Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Slope deflection method
View on WikipediaThe slope deflection method is a structural analysis method for beams and frames introduced in 1914 by George A. Maney.[1] The slope deflection method was widely used for more than a decade until the moment distribution method was developed. In the book, "The Theory and Practice of Modern Framed Structures", written by J.B Johnson, C.W. Bryan and F.E. Turneaure, it is stated that this method was first developed "by Professor Otto Mohr in Germany, and later developed independently by Professor G.A. Maney". According to this book, professor Otto Mohr introduced this method for the first time in his book, "Evaluation of Trusses with Rigid Node Connections" or "Die Berechnung der Fachwerke mit Starren Knotenverbindungen".
Introduction
[edit]By forming slope deflection equations and applying joint and shear equilibrium conditions, the rotation angles (or the slope angles) are calculated. Substituting them back into the slope deflection equations, member end moments are readily determined. Deformation of member is due to the bending moment.
Slope deflection equations
[edit]The slope deflection equations can also be written using the stiffness factor and the chord rotation :
Derivation of slope deflection equations
[edit]When a simple beam of length and flexural rigidity is loaded at each end with clockwise moments and , member end rotations occur in the same direction. These rotation angles can be calculated using the unit force method or Darcy's Law.
Rearranging these equations, the slope deflection equations are derived.
Equilibrium conditions
[edit]Joint equilibrium
[edit]Joint equilibrium conditions imply that each joint with a degree of freedom should have no unbalanced moments i.e. be in equilibrium. Therefore,
Here, are the member end moments, are the fixed end moments, and are the external moments directly applied at the joint.
Shear equilibrium
[edit]When there are chord rotations in a frame, additional equilibrium conditions, namely the shear equilibrium conditions need to be taken into account.
Example
[edit]
The statically indeterminate beam shown in the figure is to be analysed.
- Members AB, BC, CD have the same length .
- Flexural rigidities are EI, 2EI, EI respectively.
- Concentrated load of magnitude acts at a distance from the support A.
- Uniform load of intensity acts on BC.
- Member CD is loaded at its midspan with a concentrated load of magnitude .
In the following calculations, clockwise moments and rotations are positive.
Degrees of freedom
[edit]Rotation angles , , , of joints A, B, C, respectively are taken as the unknowns. There are no chord rotations due to other causes including support settlement.
Fixed end moments
[edit]Fixed end moments are:
Slope deflection equations
[edit]The slope deflection equations are constructed as follows:
Joint equilibrium equations
[edit]Joints A, B, C should suffice the equilibrium condition. Therefore
Rotation angles
[edit]The rotation angles are calculated from simultaneous equations above.
Member end moments
[edit]Substitution of these values back into the slope deflection equations yields the member end moments (in kNm):
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Maney, George A. (1915). "Secondary stresses in rigid frames". Studies in Engineering. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
References
[edit]- Norris, Charles Head; John Benson Wilbur; Senol Utku (1976). Elementary Structural Analysis (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. pp. 313–326. ISBN 0-07-047256-4.
- McCormac, Jack C.; Nelson, James K. Jr. (1997). Structural Analysis: A Classical and Matrix Approach (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley. pp. 430–451. ISBN 0-673-99753-7.
- Yang, Chang-hyeon (2001-01-10). Structural Analysis (in Korean) (4th ed.). Seoul: Cheong Moon Gak Publishers. pp. 357–389. ISBN 89-7088-709-1. Archived from the original on 2007-10-08.
Slope deflection method
View on GrokipediaIntroduction
Historical Background
The slope deflection method was introduced by George A. Maney in 1915 through his publication Studies in Engineering, issued by the University of Minnesota.[4] This work presented the foundational equations for relating end moments in beams to rotations and displacements at the joints, establishing it as a displacement-based approach for analyzing statically indeterminate structures.[5] Prior to the mid-20th century advent of digital computers, the method gained traction for manual analysis of indeterminate beams and rigid frames, particularly in steel and reinforced concrete design where exact solutions were essential for economy and safety.[3] It addressed the limitations of earlier force methods by directly incorporating joint rotations, making it suitable for hand calculations in engineering practice. By the 1930s, growing demands for efficient analysis of multi-story frames under lateral loads—such as wind and seismic forces, heightened after events like the 1906 San Francisco earthquake—spurred adaptations of the method, including its use by the San Francisco Bureau of Building Inspection in 1930.[4] During the 1930s and 1940s, it evolved from purely manual techniques into a foundational precursor for advanced displacement methods, paving the way for matrix-based stiffness formulations that would dominate post-war structural analysis. Subsequent publications significantly popularized the approach, including the 1918 bulletin Analysis of Statically Indeterminate Structures by the Slope Deflection Method by W. M. Wilson, F. E. Richart, and Camillo Weiss, published as Bulletin No. 108 by the University of Illinois Engineering Experiment Station, which provided detailed derivations, examples, and applications to complex frames.[6] These works solidified its role in engineering curricula and professional practice until computational tools supplanted manual methods.Method Overview
The slope deflection method is a displacement-based approach in structural analysis used to determine the end moments and rotations in beams and frames that possess redundant supports, thereby enabling the analysis of statically indeterminate structures.[7] Introduced by George A. Maney in 1915, it treats joint rotations and relative displacements as the primary unknowns, relating these to member end actions through compatibility conditions.[7] This method is particularly effective for plane frames, continuous beams, and multi-story structures subjected to transverse loads, as it focuses on flexural deformations while neglecting axial and shear effects.[8] It is not applicable to structures dominated by axial loads, such as trusses, due to these simplifying assumptions.[8] At a high level, the procedure begins with calculating the fixed-end actions for each member assuming no joint displacements, followed by applying slope deflection relations to express end moments in terms of unknown rotations and translations.[7] Equilibrium is then enforced at each joint by summing moments to zero, yielding a system of simultaneous equations that are solved for the unknown displacements.[7] Once displacements are obtained, the end moments and shears can be computed to complete the analysis.[8] In contrast to force methods, such as the flexibility or consistent deformation approach, which select redundant forces as unknowns and enforce compatibility through superposition, the slope deflection method prioritizes displacement unknowns and satisfies equilibrium directly via joint balances.[8] This displacement-centric framework makes it more straightforward for computer implementation and suitable for structures with moderate degrees of indeterminacy, though it requires solving linear equations rather than iterative corrections.[7]Theoretical Basis
Assumptions and Sign Conventions
The slope deflection method relies on a set of foundational assumptions to model the behavior of statically indeterminate beams and frames accurately. The material is assumed to exhibit linear elastic behavior, with stresses proportional to strains and full recovery upon load removal. Deformations are small, allowing the neglect of higher-order geometric nonlinearities and ensuring that the slope of the deflected shape remains nearly equal to the rotation. The method applies to plane frame analysis, where out-of-plane actions such as torsion or lateral-torsional buckling are disregarded. Each structural member is presumed to have a constant cross-section and uniform modulus of elasticity , resulting in constant flexural rigidity along its length. Joints are treated as rigid, meaning no relative rotation occurs between connected members at the joints. Additionally, axial deformations and shear deformations are neglected, focusing exclusively on flexural (bending) effects in line with Euler-Bernoulli beam theory.[9][5][8] These assumptions impose inherent limitations on the method's scope. It is unsuitable for plastic analysis, as the linear elastic framework does not account for yielding or post-yield behavior in materials. Similarly, the small deformation assumption renders it inappropriate for problems involving large deflections, where second-order effects like P-Δ interactions dominate. The neglect of axial and shear effects further restricts its use to slender members where bending governs the response.[5][9] To ensure consistent application, the slope deflection method employs standardized sign conventions based on local member coordinates. Moments are positive if they act clockwise on the member end, promoting tension on the bottom fiber for horizontal members. Rotations, or slopes, at the member ends (denoted and ) are positive when clockwise relative to the member's original position. The chord rotation , which accounts for relative joint displacements, is defined as the relative lateral (or vertical for beams) displacement between ends divided by the member length , or , with the sign chosen such that positive corresponds to clockwise rotation of the chord. Subscripts distinguish near-end (e.g., ) and far-end (e.g., ) actions, with all quantities resolved in the local coordinate system aligned with the member.[9][8][5] Effective use of the method requires prerequisite knowledge of fundamental concepts in structural mechanics. Familiarity with Euler-Bernoulli beam theory is essential, as it underpins the flexural focus and moment-curvature relationships. Understanding static indeterminacy—such as identifying degrees of freedom and compatibility conditions in beams and frames—is critical for setting up the necessary equilibrium equations. Proficiency in interpreting shear and moment diagrams also aids in verifying results and appreciating how end rotations and displacements influence internal forces.[9][5]Derivation of Slope Deflection Equations
The derivation of the slope deflection equations originates from the theory of beam bending, specifically the elastic curve equation , where is the modulus of elasticity, is the moment of inertia of the cross-section, is the transverse deflection, and is the internal bending moment distribution along the beam length.[5] This equation relates the curvature of the deflected beam to the applied moments and can be solved through double integration or equivalent geometric methods like the moment-area theorem to express end moments in terms of end rotations and displacements. The approach assumes small deformations and linear elastic behavior, with constant .[3] Consider a prismatic beam member AB of length , with ends A and B subjected to end moments and , respectively, and no transverse loading initially. The moment distribution along the beam is linear: , where is measured from end A. To find the relationship between these moments and the end rotations and (the changes in slope of the beam tangents at A and B relative to the chord connecting the ends), the moment-area method is applied, which states that the change in slope between two points is the area of the diagram between them, and the tangential deviation is the first moment of that area.[5][3] Using the moment-area theorem, the relative rotation between ends A and B is , no, correction: actually , representing the total area under the diagram. The tangential deviation of end B relative to the tangent at A is , wait, standard for t_{B/A} (deviation at B from tangent at A) is the first moment about A: but from integration, ? Wait, from earlier calc, it's \frac{L^2 (2 M_{AB} + M_{BA})}{6 EI}. From the elastic curve integration, the deviation . For consistency with the chord rotation (defined as the rotation of the chord AB due to relative transverse displacement of end B with respect to A, where ), the deviation relates to . Solving these equations simultaneously yields the moment-rotation relations for the unloaded case.[5][3][9] Rearranging the solved system gives: These equations show that the moment at the near end (e.g., at A) depends on a stiffness coefficient of for the local rotation and for the far-end rotation , with an additional sway term arising from the contribution, which accounts for relative joint displacements in frames.[5][3] The factor represents the rotational stiffness at the near end when the far end is fixed (), while is the carry-over factor to the far end. For beams with transverse loads, the principle of superposition is applied: the total end moments are the sum of the above expressions and the fixed-end moments and computed for the member as if both ends were fixed against rotation and displacement. Thus, the complete slope deflection equations become: This formulation, introduced by George A. Maney in 1915, enables the analysis of indeterminate structures by relating member end actions directly to joint degrees of freedom.[5][3]Key Equations and Components
Slope Deflection Equations
The slope deflection equations express the end moments in a beam member in terms of the rotations at the ends, the relative displacement between the ends, and the fixed-end moments due to applied loads. For a prismatic member with constant flexural rigidity and length , the moment at end A of member AB, denoted , is given by where and are the rotations (slopes) at ends A and B, respectively (positive in the clockwise direction), is the chord rotation due to relative transverse displacement between the ends (, positive clockwise), and is the fixed-end moment at A due to loads assuming fixed ends.[5] The symmetric equation for the moment at end B, , is These equations were introduced by George A. Maney in 1915 as a practical tool for indeterminate analysis.[5] In these equations, the terms and in (and analogously for ) represent the rotational stiffness contributions: the coefficient reflects the stiffness at the near end against rotation when the far end is fixed, while is the carry-over stiffness to the far end due to rotation at the near end. The term corrects for the effect of relative end displacement, equivalent to an imposed rotation along the member's chord that induces additional moments. The terms account for moments arising solely from transverse or axial loads on the member, independent of joint displacements, and are precomputed based on load type and position.[10][5] For non-prismatic members where varies along the length, the equations are extended by replacing the fixed coefficients 4 and 2 with member-specific stiffness and carry-over factor (typically and for slight variations), derived from elastic curve integration or tabulated for common shapes like tapered or haunched beams; fixed-end moments also require specialized tables.[11]Fixed-End Moments and Shears
Fixed-end moments (FEMs) represent the moments induced at the ends of a beam member that is completely restrained against both rotation and vertical translation when subjected to transverse loads. These moments arise solely from the applied loading and are essential components in the slope deflection method, where they account for the effects of loads on fixed-end conditions before incorporating joint displacements. The corresponding fixed-end shears are the vertical reactions at the restrained ends required to maintain equilibrium under the same loading. The formulas for fixed-end moments are derived from the integration of the differential equation for beam deflection or through standard solutions in structural mechanics. For a uniform distributed load acting over the full span length , the fixed-end moments are at end A and at end B, following the convention where positive moments produce clockwise rotation at the near end.[8] For a concentrated point load applied at the midspan, the fixed-end moments are and .[12] For other common loadings, such as triangular distributed loads, the fixed-end moments differ due to asymmetry. The following table summarizes fixed-end moments for selected load cases, assuming a beam of length with ends A (left) and B (right), and positive moments clockwise at the left end or counterclockwise at the right end:| Load Type | Description | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Uniform distributed | constant over | ||
| Point load at midspan | at from A | ||
| Triangular distributed | Increasing from 0 at A to at B |
