AdvancedFrameMulti-bayContinuityUDL

Two-bay portal frame — what the interior column really carries

Add a second bay and something exact appears: the interior column carries about two and a half times the axial load of its neighbours and precisely no moment, because the two rafters cancel each other. It is also the most fragile result in these examples — load one bay only and it vanishes.

Figure 1.A two-bay portal frame, 2 × 6 m, carrying 10 kN/m on each rafter.
Given
Bays
2 × 6 m12 m overall
Height
4 m
10 kN/mon each rafter
200 GPa
100 × 10⁶ mm⁴
Bases
all pinned
1

Part 1 — Two bays, three columns

The interior column is shared, so it only gets modeled once.

Six nodes — three column lines, each with a base and an eaves node:

N 0,0 N 0,4 N 6,4 N 6,0 N 12,4 N 12,0

Then three columns and two rafters. Note that node 3 — the interior eaves — is shared by both rafters and the interior column:

M 1 2 M 2 3 M 4 3 M 3 5 M 6 5

Pin all three bases and load both bays equally:

S 1 P S 4 P S 6 P L 2 -10 L 4 -10

Figure 2.A two-bay portal: 2 × 6 m, 4 m high, 10 kN/m on each rafter.
2

Part 2, step 1 — The interior column takes MORE than twice the load

And tributary area is not the reason why.

Total gravity load across both bays:

The solver returns 120 kN, shared between three columns — but not equally, and not the way a tributary-area sketch would suggest. The exterior columns each carry 26.58 kN; the interior one carries 66.85 kN. That is a ratio of about 2.515 : 1, not 2 : 1.

Tributary area says the interior column collects half a bay from each side and should take 60 kN against 30 kN — but the rafters are continuous over the interior column, not two separate simply-supported spans. Continuity drags load toward the interior support, the same effect that gives a two-span continuous beam its familiar reactions:

On a bare continuous beam that would be 75 kN and 22.5 kN. The frame lands between the two estimates — 66.85 and 26.58 kN — because the columns supply some rotational restraint at the outer ends that a beam on knife-edge supports does not have.

3

Part 2, step 2 — And carries no moment at all

Exactly zero, and not by accident.

Now the surprise. The exterior columns carry 16.12 kN·m of moment — but the interior column carries 0 kN·m. Exactly zero.

The reason is symmetry, and it is exact rather than approximate. The left rafter arrives at node 3 with an end moment; the right rafter arrives with an equal and opposite one. They cancel, leaving the column head with nothing to resist. The rafters peak at 36.67 kN·m each, and the columns beneath them feel none of it.

An exterior column has no such partner — there is nothing on its outer side to balance the rafter pushing in — so it takes the full unbalanced moment.

Figure 3.The solved two-bay frame. The interior column carries about 2.5 times the axial load of an exterior one — and none of the bending.

Hand calculation vs solver

Verified — hand calculation vs the solver, to round-off
QuantityBy handStructureCalcs
Total vertical reactionw × 12 = 120 kN120 kN
Interior column moment0 by symmetry0 kN·m
Exterior column momentindeterminate16.12 kN·m
Rafter peak momentindeterminate36.67 kN·m
Interior : exterior axial2 : 1 tributary — WRONG; continuity raises it66.85 : 26.58 kN

Every value was worked by hand with the classical method, then checked against this site’s solver — the same engine the Try it button opens. This agreement is re-run automatically on every build.

Now make it yours

Open this exact model in the calculator — then change a load, drag a support, and watch every diagram update in real time. The best way to build intuition is to break it and see what happens.

Take it with you

Export this worked example as a PDF, or download it as a .screport and open it in the Report Builder — the model travels inside the file, so you can reconstruct it, re-solve, and build your own report from it.

Verifying your link…