Evaluating text with units and finding the neutral axis

A few weeks ago a comment asked for guidance on finding the moment capacity of a reinforced concrete section.  This post will look at finding the depth of the neutral axis (NA) in a rectangular section, with a single layer of reinforcement.  A later post will look at how this can be extended to concrete cross sections with multiple trapezoidal layers, and any number of reinforcement layers.

I have made use of the EvalU function, which evaluates functions  entered as text, including evaluation of units.  This function is useful for anyone who wants to evaluate functions in Excel, so is worth a look even if you don’t work with reinforced  concrete.

The EvalU function can be found on the Units4Excel spreadsheet, which can be downloaded from:

Units4Excel.zip

The input for the examples presented in this post is shown below:

All user-input cells are shaded, grey for numerical data and light blue for units, but note that no cells are protected.

The highlighted cell,  J12, illustrates the use of the EvalU function to evaluate the simple function entered in  H12:

  • Input is the function to be evaluated (H12), the input data range (D11:F12), and the output units (K12).
  • The input data range is a 3 column range listing all symbols used in the function, their values, and their units.
  • The input data must be a continuous range, with text in every row of the first column, but any symbols not used in the function will be ignored.
  • Unlike Excel range names, the symbols are case sensitive.
  • The value of pi could be entered as input data, but as pi() is a built in Excel function it may be included in the function in Excel format, i.e. including the ().

The first example finds the depth of the NA under ultimate loads, for the axial load specified in cell E20, assuming a rectangular concrete stress block with constant stress alpha * f’c and depth gamma * x, where:

  • alpha and gamma are code specified constants
  • f’c is the specified concrete compressive strenth
  • x is the depth of the NA (to be determined)

The steel reinforcement is assumed to be yielded, with a stress equal to the specified yield stress.

The depth of the NA, x, is then given by the expression in D34, with the EvalU function in D36:

The calculated value of x (108.8 mm) is checked to ensure that the nett reaction force is equal to the applied load (1000 kN), and the steel strain is checked to ensure that it is greater than the steel yield strain.

If the applied axial load is increased, the depth of the NA increases, and the strain in the reinforcement reduces so that at some point the steel strain will move into the elastic region, and the steel stress will depend on the depth of the NA, x:

steel stress, fst =  epsc * (Dt-x)/x * Est
epsc = maximum concrete compressive strain
Dt = depyh of reinforcement from the compressive face
Est = steel Young’s Modulus

Equating the sum of concrete and steel forces to the applied load yields the quadratic equation for x, shown in bold below:

Solving this equation for the positive x value finds the depth of the neutral axis, which is checked above to ensure that the sum of the reaction forces is equal to the applied load, and the steel stress is less than the yield stress.

Note that the b coefficient of the quadratic equation includes the value of the increased axial load.  The Evalu function has been modified to allow an optional additional range of input data; for example b is given by: =EvalU(C58,$D$6:$F$19,G58,$C$54:$E$54)

A similar approach can be used to determine the depth of the NA under a specified bending moment, with zero axial load and both steel and compressive concrete strain within the elastic region.  In this case the concrete stress is not known, but if both concrete and steel are in the elastic range then the NA depth is constant for any applied moment.   If the maximum concrete stress is assumed to be equal to x (depth of NA), then the concrete force is equal to the first moment of area of the concrete above the NA, and the depth x is given by the quadratic function shown in bold below:

If the axial load is not zero, the NA depth is no longer constant for varying bending moment, but the eccentricity of the reaction force must be equal to the eccentricity of the applied load, or to avoid division by zero when P = 0, equate P/M for the applied loads and reaction.   As shown below, this yields a cubic equation in x, which can be solved with the user defined function (UDF) Cubic:

The calculated x value is then used to find the bending moment and axial force assuming unit maximum concrete stress; and then the bending moment for the actual applied axial force:

 

Posted in Beam Bending, Concrete, Excel, Maths, Newton, UDFs, VBA | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

On not using Hungarian Notation, and VBA shortcuts

In June this year Michael Alexander at Bacon Bits had a post on using Hungarian Notation (or not).  It contained the following quote from Stackoverflow, which for me sums up excellently a good reason for not using it:

“vUsing adjHungarian nNotation vMakes nReading nCode adjDifficult”

But what really made the post useful for me was a comment from Freek van Gilst, who posted a couple of very useful keyboard short-cuts available in VBA:

 When you have the cursor on a variable you can press Ctrl-i to get a tooltip with the type (and scope).
Or press Shift-F2 to jump to the declaration (and Ctrl-Shift-F2 to return to your original position).

Posted in Excel, VBA | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The Countif bug (and how to avoid it)

The Countif function counts the number of cells in a range that match some criterion.  If we enter 1,2,3 in cells A1:A3 and enter =COUNTIF($A$1:$A$3,A1) somewhere else, it will return 1:

But if we enter three text strings with 16 or more numerical characters, that are only different in the 16th or later characters, COUNTIF will say they are all the same:

This problem was reported by John Walkenbach at Daily Dose of Excel, back in 2006.  The solution given then used the SUM function as an array function: =SUM((A1:A3=A1)*1).  The alternative shown below gives the same results.  Note that using SUM the function must be entered as an array, using Ctrl-Shift-Enter.

An alternative that does not require array function entry is to use the SUMPRODUCT function:

But after 11 years Lori Miller returned to Daily Dose of Excel with a way to get COUNTIF to work correctly.  Precede the address of the criterion cell with CHAR(173)&:

CHAR(173) is a “soft hyphen” character, which will ensure that the contents of the data range are treated as text strings, rather than numbers, but is otherwise ignored.  Now all numeric text strings of any length may be entered, and they will only be counted as being the same if they really are.

Posted in Computing - general, Excel | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Excel Uservoice and Python for Excel

The Excel Uservoice site is a forum for users to post suggestions for improvements to Excel.  A suggestion to add native Python support to Excel, as a replacement to VBA, has had by far the most votes since the start, and now Microsoft are looking at implementing that proposal, and have posted a questionnaire, asking how people use Excel and Python in their work:  Python as an Excel scripting language.

The disappointing (but not very surprising) thing about the survey is that although it has several questions about areas of work, it does not use the words “engineer” or “engineering” once.  So all you engineering Excel users out there, please complete the survey, and let Microsoft know what you use Excel for.

_________________________________________________________

Has the free software at this site saved you time and/or money?
If so, please contribute to the Raw Impact charity group providing practical help to poor communities in Cambodia:

Everydayhero – Cambodia 2018

  • All contributions gratefully accepted.
  • Contributions are tax-deductible for Australian tax payers
Posted in Computing - general, Excel, Link to Python, VBA | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Section Properties with MeshPY, including torsion and warping

I recently discovered robbie van leeuwen’s structural engineering blog, which has an open-source set of Python routines for calculation of section properties, including torsion and warping constants.  The program uses the MeshPY Library for generating the finite element meshes required for the torsion and warping calculations.   The Python code for generation of the input to MeshPY, and for carrying out the finite element analyses, is all by Robbie van Leeuwen.

I have written an Excel front-end for these routines, allowing most of the functionality to be accessed quickly and easily, with no programming required.  The spreadsheet, including full open source code, can be downloaded from:

xlwSectProp.zip

The spreadsheet requires the following software to be installed:

  • Windows version of Excel
  • Python version 2.7 or later (not checked with version 3)
  • xlwings version 0.11.4 or later
  • Matplotlib, Numpy and Scipy
  • The required MeshPY and other Python files are included with the download

The spreadsheet includes two calculation sheets:

  • Twelve defined shapes
  • Any shape defined by a series of coordinates

The screenshots below show the list of defined shapes and input and output for a rectangular hollow section:

Input cells are shaded blue.  Select a section type by number (1-12) and the required dimensions will update.  The optional input, Nu (Poisson’s Ratio) and mesh size (maximum area of each generated mesh element), is only required for the warping results.  The applied actions are only required for display of stress results.

The section properties output is shown in the two screen-shots below.  More detailed descriptions can be found at the on-line documentation.

For graphic display of the generated cross-section, element meshes, and stress plots under the input actions, click the “Display Stress Results” button:

17 images are shown in sequence in an external window.  Close each image to move on to the next.  There is currently no way to automatically save the images to the spreadsheet, but any image may be manually saved to disk as a png file.  At present each image must be viewed in sequence before control is returned to the spreadsheet.

The image window may be dragged to any required size (or made full-screen):

Stress distributions are generated for each of applied actions, and combined stresses:

The image window has tools to zoom and pan, and edit output format:

Sections defined by co-ordinates may be analysed on the second sheet.  The Python code has provision for analysis of sections with holes, but this is not yet implemented in the spreadsheet version:

The numerical results are as for the defined shapes:

The download file contains output for an asymmetrical I section, compared with the same section analysed in Strand7.  The geometric results are in exact agreement, to machine accuracy, except for the plastic modulus results, which have larger, but still very small differences.  The shear area, and torsion and warping constants have larger differences, due to different implementations of the finite element analysis, but are generally within 1%.

The output torsion and shear stress results from the spreadsheet are compared below with the equivalent results from Strand7:

Posted in Beam Bending, Concrete, Excel, Finite Element Analysis, Frame Analysis, Link to Python, Maths, Newton, Numerical integration, NumPy and SciPy, Strand7, UDFs, VBA, xlwings | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments