Budapest University of Technology and Economics

Faculty of Architecture

APPROXIMATE ANALYSIS OF BUILDING

STRUCTURES SUBJECTED TO EARTHQUAKES

THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE OF

BUDAPEST UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMICS
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Gabriella Potzta
Supervisor:
Laszlo P. Kollar

Budapest, March, 2002

1

Acknowledgments
I wish to sincerely thank the 6 years work of my supervisor Prof. L
aszlo P. Kollar. Im grateful
for his support, all of his help and the knowledge which I owed to him.
Thanks to the chiefs of the departments for providing my Ph.D studies:
Prof. Gyorgy Farkas, Chief of the Department of Structural Engineering,
Prof. Tam
as Matuscsak, Chief of the Department of Mechanics and Structures,
Prof. M
arta Kurucz, Chief of the Department of Structural Mechanics.
I thank to Prof. Zsolt G
asp
ar for the possibility to finish my thesis in the Research Group of
Computational Mechanics.
I would like to thank to all of my professors for their help and advices which helped my research
work: Prof. K
aroly Zalka, Prof. Endre Dul
acska, Prof. Istvan Heged
us, Prof. Lajos Kollar, Prof.
P
al R
ozsa.

Introduction

Analysis of high-rise building structures stiffened by shear walls, trusses, coupled shear walls, and
frames requires time consuming numerical computations. The designer may be well served by
approximate methods, which (i) can be used in the preliminary design when some of the structural
dimensions are not yet known, (ii) can verify the results of the more advanced numerical calculation,
and, last but not least (iii) can shed light on the behavior of the structure which may lead to a
better design.
Our aim is to present an approximate analysis of building structures subjected to earthquakes
which is (i) simple, (ii) robust (i.e. it gives results with acceptable accuracy for structures with
very different characteristics), and (iii) which can also handle the torsional vibration of building
structures.
The building is stiffened by an arbitrary combination of lateral load-resisting subsystems (shear
walls, frames, trusses, coupled shear walls, cores). We consider stories with identical masses,
however the mass at the top floor may be different. The stiffnesses of the structure may vary with
the height. The analysis is based on the continuum method. We developed replacement beams of
building structures, and we solved approximately the spatial vibration problem of the replacement
beam. Simple formulas are given to calculate the periods of vibration and the internal forces of a
building structure subjected to earthquakes.
The utility and accuracy of the method is demonstrated by a numerical examples, in which the
approximate solution is compared to the results of a finite element calculation.

1.1

Continuum method

One of the most widely used approximate calculations is based on the continuum method [14],
[33],[34], [40], when the stiffened building structure is replaced by a (continuous) beam.
The simplest replacement beam is a thin-walled beam, characterized by the bending stiffnesses
(D0yy , D0zz , D0yz ), the warping stiffness (D ) and the torsional stiffness (Dt ). (When only a
plane problem is considered, torsion is excluded, and the only parameter that plays a role is the
bending stiffness D0 = D0yy in the x z symmetry plane.) This model is adequate only for solid
and slender shear walls.
When a truss is loaded laterally, it may show, depending on the stiffnesses of the elements,
bending (flexural) deformation, shear deformation, or the mixture of those (Fig.1).
Hence the shear deformation must be included and the replacement continuum is a Timoshenkobeam [39], characterized by the bending (D0 = D0yy ) and the shear stiffnesses (S = Szz ) in the
x z plane. The bending and the shear stiffnesses of typical structures are given e.g. in [39], [34],
[20] and are listed in Table 1.
A wide frame structure can be modelled by a beam which undergoes shear deformation only
and is characterized by the shear stiffness S = Szz .
3

z
Figure 1: Flexural deformation, shear deformation, and mixed deformation

D0

Dl
D0

Dl
=

a)

b)

Figure 2: Replacement beam of a frame (a), the sandwich beam is equivalent to a Timoshenkobeam supported by a beam with bending deformation only (b)
When a wide frame is braced by solid walls the replacement beam has two stiffnesses: the
shear stiffness (S) due to the frame and the bending stiffness due to the walls (Dl ). This model is
referred to a Csonka-beam because P. Csonka developed it for the analysis of building structures
subjected to wind loads [8].
Neither a thin-walled beam, nor a Timoshenko-beam, nor a Csonka-beam is adequate to
characterize a slender frame, or coupled shear walls. The replacement beam can be obtained by
smearing out the beams of the frame along the height, and thus we arrive at the model shown
in Fig.2, which is a sandwich beam [33].
The stiffnesses of the replacement sandwich beam are also included in Table 1 ([14], [37], [8],
[4], D0 is the global bending stiffness, Dl is the local bending stiffness, and S is the shear stiffness).
We note that the sandwich beam is the generalization of the previous models, thus we can
derive them from the sandwich beam with the proper choice of the stiffnesses. This is illustrated
in the following table:

Stiffnesses of a sandwich beam

Choice of the stiffnesses

Resulting beam (stiffnesses)

Dl 0

Timoshenko-beam (D0 , S)

D0

Csonka beam (Dl , S)

D0 ,

D0 , Dl , S

Dl 0

Beam with shear

deformation only (S)

Thin walled beam (D0 + Dl )

S 0 or D0 0
Thin walled beam (Dl )
It is important to note that a sandwich beam with stiffnesses D0 , Dl , and S is equivalent to a
Timoshenko-beam (with stiffnesses D0 and S) which is supported laterally by a beam with bending
stiffness Dl (Fig.2). Hence, if we set the stiffness Dl of a sandwich beam equal to zero we obtain a
Timoshenko-beam with stiffnesses D0 and S.
Continuum models were developed by several authors and it was applied successfully for building structures subjected to wind loads [8], [34], [37], [40],[46], earthquakes [2], [3], [20], [17], [34],
in the dynamic analysis [25], [28], [29], [33], [40], [43], [42], [47], and in the stability analysis [14],
[24], [28], [29], [34], [40], [41], [44], [45].
However, there are two important problems to be solved:
(i) As we stated before the replacement beam of a single lateral load-resisting subsystem (truss,
frame, shear wall etc.) is given in the literature (see Table 1). When there are several parallel lateral
load-resisting subsystems which are connected horizontally along the height the question arises:
how can they be replaced by only one replacement beam? We find answers only for the following
special cases in the literature: (a) When each lateral load-resisting subsystem is a solid wall
(their shear deformation is neglected) the replacement beam is a beam which undergoes bending
deformation only, and its bending stiffness is the sum of the bending stiffnesses of the individual
walls. (b) When there are frames which can be modeled as beams undergo shear deformation only
and solid walls undergo bending deformation only, the replacement beam is a Csonka-beam, which
has two stiffnesses (with the sandwich notation Dl and S, while D0 is infinite), the bending stiffness
is the sum of the bending stiffnesses of the walls, while the shear stiffness is the sum of the shear
stiffnesses of the frames. However, when any of the lateral load-resisting subsystem undergoes both
bending and shear deformation (which is the case of trusses, coupled shear walls, tall frames, and
P
P
P
for wide walls) it can be shown that simple summation (S =
Sk , D 0 =
D0k , Dl =
Dlk )

may result in a structure which is stiffer by orders of magnitudes than the real structure. We
will show in Section 4.1 how the replacement stiffnesses of the building should be calculated.

(ii) As an example let us consider a structure the cross section of which is shown in Fig.3.
When the structure is subjected to torsion, in the two parallel trusses both shear and bending
deformations occur. The classical (Vlasov) theory of beams does not include the shear deformation
in torsion with warping and, hence, its application may significantly overestimates the torsional
stiffness of the structure. This problem, for arbitrary arrangements of the walls, will be addressed

Replacement continuum

Structure

Siffnesses

t = thickness
Timoshenko-beam

b
wall

D0 = EI
S=

d
d
trusses

AG
1.2

b3 t
12

A = bt

Timoshenko-beam

Ac

Ac

Ad

AG

I=

Ad

L
Ac

D0 = 12 EAc L2

D0 = 21 EAc L2
S=

2EhL2 Ad
d3

S=

2Eh
L
+ 4A

2d3
L2 Ad

The shear stiffness of trusses

with other type of bracing can
be found in the literature.

n
Sandwich beam

Ibi
li
frame

Dl =

Aci , Ici

ci

Pn

i=0

EIci

Pn

EAci c2i

1
S = Sb1 + Sc1
Pn
bi
Sb = i=1 12EI
li h ,
Pn 12EIci
Sc = i=0 h2

D0 =

i=0

Aci , Ici

Abi , Ibi

Sandwich beam

Dl =

coupled
shear

h
ci
0

i=0

EIci

Pn

EAci c2i

1
S = Sb1 + Sc1
Pn 6EIbi [(di +si )2 +(di +si+1 )2 ]


Sb = i=1
12EI

D0 =

wall

Pn

i=0

d3i h 1+

si di si+1

Sc =

Pn

i=0

bi
Gd2 Abi
i

12EIci
h2

Table 1: Replacement stiffnesses of different lateral load-resisting subsystems of high-rise buildings

6

trusses

Figure 3: Plan of a building stiffened by three lateral load-resisting subsystems

in Section 4.2.

1.2

Earthquake analysis

During earthquakes the building structure is subjected to dynamic effects. The inertia forces
which arise form the ground motion cause dynamic internal forces. Several methods are available
to perform the earthquake analysis of building structures.
The Time History Analysis [6], [11] follows the exact answer of the structure subjected to
known earthquakes. An earthquake can be characterized by the ground motion, ground velocities,
or ground accelerations. Usually the accelerations as the function of the time are recorded. These
records are called accelerograms and can be used to calculate the response of a structure for an
earthquake which happened in the past. For design purposes several recorded accelerograms, or
artificial ones must be used. The answer of the building can be followed numerically by finite
element programs. This method is rather sophisticated, and requires time consuming numerical
calculations.
The Equivalent Lateral Force procedure uses a simple approximation to determine the maximum
base shear force [34], [13]. The dynamic effect of ground motion is replaced by an equivalent static
load distributed along the height, in a prescribed manner. The method is presented in Appendix
A.1. The analysis is simple and fast, however it can be very inaccurate.
The most frequently used method is the Response Modal Analysis (see Appendix A.2) which
combines the advantages of the previous methods. The basic characteristics of the analysis are
the periods of vibration and the mode shapes of the freely vibrating structure. The method does
not follows the exact answer of the structure during the earthquake, only the maximum values
of the modal responses are determined. Average curves, called Design Spectra are worked out in
the design codes for the maximum values of the modal responses as a function of the period of
vibration and the damping ratio. These are then combined to obtain an approximation of the
maximum value of the response.
In the thesis we present an approximate method to determine the circular frequencies, and
the periods of vibration which can be used in the Response Model Analysis (for buildings with
7

!1 ! 2
M2

!
M2
M1

M1

!1 !2

!
D1

1
1
1
2 + 2
2
!
!1 !2

a)

D2

D1

D2

!1 !2

!
D1

D1
D2

D1 =
D2

! 2 !12 + !22

1
1
1
2 + 2
2
!
!1 !2

b)

c)

Figure 4: Illustration of Dunkerleys (a), Southwells (b) and Foppls (c) theorems
identical stories in Section 5.1 and for buildings with different stories in Section 6). We also give
approximate formulas to calculate the internal forces in Section 5.2.

1.3

Approximate calculation of the circular frequency

We use approximate solutions of the continuum with the aid of the following three theorems, which
are illustrated in Fig.4.
Dunkerleys theorem [5], [12]: The structure contains two sets of masses denoted by M1 and
M2 . The circular frequency of the structure can be approximated by 1/2 = 1/21 + 1/22 , where
1 is the circular frequency of the structure if M2 is set equal to zero while 2 is the circular
frequency if M1 is set equal to zero.
Southwells theorem [5], [23]: The structure is characterized by two stiffnesses, denoted by D1
and D2 , such that if we set either one of the stiffnesses equal to infinity the structure would become
infinitely rigid. The circular frequency can be approximated by 2 = 21 + 22 , where 1 is the
circular frequency of the structure if D2 is set equal to zero while 2 is the circular frequency if
D1 is set equal to zero.
F
oppls theorem: Foppls theorem was developed for the stability analysis of elastic structures
[38] and is adopted here for the vibration analysis. The structure is characterized by two stiffnesses
denoted by D1 and D2 , such that if we set either one of the stiffnesses equal to zero the structure
would become a mechanism and consequently would not be capable to carry any load. According to
Foppls theorem the circular frequency of such a structure is approximated by 1/2 = 1/21 + 1/22 ,
where 1 is the circular frequency of the structure if D2 is set equal to infinity, while 2 is the
circular frequency if D1 is set equal to infinity.
The above three approximations give the exact circular frequencies when the two eigenmodes,
which belong to the circular frequencies 1 and 2 , are identical.

1.4

Previous work

Several authors applied continuum models to calculate the most important parameters of earthquake analysis (the circular frequency and base internal forces):
Basu [2] and Kollar [17] performed the earthquake analysis by using a Csonka beam (the
compressibility of columns are neglected). They provided design charts to calculate the circular
frequency of lateral vibration, and the base internal forces.
Rosman [29] gives design tables for the circular frequency of uncoupled lateral and torsional
vibration of symmetrical wall-frame structures neglecting the global bending deformation.
Ng and Kuang presented a simple analysis for the coupled lateral-torsional vibration of buildings
braced by frames and solid shear walls, where the global bending deformations were also neglected.
Skattum [33] derived the differential equations of coupled shear walls and sandwich beams. He
determined the exact values of natural frequencies and mode shapes, which results are presented
in a number of figures. He did not give closed solution for the general vibration problem.
Kollar [15] developed a simple approximation for the calculation of the circular frequency,
however his formula has limited application, the accuracy of which were presented in [22].
Stafford Smith [36], and Rutenberg [32] worked out approximate formulas to calculate the
circular frequencies of symmetrical structures, and gave design charts for the base internal forces.
However their solutions are not applicable for rigid frames and braced frames.
Kopecsiri and Kollar solved the vibration problem for any type of single horizontal load-resisting
subsystems [20], [21]. They gave design charts and also approximate formulas to calculate the
circular frequency and base internal forces. They recommended approximation for the circular
frequency of buildings braced by several plane lateral load-resisting subsystems in case of lateral
and lateral-torsional vibration, respectively.
Zalka performed the lateral and the lateral-torsional vibration analysis of sandwich beams [47].
Closed formulas are given using numerical values presented in tables to calculate the circular
frequencies of structures consisting of several horizontal load-resisting subsystems. Zalka showed
throughout numerical examples that his method is usable for practical purposes.
Several methods are available in the literature to calculate the circular frequencies of buildings.
The accuracy and the limits of application of the most robust methods [32], [21] and [47] will be
presented in Section ?? for lateral vibration of sandwich beams. We will compare these solutions
to our approximation.
To calculate the base internal forces from lateral-torsional vibration there is no closed formula
in the literature.
For earthquake analysis of building structures with varying stiffnesses there is no quick approximate method.

a)

b)

Figure 5: Symmetrical (a) and unsymmetrical (b) arrangements of the lateral load-resisting subsystems

Problem statement

We consider a building structure that consists of an arbitrary combination of lateral load-resisting

subsystems, i.e. shear walls, coupled shear walls, frames, trusses and cores. The arrangement of
the stiffening system is either symmetrical or arbitrary (Fig.5). The stiffnesses of the individual
stories may be different; however, the stiffnesses must not increase with the height. We consider
uniform mass distribution with an additional mass at the top.
Our first aim is to develop a replacement beam model for the building structure and to derive
the stiffnesses of replacement beams. This beam model can be used in the wind, earthquake, or
stability analyses of the building structure.
Our second aim is to apply this replacement beam model in the earthquake analysis and to
develop simple approximate expressions for the calculation of the eigenfrequencies, and of the
seismic forces.

Basic assumptions

We assume that the material behaves in a linearly elastic manner.

The building must have at least four stories.
The floors are considered to be rigid in their plane and they transfer only horizontal forces but
no bending or vertical forces to the lateral load-resisting subsystems. In addition, we assume that
the floors connect the stiffening system continuously, hence each cross-section of the building
remains undeformed in the horizontal plane during loading.
We will replace the building structure, consisting of discrete elements by a continuous beam,
and we will analyze this continuum instead of the building structure.
Error in the analysis.
We solve the differential equation of the continuum analytically and also with the aid of the
three theorems given in Section 1.3. In the thesis we define the error of the approximation as
10

Er =

Aapp Acont
,
Acont

(3.1)

where cont refers to the exact solution of the continuum while app refers to the approximate
solution, and A can be e.g. the circular frequency, the base shear force etc.
The total error of the suggested method comes from three sources (i) each lateral load-resisting
subsystem is replaced by a continuous cantilever beam, (ii) these beams are then replaced by a
single replacement beam, and (iii) the characteristics of the replacement beams are calculated
approximately.
In the numerical examples we verify the approximate method by solving structures with the
aid of a FE method (ETABS) and by our approximate calculation. The error is defined as

Er =

Aapp AET ABS

,
AET ABS

(3.2)

where ET ABS refers to the FE program ETABS [10].

Replacement beam

4.1

Plane problem

In this section we consider symmetrical stiffening systems which deform only in the plane of
symmetry (x z plane). The floors connect the lateral load-resisting subsystems continuously,
hence the horizontal displacements of the lateral load-resisting subsystems are identical.
Our aim is to determine the stiffnesses of the replacement beam of the building structure.
4.1.1

One lateral load-resisting subsystem

As it was stated in the Introduction, the replacement beam of a lateral load-resisting subsystem is
a sandwich beam. The replacement stiffnesses are summarized in Table 1.
For latter use we define the strain energy of a sandwich beam [1]:

U = UT + Ul ,

(4.3)

where

UT =

1
2

Z 

2
S 2 + D0 (0 ) dx,

Ul =

1
2

Dl (w00 ) dx.

(4.4)

Here UT and Ul are the strain energies of a Timoshenko beam (stiffnesses D0 and S) and of a
beam with bending deformation only (stiffness Dl ), respectively. w is the displacement in the x z
plane, is the rotation of the cross-section in the x z plane, and is the shear strain. Prime
denotes derivative with respect to x. and are related to the displacement w by:

11

D01

D0k

D0n

Dl1

Dlk

Dln

S1

Sk

Sn

D0

Dl
S

Figure 6: Parallel lateral load-resisting subsystems and the replacement sandwich beam

l
l
l

Figure 7: The load and the deformations of a sandwich beam subjected to a sinusoidal load

w0 = + .

(4.5)

It can be shown [14] that in a sandwich beam:

=
4.1.2

D0 00
.
S

(4.6)

Several lateral load-resisting subsystems

In this section we consider n lateral load-resisting subsystems (Fig.6) The k-th element has the
stiffnesses D0k , Dlk , and Sk . The stiffnesses of the beam which replaces the n lateral load-resisting
subsystems are denoted by D0 , Dl , and S.
We determine the replacement stiffnesses by applying a sinusoidal displacement on the stiffening
system which is caused by a sinusoidal horizontal load (Fig.7).
Then we equate the sum of the strain energies of the individual lateral load-resisting subsystems
to the strain energy of the replacement wall. Hence (see Eq.4.3) we write

1
2

Z 
Z n


1 X
2
2
2
2
S 2 + D0 (0 ) + Dl (w00 ) dx =
Sk 2k + D0k (0k ) + Dlk (wk00 ) dx,
2

(4.7)

k=1

wk , k , and k are the displacement, the shear strain, and the rotation of cross-section of the k-th
lateral load-resisting subsystem, and w, , and are the displacement, the shear strain, and the
12

rotation of cross-section of the replacement beam, respectively. The horizontal displacements of

the lateral load-resisting subsystems are identical, hence we can write:

w1 = w2 = ... = wn = w.

(4.8)

We apply the displacements

w = w0 sin

x,
l

= 0 cos

x
l

(4.9)

on the beam. Eqs.(4.5), (4.6), and (4.9) yield

1+

l
2 D0
l2 S

w0 cos

x,
l

2 D0
.
l2 S

(4.10)

By introducing Eqs.(4.8), (4.9) and (4.10) into Eq.(3.181) and performing the integration between 0 and l we obtain
n

X
D0
D0k
Dl +
=
Dlk +
2
2
D0
0k
1 + l2 S
1 + l2D
Sk
k=1

(4.11)

When l is large is small (see Eq.4.10) and Eq.(4.11) results in

Dl + D0 =

n
X

(Dlk + D0k ) .

(4.12)

k=1

As a consequence we may state that for large l the replacement beam is a beam which undergoes
bending deformation only.
The Taylor series expansion of the function 1/ 1 + 2 D0 / l2 S
1/l02 is

1
1+

2 D0
l2 S

1
1+

X
i=0

2 D0
l20 S


2

2 D0
S

1+
i

SD0


1+

2 D0
l20 S

2 D0
l20 S

i+1

2

1
1
2
l2
l0

1
1
2
l2
l0

i

2 D0
S

+
1+

with respect to 1/l2 about

2

2 D0
l20 S

3

1
1
2
l2
l0

2

... =

(4.13)

Introducing Eq.(4.13) into Eq.(4.11) yields

Dl +

X
i=0


i
i

2
2 D0k
i X



n

D
D0 SD0
X 0k
Sk
1
1
1
1

2
2 .
=
Dlk +




i+1
i+1
2
2
2
2
l
l0
l
l0
0
i=0 1 + 2D0k
k=1
1 + l2D
S
l Sk
0

When l is close to l0 the terms multiplied by

1
l2

1
l20

i

(i = 1, 2, ...) vanish and we have

n
X
D
D0
0k
.
Dlk +
=
Dl +
2
2 D0k
0
1 + l2D
1
+
2
S
k=1
l Sk
0

13

(4.14)

To obtain a good agreement between the replacement beam and the structure the first three
terms in the series are considered. By equating the first term in the series we obtain Eq.(4.14),
while from the second and third terms we have


1+

D0
1+

D0
2 D0
l20 S

2 D0
l20 S

3

2

X
2 D0
=

S
k=1

2 D0
S

2

n
X

k=1

D0k
2 D0k
l20 Sk

1+

D0k
2 D0k
l20 Sk

1+

2
3

2 D0k
,
Sk


2 D0k
Sk

(4.15)
2

(4.16)

Eqs.(4.14), (4.15) and (4.16) can be rearranged to yield the replacement stiffnesses of the beam:
S = 2

B3
,
C2

D0 =

C
B2

1
,
C2
l12 B
3

Dl = A

B2
,
C

(4.17)

where

A =

n
X

k=1

n
X

k=1

n
X

k=1

D0k
1+


1+

1+

2 D0k
l20 Sk

D0k
2 D0k
l20 Sk

D0k
2 D0k
l20 Sk

+ Dlk ,

2
3

(4.18)

2 D0k
,
Sk


2 D0k
Sk

2

The choice of l0 to obtain the best replacement stiffnesses will be discussed in Section 4.3.

4.2

Spatial problem

As it was stated in the Introduction, the beam undergoes both shear and bending (flexural) deformations in torsion. We adopt here the beam theory given in [18] (which was developed for
composite beams and which is the simplification of Sun and Wus theory [48]). Accordingly, the
displacements of the beam are described by the vectors

,
{u} =
w

{} =

while the shear deformations are

y
{} =
z

14

,
z

(4.19)

(4.20)

90+

90-

Figure 8: Bending (B ) and shear (S ) deformation in torsion

v and w are the displacements in the y and z directions, is the rotation of the cross section about
the x axis, y and z are the rotations of the cross-section about the z and y axes, respectively.
The total twist per unit length () contains a shear type (S ) and a bending type (B ) deformation
(Fig.8):

= 0 = B + S .
0

(We note that in Vlasovs theory y = z = S = 0 and {u} = {}). The shear deformations
are related to the displacements by (see [18]):

v0

{u}0 =
w0

The strain energy of this beam is

1
UT =
2

T
{}

S
yy

Szy

Sz

Syz

Sy

Szz

Sz

Sy

= {} + {} .

0T
{} + {}

D
0zz

D0yz

D0z

D0zy
D0yy
D0y

(4.21)

D0z

0
2
D0y {} + Dt dx.

D0
(4.22)

In this equation D0yy (= EIyy ), D0yz (= EIyz ), D0zz (= EIzz ) are the bending stiffnesses,
D0 (= EI ) is the warping stiffness. (D0z and D0y are zero if the coordinate system is
attached to the shear center see Section 4.2.3.) [S] is the shear stiffness matrix and Dt (= GIt ) is
T

the torsional stiffness. {} denotes the transpose of vector {} .

The above beam theory is the generalization of the Timoshenko-beam theory for spatial
problems. For our case, as in the plane problem, the local stiffnesses must also be included, and
the strain energy becomes

U = UT + Ul ,
where Ul is the strain energy of a beam which undergoes bending deformation only:

15

(4.23)

rk
y

rk

Figure 9: Global coordinates ( y, z) and the local coordinates (, ) attached to the k-th lateral
load-resisting subsystem

Ul =

1
2

00 T

{u}

Dlzz

Dlzy

Dlyz

Dlz

Dlyy
Dly

Dlz

00
Dly {u} dx.

Dl

(4.24)

Here {u} is the displacement vector (Eq. 4.19), and Dlij are the (local) bending stiffnesses.
4.2.1

One lateral load-resisting subsystem

First we consider a single lateral load-resisting subsystem (Fig.9).

i
h
i
h
The stiffness matrices of this bracing element in the coordinate system are D0 , Dl
k
k



and S k , and the torsional stiffness is Dtk

. The transformation of the stiffnesses into the

y z coordinate system gives:

[Dl ]k

[D0 ]k

[S]k

where

h
i
T
[T ]k Dl [T ]k ,
ik
h
T

[T ]k ,
[T ]k D0
k


T
[T ]k S k [T ]k ,

cos k

[T ]k = sin k

sin k

rk

cos k

rk

(4.25)

(4.26)

k is the angle between the axes and y; rk and rk are the distances of the and axes from
the origin (Fig.9).
4.2.2

Several lateral load-resisting subsystems

To obtain the replacement stiffnesses of a stiffening system containing several lateral load-resisting
subsystems we assume the displacements in the form of
16

0
{u} =
w0

sin

y0

{} = z0

B0

x,
l

cos x,
l

(4.27)

and introduce them into the expression of the strain energy of the replacement beam (Eq.4.23)
and into the sum of the strain energies of the individual elements. By equating them we obtain:

1
2
=

1
2

Z 

T
0T
0
00 T
00
{} [S] {} + {} [D0 ] {} + {u} [Dl ] {u} + Dt 2 dx
Z X
n 
k=1

0T

{ k } [Sk ] { k } + {k }

00 T

[D0k ] {k } + {uk }

(4.28)


00
[Dlk ] {uk } + Dtk 2 dx.

Then we follow the same steps as in Section 4.1.2. The algebra is involved but straightforward
and it is presented in Appendix B. The results are

[S] = 2 [B] [C]1 [B] [C]1 [B] ,


1
1
1
1
[D0 ] = [B] [C] [B] [E] 2 [B] [C]
,
l0
[Dl ] = [A] [B] [C]
n
X
Dt =
Dtk ,

(4.29)

[B] ,

k=1

where

A =
B

!

1
n
X
2
1
[E] + 2 [D0 ]k [S]k
[D0 ]k + [Dl ]k ,
(4.30)
l0
k=1

1
1

n
X
2
2
1
1
1
2
[E] + 2 [D0 ]k [S]k
[D0 ]k [S]k
[E] + 2 [D0 ]k [S]k
[D0 ]k ,
l0
l0
k=1
1

n
X
2
[D0 ]k [S]1
4 [E] + 2 [D0 ]k [S]1
k
k
l0
k=1

1
1

2
2
1
1
1
[E] + 2 [D0 ]k [S]k
[D0 ]k [S]k
[E] + 2 [D0 ]k [S]k
[D0 ]k .
l0
l0

We observe that Eq.(4.29) reduces to Eq.(4.17) when [D0 ] , [Dl ] , and [S] are replaced by D0 , Dl
and S.
4.2.3

Location of the replacement beam

The elements of the stiffness matrices [D0 ] , [Dl ] and [S] depends on the choice of the location of
the axis of the replacement beam which passes through the origin of the coordinate system.

17

In the analysis the location of the axis can be chosen arbitrarily. (The stiffnesses, loads,
coordinates of the mass center are influenced by the location, however the eigenfrequency, buckling
loads, internal forces are not.)
There is a special location of the origin called shear center (or more precisely the bending
deformation shear center [18]). When the origin of the coordinate system is attached to the
bending deformation shear center the stiffness matrix [D0 ] simplifies and D0z and D0y are
zero. However, this choice of the origin simplifies the analysis only when the shear deformation is
neglected (shear stiffnesses are infinite), because in this case the load applied at the shear center
does not cause the twist of the building.
As a rule, when the beam undergoes both bending and shear deformations there is no such
location and the beam may twist even if the load is applied at the bending deformation shear
center.
However for a given load and boundary conditions we may define a location (which varies with
the height) such a way that the load acting at this location do not cause the twist of the building.
When the building is symmetrical, the load which is applied in the symmetry plane does not
cause twist, and hence it is practical (however not necessary) to place the axis of the beam at the
symmetry plane.

4.3

Practical considerations

In Sections 4.1.2 and 4.2.2 we obtained a replacement beam whose stiffnesses depend on the choice
of l0 . When l0 is approximately equal to the variation of the load (see Fig.7) the behavior of
the replacement beam will be very close to the behavior of the structure. Consequently different
replacement beams should be applied for different loading conditions.
The question arises, how should we choose l0 to obtain the best replacement beam. We
suggest for a few cases the values l0 which are given in Fig.10.
We note that there are practical cases when the stiffnesses of the replacement beam are not
sensitive to the choice of l0 and hence the same replacement beam can be used for different loading
conditions.
When

D0i
Si

D0j
Sj

or Si l02 >> D0i Eqs.(4.17) and (4.18) becomes

D0

Dl

B3
,
C2
B2
,
C
n
X
(D0k + Dlk ) D0 ,

k=1

where

18

(4.31)

Lateral load

Buckling

Vibration

l0

l0

l0
l0

l0

l0 2H

l0 = 2H

l0 2H
l0 =

2
H
3

l0

2
H
3

Figure 10: The values of l0 for lateral load, buckling and vibration

B=

n
X
D2

0k

k=1

Sk

n
X
D3

0k

C=

k=1

Sk2

(4.32)

Note that these equations are identical to Eqs.(4.17) and (4.18) when l0 .

When Si l02 << D0i Eqs.(4.17) and (4.18) becomes

S=

n
X

Sk ,

k=1

D0 = ,

Dl =

n
X

Dlk .

(4.33)

k=1

These simplifications can be carried out also in case of spatial problems: When [D0 ]i [S]1

i
1

[D0 ]j [S]j or [S]i l02 >> [D0 ]i Eqs.(4.29) and (4.30) become

[S] =
[D0 ] =
[Dl ] =

[B] [C]

[B] [C]

[B] ,

[B] [C] [B] ,

n
X
([D0 ]k + [Dl ]k ) [D0 ] ,

(4.34)

k=1

where

[B] =

n
X

[D0 ]k [S]k [D0 ]k ,

[C] =

k=1

n
X

k=1

For [S]i l02 << [D0 ] Eqs.(4.29) and (4.30) become

19

[D0 ]k [S]k [D0 ]k [S]k [D0 ]k .

(4.35)

[S] =

n
X

[S]k ,

k=1

4.4

[D0 ] = ,

[Dl ] =

n
X

[Dl ]k .

(4.36)

k=1

Numerical examples

To demonstrate the utility of the replacement beam we consider two simple examples shown in
Fig. 5.3.
4.4.1

Doubly symmetrical structure

The structure is stiffened by two coupled shear walls, a frame, and two shear walls (Fig.5.3a). We
wish to determine in the x z symmetry plane (i) the circular frequencies of the structure when
the mass is distributed uniformly along the floors, and (ii) the buckling loads when the load is
applied at the top.
The replacement stiffnesses of the lateral load-resisting subsystems are (see Table 1):

Dlf

3
X
i=0

D0f
Sb

=
=

3
X

i=0
3
X

i=1
3
X

EIci = 4 1.95 1010 1.33 104 = 1.040 107 Nm2 ,

EAci c2i = 2 1.95 1010 0.04 (22 + 62 ) = 6.240 1010 Nm2 ,
12EIbi
12 1.95 1010 1.33 104
=3
= 7.672 106 N,
li h
4 3.05

(4.37)

12 1.95 1010 1.33 104

12EIci
=
4

= 1.342 106 N,
2
2
h
3.05
i=0

1
= 4.881 106 N,
Sb1 + Sc1

Sc

Sf

Dlw

0,

D0w

EIw = 1.95 1010 1.07 == 2.087 1010 Nm2 ,

Sw

GAw
=

Dtw

GItw

1.951010
21.2

0.8

= 5.42 109 N,
1.2
1.95 1010
=
1.07 102 = 1.733 108 Nm2 ,
2 1.2

20

(4.38)

H = 30 3.05 = 91.5 m

M = 3.058 105 kg/m

E = 1.95 1010 N/m 2

Q=m

frame
shear wall
coupled shear walls

362 + 182
= 4.128 107 kgm 2 /m
12

b = 18.0

r = -8 m r = 8 m

r = -8 m r = 8 m

a = 36 m

a = 36 m

(a)
0

n=3
Aw= 0.8 m2
Iw= 1.07 m4
Itw= 1.0710-2m4

h =3.05 m

Ibi= 1.3310-4 m4

(b)

li = 4 m
2

Aci= 0.04 m
-4
4
Ici= 1.33 10 m

c1=2 c2=2
c0=6

c3=6
frame

Ib= 1.0710-3 m4
2
Ab =i 0.08 m
Aci= 0.4 m2
-1
4
Ici= 1.33 10 m

2m
2m 2m
coupled shear walls

L= 4 m
shear wall

(c)

Figure 11: Numerical example. (a) symmetrical structure, (b) unsymmetrical structure, (c) lateral
load-resisting subsystems
Dlc

1
X
i=0

D0c

1
X
i=0

Sb

Sc
Sc

EIci = 2 1.95 1010 1.33 101 = 5.200 109 Nm2 ,

EAci c2i = 2 1.95 1010 0.4 22 = 6.240 1010 Nm2 ,

i
h
2
2
6EIb (d + s1 ) + (d + s2 )
6 1.95 1010 1.07 103 2 (2 + 2)2



 =(4.39)
=
10 1.07103
b
d3 h 1 + 12EI
23 3.05 1 + 121.21.9510
Gd2 Ab
1.951010 /2.422 0.08

21
= 1.468 108 N,
1
X 12EIci
12 1.95 1010 1.33 101
=2
= 6.708 109 N,
=
2
2
h
3.05
i=0

1
= 1.436 108 N,
= S 1 + S 1

mode
l0i



A 1011 kNm2


B 1014 kNm4


C 1017 kNm6


D0i 1010 kNm2


Dli 1010 kNm2


Si 107 kN

i=1

i=2

i=3

2H

2
3H

2
5H

1.341

0.7018

0.4077

7.669

1.220

0.3119

107.6

2.535

0.3120

9.406

13.29

13.08

7.950

1.149

1.047

3.841

27.87

29.06

Table 2: Replacement stiffnesses of the symmetrical structure given in Fig.5.3

deformation

1. mode

2. mode

3. mode

bending ( B1 )

3.52

22.03

61.7

shear ( S1 )

0.5

1.5

2.5

Table 3: The values of the multiplier, i for the calculation of the circular frequencies.
mode

Approximation

ETABS

Error [%]

0.2607

0.2649

-1.59

1.265

1.206

4.89

2.690

2.708

-0.66

Table 4: Comparison of the numerical and approximate results for the circular frequencies.
where superscript f , w, and c refers to the frame, to the walls, to the coupled shear walls, respectively.
The structure is symmetrical, thus the replacement stiffnesses of the structure can be calculated
from Eqs.(4.17) and (4.18). We choose l01 = 2H, l02 = 23 H, and l03 = 25 H in the analysis of the
first, second and third mode of vibration, respectively (see Fig.10). The results are given in Table
2.
Using the replacement stiffnesses we approximate the circular frequencies, i (in the x z
symmetry plane) as follows (Section 5.1.1):
1

2

1
1

Bl
+
+

=
2i = 

2
2
i
Si
B0

1
D0i
2Bi mH
4

1
Si
2Si mH
2

!1

+ 2Bi

Dli
,
mH 4

(4.40)

where Bi and Si for the first three modes are given in Table 3, the mass, M, and the total height
of the building, H are given in Fig.5.3. The approximate value of the circular frequencies (Eq.4.40)
and the results of a finite element calculation (using the ETABS program) are summarized in Table
4. The maximum error is less then 5% (Table 4).
The buckling loads of the structure (when the load is applied at the top) also can be approximated using the replacement stiffnesses [19]. Buckling loads in the x z symmetry plane
22

are:

1
Ncr

2
Ncr

3
Ncr

1
!1
2
2
1

D
01
+ Dl1 = 3.953 104 kN,

+
2
2
S1
(2H)
(2H)

1
!1
2
2

D
1
02

+ D
l2 = 1.861 105 kN,

+


2
2
2
2
S2
3H
3H
1

!1
2
2
1

D
03
+ D
l3 = 3.004 105 kN.

+


2
2
2
2
S3
H
H

(4.41)

These results are identical to the theoretical values calculated by the equations of [14].
We note that simple summation of the stiffnesses would result in the following buckling loads:

1
Ncr

= 4.947 104 kN,

2
Ncr

= 2.115 105 kN,

3
Ncr

= 3.178 105 kN,

(4.42)

and hence the maximum error would be 25.14%.

4.4.2

Unsymmetrical structure

The geometrical and material properties of the structure are given in Fig.5.3b. The building is
stiffened by a shear wall, coupled shear walls, and a frame as shown in Fig.5.3b. We wish to
determine the circular frequencies of the first three modes of vibration. The lateral load-resisting
subsystems of the unsymmetrical structure are identical to those of the symmetrical structure
(Section 4.4.1), the replacement stiffnesses are given by Eq.(4.38). The structure has one plane of
symmetry (x y). The structure vibrates either in the plane of symmetry (Section 4.1) or spatial,
lateral-torsional vibration occurs (Section 4.2).
In the symmetry plane the circular frequencies can be calculate from Eq.(4.40) independently
of the spatial vibration modes. The results for the first three modes are given in Table 5.
To calculate the circular frequencies of the coupled vibration modes first we determine the
replacement stiffness matrices (Section 4.2). The stiffness matrices of the individual lateral loadresisting subsystems are

23

mode

direction

Approximation

ETABS

Error [%]

spatial vibration

0.07834

0.07272

7.73

x y plane

0.1095

0.1095

0.00

spatial vibration

0.2187

0.2263

-3.36

spatial vibration

0.2459

0.2202

11.67

x y plane

0.6828

0.6813

0.22

spatial vibration

1.077

1.028

4.77

spatial vibration

0.4154

0.3919

6.00

x y plane

1.895

1.887

0.24

spatial vibration

2.2974

2.314

-0.72

Table 5: Comparison of the numerical and approximate results for the circular frequencies of the
unsymmetrical structure given in Fig.10

D0

D0

D0

Dt

D0c

Dw
0

Df
0

Dtw

0 0

h
i

Dl =
0 0 ,

1
0 0

0 0

h
i

Dl =
0 0 ,

2
0 0

0 0

h
i

Dl =
0 0 ,

3
0 0

Dlc

Dlw

Dlf

Sc

 

=
S
0
0 ,
1

0
0

0
Sw

 

= 0
S
0 ,
2

0
0

f
S
0




S 3 = 0
0 ,

0
0

0 0

0
0

0
0

0 ,

,
0 (4.43)

0 .

(Because of numerical considerations we replaced the zero elements in the main diagonal of the
shear stiffness matrices by a small element ( > 0)).
The matrices of the transformation from the local ( ) coordinate systems into the y z
coordinate system are

c
[T ]1 = [T ] = 0

0 8
1
0

0 ,

w
[T ]2 = [T ] = 1

For l0 = 2H Eq.(4.30) yields:

24

1 0
0
0

0 ,

f
[T ]3 = [T ] = 0

0 8

1 0 .

0 1
(4.44)

A =

1010

1014

1018

7.362

37.93

2.0776

37.93

471.1

5.556

10.89

7.865 103

10.89

356.2

9.966

66.94

2.978 105

66.94

637.8

The stiffness matrices of the replacement beam are (Eq.4.29):

= 1011

D0

= 109

Dl

= 108

1.248

0.2087

(4.45)

kNm2 ,

79.87

5.210 0 41.52

kNm2 ,
0
0
0

41.52 0 333.5

1.485
0
10.99

kN.
0
54.17
0

10.99
0
95.04

(4.46)

= 1.733 108 Nm2 .

Dt

The circular frequencies of the lateral-torsional vibration modes can be determined as the eigenvalues of the following equation (Section 5.1.1)

"
#
v

1
0m
2
2
2
H4

1
1
2
Si
Bi
[D0 ] + 2 [S]
+ 4 [Dl ] + 2 [G] mi m [M ]
w0m

2Bi
Si
H
H

0m

= 0,

(4.47)

Bi and Si for the first three modes are given in Table 3, H is the total height of the building
(H = 91.5 m), matrices [M ] and [G] are

[M ] = 0

ym

ym

zm

zm

2
2
+ ym
+ zm

[G] = 0

Dt

(4.48)

m is the mass per unit height (m = 3.058 105 kg/m), and is the polar moment of mass
(per unit height) about the mass center (Fig.5.3), ym , zm are the coordinates of the mass cen25

ter. In this example symmetrical mass distribution was considered, thus ym = 0 and zm = 0,


= m a2 + b2 /12 = 4.128 107 kgm2 /m. The approximate values of the first three circular

frequencies, and the results of the ETABS calculation are given in Table 5. The maximum error is
less then 12%.

Approximate analysis of building structures with identical

stories subjected to earthquakes

5.1

Circular frequency and period of vibration

In the previous section the replacement beam of building structures were defined. In this section
simple formulas are developed for the calculation of the circular frequencies of a beam with uniform
stiffnesses. We suggest to approximate the circular frequencies of the building by the circular
frequencies of the replacement continuum. We considered uniform mass distribution, however the
mass at the top floor may be different.
We recall that the circular frequency, is related to the period of vibration, T and to the
frequency, f by

T =
5.1.1

2
,

f=

.
2

(5.49)

Uniform mass distribution

Plane problem. We consider a building structure with a symmetrical plan which vibrates in
the x z symmetry plane. The stiffnesses of the replacement beam in the x z plane are the shear
stiffness (S), the global bending stiffness (D0 ) and the local bending stiffness (Dl ). The circular
frequencies of beams which undergo bending or shear deformations only are summarized in Table
6 [22].
The circular frequency of a sandwich beam with constant mass distribution was determined
in [22]. We obtained the exact values using the Rayleigh-Ritz method (Appendix C.1.1). An
approximate expression can be obtained by using Foppls and Southwells theorems [22]:

1
1

2mi = 
2 + S
2
0
mi
B
mi

2

l
+ B
mi

i = 1, 2, ...

(5.50)

Bl
0
where i = 1 belongs to the first mode of vibration, B
mi and mi are the circular frequencies of

beams with bending stiffnesses D0 and Dl , respectively; and Smi is the circular frequency of a
beam which undergoes shear deformation only and whose shear stiffness is S. From the second row
of Table 6 we have:

26

mass and
boundary

bending deformation only

shear deformation only

conditions

m
H

i =1 i =2
Bi = Bi

i =3

D
mH 4

i =1 i =2
Si = Si

B1 =

S1 =

B2 = 2

S2 = 2

B3 = 3

S3 = 3

i =3
S
mH 2

m
H

i =1 i =2
Bi = Bi

i =3

D
mH 4

i =1 i =2
Si = Si

i =3
S
mH 2

B1 = 3.52

S1 = 0.5

B2 = 22.03

S2 = 1.5

B3 = 61.7

S3 = 2.5

M
H

B =

q D
3 MH 3

S =

S
MH

Table 6: Circular frequencies of beams capable bending deformations only or shear deformations
only

27

Figure 12: Accuracy of approximate solutions of the circular ferquency in case of lateral vibration
with the aid of (a) K
opecsiris formula, (b) the correction of Kopecsiris formula, (c) Rutenbergs
formula, and (d) Zalkas formula

0
B
mi

= Bi

D0
,
mH 4

l
B
mi

= Bi

Dl
,
mH 4

Smi

= Si

S
,
mH 2

(5.51)

where m is the mass per unit height.

Numerical comparisons with the exact solution for the circular frequencies shows that for i = 1
Eq.(5.50) may underestimate the circular frequency by up to 15 percent (15% Er 0) for
i = 2 may underestimate the circular frequency by up to 11% and overestimate it by up to 9%
(11% Er 9%), while for i = 3 may underestimate the circular frequency by up to 4% and
overestimate it by up to 6% (4% Er 6%). The errors of using Eq.(5.50) for the lowest
circular frequency are illustrated in Fig.12a.
The accuracy of this approximation is suitable for design purposes. However in some special

28

cases the designer would need more accurate results, thus we suggest a correction factor to reduce
the errors of Eq.(5.50). To obtain a more accurate solution we fitted a curve to the values of the
error given in Fig.12a. We derived an approximate formula in the function of the stiffness ratios
q
q
Dl
:
= H DSl and = D
0

1
1

2m1 = 
2 + S
2
B0
m1
m1

where

f=

2
100(1 + 2.7)

2


l
+ B
(1 + f ) ,
m1


1.1

1
,
1.1 + e1.6 e0.013

= (1 + 4) .

(5.52)

(5.53)

Eq.(5.52) may overestimate the lawest circular frequency by up to 2.3% and underestimate it
by up to 4.14% (4.143% Er 2.3%). The errors of Eq.(5.52) compared to the exact results
are given in Fig.12b.
Comparison with previous approximate solutions As it was mentioned in Section 1.4
there are several approximate formulas available in the literature for the calculation of the circular
frequency. In this section we present the accuracy of the most robust methods [32], [47], [21].
One lateral load-resisting subsystem. We consider a single lateral load-resisting subsystem replaced by a sandwich beam with stiffnesses D0 , Dl , and S. We calculated the lawest circular
frequency with the aid of Rutenbergs [32], Zalkas [47] and Kopecsiris [21] (Eq.5.50) approximations, respectively. The errors compared to the exact results are given in Fig.?? in the function
q
q
Dl
of the stiffness ratios = H DSl and = D
.
0
Fig.?? shows that Rutenbergs method is not applicable for large values of .

The maximum errors of Zalkas formula is 16%, however in the region of maximum errors Zalka
suggest to neglect the shear deformation. With this limitation Zalka s approximation gives more
accurate results for the practical values of stiffness ratios.
Kopecsiris formula can be applied for any value of the stiffness ratios, his approximation may
result 16% error.
Eq.(5.52) is the correction of K
opecsiris formula which results less than 5% error for any value
of stiffness ratios (Fig.12).
Several lateral load-resisting subsystems. We consider a building structure consisting of
two different lateral load-resisting subsystems replaced sandwich beams with the stiffnesses D01 ,
Dl1 , S1 , and D02 , Dl2 , S2 , respectively. There is two basic concept for estimating the circular
frequency of the whole structure:
Kopecsiri and Zalka approximate the circular frequency as the sum of the circular frequencies
of the individual lateral load-resisting subsystems:
29

1
2

( B01 )

1
( S1 )

!1

Bl1 2

1
(B02 )

1
2

(S2 )

!1

+ Bl2

2

(5.54)

where represents a correction factor given in [47].

If we substitute the following stiffnesses:
Dl1 = 0, Dl2 = 0, S1 H 2 >> D01 , S2 H 2 << D02 ,

(5.55)

Eq.(5.54) results in
2 = B01

2

+ S2

2

(5.56)

which is equal to the result of Southwells theorem applied for a Csonka beam. Eq.(5.56) would
result 16% error.
According to our approximation first the replacement beam of the structure is produced, then
the circular frequency of the replacement beam is calculated. The circular frequency of a sandwich
beam can be determined by Eq.([?]) with an error less than 5%. The accuracy of the replacement
beam model was presented throughout numerical examples in Section 4.4.
Spatial problem. The replacement beam of the stiffening system has the following stiffnesses:

[D0 ] =

[S] =

D0zz

D0zy

D0z

D0yz D0yy D0y

D0z D0y D0

Syy Syz Sy

Szy Szz Sz ,

Sz Sy S

Dlzz

[Dl ] = Dlyz

Dlz

Dlzy
Dlyy
Dly

Dlz

Dly

Dl

(5.57)

Dt ,

where [D0 ] and [Dl ] are the matrices of the global and local bending stiffnesses, respectively, [S]
is the shear stiffness matrix and Dt is the torsional stiffness. The calculation of [D0 ] , [Dl ] , and
[S] are given in Section 4.2. (We note that the axis of the replacement beam passes through the
centroid of the coordinate system which may be chosen arbitrarily.)
The circular frequencies for beams where both ends are simply supported and [Dl ] is zero were
derived in [18]. Following the same steps as in [18] but taking also [Dl ] into account, we obtain
the following eigenvalue problem for the circular frequency, mi :

"

#
v0m
1

4
2
2
2
H
Si
H
Bi
1
1
2
[D0 ] + 2 [S]
+ 4 [Dl ] + 2 [G] mi m [M ]
w0m

2Bi
Si
H
H

0m
30

= 0,

(5.58)

where for simply supported beams Bi and Si are given in the first row of Table 6; m is the mass
per unit height, matrices [M ] and [G] are

[M ] = 0

ym

ym

zm

zm

2
2
+ ym
+ zm

[G] = 0

Dt

(5.59)

is the polar moment of mass (per unit height) about the mass center, and ym , zm are the
coordinates of the mass center. The eigenvector of Eq.(5.58) contains the amplitudes of vibration
in the x z plane (w0m ), x y plane (v0m ) and the amplitude of the torsional mode ( 0m ).
For a cantilever beam, we adopt Eq.(5.58) as an approximation, but we introduce values for
Bi and Si given in the second row of Table 6. We obtain three circular frequencies (and three
corresponding eigenvectors) for each value of i. The accuracy of Eq.(5.58) was also investigated
numerically. We compared the approximate results to the results of the exact solution (Appendix
C.1.1). We obtained the same accuracy for as for the plane problem.
When both the x z and the x y planes are symmetry planes, the building vibrates either in
the x z plane, or in the x y plane, or torsionally about the x axis. In this case the off-diagonal
elements of matrices [D0 ] , [Dl ] , and [S] are zero, and, accordingly, Eq.(5.58) gives the following
three sets of circular frequencies

2ymi

2zmi

2mi

1
D0zz
2Bi mH
4

1
D0yy
2Bi mH
4

1
0
2Bi D
H 4

Syy
2Si mH
2

Szz
2Si mH
2

1
S
2Si H
2

!1

+ 2Bi

Dlyy
,
mH 4

vibration in the

!1

+ 2Bi

Dlzz
,
mH 4

vibration in the

!1

+ 2Bi

Dl
GIt
+ 2Si
4
H
H 2

(5.60)

x y plane
x z plane
.

torsional
vibration

We observe that the expression for 2zmi is identical to Eq.(5.50) developed for the plane problem.
5.1.2

Additional mass at the top

Plane problem. When there is an additional mass (M ) at the end of the cantilever (Fig.15),
the lowest circular frequency may be approximated by using Dunkerleys theorem as:
2 =
where

1
2m1

1
2M

1

1
1

2M ' 
2 + S
2
0
M
B
M
31


2
l
+ B
,
M

(5.61)

(5.62)

and (see Table 6 third row)

0
B
M

= 3

D0
,
M H3

l
B
M

= 3

Dl
,
M H3

SM

S
.
MH

(5.63)

The accuracy of Eq.(5.62) was found to be: 6% Er 0.

Spatial problem. In case of spatial vibration the circular frequencies belonging to i = 1 can be
calculated as (see Dunkerleys theorem)
2 =

1
2m1

1
2M

1

(5.64)

where M is calculated from the following equation [?]

"
#
v

1
0M
H3
1
3
1
1
2
[D0 ] + H [S]
[G] mi M []
+ 3 [Dl ] +
w0M

3
H
H

0M

where M is the additional mass at the top and matrix [] is given by

[] = 0

yM

yM

zM

zM

2
yM

2
zM

= 0,

(5.65)

(5.66)

where is the polar moment of mass (at the top) about the mass center, and yM , zM are the
coordinates of the mass center.
Care must be taken in the use of Eq.(5.64). Equation (5.64) may give unacceptable error when
the horizontal distribution of masses at the top is significantly different from the mass distribution
on the other floors. In this case the eigenvectors for the uniform mass distribution and those for
the mass on the top are very different. Hence, the use of Eq.(5.64) is recommended only if the
scalar product of the eigenvectors are close to unity, say v0M vom + w0M w0m + 0M 0m > 0.9.

5.2
5.2.1

Internal forces
Uniform mass distribution

In the response modal analysis of buildings subjected to earthquakes an equivalent load is determined in each mode of vibration (Appendix A.2). For in-plane vibration, when the ground motion
is in the plane of the vibration, the horizontal force is [6]

fi (x) =

RH

0
RH
0

mi (x) dx
mi (x) SAi
m2i

(x) dx

32

(5.67)

where SAi is the spectral acceleration (which depends on the period of vibration, damping and the
ground peak acceleration), and i is the mode shape.
For spatial vibration [6]

yi
{f }i =
fzi

(x)

yi
0
m [M ]
=
zi (x)

RH

{i (x)} [M ] {i (x)} dx

(x)

RH

{i (x)} [M ] dx {}

ni

SAi

(5.68)

where fyi and fzi are horizontal forces in the y and z directions, respectively, fi is the resultant
moment about the x axis, and {} is the influence vector [6], which represents the direction of
excitation. For example if the excitation is in the xy plane {} = {1, 0, 0} , if the excitation is in the
x plane (where is in the y z plane, and the angle between y and is ) {} = {cos, sin, 0} ,
and for torsional excitation {} = {0, 0, 1} .
Plane problem. In this section we consider symmetrical structures subjected to earthquakes in
the symmetry plane.
Base shear force.

The total horizontal load, which is identical to the base shear force, is

obtained by integrating Eq.(5.67) over the height of the building.

For uniform mass distribution integration of Eq.(5.67) gives

Vi =

ZH

fi (x) dx =

RH
0

!2

i (x) dx

RH
0

mSAi = i mHSAi ,

(5.69)

2i (x) dx

the values of the multiplier, i are given in Table 7 for the first, second and third periods of
vibration for beams undergo bending deformation ( i = B1 , i = B2 , i = B3 ) and for beams
undergo shear deformation only ( i = S1 , i = S2 , i = S3 ).
For a sandwich beam the multiplier lies between these two values i.e. for the first period of
vibration 0.61 < i < 0.81, and for the second period of vibration 0.09 < i < 0.188 and for the
third 0.032 < i < 0.065. To estimate i for a sandwich beam we adopt the approximate formula
of the circular frequency. Equation (5.50) and (5.51) gives

1=

1
D0
2Bi mH
4

1
S
2Si mH
2

!1

The value of i is approximated as

i =

Si
Bi
+ 2 S
D0

2Bi mH
4
Si mH 2

!1

33

1
D
l
2mi .
+ 2Bi
mH 4

1 2 Dl

Bi Bi mH 4

2mi ,

(5.70)

(5.71)

mode

1. mode

deformation

bending deformation

base shear

shear force

force

at 3/4H

base
overturning
moment

0.61

0.32

0.45

0.81

0.32

0.52

0.188

0.09

0.039

0.09

0.09

0.018

0.065

0.033

0.00825

0.032

0.033

0.0044

only ( B1 )
shear deformation
only ( S1 )
2. mode

bending deformation
only ( B2 )
shear deformation
only ( S2 )

3. mode

bending deformation
only ( B3 )
shear deformation
only ( S3 )

Table 7: The values of the multiplier, i for the calculation of the internal forces.
where Bi and Si are given in Table 7. This expression gives the exact value for i when S ,
or S 0, or D0 0, or D0 and Dl 0. For arbitrary values of D0 , Dl and S Eq.(5.71)
was verified numerically. Comparisons with the exact solution of Eq.(5.69) for a sandwich beam
showed that the accuracy of Eq.(5.71) for 1 is 9% < Er < 0, for 2 is 37% < Er < 0, while
for 3 is 27% < Er < 0.
Shear force at height 3/4H. The distribution of the horizontal forces is determined by
the mode shape of the beam (see Eq.5.67). In the first, second, and third modes of vibration the
mode shape, the distribution of horizontal seismic forces and the shear forces along the height are
illustrated in Fig.13. The maximum of the shear force arises at the bottom of the cantilever, but
in the second mode there is another local maximum (Fig.13, middle).
This local maximum for different continuum models and different stiffness distributions was
calculated, and the location of the maximum was found to be between 0.6H and 0.9H. The
maximum can be approximated by evaluating the shear force at height 3/4H:
3/4

Vi

= i mHSAi .

(5.72)

The constant for beams with bending deformation or shear deformation only is given in Table
7 (column shear force at 3/4H), for the first three modes. For a sandwich beam Eq.(5.72)
i = Bi = Si can be used. The maximum error of this approximation for 1 is 3% < Er < +3%,
for 2 is 2% < Er < 10%, while for 3 is 7% < Er < +4% percent.
34

F1(x)

V1(x)

x
V1
M1

V2(x)

F2(x)

V(x)
x
V2
M2

V3(x)

F3(x)

H
x

V3
M3

Figure 13: Mode shapes of vibration, horizontal seismic force distribution, shear force
(The design value of the shear force can be calculated by combining the modal responses.
There are different combination rules given in design codes. We suggest to calculate the design
value of shear force at the bottom of the cantilever and at height 3/4H. At the top of the cantilever
the shear force is zero. The shear force diagram may be approximated by fitting a second order
parabola to the design value of the shear force at these three point. See Fig.13.)
Base overturning moment. The base overturning moment can be calculated from the
horizontal load Eq.(5.67) as follows
For a uniform mass distribution we have

Mi =

ZH
0

xfi (x) dx =

RH
0

i (x) dx
RH
0

2i

RH
0

xi (x) dx
mSAi = i mH 2 SAi .

(5.73)

(x) dx

The multiplier i is given in Table 7 for a beam undergoes bending deformation and for a
beam undergoes shear deformation only. For a sandwich beam the multiplier lies between these
two values. i is again calculated from Eq.(5.71) by introducing the values of i given in the last
column of Table 7. Numerical comparisons showed that Eq.(5.71) gives the value of 1 with an
error 5% < Er < 1%, while for the second and third modes the results are not acceptable.
35

Mzi
Vyi
V!i

Myi

Vzi

Figure 14: The base shear forces (Vyi , Vzi ), the resultant torque (Vi ), and the base overturning
moments (Myi , Mzi )
Spatial problem.
Base shear force.

The base shear forces and the resultant torque (Fig.14) can be calculated

from the integration of Eq.(5.68).

yi
Vzi

ZH
yi
=
fzi

f
0

dx.

(5.74)

First we consider the case when the structure consists of lateral load-resisting subsystems which
undergo shear deformation only. In this case the functions in the eigenvector (yi , zi , i ) are
cosines and Eqs.(5.68) and (5.74) give

yi
Vzi

Vi

{0i } [M ] {}

{0i }T [M ] {0i }

m [M ] H i {0i } SAi ,

(5.75)

where {0i } is the eigenvector of Eq. (5.58)

0mi
{0i } =
w0mi

0mi

(5.76)

and (for i = 1) i = Si = 0.81 (Table 7). The same equation apply when the lateral load-resisting
subsystems have bending deformation only, but we must substitute i = Bi = 0.61 into Eq.(5.75).
When the lateral load-resisting subsystems are sandwiches, the horizontal forces can be calculated by

36

yi
Vzi

Vi

T
yi 0mi
{0 } [M ] {}
=
m [M ] H
zi w0mi
T

{0 } [M ] {0 }

0mi

SAi ,

(5.77)

where yi , zi , and i are multipliers with values between Bi and Si (i.e. for i = 1
1 < 0.81 and for i = 2

0.61 <

0.09 < 2 < 0.188), see Table 7. To obtain a reasonable estimation for

we rearrange the expression obtained for the circular frequencies. By multiplication of Eq.(5.58)
1

by [M ]

/m2mi we obtain

0mi
w0mi

0mi

1


1
v
2

1
1
H4
0mi
[D0 ] [M ] + H2 [S] [M ]
+
2Bi

Si
w0mi
2
2
1
1

+ HBi4 [M ] [Dl ] + HSi2 [M ] [G]

0mi

2mi m.

(5.78)

Similarly as it was done for the plane problem (see Eq. 5.71) we introduce -s into this equation
and obtain:

yi 0m

=
zi w0m

i 0m

1 1

H
Bi H
0mi
[D0 ]1 [M ] + Si
[S]1 [M ]
+
2Bi
2Si

w0mi
2
1
2Si
1

+ BiBi
[M
]
[D
]
+
[M
]
[G]

4
l
2
H
Si H

0mi
2

2mi m,

(5.79)

which is an approximate expression for the vector { yi v0mi , zi w0mi , i 0mi }T . With this approximation Eq.(5.77) can be directly evaluated for the seismic loads.
(Note that Eqs.(5.77) and (5.79) give the exact values of the horizontal forces (Vyi and Vzi )
and the resultant torque (Vi ) when the structure is doubly symmetrical and in one direction it
has shear deformation only, in the other direction it has bending deformation only, and in torsion
it has bending or shear deformation only.)
As a rule, Eqs.(5.77) and (5.79) give only approximate values of the forces and the resultant
moment. The numerical examples showed that the accuracies are the same as for the plane problem.
Base overturning moment. The base overturning moments can be obtained in the same
way as the base shear forces. (Note that we may use the approximation only for the first mode.)
From Eq.(5.68) we arrive at

z1
My1

B
1

ZH
0

y1
x
fz1

T
y1 0m1
{01 } [M ] {}
2
m [M ] H
dx =
z1 w0m1
T

{01 } [M ] {01 }

0m1

SA1

(5.80)

where Mz1 and My1 are the base overturning moments in the x y and x z planes. The vector
on the right hand side is approximated by Eq.(5.79) where B1 = 0.45 and S1 = 0.52 (see Table
7).
37

D0
Dl
S

a)

b)

c)

Figure 15: Sandwich beam (a); constant mass distribution (b); constant mass and additional mass
at the top (c)
We may observe that when there is only bending deformation, y = z = = 0.45, and when
there is only shear deformation, y = z = = 0.52.
5.2.2

Additional mass at the top

Plane problem. When there is an additional mass on the top, we have to take the following
additional force and base overturning moment into account

FM = M SA ,

MM = HM SA .

Spatial problem. In case of spatial vibration when there are additional masses at the top,
concentrated forces and moment about the x axis may arise on the top of the building structure.
The resultant forces (VyM and VzM ) and moment (VM ) are [6]

VM

y
VzM

VM

{0 } [M ] {}
T

{0 } [M ] {0 }

M [] {0 } SA .

(5.81)

The additional base overturning moments have the values:

MzM = HVyM ,

5.3

MyM = HVzM .

Numerical example

In this section a numerical example is presented to demonstrate the accuracy and robustness of
the approximate calculation for building structures with identical stories.
The geometric and material characteristics of the structure are given in Table 8. and Fig. 16.
The approximate calculation was carried out in the following steps:
Step 1. Calculate of the stiffnesses of the lateral load-resisting subsystems [20].
Step 2. Calculate of the replacement stiffnesses of the building by Eq.(4.29).

38

Number of stories

28

Story height, h

2.97 m

Total height, H

83.2 m

Mass / unit height, m

280640 kg/m

Mass moment of inertia / unit height,

69001 kgm2 /m

Youngs modulus of walls, E w

1.95 107 kN/m2

Shear modulus of walls, Gw

8.125106 kN/m2
2.3 107 kN/m2

Youngs modulus of beams, Eb

9.58 106 kN/m2

Shear modulus of beams, Gb

Area of beams, Ab

0.07 m2

Moment of inertia of beams, Ib

5.79 104 m4

Area of walls , Aw

1.92 m2

Moment of inertia of walls , I w

8.85 m4

Table 8: Geometric and material characteristics of the shear walls (see Fig. 14)

k=7

k=9

wall

k=8

k=1

k=3

k=2

k=6

k=5

d = 3.7
s2 = 6.1
s1 = 6.1

11 3.7

k=4

5.55 1.85

coupled shear walls

5.55

9.25
16.65

Figure 16: Numerical example of Section 5.3

Step 3. Calculate the periods of vibration by Eq.(5.58).
Step 4. Calculate the internal forces: the base shear force (Eq. 5.77) and the base overturning
moment (Eq. 5.80).
The periods of vibration and the internal forces were determined also by a FE code (ETABS).
In the example uniform mass distribution was considered.
Step 1. In the longitudinal, y direction the building structure is stiffened by four shear walls
(k = 1, 2, 3, 4). In the x direction the stiffening system consists three shear walls (k = 5, 6, 7)

39

and two coupled shear walls (k = 8, 9). The replacement stiffnesses of the lateral load-resisting
subsystems are [20]:

Dlk

0,

k = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

Dlk

2E w I w = 3.45 108 kNm2 ,

k = 8, 9,

D0k

E w I w = 1.725 108 kNm2 ,

k = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

D0k

2E w Aw (cw ) = 2.02 109 kNm2 ,

Sk

Sk

1.2 Gw Aw = 1.87 107 kN,

k = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
1

1
1

2
12E w I w

6EbIb 2 (d + s1 ) 
+
2
= 9.99 104 kN,

2
12Eb Ib
h
3
d h 1 + G b d 2 Ab

k = 8, 9,

(5.82)

k = 8, 9.

Step 2. The stiffnesses in the global coordinate system are:

[Dl ]k = Dlk [R]k ,

[D0 ]k = D0k [R]k ,

[S]k = Sk [R]k ,

(5.83)

(5.84)

where

cos2 k

[R]k = cos k sin k

rk cos k

cos k sin k
sin2 k

rk sin k

rk cos k

rk sin k .

rk2

In the y direction k = 0 (k = 1, 2, 3, 4), in the x direction k = /2 (k = 5, 6, 7, 8, 9), rk is the

distance of the kth lateral load-resisting subsystem to the origin of the global coordinate system
(Fig 16):
k

rk

1.85

-1.85

1.85

-1.85

-9.25

5.55

1.85

-16.65

-5.55

For l0 = 2H

Si l02 >> D0i , thus the replacement stiffness matrices of the structure are (Eqs.

(4.34) and (4.35)):

40

[A] =

[B] =

[D0 ] =

[S] =

[Dl ] =

1
[D0 ]k [S]k [D0 ]k = 0 8.171 1016 9.069 1017 ,

k=1
0 9.069 1017 1, 258 1019

0
0
16

1
1
[D0 ]k [S]k [D0 ]k [S]k [D0 ]k = 0 1, 652 1021 1.834 1022 ,

k=1
0 1.834 1022 2, 544 1023

0
0

1
(5.85)
[A] [B] [A] = 0 4.041 1012 4.486 1013 ,

0 4.486 1013 6.223 1014

0
0

1
1
[A] [B] [A] [B] [A] = 0 1.999 108 2.219 109 ,

0 2.219 109 3.078 1010

11
6.876

10
0
0
16

([D0 ]k + [Dl ]k ) [D0 ] =

0
1.208 1012
70.978 1012 .

k=1
0
70.978 1012
1.293 1014
16
X

We note that some of the stiffness matrices are singular because they contain a zero element in
the main diagonal. For numerical purpose we replaced the zero elements in the main diagonal by
a small element ( > 0).
Step 3. The natural frequencies are calculated from Eq.(5.58):
"

#
v0m
1

2
2
H4
H

1
1
2
Bi
[D0 ] + 2 [S]
+ 4 [Dl ] mi m [M ]
w0m

2Bi
Si
H

0m

where [M ] is a diagonal matrix:

[M ] = 0

0
1
0

0 = 0

0
m

0 159.09

= 0,

(5.86)

(5.87)

By substituting B1 = 3.52, S1 = 0.5 (Table 6) into Eq.(6.110) we obtain the following three
eigenvalues:
2m1 = 1.981,

2m2 = 0.635,

2m3 = 0.352.

The following three eigenvalues are obtained by substituting B2 = 22.03, S2 = 1.5 (Table 6).
Equation (6.110) results in:
2m4 = 64.61,

2m5 = 24.86,
41

2m6 = 12.87.

Period of vibration, T (sec)

mode

direction

Approximation

lateral (x-z)-torsional

ETABS

Error [%]

Sei

10.59

10.53

0.57

0.0416

x-y plane

7.89

8.26

-4.69

0.0751

lateral (x-z)-torsional

4.46

4.32

3.24

0.234

lateral (x-z)-torsional

1.75

1.86

-5.41

0.889

x-y plane

1.26

1.35

-6.67

1.24

lateral (x-z)-torsional

0.78

0.83

-6.02

1.99

lateral (x-z)-torsional

0.63

0.70

-10.0

2.47

x-y plane

0.45

0.50

-10.0

2.60

10

lateral (x-z)-torsional

0.29

0.32

-9.38

2.60

Table 9: Comparison of the numerical and approximate results for the periods of vibration, (T ),
and the spectral accelerations, Sei
The modes 7 to 9 are obtained by introducing B3 = 61.7, S3 = 2.5 into Eq.(6.110) which yield:
2m7 = 486.02,

2m8 = 195.02,

2m9 = 99.44.

The periods of vibration, T are:

Ti =

2
.
i

(5.88)

The results of the approximate calculation and those of the ETABS code are given in Table 9. The
maximum error is -10%.
Step 4. The seismic forces are determined using the Response Modal Analysis (Appendix A.2).
The calculation was carried out according to Eurocode 8. The spectral accelerations are given in
the function of the period of vibration, [9]:

< Ti < TB

TB

< Ti < TC

TC

< Ti < TD

TD

< Ti



Ti ( 1)
,
Sei = ag St 1 +
TB
Sei = ag St ,
 k1
TC
Sei = ag St
,
Ti
k 
k

TC 1 TD 2
.
Sei = ag St
TD
Ti

(5.89)

The parameters in Eq.(5.89) depend on the soil condition, on the location of the structure,
and on the damping ratio. We considered St = 1, ag = 0.08 9.81, = 2.5, TB = 0.15, TC =
0.6, TD = 3, k1 = 1, k2 = 2, = 1.323.
Substituting the periods of vibration given in Table 9 into Eq.(5.89) the spectral accelerations,
Sei can be determined in each mode of vibration. These are also given in Table 9.
42

mode
2 (x-y plane)

3 ( x-z plane-torsional)

1 ( x-z plane-torsional)

5 (x-y plane)

excitation

internal force

x-y

x-z

x-z

x-y

6 ( x-z plane-torsional)

4 ( x-z plane-torsional)

8 (x-y plane)

x-z

x-z

x-y

10 ( x-z plane-torsional)

7 ( x-z plane-torsional)

x-z

x-z

Approximation

ETABS

Error [%]

Vy [kN]

1070

998.8

7.13

My [kNm]

65635

61147

7.34

Vz [kN]

2175

2170

0.26

V [kNm]

22031

22674

-2.84

Mz [kNm]

129450

132772

-2.50

Vz [kN]

223.6

253.7

-11.87

V [kNm]

3839

3383

8.39

Mz [kNm]

13879

15496

-10.43

Vy [kN]

5423

5232

3.65

My [kNm]

93549

90810

3.02

Vz [kN]

5415.8

5008

8.14

V [kNm]

50927

48072

5.94

Mz [kNm]

93333

89190

4.64

Vz [kN]

1432

1464

-2.20

V [kNm]

22989

21037

9.28

Mz [kNm]

24711

25987

-4.91

Vy [kN]

3938

4026

-2.20

My [kNm]

41561

41704

-034

Vz [kN]

2512

2561

-1.90

V [kNm]

23428

23363

0.28

Mz [kNm]

26543

26812

-1.00

Vz [kN]

1338.8

1336

0.22

V [kNm]

22401

19467

15.07

Mz [kNm]

14124

14350

-1.57

Table 10: Internal forces of the numerical examle in Section 5.3.

The base shear forces are calculated by Eq.(5.77). The structure has one plane of symmetry
(x y), thus from the lateral vibration in the x y plane base shear force arises only in the y
direction. However from the lateral (x z)- torsional vibration both a shear force and a torque
arise. The base overturning moments are calculated from Eq.(5.80). The internal forces in the
first three modes in case of different earthquake excitations are given in Table 10. Table 10 also
contains the results of the ETABS calculation, and the errors of the approximation.
The design value of the internal forces can be calculated by combining the modal responses [9]:

43

Figure 17: Approach: a) structure consisting of discrete elements, b) replacement continuum with
varying stiffnesses, c) replacement continuum with constant stiffnesses

6786

9 q

X
2
,
{Vi } =
{V } =
6659

68358

9 q
121601
X
{M } =
{Mi2 } =
.
164850
1

6677

9 q

X
2
{V } =
,
{Vi } =
6351

64837

9 q
118173
X
{M } =
{Mi2 } =
.
165600
1

The ETABS calculation gives:

(5.90)

(5.91)

The maximum error is 5.43%. Including 15 modes in the ETABS calculation the design values of
the base shear force are

Vy
Vz

=
=

15 q
X
Vy2 = 7050 kN,

(5.92)

1
15 p
X

Vz2 = 6500 kN,

which result less than 4% error.

Approximate analysis of building structures with different

stories subjected to earthquakes

6.1

Approach

The structure consisting of discrete elements is replaced by a continuum, the stiffnesses of which
may vary with the height (Fig.17b). (The calculation of the replacement stiffnesses is discussed in
Section 4.)

44

This continuum is further replaced by one with constant stiffnesses (Fig.17c). Then the circular
frequency (and the internal forces) are determined by the expression given in Section 5.1 (and in
Section 5.2).
According to the above approach we have to determine the stiffnesses of the replacement continuum with constant stiffnesses. We wish to answer the following question: Can we give a simple
rule how to choose the stiffnesses of the continuum with constant stiffnesses?
We will show that the answer to this question is yes, and we will determine the height where the
stiffnesses of the actual continuum must be evaluated to replace it by one with constant stiffnesses.
The error of the suggested approximate method comes from three sources: First the discrete
structure is replaced by a continuum. Second: the continuum with varying stiffnesses is replaced
by a continuum with constant stiffnesses. Third: the period of vibration of the continuum is
determined by simple approximate formulas.

6.2
6.2.1

Circular frequency and period of vibration

Uniform mass distribution

Plane problem. Following the Rayleigh-Ritz method we derived expressions and developed an
algorithm and a computer code for calculating the circular frequencies of Timoshenko-beams and
Csonka-beams with varying stiffnesses. The details of the derivation are given in Appendix C.1.2.
(We note that these expressions and the corresponding computer codes are readily applicable to
beams which undergo bending or shear deformation only.)
The results of the Rayleigh-Ritz method will be referred to as accurate solutions of the
continuum. Then we evaluate the stiffness of the beam at H (0 < < 1) and determine the
circular frequencies of beams with these uniform stiffnesses by the expressions given in Section 5.1.
We will compare these results to the accurate one.
We determine numerically at which height the stiffnesses of the continuum (with varying stiffnesses) should be evaluated to obtain the best the replacement beam with uniform stiffnesses.
Beams undergo bending deformation only. The stiffness of a beam, which undergoes
bending deformation only decreases from D to kD (0 < k < 1) from the bottom to the top. Three
different functions of the stiffness were considered: linear (Fig.18a), parabolic with vertical tangent
at the top (Fig.18b) and parabolic with vertical tangent at the bottom (Fig.18c).
The stiffness, D of the replacement beam with constant stiffness was determined at various
and k values, and the circular frequencies was calculated from the following equation (Table 6):

B1 = 3.52

D
,
mH 4

B2 = 22.03

D
,
mH 4

(6.93)

where 1 and 2 refers to the first and second mode of vibration, respectively, m is the mass per unit
height, and H is the total height of the building.
45

kD
D[1 - (1 - k )x ]

H
xH

D
a)
kD

D 1 + (k - 1)x 2

H
xH

D
b)
kD

D 1 + (1 - k )x 2 - 2(1 - k )x

H
x

xH

D
c)

Figure 18: Bending stiffness distibution: a) linear, b) parabolic with vertical tangent at the top,
c) parabolic with vertical tangent at the bottom

0.23

-0.60%

1.14%

6.00%

0.24

-0.95%

0.89%

4.63%

0.25

-1.36%

0.63%

3.25%

0.26

-1.83%

0.35%

-3.31%

0.27

-2.36%

-0.17%

-4.07%

Table 11: Error in the first period of vibration, T D1 , using replacement constant stiffness for a
B-beam
The maximum errors for different -s are given in Tables 11 and 12.
For practical purposes we suggest = 0.25 for the first mode of vibration and = 0.5 for the
second mode of vibration in case of all these distributions. The maximum error does not exceed
11%.

46


0.25

22.13%

14.05%

66.21%

0.48

1.69%

3.33%

15.24%

0.50

-2.59%

2.01%

10.81%

0.52

-3.80%

-0.77%

-8.40%

Table 12: Error in the second period of vibration, T D2 , using replacement constant stiffness for a
B-beam

cS
S [1 - (1 - c )x ]

H
xH

S
a)
cS

S 1 + (1 - c )x - 2(1 - c )x 2

H
xH

S
b)
cS

S 1 + (c - 1)x 2

H
x

xH

S
c)

Figure 19: Shear stiffness distibution: a) linear, b) parabolic with vertical tangent at the top, c)
parabolic with vertical tangent at the bottom
Beams undergo shear deformation only. The stiffness of a beam, which undergoes shear
deformation only decreases from S to cS (0.1 c 1) from the bottom to the top. Three different
functions of the stiffness were considered: linear (Fig.19a), parabolic with vertical tangent at the
top (Fig.19b) and parabolic with vertical tangent at the bottom (Fig.19c).
The stiffness, S of the replacement beam with constant stiffness was determined at various
and c values, and the circular frequencies was calculated from the following equation (Table 6):

47


0.33

6.93%

-4.72%

-7.80%

0.35

5.32%

-4.05%

-5.64%

0.37

3.69%

-3.19%

-3.08%

0.39

2.03%

-2.28%

4.14%

0.42

-2.88%

-0.80%

6.27%

Table 13: Error in the first period of vibration, T S1 , using replacement constant stiffness for an
S-beam

0.35

37.65%

27.43%

29.21%

0.60

7.98%

8.83%

9.30%

0.63

-4.97%

5.64%

-12.32%

Table 14: Error in the second period of vibration, T S2 , using replacement constant stiffness for an
S-beam

S1 = 0.5

S
,
mH 2

S2 = 1.5

S
,
mH 2

(6.94)

where 1 and 2 refers to the first and second mode of vibration, respectively, m is the mass per unit
height, and H is the total height of the building.
The maximum errors for different -s are given in Tables 13 and 14.
We obtained the highest errors in the case of the distribution presented in Fig.19c. If the ratio c
is less than 0.1, the error of that distribution can be very high. However, the limit 0.1 is acceptable
for practical purposes.
For practical purposes we suggest = 0.33 for the first mode of vibration and = 0.6 for the
second mode of vibration, in case of all these distributions. Even for this case the maximum error
does not exceed 10%.
(Considering an S-beam the minimum error belongs to = 0.38 as can be seen in Table 13. We
calculated several examples for Timoshenko-beams and for Csonka-beams with different -s. The
suggested value, = 1/3, is a compromise to keep the error of the approximation low for all the
cases and it is also a value easy to remember.)
Timoshenko-beam. We have analyzed a Timoshenko-beam with varying stiffnesses presented in Fig.20. As it is mentioned in Appendix C.1.2, the flexural stiffness varies linearly for
D0 to kD0 , while the inverse of the shear stiffness varies linearly from 1/S to c/S (1 c 10).
48

c
S

kD0
H
x

1
[1 - (1 - c )x ]
S

D0 [1 - (1 - k )x ]

xH

1
S

D0

Figure 20: Stiffness distribution of a Timoshenko-beam

D

1.mode

2.mode

0.25

0.30

1.91%

0.25

0.33

2.63%

0.25

0.38

7.35%

0.5

0.6

13.96

Table 15: Error in the periods of vibration,T 1 and T 2 using replacement constant stiffness for a
Timoshenko-beam
The Rayleigh-Ritz method yields the circular frequencies as a function of the stiffness ratios c, k
(Appendix C.1.2).
The approximate value of the circular frequencies for constant stiffnesses was determined by
Eq.(5.50) with Dl set equal to 0, which yields

1
1

2mi = 
2 + S
2
B0
mi
mi

i = 1, 2,

(6.95a)

S
0
where B
mi and mi are given by Eqs.(6.93) and (6.94), respectively (Table 6).

In the calculation of the first period of vibration the stiffnesses were evaluated for the bending
stiffness at the quarter of the height, 14 H, and for the shear stiffness at the third of the height, 13 H.
The maximum differences between the results of the Rayleigh-Ritz method and of Eq.(6.95a) was
found to be only 2.63% (Table 15).
For calculating the second period of vibration we used the stiffnesses evaluated for the bending
stiffness at the half of the height,
10
6 H.

1
2 H,

and for the shear stiffness at the six tenth of the height,

The maximum difference between the results of the Rayleigh-Ritz method and Eq.(6.95a) is

less than 14% (Table 15).

Csonka-beam. We have analyzed a Csonka-beam with stiffness distribution presented in
Fig.21. Three different functions of the stiffnesses were considered: linear (Fig.21a), parabolic
with vertical tangent at the bottom (Fig.21b) and parabolic with vertical tangent at the top
(Fig.21c). With the aid of the Rayleigh-Ritz method we can obtain the circular frequencies as a
49

dDl

cS

xH

Dl [1 - (1 - d )x ]

S [1 - (1 - c )x ]

Dl

S
a)
dDl

cS

S 1 + (1 - c )x - 2(1 - c )x 2

H
xH

Dl 1 + (1 - d )x 2 - 2(1 - d )x

Dl

b)
dDl

cS
H
xH

S 1 + (c - 1)x 2

Dl 1 + (d - 1)x 2

Dl

c)

Figure 21: Stiffness distribution: a) linear, b) parabolic with vertical tangent at the top, c)
parabolic with vertical tangent at the bottom
function of the stiffness ratios d, c (Appendix C.1.2).
The approximate value was determined by Eq.(5.50) with D0 set equal to infinity (D0 = ).
It yields:
2mi = Smi

2

2

l
,
+ B
mi

i = 1, 2,

(6.96)

S
0
where B
mi and mi are given by Eqs.(6.93) and (6.94), respectively (Table 6).

The maximum errors between the results of Rayleigh-Ritz method and Eq.(6.96) are compiled
in Table 16.
In the calculation of the first period of vibration the stiffnesses were evaluated for the bending
stiffness at the quarter of the height,
1
3 H.

1
4 H,

and for the shear stiffness at the third of the height,

The maximum differences between the results of the Rayleigh-Ritz method and Dunkerleys

theorem was found to be less than 18%.

For calculating the second period of vibration we used the stiffnesses evaluated for the bending
stiffness at the half of the height,
10
6 H.

1
2 H,

and for the shear stiffness at the six tenth of the height,

The maximum differences between the results of the Rayleigh-Ritz method and Dunkerleys

theorem was found to be less than 18%.

50

0.25

0.33

-16.37%

-15.14%

-17.89%

0.25

0.35

-16.01%

-15.10%

-17.12%

0.23

0.35

22.60%

Table 16: Error in the first period of vibration,T 1 using replacement constant stiffness for a Csonkabeam
D

0.52

0.60

-13.15%

-16.69%

-10.52%

0.50

0.60

-12.42%

-15.67%

-10.12%

Table 17: Error in the second period of vibration,T 2 using replacement constant stiffness for a
Csonka-beam
Sandwich beam. The period of vibration of a sandwich beam with constant stiffnesses can
be determined by Eq.(5.50).
For the calculation of the first period of vibration the flexural stiffnesses, Dl and D0 are evaluated at the quarter of the height, for the shear stiffness, S at the third of the height. In the second
mode Dl and D0 are evaluated at the half of the height, and S at the six tenth of the height.
A computer code for the calculation of the accurate period of vibration of sandwiches was
not developed, and hence the accuracy of the above approximation will be investigated numerically
in Section 6.4.
Spatial problem. The spatial vibration problem will be investigated with the aid of a numerical
example in Section 6.4.2.
6.2.2

Additional mass at the top

When there is an additional mass (M ) at the end of the cantilever (Fig.15), the lowest circular
frequency may be approximated by using Dunkerleys theorem as:
2

1
2m1

1
+ 2
M

1

(6.97)

where 2m1 is given by M is the circular frequency of a cantilever with a single mass at the top,
the stiffnesses of which varies with the height.
We apply the a similar approximation for a single mass at the top as we applied for uniform
mass distribution (Section 6.2.1). We replace the continuum with varying stiffnesses with a beam
with constant stiffnesses. We suggest to evaluate the replacement constant stiffnesses at different

51

height of the structure. The analysis is derived in [26]. The results are:
1/4H

D0 = D0

1/4H

Dl = Dl

S = S 0.64H .

The circular frequency of the replacement beam is (Eq.5.62):

1

1
1

2M ' 
2 + S
2
0
M
B
M


2
l
+ B
,
M

(6.98)

Bl
S
0
where B
M , M , and M are given in Table 6. The utility and accuracy of this approximation is

investigated numerically in Section 6.

6.3

Internal forces

We analyzed beams develop bending or shear deformations only, and Csonka beams with the
stiffness distributions given in Figures 18, 19, and 21, respectively. The stiffness distributions are
limited. The ratio of the stiffness at the bottom of the beam and the stiffness at the top of the
beam should not exceed 10. We suggest to approximate the base shear force of the structure with
different stories by the base shear of the replacement beam with constant stiffnesses (Eqs. 5.69
and 5.71). The approximation is acceptable only in the first mode of vibration. The maximum
error for a beam with bending deformation only ( 1 = B1 = 0.61) is 15.45%, for a beam with
shear deformation only ( 1 = S1 = 0.81) is 28.08%, and the errors for a Csonka beam (Eq. 5.71)
are under 30%. To get a better approximation we can decrease the ratio of the stiffnesses at the
bottom and at the top. If the ratio is under 5 the maximum error is less than 25%. We produced
more complicated results in the function of the stiffness ratios [27], which gives an error less than
15%, however this results are tedious for practical purposes.

6.4

Numerical examples

In this section numerical examples are presented to demonstrate the accuracy and robustness of
the approximate method for varying stiffnesses.
6.4.1

One lateral load-resisting subsystem

We present the calculation of the lowest circular frequency of type of lateral load-resisting subsystems.
The approximate calculations was carried out in the following steps:
Step 1. Calculate of the stiffnesses of the building at each level (Table 1).
Step 2. Calculate the replacement stiffnesses of the beam, D, at the quarter of the height and
S at the third of the height.
Step 3. Calculate the period of vibration by Eq.(5.50).

52

H
h

L1

L2

L3

Figure 22: Rigid frame example

The period of vibration of the buildings were determined also by a FE code (ETABS) [10].
Note that in these examples the mass at each level was calculated as mh, while at the very top
either as m h2 or as mh.
Rigid frame

The geometrical and material characteristics of the frame are given in Table 18

and Fig. 22. In this example the number of stories were 4, 6, 8, 10, 15 and 21. Here the calculation
for n = 10 is presented.
Step 1. The beams are identical to each other while the columns are different at each level. At
the ith level the dimensions of the cross-section of the columns are:

a=b=

(2/3 + i) 3.05 + 15
,
100

(6.99)

which results in areas and moments of inertia given in Table 18, and illustrated in Fig.23.

Step 2. We calculated the area and the second moment of inertia of columns at each level
(Ac , Ic ), and fitted curves to obtain Ac and Ic as a function of the distance from the ground. In
this calculation we assumed that Ac and Ic are values at the third of the heights of the columns
(Fig. 23), then the area and inertia were evaluated at the quarter and third of the total height.
This results in the following area and moment of inertia:

A1/4
c
Ic1/4
Ic1/3

30.5 3/4 + 6
= 0.379 m2 ,
100

2
30.5 3/4 + 6
=
/12 = 1.95 102 m4 ,
100
2

30.5 2/3 + 6
/12 = 1.04 102 m4 .
=
100
=

53

(6.100)

Number of storyes

n = 4 to 21

Story height, h (m)

3.05

Total height, H (m)

nh

Distance between columns, l (m)

5.00

Weight / unit height, mg (kN/m)

588.6

Youngs modulus, E (kN/m2 )

2.78107

Area of beams, Ab (m2 )

0.3660.488 = 0.1786

Moment of inertia of beams, Ib (m4 )

3.545103

Area of columns at ith story, Aci (m2 )

3.05(ni+2/3)+1.5n
100
[3.05(ni+2/3)+1.5n]2
104 12

Moment of inertia of columns at ith story, Ici (m4 )

Table 18: Geometric and material characteristics of the rigid frame example in Section 6.4

Ic
Ac

1/4

1/3

Ic1/4
1/3H

1/4H

1/4H

a)

b)

Figure 23: Variation of a) the area, b) the moment of inertia of the columns
The replacement stiffnesses are (Table 1)

54

Sc

4
1/3
X
12EI
ci
h2

i=0

Sb

D0

Dl

3
X
12EIbi

=4

12 2.78 107 1.04 102

= 1.49 106 kN,
3.052

12 2.78 107 3.54 103

= 2.32 105 kN,
l
5.00

3.05
i
i=1
1



1
1
1
1 1
+
= 2.01 105 kN,
=
Sb + Sc
14.9 105 2.32 105
h2

4
X

i=0
4
X
i=0

=3

(6.101)

1/4
EAci c2i = 2 2.52 + 7.52 2.78 107 0.379 = 1.32 109 kNm2 ,
1/4

EIci = 4 2.78 107 1.95 102 = 1.33 106 kNm2 .

Step 3. The period of vibration is (Eq.5.50):

mi

2

0.5

1
1

B
= 
2 + S
2 + mil =
B0
mi
mi
0.5

!1
4
m
1
H
1
=
(6.102)
= H4 m +
+
2 mH 2
2D
3.52
l
(0.5)
2
3.52 D0
S

0.5
!1
4
30.5
1
1
588.6/9.81

+
=
+
2 588.6/9.81
2
30.54 588.6/9.81
3.52 1.33 106
(0.5) 30.52.0110
5
3.52 1.32109
= 2.99 1/ sec .

The period of vibration is:

T =

2
= 2.098 sec .

The period of vibration of the frame was also calculated by the FE code (ETABS), the result
is

T = 2.000 sec,
which is very close to the approximate value furnished by our method. Results of n = 4, 6, 8, 10, 15
and 21 stories are presented in Table 19.
Coupled shear walls
The geometric and material characteristic of the coupled shear walls are given in Table 20 and
Fig. 24. In this example we wanted to demonstrate the effect of the variation of all the stiffnesses
(S, D0 , Dl ). To fulfill this purpose the thickness of the wall was chosen for the first nine stories as
w = 465 mm, for the middle nine stories as w = 310 mm and for the top nine stories as w = 155
mm.
55

Number of stories

ETABS

ETABS

Approximate

Error (%)

Error (%)

mh/2

mh

method

mh/2

mh

21

4.008

4.122

4.252

-6.09

-3.15

15

2.891

3.006

3.056

-5.71

-1.66

10

2.000

2.122

2.098

-4.89

1.13

1.662

1.791

1.733

-4.25

3.24

1.452

1.62

1.386

-4.58

14.44

1.059

1.24

1.071

-1.13

13.63

Table 19: Period of vibration (T , sec) of the frame given in Fig. 11 calculated by the ETABS code
and by the approximate method. (In the ETABS calculation the concentrated mass on the very
top was either mh/2 or mh, as shown in the table)

h
H

Figure 24: Coupled shear wall example

Step 1. The areas and the moments of inertia of the beams and columns are given in Table 20,
and their distributions are illustrated in Fig.25.
Step 2. We fitted a curve to obtain Ac and Ic as a function of the distance from the ground.
In the calculation we assumed that Ac and Ic are values at the third of the heights of the columns
(Fig.25), and thee area and inertia were evaluated at the quarter and third of the total height.
This results in:

56

Story

1-9

Number of stories

27

Story height, h (m)

2.74

Total height, H (m)

73.98

Weight / unit height, mg (kN/m)

3.21103

Youngs modulus, E (kN/m2 )

2.5107

Shear modulus, G (kN/m2 )

1.07107

Depth of walls, s (m)

3.00

Clear span of openings, d (m)

1.50

Area of beams, Ab (m2 )

10-18

0.740.465 = 0.344
4

19-27

0.740.31 = 0.229
10.4710

0.740.155 = 0.115
5.23103

Moment of inertia of beams, Ib (m )

15.7010

Areas of columns, Ac (m2 )

3.000.456 = 1.368

3.000.31 = 0.93

3.000.155 = 0.456

Moments of inertia of columns, Ic (m4 )

1.046

0.698

0.349

Table 20: Geometric and material characteristics of the coupled shear walls example

I1/3c
1/4H

A1/4c

1/3H

1/4H

I1/4c

I1/3b

A1/3b
1/3H

1/3H

Figure 25: Variation of the area and inertia of the columns and beams of the coupled shear walls
example

57

A1/4
c

1.20 m2 ,

Ic1/4

0.900 m4 ,

Ic1/3

0.81 m4 ,

1/3

0.268 m2 ,

1/3

12.21 103 m4 .

Ab
Ib

(6.103)

The replacement stiffnesses are (Table 1):

Sc

Sb

2
1/3
X
12EI

12 25 106 0.81 2
= 3.9 108 kN,
2
2.74
i=0
i
h
2
1 6EI 1/3 (d + s )2 + (d + s
2
)
X
i
i+1
bi
6 25 106 12.21 103 (1.5 + 3.00)




= 6
=
6
1/3
3 2.74 1 + 121.225106 12.21103
12EIbi
1.5
3
i=1
d h 1 + 2 1/3
1.07107 1.52 0.286
= 6

ci
h2

=6

Gd Abi

S
D0

= 1.47 10 kN,


1
=
= Sb1 + Sc1
= 6

2
X
i=0

Dl

2
X
i=0

1
1
+
8
3.9 10
1.47 107

1

(6.104)

= 1.42 107 kN,

1/4

EAci c2i = 2 6 25 106 4.52 1.2 = 1.82 109 kNm2 ,

1/4

EIci = 6 2 25 106 0.9 = 2.7 108 kNm2 .

Step 3.
The circular frequency is (Eq.5.50):

mi

=
=

2

0.5

1
1

B

2 + S
2 + mil =
B0

mi
mi
0.5

!1
4
1
H m
1

+
=
(6.105)
+
2 mH 2
2D
H4 m
3.52
l
(0.5)
3.522 D0
S
0.5

!1
4
3210/9.81
73.98
1
1

+
+
2 73.982 3210/9.81
73.984 3210/9.81
3.52 2.7 108
(0.5)
9
7
3.52 1.82410
1.4210
1.55 1/ sec .

The period of vibration is:

T =

2
= 4.05 sec .

The period of vibration of the structure was also calculated by the FE code (ETABS) and it
gives
58

Total height, H

83.2 m

Mass / unit height, m

280640 kg/m

Mass moment of inertia / unit height,

Youngs modulus of walls, E w

69001 kgm2 /m
1.95 107 kN/m2

Shear modulus of walls, Gw

8.125 106 kN/m2

2.3 107 kN/m2

Youngs modulus of beams, Eb

9.58 106 kN/m2

Shear modulus of beams, Gb

Story height, h (m)

2.97 m

Area of beams, Ab

0.07 m2
5.79 104 m4

Moment of inertia of beams, Ib

Area of walls , Aw

1.92 m2

Moment of inertia of walls , I w

8.85 m4

Coupled shear walls

Story

1-10

11-19

20-28

Depth of walls, s (m)

6.1

4.1

2.1

Clear span of openings, d (m)

3.7

3.7

3.7

1.92

1.44

0.958

8.85

3.35

0.722

Areas of walls, Ac (m2 )

4

Moments of inertia of walls, Ic (m )

Table 21: Geometric and material characteristics of the numerical example given in Fig.25

T = 3.90 sec,
which is very close to the approximate value provided by our method, the error is 3.86%.
6.4.2

Several lateral load-resisting subsystems

In this section a symmetrical bracing system is considered the stiffnesses of which vary with the
height. We present the approximate calculation of the periods of vibration and the base shear
forces in the first modes of vibration.
The geometric and material characteristics of the structure are given in Table 21. and Fig. 26.
The approximate calculation was carried out in the following steps:
Step 1. Calculate of the stiffnesses of the lateral load-resisting subsystems [20].
Step 2. Calculate of the stiffnesses of the building by Eq.(4.29) at each story.
Step 3. Calculate the replacement stiffnesses of the beam, D, at the quarter of the height and
S at the third of the height.
Step 4. Calculate the periods of vibration by Eq.(5.58).
Step 5. Calculate the base shear forces (Eq. 5.77).

59

11 3.7
16.65
wall

5.55

2.1

6.1

1-10 stories

4.1 4.1

6.1

11-19 stories

2.1

3.7

3.7

20-28 stories

3.7

coupled shear walls

16.65

Figure 26: Numerical example of Section 6.4.2

The periods of vibration and the internal forces were determined also by a FE code (ETABS).
In the example uniform mass distribution was considered.
Step 1. The lateral load-resisting subsystems at the first ten stories are similar to the structures
of Section 5.3. The replacement stiffnesses are given by Eq.(5.82). The stiffnesses of the coupled
shear walls at stories 11-19 are:

Dl

D0

w
2E w I919
= 1.305 108 kNm2 ,

2
w
= 8.53 108 kNm2 ,
(6.106)
2E w Aw
919 c919

1
1

1
2
w
12E w I919
)
6Eb Ib 2 (d + s919 

+ 2

= 6.33 104 kN.

2
12Eb Ib
h
3
d h 1+
2
G b d Ab

The stiffnesses of the coupled shear walls at stories 20-28 are:

60

Dl

D0

w
2E w I2028
= 2.817 107 kNm2 ,

2
w
= 6.29 108 kNm2 ,
(6.107)
2E w Aw
2028 c2028

1
1

1
2
w
12E w I2028
6Eb Ib2 (d + s2028)

+ 2

= 3.50 104 kN.

2
12Eb Ib
h
3
d h 1 + G b d 2 Ab

Step 2. The stiffness matrices at the different stories are calculated from Eq.(4.29) which results
in:

[D0 ]110

[Dl ]110

[D0 ]1119

[Dl ]1119

[D0 ]2028

[Dl ]2028

0.69

3.51

109 kNm2 , [S]110 =

992.8

0
0
0

2
9
0 1.37
0 10 kNm ,

0
0
214.6
0.69

1.68

0.203

55.52

2
109 kNm , [S]1119 =

472.05

0
0
0

2
9
0 0.602
0 10 kNm ,

0
0
85.21
0.345

0.651

171.7

0
0
0

0 0.711
0

0
0
30.0

74.8

109 kNm2 , [S]2028 =

106 kN,

74.8

0.128

35.16

37.4

0.038

9.80

6
(6.108)
kN,
10

106 kN,

109 kNm2 .

Step 3. We approximate the stiffness distributions by continuous curves as a function of the

distance from the ground. Linear and second order curves are fitted to the elements of the stiffness
matrices at the third of the height of the stories with uniform stiffnesses (Fig.27), and thee replacement stiffness matrices are evaluated at the quarter and third of the total height. This results
in:

61

Dl (1,1)

Dl (2,2)

Dl (3,3)

D0 (2,2)

D0 (3,3)

1/4H

D0 (1,1)

1/4H

S (1,1)

S (2,2)

S (3,3)

1/3H

Figure 27: Stiffness distribution in the numerical example of Section 6.4.2

[D0 ] =

0.675

2.74

771.1

[Dl ] = 0

0.972

157

109 kNm2 , [S] =

73.2

0.159

43.72

(6.109)
106 kN,

109 kNm2 .

Step 4. The natural frequencies are calculated from Eq.(5.58):

"

H4
H2
1
1
[D
]
+
[S]
0
2Bi
2Si

where [M ] is a diagonal matrix:

1

#
v

0m
2Bi
2
+ 4 [Dl ] mi m [M ]
w0m

0m
62

= 0,

(6.110)

Period of vibration, T (sec)

mode

direction

Approximation

ETABS

Error [%]

x-y plane

7.984

8.31

-3.92

x-z plane

6.03

6.10

-1.15

torsional

5.65

5.98

-5.52

x-y plane

1.44

1.51

6.32

x-z plane

1.35

1.48

8.78

torsional

1.29

1.30

-0.77

Table 22: Comparison of the numerical and approximate results for the periods of vibration, (T )
mode

excitation

Approximation

ETABS

Error

1 (x-y plane)

x-y

1045.7

981.86 kN

6.50%

2 ( x-z plane)

x-z

1904.7

1757.5 kN

8.38%

Table 23: Internal forces of the numerical examle in Section 6.4.2.

[M ] = 0

0 = 0

0
m

1
0

0 159.09

(6.111)

By substituting B1 = 3.52, S1 = 0.5 (Table 6) into Eq.(6.110) we obtain the first three
eigenvalues.
2m1 = 1.235,

2m2 = 1.085,

2m3 = 0.619.

(6.112)

The periods of vibration, T are:

T1 =

2
.
1

(6.113)

The results of the approximate calculation and those of the ETABS code are given in Table 22 for
the first six periods of vibration. The maximum error is 8.78%.
Step 4. The seismic forces are determined using the Response Modal Analysis (Appendix
A.2). The calculation was carried out according to Eurocode 8. The spectral accelerations are
calculated from Eq.(5.89). The base shear forces in the first two modes of vibration are calculated
by Eq.(5.77). The results of the approximate calculation and those of the ETABS code are given
in Table 23. The maximum error is 8.38%.

63

Discussion

We presented the stiffnesses of the replacement beam of the stiffening system of building structures.
By using an energy approach we derived formulas which show the contribution of the stiffnesses of
the individual lateral load-resisting subsystems to the overall stiffnesses of the structure. We took
the shear deformation not only in the in-plane problem but also in torsion into account.
We worked out a simple approximate method for the calculation of the period of vibrations and
base internal forces of building structures subjected to earthquakes. We considered symmetrical
and unsymmetrical building structures stiffened by shear walls, coupled shear walls, trusses, frames
or cores. We solved the vibration problem in case of lateral, torsional and spatial lateral-torsional
vibration.
We presented a simple approximation to take the effect of varying stiffnesses into account.
Numerical examples were presented to show the utility and usefulness of the replacement beam.

References
[1] H. G. Allen. Analysis and design of structural sandwich panels. Pergamon Press: Oxford,
1969.
[2] A. K. Basu. Seismic design charts for coupled shear walls. J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE 1983;
109(2): 335-352.
[3] A. K. Basu, A. K. Nagpal and S. Kaul. Charts for Seismic Design of Frame-Wall Systems. J.
Struct. Engrg., ASCE 1984; 110(1): 31-46.
[4] H. Beck. Contribution to the analysis of coupled shear walls. Journal of the American Concrete
Institute 1962; 55: 1055-1069.
[5] Bishop, R. E. D and Jonson, D. C, The mechanics of vibration. Cambridge University Press,
London, 1960; 233-239.
[6] A. K. Chopra. Dynamics of Structures: Theory and application to Earthquake Engineering.
Prentice Hall, New Yersey, 1995; 434-438, 468-519.
[7] B. Csak, F. Hunyadi, Gy. Vertes. F
oldrengesek hat
asa az eptmenyekre (In hungarian: Earthquake effects on buildings). M
uszaki Konyvkiado, Budapest, 1981
[8] P. Csonka. Egyszer
ustett elj
ar
as szelerokkel terhelt emeletes keretek szamtasara (In hungarian: Simplified analysis for the calculation of multistory frames subjected to wind load). MTA
M
uszaki Tudom
anyok Oszt
aly
anak K
ozlemenyei 1965; 35(1-4): 209-229.
[9] Eurocode 8. Design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures.
64

[10] A. Habibullah. ETABS. Three dimensional analysis of building systems. Computers and Structures Inc., USA, 1995
[11] D. J. Dowrick. Earthquake Resistant Design. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1987
[12] S. Dunkerley: On the Whirling and Vibration of Shafts. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A. 1894; 185:
279-360.
[13] Gy. Farkas . Magaseptesi vasbetonszerkezetek, M
uegyetemi Kiad
o, Budapest, 1998
[14] I. Heged
us and L. P. Kollar. Application of the sandwich theory in the stability analysis of
structures. In: Structural stability in engineering practice. Red.: L. Kollar. Spon: London,
etc., 1999.
[15] L. Kollar. A szel dinamiku hat
asa magas eptmenyekre. (In hungarian: The dynamic effect of
wind load on high rise building structures). M
uszaki Konyvkiado, Budapest, 1979
tmenyek meretezese foldrengesre (In hungarian: Earthquake resistant design of
[16] L. Kollar. Ep
teszeti Intezet, Budapest, 1990
buildings). Tervezesfejlesztesi es Technikai Ep
[17] L. P. Kollar. Calculation of plane frames braced by shear walls for seismic load. Acta Technica
Acad. Sci. Hung., Budapest 1991; 104 (1-3): 187-209.
[18] L. P. Kollar. Flexural-torsional vibration of open section composite beams with shear deformation., International Journal of Solids and Structures 2001; 38: 7543-7558.
[19] L. P. Kollar. Flexural-torsional buckling of open section composite beams with shear deformation., International Journal of Solids and Structures 2001; 38: 7525-7541.
[20] A. Kopecsiri and L. P. Kollar. Approximate seismic analysis of building structures by the
continuum method. Acta Technica, Civil Eng. 1999; 108(3-4): 417-446.
[21] A. Kopecsiri and L. P. Kollar. Simple formulas for the analysis of symmetric (plane) bracing
structures subjected to earthquakes. Acta Technica, Civil Eng. 1999; 108(3-4): 447-473.
[22] A. Kopecsiri. Approximate seismic analysis of building structures by the continuum method.
Ph.D thesis, Technical University of Budapest, Budapest, 1997.
[23] H. Lamb and R. V. Southwell. The vibration of a Spinning Disk. Proc. Roy. Soc. A. 1921; 99:
272-80.
[24] Q. S. Li. Sability of tall buildings with shear-wall structures. Engineering Structures. 2000;
23: 1177-1185.
[25] S. C. Ng and J. S. Kuang. Triply coupled vibration of asymmetric wall-frame structures. J.
Struct. Engrg., ASCE 2000; 126(8): 982-987.
65

[26] G. Potzta. Magasep

uletek meretezese foldrengesre a kontinuum modszer alapjan (In hungarian: Earthquake analysis of high-rise buildings by the continuum method). Diploma
work, Technical University of Budapest, Budapest, 1999
uletek kozelt
[27] G. Potzta. Ep
o vizsgalata foldrengesre (In hungarian: Approximate earthquake
analysis of buildings). Scientific Student Paper, Technical University of Budapest, Budapest,
1999.
[28] R. Rosman. Dynamics and stability of shear wall building structures. Proc. Instn. Civ. Engs
1973; 55: 411-423.
[29] R. Rosman. Stability and dynamics of shear wall frame structures. Build. Sci. 1974; 9: 55-63.
[30] A. Rutenberg. An accurate approximate formula for the natural frequencies of sandwich
beams. Computers & Structures. 1979; 10: 875-878.
[31] P. R
ozsa. Line
aris algebra es alkalmaz
asai (In hungarian: Applications of linear algebra).
Budapest Tank
onyvkiado, Budapest, 1997.
[32] A. Rutenberg. Approximate natural frequencies for coupled shear walls. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 1975; 4: 95-100.
[33] S.K. Skattum. Dynamic analysis of coupled shear walls and sandwich beams. PhD thesis,
California Institute of Technology, 1971.
[34] B. Stafford Smith and A. Coull. Tall building structures: Analysis and Design. John Willey
and Sons, Inc., New York etc., 1991.
[35] B. Stafford Smith and E Crowe. Estimating Periods of vibration of Tall Buildings. J. Struct.
Engrg., ASCE 1986; 112(5): 1005-1019.
[36] B. Stafford Smith and Y.-S. Yoon. Estimating seismic base shears of tall wall-frame buildings.
J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE 1991; 117(10): 3026-3041.
[37] L. Szeremi. Stiffening system of multistory buildings by the continuum model. Periodica Politechnika Civ. Engrg 1978; 22(3-4): 205-218.
[38] T. Tarnai. Summation theorems. In: Structural stability in engineering practice. Red.: L.
Kollar. Spon: London, etc., 1999.
[39] S. P. Timoshenko and J. M. Gere, Theory of elastic Stability. 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill: New
York, 1961
[40] K. A. Zalka. Global Structural Analysis of Buildings. E & FN Spon, London, 2000.
[41] K. A. Zalka and G. S. T. Armer. Stability of large structures. Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford,
1992
66

[42] K. A. Zalka. An analytical procedure for 3-dimensional eigenvalue problems. Building Research
Establishment Note, 1993; 32/93.
[43] K. A. Zalka. Dynamic analysis of core supported buildings. Building Research Establishment
Note. 1994; 127/94.
[44] K. A. Zalka. Equvivalent wall for frameworks for the global stability analysis.Building Research
Establishment Note, 1998; 33/98
[45] K. A. Zalka. Full-height buckling of frameworks with cross-bracing. Proc. Instn. Civ. Engrs.
Struct. & Bldgs. 1999; 134: 181-191.
[46] K. A. Zalka. Stress analysis of buildings under horizontal load. Proc. Instn. Civ. Engrs. Struct.
& Bldgs., 2000; 140: 179-186.
[47] K. A. Zalka. A simplified method for calculation of the natural frequencies of wall-frame
buildings. Engineering Structures, 2001; 23: 1544-1555.
[48] X. Wu and C. T. Sun, Simplified Theory for Composite Thin-Walled Beams. AIAA J., 1992;
30: 2945-2951.

Earthquake analysis

We present two approximate method to perform the earthquake analysis of multistory building
structures.

A.1

Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure

The Equivalent Lateral Force procedure uses a simple approximation to determine a maximum
base shear force [34], [13]. The dynamic effect of ground motion is replaced by an equivalent static
load distributed along the height,. in a prescribed manner.
The equivalent static load for one concentrated mass is:
Qsi = Cs G,

(1.114)

ah
k,
g

(1.115)

where
- G is the weight of the structure,
- Cs is the earthquake parameter:

Cs =
- ah the horizontal ground acceleration,
- g acceleration due to gravity,

67

- k depends on the type of the structure [11], [13].

For multistory buildings the equivalent static load is distributed along the height as follows:
Gi zi
,
Qsi = Qs P
n
Gi zi

(1.116)

i=1

where

- Qsi is the equivalent load acting at the height zi ,

- zi is the distance of the i-th story from the bottom of the structure.
The method is simple and fast, however it can be very inaccurate.

A.2

Response Modal Analysis

The most frequently used method is the Response Modal Analysis. The method is discussed first
for a structure consisting of a single mass [6], [34]
A.2.1

Single-degree-of-freedom system

The equation of motion of a single-degree-of-freedom system (without damping) is:

2 u (t)
+ Ku (t) = p (t) ,
t2

(1.117)

where
u (t)- is the horizontal displacement of the structure with respect to the ground,
Kis the lateral stiffness of the system,
M - is the mass,
p(t)-external force,
in case of earthquake excitation:

p (t) = M

2 ug (t)
,
t2

(1.118)

where ug (t)- is the ground motion given as a function of the time (t).
The investigation of the free vibration (p(t) = 0) results the complementary solution of Eq.(1.117):

2 uc
+ Kuc = 0.
t2

(1.119)

The solution has the following form

uc = Aeit ,
where =

K
M

(1.120)

is the circular frequency of vibration. The period of vibration of the system is

T =

2
.

68

(1.121)

Using Eq.(1.117) can be written in the following form:

2 ug
2u
2
+

u
=

.
t2
t2

(1.122)

For a given ground motion, ug (t) the deformation response, u(t) depends only the circular
frequency (or the period of vibration T ) of the system. However for practical purposes we are
interested only the maximum values of the response of the system:

SD

SV

SA

max |u(t)| ,
t


 du(t) 
,
max 
t
dt 
 2

 d u(t) 
.
max 
t
dt2 

(1.123)

For any given earthquake and also for damped systems these values can be calculated by solving
Eq. 1.122. The approximate relation between the responses are:

SV

SD ,

SA

2 SD .

(1.124)

For different recorded earthquakes the spectral acceleration SA was determined in the design codes,
and average curves called design spectrum are worked out in the function of the period of vibration
and the damping ratio.
In the numerical examples our calculations were carried out according to Eurocode 8. The
spectral accelerations are given in the function of the period of vibration, [9]:

0 <

Ti < TB

TB

<

Ti < TC

TC

<

Ti < TD

TD

<

Ti



Ti ( 1)
,
S A = ag S t 1 +
TB
SA = ag St ,
k

TC 1
,
SA = ag St
Ti

k 
k
TC 1 TD 2
SA = ag St
.
TD
Ti

(1.125)
(1.126)

where
SA is the ordinate of the elastic response spectrum,
T is the period of vibration of a linear single degree-of-freedom system,
ag is the design ground acceleration for the reference return period,
is spectral acceleration amplification factor for 5% viscous damping,
TB , TC are limits of the constant spectral acceleration branch,
TD is value defining the beginning of the constant displacement range of the spectrum,
69

k1 , k2 are exponents which influence the shape of the spectrum for a vibration period greater
than TC , TD
respectively,
S is soil parameter,
is damping correction factor with reference value = 1 for 5% viscous damping.
The values of the parameters are given in [9].
The equivalent static force acting on the structure:
fS = ku (t) = m2 u (t) mSA
A.2.2

(1.127)

Multi-degree-of-freedom system

The equation of motion of a multi-degree-of-freedom system subjected to earthquake excitation

[6]:

[M ]

2 ug
2 {u}
+ [K] {u} = {p (t)} = [M ] {}
,
2
t
t2

(1.128)

where
[M ]- is the mass matrix,
{u}- contains the independent displacements,
[K]- is the stiffness matrix,
{}- the influence vector represents the displacements of the masses resulting from static application of a unit ground motion.
First we investigate the free vibration of the structure:

[M ]

2 {u}
+ [K] {u} = {0} .
t2

(1.129)

Looking for the solution in the following form

{u} = {} eit ,
we obtain the eigenvalue problem:
2 [M ] {} + [K] {} = 0.

(1.130)

which results N independent eigenvectors {}n and N different n , where N is the number of
degrees of freedom of the system.
In Eq.(1.128) the displacement, {u} can be expressed as the linear superposition of the modal
vectors {} as follows
{u (t)} =

N
X

n=1

{}n qn (t) = [] {q (t)} ,

70

(1.131)

where [] contains the eigenvectors of the free vibration: We substitute Eq.(1.131) into Eq.(1.128)
and we multiply the equation by T , which results in:
T

[] [M ] []

d2 {q (t)}
T
T
+ [] [K] [] {q (t)} = [] {p (t)} .
dt2

(1.132)
T

The eigenvectors {}n are orthogonal to the [M ] , and [K] matrices, thus [] [M ] [] and

[] [K] [] are diagonal matrices. We choose the eigenvectors such a way that the following
relationship holds:
T

[] [M ] [] = [E] .

(1.133)

It can be shown [6] that the following relationship is satisfied:



[]T [K] [] = 21 ...2n ...2N .

(1.134)

Because of the orthogonality the differential equation system (1.132) reduces to N independent
differential equations:
d2 qn (t)
+ 2n qn (t) = pen (t) ,
dt2

(1.135)

which is equal to the equation of motion of a one-degree-of-freedom system (Eq.1.122), where

pen (t) =

{}Tn

{}n [M ] {}n

p (t) =

Eqs.(1.135) and (1.136) result in:

{}Tn [M ] {} 2 ug
2 ug
= n 2 .
T
2
t
{}n [M ] {}n t

qn (t) = n un (t),

(1.136)

(1.137)

where un (t) is the displacement function of a one-degree-of-freedom system with eigenfreqvency,

n subjected to the ground motion ug (Eq. 1.122). The peak response of the structure in the n
-th mode of vibration (using Eq. 1.123) [6] is

|{un (t)}|max = {}n |qn (t)|max = {}n n SDn .

(1.138)

The total displacement can be approximated by combining the modal responses. The modal
maximum values will not occur at the same time. However for design purposes superpositions are
recommended in the different codes.
A.2.3

Spatial problem

For unsymmetrical-plane structures the equation of motion has the same form as Eq.(1.128)
[M ]

2 {u}
2 ug
+
[K]
{u}
=
{p
(t)}
=

[M
]
{}
,
t2
t2

however it has three times more degrees of freedom:

71

{uy }
[M ]

2
{uz }
[M ]
t

{u }
[]

[Kyy ] [Kyz ] [Ky ]

{uy }

2 ug

,
= [M ] {}
[Kzy ] [Kzz ] [Kz ]
{uz }

t2

[Ky ] [Kz ] [K ] {u }
(1.139)

where the influence vector {} depends on the direction of the earthquake excitation.
If the building is subjected to ground acceleration in the y z plane:

{1}

(1.140)

{0}

(1.141)

{0}

(1.142)

{} = {0} ,

{0}

in case of ground motion in the x z plan

{} = {1} ,

{0}

and for torsional excitation

{} = {0} .

{1}

The method of solving Eq.(1.139) is similar to the method described in the previous section.
A.2.4

Continuum

The equation of motion for a continuous beam is:

2 u (x, t)
+ ku (x, t) = p (t) .
t2

(1.143)

The Taylor series expansion of the displacement function is:

u (x, t) =

r (x) qn (t) .

(1.144)

r=1

We substitute Eq.(1.144) into Eq.(1.143), and we multiple it by n . The integration between 0

and H results in:
H

Z
X

n=1 0

n mr

Z
Z
X
d2 qn (t)
dx
+

k
q
(t)
dx
=
Tn p (t) dx.
n
r n
dt2
n=1
0

The eigenvectors n are orthogonal to each other:

72

(1.145)

ZH

n r dx = 0.

(1.146)

Because of the orthogonality Eq.(1.145) becomes

d2 qn (t)
+ 2n qn (t) = pen (t) ,
dt2

(1.147)

which is equal to the equation of motion of a one-degree-of-freedom system (Eq. 1.122). pen (t) is
obtained as follows:

pen (t) =

ZH

Tn p (t) dx.

(1.148)

The solution in the n-th mode can be obtained using the Response Spectrum Analysis as in
section A.2.1. The approximate value of the displacement is the sum of th the peak responses of
the considered modes.
In case of spatial vibration of the continuum the equation of motion

[M ]

m
m

2 ug
2 {u}
+ [K] {u} = {p (t)} = [M ] {}
,
2
t
t2

u (x)

kyy

+
2
kzy
uz (x)

u (x)
ky

kyz

ky

kzz

kz

kz

(1.149)

u
(x)
y

2 ug

= [M ] {}
. (1.150)

uz (x)

t2

u (x)

Three independent displacement functions belong to every mode of free vibration. It is denoted

by {}n which has the following form:

yn

{}n = zn

(1.151)

where yn , zn , n are the mode shapes of the vibration along to the y axis, the z axis and the
rotational vibration, respectively. We can use the modal vectors {}n and the circular frequency
n to solve Eq.(1.150) as in Section A.2.2.
A.2.5

Internal forces

In the Response Modal Analysis equivalent load is determined in each mode of vibration. For
in-plane vibration, when the ground motion is in the plane of the vibration, the horizontal forces
acting on a multistory building are [6]

73

Fn(x)

V
M
Figure 28: The horizontal seismic force (Fn (x)), and the internal forces at the bottom of the
canilever (V, M ).

[K] {un (t)} = 2n [M ] {}n qn (t) = 2n [M ] {}n n un (t) ,

{fn (t)} =
{f }n

|{fn (t)}|max = n [M ] {}n SAn =

T
{}n [M ] {}
T
{}n [M ] {}n

(1.152)

[M ] {}n SAn .

The horizontal force acting on a continuum

fn (x) = n mn (x) SAn =

RH

0
RH
0

For the spatial vibration of a continuum

{f }n = n [M ] {}n SAn =

mn (x) dx
mn (x) SAn .
m2n

(x) dx

{}Tn [M ] {}
T

{}n [M ] {}n

[M ] {}n SAn

(1.153)

For example in case of earthquake in the y direction

yn
{f }n =
Vzn

tn

(x)

myn (x) dx
yn
0
m
= H
zn (x)

R

2
2
2

myn (x) + mzn (x) + n (x) dx (x)

RH

SAn

If the distribution of the horizontal seismic forces, {f }n is known, the internal forces in the
n-th mode of vibration can be calculated by performing a simple static analysis on the building
(Fig.28).
The total design value can be determined by one of the modal combination rules (given in the
codes), for example by the square-root-of-sum-of-squares rule

74

R'

N
X

Rn2

n=1

!1/2

Replacement stiffnesses for spatial problem

In this section of the final version of the thesis we will give the derivation of Eq.(4.29).

Solutions of vibration problem of replacement beams

In this section we present an analysis for the free vibration of a cantilever beam with uniform and
varying stiffnesses.
The differential equation of the in-plane free vibration of a sandwich beam with uniform stiffnesses is [14], ??:
D0 Dl V I
IV
wB (D0 + Dl )wB
= m2 w,
S

(3.154)

where m is the mass, D0 , Dl and S are the stiffnesses of the sandwich beam, is the circular
frequency, and w is the displacement function consisting of two parts[14]:

w = wD + wS .

(3.155)

This differential equation has constant coefficients and can be solved analytically ??, when the
stiffnesses vary with the height, the coefficients are not constant, and we may obtain solutions by
using the Rayleigh-Ritz method.
We developed analysis for the free vibration of beams with both uniform and varying stiffnesses
based on the Rayleigh-Ritz method. First the analysis of in-plane and spatial vibration of sandwich
beams with uniform stiffnesses are presented (Section ??), then the in-plane vibration analyses of
Timoshenko-beams and Csonka-beams (Section C.1.2).
On the basis of the presented analyses we developed a computer code written in MATLAB to
determine the eigenfrequencies and internal forces of replacement beams.

C.1
C.1.1

Exact solution by the Rayleigh-Ritz method

Uniform stiffnesses

Plane problem. A sandwich beam undergoes both flexural and shear deformations, thus its
mode shape consists of two parts [14]:

w = wD + wS .
The relationship between wD and wS is:
75

(3.156)

00 0
S wS0 = (D0 wD
).

(3.157)

In case of constant stiffnesses Eq.(3.157) can be rearranged as:

wS =

D0 00
wD .
S

(3.158)

We approximate wD by an n-th order polynomial:

wD =

n
X
i=0

w0i xi = {x} {w0 } ,

(3.159)

where w0i -s are yet unknown constants.

This function must satisfy the geometrical boundary conditions, which are at the bottom of
the beam (x = 0):

0
= 0, and w0 = 0.
w = 0, wD

(3.160)

(Note that the force boundary conditions do not have to be satisfied in the Rayleigh-Ritz
method.)
The remaining constants can be determined from the stationary condition of the potential
energy, which can be written in the following form:
(U + K)
= 0,
w0i

i = 2, ..., n.

(3.161)

where U is the strain energy and K is the kinetic energy [14]:

U=

1
2

00 2
S (wS0 ) + D0 ( wD
) + Dl ( w00 )2 dx,

1
K=
2

m2 w2 dx,

(3.162)

(3.163)

is the circular frequency, m is the mass per unit length, D0, Dl are the local and global bending
stiffnesses and S is the shear stiffness of the structure.
After a straightforward algebraic manipulation we obtain from Eqs. (3.156) trough (3.163) the
following equation:

[A] {w0 } = [B] {w0 } ,

where

76

(3.164)

[A]

D02

H2 S
{0}

+ (Dl + D0 )

(i+2)(i+1)ij(j+2)(j+1) i+j+1
H
i+j1

4H

2 (j + 2) H j+1

1 D02 Dl 0
+ 4
H S2
{0}

2 D0 Dl 0
2
H
S
{0}

[B]

{0}
h

{0}
h


h

i +

2 (i + 2) H i+1

(i+2)(i+1)(j+2)(j+1) i+j+1
H
i+j+1

(i+2)(i+1)i(i1)(j1)j(j+2)(j+1) i+j+1
H
i+j3


h

2 (i + 2) (i + 1) iH i+1

(i+2)(i+1)i(i1)(j+2)(j+1) i+j+1
H
i+j+1

oT

i +

(3.165)

i ,

(3.166)

T
2
0
{0}
D
m
1
h
i
= m n j+5 o h i+j+5 i + 4 02
(i+2)(i+1)(j+2)(j+1) i+j+5
H
H
H S
{0}
H
i+j+1
j+5
i+j+5

n
o
T
(i+2)(i+1)H i+5
2 D0 m 0
i+3
i
h
2
(i+2)(i+1) i+j+5
H
S
H
{0}
i+j+3

H5
5

H i+5
i+5

Spatial problem. A sandwich beam has flexural and shear deformations in y direction, in z
direction, and also in torsion, its mode shape consists of two parts:

{} = {}D + {}S ,

(3.167)

where {}D , and {}S contain the following displacement functions:

{}D

v (x)

D
=
wD (x)

(x)
D

v (x)

S
{}S =
wS (x)

(x)
S

The relationship between {}D and {}S is [14]:

[S] {}0S = ([D0 ] {}00D )0 .

(3.168)

(3.169)

In case of constant stiffnesses

{}S = [S]

We approximate {}D by n-th order polynomials:

P

n
vD (x)
vi xi
i=0

Pn

i
{}D (x) = wD (x) =
=
w
x
Pi=0 i

n
i
D (x)
i=0 i x

1 x x2 ... 0 0 0
0
0

= 0 0 0
0
1 x x2 ... 0

0 0 0
0
0 0 0
0
1
77

00

[D0 ] {}D

(3.170)

x x2

{v0 }

0 {w0 }

...
{0 }

T
= [X] {}0

where {}0 contains yet unknown constants.

The displacement function must satisfy the geometrical boundary conditions, which are at the
bottom of the beam (x = 0):

{} (0) =
0

{}D

{}D + {}S = 0

{} (0) =

{}D + {}S = 0

(3.171)

By satisfying these boundary conditions the displacement functions become

{}D (x)

{}S (x)

{x}

= {0}T

T
{0}
1

= [S]

where

{x}

{0}

{x}S

{0}

[D0 ] {0}T

{0}T

T
T

{x}S

=
=

x2

The derivatives of {}D

{0}

{0}T

xi+2

T
= [X] {}0 ,

{0}

{x}S

{v0 }

{0}T {w0 }

T
{0 }
{x}

{x}T
{0}

{0}

{x}TS

T i

{v0 }

{w0 }

{0 }

T
= [X]S {}0 ,

(3.173)

T i
.
(i + 2) (i + i) xi

{}D

[X]1 {}0 ,

{}00D

[X]T2 {}0 ,

{}D

000

[X]3 {}0 ,

IV

[X]4 {}0 ,

{}D

(3.172)

(3.174)

where matrices [X]1 , [X]2 , [X]3 , [X]4 have the same form as matrix [X] , and contain the
derivatives of vector {x} .
The remaining constants can be determined from the stationary condition of the potential
energy, which can be written as
(U K)
= 0,
w0i

i = 2, ..., n,

where U is the strain energy and K is the kinetic energy [14] (if we neglect GIt )

78

(3.175)

1
U=
2

ZH h
0

{}0S

T

[S] {}0S + {}00D

1
K=
2

ZH
0

T

[D0 ] {}00D + {}00S + {}00D

T

[Dl ] {}00S + {}00D

i

dx,

(3.176)

({}S + {}D )T 2 [M ] ({}S + {}D ) dx

Substituting Eq.(3.169) into Eq.(3.175) results in an eigenvalue problem with eigenvector {}D
and eigenvalue .

[A] {}0 = [B] {}0

(3.177)

where

[A] =

[B] =

0
0
1
1
+
[D0 ] [S] [D0 ]
H2
0 (i+2)(i+1)ij(j+2)(j+1)
H i+j+1
i+j1

4H
2 (i + 2) H i+1

+ ([Dl ] + [D0 ])
(i+2)(i+1)(j+2)(j+1) i+j+1
j+1
2 (j + 2) H
H
i+j+1

0
0
1

(3.178)
+ 4 [D0 ] [S]1 [Dl ] [S]1 [D0 ]
i+j+1
H
H
0 (i+2)(i+1)i(i1)(j1)j(j+2)(j+1)
i+j3

i+1
0
2
(i
+
2)
(i
+
1)
iH
2
,
2 [Dl ] [S]1 [D0 ]
i+j+1
H
0 (i+2)(i+1)i(i1)(j+2)(j+1)
H
i+j+1

5
i+5
H
H
0
0
1
i+5
+

[M ] 5j+5
[D0 ] [S]1 [M ] [S]1 [D0 ]
(i+2)(i+1)(j+2)(j+1) i+j+5
H i+j+5
H
H4
0
H
j+5
i+j+5
i+j+1

i+5
0 (i+2)(i+1)H
2
1
i+3
.
2 [M ] [S] [D0 ]
H
0 (i+2)(i+1) H i+j+5
i+j+3

where refers to the Kronekker multiplication [31].

C.1.2

Varying stiffnesses

An analysis is presented below to determine the period of in-plane vibration of Timoshenko-beams

and Csonka-beams. The equation of beams capable bending or shear deformation only can be
derived from those of the latter two cases, hence the derivation for those are not presented. The
sandwich beam with varying stiffnesses was investigated numerically. Only lateral vibration was
considered.
Csonka-beam. We approximate the mode shape of a Csonka-beam by an n-th order polynomial:
w=

n
X
i=0

79

wi xi ,

(3.179)

where wi -s are yet unknown constants.

This function must satisfy the geometrical boundary conditions, which are at the bottom of
the beam (x = 0):

w=0

and

w0 = 0.

(3.180)

(Note that the force boundary conditions do not have be satisfied in the Rayleigh-Ritz method.)
The remaining constants can be determined from the stationary condition of the potential
energy, which can be written as
(U K)
= 0,
wi

i = 2, ..., n,

(3.181)

where U is the strain energy and K is the kinetic energy [14]:

1
U=
2

Dl ( w00 )2 + S (w0 ) dx,

(3.182)

K=

1
2

m2 w2 dx.

(3.183)

Here is the circular frequency, m is the mass per unit length, and stiffnesses Dl and S may vary
with the height.
After a straightforward algebraic manipulation we obtain from Eqs. (3.179) trough (3.183) the
following equation:

[aij ] {wj } = [bij ] {wj } ,

m 2 2
H ,
Dl

(3.184)

where [aij ] and [bij ] are given in Table 24 for the three different stiffness distributions given in Fig.
29.
Equation (3.184) is a linear eigenvalue problem with eigenvector {wj } and eigenvalue . The
circular frequency and the period of vibration can be calculated from the eigenvalues (Eq. 3.184)
as follows :
r
Dl
= 2
,
H
m

T =

2
.

(3.185)

Timoshenko-beam. A Timoshenko-beam has flexural and shear deformations, its mode shape
consists of two parts:

w = wD + wS .

(3.186)

The relationship between wD and wS is [14]:

00 0
S wS0 = (D0 wD
).

80

(3.187)

Stiffness distribution
Csonka-beam
Fig. 29a

Fig. 29c

Fig. 29b

aij = ij

aij = ij

aij = ij

=H
2
i+j1

i+j1

S
Dl

(i1)(j1)
i+j3

(d1)(i1)(j1)
i+j2

bij =

1
i+j1
(i1)(j1)
i+j3

(d1)(i1)(j1)
i+j1

2 (c1)
i+j

(c1)
i+j+1

1
i+j1
(1c)
2 (1c)
i+j+1 2 i+j

bij =

i+j1

bij =

Timoshenko-beam
A = ij (i 1) (j 1)

(i1)(j1)
i+j3

(1k)
i+j2

B = (1) ij (i 1) (j 1) (1k)(j2)
2

(1d)(i1)(j1)
i+j1

1
i+j1

=H
1
i+j3

+
h

S
Do
(1k)2
2 (i+j3)

1
i+j4

(c1)(1k)2
2 (i+j2)

c+k2
i+j3

i
1d
,
2 i+j2

(1k)(c1)
i+j2

h
i
(1k)(c1)
1
c+k2

C = (1) ij (i 1) (j 1) (1k)(i2)
2

i+j4
i+j3
i+j2
h
i
ij(i1)(j1)(j2)(i2)
(1k)(2c+k3)
(1k)2 (c1)
1
2kc3
D=
+
+
+
2

i+j5
i+j4
i+j3
i+j2
2
1+ 14 (1k)2 (c1)2 (j1)(i1)
ij
+ (1k)
4 (i+j1)
i+j+1
2 j(j1)ij(j2)(2ck)(1k)+(1k)(c1)j(ji)(i1)
F = 4ij(j1)
+
(i+j2)
4 (i+j1)
2 j(j2)(2ck)+i(j1)(j2)(c1)(1k)2 +(1k)(c1)(2ck)j(ii)(j2)
+
4 (i+j)
ij(i1)
2 i(i1)ij(i2)(2ck)(1k)+(1k)(c1)i(ii)(j1)
G = 4 (i+j2)
+
4 (i+j1)
2 i(i2)(2ck)+j(i1)(i2)(c1)(1k)2 +(1k)(c1)(2ck)i(ji)(i2)
+
4 (i+j)
(2ck)ij[(i1)(j2)+(j1)(i2)]
ij(i1)(j1)
+
H = 4 (i+j3)
4 (i+j2)
ij(i2)(j2)(2ck)2 (i1)(j1)(1k)(c1)[i(j2)+j(i2)]
+
+
4 (i+j1)
+
+ (i2)(j2)(c1)(1k)(2ck)[i(j1)+j(i1)]
4 (i+j)
(i2)(j2)(i1)(j1)(c1)2 (1k)2 [i(j1)+j(i1)]
+
+
4 (i+j+1)

E=

Fig. 30

if i = 2, j = 2 : bij = E, aij = A
if i = 2, j 6= 2 : bij = E + F, aij = A + B
if i 6= 2, j = 2 : bij = E + G, aij = A + C
if i 6= 2, j 6= 2 : bij = E + F + G + H,
aij = A + B + C + D
Table 24: Parameters of Eq. (7) for a Csonka-beam and those of Eq. (17) for a Timoshenko-beam.
We approximate wD by an n-th order polynomial:

wD =

n
X

wi xi ,

(3.188)

zi xi .

(3.189)

i=0

and wS by an (n 2)-th order polynomial:

wS =

n2
X
i=0

The geometrical boundary conditions at the bottom of the beam (x = 0) are:

81

a)

cS

dDl
1- d
Dl 1 H

H
x

1- c
S 1 x
H

Dl
b)

kDl

cS

2(1 - d )
1- d
x
Dl 1 + 2 x 2 H
H

H
x

2(1 - c )
1- c
x
S 1 + 2 x 2 H
H

Dl
c)

cS

kDl
d -1
Dl 1 + 2 x 2
H

H
x

c -1
S 1 + 2 x 2
H

H
S

Dl

Figure 29: Distribution of stiffnesses for a Csonka-beam

c
S

kD0
H
x

1- k
D0 1 H

D0

1 1- c
1x
S
H

H
1
S

Figure 30: Distribution of stiffness D0 and the inverse of stiffness S for a Timoshenko-beam

wD = 0,

0
wD
= 0,

wS = 0.

(3.190)

If the stiffnesses S and D0 are uniform, zi can be determined directly from wi using Eqs.(3.187)
to (3.189). If Eq.(3.187) is satisfied, wD is a polynomial and S is not constant, as a rule, ws must
be a function which is not a polynomial. For the sake of a simple solution we assume that D0 and
the inverse of S vary linearly (Fig.30). By so doing, both wD and wS are polynomials (Eqs.3.188
and 3.189) and zi can be determined as a function of wi from Eq.(3.187). The results are given in
Table 25.
The remaining constants can be determined from the stationary condition of the potential
energy, which can be written as

82

i
0
z0 = c
1

i> 2

z1 = 2w2 1k
H 3w3


c1
+ 3w3 3 1k
z2 = w2 (1k)(c1)
H2
H 2 H
2

zi = wi (1k)(c1)(i1)
+ wi+1 (i + 1)
H2

(1k)i
H

(c1)(i1)
H

wi+2 (i + 1) (i + 2)

Table 25: Determination of the constants,zi of the shear deformation. c and k are defined in Fig
4.

(U K)
= 0,
wi

i = 2, ..., n,

(3.191)

where U is the strain energy and K is the kinetic energy [14]:

U=

1
2

00 2
D0 ( wD
) + S (wS0 ) dx,

1
K=
2

(3.192)

m2 w2 dx,

(3.193)

is the circular frequency and m is the mass per unit length, as before.
Equations (3.188) through (3.193) results in the following algebraic equation:

[aij ] {wj } = [bij ] {wj } ,

m 2 2
H ,
D0

(3.194)

where [aij ] and [bij ] are given in Table 24. The circular frequency and the period of vibration can
be calculated from the eigenvalues (Eq. 3.194):
r
D0
= 2
,
H
m

83

T =

2
.

(3.195)