Lec 1: Introduction to Statically

Indeterminate Structures
As discussed before, the support reactions and internal forces of statically determinate structures can
be determined from the equations of equilibrium (including equations of condition, if any). However,
since indeterminate structures have more support reactions and/or members than required for static
stability, the equilibrium equations alone are not sufficient for determining the reactions and internal
forces of such structures, and must be supplemented by additional relationships based on the
geometry of deformation of structures.
These additional relationships, which are termed the compatibility conditions, ensure that the
continuity of the displacements is maintained throughout the structure and that the structures
various parts fit together. For example, at a rigid joint the deflections and rotations of all the
members meeting at the joint must be the same. Thus the analysis of an indeterminate structure
involves, in addition to the dimensions and arrangement of members of the structure, its crosssectional and material properties (such as cross-sectional areas, moments of inertia, moduli of
structure. The design of an indeterminate structure is, therefore, carried out in an iterative manner,
whereby the (relative) sizes of the structural members are initially assumed and used to analyze the
structure, and the internal forces thus obtained are used to revise the member sizes; if the revised
member sizes are not close to those initially assumed, then the structure is reanalyzed using the
latest member sizes. The iteration continues until the member sizes based on the results of an
analysis are close to those assumed for that analysis.
Despite the foregoing difficulty in designing indeterminate structures, a great majority of structures
being built today are statically indeterminate; for example, most modern reinforced concrete
buildings are statically indeterminate. In this lecture, we discuss some of the important advantages
and disadvantages of indeterminate structures as compared to determinate structures and introduce
the fundamental concepts of the analysis of indeterminate structures.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF INDETERMINATE STRUCTURES

The advantages of statically indeterminate structures over determinate structures include the
following.
1. Smaller Stresses The maximum stresses in statically indeterminate structures are generally
lower than those in comparable determinate structures. Consider, for example, the statically
determinate and indeterminate beams shown in Fig. 1(a) and (b), respectively. The bending
moment diagrams for the beams due to a uniformly distributed load, w, are also shown in the
figure. It can be seen from the figure that the maximum bending momentand consequently
the maximum bending stressin the indeterminate beam is significantly lower than in the
determinate beam.
2. Greater Stiffnesses Statically indeterminate structures generally have higher stiffnesses
(i.e., smaller deformations), than those of comparable determinate structures. From Fig. 1, we
observe that the maximum deflection of the indeterminate beam is only one-fifth that of the
determinate beam.
3. Redundancies Statically indeterminate structures, if properly designed, have the capacity for
redistributing loads when certain structural portions become overstressed or collapse in cases
of overloads due to earthquakes, tornadoes, impact (e.g., gas explosions or vehicle impacts),
and other such events. Indeterminate structures have more members and/or support
reactions than required for static stability, so if a part (or member or support) of such a
structure fails, the entire structure will not necessarily collapse, and the loads will be
redistributed to the adjacent portions of the structure. Consider, for example, the statically
determinate and indeterminate beams shown in Fig. 2(a) and (b), respectively. Suppose that
the beams are supporting bridges over a waterway and that the middle pier, B, is destroyed

when a barge accidentally rams into it. Because the statically determinate beam is supported
by just the sufficient number of reactions required for static stability, the removal of support B
will cause the entire structure to collapse, as shown in Fig. 2(a). However, the indeterminate
beam (Fig. 2(b)) has one extra reaction in the vertical direction; therefore, the structure will
not necessarily collapse and may remain stable, even after the support B has failed. Assuming
that the beam has been designed to support dead loads only in case of such an accident, the
bridge will be closed to traffic until pier B is repaired and then will be reopened.

Figure
1

Figure
2
The main disadvantages of statically indeterminate structures, over determinate structures, are the
following.
1. Stresses Due to Support Settlements Support settlements do not cause any stresses in
determinate structures; they may, however, induce significant stresses in indeterminate
structures, which should be taken into account when designing indeterminate structures.
Consider the determinate and indeterminate beams shown in Fig. 3. It can be seen from Fig.

3(a) that when the support B of the determinate beam undergoes a small settlement B, the
portions AB and BC of the beam, which are connected together by an internal hinge at B,
move as rigid bodies without bendingthat is, they remain straight. Thus, no stresses
develop in the determinate beam. However, when the continuous indeterminate beam of Fig.
3(b) is subjected to a similar support settlement, it bends, as shown in the figure; therefore,
bending moments develop in the beam.

2. Stresses Due to Temperature Changes and Fabrication Errors Like support

settlements, these effects do not cause stresses in determinate structures but may induce
significant stresses in indeterminate ones. Consider the determinate and indeterminate
beams shown in Fig. 4. It can be seen from Fig. 4(a) that when the determinate beam is
subjected to a uniform temperature increase T, it simply elongates, with the axial
deformation given by = (T)L. No stresses develop in the determinate beam, since it is
free to elongate. However, when the indeterminate beam of Fig. 4(b), which is restrained from
deforming axially by the fixed supports, is subjected to a similar temperature change, T, a
compressive axial force, F = (AE/L) = (T)AE, develops in the beam, as shown in the figure.
The effects of fabrication errors are similar to those of temperature changes on determinate
and indeterminate structures.

Figure
3

Figure
4

ANALYSIS OF INDETERMINATE STRUCTURES

Fundamental Relationships
Regardless of whether a structure is statically determinate or indeterminate, its complete analysis
requires the use of three types of relationships:
-

Equilibrium equations
Compatibility conditions
Member force-deformation relations

The equilibrium equations relate the forces acting on the structure (or its parts), ensuring that the
entire structure as well as its parts remain in equilibrium; the compatibility conditions relate the
displacements of the structure so that its various parts fit together; and the member-force
deformation relations, which involve the material and cross sectional properties (E, I , and A) of the
members, provide the necessary link between the forces and displacements of the structure.
In the analysis of statically determinate structures, the equations of equilibrium are first used to
obtain the reactions and the internal forces of the structure; then the member force-deformation
relations and the compatibility conditions are employed to determine the structures displacements.
For example, consider the statically determinate truss shown in Fig. 5(a). The axial forces in the truss
members can be determined by considering the equilibrium of joint A (see Fig. 5(b)):

(1
)

Figure
5
Similarly, the reactions at the supports B and C can be obtained by considering the equilibrium of
joints B and C, respectively (Fig.5(c)). To determine the displacement of joint A of the truss, we first
employ the member force-deformation relationship, = F(L/AE), to compute the member axial
deformations:

(2
)
Then these member axial deformations are related to the joint displacement by using the
compatibility condition (see Fig. 5(d)):

(3
)
in which is assumed to be small. Note that Eq. (3) states the compatibility requirement that the
vertical displacements of the ends A of members AB and AC must be equal to the vertical
displacement, D, of joint A. By substituting Eq. (2) into Eq. (3), we find the displacement of joint A to
be

(4
)
The displacement could also have been computed by employing the virtual work method, which
automatically
satisfies the member force-deformation relations and the necessary compatibility conditions.

Indeterminate Structures

In the analysis of statically indeterminate structures, the equilibrium equations alone are not su
cient for determining the reactions and internal forces. Therefore, it becomes necessary to solve
the equilibrium equations in conjunction with the compatibility conditions of the structure to
determine its response. Because the equilibrium equations contain the unknown forces, whereas the
compatibility conditions involve displacements as the unknowns, the member force-deformation
relations are utilized to express either the unknown forces in terms of the unknown displacements or
vice versa. The resulting system of equations containing only one type of unknowns is then solved
for the unknown forces or displacements, which are then substituted into the fundamental
relationships to determine the remaining response characteristics of the structure.
Consider, for example, the indeterminate truss shown in Fig. 6(a). The truss is obtained by adding a
vertical member AD to the determinate truss of Fig. 5(a), considered previously. The free-body
diagram of joint A of the truss is shown in Fig. 6(b). The equations of equilibrium for this joint are
given by

(5)
(6)
Note that the two equilibrium equations are not sufficient for determining the three unknown
member axial forces.
The compatibility conditions are based on the requirement that the vertical displacements of the
ends A of the three members connected to joint A must be equal to the vertical displacement of
joint A. The displacement diagram of joint A is shown in Fig. 6(c). Assuming the displacement D to be
small, we write the compatibility conditions as

(7)
(8)

Figure
6
By substituting Eq. (8) into Eq. (11.7), we obtain the desired relationship between the member axial
deformations:

(9
)
which indicates that the axial deformations of the inclined members AB and AC are equal to 0.8
times the axial deformation of the vertical member AD. To express Eq. (9) in terms of member axial
forces, we utilize the member force-deformation relations:

(1
0)
(1
1)

Substitution of Eqs. (10) through (12) into Eq. (9) yields

(13
)
Now, we can determine the axial forces in the three members of the truss by solving Eq. (13)
simultaneously with the two equilibrium equations (Eqs. (5) and (6)). Thus (Fig. 6(d)),

The member axial deformations can now be computed by substituting these values of member axial
forces into the member force-deformation relations (Eqs. (10) through (12)) to obtain

Finally, by substituting the values of member axial deformations into the compatibility conditions
(Eqs. (7) and (8)), we determine the displacement of joint A as

In this lecture we have learned that the advantages of statically indeterminate structures over
determinate structures include smaller maximum stresses, greater stiffnesses, and redundancies.
Support settlements, temperature changes, and fabrication errors may induce significant stresses in
indeterminate structures, which should be taken into account when designing such structures.
The analysis of structures involves the use of three fundamental relationships: equilibrium equations,
compatibility conditions, and member force-deformation relations. In the analysis of indeterminate
structures, the equilibrium equations must be supplemented by the compatibility conditions based
on the geometry of the deformation of the structure. The link between the equilibrium equations and
the compatibility conditions is established by means of the member-force deformation relations of
the structure.
The methods for the analysis of indeterminate structures can be classified into two categories,
namely, the force (flexibility) methods and the displacement (stiffness) methods.