As evolved in the discussions, a true pinned joint is seldom possible for a practical truss, unless you

adopt a single bolt or rivet at joints. In most of the bolted joints, minimum two bolts will be there,
thereby putting a constraint on free rotation. As told, its play would allow a small rotation, thus making
it a semi-rigid joint. Welded joints will impart more rigidity to the joint than rivet or bolt. In order to
study the effect of rigidity of joints of a truss on its member forces, an example of a simple fink truss of
span 6m with vertical loads, as shown below, is selected on academic interest.

SIMPLE FINK TRUSS

C
1.625

2 3
B D
1.625 1.25
8 9 10
1 11 4
G 6 F
A 7 5 E
2.00 2.00 2.00

6.00

The loads as shown below are assigned right at the joints. The truss is analysed, using STAAD,
as :

(1) A truss itself such that there is only axial force and no moment in individual members and

(2) A plane frames with rigid joints such that moments can also develop in members.

TRUSS WITH JOINT LOADS

5.0 KN

5.0 KN 5.0 KN

2.5 KN 2 2.5 KN
3

8 9 10
1 11 4
G 6 F
7 5
 The results are compared in the table given below.

In a third trial, the loads are made slightly off-joint (by 30cm) as shown below and analysed as a
plane frame. If this is analysed in STAAD as a truss, the results would be erroneous. This case represents
the situation were the purlins are not positioned exactly at joints.

TRUSS WITH SLIGHTLY OFF-JOINT LOADS

2.5 KN 2.5 KN

5.0 KN 5.0 KN

2.5 KN 2.5 KN
2 3

8 9 10
1 11 4
G 6 F
7 5

The comparison of the member forces in the above three cases is tabulated below:

Analysed as truss with As plane frame with As plane frame with

joint loads joint loads off-joint loads
Member
Axial Max. Axial Max. Axial Max.
force moment force moment force moment
1 AB 19.5 0 19.412 0.039 20.721 0.783
2 BC 16.25 0 16.192 0.033 15.865 0.521
3 CD 16.25 0 16.192 0.033 15.865 0.521
4 DE 19.5 0 19.412 0.039 20.712 0.783
5 EF 18 0 17.908 0.023 18.166 0.399
6 FG 12 0 12.005 0.011 11.096 0.151
7 GA 18 0 17.908 0.023 18.166 0.003
8 BG 4.8 0 4.739 0.006 5.314 0.262
9 CG 4.8 0 4.739 0.007 5.314 0.003
10 CF 4.8 0 4.739 0.007 5.314 0.003
11 DF 4.8 0 4.739 0.006 5.314 0.262
Axial loads in KN & Moments in KN-m

From the table, it can be observed that for purely pinned joint as well as fully rigid joint conditions, there
is no much difference in axial forces, in regard to a truss with joint loads. Only minor moments are
developing in the members, in the case of rigid joints. Thus, for all practical purposes, we can analyse
any truss (pin jointed or welded) with joint loads as a pin jointed one, and safely design the members for
the resulting axial forces alone. This will facilitate manual design too, in the absence of a software.

However, if the loads go off-joint, then the axial forces are seen to fluctuate and the moments
get amplified. In that case, the truss may be analysed as a plane frame and get the members, especially
the rafters, designed as beam-columns subjected to axial force & moment.