Structural Theory |1

Module 5: Analysis of
The three-moment equation gives us the relation
between the moments between any three points in a beam and
Indeterminate Beams their relative vertical distances or deviations. This method is
widely used in finding the reactions in a continuous beam.

The three-moment equation, which was initially

5.1 Three-Moment Equation presented by Clapeyron in 1857, provides a convenient tool for
analyzing continuous beams. The three-moment equation
Consider three points on the beam loaded as shown. represents, in a general form, the compatibility condition that the
slope of the elastic curve be continuous at an interior support of
the continuous beam. Since the equation involves three
moments—the bending moments at the support under
consideration and at the two adjacent supports—it commonly is
referred to as the three-moment equation. When using this
method, the bending moments at the interior (and any fixed)
supports of the continuous beam are treated as the redundants.
The three-moment equation is then applied at the location of
each redundant to obtain a set of compatibility equations which
can be solved for the unknown redundant moments.

From proportions between similar triangles:

𝒉𝟏 − 𝒕𝟏/𝟐 𝒕𝟑/𝟐 − 𝒉𝟑
=
𝑳𝟏 𝑳𝟐
 Structural Theory |2

we obtain the general form of the three-moment equation: Factors for the three-moment equation
𝑴𝟏 𝑳𝟏 𝑳𝟏 𝑳𝟐 𝑴𝟑 𝑳𝟐 𝟔𝑨𝟏 𝒂𝟏 6𝐴1 𝑎1 6𝐴2 𝑎2
+ 𝟐𝑴𝟐 ( + )+ + The table below list the values of and , for
𝑬𝟏 𝑰𝟏 𝑬𝟏 𝑰𝟏 𝑬𝟐 𝑰𝟐 𝑬𝟐 𝑰𝟐 𝑬𝟏 𝑰𝟏 𝑳𝟏 𝐿1 𝐿2
𝟔𝑨𝟐 𝒂𝟐 𝒉𝟏 𝒉𝟑 different types of loading.
+ = 𝟔( + ) A1 = area of M-diagram in the left span
𝑬𝟐 𝑰𝟐 𝑳𝟐 𝑳 𝟏 𝑳𝟐
a1 = distance of the c.g. with respect to the left support
If E is constant this equation becomes, A2 = area of M-diagram in the right span
𝑴𝟏 𝑳𝟏 𝑳𝟏 𝑳𝟐 𝑴𝟑 𝑳𝟐 𝟔𝑨𝟏 𝒂𝟏 a2 = distance of the c.g. with respect to the right support
+ 𝟐𝑴𝟐 ( + ) + +
𝑰𝟏 𝑰𝟏 𝑰𝟐 𝑰𝟐 𝑰𝟏 𝑳𝟏
𝟔𝑨𝟐 𝒂𝟐 𝒉𝟏 𝒉𝟑 (Left Span) (Right Span)
+ = 𝟔𝑬( + )
𝑰𝟐 𝑳𝟐 𝑳 𝟏 𝑳𝟐

If E and I are constant then,

𝟔𝑨𝟏 𝒂𝟏
𝑴𝟏 𝑳𝟏 + 𝟐𝑴𝟐 (𝑳𝟏 + 𝑳𝟐 ) + 𝑴𝟑 𝑳𝟐 +
𝑳𝟏
𝟔𝑨𝟐 𝒂𝟐 𝒉𝟏 𝒉𝟑
+ = 𝟔𝑬𝑰( + )
𝑳𝟐 𝑳 𝟏 𝑳𝟐

For the application of three-moment equation to continuous

beam, points 1, 2, and 3 are usually unsettling supports, thus h1
and h3 are zero. With E and I constants, the equation will reduce
to
𝟔𝑨𝟏 𝒂𝟏 𝟔𝑨𝟐 𝒂𝟐
𝑴𝟏 𝑳𝟏 + 𝟐𝑴𝟐 (𝑳𝟏 + 𝑳𝟐 ) + 𝑴𝟑 𝑳𝟐 + + =𝟎
𝑳𝟏 𝑳𝟐

Assumptions for Three-Moment Equation

1. Assume spans simply supported and draw M/EI
diagrams due to the real loadings.
2. Assume redundant moments positive and draw the
M/EI diagrams.
3. Assume uneven support settlements.
 Structural Theory |3

Procedures for Analysis

(Left Span) (Right Span)
1. Determinacy ( r ? 3 + c )
2. Consider moments at all interior simple supports and
fixed supports redundant.
3. Construct Three-Moment Equations for each
redundant.
4. Solve the unknown redundant moments using the
system of Three-Moment Equations.
5. Solve the shear at the ends of each span of the beam
(Draw an FBD showing external loads and member
end moment acquired then apply the equations of
equilibrium)
6. Solve the required support reactions and draw the
shear and moment diagrams.

Sign Convention
1. For the redundant moments:
Positive moments are upward (arrowheads are above).

Negative moments are downward (arrowheads are below).

2. For the support settlement heights:

Take the middle support M as the neutral axis. All
settlements above it are positive and all below are negative.

h1 = settlement between M and L

h3 = settlement between M and R
 Structural Theory |4

6𝐴1 𝑎1 6𝐴2 𝑎2 Effects of Cantilever Overhangs

3. For and , positive if it is due to downward
𝐿1 𝐿2 Since the cantilever portion CD of the beam is statically
loading and negative if due to upward loading. determinate in the sense that the shear and moment at its end C
can be obtained by applying the equations of equilibrium, it is
Effects of Fixed Supports not necessary to include this portion in the analysis. Thus, for
A fixed support must be replaced by an imaginary the purpose of analysis, the cantilever portion CD can be
interior roller support with an adjoining end span of zero length removed from the structure, provided that the moment and the
simply supported at its outer end, as shown below. The reaction force exerted by the cantilever on the remaining structure are
moment at the actual fixed support is now treated as the included in the analysis.
redundant bending moment at the imaginary interior support,
and the three-moment equation when applied to this imaginary
support satisfies the compatibility condition of zero slope of the
elastic curve at the actual fixed support.

When analyzing a beam for support settlements, both

imaginary supports—that is, the interior roller support and the
outer simple end support—are considered to undergo the same
settlement as the actual fixed support.
𝑴𝑪 = Ʃ𝑴𝑪𝑼𝑻
↺ + 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝐹𝐵𝐷
↻ + 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑒𝑓𝑡 𝐹𝐵𝐷
 Structural Theory |5

𝑀𝐴 = 0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑀𝐶 = 0 (𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑠)

Example 5.1 Determine the reactions and draw the
shear and bending moment diagrams for the 6𝐴1 𝑎1 150(2) 2 100(4) 2
beam shown by using the three-moment = (6 − 22 ) + (6 − 42 )
𝐿1 6 6
equation. E is constant. 6𝐴1 𝑎1 8800
=
𝐿1 3

6𝐴2 𝑎2 50(53 )
=
𝐿2 4
6𝐴2 𝑎2 3125
=
𝐿2 2

6 5 8800 3125
0 + 2𝑀𝐵 ( + ) + 0 + + =0
2𝐼 𝐼 3(2𝐼) 2(𝐼)
Determinacy Redundant 6 5 8800 3125
0 + 2𝑀𝐵 ( + ) + 0 + + =0
𝑟 ?3+ 𝑐 Consider 𝑀𝐵 redundant. 2 1 3(2) 2(1)
4 ?3 + 0 𝑀𝐵 = −189.32 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
4>3
FBD Analysis
∴ 1° 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒 (1 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑡)
Three-Moment Equation
Spans AB and BC
𝐿1 =6m 𝐿2 = 5𝑚
𝐼1 = 2𝐼 𝐼2 = 𝐼
𝑀1 𝐿1 𝐿1 𝐿2 𝑀3 𝐿2 6𝐴1 𝑎1
+ 2𝑀2 ( + ) + +
𝐼1 𝐼1 𝐼2 𝐼2 𝐼1 𝐿1 Span AB
6𝐴2 𝑎2 ℎ1 ℎ3 Ʃ𝑀𝐴 = 0 Ʃ𝑀𝐵 = 0
+ = 6𝐸( + )
𝐼2 𝐿2 𝐿1 𝐿2 189.32 + 150(2) 189.32 − 150(4)
𝑀𝐴 (6) 6 5 𝑀𝐶 (5) 6𝐴1 𝑎1 6𝐴2 𝑎2 +100(4) − 𝑉𝐵𝐴 (6) = 0 −100(2) + 𝐴𝑉 (6) = 0
+ 2𝑀𝐵 ( + ) + + + =0
2𝐼 2𝐼 𝐼 𝐼 (2𝐼)𝐿1 (𝐼)𝐿2 𝑉𝐵𝐴 = 148.22 𝐾𝑁 ↑ 𝐴𝑉 = 101.8 𝐾𝑁 ↑
 Structural Theory |6

Span BC
Ʃ𝑀𝐵 = 0 Ʃ𝑀𝐶 = 0
5 5
50(5) ( ) − 189.3 −50(5) ( ) − 189.3
2 2
−𝑅𝐶 (5) = 0 +𝑉𝐵𝐶 (5) = 0
𝑅𝐶 = 87.14 𝐾𝑁 ↑ 𝑉𝐵𝐶 = 162.86 𝐾𝑁 ↑
Joint B
Ʃ𝐹𝑉 = 0
−162.86 − 148.2 + 𝑅𝐵 = 0
𝑅𝐵 = 311.06 𝐾𝑁 ↑

Example 5.2 Determine the reactions for the

continuous beam shown by the three-moment
equation. EI is constant.

Determinacy Redundant
𝑟 ?3 + 𝑐 Consider 𝑀𝐴 and 𝑀𝐵
5 ? 3 + 0) redundant.
5>3
∴ 2° 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒
(2 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑠)
 Structural Theory |7

Spans AB and BC
𝐿1 = 6𝑚 𝐿2 = 9𝑚
𝐼1 = 𝐼 𝐼2 = 𝐼
𝑀1 𝐿1 𝐿1 𝐿2 𝑀3 𝐿2 6𝐴1 𝑎1
+ 2𝑀2 ( + ) + +
𝐼1 𝐼1 𝐼2 𝐼2 𝐼1 𝐿1
6𝐴2 𝑎2 ℎ1 ℎ3
+ = 6𝐸( + )
Three-Moment Equation 𝐼2 𝐿2 𝐿1 𝐿2
Spans AOA and AB 𝑀A (6) 6 9 𝑀𝐶 (9) 6𝐴1 𝑎1 6𝐴2 𝑎2
+ 2𝑀𝐵 ( + ) + + + =0
𝐿1 = 0 𝐿2 = 6𝑚 𝐼 𝐼 𝐼 𝐼 (𝐼)𝐿1 (𝐼)𝐿2
𝐼1 = ∞ 𝐼2 = 𝐼
For Mc (FBD right of C)
𝑀1 𝐿1 𝐿1 𝐿2 𝑀3 𝐿2 6𝐴1 𝑎1 3
+ 2𝑀2 ( + ) + + 𝑀𝐶 = Ʃ𝑀𝐶 ↺= −30(3) ( ) = −135 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
𝐼1 𝐼1 𝐼2 𝐼2 𝐼1 𝐿1 2
6𝐴2 𝑎2 ℎ1 ℎ3
+ = 6𝐸( + ) 6𝐴1 𝑎1 225(3) 2 6075
𝐼2 𝐿2 𝐿1 𝐿2 = (6 − 32 ) =
𝑀𝐴𝑂 (0) 0 6 𝑀𝐵 (6) 6𝐴1 𝑎1 6𝐴2 𝑎2 𝐿1 6 2
+ 2𝑀𝐴 ( + ) + + + =0
∞ ∞ 𝐼 𝐼 (∞)𝐿1 (𝐼)𝐿2
6𝐴2 𝑎2 30(93 )
=
6𝐴1 𝑎1 𝐿2 4
=0 6𝐴2 𝑎2 10935
𝐿1 =
𝐿2 2
6𝐴2 𝑎2 225(3) 2
= (6 − 32 ) 𝑀A (6) 6 9 −135(9) 6075 10935
𝐿2 6 + 2𝑀𝐵 ( + ) + + + =0
6𝐴2 𝑎2 6075 𝐼 𝐼 𝐼 𝐼 2(𝐼) 2(𝐼)
= 𝑀A (6) 6 9 −135(9) 6075 10935
𝐿2 2 + 2𝑀𝐵 ( + ) + + + =0
1 1 1 1 2(1) 2(1)
6 𝑀𝐵 (6) 6075 6𝑀𝐴 + 30𝑀𝐵 = −7290 → 𝑒𝑞𝑛. 2
0 + 2𝑀𝐴 (0 + ) + +0+ =0
𝐼 𝐼 2(𝐼)
6 𝑀𝐵 (6) 6075 𝑀𝐴 = −146.25 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
0 + 2𝑀𝐴 (0 + ) + +0+ =0 𝑀𝐵 = −213.75 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
1 1 2(1)
12𝑀𝐴 + 6𝑀𝐵 = −3037.5 → 𝑒𝑞𝑛. 1
 Structural Theory |8

FBD Analysis

Span AB Summarizing,
Ʃ𝑀𝐴 = 0 Ʃ𝑀𝐵 = 0
213.75 − 146.25 213.75 − 146.25
+225(3) − 𝑉𝐵𝐴 (6) = 0 −225(3) + 𝐴𝑉 (6) = 0
𝑉𝐵𝐴 = 123.75 𝐾𝑁 ↑ 𝐴𝑉 = 101.25 𝐾𝑁 ↑

Span BC
Ʃ𝑀𝐵 = 0 Ʃ𝑀𝐶 = 0
135 − 213.75 135 − 213.75
9 9
+30(9)( ) − 𝑉𝐵𝐶 (9) = 0 −30(9) ( ) + 𝑉𝐶𝐵 (9) = 0 Example 5.3 Determine the moments at the supports of
2 2 the continuous beam shown due to the applied
𝑉𝐵𝐶 = 126.25 𝐾𝑁 ↑ 𝑉𝐵𝐶 = 143.75 𝐾𝑁 ↑ loadings and due to the support settlements of 10
Span CD mm at A, 50 mm at B, and 40 mm at C. Use the
three-moment equation. Assume E = 200 GPa
Ʃ𝐹𝑉 = 0
and I = 700x106 mm4.
−30(3) + 𝑉𝐶𝐷 = 0
𝑉𝐶𝐷 = 90 𝐾𝑁 ↑
Joint B
Ʃ𝐹𝑉 = 0
−123.75 − 143.75 + 𝑅𝐵 = 0
𝑅𝐵 = 267.5 𝐾𝑁 ↑
Joint C
Ʃ𝐹𝑉 = 0
−126.25 − 90 + 𝑅𝐶 = 0
𝑅𝐶 = 216.25 𝐾𝑁 ↑
 Structural Theory |9

Determinacy Redundant 5 KN
𝑟 ?3+ 𝑐 Consider 𝑀𝐵 and 𝑀𝐶
20 KN/m 5 KN 20 KN/m
5 ? 3 + 0) redundant.
5>3 A E F B B C
∴ 2° 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒 (2 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑠)
1.5m 1.5m 1.5m 3m
15 5 12.5 12.5
22.5 18.75

CO

L=0m 3° 3° 3°
-7.5 -7.5

Three-Moment Equation
Spans AB and BC -15
𝐿1 = 4.5m 𝐿2 = 3𝑚
For A1a1
𝐼1 = 2𝐼 𝐼2 = 1.5𝐼 1 4.5
ℎ1 = 0.04𝑚 ℎ3 = 0.01𝑚 𝐴1 𝑎1 = (4.5)(22.5) ( )
2 3
𝑀1 𝐿1 𝐿1 𝐿2 𝑀3 𝐿2 6𝐴1 𝑎1 1 1 1 3
+ 2𝑀2 ( + ) + + + (1.5)(−7.5)( )(1.5) + (3)(−15)( )
𝐼1 𝐼1 𝐼2 𝐼2 𝐼1 𝐿1 3+1 3+2 2 3
6𝐴2 𝑎2 ℎ1 ℎ3 1683
+ = 6𝐸( + ) 𝐴1 𝑎1 =
𝐼2 𝐿2 𝐿1 𝐿2 32
𝑀A (4.5) 4.5 3 𝑀𝐶 (3) 6𝐴1 𝑎1
+ 2𝑀𝐵 ( + )+ + 1683
2𝐼 2𝐼 1.5𝐼 1.5𝐼 (2𝐼)𝐿1 6𝐴1 𝑎1 6( 32 ) 561
6𝐴2 𝑎2 0.04 0.01 = =
+ = 6𝐸( + ) 𝐿1 4.5 8
(1.5𝐼)𝐿2 4.5 3
For A2a2
For MA (FBD left of A) 1 2 1
2 𝐴2 𝑎2 = (1.5)(18.75) ( ) (1.5) + (1.5)(18.75)
𝑀𝐴 = Ʃ𝑀𝐴 ↻= −11(2) ( ) 2 3 2
2 1.5 1 1.5
𝑀𝐴 = −22 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚 (1.5 + )+ (1.5)(−7.5) (1.5 − )
3 3+1 3+2
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 10

1 1.5 𝑀B (3) 3 0 𝑀𝐶 (0) 6𝐴1 𝑎1

+ (1.5)(−7.5)(1.5 + ) + 2𝑀𝐶 ( + )+ 𝑂 +
3+1 3+2 1.5𝐼 1.5𝐼 ∞ ∞ (1.5𝐼)𝐿1
135 6𝐴2 𝑎2 −0.01 0
𝐴2 𝑎2 = + = 6𝐸( + )
4 (∞)𝐿2 3 ∞
135
6𝐴2 𝑎2 6( 4 ) 135
= = 6𝐴1 𝑎1 5(20)(33 ) 5(1.5) 2
𝐿2 3 2 = − (3 − 1.52 )
𝐿1 32 3
−22(4.5) 4.5 3 𝑀𝐶 (3) 561 6𝐴1 𝑎1 135
+ 2𝑀𝐵 ( + )+ + =
2𝐼 2𝐼 1.5𝐼 1.5𝐼 8(2𝐼) 𝐿1 2
135 0.04 0.01
+ = 6𝐸( + ) 6𝐴2 𝑎2
2(1.5𝐼) 4.5 3 =0
−22(4.5) 4.5 3 𝑀𝐶 (3) 561 𝐿2
+ 2𝑀𝐵 ( + )+ +
2 2 1.5 1.5 8(2)
135 0.04 0.01 𝑀B (3) 3 135
+ = 6𝐸𝐼( + ) + 2𝑀𝐶 ( + 0) + 0 + +0
2(1.5) 4.5 3 1.5𝐼 1.5𝐼 2(1.5𝐼)
−22(4.5) 4.5 3 𝑀𝐶 (3) 561 −0.01
+ 2𝑀𝐵 ( + )+ + = 6𝐸( + 0)
2 2 1.5 1.5 8(2) 3
𝑀B (3) 3 135
135 0.04 0.01 + 2𝑀𝐶 ( + 0) + 0 + +0
+ = 6(200𝑥106 )(7𝑥10−4 )( + ) 1.5 1.5 2(1.5)
2(1.5) 4.5 3 −0.01
8.5𝑀𝐵 + 2𝑀𝐶 = 10236.1042 → 𝑒𝑞𝑛. 1 = 6𝐸𝐼( + 0)
3
𝑀B (3) 3 135
Spans BC and CCO + 2𝑀𝐶 ( + 0) + 0 + +0
1.5 1.5 2(1.5)
𝐿1 = 3m 𝐿2 = 0 −0.01
𝐼1 = 1.5𝐼 𝐼2 = ∞ = 6(200𝑥106 )(7𝑥10−4 )( + 0)
3
ℎ1 = −0.01𝑚 ℎ3 = 0 2𝑀𝐵 + 4𝑀𝐶 = −2845 → 𝑒𝑞𝑛. 2
𝑀1 𝐿1 𝐿1 𝐿2 𝑀3 𝐿2 6𝐴1 𝑎1
+ 2𝑀2 ( + ) + + 𝑀𝐵 = 1554.48 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
𝐼1 𝐼1 𝐼2 𝐼2 𝐼1 𝐿1
6𝐴2 𝑎2 ℎ1 ℎ3 𝑀𝐶 = −1488.49 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
+ = 6𝐸( + )
𝐼2 𝐿2 𝐿1 𝐿2 𝑀𝐴 = −22 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
𝑀𝐷 = 0
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 11

Summarizing, to work with the relative bending stiffnesses of members in the

5 analysis. The relative bending stiffness, K, of a member is
20 20 1488.49
5 obtained by dividing its bending stiffness, 𝐾, by 4E.
11 KN-m
𝐾 4𝐸𝐼/𝐿
𝐾= =
D A A B B C 4𝐸 4𝐸
𝐼
22 KN-m 1554.48 KN-m 𝐾=
𝐿

A comparison of equations indicate that the stiffness of

5.2 Moment Distribution Method the beam is reduced by 25 percent when the far of the member
is a hinged support. Thus, the bending stiffness of a member is
The moment-distribution method can be used only for given by
the analysis of continuous beams and frames, taking into account
their bending deformations only. This method, which was
initially developed by Hardy Cross in 1924, was the most widely
used method for analysis of structures from 1930, when it was
first published, through the 1960s.
Similarly, the relative bending stiffness of a member is
The main reason for the popularity of the moment- given by
distribution method in the precomputer era was due to the fact
that it does not involve the solution of as many simultaneous
equations as required by the other classical methods.

Member Stiffness
A. Bending Stiffness, 𝐾
Carryover Moment, 𝑪𝑶𝑴
The bending stiffness, 𝐾, of a member is defined as the
Let us consider again the hinged-fixed beam AB. When
moment that must be applied at an end of the member to cause a
a moment M is applied at the hinged end A of the beam, a
unit rotation of that end.
4𝐸𝐼 moment MBA develops at the fixed end B, as shown in the figure.
𝐾= The moment MBA is termed the carryover moment. when a
𝐿 moment of magnitude M is applied at the hinged end of a beam,
B. Relative Bending Stiffness, 𝐾
one-half of the applied moment is carried over to the far end,
When the modulus of elasticity for all the members of a
provided that the far end is fixed. Note that the direction of the
structure is the same (i.e., E = constant), it is usually convenient
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 12

carryover moment, MBA, is the same as that of the applied We can state that, in general, the distribution factor (DF)
moment, M. for an end of a member that is rigidly connected to the adjacent
1 joint equals the ratio of the relative bending stiffness of the
𝐶𝑂𝑀 = 𝐶𝑂𝐹(𝑀) = 𝑀
2 member to the sum of the relative bending stiffnesses of all the
members framing into the joint; that is,

𝐾𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟
or 𝐷𝐹 = 𝐾𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡

Fixed-End Moments, 𝑭𝑬𝑴

When the far end of the beam is hinged, the carryover The fixed-end moment expressions for some common
moment MBA is zero. Thus, we can express the carryover types of loading conditions as well as for relative displacements
moment as of member ends are given in this chapter for convenient
reference. In the moment-distribution method, the effects of
joint translations due to support settlements and sidesway are
also taken into account by means of fixed-end moments.

Distribution Factors, 𝑫𝑭
When analyzing a structure by the moment-distribution
method, an important question that arises is how to distribute a
moment applied at a joint among the various members connected
to that joint. To determine what fraction of the applied moment
M is resisted by each of the three members connected to the
joint, we draw free-body diagrams of joint B and of the three
members AB, BC, and BD, as shown

Note:
DF = 0 for fixed end
DF = 1 for hinged or
roller end
DF = NONE for free end
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 13

𝑃 = 𝑤𝑑𝑥

𝑐 𝑐
𝑃𝑎𝑏 2 𝑃𝑎2 𝑏
න න
𝑑 𝐿2 𝑑 𝐿2
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 14

Basic Concept of the Moment Distribution Method In simpler terms,

The moment-distribution method is an iterative 1. Fix all the joints – “LOCK” joints
procedure, in which it is initially assumed that all the joints of 2. Calculate Fixed-end Moments
the structure that are free to rotate are temporarily restrained 3. Examine fixed joints and provide a Balancing Moment
against rotation by imaginary clamps applied to them. External for equilibrium – “UNLOCK” joints
loads and joint translations (if any) are applied to this 4. Distribute balancing moment to members based on the
hypothetical fixed structure, and fixed-end moments at the ends distribution factor
of its members are computed. 5. Carry over moment for equilibrium of member. Carry
over factor – “LOCK” joints
These fixed-end moments generally are not in
equilibrium at those joints of the structure that are actually free
to rotate. The conditions of equilibrium at such joints are then
satisfied iteratively by releasing one joint at a time, with the
remaining joints assumed to remain clamped. A joint at which
the moments are not in balance is selected, and its unbalanced
moment is evaluated. The joint is then released by removing the
clamp, thereby allowing it to rotate under the unbalanced
moment until the equilibrium state is reached. The rotation of
the joint induces moments at the ends of the members connected
to it. Such member end moments are referred to as distributed
moments, and their values are determined by multiplying the
negative of the unbalanced joint moment by the distribution
factors for the member ends connected to the joint. The bending
of these members due to the distributed moments causes
carryover moments to develop at the far ends of the members,
which can easily be evaluated by using the member carryover
factors.

The joint, which is now in equilibrium, is reclamped in

its rotated position. Next, another joint with an unbalanced
moment is selected and is released, balanced, and reclamped in
the same manner. The procedure is repeated until the unbalanced
moments at all the joints of the structure are negligibly small.
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 15

Structures with Cantilever Overhangs 5.2.1 Analysis of Beams without Support

Consider a continuous beam with a cantilever overhang,
Settlement
as shown. Since the cantilever portion CD does not contribute to
the rotational stiffness of joint C, the distribution factor for its Procedures for Analysis
end C is zero. Thus, joint C can be treated as a simple end 1. Assume all joints/supports fixed
support in the analysis. The moment at end C of the cantilever, 2. Fixed End Moments (FEM)
however, does affect the unbalanced moment at joint C and must 3. Stiffness (K)
be included along with the other fixed-end moments in the 4. Distribution Factor (DF)
analysis. Note that the cantilever portion CD is statically 5. Moment Distribution Table (actual moments)
determinate; therefore, the moment at its end C can be easily a. Unbalanced Moments
evaluated by applying the equation of moment equilibrium b. Distributed Moments (Negate sign of
Munbalanced)
c. Carry Over Moments (COM) (Same sign as
Mdistributed)
6. FBD Analysis (shear at ends of span, support
reactions)
7. Solve remaining requirements (V & M diagrams,
deflected shape)

Note: Adopt sign Sign Convention

convention of FEM for the For all the moments (FEM’s, Distributed Moments,
Unbalanced Moments, and the like), counterclockwise moments
computed moments.
are positive and clockwise moments are negative.

Example 5.4 Determine the fixed-end moments of the

Working Formulas beam shown.
A. Unbalanced Moment
𝑴𝑼𝒏𝒃𝒂𝒍 = Ʃ𝑭𝑬𝑴𝑱𝒐𝒊𝒏𝒕
B. Distributed Moment
𝑴𝑫𝒊𝒔𝒕′𝒅 = −(𝑴𝑼𝒏𝒃𝒂𝒍 )(𝑫𝑭𝑴𝒃𝒓 )
C. Carryover Moment
𝑴𝑫𝒊𝒔𝒕′ 𝒅 𝒀𝑿 2m 3m 3m
𝑪𝑶𝑴𝑿𝒀 =
𝟐
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 16

For the force P of the triangular loading,

Example 5.5 Determine the member-end moments of
the continuous beam shown. Use moment
distribution method. Assume E = constant.

By similar triangles,
𝑤 6 Fixed-end Moments, FEM
=
𝑥−2 3 For P of triangular load,
𝑤 = 2(𝑥 − 2) 𝑤 30
= ; 𝑤 = 10(𝑥 − 2)
𝑃 = 𝑤𝑑𝑥 = 2(𝑥 − 2)𝑑𝑥 𝑥−2 3
𝑃 = 𝑤𝑑𝑥 = 10(𝑥 − 2)𝑑𝑥
For FEMAB
10(2)(6)2 20(5)(3)2 5
10(𝑥 − 2)𝑑𝑥(𝑥)(5 − 𝑥)2
𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐴𝐵 = − 𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐴𝐵 = න = +8.64 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
82 82 2 52
5
2(𝑥 − 2)𝑑𝑥(𝑥)(8 − 𝑥)2 5
10(𝑥 − 2)𝑑𝑥(𝑥)2 (5 − 𝑥)
+න 𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐵𝐴 = න = −22.86 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
2 82 2 52
45 225 2781
𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐴𝐵 = − + = +5.8781 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
4 16 320 49(3)(4)2
𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐵𝐶 = = +48 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
72
For FEMBA 49(3)2 (4)
10(2)2 (6) 20(5)2 (3) 𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐶𝐵 = = −36 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐵𝐴 = − + 72
82 82
5
2(𝑥 − 2)𝑑𝑥(𝑥)2 (8 − 𝑥) 18(6)2
−න 𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐶𝐷 = = +54 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
2 82 12
15 375 2799 18(6)2
𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐵𝐴 =− + − = +10.9406 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚 𝐹𝐸𝑀𝐷𝐶 = = −54 𝐾𝑁 − 𝑚
4 16 320 72
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 17

FBD Analysis
 S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 18

Stiffness, K REFERENCES
Note: When E is constant, use relative stiffness (K=I/L). Limit
to at least 4 decimals.
2𝐼 a. Kassimali, A. (2011). Understanding
𝐾𝐴𝐵 = 𝐾𝐵𝐴 = = 0.4𝐼 structural analysis.
5
𝐼 b. Wang, C. and Eckel, C. (1983).
𝐾𝐵𝐶 = 𝐾𝐶𝐵 = = 0.1429𝐼
7 Indeterminate structural analysis. New
1.5𝐼
𝐾𝐶𝐷 = 𝐾𝐷𝐶 = = 0.25𝐼 York, USA: McGraw Hill Inc.
6 c. Tuma, J. (1969). Theory and problems of
Distribution Factor, DF structural analysis. New York, USA:
Note: ƩDF at every joint = 1 [Except for fixed support(zero) and McGraw Hill Inc.
free end(none)]. Limit to at least 2 decimals. d. Kinney, J. (1987). Indeterminate
Joint A structural analysis. New Delhi, India:
𝐾𝐴 = ∞ (𝐹𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 𝑒𝑛𝑑) Narosa Publishing House and
0.4
𝐷𝐹𝐴𝐵 = =0 Applications.
∞
Joint B e. Engr. Crisostomo’s CE 3111 Modules
𝐾𝐵 = 𝐾𝐵𝐴 + 𝐾𝐵𝐶 = 0.4 + 0.1429 = 0.5429 f. www.mathalino.com by Engr. Verterra
0.4
𝐷𝐹𝐵𝐴 = = 0.74
0.5429
0.1429 CONTACT INFORMATION OF THE FACILITATOR
𝐷𝐹𝐵𝐶 = = 0.26
0.5429
Joint C
𝐾𝐶 = 𝐾𝐶𝐵 + 𝐾𝐶𝐷 = 0.1429 + 0.25 = 0.3929 Engr. Arjay B. Cuh-ing
0.1429 FB account/messenger: Arjay Cuh-ing
𝐷𝐹𝐶𝐵 = = 0.36
0.3929 E-mails: [email protected],
0.25 [email protected] ,
𝐷𝐹𝐶𝐷 = = 0.64
0.3929 [email protected]
Joint D
Cellphone/Viber Nos.: 09392600616 /
𝐾𝐷 = 𝐾𝐷𝐶 = 0.25
0.25 09676021162
𝐷𝐹𝐷𝐶 = =1
0.25
S t r u c t u r a l T h e o r y | 19