Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Transaction B, Engineering, Vol. 31, No.

B5, pp 567-571
Printed in The Islamic Republic of Iran, 2007
© Shiraz University

“Research Note”

NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF SEMI-RIGID FRAMES

*
WITH RIGID END SECTIONS

S. SEREN AKAVCI **
Cukurova University, Department of Architecture, 01330 Balcali, Adana, Turkey
Email: akavci@mail.cu.edu.tr

Abstract– This work presents a computer-based analysis of semi-rigid steel frames. The geometric
nonlinearity of the structure and the material nonlinearity of the connections are considered in the
analysis. The critical load has been searched as a suitable load parameter for the loss of stability of
the system. Several examples are presented to demonstrate the validity of the analysis procedure.

Keywords– Semi-rigid, nonlinear, plane frame, rigid-end section, critical load

1. INTRODUCTION

Connection flexibility affects both the force distribution and the deformation in the beams and columns of
a frame and must be included in stuctural analysis. The behavior of flexible connections is usually
described by their moment-rotation curves, in which the slope of the curve corresponds to the rotational
rigidity of the connections. Several analytical and experimental studies have been done on this subject in
recent years [1, 7].
In this study, the nonlinear analysis of frames with rigid end sections and nonlinear semi-rigid
connections has been carried out taking into consideration the effect of geometric nonlinearity. The
element matrices of members are formulated by using the second order theory. The analysis is then carried
out by an incremental procedure. In the analysis, the critical load of the system has been obtained by using
a double iteration process. The calculation of the critical load is purely a search for the value of a suitable
load parameter λ for the loss of stability of the system.

2. ELEMENT STIFFNESS MATRIX AND STABILITY ANALYSIS

In this study, to describe the connection behavior, different mathematical models have been proposed. The
chosen connection model to describe the nonlinear M-θr curve of semi-rigid connections is given by King
and Chen [6] as follows:

dM   M c 
Kt = = K i 1 −    (1)
dθ r   M u  

where Kt is the tangent stiffness of the connection, Ki is the initial connection stiffness, Mu is the ultimate
bending moment capacity of the connection, M is connection moment, and c is the shape factor.

∗
Received by the editors May 10, 2004; final revised form January 23, 2007.
∗∗
Corresponding author
568 S. Seren Akavci

The nonlinear stiffness matrix of a homogenous, flexibly connected member having rigid end
sections has been obtained from the solution of the second order analysis, where axial force is taken into
account as

 EA   EA   EA 
 kii kij   L 0 0  − L 0 0  L 0 0 
k=  where;    EIu3H EIu2H4   EIu3H1 EIu2H 
(2)
k ji k jj  EIu 3 H1 2
EIu H 2 
kii =  0 kij =  0 − 3 1 k jj =  0 − 2 4
 L3 H LH 
2
 LH L2H   3
LH LH 
 EIu 2 H 2 EIuH 3   EIu2H2 EIuH5   EIu2H4 EIuH6 
 0   0 − 2  0 − 2 
 L2 H LH   LH LH   LH LH 

In expression (2)

H 1 = (k A k B + * N EI ) S + α EI (k A + k B ) C
H 2 = α EI k A S − * k A k B (1 − C )
H 3 = (N L k A − * k A k B ) S + * (αL ) k A k B C
H 4 = α EI k B S − * k A k B (1 − C ) (3)
H 5 = − * (αL ) k A k B + * k A k B S
H 6 = ( N L k B − * k A k B ) S + * (αL ) k A k B C
H = [α EI ( NL − *(k A + k B ) ) + * (αL ) k A k B ] S + * [NL (k A + k B ) − 2 * k A k B ]C + 2 k A k B

where E is Young’s modulus, A is the cross-sectional area of the member, I is the moment of inertia of the
member, L is the length of the member, kA is the moment value necessary for the spring at the left support
to rotate one radian, kB is the moment value necessary for the spring at the right support to rotate one
radian, N is the axial force in the member,C is [cos (αL)] for compressive and [cosh (αL)] for tensile axial
force, S is [sin (αL)] for compressive and [sinh (αL)] for tensile axial force, * is -1 for compressive and
+1 for tensile axial force, and u = α L.
The point of frame instability occurs when the determinant of the overall stiffnes matrix becomes
equal to zero.

Det K ( N ) = 0 (4)

3. INCREMENTAL ITERATIVE SOLUTION METHOD

The computational technique, namely The Newton-Raphson method, used to obtain the nonlinear response
of a frame is shown graphically in Fig. 1. The loading is applied incrementally to the frame and within
each load step an iterative solution is performed until a required accuracy is attained.

PB
2
P1 1

PA ∆u1 ∆u2

uA u
u1 uB

Fig. 1. The Newton-Raphson iteration procedure

Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Volume 31, Number B5 October 2007
 Nonlinear analysis of semi-rigid frames with… 569

The Newton-Raphson iteration procedure for each increment:

K i j −1 ∆u ij = Pi − Fi j −1 = Ri (5)

∆ui = ui +1 − ui (6)

where K i j −1 is the nonsingular tangent stiffness matrix, ∆u ij is the incremental structure nodal
displacement vector, Pi is the incremental load vector, Fi j −1 is the structure internal force vector, and i, j
are the numbers of the load step and iteration.
The right side of Eq. (5) is known as a vector of out-of-balance (residue) loads due to nonlinearity.
Convergence is assumed when
Ri < ε R , ∆ u i < ε u (7)

where Ri is the out-of-balance load, and εR and εu are tolerances.

4. NUMERICAL RESULTS

In the first example, the two-story one-bay frame as shown in Fig. 2 is analyzed with rigid and semi-rigid
connections, with and without geometric nonlinearity. The connections have an initial stiffness of 206667
in-kip/rad, and an ultimate moment of 761 in-kip with a shape factor of 0.525 . The results of linear and
nonlinear analysis are presented in Figs. 3-4.
P/21
P
6 7 8 Columns : W10×33
3 4 Beams : W21×44 (first floor)
P/15 144 in W16×31 (second floor)
2P
3 4 5
2 144 in
1
1 2
288 in

Fig. 2. Two-story one-bay frame with uniform and concentrated loads

P (kips) 7 P (kips) 7
6 6
5 5
4 semi-rigid conn.- nonlinear analysis 4
semi-rigid conn.- linear analysis
3 x semi rigid conn.- linear analysis 3 x semi rigid conn.- nonlinear analysis
2 rigid conn.- linear analysis 2 rigid conn.- linear analysis
rigid conn.- nonlinear analysis rigid conn.- nonlinear analysis
1 1
0 0
0 5 10 15 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Displacement (in) Moment (in-kips)

Fig. 3. The load-lateral displacement curves of node 8 Fig. 4. The load-moment curves of node 1

As the second example, the frame with concentrated loads in Fig. 5 is analyzed for different
connection stiffnesses and rigid end lengths. The definition of the fixity factor is given as
1 , where ki is the rotational stiffness of the connection.
γi =
1 + 3EI k i L
October 2007 Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Volume 31, Number B5
570 S. Seren Akavci

P P P(kips)
4000
nP 3500 1 d = 0 in
5 6 2 d = 10 in
3000 3 d = 20 in
12 ft
6
P d d 2500 4 d = 30 in
P 5 d = 40 in 5
nP 2000 4
6 d = 50 in 3 2
3 4 1500 1
Columns : W12x96 1000
Beams : W14x48 12 ft 500
n = 0.1 γi
1 2 0
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
20 ft

Fig. 5. Two-story one-bay frame with Fig. 6. The critical loads for the frame as a function of the fixity
rigid end sections factor and the length of the rigid end sections

The variation of the critical load of the frame with the connection sitffness and the rigid end length is
given in Fig. 6. The variations of the displacement and moment with the connection stiffness and rigid
end length are given in Figs. 7-8 for P = 100 kips. The displacements and moments are normalized by
dividing them by the corresponding results for the case of fully pinned joints.
1 1
1 d = 0 in
0.9 0.9 1 d = 0 in 4 d = 30 in
0.8 2 d = 10 in 0.8 2 d = 10 in 5 d = 40 in
1
Normalized displacement

0.7 3 d = 20 in 0.7 2 3 d = 20 in 6 d = 50 in
Normalized moment

0.6 1 0.6 3
4 d = 30 in
0.5 2 0.5
3 5 d = 40 in
0.4 0.4 6 5
4 6 d = 50 in 4
0.3 5 0.3
0.2 6 0.2
0.1
γi 0.1 γi
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Fig. 7. The variation of displacement with connection Fig. 8. The variation of moment with connection
stiffness and rigid end length at node 6 ………stiffness and rigid end length at node 1

The last example (Fig. 9), which is selected for comparison, is taken from Sekulovic and Salatic[7]. The
critical loads of bifurcation type stability loss of a single bay frame with a different number of storeys
found by the present method has been compared with those of [7].

P P
Normalized Critical Load Pcr

1
I1 0.9
P P
P P
0.8
P P P P
E= 210 GPA 0.7
a
I1= 2770 cm4 0.6
a b c d
I2 I2 4m 0.5 b
I2 = 1510 cm4 0.4
A1=43 cm2 0.3 c d
A2=33.4 cm2 0.2
Present Study
0.1
0 Sekulovic and Salatic
6m 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Fixity Factor p

Fig. 9. The single bay frame with one Fig. 10. Influence of connection flexibility on the
critical load of the frame

Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Volume 31, Number B5 October 2007
 Nonlinear analysis of semi-rigid frames with… 571

5. CONCLUSIONS

In the numerical part of this study, some examples have been solved for observing the influence of the
semi rigid connections on the bending response of frames. For frames with rigid connections and low
levels of loading, the difference between the displacements and moments of linear and nonlinear analyses
is very slight. However, for frames with semi-rigid connections, the displacements and moments take
significantly fewer values in the linear case than in the nonlinear one for the same load, even when it is at
a low level. Furthermore, as the load level increases, it is observed that, the linear analysis yields much
lower critical loads compared to the nonlinear one.
The results of examples show that when the connections are pinned joints, the effect of the lengths of
the rigid end sections on the critical load of the system is very slight, almost none. However, when the
connections are semi-rigid, the critical load of the system increases with the increase in the lengths of the
rigid end sections and the stiffness of the springs.

REFERENCES

1. Baniotopoulos, C. C. & Ivanyi, M. (2000). Semi-rigid joints in structural steelwork. CISM Lecture Notes 419,
Springer-Verlag Vienna, ISBN 3-211-83331-5.
2. Ivanyi, M. & Skaloud, M. (1993). Stability problems of steel structures. CISM Lecture Notes, 323, Springer-
Verlag, ISBN 0-387-82398-0.
3. Lightfoot, E. and Messurier, A. P. (1979). Elastic analysis of frame-works with elastic connections. J. of Struct.
Div. ASCE, Vol. 100, pp. 1297-1309.
4. Ang, K. M. & Morris, G. A. (1984). Analysis of three-dimensional frames with flexible beam-column
connections. Can. J. Civil Eng., Vol. 11, pp. 241-254.
5. Barakat, M. & Chen, W. F.(1990). Practical analysis of semi-rigid frames. Eng. J. AISC, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 54-
68.
6. King, W. S. & Chen, W. F. (1993). LRFD analysis for semi-rigid frame design. Eng. J. AISC, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp.
130-140.
7. Sekulovic, M. & Salatic, R. (2001). Nonlinear analysis of frames with flexible connections. Computers and
Structures, Vol. 79, pp. 1097-1107.

October 2007 Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Volume 31, Number B5