Stability of Rigid Frames
Under vertical loads, frame buckling is usually of Type II (limit-point type). In engineering practice, the beam's vertical loads are equivalently replaced by column-top concentrated forces, turning the problem (approximately) into a Type-I one — and then the displacement method or finite-element method builds a structural stiffness equation with axial-force corrections, from which $F_{\mathrm{Pcr}}$ is obtained via $|\boldsymbol K + \boldsymbol K_{G}| = 0$.
Click any item in the left Contents to jump · Click the green "Next" · Each animation has a ▶ button.
Features of frame stability problems
OverviewUnder vertical loads, does a frame buckle as Type-I (bifurcation) or Type-II (limit point)? What is the difference?
Answer: typically Type-II (limit point) — a frame deflects laterally immediately upon loading; members are in bending, deflection grows nonlinearly, and the capacity peaks and drops (§11-1.5). In engineering practice, the problem is approximated as Type-I (axial deformation neglected, loads lumped at joints).
A frame under uniformly distributed vertical loads begins to sway immediately, and its members are in bending equilibrium. The axial-force-induced additional moment increases with sway, which grows nonlinearly — at the critical load a maximum point appears (see Animation 11.6.1-a), i.e. Type-II (limit-point) buckling.
In practice, the vertical load on the beam (see Animation 11.6.1-a) is decomposed into concentrated forces at the joints of the beam ends (see Animation 11.6.1-a). Ignoring the bars' axial deformation, then only the columns carry axial compression — the frame stays straight until buckling, at which point a bifurcation occurs.
This converts the original "Type-II stability" problem to an approximately Type-I problem, now amenable to the displacement/finite-element method.
Stiffness change in axially loaded members
The larger the axial compression $F_{\mathrm P}$, the smaller the member's rotational stiffness and lateral stiffness — when $F_{\mathrm P}$ reaches the critical value, the stiffness drops to zero. Without axial force, a cantilever member in has rotational stiffness $S_{BA} = 3i = 3EI/l$ and lateral stiffness $k = 3i/l^{2} = 3EI/l^{3}$. Once either stiffness vanishes, the rest of the structure can no longer support the member.
Displacement method · Slope-deflection with axial force
Displacement Method① Equilibrium of an axially loaded member
Consider the member in the figure: rotations $\theta_{A}, \theta_{B}$ at the ends, relative lateral displacement $\Delta$; end moments and shears as in the figure.
The third term in parentheses captures the effect of axial force on bending moment. Let
So equation becomes $y'' + (u/l)^{2}\, y = -(M_{AB} + F_{\mathrm Q} x)/EI$; general solution
② Fixed-fixed member · Slope-deflection equation
Applying BCs $y=0, y' = \theta_{A}$ at $x = 0$; $y = \Delta, y' = \theta_{B}$ at $x = l$, we obtain
Here $i = EI/l$ is the linear stiffness; $\xi_{1},\xi_{2},\eta_{1},\eta_{2}$ are the axial-force-modified stiffness coefficients (functions of $u$; see Table 11-2).
③ Fixed-pinned case
If end $A$ is pinned, use $M_{AB}=0$ to eliminate $\theta_{A}$:
Table 11-2 also lists the end moments and shears induced by unit displacements.
④ Displacement-method stability equation · $D = 0$
For a frame with $n$ joint displacements $Z_{1}, \ldots, Z_{n}$, assembly gives the displacement-method canonical system:
$Z_{i}=0$ is the trivial solution (frame in its original equilibrium); buckling requires a non-trivial solution, so the determinant must vanish:
Example 11-7 · Critical load of Animation 11.6.2-b
The frame has two rotational DOF at joints $B$ and $D$ as basic unknowns $Z_{1}, Z_{2}$. Because both columns have the same size and axial force:
Drawing unit moment diagrams $\overline{M}_{1}, \overline{M}_{2}$ (Animation 11.6.2-b,d):
Stability equation:
Substituting:
Roots $\xi_{1}(u) = -1.307, -3.443$; from Table 11-2 the smaller-$u$ root gives $u = 5.46$. Hence
Finite-element method · Geometric stiffness matrix
FEM · K + K_GIn Ch. 8's matrix displacement method, the element force $\boldsymbol{F}^{e}$ and end displacement $\boldsymbol{\Delta}^{e}$ are related by the element stiffness equation:
For stability analysis of a frame, incorporating the axial-force effect on element stiffness modifies this to:
Structural stiffness equation
Assembly using the same procedure as in the displacement method gives the global form:
The RHS is zero, as the "free" terms in the displacement-method canonical equations all vanish.
Stability equation (FEM form)
At the critical state, Eq. (11-39) has a non-trivial $\boldsymbol{\Delta}$, which requires
Because $\boldsymbol{K}_{G}$ scales linearly with the axial forces (which scale with $F_{\mathrm P}$), Eq. (11-40) is a generalized eigenvalue problem — the smallest eigenvalue is the critical-load factor. This approach is easily programmed for arbitrarily complex frames and is the standard modern stability-analysis procedure.
When internal forces in a frame are computed with very large axial forces (comparable to the critical load), the axial-force effect on stiffness cannot be ignored. Structural analysis that includes this effect (i.e. $P\Delta$) is called second-order analysis. For super-high-rise buildings or tall structures, second-order effects are often decisive.
- Frames usually exhibit Type-II buckling; "concentrated joint loads" approximate the problem as Type-I;
- Displacement method: derive the slope-deflection equations with axial force (Eqs. 11-35/36), whose correction factors $\xi, \eta$ are functions of $u = l\sqrt{F_{\mathrm P}/EI}$;
- Displacement-method stability equation $D = |r_{ij}| = 0$ — find the smallest positive root for $F_{\mathrm{Pcr}}$;
- FEM: wrap the axial-force effect into the geometric stiffness matrix $\boldsymbol{K}_{G}$; the stability equation $|\boldsymbol{K}+\boldsymbol{K}_{G}|=0$ is a generalized eigenvalue problem;
- End of chapter — Chapter 12 turns to plastic analysis and ultimate load.