Analysis, Verification & Post-Processing

Learning Objectives

  • Explain what a linear static structural solution represents.
  • Separate solver completion from engineering validation.
  • Verify applied loads against support reactions and expected load paths.
  • Interpret nodal displacement, member axial/shear/moment/torsion results, and deflected shapes.
  • Use diagrams/envelopes without losing sign and local-axis context.
  • Interpret plate results with explicit attention to local axes and mesh sensitivity.
  • Identify governing cases and document independent reasonableness checks before design.

Run complete ≠ model verified

A solver can return numbers for a model containing wrong units, unintended releases, incorrect section orientation, poor connectivity, unrealistic support stiffness, wrong load signs, or inappropriate analysis assumptions. Post-processing begins with model verification, not with looking for the largest colorful contour.

Linear Static Analysis

What is being solved

For a linear-elastic static model, STAAD assembles the global stiffness system, applies boundary conditions and loads, solves nodal displacements, and recovers member/element actions and support reactions. Linearity means stiffness is treated as independent of the load level and the principle of superposition can be used where the analysis formulation permits it.

Static equilibrium solution

Core displacement solution after the model is assembled and restrained.

[K]{D}={F}[K]\{D\}=\{F\}

Variables

SymbolDescriptionUnit
[K][K]Global structural stiffness matrix-
{D}\{D\}Solved nodal displacement vector-
{F}\{F\}Applied load vector-

When linear static analysis is insufficient

If second-order geometry, tension/compression-only behavior, cables, material yielding, contact, staged effects, dynamic inertia, or other nonlinear/time-dependent behavior materially affects the engineering decision, select and verify an analysis formulation that represents that behavior. Do not infer advanced behavior from a linear run.

Simply Supported Beam — Analysis Result Benchmark

A single static point-load case used to verify reactions, shear and bending moment against closed-form statics. It is not a load-envelope or code-design result.

Closed-form results

Left reaction (RLR_L)25.0 kN
Right reaction (RRR_R)25.0 kN
Moment at load point (MaM_a)125.0 kN·m
Verification use: compare these results with the corresponding STAAD member forces/reactions using the correct local/global sign convention. A matching benchmark validates this case and idealization only; it does not validate unrelated loads, releases, member properties, or combinations.
FBD50 kN25.025.0SFD25.0-25BMD125.0

SFD and BMD identify the force/moment distribution for this one benchmark case.

Project design still requires the correct local-axis interpretation and comparison across all relevant cases/combinations/envelopes.

Verification Sequence After Every Analysis

Analysis acceptance workflow

  1. Read the analysis/output status: confirm the run completed and identify every error/warning/note requiring review.
  2. Check applied-load totals: compare software totals with a hand/independent estimate.
  3. Check reactions/equilibrium: for applicable static cases, verify that support reactions balance applied forces and moments within numerical tolerance and modeling expectations.
  4. Inspect deformed shape: confirm the direction and relative shape are physically plausible.
  5. Inspect load path: trace gravity/lateral action through slabs/beams/braces/columns/supports rather than inspecting isolated members.
  6. Inspect force diagrams: verify expected BMD/SFD/axial patterns on simple representative members.
  7. Inspect extrema and governing cases: identify which load case/combination actually causes the reported maximum/minimum.
  8. Compare with an independent estimate: reaction, simple-beam moment, deflection, frame drift, period, or another quantity appropriate to the model.
  9. Only then proceed to design.
Analysis Result Acceptance Before Design

Review solver status, independently verify modeled load totals, then check reaction forces, structural response, and applicable equilibrium before releasing a revision to design.

For applicable static cases, use consistent load cases, sign conventions, units, and project tolerances. First compare applied-load totals with an independent estimate based on the intended loads and geometry; this gate is separate from force equilibrium because a model can balance its reactions while representing the wrong total load. Then check force balance between applied loads and support reactions, inspect deformed shape and governing results, and evaluate applicable moment equilibrium. STAAD.Pro documents a second-order P-Delta/Direct Analysis moment-balance note: the statics check may omit secondary moments from applied-load totals while reactions include them. Do not reject solely for that documented moment note, but require the independent load-total and force checks to pass and investigate other unexplained response concerns.

Analysis Result Acceptance Before DesignReview solver status, independently verify modeled load totals, then check reaction forces, structural response, and applicable equilibrium before releasing a revision to design.. For applicable static cases, use consistent load cases, sign conventions, units, and project tolerances. First compare applied-load totals with an independent estimate based on the intended loads and geometry; this gate is separate from force equilibrium because a model can balance its reactions while representing the wrong total load. Then check force balance between applied loads and support reactions, inspect deformed shape and governing results, and evaluate applicable moment equilibrium. STAAD.Pro documents a second-order P-Delta/Direct Analysis moment-balance note: the statics check may omit secondary moments from applied-load totals while reactions include them. Do not reject solely for that documented moment note, but require the independent load-total and force checks to pass and investigate other unexplained response concerns.. Start from the identified model revision and analysis basis → Run the intended analysis cases and collect complete output; Run the intended analysis cases and collect complete output → Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue?; Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue? — No → Diagnose the cause, correct the model, and restart acceptance; Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue? — Yes → Estimate intended applied-load total independently; inspect reactions, response, and equilibrium; Estimate intended applied-load total independently; inspect reactions, response, and equilibrium → Does the independent applied-load total check pass?; Does the independent applied-load total check pass? — No → Correct the load model, then rerun acceptance; Does the independent applied-load total check pass? — Yes → Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained?; Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained? — No → Investigate unexplained results, then repeat acceptance checks; Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained? — Yes → Accept this verified revision for design

Start from the identified model revision and analysis basis → Run the intended analysis cases and collect complete output; Run the intended analysis cases and collect complete output → Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue?; Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue? — No → Diagnose the cause, correct the model, and restart acceptance; Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue? — Yes → Estimate intended applied-load total independently; inspect reactions, response, and equilibrium; Estimate intended applied-load total independently; inspect reactions, response, and equilibrium → Does the independent applied-load total check pass?; Does the independent applied-load total check pass? — No → Correct the load model, then rerun acceptance; Does the independent applied-load total check pass? — Yes → Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained?; Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained? — No → Investigate unexplained results, then repeat acceptance checks; Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained? — Yes → Accept this verified revision for design

  • Start from the identified model revision and analysis basis: terminator
  • Run the intended analysis cases and collect complete output: process
  • Did the run complete without an unresolved solver issue?: decision
  • Diagnose the cause, correct the model, and restart acceptance: terminator
  • Estimate intended applied-load total independently; inspect reactions, response, and equilibrium: process
  • Does the independent applied-load total check pass?: decision
  • Correct the load model, then rerun acceptance: terminator
  • Do force and response checks pass with any moment note explained?: decision
  • Investigate unexplained results, then repeat acceptance checks: terminator
  • Accept this verified revision for design: terminator

Global Equilibrium / Statics Check

Force equilibrium

For a stable static load case, external applied forces and reactions must satisfy global equilibrium using a consistent sign convention.

∑F⃗=0\sum \vec F=0

Moment equilibrium

Global moments about a chosen reference must also balance for the complete external force system.

∑M⃗=0\sum \vec M=0

What an imbalance can reveal

A suspicious reaction total can indicate omitted loads, wrong directions, unsupported/disconnected components, load-generation boundaries that do not cover the intended area, or misunderstanding of which loads are included in the displayed case. Small numerical residuals are different from a structural-scale imbalance; interpret tolerance in context.

Global equilibrium free-body check

Sum the applied forces and support reactions in one stated coordinate system, then check moment balance about a stated origin. This global check complements individual member hand checks.

An isolated analytical frame shows applied gravity and lateral resultants balanced against total base force reactions and a reaction moment in global axes.

Deflected Shape and Nodal Displacements

Shape before magnitude

Before comparing drift or deflection to limits, inspect whether the structure moves in the expected direction. Unexpected rigid-body motion, one joint moving far more than neighboring joints, a beam separating visually from a column, or a twisting response in a nominally symmetric frame can expose modeling errors immediately.

Scaled visualization

Graphical deflected shapes are typically exaggerated for visibility. Read the actual displacement values and units; do not infer physical displacement magnitude from the screen scale alone.

Member Force Results

Axial, shear, bending and torsion

Member results are reported in the member-local system. Always show/understand local axes before interpreting signs. A positive/negative moment diagram is only meaningful when the member direction and software sign convention are known.

Post-Processing Results Visualizer

10 kN
Max bending moment25.0 kN·m
Max shear force5.0 kN
Beam length10 m
Plot scale: each diagram is normalized to its own maximum ordinate so its theoretical shape remains visible. Read engineering magnitudes from the numeric results/labels, not from pixel height.
Physical ModelP = 10 kN
Bending Moment Diagram (BMD)Mmax = 25.0 kN·m
Shear Force Diagram (SFD)V = 5.0 kNV = -5.0 kN

Simple-beam hand checks

For a simply supported beam of span LL:

  • centered point load PP: Mmax=PL/4M_{max}=PL/4, ∣V∣max=P/2|V|_{max}=P/2
  • full-span uniform load ww: Mmax=wL2/8M_{max}=wL^2/8, ∣V∣max=wL/2|V|_{max}=wL/2

These idealized relationships are valuable regression checks for educational simulations and small benchmark models before trusting a large model.

Load Envelopes and Governing Cases

Maximum alone is incomplete information

Whenever reporting a maximum displacement, reaction, moment, utilization or reinforcement demand, also record which load case/combination and location produced it. Separate serviceability envelopes from strength/design envelopes so a service deflection is not accidentally checked using a strength combination—or vice versa.

Separate serviceability and strength envelopes

An envelope is meaningful only with its purpose, response component, controlling case, and member station. The curves are qualitative and contain no project values.

Two schematic response plots keep service deflection cases and strength moment combinations separate, with each peak labeled by case and location.

Plate / Surface Results

Local-axis dependence

Plate moments/stresses are expressed relative to element local axes. Before translating plate output into engineering reinforcement directions or membrane actions, confirm the local axes, element orientation, and whether adjacent elements use a consistent orientation.

Do not design to a single contour spike blindly

Finite-element stress/moment peaks near supports, point loads, openings, re-entrant corners, rigid links or abrupt stiffness changes can be mesh-sensitive or singular. Review distributions, equilibrium, design strips/cut lines/averaging methods appropriate to the engineering workflow, and mesh-refinement sensitivity rather than treating one extreme pixel as a directly constructible demand.

Minimum post-processing record

Key Takeaways
  • Post-processing is a verification workflow, not merely a results viewer.
  • Reaction/equilibrium and deformed-shape checks are among the fastest ways to detect model defects.
  • Member forces are local-axis quantities; sign interpretation requires member-direction awareness.
  • Envelopes must preserve the governing case and the purpose of the combination set.
  • Plate peaks require engineering interpretation and often mesh/result-distribution checks.
  • Do not begin automated design until the analysis model has been accepted.