Mechanical failure modes  

Buckling  
Corrosion  
Creep  
Fatigue  
Fracture  
Impact  
Mechanical overload  
Rupture  
Thermal shock  
Wear  
Yielding  
Structural analysis comprises the set of physical laws and mathematics required to study and predict the behavior of structures. The subjects of structural analysis are engineering artifacts whose integrity is judged largely based upon their ability to withstand loads; they commonly include buildings, bridges, aircraft, ships and cars. Structural analysis incorporates the fields of mechanics and dynamics as well as the many failure theories. From a theoretical perspective the primary goal of structural analysis is the computation of deformations, internal forces, and stresses. In practice, structural analysis can be viewed more abstractly as a method to drive the engineering design process or prove the soundness of a design without a dependence on directly testing it.
Contents 
To perform an accurate analysis a structural engineer must determine such information as structural loads, geometry, support conditions, and materials properties. The results of such an analysis typically include support reactions, stresses and displacements. This information is then compared to criteria that indicate the conditions of failure. Advanced structural analysis may examine dynamic response, stability and nonlinear behavior.
There are three approaches to the analysis: the mechanics of materials approach (also known as strength of materials), the elasticity theory approach (which is actually a special case of the more general field of continuum mechanics), and the finite element approach. The first two make use of analytical formulations which apply mostly to simple linear elastic models, lead to closedform solutions, and can often be solved by hand. The finite element approach is actually a numerical method for solving differential equations generated by theories of mechanics such as elasticity theory and strength of materials. However, the finiteelement method depends heavily on the processing power of computers and is more applicable to structures of arbitrary size and complexity.
Regardless of approach, the formulation is based on the same three fundamental relations: equilibrium, constitutive, and compatibility. The solutions are approximate when any of these relations are only approximately satisfied, or only an approximation of reality.
Each method has noteworthy limitations. The method of mechanics of materials is limited to very simple structural elements under relatively simple loading conditions. The structural elements and loading conditions allowed, however, are sufficient to solve many useful engineering problems. The theory of elasticity allows the solution of structural elements of general geometry under general loading conditions, in principle. Analytical solution, however, is limited to relatively simple cases. The solution of elasticity problems also requires the solution of a system of partial differential equations, which is considerably more mathematically demanding than the solution of mechanics of materials problems, which require at most the solution of an ordinary differential equation. The finite element method is perhaps the most restrictive and most useful at the same time. This method itself relies upon other structural theories (such as the other two discussed here) for equations to solve. It does, however, make it generally possible to solve these equations, even with highly complex geometry and loading conditions, with the restriction that there is always some numerical error. Effective and reliable use of this method requires a solid understanding of its limitations.
The simplest of the three methods here discussed, the mechanics of materials method is available for simple structural members subject to specific loadings such as axially loaded bars, prismatic beams in a state of pure bending, and circular shafts subject to torsion. The solutions can under certain conditions be superimposed using the superposition principle to analyze a member undergoing combined loading. Solutions for special cases exist for common structures such as thinwalled pressure vessels.
For the analysis of entire systems, this approach can be used in conjunction with statics, giving rise to the method of sections and method of joints for truss analysis, moment distribution method for small rigid frames, and portal frame and cantilever method for large rigid frames. Except for moment distribution, which came into use in the 1930s, these methods were developed in their current forms in the second half of the nineteenth century. They are still used for small structures and for preliminary design of large structures.
The solutions are based on linear isotropic infinitesimal elasticity and EulerBernoulli beam theory. In other words, they contain the assumptions (among others) that the materials in question are elastic, that stress is related linearly to strain, that the material (but not the structure) behaves identically regardless of direction of the applied load, that all deformations are small, and that beams are long relative to their depth. As with any simplifying assumption in engineering, the more the model strays from reality, the less useful (and more dangerous) the result.
Elasticity methods are available generally for an elastic solid of any shape. Individual members such as beams, columns, shafts, plates and shells may be modeled. The solutions are derived from the equations of linear elasticity. The equations of elasticity are a system of 15 partial differential equations. Due to the nature of the mathematics involved, analytical solutions may only be produced for relatively simple geometries. For complex geometries, a numerical solution method such as the finite element method is necessary.
Many of the developments in the mechanics of materials and elasticity approaches have been expounded or initiated by Stephen Timoshenko.
It is common practice to use approximations the solution of differential equations as the basis for structural analysis. This is usually done using numerical approximiation techniques. The most commonly used numerical approximation in structural analysis is the Finite Element Method.
The finite element method approximates a structure as an assembly of elements or components with various forms of connection between them. Thus, a continuous system such as a plate or shell is modeled as a discrete system with a finite number of elements interconnected at finite number of nodes. The behaviour of individual elements is characterised by the element's stiffness or flexibility relation, which altogether leads to the system's stiffness or flexibility relation. To establish the element's stiffness or flexibility relation, we can use the mechanics of materials approach for simple onedimensional bar elements, and the elasticity approach for more complex two and threedimensional elements. The analytical and computational development are best effected throughout by means of matrix algebra.
Early applications of matrix methods were for articulated frameworks with truss, beam and column elements; later and more advanced matrix methods, referred to as "finite element analysis," model an entire structure with one, two, and threedimensional elements and can be used for articulated systems together with continuous systems such as a pressure vessel, plates, shells, and threedimensional solids. Commercial computer software for structural analysis typically uses matrix finiteelement analysis, which can be further classified into two main approaches: the displacement or stiffness method and the force or flexibility method. The stiffness method is the most popular by far thanks to its ease of implementation as well as of formulation for advanced applications. The finiteelement technology is now sophisticated enough to handle just about any system as long as sufficient computing power is available. Its applicability includes, but is not limited to, linear and nonlinear analysis, solid and fluid interactions, materials that are isotropic, orthotropic, or anisotropic, and external effects that are static, dynamic, and environmental factors. This, however, does not imply that the computed solution will automatically be reliable because much depends on the model and the reliability of the data input.
Contents 
Degrees of freedom(DoF) In two dimension space, single part of structure have 2 displacements and 1 rotation.
In three dimension space, single part of structure have 3 displacements and 3 rotations.
In general, a rigid body in d dimensions has d(d + 1)/2 degrees of freedom (d translations and d(d −1)/2 rotations), 2 directions combine to 1 rotation, therefore use Binomial coefficient to determine number of rotations.
