08.01.2013 Views

Steel Designers Manual - TheBestFriend.org

Steel Designers Manual - TheBestFriend.org

Steel Designers Manual - TheBestFriend.org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

This material is copyright - all rights reserved. Reproduced under licence from The <strong>Steel</strong> Construction Institute on 12/2/2007<br />

To buy a hardcopy version of this document call 01344 872775 or go to http://shop.steelbiz.<strong>org</strong>/<br />

<strong>Steel</strong> <strong>Designers</strong>' <strong>Manual</strong> - 6th Edition (2003)<br />

The number of redundancies has now been reduced by one (since M B = M p) while<br />

the compatibility condition represented by Equation (10.7) no longer applies. Substitution<br />

of q A = wL 3 /144EI and M B = M p in Equations (10.4) and (10.7) gives<br />

M<br />

M<br />

A<br />

C<br />

2<br />

5wL<br />

M<br />

= -<br />

48 2<br />

2 7wL<br />

M<br />

= -<br />

96 4<br />

p<br />

p<br />

Using these new values for M A and MC the bending-moment diagram (Fig.<br />

10.10(b)) is obtained, and inspection of the diagram shows that the second plastic<br />

hinge can be expected to occur at end A. Putting MA = Mp gives<br />

w<br />

M 3 p 48 14. 4Mp<br />

= ¥ = M = 08 . M<br />

2 2<br />

2 5L<br />

L<br />

C p<br />

while Equation (10.3) gives D C = MpL 2 /16EI. The beam is now statically determinate<br />

with MA = MB = Mp, and eventually the third hinge forms at C when w reaches<br />

16Mp/L 2 (see Fig. 10.10(c)) and DC = MpL 2 /12EI. The important point to note is that,<br />

despite the difference in initial conditions, the failure pattern, the failure load and<br />

the deflection at the point of failure (relative to the ends) are the same for the two<br />

cases. The uniqueness of the plastic limit load, i.e. its independence of initial conditions<br />

of internal stress or settlement of supports, is a general feature of plastic analysis.<br />

Deflections at the point of collapse can however be affected, as indeed they are<br />

in the second case just described, when considered relative to the original support<br />

position A0B (Fig. 10.10(a)).<br />

10.6 Plastic failure of propped cantilevers<br />

The case of the propped cantilever under a uniformly distributed load, Fig. 10.11(a),<br />

cannot be solved quite so simply, and both upper and lower bound methods<br />

described in Chapter 9 have to be used. A possible equilibrium condition is shown<br />

in Fig. 10.11(b) where the reactant line a1B has been arranged so that the coordinate<br />

at the left-hand support is equal to the co-ordinate of the resultant moment<br />

diagram at mid-span. At the right-hand support the condition of zero resultant<br />

moment has to be satisfied. If the equal moments at A and C are regarded as plastic<br />

hinge (Mp) values, the mechanism condition is satisfied. Hence Mp is an upper bound<br />

(unsafe) value and should be denoted by Mu. Considering the geometry of the<br />

moment diagram at mid-span,<br />

2 lwL Mu = Cc1 + c1c= + Mu ( Mu = Mp)<br />

8 2<br />

Plastic failure of propped cantilevers 339<br />

where l is the load factor at rigid plastic collapse (see Section 9.3.6)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!