Unit 3.

Flexibility Method
ADA 2H – HOMEWORK 2 – PROCESS

Team 2:
Albertos Leon Ivan Alejandro
Burgos Chan Victoria Guadalupe
Escobar Garcia Gipsy Sugey
Méndez Atoche Elías Manuel
Vargas Echeverría Ligia Guadalupe

Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán

Facultad de Ingeniería
Structural Analysis
Group B

Professor: Luis Enrique Fernández Baqueiro

October, 25, 2023

 Index

Learning outcome 3
Activity 3
Case 1 3
Case 2 8
Case 3 12
Staad Pro step by step guide 16
Results obtain with STAADPro 24
Case 1 24
Reactions 24
Displacements 24
Internal forces 25
Case 2 26
Reactions 26
Displacements 26
Internal forces 27
Case 3 28
Reactions 28
Displacements 28
Internal forces 29
Conclusions 29
Participations 30
 ADA 2H – HOMEWORK 2 – PROCESS

Learning outcome
Determine the internal forces, and their diagrams, in statically indeterminate planar
beams using the Flexibility Method.

Activity
In this assignment, we will use the flexibility method to calculate the reactions in
beams. The analysis will consider the following properties:

● 𝐸𝐼 = 8000 𝑡𝑜𝑛 𝑚2
● The length of the section (𝐿) is 5.5 meters.
● The applied load (𝑤) is 2.2 𝑡𝑜𝑛/𝑚.

We will create a free body diagram and internal force diagram for each of the cases
to be studied. Likewise, the results will be obtained through the STAADPro software. The
scenarios to analyze are the following:

● Case 1: Beam with both ends fixed and uniform load. (𝑤 = 2.2 𝑡𝑜𝑛/𝑚)
● Case 2: Beam with both ends fixed and a point load in the center (𝑃 = 12.1 𝑡𝑜𝑛).
● Case 3: Beam with both ends fixed subjected to a predefined linear displacement at
node B of -0.02 meters (Settlement ∆).

Afterward, the Flexibility Method will be used to determine the reactions in the
corresponding supports. Once the results are obtained, the results generated by STAADPro
and the ones obtained by the flexibility method will be compared to ensure the accuracy of
our analysis.

Case 1
Beam with both ends fixed and a uniform load.

Figure 1. Case 1 beam.

 Step 1.
Determine the degree of static indeterminacy (n) of the structure.

Figure 2. Reactions of the beam in the first case

Considering the Beam Approach, just SFy=0; SMz=0 are considered.

Step 2.
Select n redundant forces (reactions) and remove them from the structure in order to

obtain the primary structure. and were selected.

Figure 3. Primary structure of the beam in first case.

Step 3.
Write a compatibility equation for the displacement at each point where there is a
redundant force or moment. Write compatibility equations.

Figure 4. Applying the principle of superposition for case 1.

 Since:

Step 4.
Determine the displacements of the primary structures: 1 with the load
and with unit loads applied at the points of each redundant forces.

a) Primary structure subjected to the load.

b) Primary structure subjected to unit load.
 c) Primary structure subjected to unit moment.

Step 5.
Solve the system of equations (compatibility equations) to obtain the redundant
forces or moments.
Having the following equations:

Then, substituting in the equations:

Setting up the equations system:

Resolve the system:

Step 6.
Calculate the remaining reactions using the equilibrium equations.
Free body Diagram
Case 2
Beam with both ends fixed and a point load at the center 𝑃 = 12.1 𝑡𝑜𝑛.

Figure 5. Case 2 beam.

Step 1.
Determine the degree of static indeterminacy (n) of the structure.

Step 2.
Select n redundant forces (reactions) and remove them from the structure in order to
obtain the primary structure.

Figure 6. Reactions of the beam in second case.

and are removed.

Step 3.
Write a compatibility equation for the displacement or rotation (angular displacement)
at each point where there is a redundant force or moment. Write compatibility
equations.
 Figure 7. Applying the principle of superposition.

Change as:

Then:

Step 4.
Determine the displacements of the primary structures: 1 with the load
and with unit loads applied at the points of each redundant forces.
 With the unit load:

With the unit moment:

Step 5.
Solve the system of equations (compatibility equations) to obtain the redundant
forces or moments.

We have the following equations:

Substituting in the equations:

Setting up the equations' system:

Resolve the system:

Step 6.
Calculate the remaining reactions using the equilibrium equations.
 Free body Diagram

Case 3

Beam with both ends fixed, subjected to prescribed linear displacement at node B
equal to -0.02 m (Settlement ∆).

Figure 6. Case 3 beam.

First, we determined the degree of static indeterminacy of the structure by the

following equation:

𝑟>𝑛+𝑐

Figure 7. Reactions of the beam in the third case

 As we see, the reactions in the beam are 4 instead 6 like fixed supports have to and
the equilibrium equations are 2 instead 3 too. Since only perpendicular loads in the beam
are applied, the horizontal reactions are zero, and we didn’t consider it , in consequence, the
equilibrium equations are 2.

We got an 2 degree indeterminate structure, that means we had to select two

redundant forces and remove them from the structure in order to obtain the primary
structure, see the image below:

Once we had the primary structure we applied the superposition principle. Knowing
the forces and displacements, we can write a compatibility equation for the displacement or
rotation (angular displacement) at each point where there is a redundant force or moment.

Figure 8. Applying the principle of superposition.

 Change it as,

We had,

Then we had to determine the displacements of 𝑛 + 1 primary structure, applying

𝑆𝐷𝐼

unit loads at the points of each redundant forces.

For 𝑋1,

Internal forces diagrams:

● Share forces: ● Bending moment:

 For 𝑋2,

Internal forces diagrams:

● Bending moment:

Then we had to solve the system of compatibility equations to obtain the redundant
forces or moments, following equations:

Solving,
Setting up the equations' system:

Resolving for x1 and x2,

Freebody Diagram
Results obtain with STAADPro
Staad Pro step by step guide
Case 1

Reactions

Figure n. Reactions of case 1 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Displacements

Figure n. Displacements of case 1 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Internal forces

Figure n. Internal forces of case 1 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Figure n. Internal forces of case 1 beam obtained from STAADPro (2).

Case 2

Reactions

Figure n. Reactions of case 2 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Displacements

Figure n. Displacements of case 2 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Internal forces

Figure n. Internal forces of case 2 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Figure n. Internal forces of case 2 beam obtained from STAADPro. (2)

Case 3

Reactions

Figure n. Reactions of case 3 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Displacements

Figure n. Displacements of case 3 beam obtained from STAADPro.

 Internal forces

Figure n. Internal forces of case 3 beam obtained from STAADPro.

Figure n. Internal forces of case 3 beam obtained from STAADPro. (2)

Conclusions
The results obtained using the flexibility method for cases 1, 2, and 3 closely
approximated the results obtained in STAADPro, with differences limited to just a few
decimal places. These minute variations could be attributed to rounding errors or disparities
in the section properties used within the STAADPro software. Notably, the results obtained
through STAADPro exhibited consistency with the manual results but with reversed sign
conventions for moments, which can be attributed to the different sign conventions employed
by STAADPro.
Case 3 is notably straightforward, as it remains unburdened by applied loads,
resulting in zero displacements caused by external forces.
 The flexibility method proves in comprehending how alterations in a design impact
the structural response. In the realm of civil engineering, where decisions frequently hinge
on a delicate balance between economic efficiency, safety, and functionality, this
understanding is of paramount importance. It can be seamlessly integrated with
sophisticated structural analysis software like STAADPro or SAP 2000. Proficiency in
utilizing these programs not only equips us to apply flexibility principles in practical scenarios
but also enhances our versatility as civil engineers.
 Participations

Student Activity Date Co-evaluation 0 – 100%

Albertos Leon Carrying out the exercise 24/10/2023 100%

Ivan Alejandro case 3 by the flexibility
method.

Burgos Chan Carrying out the exercise 23/10/2023 100%

Victoria case 1 by the flexibility 25/10/2023
Guadalupe method. Contributions in the
writing of the assignment.

Escobar Garcia Contributions in the writing of 25/10/2023 100%

Gipsy Sugey the assignment and the
conclusions. She made the
free body of cases 1, 2 and 3.

Méndez Atoche Making and evaluating the 23/10/2023 100%

Elías Manuel three beam models in Staad
Pro software.

Vargas Carrying out the exercise 23/10/2023 100%

Echeverría Ligia case 2 by the flexibility
Guadalupe method.