I

'>

I

EXPANDABLE TRIANGULAR CYLINDRICAL VAULTS.

P. Valcarcel, J.(*); Escrig, F.(**); Estevez, J.(*)

(*) Departamento de Tecnologfa de la Construcci6n E.T.S. Arquitectura La Corufia, Espana. (**) Departamento de Estructuras E.T.S. Arquitectura. Sevilla. Espana.

SUMMARY

In this paper, a new typology based on the triangularization of the cylindrical surface is introduced. This type of expandable structure presents the advantage of not requiring bracing, but it also shows the disadvantage that the modulus cannot be simultaneously compatible in both the folded and unfolded positions. The solution lies in assuming this incompatibility and therefore designing a structure subject to internal tensions minor enough to be considered acceptable.

Two solutions are possible here: First, triangular cylindrical vaults, geometrically compatible in the folded position, and to which a certain force must be applied in order to unfold them, so as to make the folding movement automatic when the external forces are released. Second, cylindrical vaults which are compatible in the unfolding position, capable of unfolding automatically, but with require a certain amount of energy applied in order to be folded. Both types of vaults may have specific applications, according to the urgency of the process. Third, it is possible another way, forcing the deployment in the first case until the truss give a part of input of energy back.

The present paper includes two theoretical for the numerical calculation of both types of vaults and the problems of calculation and the program developed are explained. The calculation of several examples is also included.

A.- INTRODUCTION.

In the last few years our team has studied different types of expandable structures consisting of sets of bars capable of folding into a compact pack, easily transportable and with the ability of being unfolded back to form a cover for a large area. Flat trusses have been considered as well as cylindrical vaults and spherical domes, and some interesting results

Figure 1

have been obtained, a selection of which are mentioned in the bibliography. The example shown in figure 1 can be considered representative of such structures.

In this article, a new typology corresponding to expandable triangular cylindrical vaults, such as shown in fig. 2, will be considered. This typology is of great usefulness, because it allows for the roofing of rectangular spaces and which, unlike cylindrical vaults of quadrangular modulus described in the reference (3), does not need bracing, therefore showing a greater stability. On the other hand, the following disadvantage must be pointed out: The lateral bars of the modulus tend to separate during the unfolding process, due to a geometrical incompatibility at this time. This makes necessary the application of certain external force during the folding stage. In this way this process is greatly facilitated and may even be produced spontaneously upon doing away with the external coercion.

Figure 2

Figure 3

y

This can be easily visualized in fig. 3 The point 1-2-5 define a plane and the points 3-4-5 define another plane whose intersection is the straight line 0-5. In order for the lateral faces of the modulus to be flat, the point 6 would have to be over the former line and it would not possible to fit the following modulus of the structure. Therefore, for it to be possible to built the structure, line 5-6 must be normal to the external cylindrical surface and thus the lateral faces of the modulus must be flattened. If we wish to place a scissor of bars in this face, under no circumstances could it be flat. Straight bars which are not joined at the centre or curved bars can be possible solutions.

B.- STRAIGHT BAR STRUCTURES.

When the structure is resolved with straight bars, the bars of the lateral crosspiece cross in space. It is easy to show that the distance between the points of cross of such bars can be showed in function of ratio llr and the % of deployment like fig 4. It is made for a radius of cylindrical surface of 10 m.

E ' ..
0 II
~
til ••
a:
iii o •
...J
~ :.z_1
~ zo
-<
...J
U. '1'
0
'" '"
!z
0 ...
,
a: l'
w
~ 1.
Z
W •
~
Iii •
III
W 1
<J
Z •
«
Iii
(J
• DISTANCE BETWEEN ~OINTS OF BARS

/J - -- '\
V ,- .......... -,
.,. ..
/ v - -- " [\
/ /' ./ v ... • r-, -, \
/ ./ y . V D.'!'" - -- ........... -, \
/ /' /"" /'" .....- <, r-, ,,\
~.
/ V V / ".,- .- ...- ............. ",\
__.
~ V' V V ....... - - - --- ",\
/ -
W ~ ~ v . - :-0
v - ,.:-- .," r-.:
.A, r:::;;:::: ,..-::: ~~ "1",:'" r-- ~ -

Figure 4

DEPLOY~ENT IN ~ OF MAXIMUN ANGLE

Therefore, the distance will increase when the angle of unfolding the bars increases. If at such points a joint is placed, while the structure is expanded, a side bending of these bars is forced as shown in fig. 5.

X'

Y'

Figure 5

In structures of practical utility, the lengths of the bars are such that the curvature is small, and, consequently, the bending moments are not excessive. The exact elastic force is maintained equally within reasonable limits, by we conclude that these structures are viable for architectural use.

The stiffness matrix of these bars is explained in detail in the references. Its general form will be

STIFFNESS MATRIX IN LOCAL COORDINATES

EA 0 0 0
1";
0 EA 0 0
12
= JEII1l *
0 0 0 °1
2 2
X' ¢llll'}, , °2
0 0 0 3E12l
2 2
Figure 6 ¢2l]12 COMPATIBILITY MATRIX.\,

z'

x'-

Figure 7

Orientation of local axis like fig 7. x axis - > direction of bar

y axis - > direction of normal to plane of scissor. We can obtain by vectorial product of vectors of bars.

y'

z axis - > direction perpendicular of x and yaxis.

After defining local axis, the relationship between local and global systems are in matrix form

Z = A XX

v w

= A

The compatibility matrix As
-cosal -cos{3l -cos)'! cosal cos{3l COS)'l 0 0 0
0 0 0 -co sal -cos{3l -COS)'l cosal cos{3l COS)'l
-'- 12cosa2 12cos{32 l'2cos'Yz cosa2 cos{3z COS)'2 - llcosa2 llcos{32 llcos'Y2
1 1 1 1 1 1
12cosa3 12cos{33 12cos'Yl cosa3 cos{33 COS)'3 llcosa3 llcos{33 llcos'Y3
1 1 1 1 1 1 STIFFNESS MATRIX IN GLOBAL COORDINATES

Matrix equation is L = N . K . A • X

::::} L = S X

In the bars corresponding to the flattened bars fig(3), it is necessary to apply a new condition to the stiffness matrix in global coordinates.

Oz - 0 = d

I Z, Z

This condition may be easily applied by modifying the stiffness matrix in such a way as to obey the restrictions [1].

C.- CURVED BAR STRUCTURES.

The cylindrical vaults which we have described present the relative disadvantage of a stable position which corresponds to the complete unfolding, that

is when it is in the shape of a compact package. In order to unfold it, it is necessary to introduce an external force and sustain it once unfolded. By this token the elastic force accumulated will greatly ease the folding process.

It is also possible to design a triangular cylindrical vault in which this tendency is inverted. If the lateral bars are curved so as to reach their stable position when the vault is unfolded, they will require a external force in order to fold up; however, it will expanded almost automatically. This feature may prove valuable for those applications which require speed in setting up a structure, as in the case of emergency shelters. They will also prove useful in those structures which cannot be easily fixed on their edge and which we wish to keep simply folded.

This new process leads to an important modification of the methods of calculation of truss. On one hand, in a curved bar the axial forces considerably modify the bending moments, for which reason these should be taken into account in formulating the stiffness matrix. On the other hand, the perpendicular loads to the plane of the bar will produce twist moments which would require knots capable of absorbing them. But this is nearly impossible in structures which intrinsically must be mobile, from which we conclude that these bars lack transversal stiffness and so this cannot be considered in the calculation.

The direct formulation of the stiffness matrix is nearly unworkable. For this reason we have preferred to formulate a flexibility matrix with a much simpler deduction and, by inverting the same, obtain the stiffness matrix.

The first matter at hand is to define the adequate curve for the bar. We have searched for an easily constructible form by simple bending and the second degree parabola has been proposed. Moreover, this shape allows for simple analytical formulation. The calculation scheme will be that shown in fig 8.

p

Figure 8

Equation span I

Equation span 2

f

Strain energy will be

If the effect of shear deformation is neglected, the displacements can be obtained by differentiating the expression of strain energy with respect of the adequate loads.

b

U, = 1 k. aM + N' pN ]. ds

l OFT; iJN,

b

U, " 1 ro ::, +N0 ::, l ds [2]

b

V = I-(M' aM + N' aN). ds

7fP 7fP

and considering that the efforts are

Span 1

P·I·

M = -N]' Y + __ 2. X

I

Span 2

P'l

M = -N2' Y + __ 1. X

I

By substitution of these values in [2] we can obtain in matrix form

being

= k~ .11. 1~ _ 1· 1: + 1~ 1 +

f11 E'I 3 2 5

f12 = f21 = 0

Upon inversion of these matrix we can obtain

P = F-1• Z

The compatibility matrix is nearly the same, eliminating the values corresponding to the stiffness in the perpendicular plane to that of the bar leaving

-CO$0:1 -cos(31 -COS')'1 cosa1 cos(31 COS')'l 0 0 0
a 0 0 -cosa1 -cos(31 -COS')'l cosa1 cos(31 COS')'l
12cos0:2 12c05(32 12c05')'2 cosa2 cos(32 COS')'2 11cosa2 l1c0S{32 11COS')'2
1 1 1 1 1 1 D.- EXAMPLE.

The methods described here have been used for calculating various vaults, that shown in fig 9 is representative.

Figure 9

The structure has 20 m of radius and 5 m of lengh of bars. The figure () shows the truss in 4 positions of unfolding: ex = 30, ex = 60, ex = 90 and ex = 140. It has been calculated for straight and curved bars in the hypothesis of its own weight, snow (40 klm2) and wind (100 km/h) with the following results

Type of bars weight/m? max. section max reaction max. react.
without load with load
Straight 17.25 90.40.4 775.8 kg 1425.3 kg
Curved 18.34 90.40.4 -794.5 kg 1408.5 kg The energy-unfolding curves would be for both types like in figure 10

CONCLUSIONS.

The above analysis has been applied to various types of triangular, cylindrical vaults with excellent structural behaviour, from the theoretical point of view. As for the difference between those structures built entirely with straight bars and those using curved bars there is hardly any difference in behaviour upon fixing the boundary points.

1000

ENERGY OF DEFORMATION

600

I 11
MO[ ULU WI H C lJRVl toa RS_ 1 M DUI_! ~s ~ kH 5TR IGH1 BAS
r-"- r-, V IT "'< L
1,\ / I!i \ I i:
\ V I~i \ I :~
J lin
\ / l?1 \ I~
It; . l-
I 1\ '~I ~ ~~
19: I
I ~ I~I I \ I~
!!:s: u,
/ \ ~I \ 13
/ I
.... V ~ I ~./ ~ 900

800

700

500

~ 400 _j

::J

o 300 ""'J

~ 200 >-

~ 100

w

r5 0

o 1 2 3 4- 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 B 19 20

DEPLOYMENT OF SCISSORS IN DEGREES

Figure 10

REFERENCES.

I.-Perez Pinero, E. "Estructures reticulees'l.L' Architecture d' Aujourd'hui. Vol. 141.Dec. 1968.pp 76-81.

2.-Escrig, F.; P.Valcarcel, J.B. "Curved Expandable Space grids" . Non-conventional Structures '87. London 1987.

3.-P.Valcarcel, J.B.; Escrig, F. "Analysis of curved expandable space bar structures" Int. Symposium on 10 Years of Progress in Shell and Spatial Structures. lASS. Madrid 1989.

4.-Escrig, F.; P.Valcarcel, J.B. "To cover a Swimming Pool with an Expandable Structure". International Conference on Mobile and Rapidly Assembled Structures. MARAS'91. Southampton 1991.

5.-P.Valcarcel, J.B.; Escrig, F. "Expandable Structures with Self-folding Textile Cover". International Conference on Mobile and Rapidly Assembled Structures. MARAS'91. Southampton 1991.

6.- P.Valcarcel, J.B.; Escrig, F.; Estevez, J.; Martin, E. "Large Span Expandable Domes" Int. Symposium on Large Span Structures. lASS. Toronto 1992.