelight on the enormous trade done by the
Federation in pastries, teabread, cakes, etc., is given in a report
which was prepared by the Federation at the instance of the Co-
operative Union. The Union was collecting information with the
object of having the tax on sugar repealed or reduced, and the
information supplied by the U.C.B.S. showed that the amount of
sugar consumed by that Federation in its various products during the
past year had been 837 tons; while the taxation which had been paid
on this article was £1,500.
Various items of business were engaging attention, all of which
had a bearing on the success of the Society. The Continental Tyre
Company offered a prize of 5/ to the vanmen for every tyre of theirs
which was run more than the guaranteed 10,000 miles, and the
directors agreed to accept this; as not only was it good for the tyre
manufacturers, but it also made for the saving of outlay on tyres. A
test of flour for shrinkage was carried out for thirty-three days, with
the result that it was decided to call the attention of the S.C.W.S. to
the excessive shrinkage shown. This was explained later as being due
to the great demand for flour, which necessitated its being sent out
from the mill too soon after being milled, and an amicable settlement
was reached. In November 1911, it was agreed to insure the members
of the board against accident when engaged on the business of the
Society. The only surprising thing about this step is that it had not
been taken before.
TESTING DEPARTMENT CONSIDERED.
In November 1911, a special report by Mr Murdoch, principal of
the Baking Section of the Glasgow Technical College, was received,
the subject of which was the standardisation of flour, so far as
proportions of moisture and gluten contained were concerned. Mr
Murdoch suggested that the flour should be tested at the beginning
of the season and a standard of moisture for each brand fixed; he
also suggested that baking tests should be made with the object of
comparing the relative values of the various brands. After this report
had been considered for some time by the members of committee, it
was again discussed, but decision was delayed, and it was not until
May 1913 that mention of it again appeared in the minutes. It was
then decided that a chemical analysis of the various ingredients in a
laboratory was not necessary, but it was thought that an experienced
baker might be engaged who would devote his time to making
experiments with the various brands of flour, checking costs and
testing new recipes; and the whole question was remitted to the
productive committee to make further arrangements. The coming of
the war put a stop to definite steps being taken, however, and it was
not until the end of the fiftieth year of the Society’s history that it was
finally decided to establish a testing department. For this purpose,
the services of Mr Murdoch, the Technical College expert, were
secured for the exclusive use of the U.C.B.S.
PROPOSED SUPERANNUATION FUND.
By a coincidence it came about that the two big federations in the
Scottish Co-operative movement were called upon to consider the
question of the superannuation of their employees about the same
time. It was in the month of August 1912 that the question was raised
in the U.C.B.S. boardroom. Mr Miller, the Shettleston representative
on the board, who had given notice some time earlier, moved at the
committee meeting held on 2nd August “That we consider the
possibility of forming a compulsory contributory superannuation
fund for all employees, with a compulsory retiral at sixty-five years of
age.” This motion, which was seconded by Mr M‘Lean, was agreed to,
and it was remitted to the finance committee, manager, and cashier
to prepare a scheme for submission to the board.
It is difficult to say whether the two things had any relation, but at
anyrate it is remarkable that at the quarterly meeting of the S.C.W.S.
which took place in September of the same year a motion for the
appointment of a committee to consider the superannuation of
directors and employees and to prepare a scheme was given notice of
by Kinning Park Society.
At the quarterly meeting of the Baking Society which was held in
June 1913 a draft scheme was submitted by the directors for the
consideration and provisional approval of the delegates, the
chairman stating that if this was done the scheme would be
submitted to an actuary for his report on the financial proposals.
Delay was moved on behalf of Kinning Park Society, in order that
the societies should have an opportunity of submitting amendments.
On the other hand, those who favoured giving the board the
provisional approval they asked for argued that the proper time to
submit amendments was after the actuary had considered the
financial proposals and had come to a decision as to their soundness
or otherwise. Disapproval of the whole proposal was also moved, but
eventually the motion for delay became the finding of the meeting.
The proposals of the committee were most elaborate. They
proposed that all employees who had been in regular employment by

Matrix Analysis of Structures 2Nd Edition Kassimali Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Matrix Analysis of Structures 2Nd Edition Kassimali Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Matrix Analysis of Structures 2nd

Edition Kassimali Solutions Manual

FAb = FAe = 0; FSb = FSe =

Member 1: L = 216 in.

Member 2: A = 108 in.2 , I = 1300 in.4 , L = 300 in.

Member 2: A = 9.12in .2 , I = 375in.4 , L = 300 in.

←  Fy = 0 − 17.636 + 17.636 = 0 checks

M = 0 − 58.196 − 118.17 + 17.636 (10 ) = −0.006 ≈ 0 checks

+   Fy = 0 86.728 − 15 (13 ) + 108.27 ≈ 0 checks

M (2) = 0 118.17 − 15 (13)( 6.5 ) − 258.2 + 108.27 (13) ≈ 0 checks

FAb = FAe = 0; FSb = 14 k; FSe = 6 k;

+ ↑  Fx = 0 128.12 − 128.12 = 0 checks

FAb = FAe = −14.423k; FSb = FSe = −34.615k

FM b = − FMe = −1350 k - in.

 M = 0 5179.3 − 69.231( 78 ) + 1942.5 − 11.038 (156 ) ≈ 0 checks

Member 2: cosθ = 1, sin θ = 0

Member 2: cosθ = 1, sin θ = 0

Member 2: cosθ = 0.8, sinθ = −0.6

Member 2: cosθ = −0.96, sinθ = 0.28

Member 2: cosθ = 1, sin θ = 0

Member 2: cosθ = 1, sin θ = 0

+ ↑  FY = 0 167.97 − 167.97 = 0 checks

 M = 0 − 58.196 − 118.17 + 17.636 (10 ) ≈ 0 checks

 M = 0 118.17 − 15 (13)( 6.5 ) − 258.2 + 252.64 ( 5 ) + 12.026 (12 ) ≈ 0 checks

+ ↑  FY = 0 128.12 − 75 − 53.119 ≈ 0 checks

 M = 0 5179.3 − 75 ( 72 ) + 1942.5 − 53.119 (144 ) + 98.786 ( 60 ) ≈ 0 checks

+ ↑  FY = 0 − 53.119 + 53.119 = 0 checks

 M = 0 − 2176.6 − 1942.5 + 51.214 (180 ) − 53.119 ( 96 ) ≈ 0 checks

Member 1: L = 240 in. , cosθ = 0 , sin θ = 1

Member 1: L = 10 m, cosθ = −0.6, sin θ = 0.8

94770 −123922 −7315.2 −94770 123922 −7315.2 

FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = −62.5 kN, FMb = − FM e = −156.25 kN ⋅ m

Member 2: L = 12 m , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0

FSb = FSe = 144 kN, FMb = − FM e = 288 kN ⋅ m

Member 1: L = 216 in.; cosθ = 1, sinθ = 0

315.57 − 234.05 188.89 − 315.57 234.05 188.89 

Member 1: L = 16 m ; cosθ = 0, sinθ = 1

694.92 0 − 5,559.4 − 694.92 0 − 5,559.4

117,980 − 34,357 − 637.59 − 117,980 34,357 − 637.59

Members 1 and 3: A = 80 in.2 , I = 550 in 4 , L = 240 in. , cosθ = 0 , sin θ = 1.

2.1484 0 −257.81 −2.1484 0 −257.81

Member 2: A = 108 in.2 , I = 1300 in.4 , L = 300 in. , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0

FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = 25 k, FM b = − FMe = 1250 k- in.

Member 1: A = 10.3in.2 , I = 285in.4 , L = 268.33in. , cosθ = 0.44721 ,

FAb = FAe = 10 k, FSb = FSe = 5 k

Member 2: A = 9.12 in 2 . , I = 375in.4 , L = 300 in. , cosθ = 1 , sin θ = 0

Member 1: L = 10 m , cosθ = 0 , sin θ = 1

From the solution of Problem 6.22, we obtain

Member 2: L = 13m , cosθ = 0.92308 , sin θ = 0.38462

FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = FSe = 97.5 kN

Member 1: L = 120 in., cos θ = 0, sin θ = 1

57.396 0 −3443.8 −57.396 0 −3443.8 

FAb = FAe = 0, FSb = 14 k, FSe = 6 k, FM b = 240 k- in., FMe = −160 k - in.

cosθ = −0.92308, sin θ = −0.38462

From the solution of Problem 6.23, we obtain

The equilibrium equations check (see solution of Problem 6.23).

Member Code Numbers:

Structure Fixed-Joint Force Vector and Equivalent Joint Loads:

Member Code Numbers:

Structure Fixed-Joint Force Vector and Equivalent Joint Loads:

Member Code Numbers:

BISCUIT FACTORY REMODELLED—COVER-PLATE OVENS—

The new offices of the Society were ready to be occupied in 1910,