You are on page 1of 21

# COMPARISON BETWEEN MANUAL ANALYSIS AND

## SOFTWARE BASED ANALYSIS

BY:
W.P.R Indrajith (168913V)

## DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF MORATUWA
SRI LANKA
JANUARY 2017
Contents

Introduction............................................................................................................. 1

Example 1................................................................................................................ 3

Example 2................................................................................................................ 5

Example 3................................................................................................................ 6

Example 4................................................................................................................. 8

Example 5................................................................................................................ 9

Example 6................................................................................................................ 11

Example 7................................................................................................................ 14

Example 8................................................................................................................ 17

Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 19
Introduction

We were taught to calculate reactions in statically indeterminate structures using "Force method of
analysis" and "Displacement method of analysis" during the classes. The examples which we worked
out during the course have been solved using SAP2000 software package and compared with the
results which we obtained with our manual calculations.

This short report presents the compression of results between manual calculation and SAP2000
output. Most of the examples, solved manually, contain variables with symbols rather than numerical
values. But, during the pre-processing stage with software, we have to define material and section
properties with numerical values. In order to compare the results, rounded up values were used
during the property definition stage with the software. Yet, there are some examples which those
parameters were given in the example itself. Those were used exactly the same during definitions in
the software.

For the general case, the material and section definition was done with the values given below.

I = 0.12 x 0.1.3
12

= 1x 10-5 m4

## Hence, EI value become = 1x 105 kNm2

Page 1
Material and section definition for the typical frame section with SAP2000

Page 2
Example 1: A B C
L L

## Flexural rigidity EI. Find support reactions.

Load case 1: Downward settlement of support A by L/100.
Load case 2: Downward settlement of support B by L/100 together with clockwise rotation
of 0.004 at support C.

## Analysis with sap

Data:
Span (L) = 5 m.
Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x1010 kN/m2
Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2

Arrangement in SAP2000

## Support reactions- SAP2000 Results - Load case 1 : Settlement at A

(Support reactions in KN)

## Support reactions- SAP2000 Results - Load case 2 : Settlement at B & Rotation at C

(Support reactions in KN)

Page 3
Bending moment diagram- SAP2000 Results - Load case 1 : Settlement at A
(Bending moments in KNm)

Bending moment diagram- SAP2000 Results - Load case 2 : Settlement at B and Rotation at C
(Bending moments in KNm)

Results Comparison

Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
L.C 1 L.C 2 L.C 1 L.C 2 L.C 1 L.C 2
2 2
Reaction at A (kN) (-0.017EI/L ) 0.046EI/L -L/500 (- 68 ) 183.99 ( - 68.53) 185
Reaction at B (kN) 0.0429EI/L2 (-0.1577EI/L2) 171.6 (- 630.8 ) 171.31 ( - 630.38)
B.M at C (kNm) (-0.00857EI/L) 0.0651EI/L (- 171.4) 1302 (- 171.19) 1301.86

## Clockwise moments (+Ve) Clockwise moments (-Ve)

Upward reaction (+Ve)

Above table shows the reaction summary where SAP2000 sign convension
converted as per manual analysis

Page 4
Example 2: udl - W kN/m
A D
L B L C L

## Flexural rigidity EI. Spring constant 20EI/L3.

Find bending moments at B and C.

## Analysis with sap

Data:
Span (L) = 5 m. Udl = 10 kN/m
Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x1010 kN/m2
Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2
Hence spring constant = 16000 kN/m

Arrangement in SAP2000

## Bending moment diagram from SAP2000

Results Comparison

Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
2
Bending moment at B (kNm) 0.0377 wL 9.425 9.43

## Results converge well.

Page 5
Example 3:

Cable C2 3m

Cable C1 1.5 m

A B
3m C 3m D 6m

25 kN
Data
Beam I = 16 x 106 mm4
E = 200 GN/m2
Cable a = 100 mm2
= 1 x 10-5 per oC Find forces in cables and bending moment at D due to 25kN at
D and drop of temperature of 200C.
Analysis with sap
Data:
Define member section: width (b) = 192mm, height (h) = 100mm (I = 16 x 106 mm4 )

Arrangement in SAP2000

## Define cable properties in SAP2000

Page 6
Assignment of temperature drop in SAP2000

## Bending moment diagram

Cable forces

Results Comparison

## Manual Analysis SAP2000 Analysis

Tension-Cable 1 (kN) 2.12 2.2
Tension-Cable 2 (kN) 23.3 23.29
B.M at D (kNm) 1.95 1.96

Page 7
Example 4: 4P
B C

L
udl - P/L
0.8 L
P

A D
0.6 L

## Analysis with sap

Data:
Span (L) = 10 m. Udl = 10 kN/m
10 2
Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x10 kN/m
Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2
P = 100 kN

Arrangement in SAP2000

## Results Comparison Manual Analysis

SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Bending moment at D (kNm) 0.74 PL 740 741.6
B.moment at span B-C(kNm) 0.6435 PL 643.5 643.37
B.moment at end A-B(kNm) 0.309 PL 309 310.25
B.moment at end C-D(kNm) 0.683 PL 683 684.18
Results converge well.

Page 8
Example 5: PL P
B C

L
0.5 L
L P D

## Analysis with sap

Data:
Span (L) = 10 m.
10 2
Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x10 kN/m
Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2
P = 10 kN

## Assignment of point loads in SAP2000 Assignment of applied moment in SAP2000

3D view

Page 9
Bending moment diagram from SAP2000

Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Bending moment at A (kNm) 0.09 PL 9 9.36
Bending moment at D (kNm) 0.27 PL 27 27.08
B.Moment at end BA (kNm) 0.61 PL 61 61.45
B.Moment at end CD (kNm) 0.33 PL 33 33.33

Signs have been omitted and only the magnitudes are presented.

## Results converge well.

Page 10
Example 6: B Plan view of a grid is shown
udl - q kN/m L/3

A 2L/3 L/3 C

2L/3

## Analysis with sap

Data:
Span (L) = 6 m.
10 2
Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x10 kN/m
Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2
q = 10 kN/m

## Assignment of point loads in SAP2000 (3D view)

It is given that, GJ = 0.5 EI. But based on the defined material properties and member dimensions,
that condition does not come automatically. Hence Torsional constant need to be modified as
follows.

Page 11
Material data definition in SAP2000

E = 1 x 1010 kN/m2
G = 4.167 x 109 kN/m2

I = 1 x 10-5 m4
Section definition in SAP2000 J = 1.984 x 10-5 m4

## E = 1 x 1010 kN/m2 I = 1 x 10-5 m4 EI = 1 x 105 kNm2

G = 4.167 x 109 kN/m2 J = 1.984 x 10-5 m4 GJ = 82673 kNm2

## But GJ should be half of EI.

Hence Torsional constant need to be modified by, 0.5x 1 x 105 = 0.6048
82673

Page 12
Modification factor for Torsional constant in SAP2000

## Bending moment diagram with SAP2000

Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Vertical reaction at A (kN) 0.4197 qL 25.182 25.08
2
Bending moment at A (kNm) 0.0611 qL 21.996 21.69

## Results converge well.

Page 13
Example 7: Plan view of a grid is shown
udl - q kN/m
B
L
A
udl - q kN/m
L

Flexural rigidity EI. Take GJ = 0.5 EI Find end moments at A & deformations at B.

## Analysis with sap

Data:
Span (L) = 4 m.
10 2
Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x10 kN/m
Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2
q = 10 kN/m

## Assignment of point loads in SAP2000 (3D view)

It is given that, GJ = 0.5 EI. But based on the defined material properties and member dimensions,
that condition does not come automatically. Hence Torsional constant need to be modified exactly
the same way as did in example 6.

Page 14
With the specified material and section,

## E = 1 x 1010 kN/m2 I = 1 x 10-5 m4 EI = 1 x 105 kNm2

G = 4.167 x 109 kN/m2 J = 1.984 x 10-5 m4 GJ = 82673 kNm2

## But GJ should be half of EI.

Hence Torsional constant need to be modified by, 0.5x 1 x 105 = 0.6048
82673

## Modification factor for Torsional constant in SAP2000

Page 15
Bending moment diagram with SAP2000

## Bending moment diagram with SAP2000

Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Bending moment at A (kNm) 0.443qL2 70.88 71.11
4
Vrtical deflection at B (m) 0.097qL /EI 0.00248 0.00249
3
Rotation at B 0.111qL /EI 0.00071 0.00071
Signs have been omitted and only the magnitudes are presented.

## Results converge well.

Page 16
Example 8: A B C D
3m 4m 3m

Data:

## Define material : Modulus of elasticity (E) = 1x1010 kN/m2

Define member section: width (b) = 120mm, height (h) = 100mm
Hence flexural rigidity (EI) = 1x105 kNm2

Arrangement in SAP2000

Application of settlement at C

Application of settlement at C

Page 17
Bending moment diagram
(Bending moments in KNm)

Results Comparison

Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
B.M at A (kNm) 5.503 x 10-3 EI 550.3 547.84
-2
B.M at B (kNm) 1.10 x 10 EI 1100 1098.31
B.M at C (kNm) 1.565 x 10-2 EI 1565 1562.58

Signs have been omitted and only the magnitudes are presented.

Page 18
Conclusion

## - Results from manual calculation are matching well.

- The results are not exactly the same and the difference is almost in the decimal places and
negligible.

## 1 Rounding-up and rounding-down in manual calculation.

2 Most of the cases in manual analysis, we ignore the axial deformation in
members, where soft ware counts these as well. Indeed this axial stifnesses can
be modified in the software also in the case of exact comparission is required.

- This exercise helped to improve the confidence of both manual analysis and software based
analysis with SAP2000.

Page 19