KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

Vol. 12, No. 1 / January 2008 pp. 25~29 DOI 10.1007/s12205-008-8025-7

Structural Engineering

Structural Engineering: Seeing the Big Picture

By W. F. Chen*

Abstract
The state-of-the-art of progress of structural engineering over the last 50 years is examined in three areas: (1) The spatial idealization of structural elements in the form of kinematical assumptions; (2) The constitutive idealization of materials in the form of generalized stresses and generalized strains relations; and (3) The computational implications of solution strategy in the form of closed form, approximate, and numerical procedures on the structural level. Keywords: structural engineering, stress-strain, kinematics, finite element, strength of materials, modeling and simulation, state-ofthe-art

1. Introduction
Structural engineering is a part of the broad and fascinating subject of mechanics of materials or continuum mechanics, which spans the spectrum from the fundamental aspects of elastic and inelastic behavior of materials to the practical solution of engineering problems in engineering practice. Mechanics is a branch of applied physics involving mathematical formulation of a physical problem and its solution strategy for engineering applications. The process must involve three basic conditions or equations for solutions: 1. Equilibrium equations or motion reflecting law of physics (Newtons law or Physics). 2. Constitutive equations or stress-strain relations reflecting material behavior (Materials or Experiments). 3. Compatibility equations or kinematical assumptions reflecting the geometry (Continuity or Logic). The required simplicity of equilibrium, material behavior, and kinematics to be usable with the most powerful computers, for the analysis or design of engineering structures over their life cycle simulation, requires drastic idealizations and simplifications to achieve realistic and practical solution for engineering design. This paper shows how structural engineering field has been evolved and progressed over the last 50 years along with the rapid growth and development of computing power over the last several decades.

2. Strength of Materials Approach to Structural Engineering in the Early Years

The methods of formulation and calculation of a structural

problem must be adapted to a wide class of structural forms so that the basic equations to be written for a structural element are manageable and not too excessively complex. To this end, the concept of generalized stresses and generalized strains were introduced in the 1950s for solutions of strength of materials types of problems including beams, columns, beam-columns that form the basis of analysis for frame design. This was later extended to include plate and shell types of structural analysis and design. In the case of simple beam theory, for example, the stressed state in a beam element is determined by only one generalized stress, the bending moment, instead of six stresses; while the corresponding deformation is defined by one generalized strain, the curvature, instead of six strains. This drastic simplification is achieved through the powerful kinematical assumption of plane section remains plane after bending. This generalized stress and generalized strain concept for a simple beam element can be easily extended to the case of column element, for example, with combined generalized stresses of bending moment and axial force with the corresponding generalized strains of bending curvature and axial shortening. As a result of this simplification, the equilibrium equations are used to relate the stresses in an element to its generalized stresses, while the kinematical assumption is used to relate the strains in an element to its generalized strains, and the stress-strain relations of materials are then used to derive the generalized stresses and generalized strains relations for a structural element. The basic formulation for a structural member is now reduced to a one-dimensional problem instead of six dimensions in the sense of continuum mechanics approach to a structural engineering problem.

*Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 (E-mail: chenwf@eng.hawaii.edu) Vol. 12, No. 1 / January 2008 25

W. F. Chen

For an elastic problem, most of strength of materials problems can be solved in closed form by power series expansion as well documented in the famous work of Timoshenko. Many of these well known classical solutions for beams, columns, beam-columns, plates and shells were reported in a series of widely popular books by Timoshenko (1951, 1953, 1961, 1962), among others. For high rise building frames, the entire length of a structural member is selected as the basic element for engineering analysis. To this end, the corresponding relationships between the generalized stresses (member end moments and end forces) and the corresponding generalized strains (member end rotations and relative end lateral displacements) for a structural member were represented in the form of the well-known slope-deflection equations for elastic structural system analysis (Chen and Lui, 1987, 1991). The slope deflection equations were simple and powerful and thus widely used in engineering practice for building frame design based on the Allowable Stress Design codes in early years. In engineering practice, a more powerful companion approximate method known as the moment distribution method was also developed by Hardy Cross at the University of Illinois (Gere, 1962). It was based on the St. Venant principle in that the moment distribution in a particular structural member in a high rise building frame is affected mostly by the surrounding members adjacent to it. The influence of other members in some distance from the member under consideration is relative small and may be ignored after a few cycles of iteration. For inelastic problems, a further simplification of material behavior is made by ignoring strain hardening and also to eliminating entirely the factor of time from the formulation. This leads to the time independent idealization for plastic behavior and enables us to use the simple plastic theory to determine the plastic collapse load with the equilibrium methods for lower bound solutions and the mechanism methods for upper bound solutions. For low rise building, simple plastic theory was developed in which the material model used was elastic perfectly plastic (ASCE Manual 41, 1971). The kinematical assumption used was the powerful concept of plastic hinge. Upper and lower bound solutions were obtained by the simple mechanism methods bounded above; and the simple equilibrium methods with moment check bounded below (see for example, Chen and Sohal, 1995). The Plastic Design method was officially adopted by the American Institute of Steel Construction in the early 1960s (see, for example, ASCE Manual 41, 1971). As a result of this advancement, plastic design methods for steel structures were spread widely and introduced quickly in various new codes around the world for steel design; while the companion ultimate strength design for reinforced concrete was advanced quickly and adopted widely in the reinforced concrete codes for building design. Similar advancements were also made for the plate theory for plate type of steel structural design; while the yield line theory was introduced at the same time for slab design in reinforced concrete code.

Based on these simple and practical solution techniques using drastic simplifications and idealizations for materials, geometry and equations of equilibrium, the traditional Allowable Stress Design Method and the newly developed Plastic Design Method were widely used in engineering practice in those years. These simple and powerful design methods are ideal and suitable with the basic computing facility available at the time such as slide rule and calculators. Drastic idealizations and simplifications were the key elements for a rapid and successful implementation of these methods for design of real world engineering problems. In summary, the idealizations and simplifications used in the strength of materials approach to structural engineering problems can be highlighted by the following seven steps of progress: 1. Structural elements beam, column, beam-column, plate and shell. 2. Generalized stresses stress resultants such as moment and axial force. 3. Generalized strains strain resultants such as curvature and axial displacement. 4. Stresses to generalized stresses through equilibrium equations. 5. Strains to generalized strains through kinematical assumptions. 6. Generalized stress and generalized strain relations through stress-strain relations of materials. 7. Solution strategy series expansion, approximate and numerical.

3. Finite Element Approach to Structural Engineering in Recent Years

In the 1970s, our computing power changed drastically with mainframe computing. The Finite Element methods were well developed and widely used in structural engineering. The basic material model used was the extension from linear elasticity to inelasticity, or plasticity in particular. The basic kinematical or compatibility condition used for a finite-element formulation was known as the shape function. The equilibrium condition was achieved through a weak format of equation of virtual work instead of the usual free body equilibrium formulation. As a result of these simplifications, the force displacement relation for a finite element was expressed in the form of the generalized stress and generalized strain relationship. This basic relationship for an element in a discrete continuum of a structural system is known as the nodal force and nodal displacement equation. The stresses in elements were related to the generalized stresses or nodal forces through the virtual work equation. Elemental strains were related to the generalized strains or nodal displacements through the kinematical assumption, or shape function. The incremental generalized stress and generalized strain relation for a finite element was then obtained through the constitutive equation of a particular material. In summary, the three basic conditions for a valid solution of a typical finite element formulation are achieved with the following
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

26

Structural Engineering: Seeing the Big Picture

idealizations and simplifications: (1) Equilibrium Condition (Newtons Law or Physics) The virtual work equation is used exclusively to establish the relationship between the stress in an element to the generalized stresses or nodal forces at nodal points. (2) Kinematics Condition (Continuity or Logic) The shape function is introduced to establish the relationship between the strains in an element to the generalized strains of nodal displacements at the nodal points. (3) Constitutive Relations (Material or Experiment) The theory of plasticity or viscosity is used to relate the generalized stresses to generalized strains or the nodal forces and nodal displacements relationships through the use of constitutive equations of engineering materials. The two-volume treatise on constitutive equations for engineering materials by Chen and Saleeb (1982), and Chen (1994) covers most of these developments, among others (Chen and Baladi, 1985). During this period, we were able to solve almost any kind of structural engineering problems with computer simulation. For the first time in the history of computing, the physical theory is lagging behind the computing power. By now, engineers need to develop a more refined theory of constitutive equations for engineering materials for their special finite element types of applications. As a result of these simplifications, the structural engineering problem is now reduced to the solution of a set of simultaneous incremental equations for a structural system. Since the solution includes the inelastic behavior of materials which is load path dependent, the numerical scheme used was an incremental and iterative process (Chen and Han, 1988). Many numerical procedures were developed during the period, most notably the tangent stiffness method, among others. With a large amount of numerical data so generated, it became necessary for engineers to use probability theory and reliability analysis to analyze the data and develop design procedures for practical implementation. As a result of this development, a new generation of codes based on an extensive computer simulation and reliability analysis was developed and adopted around the world. For the first time in engineering practice ever, the load effect and structural resistance effect were treated separately in design, each with its own safety or load factor. The new code in US, for example, was adopted by the American Institute of Steel Construction entitled the load and resistance factor design specifications for steel buildings in 1986. The following is a brief summary in a tabular form of the impact of the applications of finite element methods with plasticity theory on structural engineering practice. 3.1 In the 1970s: Development of Structural Member Strength Equations Beam strength equation beam design curve. Column strength equation column design curve. Beam-Column strength equation beam-column interaction design curve.
Vol. 12, No. 1 / January 2008

Bi-axially loaded column strength equation for plastic design in steel building frames. These developments were summarized in the two-volume beam-columns treatise by Chen and Atsuta (1976, 1977) and the SSRC Guide edited by Galambos (1988), among others. 3.2 In the 1980s: Limit States to Design Development of reliability-based codes. The publication of the 1986 AISC/LRFD Specification. The introduction of the second-order elastic analysis to the design codes. The explicit consideration of semi-rigid connections in frame design (now known as the PR Construction) (Chen and Kim, 1998). These developments were summarized in the structural stability books by Chen and Lui (1991) and Chen (1993), among others. 3.3 In the 1990s: Structural System Approach to Design Second-Order inelastic analysis for steel frame design was under intense development (White and Chen, 1993). The theory of plasticity is combined with the theory of stability for a direct steel frame design (Chen and Kim, 1997). The advanced analysis considers explicitly the influence of structural joints in analysis/design process (Chen, 2000). These developments were summarized in the structural stability books by Chen and Toma (1994), and Chen and Lui (2005), among others.

4. Model-Based Simulation in Civil Engineering: Challenges and Opportunities

We are now in a desk top environment for free computing. We are able to do a large scale simulation of structural system over its life-cycle performance analysis. Computer simulation has now joined theory and experimentation as a third path for engineering design and performance evaluation. The development of model-based simulation for any civil engineering structures or facilities must involve the following four steps: 4.1 Modeling of Materials The constitutive equations for materials are now moving from time-independent to time-dependent behaviors such as creep, relaxation, temperature variation, and deterioration or aging. These equations must be developed by engineers on the basis of mechanics, physics, and materials science. In a numerical analysis of these materials in a structural system, the proper modeling of discontinuity and fracture or crack for tension-weak materials becomes increasing important. 4.2 Solution Algorithm For a realistic life-cycle simulation of constructed facilities, it

27

W. F. Chen

is not uncommon for engineers to deal with the mathematical modeling of radically different scales, in time and/or space. The computational effort for different parts of a large structural system may be drastically different. For example, in the analysis of reinforced concrete bridge system under seismic loading, a macro scale is necessary to model the overall behavior of the structure-soil interaction. Yet, a micro scale is needed at a local level to trace crack initiation and propagation. Computation efficiency can be achieved in this case by using parallel finite-element analyses for the structural system. Parallel macro and micro analyses can be performed by multiple machines, such as PC cluster systems. This computational method requires repartitioning of the domain during the course of the analysis, making the development of suitable interfaces, data communication tools, or central databases with different levels for different scales in time and in space is of critical importance. As another example, the finite-element method is preferred in structural engineering and solid mechanics, while the finitedifference method is more commonly used in fluid mechanics. When dealing with structure-fluid interaction problems, as frequently encountered in offshore structural engineering, the development of suitable data translators or data communication tools is necessary in order to use existing codes, which are based on two different methodologies. 4.3 Software Development There are hundreds of software systems on the market to support software development. A software support system is a compatible set of tools, usually based on a specific software development methodology, which can be employed for several phases of software and operation. The key to a domain-specific software development environment is software reuse. Software reuse enables the knowledge obtained from the solution of a particular problem to be accumulated and shared in the solution of other problems. If software components accumulated from previous software development can be utilized readily in the development of new applications, substantial applications can be built more efficiently. This is an ideal environment for university research and education. This idea was carried out and implemented, for the first time, at Purdue University with my former colleagues, D.W. White and E. Sotelino (1994), and former doctoral students, H. Zhang and J. Lu, among others with major financial supports from the National Science Foundation (NSF). At present, the key to software development is software integration. Since most commercial software has its own particular function and input/output formats, it may prohibit direct data access. It seems very necessary to unify the documentation from different software and to make the newest and largest efforts in the development of standard models, such as Industry Foundation Class (IFC). Following the development of grid computing, the interoperability of facilities and software at different location in the network can be realized.

4.4 Visualization and Verification Modeling is science, simulation is computing, and computing requires solution algorithms and software development. Visualization is a necessary step to aid in the interpretation of the simulated results. Validation of the simulation of an engineering problem must be verified by experimental work. Model-based simulation is inherently interdisciplinary in science and engineering, where computation plays the key role. The entire process of model-based simulation involves the following seven steps: 1. Experimental measurements as the basis for the development of relevant constitutive equations for a physical system; 2. Design of a proper algorithm for its numerical solutions; 3. Implementation of the procedures with necessary documentation and software interface development; 4. Selection of appropriate hardware to run the computer simulation of the physical system; 5. Validation of the computer model with physical testing; 6. Graphical visualization of the simulated results; and finally; 7. Sharing of the simulation model with others through high speed network communication. In the current high-performance computing environment, the major challenges of modeling, simulation and validation are the integration of material science, structural engineering and computational mechanics with proper simplifications and idealizations for practical applications. As mentioned previously, modeling is science, simulation is computing, and validation is experimentation. All these three areas of further development require structural engineers own effort and focus including, for example, the following issues for future structural engineering implementation: From structural system approach to life-cycle structural analysis of structures covering construction sequence analysis during construction, performance analysis during service, and degradation and deterioration analysis during maintenance, rehabilitation, and demolition (Chong et al., 2002). From finite element modeling for continuous media to finite block modeling for tension-weak materials with tensile crack development and subsequent changing of structural geometry and topology. From time-independent elastic and inelastic material modeling to time-dependent modeling reflecting material degradation and deterioration science (Montero et al., 2001).

5. Concluding Remarks
Advancement in computer technology in recent years has spurred the development of scientific simulation and visualization in science and engineering. Such capability has spurred similar developments in structural engineering and allowed the solutions of many structural engineering problems before thought of unsolvable, and consequently, are now driving progress in a
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

28

Structural Engineering: Seeing the Big Picture

number of challenging areas of structural engineering including, for example, life-cycle type of analysis for cost estimate and lifecycle design considerations, finite block type of analysis for structures with tensile crack development and topology change under an increasing loading, and degradation type of analysis for deterioration and aging of structural materials with time, among others. Good progress has been made in recent years in structural engineering, but much more remains to be done in terms of simplification and idealization in constitutive modeling of materials, structural modeling of elements, and computing strategy for reliable solution scheme of large scale simulation in time and space for large constructed facilities.

References
ASCE, American Society of Civil Engineers Manual 41 (1971). Plastic Design in Steel: A Guide and Commentary, ASCE, New York, p. 336. LRFD, The Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (1986, 2005). American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago. Chen, W.F. and Atsuta, T. (1976). Theory of Beam-Columns, Vol. 1 In-Plane Behavior and Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 513 Chen, W.F. and Atsuta, T. (1977). Theory of Beam-Columns, Vol. 2 Space Behavior and Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 732. Chen, W.F. and Lui, E.M. (1987). Structural Stability: Theory and Implementation, Elsevier, New York. p. 486. Chen, W.F. and Lui, E.M. (1991). Stability Design of Steel Frames, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, p. 380. Chen, W.F., Editor (1993). Semi-Rigid Connections in Steel Frames, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 318. Chen, W.F. and Toma, S. (1994). Advanced Analysis of Steel Frames, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, p. 384. Chen, W.F. and Sohal, I. (1995). Plastic Design and Second-Order Analysis of Steel Frames, Springer-Verlag, New York, p. 509. Chen, W.F. and Kim, S.E. (1997). LRFD Steel Design Using Advanced Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, p. 448. Chen, W.F., Goto, Y., and Liew, J.Y.R. (1996). Stability Design of SemiRigid Frames, John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 468 Chen, W.F. and Kim, Y.S. (1998). Practical analysis for partially restrained frame design, Structural Stability Research Council,

Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, p. 82. Chen, W. F., Editor (2000). Practical Analysis for Semi-Rigid Frame Design, World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, p. 465. Chen, W. F. and Lui, E. M., Editors (2005). Chapter 5: Steel Frame Design Using Advanced Analysis, In the Handbook of Structural Engineering, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, Second Edition. Chen, W. F. and Han, D. J. (1988). Plasticity for Structural Engineers, Springer-Verlag, New York, p. 606. Chen, W.F. ana Baladi, G.Y. (1985). Soil Plasticity: Theory and Implementation. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p. 231. Chen, W.F. and Saleeb, A.F. (1982). Constitutive Equations for Engineering Materials, Vol. 1 - Elasticity and Modeling, Wiley Inter-science, New York, p. 580. Chen, W. F. (1994). Constitutive Equations for Engineering Materials, Vol. 2 - Plasticity and Modeling, Elsevier, Amsterdam, p. 1096. Chong, K. P., Saigal, S., Thynell, S., and Morgan, H., Editors (2002). Modeling and Simulation-Based Life-Cycle Engineering, Spoon Press, London, UK, p. 348. Galambos, T. V., Editor (1988). Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures, 4th edition John Wiley & Sons, New York. Gere, J. M. (1962). Moment Distribution, Van Nostrand, Princeton, New Jersey. Montero, P., Chong, K. P., Larsen-Basse, J. and Komvopoulos, K. (2001). Long-Term Durability of Structural Materials. Elsevier, Netherlands, p. 296. Sotelino, E. D. and Chen, W. F. (1998). Future challenges for simulation in structural engineering, Proceedings of the Fourth World Congress on Computational Mechanics, Buenos Aires, Argentina, June 30-July 3. (In CD-ROM). Sotelino, E. D., White, D. W. and Chen, W. F. (1994). An automated environment for parallel computing, Proceedings of the 11th Analysis and Computation Conference, Editor, F.Y. Cheng, Atlanta, GA, April 24-28, (1994) ASCE Publication, pp. 193-202. Timoshenko, S. P. (1953). History of the Strength of Materials, McGraw-Hill, New York. Timoshenko, S. P. and Gere, J. M. (1961). Theory of Elastic Stability, McGraw-Hill, New York. Timoshenko, S. P. and Goodier, J. N. (1951). Theory of Elasticity, McGraw-Hill, New York. Timoshenko S. P. and Young D. H. (1962). Elements of Strength of Materials, Van Nostrand, Princeton, New Jersey. White, D. W. and Chen, W. F. (1993). Plastic hinge based methods for advanced analysis and design of steel frames: An assessment of the State-of-the-Art, Structural Stability Research Council, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, p. 299.

Vol. 12, No. 1 / January 2008

29