Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lab #3: Risa 2D
Lab #3: Risa 2D
Fall 2020
October 9, 2020
The author listed below affirm that I conducted this experiment and prepared this technical
report to the absolute best of my abilities. The author understand that I am preparing to become a
practicing engineer meaning that I take manners of plagiarism and falsification of data very
seriously, and I affirm that this submitted report does not contain any plagiarized content or
falsified information.
Signature: _________________________________
Contributions: Abstract, Introduction, Procedure, Results, Discussion, Summary and
Conclusion, Reference, Appendix
ABSTRACT
The following report focuses on the use of an open source software, RISA 2D. This
program is designed to evaluate 2D structures and produce results for reactionary and internal
forces. The values found using RISA 2D were compared to hand-written calculations for an
example truss and the Linville Creek Bridge truss. It is expected that the hand-calculated results
will be equal to the RISA 2D results, which indicated the program is reliable and can be used to
INTRODUCTION
The Linville Creek Bridge was analyzed by hand in Part 02 – Analyze. Now an open source
software was used to structurally analyze the pedestrian truss bridge. RISA 2D is an interactive
computer program that allows for the analysis of two-dimensional structures (i.e. trusses, frames,
beams, etc.) [1]. RISA 2D was validated using hand-calculations for an example truss because
while programs are useful, they are not always accurate. This project part confirms that RISA 2D
By reading this report, technical information regarding RISA 2D and the pedestrian bridge
external reactions acting on the truss, and 𝑗 represents the number of joints in the truss
superstructure. A truss that is statically determinate means the reactionary forces can be solved for
order to solve for the reactionary forces. A sample calculation can be seen in Sample Calculation
SC 1 in the Appendix.
Trigonometry was used to calculate the angle between two members in a truss and can be
seen in Equation 3.
𝑂
𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (𝐴) = 𝜃 Equation 3
Where 𝑂 represents the length of the member opposite of the angle being calculated, 𝐴
represents the length of the member adjacent to the angle being calculated, and 𝜃 (or another letter
denoted specifically) represents the angle. A sample calculation can be seen in Sample
The length of member EF in the example truss for this part of the project was determined
using Equation 4.
𝑥 = √𝑎2 + 𝑏2 Equation 4
Where 𝑥 represents the length of the member (or hypotenuse), 𝑎 represents the length of
one side of the triangle, and 𝑏 represents the length of the second side of the triangle. A sample
Equilibrium equations were used to determine the reactionary and internal forces of the
→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0 Equation 5
↑ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0 Equation 6
↺ Σ𝑀 = 0 Equation 7
Where Equation 5 represents the sum of the forces in the x-direction, Equation 6
represents the sum of the forces in the y-direction, and Equation 7 represents the sum of the
moment at a particular point. Equation 7 was not used during the method of joints procedure.
Integration was used to determine the internal shear and internal moment functions of the
example truss. The internal shear function can be seen in Equation 8 and the internal moment
𝑀 (𝑥 ) = ∫ 𝑉 (𝑥 )𝑑𝑥 Equation 9
Where 𝑉(𝑥 ) is the function for internal shear, 𝜔 is the distributed load on a member, 𝑀 (𝑥 )
is the function for internal moment, and 𝑑𝑥 is what the integration is with respect to. Sample
calculations for the internal shear function and internal moment function can be seen in Sample
An assumption for this part of the project were made. When analyzing the statically
determinate Linville Creek Bridge truss, it was assumed that the material of the truss was A36
Grade 36, which is a low carbon steel, and the Young’s Modulus for this material is 29,000 kilo-
pounds per square inch (ksi) [2]. The loading of 85 pounds per square foot (psf) [3] used in Part
The first step in this part of the project was to determine the determinacy of the example
truss (Figure 1). Before counting the number of bars, joints, and external reactions, the truss was
idealized (Figure 2). After determining the number of bars, joints, and external reactions in the
truss, Equations 1 and 2 were used to determine if the truss was statically determinate or statically
indeterminate. Before evaluating the example truss, all of the angles between members was
calculated using trigonometry. The length of member EF was also calculated to properly isolate it
before solving for the reactionary and internal forces. Member EF was “removed” from the truss
(Figure 3) to determine the reactionary loads at nodes E and F. The member was assumed to be
simply supported at E and F, and equilibrium equations were used to determine the reactionary
forces. These forces were then considered to be point loads at nodes E and F when looking at the
entire truss (Figure 4). The drawing seen in Figure 4 was referred to when solving for the
reactionary forces at A and G of the example truss and equilibrium equations were used to
Next, method of joints was used to solve for the internal force of each member in the truss.
Joint D (Figure 5) was evaluated first due to it having the least number of unknowns. Joint C
(Figure 6) was evaluated after joint D, then joint E (Figure 7), followed by joint B (Figure 8),
joint G (Figure 9), and joint A (Figure 10). Once the internal forces of each member were
calculated, the internal shear was determined by using conceptual knowledge gained from statics
and dynamics. It is known that shear does not exist in a truss due to the pin-pin connections of
each member. However, shear does exist if there is an external load acting directly on a member.
For this project, the internal shear function of member EF was determined by taking the integral
of the distributed load. This function and conceptual knowledge were then used to draw the internal
shear diagram (Figure 11). Since there is no shear in a truss, there is also no moment unless an
external load is acting directly on a member. Since member EF has a distributed load, the
integration of the internal shear function was taken to find the internal moment function, which
was then used with conceptual knowledge to draw the internal moment diagram (Figure 12). This
diagram was then used to draw the deformed shape of the example truss. The deformed shape can
The next portion of this part of the project required the use of RISA 2D. The demonstration
version was downloaded using a James Madison University (JMU) student account. The
instructions in 2D_Tutorials, provided by Dr. Daniel Castaneda, were followed to understand how
to create a 2D structure and evaluate it. The example truss in Figure 1 was recreated in RISA 2D
(Figure 14). Once the structure is made, the “solve” button was pressed to see the reactionary and
RISA 2D was then used to evaluate the pedestrian truss bridge to be compared to the hand-
calculated values from Part 02 – Analyze. The modified truss (Figure 15) was created in the
program (Figure 16). The “solve” button was pressed to view the reactionary and internal forces
of the modified pedestrian truss bridge. Since the Linville Creek Bridge has more components to
it (Figure 17) the as-built structure was modeled in RISA 2D (Figure 18) to compare the results
of the reactionary and internal forces to the modified structure. The “solve” button was clicked to
RESULTS
The result of the determinacy of the example truss is statically determinate (hand-written
calculations can be seen in Sample Calculations SC 1) since the sum of the number of bars and
external reactions equals the number of joints multiplied by two. Numerical results for the hand-
calculated example truss reactionary forces and internal forces of each member can be found in
Table 1. The handwritten calculations for these results are in Sample Calculations SC 5 and SC
6. The results using RISA 2D can be found in Table 2 and a comparison of the software results
and hand-calculated results can be found in Table 3. It can be noticed that the results are overall
very similar and differ by a small amount. Some values have a larger difference between the hand-
calculated results and the software results, this could be due to rounding during hand-calculations
or a mathematical error.
After confirming the RISA 2D results are accurate, the reactionary and internal forces for
the modified Linville Creek Bridge truss can be seen in Table 4. This table also shows the hand-
calculated results from Part 02 – Analysis. The values are nearly identical with the exception of
rounding during the hand-calculations. RISA 2D results for the as-built (statically indeterminate)
Linville Creek Bridge truss can be seen in Table 5. This table also compares the reactionary and
DISCUSSION
Overall, the simplified truss results and the as-built truss results compare very well. With
the exception of the internal forces for members OP, JK, NO, KL, MN, and LM, all of the values
are nearly identical. The values are slightly different due to rounding during the hand-written
calculations. It was discovered that a mathematical error was made during Part 02 – Analysis for
members OP, JK, NO, KL, MN, and LM. The equations were written correctly, but the numbers
were not typed into the calculator properly. Therefore, the values should be equal to what RISA
2D produced. Since completing this part of the project, RISA 2D is reliable and can be used
confidently without a complimentary hand-written solution. This confidence comes from the
results comparison of the example truss and the Linville Creek Bridge truss.
The use of RISA 2D was done to determine the reliability of the program when evaluating
two-dimensional structures. Since the as-built truss for the Linville Creek Bridge is statically
indeterminate, RISA 2D is useful for the evaluation of the truss. The program also confirms any
hand-calculated results that were done. Programs like RISA 2D are very useful when evaluating a
complex structure. It will prevent any human error that may occur when doing calculations by
calculations but continue to use skills like method of joints for less complex structures or when
Table 4: Linville Creek Bridge truss RISA 2D results versus hand-calculated results from Part
02 – Analysis
(*Note: hand-calculated results for members OP, JK, NO, KL, MN, and LM are incorrect due to
a mathematical error when using a calculator)
RISA 2D Results Hand-Calculated Results
Member Internal Force (kip) Internal Force (kip)
Iy 28 (T) 28 (T)
Ay 28 (T) 28 (T)
Ax 0 0
AP and IJ 29.7 (C) 29.8 (C)
AB and HI 16.98 (T) 17 (T)
BP and HJ 6.769 (T) 7 (T)
BC and GH 17.016 (T) 17 (T)
CP and GJ 8.822 (T) 8.5 (T)
CD and FG 22.066 (T) 21.8 (T)
DP and FJ 17.705 (T) 17.9 (T)
OP and JK 36.438 (C) 7.3 (C)
NO and KL 36.438 (C) 7.3 (C)
MN and LM 36.438 (C) 7.3 (C)
DM and FM 4.276 (C) 4.2 (C)
DE and EF 38.907 (T) 38.7 (T)
EM 7.03 (T) 7 (T)
CO, DN, FL, and GK Zero force members Zero force members
Table 5: Modified Linville Creek Bridge truss results in RISA 2D versus the as-built Linville
Creek Bridge Truss results in RISA 2D
Simplified As-Built
Member Internal Force (kip) Internal Force (kip)
Iy 28 (T) 28 (T)
Ay 28 (T) 28 (T)
Ax 0 0
AP and IJ 29.7 (C) 29.718 (C)
AB and HI 16.98 (T) 19.993 (T)
BP and HJ 6.769 (T) 6.875 (T)
BC and GH 17.016 (T) 17.05 (T)
CP and GJ 8.822 (T) 13.124 (T)
CD and FG 22.066 (T) 29.827 (T)
DP and FJ 17.705 (T) 11.377 (T)
OP and JK 36.438 (C) 33.772 (C)
NO and KL 36.438 (C) 33.821 (C)
MN and LM 36.438 (C) 34.174 (C)
DM and FM 4.276 (C) 0.994 (T)
DE and EF 38.907 (T) 38.499 (T)
EM 7.03 (T) 6.99 (T)
CO and GK Zero force members 0.042 (T)
DN and FL Zero force members 0.484 (C)
CM and GM - 6.454 (C)
NR and LS - 0.63 (T)
RS - 0.837 (T)
Figure 7: Example truss joint E method of Figure 8: Example truss joint B method of
joints joints
(*Note: Handwritten calculations can be seen (*Note: Handwritten calculations can be seen
in Sample Calculations SC 6 Joint E) in Sample Calculations SC 6 Joint B)
Figure 9: Example truss joint G method of Figure 10: Example truss joint A method of
joints joints
(*Note: Handwritten calculations can be seen (*Note: Handwritten calculations can be seen
in Sample Calculations SC 6 Joint G) in Sample Calculations SC 6 Joint A)
Figure 16: Modified (statically determinate) pedestrian truss bridge modeled in RISA 2D
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
SC 1 – Determinacy
SC 2 – Trigonometry
Joint C:
Joint E:
Joint B:
Joint G:
Joint A:
SC 7 – Internal Shear Function for the Example Truss