You are on page 1of 8

Abstract. Leonard K.

Eaton resurrects the reputation of Hardy Cross, developer of the "moment distribution method" and one of America's most brilliant engineers. The structural calculation of a large reinforced concrete building in the nineteen fifties was a complicated affair. t is a tribute to the engineering profession, and to Hardy Cross, that there !ere so fe! failures. "hen architects and engineers had to figure out !hat !as happening in a statically indeterminate frame, they inevitably turned to !hat !as generally #no!n as the "moment distribution" or "Hardy Cross" method. Although the Cross method has been superseded by more po!erful procedures such as the $inite Element %ethod , the "moment distribution method" made possible the efficient and safe design of many reinforced concrete buildings during an entire generation. Hardy Cross and the "Moment Distribution Method" Leonard K. Eaton &o' ()) *tter +oc#, *regon ,-(./ 01A I T!"D#CTI" n his paper "2he nfluence of %athematics on the 3evelopment of 1tructural $orm" in 4e'us 5 Architecture and %athematics, Holger $alter comments on the difficulty of calculating statically indeterminate frames of reinforced concrete. He remar#s, "$orming hinges was simple with iron, but difficult with reinforced concrete. It created statically indeterminate frames continuing through se%eral spans, a difficulty surmountable only by using analytical methods" 6$alter 7,,85.79. He emphasi:es the change from graphic to analytical statics and concludes that, "*nly a limited number of statically indeterminates could be solved !ith these ne! procedures, !hich is probably the reason for the mostly simple structures, causing as little calculating effort as possible" 6$alter 7,,85 .79 "hi7e am in general agreement !ith $alter's account, !ould li#e to offer an emendation and in so doing resurrect the reputation of Hardy Cross, one of America's most brilliant engineers. &hen I started teaching at the #ni%ersity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, in '()*, architects !ere understandably cautious about designing large buildings !ith reinforced concrete frames, because they !ere uncertain about the location of moments ;movements< !ithin a frame of reinforced concrete. 4obody li#es building failures. 2hey lead to la!suits and shattered careers. t happened that !as recruited by an architectural school !hich has al!ays ta#en the structural side of the profession seriously. 0nli#e many places, !hich have traditionally "farmed out" this end of architecture to schools of civil engineering, the architectural school at #ni%ersity of Michigan has always ta+en structures as part of its domain. #ne! some of my colleagues in the structural program rather !ell, and occasionally as#ed them for help in understanding problems of structure in =othic, +enaissance, and &aro>ue buildings. 1ometimes heard them tal#ing about the behavior of reinforced concrete structures. 2he name of Hardy Cross !ould be invo#ed !ith a!e. The attitude of my fellow faculty members has to be understood in the conte,t of the decade. n the nineteen fifties the post?"orld "ar building boom !as !ell under !ay, and a number of American architects !ere confronted !ith demands for multistory structures !hich had, by their very nature, statically indeterminate frames. Many of these were done in reinforced concrete, especially in the years of the -orean war when steel was generally

una%ailable. Even %ies @an 3er +ohe, the apostle of steel construction, did one reinforced concrete buildingA it !as far from his best performance. 2he old column and slab system, developed by C. A. B. 2urner, and the more refined version of Maillart, !ere alright for industrial buildings but deemed unsuitable for first class office buildings and apartment houses.679 &ut even in the fifties concrete !as seen as a tric#y material. had one colleague !ho !as al!ays tal#ing about "the dreaded creep", a movement of concrete after it has hardened. *ver in Cac#son, %ichigan a building framed in concrete collapsed and four or five men !ere #illed. An investigation sho!ed that the material had not been given sufficient time to cure. 2he !or#men pulled a!ay the forms too >uic#ly, and a failure at the Doints !as the result. The structural calculation of a large reinforced concrete building in the nineteen fifties was a complicated affair. t is a tribute to the engineering profession, and to Hardy Cross, that there !ere so fe! failures ;2his may have been one of the reasons for the !idespread interest in the unusual reinforced concrete systems developed by $ran# Lloyd "right for his Cohnson "a' office building in 7,(,<. "hen architects and engineers had to figure out !hat !as happening in a statically indeterminate frame, they inevitably turned to !hat !as generally #no!n as the "moment distribution" or "Hardy Cross" method. TH. "HA!D/ C!"00 M.TH"D" "! "M"M. T DI0T!I1#TI" M.TH"D" 2he greatest contribution of Hardy Cross has an amusing bac#ground. His dean, Milo -etchum, resented Cross2s reputation as a great teacher. 3uring his term of office he prevented Cross from getting salary increases, and several times suggested that the professor might do better !or#ing else!here. "ne of -etchum2s charges against Cross was that he failed to publish enough papers, although in '(3* he published his important wor+ on "The Column Analogy". t appeared in &ulletin E7/ of the 0niversity of llinois E'periment 1tation. #ndoubtedly Cross benefited greatly by his contact with this structural laboratory. n any event, his response to Ketchum's threats !as the publication of a ten?page paper in the %ay, 7,() Broceedings of the American 1ociety of Civil Engineers. 2he paper !as entitled "Analysis of Continuous $rames by Distributing $i,ed4.nd Moments", and it set forth an entirely ne! method of analy:ing building frames. 3iscussion !as closed in 1eptember 7,()A the paper !as not published in the 2ransactions until 1eptember 7,(E. At that time space was afforded for 35 commentators who too+ up '67 pages. 2his may be a record for comment on a single paper. Cross !as immediately hailed as a man !ho had solved one of the #nottiest problems in structural analysis. And he did so in a !ay that could be adopted by any engineer !or#ing in the field. Although Cross was +nown as "philosophical", his approach here was e,tremely practical . His %iew was that engineers li%ed in a real world with real problems and that it was their 8ob to come up with answers to 9uestions in design e%en if appro,imations were in%ol%ed. n his first paragraph he !rote, 2The essential idea which the writer wishes to present in%ol%es no mathematical relations e,cept the simplest arithmetic " 6Cross 7,F,579.6E9 2his statement is not >uite accurate. 2he Cross method depended on the solution of three problems for beam constants: the determination of fi,ed4end moments, of the stiffness at each end of a beam, and of the carry4o%er factor at each end for e%ery member of the frame under consideration. 2he author remar#s that the determination of these values is not a part of his method. n point of fact, these moments are often determined by calculus. n 7,(E, ho!ever, that branch of mathematics !as part of the intellectual e>uipment of any !ell? trained engineer. Its application re9uired no contri%ance more complicated than a slide rule.

n order to understand the achievement of Hardy Cross, it !ill be helpful to revie! developments of the theory of elasticity as it applies to statically indeterminate structutes. "hile there !ere important additions to the theory of elasticity in the late 78th century, maDor interest in the analysis of indeterminate structures started in the early 7,th century. Most of the attention was directed to the solutions of trusses in timber and iron ha%ing redundant ;i.e. indeterminate< members. Clebsch and Castigliano come to mind as pioneers. ndeterminate frame structures, li#e continuous beams, !ere of little interest, because in the a%ailable materials it was difficult ;and perhaps undesirable< to create continuity at the nodes between members. 2he developed methodology in solving indeterminate trusses !as cumbersome, since it re>uired the solution of as many simultaneous e9uations as there were redundancies ;indeterminacies< in the structure. Tedious longhand calculations were re9uired, with an accuracy to many decimals, carried forward at each step. Anyone !ho has tried to solve only five e>uations !ith that many un#no!ns in them !ill appreciate the problem. And !ith each higher order of indeterminacy the amount of longhand calculation !or# increased geometrically. Clapeyron !as the first to offer a practical solution to the problem of continuous beams over supports. His Three Moment Method was widely used well into the =*th century 62imeoshen#o 7,/(9. He still had as many e>uations as there !ere indeterminacies ;number of supports beyond t!o< but in any of these there !ere only a ma'imum of three un#no!ns. 2he development of a ne! material, reinforced concrete, made it imperative to find solutions for statically indeterminate frames. %onolithic reinforced concrete structures are highly indeterminate. Hence methods !hich gave reasonably accurate results and did not re>uire an horrendous amount of calculation !ere a necessity. n this, Brofessor $alter is >uite correct. A,el 1endi,en in '('6 offered a procedure +nown as the slope deflection method 62imoshen#o 7,8(9. t !as the first readily practiced !ay to solve rigid frame structures. His method leads to an easily !ritten series of simultaneous e>uations. 2he initial !riting of the e>uations re>uired little !or#. Each e>uation is rather "sparse" ;i.e. it contains only a fe! of the un#no!ns<. 2hus the effort re>uired for the solution of these simultaneous e>uations became less as compared to the methods developed earlier. 2he results from the solution of the simultaneous e>uations yielded rotations and displacements at the ends of individual members that in turn could be used to find moments and shears. n 7,EE, -. A. Calise%, !riting in Croatian, offered a method of sol%ing the slope deflection e9uations by successi%e appro,imations 62imoshen#o 7,8(A &ulletin 7)89. Brobably because of the linguistic difficulty, Hardy Cross seems not to have been a!are of Calisev's contribution. 2hough cumbersome, it !as a pioneering !or#. 2he problem !ith it !as that Calisev still used successi%ely ad8usted rotations to establish moment balances at the nodes. t !as Hardy Cross's genius that he recogni:ed he could bypass adDusting rotations to get to the moment balance at each and every node. He found that he could accomplish the same tas# by distributing the unbalanced moments !hile unloc#ing one Doint at a time and #eeping all the others temporarily fi'ed. &y going around from Doint to Doint, the method con%erged %ery fast ;at least in most cases< and it had enormous psychological ad%antages . %any practicing engineers had dubious mathematical s#ills in handling simultaneous e>uations, and many had difficulties in visuali:ing rotations and displacements. Moments are.much more "friendly" for the a%erage engineer and therefore easier to deal with. 2hus the %oment 3istribution %ethod ;also #no!n as the Cross %ethod< became the preferred calculation techni>ue for reinforced concrete structures. 2he description of the moment distribution

method by Hardy Cross is a little masterpiece. He !rote5 "%oment 3istribution. 2he method of moment distribution is this5 ;a< magine all Doints in the structure held so that they cannot rotate and compute the moments at the ends of the members for this conditionA ;b< at each Doint distribute the unbalanced fi'ed?end moment among the connecting members in proportion to the constant for each member defined as "stiffness"A ;c< multiply the moment distributed to each member at a Doint by the carry?over factor at the end of the member and set this product at the other end of the memberA ;d< distribute these moments Dust "carried over"A ;e< repeat the process until the moments to be carried over are small enough to be neglectedA and ;f< add all moments ? fi'ed?end moments, distributed moments, moments carried over ? at each end of each member to obtain the true moment at the end." 6Cross 7,F,5E9 n the ne't paragraph Cross observed that for the mathematically inclined his method !ould appear "... as one of solving a series of normal simultaneous e>uations by successive appro'imation" 6Cross 7,F,5E9. ndeed it !as. Cross supplied an illustration sho!n in $igure 7. He assumed that the members !ould be straight and of uniform section. 1iffnesses !ere proportional to the moments of inertia ; <, divided by the lengths ;L<, but the relative volume given for GL in the problems might as !ell be the relative stiffnesses of a series of beams of varying section. n that case the carry?over factors !ould not be ?H. $igure 7 64ot available, but >uite trivial9 is entirely academic. t does not represent any particular type of structure or any probable conditions of loading. t has the advantage that it involves all the conditions that can occur in a frame that is made up of straight members and in !hich the points are not displaced. 2he table in $igure E 64ot available, but >uite trivial9 sho!s the remar#able convergence that occurs after the moments have been distributed according to the Cross method. Cross's !illingness to accept appro'imation troubled that minority in the engineering profession !ho insisted on e'actitude. Cross himself readily admitted that the values of moments and shears could not be found e'actly. He concluded that there !as then no point in trying to find them e'actly. He !as after a method of analysis !hich combined reasonable precision with speed. 2hat he achieved his end is clear from a survey of the thirty eight commentators to his brief article. 2hese individuals, partly academics, partly practicing engineers, generally sa! that his method !as a maDor contribution to structural analysis. t >uic#ly passed into the curricula of the best American schools of engineering and by '(3) was generally taught. It continued to be recei%ed doctrine until the nineteen4si,ties. n the light of subse>uent developments in t!entieth century architecture and engineering, it is !orth noting that Hardy Cross included a list of seventeen problems for !hich his method of analysis !ould not !or#. Chief among these !ere ;7< %ethods of constructing curves of ma'imum moments and ;E< %ethods of constructing curves of ma'imum shears. 2he Cross system !ould not therefore be of any assistance to an engineer computing the stresses in an elegant bridge by Maillart or one of the superb hyperbolic paraboloids of $eli, Candela. $or this #ind of building other tools of analysis !ere re>uired. And since much late t!entieth century architecture involves curved forms ;one thin#s immediately of $ran+ >ehry<, there is no possible application of the moment distribution method. &ut for anyone building a structure !ith a reinforced concrete frame bet!een 7,(E and 7,.), the method of Hardy Cross !as a blessing indeed. And there !ere many of these, perhaps more in Europe than in the 0nited 1tates, !hich has al!ays had a building economy !here multistory structures have been framed in steel. Brofessor +obert 3arvas, an eminent structural engineer !ho !as

educated in &udapest after "orld "ar , learned the moment distribution method of Hardy Cross. &ob remar#ed in conversation that "His reputation !as absolutely !orld !ide". Hence it seems to me that Brofessor $alter overloo#ed an important mathematical contribution to structural theory in the years 7,(E?7,.,. TH. ?I$. "$ HA!D/ C!"00 Hardy Cross !as a @irginian, born in 788/ in 4ansemond County. His first degree was a 1.A. in .nglish, !hich he too# at Hampden?1ydney College in 7,)E. n his final year he began his teaching career in the English department at that college. Hampden?1ydney is a small institution, long #no!n for its strong traditions in the liberal arts. t emphasi:es =ree#, Latin, the English classics, mathematics and science, philosophy, and religious history. *ne of my teachers in secondary school !as a Hampden?1ydney graduate. He #ne! his field thoroughly and !as a demanding master. 1o have often !ondered !hether the e'cellence of this early training may be at least partly responsible for the clarity and forcefulness of the pub7ished papers of Hardy Cross. n 7,)( Cross received a &.1. from Hampden?1ydney, and continued teaching for three years at 4orfol# Academy. He too# a 1.0. in ci%il engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in '(*5 , and then Doined the bridge department of the %issouri Bacific +ailroad in 1t. Louis, !here he remained for a year, after !hich he returned to 4orfol# Academy in 7,),?7). After a year of graduate study at Har%ard he was awarded the M.C... degree in '(''. He ne't became an assistant professor of civil engineering at &ro!n 0niversity, !here he taught for seven years. After a brief return to general engineering practice, he accepted a position as professor of structural engineering at the #ni%ersity of Illinois, Champaign4#rbana, in '(='. 2he most creative years of Hardy Cross !ere spent at the 0niversity of llinois. 2here he developed a reputation as a brilliant, if forbidding, classroom teacher. Li#e his eminent colleague, Harald "estergard, Cross suffered from deafness, and he used this handicap to his o!n advantage, both in and out of the classroom. 1tudents soon found out that it !as difficult to improvise ans!ers at the tops of their voices. And they learned either to be e'plicit or to admit that they couldn't ans!er his >uestions. He lectured !ithout notes, and his performance !as al!ays calculated to produce an atmosphere. *ccasionally he !ould stomp out of the class early because no one had attempted a particular problem, and then as# some one !ho had observed his e'it, "ho! do you thin# they too# itI" Cross belie%ed that the classroom was, abo%e all else, the place to de%elop ingenuity and self confidence . He held that a uni%ersity was a place to ma+e inte'lectual mista+es, many mista+es, and learn to rectify them. This is not a bad definition of a uni%ersity. A chronicle of his years at llinois remar#s that he sometimes chose to play the devil's advocate. *nce a student named Alford told Cross that he thought one of the problem solutions in their te't !as !rong. Cross paced bac# and forth, staring hard at the student, and pointing at him fiercely. "Can you, a graduate student, actually have the temerity to accuse the internationally #no!n engineer !ho !rote this boo# of %AK 4= A % 12AKEI Can you really believe that the publishers !ould allo! such an alleged error to be printedI Can you sho! us the errorI" Alford seemed unable to ans!er. 1till pacing, Cross said, "Can anyone help %r. AlfordI 3o any of you see a mista#e in problem fourI" 2he class !as silent. ""ell, %r. Alford," Cross said sternly, "!ould you care to retract your accusationI" " t's Dust that can't..."

"1pea# upJ" Cross thundered. "I still belie%e it2s wrong@" Alford shouted, his face red with embarrassment. "2hen #indly come to the board and prove it to us," Cross taunted. ""e shall be pleased to see the proof of your unfounded allegation." Alford labored at the board !ithout success for the rest of the period. Cross began his ne't lecture by saying, " n our last meeting %r. Alford raised a serious and unfounded charge against the author of our te't." 1taring at Alford, he said, "Ha%e you reconsidered your accusationA" " o, sir," Alford replied. "I still belie%e he is wrong." "To the board, then. &e still await your proof." Alford2s labors were again unsuccessful. The third time the class met, Cross said, "Mr. Alford, are you ready to withdraw your ill4 considered accusation about problem fourA" Moments 'ater Alford was at the board. &ithin a few minutes he managed to show the solution to the problem in the boo+ was incorrect, and he returned to his seat. Cross's pleasure !as evident from his e'pression. "Kou must al!ays have the courage of your convictions," he said. "%r. Alford doesA apparently the rest of you do not, or you are not yet sufficiently !ell educated to reali:e that authority L the authority of a reputation or the authority of a printed page L means very little. All of you should hope to someday develop as much insight and persistence as %r. Alford." 6(9 HA!D/ C!"0020 ?AT.! CA!..! A !ord is in order on the later career of Hardy Cross. "ith 4. 3. %organ he amplified his paper and published a boo# on Continuous $rames of +einforced Concrete ;"iley, 7,(E<. And he e'tended his geometrical methods to the solution of pipe net!or# problems that arise in municipal !ater supply design. 2hese methods have been used to solve similar net!or#s such as gas pipelines. He received numerous honors. Among these !ere the Lamme %edal of the American 1ociety for Engineering Education ;7,FF<, the "ason %edal of the American Concrete nstitute ;7,(/<, and the =old %edal of the nstitution of 1tructural Engineers of =reat &ritain shortly before his death in 7,/,. n 7,(- he moved to Kale to become 1trathcona Brofessor and Chairman of the 3epartment of Civil Engineering. A year after retirement from Kale in 7,/7 he published .ngineers and I%ory Towers, a short boo+ of his papers edited and arranged by !obert C. >oodpasture. 2his little volume is as lively and loaded !ith good sense today as it !as !hen it came out in 7,/E from %c=ra!?Hill. 2he reader !ill learn to enDoy its irony its blunt statements, and its good sense. An e'cellent e'ample is author's discussion of standardi:ation. He !rote, " 0tandardiBation, as a chec+ on fools and rascals or set up as an intellectual assembly line, has ser%ed well in the engineering world." 6Cross 7,/E5EE9 *ne has the feeling that Cross might have been a memorable chairman. "e !onder ho! he !or#ed !ith other administrators and !ith the president of the university. C" C?#0I" 1o Hardy Cross died full of years and honor, having achieved an international reputation. Ket today his name is almost un#no!n. He does not even rate an entry in the 3ictionary of American &iography. "hat is the reason for this neglectI thin# it is that the advent of the computer rendered his moment distribution method old fashioned and unnecessary. "ith a computer there is no longer any such thing as a statically indeterminate structure. *ne can punch in the numbers and get a result to any desired accuracy. 2he Cross method has been superseded by more po!erful procedures such as the $inite Element %ethod mentioned by

Brofessor $alter. 1till, the moment distribution method made possible the efficient and safe design of many reinforced concrete buildings during an entire generation. Berhaps Brofessor $alter !ill accept this emendation to his paper. AC- "&?.D>M. T 2he !riter is much indebted to Brofessors +obert 3arvas and Emory Kemp for help !ith this paper. "T.0 679 2o some e'tent have discussed the early history of the concrete slab in 6Eaton 7,8,5 77(?7E89 and in 6Eaton 7,,85 (7/?(E/9. %y article, it is !orth noting that the flat slab system !as also used in fashionable hotels such as the &enson in Bortland ;7,7/< and the Leamington in %inneapolis ;7,E(<. have not found any instances of its use in first class business buildings. 6E9 n addition to the publications noted in the te't, this classic paper made t!o other appearances. t !as included in the report of a symposium at llinois nstitute 2echnology in Chicago. 2he symposium !as dedicated to Hardy Cross, "!hose simple demonstration of the po!er of numerical analysis brought these methods !ithin the hori:on of practicing engineers". t !as also published in 6Cross 7,.(9. 2his e'tremely valuable volume contains t!o of Cross's additional papers on moment design. 6(9 2his account of Cross at the 0niversity of llinois is ta#en from %en and deas in Engineering5 2!elve Histories from llinois ;0rbana, 7,.-<. am much indebted to Brofessor Emory Kemp of "est @irginia for this reference and for his encouragement. !.$.!. C.0 &ulletin 7)8. Engineering E'perimental 1tations. 0niversity of llinois. Cross, Hardy. 7,F,. Analysis of Continuous $rames by 3istributing $i'ed?End %oments. n 4umerical %ethods of Analysis in Engineering. 1uccessive Corrections. L &. =rinter, ed. 4e! Kor#. Cross, Hardy. 7,/E. Engineers and vory 2o!ers. 4e! Kor#5 Ayer. 2o order this boo# from Ama:on.com, clic# here. Cross, Hardy. 7,.(. Arches, Continuous $rames, Columns, and Conduits5 1elected Bapers of Hardy Cross. ntroduction by 4athan 4e!mar#. 0rbana, L. Eaton, Leonard K. 7,8,. =ate!ay Cities and *ther Essays. Ames, o!a. Eaton, Leonard K. 7,,8. $ran# Lloyd and the Concrete 1lab and Column. Cournal of Architecture 5 (7/?(E/. $alter, Holger. 7,,8. 2he nfluence of %athematics on the 3evelopment of 1tructural $orm. Bp. /7?.F in 4e'us 5 Architecture and %athematics, Kim "illiams, ed. $ucecchio, $lorence5 Edi:ioni dell'Erba. 2o order this boo# directly through the 44C, clic# here.

2imoshen#o, 1tephen. 7,8(. History of the 1trength of %aterials, !ith a brief account of the history of theory of elasticity and theory of structures. 4e! Kor#5 %c=ra!?Hill. 2o order this boo# from Ama:on.com, clic# here. !.?AT.D 0IT.0 " TH. &&& 1tability of structural members under a'ial load 2he %oment 3istribution %ethod ?1ummary A1"#T TH. A#TH"! Leonard K. Eaton is Emil Lorch Brofessor of Architecture Emeritus, the 0niversity of %ichigan, !here he taught architectural history from 7,/) to 7,88. He has also taught at "ayne 1tate 0niversity, %ichigan 1tate 0niversity, and the 0niversity of @ictoria ;&ritish Columbia<. n 7,8/ he !as %argan Brofessor at the 0niversity of Louisville. He too# his &.A. !ith highest honors at "illiams College in 7,F(, and after !ar service !ith the 7)th %ountain 3ivision, received an %.A. and Bh.3. from Harvard 0niversity. His publications include5 Landscape Artist in America5 the Life and "or# of Cens Censen ;7,.F<, 2!o Chicago Architects and their Clients ;7,.,<, American Architecture Comes of Age ;7,-E< and =ate!ay Cities and *ther Essays ;7,8,<. He is best #no!n for his !or# on $ran# Lloyd "right, he has presented t!o papers at 4e'us conferences, "$ractal =eometry in the Late "or# of $ran# Lloyd "right5 the Balmer House" ;4e'us ,8< and "%athematics and %usic in the Art =lass "indo!s of $ran# Lloyd "right" ;4e'us E)))<. Brof. Eaton is contemplating a longer !or# on Hardy Cross and !ould be glad to hear from any one !ith information on this remar#able man. 2he correct citation for this article is5 Leonard K. Eaton, "Hardy Cross and the '%oment 3istribution %ethod'"9, 4e'us 4et!or# Cournal, vol. (, no. ( ;1ummer E))7<, http5GG!!!.ne'usDournal.comGEaton.html

You might also like