# Ch4sol - x y B A C D P 10 ’ 10 ’ P B C A D E 25’...

This preview shows pages 1–6. Sign up to view the full content.

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: x y B A C D P 10 ’ 10 ’ P B C A D E 25’ 25’ 2I I I 2I A 25’ 20’ 4.1 Determine of the structure shown in Fig. P4- 1 for the given parameters: Fig. P4-1 , , Case 1: Case 2: Case 3: Compare the solutions by the Energy method and the slope-deflection equations and provide comments. Solution Slope-deflection equation method 1 Let (1) @ b 2 (2) Symbolically, The smallest values of from the solution of the characteristic equation resulting from the stability condition determinant are Case 1: =2,730.4 kips 3 Case 2: =1,944.7 kips Case 3: =1,966.3 kips Energy method Total potential energy functional Assume For Case 1, From Maple ® Case 1: =2,736.1 kips For Case 2, 4 Case 2: =1,971.1 kips For Case 3, Case 3: =1,992.7 kips Try whether these solutions could be improved by assuming more terms. Proceeding exactly the same manner as that used for one-term function, Maple ® yields Case 1: =2,731.9 kips Case 2: =1,945.1 kips Case 3: =1,966.7 kips In view of the small improvement of the solutions, just one-term assumed function is...
View Full Document

## This note was uploaded on 09/24/2011 for the course CIVL 3110 taught by Professor Melville during the Spring '08 term at Auburn University.

### Page1 / 14

Ch4sol - x y B A C D P 10 ’ 10 ’ P B C A D E 25’...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 6. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document
Ask a homework question - tutors are online