Numerical model and experimental tests on single-layer latticed

domes with semi-rigid joints

Aitziber Lo pez
*
, In igo Puente, Miguel A. Serna
Institute of Civil Engineering, Tecnun, University of Navarra, Manuel de Lardizabal 13, 20018 San Sebastian, Spain
Received 4 October 2005; accepted 21 November 2006
Available online 25 January 2007
Abstract
Geometric non-linearities in single-layer domes can cause the loss of global stability, which is strongly inuenced by both geometric
parameters and joint rigidity. The rigidity of the joint requires deeper study, since it signicantly aects the behaviour of these structures.
To this end, a model is proposed for the ORTZ joint. The model is established from the dimensions and properties of the dierent ele-
ments of which the joint is composed and considers the possibility of the material reaching its yield point. After experimental verication,
the model is implemented in a computer application. Finally, experimental tests have been conducted on two structures possessing very
dierent features related to geometry and rigidity of joints. In both cases the proposed model has given a good estimation of the exper-
imentally observed behaviour of the structures.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Single-layer; Geometric non-linear; Semi-rigid joints; Snap-through; Stability
1. Introduction
Optimising structural design can achieve material sav-
ings but can also lead to solutions where members are often
at the limit of their capabilities. In particular, structures are
sometimes required to perform close to instability. This is
so with single-layer latticed domes, in which all members
are disposed in only one surface. In return, spaces covered
by single-layer structures oer a dierent sense of
lightness and transparency, when compared to traditional
constructions.
However, rigidity is much less in single-layer domes than
in double-layer structures. The points dening the surface
are likely to undergo movements that change the geometry
and the global behaviour of the structure. Consequently,
analysis has to include geometric non-linear eects. This
is achieved by means of incremental-iterative procedures.
The one used here is based on the displacement control
method [1], although other control methods have been used
to verify the obtained results. In addition, in a large sum-
mary on the stability of latticed structures, Gioncu [2]
states that material non-linearities, whilst often observed
in double-layer structures, are not likely to occur in sin-
gle-layer domes (Fig. 1).
The stability of single-layer domes is inuenced by the
geometric parameters which dene the mesh of elements.
Many results can be found in the available literature, from
both numerical and experimental analyses. In most of them
the structure under consideration is a single-layer diamatic
dome. In [3], for instance, it is observed that the buckling
load increases as the span/depth ratio decreases. Sohn
et al. [4] consider the reduction of snap-through instability
with respect to joint rigidity. In [5], the implication of mem-
ber slenderness on global stability is considered. However,
the lack of similarity among the types of loads, boundary
conditions and geometric parameters studied in previous
papers makes it dicult to establish a clear trend in the
behaviour of single-layer domes.
0045-7949/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2006.11.025
*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: alopez@tecnun.es (A. Lo pez).
www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruc
Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
As a result, single-layer latticed domes have often been
calculated by making use of the knowledge accumulated
over the years on continuous shells. Certain criteria can
be used to obtain an equivalent continuous shell for a
particular single-layer structure [6]. Once the latticed
dome can be interpreted as a shell, there are formulae
that can then be applied to directly estimate the critical
load of single-layer structures [79]. However, in addition
to the diculty of nding the equivalent shell, this so
called equivalent continuum method does not seem to
be appropriate for the study of discrete structures. For
this reason, the authors have analysed a group of sin-
gle-layer domes numerically to achieve a formula that
allows the accurate estimation of these domes directly
[10]. This formula maintains the discrete character of
the structure and takes into account the parameters that
dene the geometry, the distribution of the loads and
the rigidity of the joints.
Joint rigidity is a particular key factor in the behaviour
of single-layer structures, whose exibility often makes
them unsuitable for spanning large distances. This incom-
patibility has sometimes been overcome by a combination
of double and of single-layer structures [11]. Finding a
solution to the above has also lead to the development of
new joints, like the ones shown in [12,13], or the reinforce-
ment of existing ones [14]. Advances have also been made
in the modelling of joint systems as the use of numerical
methods to foresee real behaviour become more feasible.
For instance, Ueki et al. [15] model the joint by means of
an elastic spring with experimentally set rigidity. In this
case plasticity is considered only likely to occur in the tubu-
lar steel member. In contrast, [5,16] assume the tube to be
elastic and the properties of the spring are changed with the
stress level.
In this paper, the inuence of joint rigidity on the global
behaviour of the structure is analysed numerically. Later, a
model is proposed for the study of the ORTZ joint, which
is widely used, especially in Spain [17]. This model also
takes into account the possibility of the material reaching
its yield point. Finally, the model is checked with two
experimental tests.
2. The inuence of geometric parameters on the behaviour of
single-layer domes
2.1. Study of a basic structure
The study of the inuence of geometric parameters on
the behaviour of a single-layer dome begins with the anal-
ysis of a simple structure composed of two pinned mem-
bers. The structure is represented in Fig. 2 without loads
(left) and in nal equilibrium under the vertical load P
(right), when the angle between the members and the hor-
izontal has changed from h
0
to h.
The curve of applied load vs. vertical displacement of
the node (Fig. 3) is obtained by means of a geometrically
non-linear incremental-iterative method. The use of a dis-
placement control method allows plotting the reduction
of the applied load that occurs as the members move
towards the horizontal position. This behaviour can also
be detected in experimental tests when appropriate precau-
tions are taken.
In reality, however, the loads acting on a structure do
not diminish. Instead, once the applied load has reached
a maximum value (point A in Fig. 3), snap-through instabil-
ity appears. As there is no equilibrium position close to
point A, the node moves towards A
0
, a new point on the
curve where the value of the applied load equals the
maximum value of A. This instantaneous displacement of
the node implies a dynamic energy which can produce
the collapse of the structure. For that reason, the position
of A is critical in relation to the global stability of the
structure.
An exact relation between the applied load and the angle
of the members is given by the equation of equilibrium in
the deformed conguration, when the shortening of the
members is expressed as a function of h
0
and h:
2
2
0
P
Fig. 2. Two-member structure.
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d
Displacement
snap-through
A
A'
Fig. 3. Snap-through instability.
geometric nonlinearity
large
material
nonlinearity
medium small
single-layer shells
large
medium
small
double-layer shells
double-layer grids
Fig. 1. Dierent causes of non-linear behaviour aecting latticed struc-
tures [2].
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 361
P 2EA 1
cos h
0
cos h
_ _
sin h 1
In Eq. (1), h
0
is the initial angle of the member, E represents
Youngs modulus and A is the section area of the member.
The value for the load at A is obtained by maximizing the
function P(h):
P
cr
2EA1 cos
2=3
h
0

3=2
2
Snap-through instability appears when it occurs before
Euler load in the members is reached. This condition
implies that the angle h
0
in Fig. 2 satises Eq. (3):
cos h
0
>
k
2
p
2
k
2
_ _3=2
3
where k stands for member slenderness. If h
0
is larger than
that in Eq. (3), the Euler load is lower than the critical
value for snap-through and the members buckle under
the load given in Eq. (1) when letting h be the angle at
which Euler load is reached in the members:
P
E
2EA
p
2
k
2
1
k
2
cos h
0
k
2
p
2
_ _2
_ _
1=2
4
Some comparative values are shown in Table 1. They have
been calculated using two structures of the same geometry,
but with member slenderness of 75 and 120, respectively.
Buckling of members occurs in the structure with more
slender members. The results also demonstrate that the
critical loads are overestimated by the linear analysis.
2.2. Study of single-layer structures
The previous analysis undertaken on a simple structure
provides a better understanding of the behaviour of a dia-
matic single-layer dome, like the one shown in Fig. 4 (top).
The global dimensions of the structure are the span, D, and
the height, H. Fig. 4 (bottom) also schematises the layout
of the members in a rings and n meridians lines. The
structure is completed with diagonal members.
Single-layer structures are often composed of tubular
members, all of them being of the same section, A, and
moment of inertia, I. The length of a member depends on
its position in the mesh. The length, L, of members located
along the meridian lines is thus set as the reference length.
The non-linear numerical analysis of the structure makes it
possible to study how the parameters dening the structure
aect its stability.
2.3. The eect of member section properties
Numerical non-linear analyses have been carried out on
rigidly jointed single-layer domes with six meridians lines
and a span/depth ratio of 6. Members dimensions were
assigned according with previous linear analysis. The
Table 1
Results of linear and non-linear analyses
Failure mode
(5,0.3)
x
y
P
(0,0) (10,0)
E = 200 GPa
A1 = 4.83e-3 m
2
A2 = 2.24e-3 m
2
Lengths in metres
Snap-thr.
Linear analysis
Euler
Nonlinear analysis
Pcr = 4.210
5
N Pcr = 0.810
5
N
Pcr = 1.910
5
N Pcr = 0.410
5
N
Pcr = 2.010
5
N --
Pcr = 0.410
5
N Pcr = 0.310
5
N
1 = 75
1 = 75
2=120
2=120
a
n
L, A, I
D
H

Fig. 4. Diamatic single-layer dome (top) and parameters dening the structure (bottom).
362 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
corresponding member properties are listed in Table 2 and
the results are shown in Fig. 5. The structures were loaded
with the same value at every node. Loads in Fig. 5 repre-
sent the load applied on each node when the critical point
was reached.
In Fig. 6, previous results for the critical loads have been
divided by the area of the member section. In this way, it
can be seen how the critical load divided by the corre-
sponding section area is the same for all single-layer domes
with the same number of rings. Single-layer domes with pin
joints behave in a similar way. As a result, it can be con-
cluded that the critical load for a single-layer dome is pro-
portional to the area of the member section, just as it was
for the simple structure of Fig. 2 (see Eq. (2)).
2.4. The eect of the number of rings
The critical loads undergo a signicant change as the
number of rings varies in Fig. 6. The eect of a change in
the number of rings is bigger when the number of rings is
low. This is due to the relation between the number of rings
and the angle between members in the structure, since this
angle plays a relevant role as illustrates the simple structure
of Fig. 2. In eect, when Eq. (2) is developed for small val-
ues of the angle h
0
, it can be expressed as Eq. (5), where it
can be seen that the critical load is proportional to the third
power of the angle between members. Eq. (5) is equal to
that given by [18], where a structure with only one free
node is considered as well.
P
cr
2EA
h
3
0
3

3
p 5
In the single-layer dome with several rings, the angle be-
tween two members located on the same meridian line de-
pends on the number of rings a and on the span/depth
ratio D/H:
2h
0

u
a

1
a
tan
1
4D=H
D=H
2
4
_ _
6
where u is the half-subtended angle of the dome (Fig. 7).
Thus, replacing h
0
by u divided by 2a and being n the
number of meridian lines, which is also the number of
members joined at each node, Eq. (5) can be extended for
single-layer domes so that the critical load is given in Eq.
(7):
P
cr
nc
A
EA
u=2a
3
3

3
p 7
Coecient c
A
has been introduced in Eq. (7) to take into
account dierences of critical load depending on load dis-
tribution. Values of c
A
proposed by the authors after
numerical analysis of a signicant number of single-layer
domes are given in Fig. 8. Eq. (7) is valid for pin-jointed
single-layer domes but will be extended later for semi-rigid
joints.
Fig. 9 shows reasonable agreement between the values
given by Eq. (7) and those obtained numerically from the
non-linear analysis. The values of Eq. (7) have been joined
in a continuous line in order to make the comparison
clearer.
Table 2
Properties of tubular members
Span (m) Dimensions
a
Area (cm
2
) M. inertia (cm
4
)
20 70 2 4.27 24.7
30 90 4 10.8 100
40 125 5 18.8 340
50 200 5 30.6 1460
60 200 8 48.3 2230
a
Dimensions = outer diameter thickness (mm
2
).
0
4
8
12
4 5 6 7
number of rings
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

l
o
a
d

p
e
r

n
o
d
e

(
1
0
5
N
)
50
20 m
30 m
40 m
m
60 m
Fig. 5. Critical loads of single-layer domes obtained numerically (rigid
joints).
0
100
200
300
4 5 6 7
number of rings
C
r
.

l
o
a
d

/

n
o
d
e
/


s
e
c
t
i
o
n

(
N
/
m
m
2
)
20 m
30 m
40 m
50 m
60 m
Fig. 6. Critical loads per node and per member section area.

0
2
0
Fig. 7. Meridian section of a diamatic dome.
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 363
2.5. The eect of the span/depth ratio D/H
The span/depth ratio aects the critical load of single-
layer domes because it aects the angle between members,
as has been shown in Eq. (6). Using Eq. (6) in combination
with Eq. (7), the critical loads can be worked out directly
for domes with dierent span/depth ratios. The results
for a dome spanning 40 m are shown in Fig. 10 and are
compared with the loads obtained by means of numerical
analysis.
3. The eect of joint rigidity on the behaviour of single-layer
domes
For many years, analyses of single-layer structures have
assumed (conservatively) the use of pin-jointed systems.
However, in order to extend the use of single-layer struc-
tures, new designs of semi-rigid joints have been intro-
duced. As a result, the behaviour of the structure may
dier signicantly, as is shown in Fig. 11, where the
loaddisplacement curves of two single-layer structures
are compared. Besides the dierence in the load values,
there is a noticeable variation in the behaviour of the struc-
ture. In fact, snap-through instability can disappear
because of the presence of rigidity in the joints.
The inuence of the rigidity of the joint on the critical
load of single-layer domes has been studied in [10], based
on the analysis of a two-member structure with perfectly
rigid joints. The equilibrium equation in the deformed con-
guration for that structure gives Eq. (8):
P EAh
2
0
h
2
h
24EI
L
2
h
0
h 8
The value of the critical load is obtained by maximizing the
function P(h):
P
cr
2EA
1
3
h
2
0

4I
AL
2
_ _
h
2
0
3

8I
AL
2
_ _1=2

24EI
L
2
h
0

h
2
0
3

8I
AL
2
_ _1=2
_ _
9
Performing in Eq. (9) the same transformation as for the
simple structure of two pinned members, a new formula
for the direct estimation of the critical load of a single-layer
diamatic dome with semi-rigid joints is obtained in Eq.
(10), where coecients c
A
and c
R
multiplies the area and
moment of inertia of the member section, respectively,
and have been introduced to take into account the eects
of load distribution. The values of these coecients for
the two distributions of loads considered here are shown
in Fig. 8. When all the nodes are loaded and, consequently,
their horizontal movements are limited, the load bearing
capacity is larger.
P
cr
nc
A
EA
1
3
u=2a
2

4c
R
aI
c
A
AL
2
_ _
1
3
u=2a
2

8c
R
aI
c
A
AL
2
_ _
1=2
nc
R
12EaI
L
2
u=2a
1
3
u=2a
2

8c
R
aI
c
A
AL
2
_ _
1=2
_ _
10
In Eq. (10) a is a non-dimensional parameter whose values
are between 0 and 1, depending on the rotational stiness k
(Eq. (11)), which is the proportionality constant between
the rotation at a joint and the applied moment.
0
8
16
24
4 5 6 7
number of rings
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

l
o
a
d

p
e
r

n
o
d
e

(
1
0

5

N
) D/H = 6.0
D/H = 4.5
D/H = 3.0
Eq. (7)
Fig. 10. Critical loads for dierent span/depth ratios (pin-jointed dome
under uniform load).

A
=1

R
=1

AC
=0.55

RC
=0.70

AU
=1.60

RU
=0.85
Fig. 8. Values of c
A
and c
R
according to the load case (C, concentrated; U, uniform).
0
5
10
4 5 6 7
number of rings
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

l
o
a
d

p
e
r

n
o
d
e

(
1
0
5

N
)
20 m
40 m
60 m
Eq. (7)
Fig. 9. Comparison between Eq. (7) and critical loads obtained
numerically.
364 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
k 6
EI
L
a
1 a
11
Loads predicted with Eq. (10) are compared in Fig. 12 with
those obtained numerically. A very reasonable agreement
has been achieved. Numerical analysis has also veried that
snap-through instability disappears when the rigidity of the
joint satises Eq. (12), which corresponds with imaginary
values of Eq. (10):
a >
c
A
24c
R
AL
2
I
u=2a
2
12
4. Comparison with other proposals found in the literature
The use of single-layer structures to provide interesting
architectural solutions has prompted the proposal of sev-
eral formulations for the rapid estimation of their load
bearing capacity. Most of these formulations are based
on the continuum analogy and are unable to satisfactorily
anticipate the behaviour of a discrete structure. Some of
the ones applicable to uniform loading are going to be
compared here. Eq. (13) was presented by Suzuki et al.
[7] and applies to domes with completely rigid joints.
q
cr

3:6EA
kR
2
for S < 3:3
q
cr

38:8EA
k
2
RL
for S > 3:3
13
Saitoh et al. [8] give the corresponding expression for
pinned joints in Eq. (14).
q
cr
1:70EA
r
y
LR
2
14
Finally, Eq. (15), taken from [9], is a more complex for-
mula which, in certain respects, takes into account the sti-
ness of the dome, but does not truly quantify joint rigidity.
When comparing these formulae, Q
cr
, which represents
load per node in Eq. (15), will be converted to q
cr
, load
per area.
Q
cr

EA
1
a
2
B
8p
2
0:47
L
3
R
3
3B
I
ALR
_ _
15
In the previous equations, L is the length of the meridian
members, A and I are the member section area and mo-
ment of inertia, respectively, k stands for member slender-
ness and R is the radius of the dome. The value of S in Eq.
(13) is given by Eq. (16):
0
1
2
3
0.00 0.33 0.67 1.00
Joint rigidity ()
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
5

N
)
Eq. (10)
numerical
0
1
2
3
0.00 0.33 0.67 1.00
Joint rigidity ()
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

l
o
a
d

p
e
r

n
o
d
e

(
1
0
5

N
)
Eq. (10)
numerical
Fig. 12. Comparison between Eq. (10) and numerical analysis. Concentrated load (left) and uniform load (right).
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Displacement of the upper node (m)
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
5

N
)
Pinned joints
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Displacement of the upper node (m)
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
5

N
)
Rigid joints
Fig. 11. Loaddisplacement curves (six rings and 40 m span).
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 365
S

kL
R
_
16
In Eq. (15), B is the equivalent bending stiness. Its values
are given in Table 3 as a function of a
B
, where
a
B

L
2
r
y
R
and r
y

I
A
_
17
The equivalent bending stiness B equals zero for pin-
ned joints.
Some calculations have been worked out with ve-ring
domes in order to compare the formulae presented in this
paper, with Eqs. (13)(15) and with the numerical analysis.
The diameters of the domes varied from 20 to 60 m and all
had a span/depth ratio, D/H, equal to 6. The results for
pinned joints are shown on the left in Fig. 13 and the
results for rigid joints on the right.
For the rigidly jointed domes (Fig. 13, right) only the
results given by Suzuki et al. [7] are close to those obtained
numerically. Besides, applying the formulae available in the
literature to pinned domes (Fig. 13, left) does not provide
accurate values. In addition to the precision which it
achieves, the expression proposed by the authors allows
the introduction of intermediate values of joint rigidity that
are not considered by the continuum analogy-based
formulae.
5. Modelling the joints
Up to this point, the eects of the angle between mem-
bers and of the joint rigidity on the load bearing capacity
of single-layer structures have been examined only numer-
ically. The rigidity of the joint requires deeper study, since
it signicantly aects the behaviour of these structures. To
this end, a model is proposed for the ORTZ joint. The
model is established from the dimensions and properties
of the dierent elements of which the joint is composed.
After experimental verication, the model is implemented
in a computer application for latticed structural design.
5.1. Proposal of joint model
The ORTZ system consists of a solid steel ball into
which tubular members are screwed by means of captive
bolts. The bolts, which are tightened by two nuts, are
threaded in opposing directions in order to allow an easier
assembly of the system. A detailed scheme of the ORTZ
joint is shown in Fig. 14.
In the computer application developed for the non-lin-
ear numerical analysis of lattice structures, the single-layer
dome is considered as being composed of members that
join the points of a mesh. Each member consists of a tube
with a joint at either end. The following approximation is
proposed for the modelling of the jointtubejoint group.
The stiness of the ball is considered to be innite. The
tube is assumed to be elastic and with the same properties
as the real tube. The bolt is replaced by an elasto-plastic
cylinder located between the tube and the balls. As a result,
the real jointtubejoint group shown in Fig. 15 (top) is
modelled by the simplest set in Fig. 15 (bottom).
The stiness matrix for the new structural members is
formed through a procedure of condensation of degrees
of freedom (see Appendix A). Finally, the global stiness
matrix for the structure is formed by assembling all of
the members stiness matrices together.
During calculation of the equilibrium curve, the devel-
oped software detects the eventual yielding point of the
bolts. As soon as plasticity is reached by any of the bolts,
the moment of inertia is reduced according to Eq. (18):
I
eq

D
4
4
u
c
8

sin4u
c

32

1
3
cos
3
u
c
sin u
c
_ _
18
where u
c
is the angle limiting the plastic zone of the bolt
section and D is the bolt diameter (see Appendix B). In this
Table 3
Equivalent bending stiness, B [9]
a
B
1/32 1/16 1/8 1/4 1/2 1
B 0.868 0.873 0.886 0.950 1.176 1.850
a
B
2 4 8 16 32 64
B 3.15 4.83 6.48 7.35 7.80 7.90
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
20 40 60
dome span (m)
C
r
i
t
.

l
o
a
d

p
e
r

s
q
.

m
.

(
1
0
4

N
/
m
2
)
Eq. (7) [9]
Numerical [8]
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
20 40 60
dome span (m)
C
r
.

l
o
a
d

p
e
r

s
q
.

m
.

(
1
0
4

N
/
m
2
)
Eq. (10) [9]
Numerical [7]
Fig. 13. Comparison between existing direct formulae and numerical analysis. Pinned joints (left) and rigid joints (right).
366 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
way, plasticity is taken into account and a distribution of
stress equivalent to that of a linear elastic element
maintained.
6. Experimental test for the joint model
The model for the structural element has been tested
experimentally. Fig. 16 shows the test arrangement. A sym-
metric layout was chosen in order to avoid torsional eects.
Four members were attached to the central node. The other
ends were simply supported on the test bench and were
reinforced against local buckling.
As a result, the ball was rigidly joined and the load
was applied at the other ends of the members. Fig. 17
shows the vertical load and the bending moment acting
at the section which limits the tube and the bolt. As the
tube is much longer than the bolt, the largest eect is due
to the bending moment. Therefore, the equivalent length
of the cylinder model for the real bolt is obtained by keep-
ing the same rotational stiness for a given bending
moment. This assumption leads to the equivalent length
of Eq. (19).
L
Eq

I
R
I
L
L
L
L
R
19
where I
R
and I
L
are the moments of inertia corresponding
to the diameters D
R
and D
L
in Fig. 14.
The experimental curve of applied load versus displace-
ment is shown in Fig. 18. The graph also shows the curve
Fig. 16. Experimental testing of joint rigidity.
D
L
L
L
L
R
D
R
Fig. 14. Detail of ORTZ joint.
L
2
L
3
L
4
L
l
L
0
L
Fig. 15. Proposed approximation for the study of structural members.
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 367
predicted by the numerical analysis of the test structure
modelled as explained beforehand. Agreement between
both curves was found to be quite satisfactory. Therefore,
it has been proved to be a good model for the joint even
after the initial yielding of the bolts.
7. Testing a basic single-layer structure
In order to check the results achieved with the proposed
model, an experimental test on a basic single-layer dome
was carried out.
7.1. Description of the test structure
The tested single-layer structure consisted of six tubular
members attached to a central node (Fig. 19). The other
ends were joined by six more tubular members forming
the only ring, which was simply supported on the bench.
These nodes had a free movement in the radial direction.
The structure had a 7-m span and all the tubular members
were 90 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick.
The height between the ring and the central node has a
great inuence on the critical load of the structure, as has
been demonstrated by [18]. In his article, Ishikawa and
Kato [18] show that, for a pin-jointed structure, the critical
load is proportional to the third power of the angle of the
members. In particular, for a pin-jointed structure with the
same geometry as the one in Fig. 19, a 1-mm shortening of
the members would cause a reduction of about 50% of the
critical load. And this angle is relevant when the joints are
semi-rigid as well. In the actual experiment, the expected
value for the height of the upper node was 15 cm. However,
after the assembly of the members the measured height
turned out to be only 13 cm. Nowadays, in spite of the
reduction of fabrication errors, any small deviation intro-
duced during the assembly of a shallow single-layer struc-
ture can cause changes in the position of the nodes and,
consequently, aect its load carrying capacity. Accord-
ingly, verication of the node locations after assembly is
highly recommended.
Fig. 20 contains a photograph of the test specimen. Dur-
ing the test, the load was applied on the central node and
the vertical displacement was measured. The load was
applied under control displacement conditions by means
of a specic device located between the node and the actu-
ator. A displacement sensor measured the aperture of the
ring (Fig. 19). In addition, axial strain in all members
was recorded, as well as bending strain in radial members.
l
o
a
d

(
1
0
3

N
)
0
2
4
6
8
0 0.02 0.04 0.06
displacement (m)
experimental
proposed model
Fig. 18. Experimental and numerical results for joint rigidity test.
7 m
d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
Fig. 19. Overall layout of the basic test structure.
L
A
P
P L - L
A
L
P
Fig. 17. Actions at the section limiting tube and bolt.
Fig. 20. Overall view of the structure before the experimental test.
368 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
7.2. Experimental test results
The experimental loaddisplacement curve is shown in
Fig. 21 together with the numerically derived curves for
the structure when it is assumed to have rigid joints and
when it is assumed to have pin joints. The experimental
curve is closer to the pin-jointed curve and also exhibits
snap-through instability. Joint rigidity in the experimental
structure was low enough to ensure that only certain
increases in the supported loads were introduced that do
not signicantly change its global behaviour.
7.3. Model to be applied in the analysis of a real structure
In order to take into account imperfections introduced
during the assembly of a real structure, certain variations
need to be applied to the proposed model. The imperfec-
tions are due to lack of adjustment and inadequate tighten-
ing of the joints. As has been previously mentioned, small
dierences in the length of the members lead to relevant
changes in the behaviour of shallow single-layer structures.
The fact that defects in the joints increase the exibility is
considered by modelling the double-threaded bolt using
its smallest diameter. The resulting model is illustrated in
Fig. 22.
Unlike the experimental test conducted on a single-node
structure (Fig. 16), joints in a real structure cannot be con-
sidered as perfectly rigid joints. Their greater exibility is
more accurately approximated by the scheme in Fig. 23,
where the actions which appear in the section between
the tube and the bolt are shown. There, the shear force is
more relevant than the bending moment. Consequently,
the equivalent length for the modelled bolt is obtained in
Eq. (20) as the length which maintains the same rotational
stiness for a given shear force.
L
2
Eq
L
L
2L
R
L
L
L
2
R
I
L
I
R
20
Considering the element sizes in the actual experimental
structure and making use of Eq. (20), the joint is modelled
by an innitely rigid ball with a 67-mm long radius and an
elasto-plastic cylinder with a diameter of 25.7 mm and a
length of 54.6 mm.
The curve obtained from the numerical analysis of the
modelled structure is compared in Fig. 24 with the experi-
mental results. The reasonable level of agreement achieved
proves the capability of the model to reproduce the real
behaviour of the structure for at least this particular case,
where joint rigidity is not quite so high.
-1
0
1
2
0 100 200 300
Displacement of the upper node (mm)
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
4

N
)
rigid joints
experimental
pin-jointed
Fig. 21. Experimental loaddisplacement curve bounded by the numer-
ically derived curves.
L
Eq
D
R
L
L
L
R
D
L
Fig. 22. Joint model for the assembled member.
L
A
L
A
P
P
2
P
2
L
A
Fig. 23. Actions at the section limiting tube and bolt.
-1
0
1
2
100 0 200 300
Displacement of the upper node (mm)
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
4

N
)
experimental
proposed model
Fig. 24. Comparison of numerically and experimentally obtained load
curves.
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 369
8. Testing a shallow single-layer dome
One last experiment was conducted on a complete sin-
gle-layer dome of the parallel diamatic sort. The purpose
was to check whether the proposed model performs well
with a more complex single-layer structure.
8.1. Description of the test
The dome was 7-m-spanned and has four rings. There
were a total of 156 members and 61 joints. All tubular
members had a diameter of 40 mm and a thickness of
2 mm, except the tubes composing the external ring, which
were 60 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick. The height of the
central joint measured before the test was 647 mm.
The external ring rested on a robust support structure.
This auxiliary structure allowed the required workspace
for the test equipment and provided the structure with vol-
ume enough to undertake congurations quite distinct
from the initial shape of the dome. The supporting joints
were bolted to the auxiliary structure and were free to move
in a radial direction. Small plates of steel and Teon
located under the ball-joint ensured that they could slide
freely (Fig. 25). In fact, the numerical analysis revealed that
the radial displacements were negligible.
The structure was loaded at the central point by means
of a hydraulic jack. A device located between the node and
the actuator guaranteed that the test was performed under
displacement control conditions (Fig. 26). In addition to
the measurements of the load and the vertical displacement
at the central node, displacements in the four nodes encir-
cled in Fig. 27 were registered. Highlighted members in
Fig. 27 are those for which axial and bending strains were
measured during the test.
Fig. 25. Detail of the sliding support.
Fig. 26. Hydraulic jack.
Fig. 27. Location of the instrumented tubular members and nodes.
370 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
8.2. Experimental test results
The record of the vertical displacement of the nodes
(Fig. 28) shows that initially, whilst the central node was
descending under the applied load, the adjacent nodes
hardly moved. Movement of the central node was, there-
fore, not strongly restricted. In fact, it was facilitated in
its movement due to the high number of rings and its mark-
edly shallow shape. In addition, the experimental loaddis-
placement curve in Fig. 29 reveals a linear relationship
between load and displacement of the central node for
the rst stage which lasted up to 55 mm of the upper node
displacement.
The original position of the central members was
inverted when the central node reached a displacement of
55 mm. The applied load caused a tensional force in the
central members whilst the ring members were compressed.
As a result, the slope of the load curve in Fig. 29 exhibits a
sudden increase at 55 mm. A similar change is observed in
Fig. 30, where the axial strains of the ring members are
shown. The behaviour was maintained up to an axial strain
of about 1000 le. Beyond this point the steel began to yield.
The strain of the yielded members increased notably and
the buckling of three members of the ring occurred. The
successive buckling of the tubes in Fig. 30 correspond to
the peaks observed in the loaddisplacement curve
(Fig. 29). The photograph in Fig. 31 shows the ring with
the buckled members.
In contrast with the structure tested rst, the presence of
a constant increase in load in Fig. 29 also leads to the con-
clusion that joint rigidity in this structure was high enough,
when compared to the stiness of the members, to ensure
that the loss of stability due to snap-through was avoided.
Two test experiments have, thus, been conducted on struc-
tures possessing very dierent features related to the num-
ber of rings and members present in each and to the relative
stiness between their joints and tubes.
8.3. Experimental test results vs. proposed model
The dome of the test experiment has been calculated
with the non-linear application which includes the model
0
100
200
0 100 200
Displacement of the upper node (mm)
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
upper node
first ring
second ring
Fig. 28. Displacement of the nodes vs. displacement of the central node.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 50 100 150 200
Displacement of the upper node (mm)
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
4

N
)
buckling
Fig. 29. Experimental loaddisplacement curve.
-4000
-2000
0
0 100 200
Displacement of the upper node (mm)
A
x
i
a
l

s
t
r
a
i
n
,

f
i
r
s
t

r
i
n
g

(

)
buckling
yielding
Fig. 30. Axial deformations of rst-ring-members.
Fig. 31. Buckling of rst-ring-members.
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Displacement of the upper node (mm)
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

l
o
a
d

(
1
0
4

N
)
experimental
proposed model
Fig. 32. Comparison of numerically and experimentally obtained load
curves.
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 371
of members proposed beforehand. The joints were
modelled as a 38-mm part of innite stiness connected
to an elasto-plastic cylinder with a diameter of 13.6 mm
and a length of 32.0 mm, obtained through Eq. (20).
The loaddisplacement curve arrived at by this analysis
is compared in Fig. 32 with the results of the test experi-
ment. The graph illustrates how the numerical analysis of
the modelled structure allows a good estimation of the real
behaviour of the dome.
9. Conclusions
The analysis of tubular single-layer structures involves
geometric non-linear methods that can consider large dis-
placements of nodes. In this paper, the inuence of various
factors on the behaviour of single-layer spherical domes
has been studied. These factors are dome geometry, slen-
derness of members, joint rigidity and load hypothesis.
The angle between members located along the same merid-
ian line has been found to have a relevant eect on the load
carrying capacity of the domes.
When considering structures with rigid or semi-rigid
joints, the inuence of the angle between members in the
behaviour of the dome depends on the rigidity with which
the joint contributes to the global structure. The results of
several numerical analyses have allowed the determination
of an expression for the critical load where all the features
of the dome are taken into account (number of rings and
meridian lines, properties of members, rigidity of the joints
and load distribution).
A model of the members of the structure has been pro-
posed in order to obtain a more exact analysis of the
domes. This model establishes a new unique element that
integrates the jointtubejoint group. As a result, a stiness
matrix has been obtained where all the dimensions and
mechanical properties of the real elements are considered,
including the plastic behaviour of the bolts of the joint.
The model has been tested with satisfactory results.
In addition, two experimental tests have been con-
ducted: the rst on a simple structure with only one free
node and the second on a dome spanning seven metres.
The two test experiments have been conducted on struc-
tures possessing very dierent features related to the num-
ber of rings and members present in each and to the relative
stiness between their joints and tubes. In both cases the
numerical analysis of the structure modelled by following
the proposed model has given a good estimation of the
experimentally observed behaviour of the structures.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to express their gratitude to the
Spanish Government Agency CICYT (Project TAP98-
0377-C02-01), and to the Basque Government and the
Diputacion Foral de Gipuzkoa. Also, they thank LANIK
Engineers for their collaboration with the University of
Navarra.
Appendix A
The stiness matrix of the member with semi-rigid joints
is presented in this appendix. Cross section properties of
the dierent parts of the members are given with reference
to Fig. 33, where Li, Ai and Ii are, respectively, the length,
the area and the moment of inertia of each part of the
member.
The stiness matrix for bending of the member in
Fig. 33 is obtained by the condensation of the stiness
matrices of the member in Fig. 34, composed of three parts.
The stiness matrix of the central part is that of a tube (Eq.
(21)):
k
B

EI
2
L
2
2
12
L
2
6
12
L
2
6
6 4L
2
6 2L
2

12
L
2
6
12
L
2
6
6 2L
2
6 4L
2
_

_
_

_
21
The stiness matrices for Part A and C, composed of the
ball and the bolt, are obtained by imposing a unit displace-
ment to each degree of freedom (Fig. 35 shows, as an exam-
ple, a unit vertical displacement of the right end of Part A).
The forces and moments which appear at the ends are the
columns of the stiness matrices (Eqs. (22) and (23)).
L
4
L
3
L
1
L
2
L
0
L
A
2
I
2
A
1
I
1
A
3
I
3
Fig. 33. Lengths and properties of the elements composing a structural member.
A
B
C
Fig. 34. Parts of a member before condensation.
372 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374
k
A

EI
1
L
2
1
12
L
1
6 12
L
0
L
1

12
L
1
6
6 12
L
0
L
1
4L
1
12L
0
1
L
0
L
1
_ _
6 12
L
0
L
1
2L
1
6L
0

12
L
1
6 12
L
0
L
1
12
L
1
6
6 2L
1
6L
0
6 4L
1
_

_
_

_
22
k
B

EI
3
L
2
3
12
L
3
6
12
L
3
6 12
L
4
L
3
6 4L
3
6 2L
3
6L
4

12
L
3
6
12
L
3
6 12
L
4
L
3
6 12
L
4
L
3
2L
3
6L
4
6 12
L
4
L
3
4L
3
12L
4
1
L
4
L
3
_ _
_

_
_

_
23
Finally, the member stiness matrix is obtained by conden-
sation of the three stiness matrices. For simplicity, in Eq.
(24), only the stiness matrix for a symmetric member is
represented (L
0
L
4
; L
1
L
3
; A
1
A
3
; I
1
I
3
). As it
can be noted, torsion rigidity has been neglected.
where
K
1;1
E
A
1
A
2
2L
1
A
2
L
2
A
1
25
K
2;2

12
L
1
E
D
I
1
L
1
2
I
2
L
2
_ _
26
K
5;5
4
E
D
I
1
3 3
L
2
L
1
6
L
0
L
1

L
2
L
1
_ _
2
3
L
0
L
1
L
2
L
1
3
L
0
L
1
_ _
2
_ _ _
I
2
9 8
L
1
L
2
3
L
2
L
1
6
L
0
L
1
12
L
0
L
2
6
L
0
L
1
L
0
L
2
_ _
_
27
K
2;6
6
E
D
I
1
L
1
2
I
2
L
2
_ _
2
L
2
L
1
2
L
0
L
1
_ _
28
K
5;11
2
E
D
I
1
6 6
L
2
L
1
12
L
0
L
1

L
2
L
1
_ _
2
6
L
0
L
1
L
2
L
1
6
L
0
L
1
_ _
2
_ _ _
2I
2
3 4
L
1
L
2
6
L
0
L
1
12
L
0
L
2
6
L
0
L
1
L
0
L
2
_ _
_
29
And D is given in Eq. (30):
D 4 2L
1
3L
2
2
L
2
2
L
1
_ _

I
1
I
2
L
2
L
1
_ _
2
L
2
4
I
2
I
1
6L
1
3L
2
4
L
2
1
L
2
_ _
30
Appendix B
The developed software supposes a linear elastic behav-
iour of the steel. But stresses in the bolts can be beyond the
yielding limit. Therefore, in order to take plasticity into
account, the moment of inertia of the bolts is changed
when yielding is detected.
Fig. 36 shows the stress and strain distributions corre-
sponding to a cylindrical section with plastic behaviour
for points located farther than c. The bending moment
which causes this distribution is given by
M 2
_
u
c
0
r
y
D
4
8c
sin
2
ucos
2
udu2
_
p=2
u
c
r
y
D
3
4
sinucos
2
udu
31
M
r
y
D
4
32c
u
c

sin 4u
c

4
_ _

D
3
6
r
y
cos
3
u
c
32
K
K
1;1
0 0 0 0 0 K
1;1
0 0 0 0 0
K
2;2
0 0 0 K
2;6
0 K
2;2
0 0 0 K
2;6
K
2;2
0 K
2;6
0 0 0 K
2;2
0 K
2;6
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
K
5;5
0 0 0 K
2;6
0 K
5;11
0
K
5;5
0 K
2;2
0 0 0 K
5;11
K
1;1
0 0 0 0 0
K
2;2
0 0 0 K
2;6
K
2;2
0 K
2;6
0
0 0 0
K
5;5
0
S Y M M E T R I C K
5;5
_

_
_

_
24
F
L
M
L
M
R
F
R
L
0
L
1
Fig. 35. Unit vertical displacement of the right end of Part A.
A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374 373
The stress distribution for a linear elastic material with
the same strain distribution is given in Fig. 37. The bending
moment which corresponds to the linear distribution is
given by
M
r
y
c
I
eq
33
Consequently, the moment of inertia, I
eq
, used in Eq. (18)
to characterize the plastic behaviour with a ctitious linear
stress distribution, is obtained by making equal Eq. (32)
with Eq. (33) and substituting:
c
D
2
sin u
c
34
References
[1] Yang YB, Kuo SR. Theory and analysis of nonlinear framed
structures. Prentice-Hall; 1994.
[2] Gioncu V. Buckling of reticulated shells: state-of-the-art. Int J Space
Struct 1995;10(1):146.
[3] Park SH, Suk CM, Jung HM, Kwon YH. A comparative study on
the buckling characteristics of single-layer and double-layer lattice
dome according to rise ratio. In: Astudillo, Madrid, editors.
Proceedings of the 40th anniversary congress of IASS, Madrid,
1999. p. B2.2130.
[4] Sohn SD, Kim SD, Kang MM, Lee SG, Song HS. Nonlinear
instability analysis of framed space structures with semi-rigid joints.
In: Lightweight structures in civil engineering, proceedings of the
IASS international symposium, Warsaw, Poland, 2002. p. 4227.
[5] Kato S, Mutoh I, Shomura M. Collapse of semi-rigidly jointed
reticulated domes with initial geometric imperfections. J Construct
Steel Res 1998;48:14568.
[6] Dulacska E, Kollar L. Buckling analysis of reticulated shells. Int J
Space Struct 2000;15(34):195203.
[7] Suzuki T, Ogawa T, Ikarashi K. Elastic buckling analysis of rigidly
jointed single-layer reticulated domes with random initial imperfec-
tion. Int J Space Struct 1992;7(4):26573.
[8] Saitoh M, Hangai Y, Toda I, Yamagiwa T, Okuhara T. In: Heki,
editor. Buckling loads of reticulated single-layer domes. Proceedings
of the IASS symposium, Osaka, vol. 3, 1986. p. 1218.
[9] IASS Working Group 8. Analysis, design and realization of space
frames: a state-of-the-art report. Bull Int Assoc Shells Spatial Struct
1984/85;25(1/2).
[10] Lo pez A. Theoretical and experimental analysis of tubular single-
layer domes (in Spanish). PhD thesis, Department of Mechanical
Engineering, University of Navarra, Spain, 2003.
[11] Ueki T, Kubodera I, Kato S. Single-layer lattice domes using
systematized semi-rigid joints. In: Astudillo, Madrid, editors. Pro-
ceedings of the 40th anniversary congress of IASS, Madrid, 1999.
B1.6976.
[12] El-Sheikh A. New space truss system from concept to implemen-
tation. Eng Struct 2000;22:107085.
[13] Bardell NS, Brown D, Shearn PD, Turner DP, Longbourne JR,
Traxson RJ. The development of MURJ-3D: a modular, universal,
re-congurable joint for 3-D space frame applications. Int J Space
Struct 1997;12(2):89107.
[14] Battista RC, Pfeil MS, Batista EM. Strengthening a reticulated
spherical dome against local instabilities. J Construct Steel Res
2001;57:1528.
[15] Ueki T, Matsushita F, Shibata R, Kato S. Design procedure for
karge single-layer latticed domes. In: Parke, Howard, editor. Space
structures 4, Guildford conference, 1993. p. 23746.
[16] Hiyama Y, Takashima H, Iijima T, Kato S. Buckling behaviour of
aluminium ball jointed single layered reticular domes. Int J Space
Struct 2000;15(2):8194.
[17] Makowski ZS. In: Nooshin H, editor. Space structures of today and
tomorrow. Third international conference on space structures. Lon-
don: Elsevier Applied Science Publishers; 1984. p. 18.
[18] Ishikawa K, Kato S. Elasticplastic dynamic buckling analysis of
reticular domes subjected to earthquake motion. Int J Space Struct
1997;12(34):20515.

c
D
c
M

y
c

y
Fig. 36. Stress and strain distributions for a perfect elasto-plastic
cylindrical section.

y
M
c

y
Fig. 37. Stress and strain distributions for a linear elastic material.
374 A. Lo pez et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 360374