E

COMMISSION
SCIENCE RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT

technical

steel

research

Properties and in-service performance

Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections: new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4

Report EUR 18404 EN

hi
STEEL RESEARCH

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Edith CRESSON, Member of the Commission responsible for research, innovation, education, training and youth DG XII/C.2 RTD actions: Industrial and materials technologies Materials and steel Contact: Mr H. J.-L. Martin Address: European Commission, rue de la Loi 200 (MO 75 1/10), B-1049 Brussels Tel. (32-2) 29-53453; fax (32-2) 29-65987

European Commission

technical steel researcl

Properties and in-service performance

Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections: new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4
J. B. Schleich
ProfilARBED-Recherches 66, rue de Luxembourg L-4221 Esch/Alzette

B. Chabrolin
CTICM Domaine de St Paul BP1 F-78470 St-Rmy-les-Chevreuse

F. Espiga
Ensidesa & Labein Cuesta de Olabeaga, 16 E-48013 Bilbao

Contract No 7210-SA/319/519/934 1 July 1993 to 30 June 1995

Final report

Directorate-General Science, Research and Development 1998 EUR 18404 EN

LEGAL NOTICE Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1998 ISBN 92-828-4466-8 European Communities, 1998 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Luxembourg
PRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER

Acknowledgements This research project n P3198 which has been sponsored by C.E.C., the Commission of the European Community, has been performed from 01.07.1993 to 30.06.1995 by the working group composed of : Profil AJRBED (coordinator) CTICM (partner) ENSIDESA-LABEIN (partner) (CE. C. Agreement 7210-SA/519) (CE. C. Agreement 7210-S A/319) (CE.C. Agreement 7210-SA/934)

We want to acknowledge first of all the financial support from the Commission of the European Community, as well as the moral support given during this research by all the members of the CE.C Executive Committee F6 "Steel Structures". Many thanks are also due to all, who by any means may have contributed in this research : ProfilARBED-Recherches RPS Department (Luxembourg): . MM. Chantrain Philippe, Conan Yves and Mauer Thierry, . MM. Klsak Maciej and Linn Cao Hoang (as trainees), CTICM (France) : . MM. Chabrolin Bruno, Galea Yvan and Bureau Alain, ENSIDESA and LABEIN (Spain) : . MM. Anza Juan, Espiga Fernando, RWTH- LfS (Germany) : . M. Feldmann Markus, EPFL - ICOM (Switzerland) : . M. Couchman Graham.

Table of Contents List of Symbols List of Figures List of Annexes References 1 Introduction 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 3 4 Obj ectives of the Research Proj ect Ways and Means Final Report 6 10 11 12 13 13 13 14 14 14 17 17 22 23 23 23

Bibliography Definition of Cross-Sections Classification Review of Rules for classification 4.1 4.2 4.3 General review Review of Elastic Global Analysis Review of Plastic Global Analysis

Numeric Simulations 5.1 5.2 Numerical Simulations for the Influence of Parameter Numerical Simulations of Steel cross-Sections Classifications for My Loading

26 33 33 36 38 39 41 45 57 67 75 91 117 127 161 171 221 245

New Proposals for Rules of Classification 6.1 6.2 Proposal for Steel Sections Proposals for Composite Sections

7 8

Conclusions List of Annexes Annex 1 Annex 2 Annex 3 Annex 4 Annex 5 Annex 6 Annex 7 Annex 8 Annex 9 Annex 10 Annex 11 Annex 12

List of Symbols 1. Latin symbols distance between forces area of gross cross-section area of the effective cross-section shear area of cross-section about z-z axis area of m e w e D of H or I cross-section (= A - 2btf) flange width of H or I cross-section effective length of element part half of flange width (= b/2) distance between zero moment points (= di + d2) web depth of H or I cross-section (= h - 2(tf + r)) part of the distance between zero moment points part of the distance between zero moment points specific web depth defined by CRM (= h - tf) flange displacement modulus of elasticity or Young Modulus shift of centroidal axis of effective cross-section submitted to bending moment shift of centroidal axis of effective cross-section submitted to uniform compression tangent modulus for strain hardening concentrated load concentrated load (for which the 1st plastic hinge occurs) maximum deflection in a span ultimate concentrated load ultimate tensile strength yield strength yield strength of the flange yield strength of the web overall depth of the cross-section moment of inertia of cross-section moment of inertia of cross-section about y-y axis moment of inertia of cross-section about z-z axis radius of gyration of cross-section about z-z axis specific factor in formula specific factor in formula buckling factor for outstand flanges specific factor in formula specific factor in formula system length span length length of flange overthickness (finite element modelization offilletradius) length of web overthickness (finite element modelization of fillet radius) distance between two adjacent lateral bracing span length bending moment

a A, Atotal Aeff Avz A\veb b b c d d d d2 dCRM dy E e\i eN Est F Fi fmax Fu fu fy fy fy w h I Iy Iz iz kf kr kj kvi kv2 L L L2 Lj, LLT> LLTB LSpan M

Mb.Rd Mcr Mcrit Meff Mei Mel.Rd M exp . Mmax

design resistance moment for lateral-torsional buckring elastic critical moment for lateral-torsional budding (Eurocode 3, Annex F) elastic initial moment for local and/or global buckling elastic effective bending moment resistance from the effective cross-section elastic bending moment resistance (=Wei fy) design elastic moment resistance of the cross-section experimental bending moment maximum bending moment in - curves

MPa = N/mm2 Mpi plastic bending moment resistance of cross-section (= Wpi fy) Mpi.N reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the axial force Mpi.Rd design plastic moment resistance of the cross-section M< design bending moment applied to the member Mu ultimate bending moment in M-m curves Mv.Rd- Mpi.v.Rd design plastic resistance moment reduced by shear force My bending moment about yy axis My.sd design bending moment about yy axis applied to the member Mz bending moment about zz axis normal force; axial load Nfl flange resistance part of axial compression load in combined N-My loading Npi design plastic resistance of the gross cross-section (= A fy) Nsd> Nx design value of tensile force or compressive force applied to the member O Other sections point load Pc specific term in formula Pei point load related to Mei Pu specific term in formula q distributed load qj distributed load for which the 1st plastic hinge occurs qu ultimate distributed load R Rolled sections R rotation capacity of plastic hinge r radius ofrootfillet 180 rad radian ( = unit forrotations;1 radian = degrees = 57,3 degrees) Rav available rotation capacity of plastic hinge RCRM availablerotationcapacity of plastic hinge from CRM model Rexp. availablerotationcapacity of plastic hinge from experimental results RFeld. availablerotationcapacity of plastic hinge from Feldmann model RKS available rotation capacity of plastic hinge from Kemp's simplified model Rreq requiredrotationcapacity of plastic hinge SLS Serviceability Limit States t design thickness, nominal thickness of element, material thickness tf flange thickness of H or I cross-section tw web thickness of H or I cross-section ULS Ultimate Limit State Vba.Rd design shear buckling resistance of web

VpLRd Vsd Vy Vz ei Vz w W We W e ff W w0 Wpi y y

design shear plastic resistance of cross-section design shear force applied to the member shear force parallel to yy axis (=parallel to flanges of I or H sections) shear force parallel to zz axis related to M e i shear force parallel to zz axis (=parallel to web of I or H sections) deflection of member Welded sections external work done by the load elastic section modulus of effective class 4 cross-section internal work absorbed by the structure initial plate imperfection magnitude plastic section modulus about y-y axis major axis of H or I cross-section minor axis of or I cross-section

2. ,
ocu s %LT est eu Ey

Greek symbols length factor (giving the position of point load) load factor for thefirstplastic hinge
load factor at collapse yield strength of reinforcement bars reduction factor for lateral-torsional buckling moment redistribution stress increase in strain-hardening domain coefficient = 235 I V fy -, (with fy in N/mm z )

strain at the end of yield plateau ultimate strain corresponding to fu yield strain corresponding to fy factor for uniform distributed load partial safety factors partial safety factor for resistance of member to buckling partial safety factor for available inelastic rotation <pav partial safety factor for available rotation capacity R a v load factor after the occurence of the first plastic hinge inelastic rotation of plastic hinge characteristic value of available inelastic rotation of plastic hinge elastic rotation of plastic hinge related to M p i required inelastic rotation of plastic hinge maximal rotation of plastic hinge obtained by the intersection between decreasing part of experimental (-) curves from 3-point bending tests and the plastic moment level Mpi of the profile = (p av , characteristic value of available inelastic rotation of plastic hinge length factor for adjacent spans load factor effective lateral slendemess

Ya< YRd YMl YMR 3 (Ppl cpreq (p r o t

(pj^t XQ

5TLT

reduced slenderness of m e m b e r according to lateral-torsional b u c k l i n g

^ v . 6p.req* req , 2 , ocrit 0 Tcrit 3.

plate slendemess plate i slendemess ratio of support to span bending moments Poisson coefficient (=0,3 for steel) = 9req required inelasticrotationof plastic hinge inelasticrotationsof plastic hinges reduction factor for determination of effective width normal stress elastic critical buckling normal stress amplitude of residual stresses shear stress elastic critical buckling shear stress length factor (giving the position of point load) bending moments ratio for a member (or parts of it) between lateral bracings

Drawing symbols perfect hinge

-o-

plastic hinge

simple support (with vertical reaction)

simple support (with vertical and horizontal reactions)

7

fully fixed support

List of Figures
Figure 1 : Definition of the classification of cross-sections Figure 2 : Influence of and initial slendemess limits Figure 3 : Deflection history of beam 2 including unloading branch Figure 4 : Calculated and measured moment resistances Figure 5 : a) Flange b) Web Figure 6 : Flange simulations Figure 7 : Web simulations Figure 8 : Boundary conditions Figure 9 : Modelization of fillet radius Figure 10 : Border class 3 &4 elastic cross-sections : (meaning Mei.Rd is reached) Figure 11 : EC3 and simulated borders between classes 3&4 and classes 2&3 versus EPE profiles Figure 12 : EC3 and simulated borders between classes 3&4 and classes 2&3 versus HE AA profiles Figure 13 : Moment-rotation curve for 3-points bending beam Figure 14 : Summary of formulas from Feldmann's model to evaluate inelastic rotations of steel plastic hinges Figure 15 : Table for the EC4 classification of cross-sections

10

List of Annexes

Annex 1: Annex 2: Annex 3 : Annex 4

Complete Set of Distributed Documents Final report (Excerpts) Simplified Version of Eurocode 3 for Usual Buildings Document 3198-1-1 (Ref. 15) Excerpts) Local buckling rules for structural steel members Document 3 263 -1 -27 (ProfilARBED) Available rotation capacity of plastic hinges Ravanabie - Tests results and models Document 3 263 -1 -27 (ProfilARBED Available rotation capacity of plastic hinges Ravaiiabie - Tests results and models Document 3198-1-18 (ProfilARBED) Stability of composite bridge girders near internal support Document 3263-2-12 (CTICM) Required rotation capacity for a 15% reduction of elastic peak moment Document 3263-2-15 (CTICM) Required rotation capacity for continuous beams Document 3 263 -1 -29 Mr. Couchman' s thesis (excerpts) Design of continuous beams allowingfor rotation capacity Document 3198-3-3 (LABEIN) Technical report n 4 Numerical simulations of class 2&3 limit and class 3&4 limit Exploitation of Labein numerical simulations (ProfilARBED) presented in Document 3198-3-3 (Annex 10) Document 3198-2-10 (CTICM) Some numerical tests for checking the influence ofyield strength on limiting b/t ratios

Annex 5

Annex 6 Annex 7 Annex 8 Annex 9 Annex 10

Annex 11 Annex 12

References The hst of the numbered documents distributed in the scope of this research project is given in Annex 1. Ref. 1: Ref. 2: Ref. 3: Ref. 4: Ref. 5: Ref. 6: Eurocode 3, ENV 1993-1-1, Design of Steel Structures, Part 1.1, General Rules and Rules for Buildings, CEN European pre standard. Eurocode 4, ENV 1994-1-1, Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, Part 1.1, General Rules and Rules for Buildings, CEN European pre standard. "Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections - new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4", CE.C. agreements 7210-S A/519/319/934, Technical report n 1, ProfilARBED-Recherches, Luxembourg, March 1994. "Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections - new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4", CE.C. agreements 7210-SA/519/319/934, Technical report n 2, ProfilARBED-Recherches, Luxembourg, September 1994. "Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections - new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4", CE.C agreements 7210-SA/519/319/934, Technical report n 3, ProfilARBED-Recherches, Luxembourg, April 1995. "Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections - new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4", CE.C. agreements 7210-SA/519/319/934, Technical report n 4, ProfilARBED-Recherches, Luxembourg, September 1995. "Local buckling rules for structural steel members", by Bild S. and Lulak G.L., Journal of Constructional Steel Research, n 20 (1991), published in 1992. "Available rotation capacity in steel and composite beams", by Kemp A.R. and Decker N.W., "The structural Engineer", volume 69, n5/5, March 1991. "Promotion of plastic design for steel and composite cross-sections: new required conditions in Eurocodes 3 and 4, practical tools for designers (rotation capacities of profiles,...)", CE.C agreements 7210-SA/520/321/935, Draft of Final Report, ProfilARB ED-Recherches, Luxembourg, February 1996. RWTH Thesis of Mr. Feldmann M. :"Zur Rotationskapazitt von I-Profilen statisch und dynamisch belasteten Trger" (Aaachen; Heft 30; 1994; ISSN 0722-1037). EPFL Thesis n1308 (1994) of Mr. Couchman G., Lausanne, EPFL, 1995 : "Design of continuous composite beams allowing for rotation capacity." "Rotation Capacity of wide-flange beams under moment gradient", by Lukey A.F. and Adams P.R., Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE Vol. 95, n ST 6, pp. 1173-1188, June 1969. "Experimentelle ermittlung der Rotationskapazitt biegebeanspruchte I-Profile", by Rok K. and Kuhlmann U., Stahlbau 56, n 12, December 1987, pp. 353-358. Projekt P169 "Untersuchung der Auswirkungen unterschiedlicher Streckgrenzen -Verhltnisse auf das Rotations- und Bruchverhalten von I-Trgern"; von Sedlacek G., Spangemacher R., Dahl W., Hubo R. und Langenberg P.; Studiengesellschaft Stahlanwendung e.V-Forschung fr die Praxis; 1992. "Elastisch-Plastisches verhalten von Stahlkonstruktionen, Anforderungen und Werkstoffkennwerte"; Sedlacek G., Spangemacher R., Dahl W. und Langenberg P.;EGKS-F6 Projekt 7210-SA/113; Abschubericht 1992. "Elasto-plastic behaviour of metallic frameworks- Interaction between strength and ductility" ; by D'Haeyer R., Delooz M., Defoumy J.; ECSC agreement 7210-SA/204; Draft of final report 1992. Schaumann P.,Steffen .: Verbundbrcken auf basis von Walztrgern, Versuch 1 Einstegiger Verbundtrger, Nr. A 88199, Versuch 2 - Realistischer Verbundbrckentrger, Nr. A 89199-2, im Auftrag von Arbed Recherches, Luxembourg. CM66 - Additif 80, DPU P22-701 (French code), "Rgles de calcul des constructions en acier". "Elasto-Plastic Behaviour of Steel frame works", by Grardy J.C. and Schleich J.B., ECSC Agreement 7210-SA/508; Draft of Final Report, 1992.

Ref. 7: Ref. 8: Ref. 9:

Ref. 10 : Ref. 11 : Ref. 12 :

Ref. 13 : Ref. 14 :

Ref. 15 : Ref. 16 : Ref. 17 : Ref. 18 : Ref. 19 :

12

1. 1.1

Introduction Objectives of the research project In each specification detailing the design of structural steel members there are usually rules about the local buckling. These rules are based on the combination of cross-sectional dimensions (slendemess of different parts of profiles, b/t for the web and the flange) and on the yield point; for these combinations a critical level is defined over which local buckling appears (classification of crosssections). Thus, this classification does not take into account the real stresses of the cross-sections which are rarely equal to the yield point. Besides, for high strength steels (yield point = 460 MPa), these rules have been extrapolated without verification and because of their definition, they discriminate these steels. For a designer the usual procedure is to choose a cross-section in such a way that the maximal capacity is not controlled by local buckling but is associated with the bearing load of a particular member of the structure (column, beam, beam-column). Therefore the local buckling rules play an important part in the design of structural steel and composite members. In this research we propose to evaluate the local buckling problem for all main steel grades (S 235, S 355 and S 460 steels) with a more realistic approach based on tests results and numerical simulations. This approach should take into account the existing stresses in members submitted to global buckling (cross-sections loaded by centered'and also eccentric compression) and should take into account the real boundary conditions of the cross-sections (for instance in a composite cross-section the collaborating concrete slab influences greatly the stability of the steel beam web). The aim of this research is to improve the classification of steel and composite cross-sections in Eurocode 3 (Ref. 1) and Eurocde 4 (Ref. 2) by a more realistic approach. The practical result of this research consists in new rules of classification of cross-sections which will be introduced in both Eurocodes 3 and 4 with the support of expertises. In such a way the competitivity of steel and composite (steel-concrete) cross-sections will be improved and these sections will not be evaluated too conservatively as it is done presently because of lack knowledge in the field of local buckling problems.

1.2 (1)

Ways and means The followingfinanciallyindependent partners participated in the research project: ProfilARBED - Recherches, Luxembourg : CTICM, France : LABEIN and ENSIDESA, Spain : Mr. Chantrain Ph. MM. Chabrolin B., Galea Y., Bureau A. MM. Anza J., Espiga F.

(2)

The technical coordination was handled by ProfilARBED - Recherches Department "Recherches et Promotion technique Structure (RPS)". It was decided that only one common ECSC report had to be written by ProfilARBED for each period. Each report included the contributions done by the different partners during different four research periods (Ref. 3, Ref. 4, Ref. 5 and Ref. 6). During this research project, the main works were distributed between partners as follows: - ProfilARBED : management of the project, generalities, study of tests results (see chapters 3,4 and 6), - CTICM : . generalities (see chapters 4 and 6), numerical simulations for the influence of parameter (see chapter 5.1), - LABEIN : . generalities (see chapter 6) numerical simulations of the border between class 3 & class 4 crosssections (see chapter 5.2),

(3)

13

1.3

Final report The present final report compiles all results of works done in the scope of this research project. This final report presents : in chapter 2, bibliography, in chapter 3, the definition of cross-sections classification, in chapter 4, the review of rules about cross-sections classification, in general, for steel sections, for composite sections, in case of elastic global analysis, in case of plastic global analysis, in chapter 5, numerical simulations of : flange and web, to highlight the influence of parameter, the border between Class 3 & Class 4 cross-sections, in chapter 6, new proposal for rules of cross-sections classification, for steel sections, for composite sections.

2. (1)

Bibliography Collection of information according to Eurocode 3 (steel) and Eurocode 4 (composite steel and concrete ) has been performed by all the partners : bibliography, technical reports, papers, results from tests, statistical evaluations, conclusions of previous or in progress researches, existing rules or new proposals of rules, development of calculation models For convenience a specific numbering has been introduced for the documents distributed in the scope of this research project. The list of the numbered documents distributed up to December 1995 is given in Annex 1. The convention ofthat numbering is proposed as follows (for example 3198-2-4) : 'number of the project" ("3198"),

(2)

'number of the partner" ("1", "2" or "3" respectively related to ProfilARBED, CTICM or LABEIN),

'number of the paper in the chronological order of distribution". 3. (1) Definition of cross-sections classification A classification of cross-sections has been introduced into several Design codes (Ref. 1, Ref. 2, ...) identifying : conditions for global analysis of the structure to determine the effects of actions (for instance, internal forces and moments, deflections, rotations,...) and, criteria to be used for ultimate limit state (ULS) checks of cross-sections and members. Global analysis of structures involves either elastic global analysis, or elastic global analysis with specified limits of moment redistribution, or plastic global analysis. Moment resistance of a critical cross-section is then determined on either a plastic stress-block or elastic basis.

14

(2)

In Eurocodes 3 (Ref. 1) and 4 (Ref. 2), four classes of cross-sections are defined, as follows : Class 1 plastic cross-sections are those which can form a plastic hinge with therotationcapacity required for plastic analysis. Class 2 compact cross-sections are those which can develop their plastic moment resistance, but have limitedrotationcapacity. Class 3 semi-compact cross-sections are those in which the calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength, but local buckling is hable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. Class 4 slender cross-sections are those in which it is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance. The characteristics of each class of cross-section are illustrated in case of simply supported beam in Figure 1.

(3)

The four classes of cross-section are defined according to (see Annex 2 for Eurocode 3 rules) : the slendemess of its compression elements (width-over-thickness ratios of web (d / t w ) or flange (b/tf)), the yield strength of the steel (fy) and, the applied loading : separate or combined axial forces (Nx) and/or bending moments (My, Mz), all inducing normal stresses ( ); the classification of cross-sections is not affected by shear forces (Vy, Vz).

(4)

A structure or a substructure comprising members with class 1 plastic sections may be analysed plastically using plastic resistance moments (Mpi), whereas those containing class 2 compact sections should be analysed elastically with limited potential for moment redistribution, but will also develop the plastic resistance moments (Mpi) (see Figure 1). A structure or a substructure including members with class 3 semi-compact sections may be analysed elastically using elastic resistance moments (Mei), whereas those containing class 4 slender sections should be analysed elastically with moment of inertia (I) of "complete" cross-section but will only develop elastic "effective" resistance moment (Meff) issued from the effective cross-section which takes into account local buckling.

15

Definition of the classification of cross-section

^uiiliJJ]]^^
M Available rotation capacity of plastic hinge plastic important or, elastic (with moment redistribution) Global analysis of structures

'Sections" Classes
&

Behaviour model

Design resistance

"Plastic" Classi

Mpi

PLASTIC across full section local buckling

Failure mechanism after resistance maintained over plateau of displacements M Mpi

Plastic moment resistance PLASTIC across full section

'Compact' Class 2

local buckling Plastic moment resistance ELASTIC across full section f^

limited

elastic (with limited moment redistribution)

Failure after reaching plastic resistance, but no plateau of displacements 4M Mpi Mel

"Semicompact" Clas 3

local buckling
Failure before plastic resistance is reached iM Mpi Mel

Stress limit of yield ELASTIC across effective section

V -y

elastic none (without moment redistribution)

"Slender" Class 4

" ~ ~ local buckling

Failure before elastic resistance is reached

'

f y

elastic none (without moment redistribution)

Stress limit of yield

Figure 1 : Definition of the classification of cross-sections

16

4. 4.1 (1)

Review of rules for classification General review In general, the development of rules for local buckling has not received the same amount of attention as the evaluation of strength or overall stability of members. However the number of both analytical and experimental studies of local buckling has increased recently. Therefore it is interesting to present a comparative review of the criteria for classification of crosssections (local buckling rules for normal stresses, ) for several specifications or standards (see the distributed paper n 3198-1-1 (Ref. 7) : "Local buckling Rules for Structural Steel Members"). The different compared specifications are : ISO-TC 167-SC1, Eurocode 3, national standards from Canada, USA, Germany, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Australia. Those rules of local buckling always depend on siendemesses (b/tf or d/rw) and on yield strength (fy) of different parts of cross-sections. That paper highlights the differences between the various prescriptions: several examples are provided in Annex 3 issued from that paper. In view of the non negligible differences between specifications rules, it is important to make a critical assessment of those rules.

(2)

The classification of cross-sections provides greater flexibility for designers which should lead to improved efficiency and consistency. Unfortunately it has also-led to many new questions and uncertainties. The following points which concern steel and composite cross-sections falling in class 1 or 2 of Figure 1, are illustrations of questions and uncertainties about classification rules (Ref. 8): a) Conditions for satisfying the classification of Figure 1 in steel and composite Codes have been based largely on a qualitative evaluation of experiments on local buckling of steel sections, without emphasising the actual rotation capacity required for plastic analysis or redistribution of moments from an elastic analysis, which will vary from one structural arrangement to another. A need therefore exists to quantify required rotation capacity as a function of the percentage redistribution of moments and the structural arrangement. Increased emphasis is being given in design to avoid brittle or sudden mode of failure, if the conditions assumed in the structural design no longer apply or are subject to gross error. It would be therefore suitable to adopt relatively conservative requirements in Figure 1 which will lead to more ductile behaviour, if Oils can be achieved at little extra cost. The use in recent Codes of local buckling as a limiting criterion for rotation capacity of steel sections is convenient and relatively simple as shown in Annex 2 (for Eurocode 3), but it is in disagreement with experimental evidence showing that lateral-torsional buckling, even at low slendemess ratios, is also a crucial limitation onrotationcapacity, particularly where it interacts with flange buckling. In the case of local buckling of flanges, other factors such as moment gradient and combined axial force have a significant effect on inelastic rotation, but are not considered in Codes. End connections in steel and composite members and cracking of concrete in composite members influence the distribution of moments and should be assessed consistently with the member properties in consideringrotationcapacity. It would be suitable that the contribution of both the members and their end connections to the available inelastic rotation prior to strainweakening should be considered on a consistent basis, rather than providing separate classifications.

(3)

b)

c)

d)

17

(4)

Other questions are still open about the rules for classification of cross-sections : about the sensitivity to local buckling of a cross-section, the relative influence between the different parts of a cross-section should be considered (see new proposals in chapter 6): according to present mies of Eurocode 3 (Ref. 1, 5.3.2(6)), a cross-section is normally classified by quoting the highest (least favorable) class of its compression elements (flanges and web which are classified separately) but in reality the web and flanges behave in interaction; for a particular case, Eurocode 3 takes into account this interaction (Ref. 1, 5.3.4(5)) : with a class 2 compression flange, a class 3 web may alternatively be treated as an efffective class 2 web with a reduced effective area; the rules of classification should be defined in function of relative stiffening of the different parts of a cross-section (steel webs and steel flanges, concrete slab and steel webs and flanges). about class 4 cross-sections: are the criteria correct or too conservative ? the formulas for the classification of different parts of the cross-section (border between class 3 and class 4) (see results of numerical simulations in chapter 5.2), the formulas for the calculation of effective cross-sections, the partial safety factor ym . about the influence of yield strength: the reduction factor, = (235/yield strength)05, severely discriminates high strength steels and seems to provide conservative results (see results of numerical simulations in chapter 5.1).

4.1.1 (1)

General review of steel sections The following 90 available 3 point bending tests results which are provided in Annex 4 are used to review the rules of Classification of steel cross-sections : 15 tests from Lukey and Adams (USA) (Ref. 12), 20 testsfromRoik and Kuhlmann (Bochum, Germany) (Ref. 13), 26 tests from Sedlacek (RWTH Aachen, Germany) (Ref. 14 and 15), 29 tests from CRM (Lige, Belgium) (Ref. 16), In the tables of Annex 4 the values of Feldmann's (Ref. 10 and Figure 14) and Kemp's (Ref. 8) models are calculated with measured characteristics (geometry, steel grade) (see chapter 6.1.1 for explanation of available inelasticrotation( 3 ) and availablerotationcapacity (RaV) of plastic hinges) : rot ( = 3) (Teldmann's model), Ravailable (= Rav) predicted Kemp's simp. (= Kemp's simplified model), Ravailable (= Rav) predicted Feldmann (= Feldmann's model),

(2)

Tests results provided in Annex 4 are compared in Annex 5 with Eurocode 3 (Ref. 1) rules for classification of cross-sections (see definition of rules in present chapter 3 or in chapter 5.3 of Eurocode 3) : experimental rotation capacities are related to width-over-thickness ratios and to yield 235 points (b/(tf) for flanges and d/(tw) for webs, where = I , with fy in N/mm2). V fy

18

(3)

The conclusions for hot-rolled sections tests are : all webs were in class 1 and no tests results were available with slender webs (see Annex 5 (4/14)) several tests results with "EC3 slender" flanges are conflicting with assumptions of Eurocode 3 (EC 3) rules (see Annex 5 (5/14)) : high rotation capacities (> 6) for class 2, class 3 and even class 4 cross-sections according to EC3 (see Annex 5 (11/14)), rotation capacities > 0 for class 3 and class 4 cross-sections according to EC3 (see Annex 5 (9/14 and 10/14)); because delivering available rotation capacities greater than zero, all tested cross-sections should be considered in EC3 class 1 or class 2 for which, per definition, the plastic bending moment resistance has been reached and passed over.

(4)

The Annex 5 (9/14 to 11/14) shows the influence of factor on b/tf limits of Eurocode 3: 235 either, the present = I factor seems to be too much conservative if the initial slendemess limits (b/tf) for the lowest steel grade S235 are considered correct, or, the initial slendemess limits (b/tf) for the lowest steel grade S235 are too much conservative if factor is considered correct. In practice both parameters ( factor and initial slendemess limits (b/tf) for the lowest steel grade S235) are too much conservative. Numerical simulations highlight this reality respectively in chapter 235 235 5.1 and 5.2. factor should be changed to a less restrictive relation like 31 or4l and the f t V y Vfy j initial slendemess limits (b/tf) for S 235 steel grade should also be increased (see Figure 2).
f

"\

19

b/tf

Influence of =

[235^

30

U 'y )

and initial slendemess limits

28-,

new initial slendemess limit (b/tf) [235" for the lowest steel grade S235 with =

*1

26
24
22-

KJ

=9

o
)

re s o re

ro w 3

present initial limit (b/tf) in EC3 for class 1 compressed flange

c E. S"
3

1412
235

; present EC3 mie for classification fy [Mpa]

275

315

355

395

435

4.1.2 (1)

General review for composite sections Some full scale tests on composite bridges using hot-rolled steel girders have been carried out in Bochum (Germany) in 1990 with the following main purposes (see Ref. 17 and Annex 6) : buckling behaviour of rolled shapes in composite sections in negative moment regions (local buckling in steel webs; global instability with lateral-torsional buckling), application of high strength steel (S 460) in bridge building, structural behaviour of the deck when using prefabricated concrete elements as composite formwork, demonstration of construction principles.

(2)

Figure 3 shows the deflection of a test specimen below the hydraulic jack as function of the ratio M/Mpi. That test specimen of 20 m length was composed of 3 beams HE A 900 (S 460 steel grade) and of a 28 cm thick concrete slab. Taking into account the moments due to self-weight of the specimens the curves start at a value of M/Mpi = 0,14. The experimental investigations demonstrated a ductile behaviour of the beams, although geometric and material properties have been chosen unfavourable for this type of composite bridge. In both tests the full plastic moment capacity predetermined by calculations could be verified by the tests.
1.11 1.0 0.9 u.o u./
Q.
O.b

1 Mexp.2/Mpl1 1/1
014

I |

*=

0.5
U.4"

b --'--" -

tfc=

VH,j. - > . |

U.o*

self 2 " '

weiahti ^ _

_-

PI
! 300 400 Deflection [mm] 1 500 1 600 1w 700

o.o-

100

200

Figure 3 : Deflection history of beam 2 including unloading branch (3) According to Eurocode 4 (Ref. 2) the design of composite sections in hogging moment regions is linked to a classification based on the slendemess of steel elements in compression (here : web or lower flange). As the cross-section is classified according to the least favourable class of its elements in compression, the test specimens had to be classified class 3 due to their width-over-thickness ratio of the web (d/tw = 48). Using an effective web with a reduced width the section could be lifted into class 2. This method leads to a moment resistance, MpijRd which lies in between the elastic moment for a class 3 section governed by yield of the steel bottom flange, MeiJid and the plastic moment Mpij^d, for a class 2 section (see Figure 4).

21

Moment resistance Class 3 : Mei.Rd [kN.m]

Test specimen 15580 18410 20860 21145

Class 2 with effective web : Mpid [kN.m] Class 2 : Test result Mpi.Rd [kN.m] M e x p . [kN.m]

Figure 4 : Calculated and measured moment resistances (4) In the test a typical class 2 behaviour of the beams could be observed. The theoretical plastic moment Mpi has been reached. The deflection history reflects an impressive ductile behaviour of the composite sections together with a high rotation capacity. These results point out that the classification system of Eurocode 4 leads to conservative and uneconomic results especially in those cases where actual conditions do not fit the assumptions taken into account when drafting the code regulations. (5) For the given parameters all influences like vertical stiffeners at the support, the restraint by the cracked concrete slab, combined stressing due to shear and bending and the non-linear elasticity of the bottom flange have been taken into consideration when calculating the buckling load of the beam with a computer program. With a more sophisticated calculation the cross-section can be classified into class 2. Furthermore a proposal has been worked out for the maximum width-over-thickness ratios for steel webs in composite beams taking into account the restraint of the concrete slab (see chapter 6.2 and Figure 15). 4.2 (1) Review of elastic global analysis The clause 5.2.1.3 (3) (which is a principle) of Eurocode 3 may be unsafe in certain cases : " 5.2.1.3 Elastic global analysis
(...)

(3)

Following a first order elastic analysis, the calculated bending moments may be modified by redistributing up to 15% of the peak calculated moment in any member, provided that : a) the internal forces and moments in the frame remain in equilibrium with the applied loads, and

b) all the members in which the moments are reduced have class 1 or class 2 cross-sections (see 5.3)". In Annex 7 (document 3263-2-12 : see Ref. 9), the restrictions of that rule are precised for 2 common examples : A- 2 spans continuous beam with a uniform distributed load; B- 2 spans continuous beam with a point load. In example A, the requiredrotationcapacity is shown to be quite limited (Rrequired < 0.6) and so class 2 cross-sections may be used in that case.

22

In example , for certain cases (concentrated loads,...) the required rotation capacity may be very large (Rrequired > 4) and the use of class 2 or even class 1 cross-sections with a 15% redistribution of peak moment may be unsafe regarding therotationcapacity. 4.3 (1) Review of plastic global analysis The clause 5.3.3 (4) (which is a principle) of Eurocode 3 may be unsafe in certain cases : " 5.3.3 Cross-section requirements for plastic global analysis
(...)

(4)

For building structures in which the required rotations are not calculated, all members containing plastic hinges shall have class 1 cross-sections at the plastic hinge location."

Indeed it may happen that class 1 cross-sections would have not enough available rotation capacity R av compared with rotation requirements depending on the percentage of redistribution of moments and the structural arrangement The two following examples (2 spans beam with a concentrated load) illustrate this problem in using : Feldmann's model to evaluate available plastic rotation (pav and available rotation capacity Rav (see Figure 14 (Ref. 10)), and formulae of required rotation capacity (cpreq. Rreq) 6/13) and Ref. 9): Example 1 : IPE 400, S 460 : class 1 cross-section 7M(p = 7MR = 1.5 < < Bending about major axis My.sd (not fulfilled !) (not fulfilled !)
ror

continuous beams (see Annex 8 (1/13 to

= 0,37 = 1 L = 5,8m Vsd/VpLRd = 0,59 (Pav = 0,067/1,5 = 0,045 rad R av = 2,708/1,5 = 1,805 Example 2 :

(fteq = 0,069 rad R req = 2,792

IPE 60 0 A, S 355 : class 1 cross-section = YMR =1.5 < < Bending about major axis My.sd (not fulfilled !) (not fulfilled !)

= 0,33 = 1 L = l l , 0 m Vsd/Vpl.Rd = 0,47 (pav = 0,077/1,5 = 0,051 rad R av = 3,293/1,5 = 2,195

(fteq = 0,0794 rad R r e q = 3,389

5. 5.1 5.1.1

Numerical simulations Numerical simulations for the influence of parameter General The influence of the parameter has been investigated. According to Eurocode 3 (Table 5.3.1 in Ref. 1) (see also present Annex 2), the influence of yield strength on the limiting ratios for the classification of cross-sections is taken into account through the parameter : = I with fv in N/mm^
y

(Except for circular hollow sections where 2 is used)

Vfy

23

In order to check the relevance of this proportionnality in for high strength steels, CTICM has carried out a parametrical study with the help of numerical simulations. 24 numerical simulations with ANSYS program allowed us to look for the influence of the following parameters (see Annex 12) : Steel grade (S 235 and S 460) Geometrical imperfection Residual stresses A web under pure bending (supported on both sides) and (half) a flange under pure compression (supported on one side) have been studied.
simply supported

simply supported simply supported

Figure 5 : a) Flange

b) Web

We give hereafter more details concerning the simulations for theflangeand for the web. 5.1.2 Flange

5.1.2.1 Purpose The main purpose of these simulations is to check the adequacy of the formula for : = 235 (fy in N/mm2)

In order to take into account the relative influence of residual stresses for steel grade S 460, it has been assumed that the following modified fornitila could be proposed. 235 ^ y;
f

1/n with = 2, 3,4

We consider the limiting ratio for Class 1: b / t < 10 . For steel grade S 235, is equal to 1,00 whatever the value of is. Therefore if we choose b = 100 mm, the plate thickness is : t = 100/10 = 10 mm. This case can be considered as the reference case. Then for steel S460, we have to keep the same limiting ratio, but now factor is not equal to 1,00. So we modify the plate thickness t as follows : =100/(10.) where is calculated for the various values of n. Thus we can simulate the behaviour of plates for steel grades S 235 and S 460 with the same limiting ratio, and only the relative influence of residual stresses is highlighted by assuming that the level of the residual stresses is the same for both steel grades : half the yield strength of steel grade S 235 ( 0 = 117,5 MPa). 5.1.2.2 Results Figure 6 shows the curves obtained from the numerical simulations. This figure demonstrates that residual stresses have a non negligible influence in so far as the curve "n = 2" is not the closest curve to the reference curve, the curve "n = 3" is closer than the curve "n = 2". For instance, the value =

24

N1 Up 1 000.90II I

" **

=<5^>.

" '

"*^C^ ^~._

^~_

//

4 A Reference curve : 5235

a L.

, 4

/ / / / 0 20- / / / / /
0.()0 1.00

Steel grade : S460

I I

wo/b = 6/1000

d/dy 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8. 30

Figure 6 : Flange simulations 5.1.3 Web

5.1.3.1 Purpose The process is the same except for the limiting ratio : b / t < 72 (instead of < 10 ). Numerical simulations have also been made for S 460 with = 2,3 and 4. 5.1.3.2 Results Curves obtained from numerical simulations are plotted in Figure 7. The conclusions are approximatively the same as those given for theflange,even if the difference does not seem to be so large.
M/Mpi
1 000.900.800.700.600 500.400 300 200.10000 0.00
V

I 7T7n
= 2

\ ^^ n = 4

//
II

^ n -

1
h 1

A v ^

Steel grade : S460

I , , !

Residual stresses : 117,5 MF3a - w o / b = 3/1000

/
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6 00

Figure 7 : Web simulations

25

5.1.4

Conclusions These simulations have allowed us to show that the relative influence of the residual stresses is not negligible. But these are only comparisons. More general conclusions are not possible yet, for the following reasons : residual stresses depend on the shape of the cross-section simulations should be done for steel grade S 355 other stress distributions should be tested

5.2 5.2.1 (1)

Numerical simulations of steel cross-sections classification for My loading Introduction These series of simulations (see Annex 10) have been carried out by LABEIN with the aim of providing information about realistic class limitations in order to verify the limits provided by Eurocodes 3 (limits onflangeslendemess c/tf and on web slendemess d/tw ) for the borders between : - class 3 & class 4 cross-sections (meaning that elastic bending moment resistance, Mel is reached), - and class 2 & class 3 cross-sections (meaning that plastic bending moment resistance, Mpi is reached) The limits between classes 3 & 4 cross-sections and between classes 2 & 3 cross-sections have been evaluated according to linear and non linear numerical simulations and for both S 235 and S 460 steel grades. The numerical simulations studied the cases of 3-point bending beams for which a big amount of tests results is available. The finite element modelling for the simulations has been calibrated on those tests results and is proven to give realistic results (Ref. 9; Ref. 19). Such simulations of beams demonstrate the effect of web-flange interaction on the cross-section classification. Finite element modelling Cross sections: Span: Meshing: Element type: Load application: IPE A 500, HE A 200, HE AA 300, HE A 280, IPE 300, A 400 and HE A 450 with modified flange and web thickness (tf and t w ). 6m 616 elements and 1913 nodes S8R-Abaqus (parabolic 8-node shell element) Central concentrated load with the vertical displacement of the central section upperflangenodes linked together

(2)

5.2.2

Boundary conditions:

Vertical supports: both ends Lateral restraints: both ends, central section, and Lj_TB m accordance with the specified rules in CM66 (Ref. 18).

Figure 8 : Boundary conditions

26

Analysis conditions:

* h-tf = cte * Fillet radius modelled by means of the following length of overthicknesses in each case : IPE A 500 : Li = r=21mm L2 = 4/5.r+ tf average/2 = 26,805 mm tf average = 20,01 mm HE A 200: Li = 4/5.r + t w average/2 = 16,26 mm t w average = 3,72 mm ]_2 = r= 18 mm

HE AA 300 : Li = 4/5.r + t w average/2 = 25,35 mm L2 = r = 27 mm HE A 280 : Li = 4/5.r + t w average/2 = 23,20 mm L2 = r = 24 mm IPE 300: Li=r=15mm L2 = 4/5 r + tf average/2 = 17,35 mm

EPE A 400 : Li = r=21mm L2 = 4/5 r + tf average/2 = 22,80 mm HE A 450 : Li = 4/5.r + t w average/2 = 27,35 mm L2 = r = 27 mm These values have been taking into account in order to evaluate the elastic moment Mei and the plastic moment Mpi in terms of Li, L2 (see Figure 9) and the section geometry. * For chosen values of (h - tf) and b for a profile, numerical simulations follows an iterative process to determine the web thickness t w corresponding to a chosen flange thickness tf (or vice versa) and allowing to reach : - either, the elastic bending moment resistance of cross-section M e i ,for the border between class 3 & class 4, - or, the plastic bending moment resistance of cross-section Mpi , for the border between class 2 & class 3.

tf

+ 2a

>'
i !~

1
a
>

L2
( t + 2a -e a

a^-

-|4
l

Figure 9 : Modelization of root fillet

27

5.2.3 (1)

Results On the basis of these numerical simulations presented in details in Annex 10 (see working document 3198-3-3) and exploited in Annex 11, Eurocode 3 present rules for classification of steel crosssections submitted to bending about major axis yy (My), are shown to be too conservative for all values of flange slendemess (c/(tfe)) and web slendemess (d/(twe)), in cases of borders between class 3 & 4 cross-sections (Mel is reached) and borders between class 2 & 3 cross-sections (Mpi is reached). The class 3 & 4 limits for S235 and S460 steel grades obtained in the simulation are shown in figure 10 (issued from Annex 11). In Figure 10, the simulations gouvemed by shear buckling failure mode (see chapter 1.2 of Annex 11) have been excluded (see specific fines between concerned points). A new border for class 3 & 4 crosssections is proposed. Present rules of Eurocode 3 are provided. The safety reserve between present rules and new proposal is highlighted by hatching : forflangeslendemess a safety cefficient of 1,7 to 2,3 can be obtained, for web slendemess a safety coefficient of 1,3. In the upper graphs of Figures 11 and 12 (issued from Annex 11) the results shown in Figure 10 are presented with characteristic values of (c/(tfe) ; d/(twe)) for standard IPE and HE AA, hot-rolled profiles and for both S235 and S460 steel grades. In the lower graphs of Figures 11 and 12 similar results from simulations are presented for class 2 & 3 limits and for S235 and S460 steel grades, The safety coefficient of 1,8 to 3,2 can be obtained for flange slendemess and probably a safety coefficient of 1,5 for web slendemess. Although additional analysis would be required. For standard profiles, flange slendemess (c/(tfe)) is clearly relevant (see Figure 12 with HEAA profiles for the worst cases of slender flanges) whereas web slendemess (d/(twe)) is not determinant for classification (see Figure 11 with EPE profiles for the worst cases of slender web). At present state, following improved rules could be proposed :

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Present EC 3 rules class 2 web

d/tw<

New proposals class 2 web d/t w < flange

C/tf<

flange
C/tf<

4-

| -

fy

83
1 1

11

124

35

6,2tw

28

Present EC 3 rules class 3 web d/t w flange cAf< web d/t w

New proposals class 3 flange c/tf<

+ fy
_ / - I

,,

124

15

165

max (25 ; 35 -

8t w

(7)

But more developments should be necessary to reach general and safe conclusion and to define precisely new improved limits.

29

Linear Analysis - Border Class 3&4 elastic cross-sections (= MtlRd is reached)]

'
*
Cd

1 .
"1

Q,
CA C

tf . 45

1*L

3 L

"S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposed limits of simulations Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 Simulations numbers related to points of enclosed tables

ML

Rp ST - o VI
o
VI

Zt.
O 3
CA

s
3

ora

2
2.
CA

S
NM.

1 re

f9

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus IPE profiles!
S 235 - Simulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) Simulations excluded by b y ;shear buckling failure mode Proposed limits of simulations nula Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 A IPE profiles-S 235 IPE profiles - S 460 S

tfT
45

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus IPE profiles |
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 IPE profiles-S 235 IPE profiles - S 460

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Figure 11 : EC3 and simulated borders between classes 3&4 and classes 2&3 versus IPE profiles

31

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus HE AA profiles |
A
c

tji
45
A

S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor fn = 2) -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode by.' Proposed limits of simulations lula Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 HE AA profiles-S 235 HE AA profiles - S 460

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus HE AA profiles |
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor - Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 HE AA profiles - S 235 HE AA profiles - S 460

A D

Border meaning that M plRd is reached

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Figure 12 : EC3 and simulated borders between classes 3&4 and classes 2&3 versus HE AA profiles

32

6. 6.1 6.1.1 (1)

New proposals for rules of classification Proposal for steel sections In case of plastic global analysis For plastic global analysis new proposals using the concept of rotation capacity of plastic hinges include the properties of resistance to local buckling of the cross-sections if lateral-torsional buckling is prevented according to Eurocode 3 rules for instance (see Ref. 9). The proposed method (see Ref. 9) which compares required and available inelastic rotations () or rotation capacities (R) for each formed plastic hinges, is an alternative to the use of width / thickness limits (rules for classification of cross-sections) existing in Eurocodes 3 and 4 (Ref. 1 and Ref. 2), for the verification of sufficient ductility of plastic hinges. Eurocode 3 (Ref. 1) provides general rules concerning rotation requirements of plastic hinges: " 5.3.3 Cross-section requirements for plastic global analysis
(...)

(2)

(2) (3) (4) (3)

At plastic hinge locations, the cross-section of the member which contains the plastic hinge shall have a rotation capacity of not less than the required rotation at that plastic hinge location. To satisfy the above requirement, the required rotations should be determined from a rotation analysis. For building structures in which the required rotations are not calculated, all members containing plastic hinges shall have class 1 cross-sections at the plastic hinge location."

Using plastic analysis, required inelastic rotation (Dreq can be determined, and computer programs can give directly these values for all plastic hinges in the frame. On the other hand, tests results, numerical simulations and, now, analytical models and formulae allow to determine an available inelastic rotation (p av of plastic hinge for a given cross-section (see Figure 13). These studies are carried out especially on 3-point bending systems. The following limit states criterion for ductility in bending (to be checked in all cross-sections) naturally yields for checking the validity of the plastic state of a frame under a given loading: <Preq^ where TMcp

<_ay_

(6.1)

is a partial safety factor to allow for the uncertainties of (Dav model (see Ref. 9).

It can be shown that the available inelasticrotation(Dav depends only on local parameters : material properties (yield strength, ultimate strength,... ), shape and dimensions of the cross-section, internal forces at the location of the plastic hinge. This criterion (6.1) that only applies till now to class 1 and class 2 cross-sections according to present Eurocode rules, is sufficient in so far as the available inelastic rotation (pav can be given by formulae or in tables according to Feldmann's model (Ref. 10). The inelastic rotation can be expressed in radians. The basis of Feldmann's method is the modelling of the non-linear buckling phenomena in the yielding zones by a plastic folding mechanism that allows to determine the rotation capacity in a reliable way. Formulae have been developed for inelasticrotation(pav and the rotation capacity Rav of I-profiles and -profiles in bending about the major and the minor axes, for bending with and without shear only as weh as for bending with axial force (see Figure 14, Ref. 9 and Ref. 10). Practical tables and recommendations to evaluate the ductility of plastic hinges are given in Ref. 9.
33

(4)

A great number of authors have preferred to talk about "rotation capacity" (R a v, Rreq) instead of "inelastic rotation" ((p a v. <Preq) by introducing an elastic rotation of reference () (determined at Mpi level) in order to adimensionalize the problem. It is understood that the available rotation capacity R a v related to the available inelastic rotation ( p a v in the hinge is to be determined for a 3-point bending system and is given by (see Figure 13) :

R av _<Pav
where L <Ppl Mpi E I

<Ppl

<Ppl =

_ M p l .L 2. E.I

is the length of the beam, is the sum of the elastic rotations (determined at Mpi level) at the ends of the beam, is the plastic resistance moment of the cross-section, is the modulus of elasticity of steel, is the moment of inertia of the cross-section.

/2

1
Pav L

M
i

/2

Mpi-

"* <Pav
I I
,-,

Figure 13 : Moment-rotation curve for 3-points bending beam So, the validity and the consistency of a plastic analysis can also be checked in all cross-sections by the following limit states criterion for ductility in bending which is equivalent to criterion n(6.1):

Kreq * ~
where Rreq 7MR =<Preq/<Ppl and.

(6.2)

YMR

is a partial safety factor allowing for the uncertainties of R a v model.

6.1.2
(1)

In case of elastic global analysis

On one hand realistic numerical simulations of 3 point-bending beams (see chapter 5.2) highlight the excess of conservatism for the present classification of steel I or cross-sections submitted to bending moment about major axis My. New particular proposals have been made for borders between classes 2 & 3 and classes 3 & 4 but more developments are necessary to reach general and safe proposals.

(2)

On the other hand a proposal concerning the classification of I-cross-sections taking into account the interaction between web and flanges has been submitted to the partners in the project but presently there is no practical issue from this proposal. This proposal is derived from Feldmann's model (Ref. 10) and it consists in a classification of a cross-section depending on combined check of the web slendemess and the flange slendemess. Therefore the class of a cross-section should not be anymore only determined by the weakest wall component that is presently checked separately.

34

Feldmann's model :

i
f f
i

evaluation of inelastic rotations [ (= 3 ) of plastic hinges for I or steel profiles and for different load cases.

"..

(-).

ji
(PD

4k,
(fyfl+Aa)bh

^4Ebtw 5h2

+j(fy.whtw)

+4fy-wbtftwhAa-fy#wht

Mpi

(h2tf)twf. L y.w

L/

5 I (pi) _
"

0,2 'i_|

2tf
b

b3(fy.fl+Aa)

ill
TT
--

TT\

/"-a

(pl)__4kvikV2k|_ rot (fyil+Aa)bh N tf h

4Ebt 5h'

+ J(fy. w ht w J +4fy

wbtftwhAa-fywht w

en

1 - ^
1 02
0 or

(1)2 4k f

tfMpLN Ph' ^4Ebtw 5h2

tf(Nfl-Pc)
p

uh

(pl) (D rot =

+ J(fy.wht w ) + 4fy w btf tw - fy w ht w

(fyil+Ao)bh'
m

where

9rot ( = 9av)

radians 2 kN/cm ,

= 15 k N / c m 2 1,3 kf = l , with fy is in y.

+ 0,25

40 kvl =

^a^' 75 200^
l

, with fy is in y J 0,35

/mm ,

k v2 = 1,50,38|f
Mpij^ according to Eurocode 3 (Ref.l), for instance, Nfl ^tf-tM^fyii _4Ebtw 5h2 A
tM=

ib~

1V

N Pi

Pu=btf(fy.fl+Ac). igure 14 : Summary of formulas from Feldmann's model to evaluate inelastic rotations of steel plastic hinges

35

6.2 (1)

Proposals for composite sections For elastic and plastic global analysis of continuous composite beams : on the basis of experimental results (see chapter 4.1.2 (Annex 6 and Ref. 17)) a proposal for Eurocode 4 has been worked out for maximum width-over-thickness ratios for steel webs in compression and in combined pendingcompression, in composite beams taking into account the restraint of the concrete slab (see Figure 15). For plastic global analysis of continuous composite beams, a specific design method has been proposed by Mr. Couchman G. (Ref. 11) for continuous composite beams (see Annex 9 (1/9 and 2/9)). That design method based on the idea of rotation capacity : includes the influences of all relevant parameters, is applicable to beams with plastic (class 1), compact (class 2) or semi-compact sections (class 3), gives a uniform margin of safety for all cases, is suitable for everyday use by the practising engineer. That design method allows considerable increases in beam load capacity for beams with compact or semi-compact critical sections. At present stage, more developments (tests results, numerical simulations, statistical evaluations,...) are necessary to exploit that method for continuous composite beams in order to elaborate design aids or charts which win help designers in their daily works.

(2)

(3)

The software Compcal developed at EPFL has been used to compute the available rotation capacities of beams with plastic and compact sections by introducing Kemp's model (Ref. 8). A wide variety of parameters have been chosen to study the influential factors to the available rotation capacities. These factors were : slendemess of the cross-section, reinforcement at the support, represented by the ratio of hogging to sagging plastic resistance moment (the plastic moment ratio), structural steel characteristics, slip between the steel and concrete, degree of shear connection between the steel and the concrete, ductility of shear connectors, span lengths, number of spans, ratio of adjacent span lengths, type and arrangement of loading, propping of the beam during construction. The influence of parameters which are related to the composite section, or length of beam in hogging, on available rotation capacity has been shown, and a single variable can be used to represent all such individual parameters (see Annex 9 (3/9) and (4/9)). All parameters which affect available rotation capacity should therefore be allowed for in a design model, which is not the case for simplified methods of analysis such as those proposed in Eurocode 4 (Ref. 2).

(4)

For semi-compact composite sections, the available rotation capacity depends on cross-section properties but also on the arrangement of spans and loads (see Annex 9 (5/9)). The Kubo and Galambos model is used (see Annex 9 (6/9)). In the scope of the design method proposed by Mr. Couchman G. (Ref. 8), the required rotation 0req (= 9req) n a s been graphically represented as a function of moment redistribution (). The use of such curves allows for the parameters which affect the rotation capacity required by a beam to achieve a given moment redistribution. These parameters are: Elastic moment ratio (^) and span type (external or internal). These two parameters affect the basis form of Oreq vs. curves. Plastic moment ratio (), which affects values of moment redistribution but not the form of Oreq vs - curves. Degree of shear connection and construction method (propped or unpropped). These two parameters may necessitate modification to the value of moment redistribution which is given by a Oreq vs. curves. ( See Annex 9, (7/9) to (9/9)).
36

(5)

EC4 Classification of crosssections : Web in compression and bendingcompression

Webs : (Internal elements perpendicular to axis of bending)

X
tw e

Code

Class Stress distribution in element (compression positive)

Compression

Combined bending and compression

T
ad when > 0,5 : d/t < 396 /(13-1) when a < 0,5 : d/t<36e/a when a > 0,5 : d/t < 684 / (17a+ 1) when a < 0,5: d/t<36 / a when > 0,5 : d/t < 456 /(13-1) when < 0,5 : d/t<41,5e/a when a > 0,5 : d/t < 730 /(15,6a+1) when a < 0,5: d/t < 41,5/ a

EC4 New proposal EC4 New proposai

d/tw < 33.

d/tw<38.e

2
Stress distribution in element (compression positive)
t

d/tw ^ 38. d/tw<44.

J
275 0,92 355 0,81

EC4

d/tw ^ 42.8

New proposai

3
fy [MPa]

d/tw<49. 235

when>-l : <42/(0,67 + 0,33) when\|/<-l : (1<62(1-) /(^) when > 0,5 : d/t < 730 /(15,6a+1) when a < 0,5: d/t<4L5e/a

= /2357

460 0,71

Figure 15 : Table for the EC4 classification of crosssections

37

Conclusions On the basis of test results and numerical simulations, this project highlighted the tremendous conservatism of present mies for cross-sections classification defined by Eurocodes 3 and 4 : no interaction between web and flanges is considered for steel profiles, no influence of stiffening effect from concrete slab is considered for composite sections, the dependence on fy (included in parameter ) is not enough precise,... New rules for cross-section classification are proposed on the basis of tests results and numerical simulations : - for Eurocode 3: in case of elastic and plastic analysis : significant improvements are suggested in view of tests results and of related simulation results of I or hot-rolled sections submitted to bending about major axis M y (see chapters 6.1.2 & 5). On the other hand improvements of factor that takes into account the influence of yield strength, are presented according to results of realistic numerical simulations (see chapter 5.1). But more developments (tests results, simulations,...) are necessary to confirm such proposals and extend them to other cross-sections and to other load cases; in case of plastic global analysis : a new concept is presented with a limit states criterion for ductility of plastic hinges, including terms of inelastic available rotation cpav or available rotation capacity Rav (see chapter 6.1.1). But till now this criterion is only proposed for class 1 & class 2 cross-sections according to present conservative Eurocode 3 rules; for Eurocode 4: in case of elastic and plastic analysis : improved values of present limits are proposed for steel webs in compression and in combined bending (My) - compression for composite cross-sections in view of tests results (see chapter 6.2). in case of plastic global analysis : a specific design method is suggested for continuous composite beams for present class 1, class 2 & class 3 cross-sections (see chapter 6.2). But more developments (tests results, simulations, ...) are necessary to exploit that method and produce practical design aids.

38

List of Annexes

Annex 1 : Annex 2: Annex 3 : Annex 4

Complete Set of Distributed Documents Final report (Excerpts) Simplified Version of Eurocode 3 for Usual Buildings Document 3198-1-1 (Ref. 15) Excerpts) Local buckling rules for structural steel members Document 3 263 -1 -27 (ProfilARBED) Available rotation capacity of plastic hinges RaVaHabie - Tests results and models Document 3 263 -1 -27 (ProfilARBED Available rotation capacity of plastic hinges Ravanabie - Tests results and models Document 3198-1-18 (ProfilARBED) Stability of composite bridge girders near internal support Document 3263-2-12 (CTICM) Required rotation capacity for a 15% reduction of elastic peak moment Document 3 263 -2-15 (CTICM) Required rotation capacity for continuous beams Document 3263-1-29 Mr. Couchman's thesis (excerpts) Design of continuous beams allowingfor rotation capacity Document 3198-3-3 (LABEIN) Technical report n 4 Numerical simulations of class 2&3 limit and class 3&4 limit Exploitation of Labein numerical simulations (ProfilARBED) presented in Document 3198-3-3 (Annex 10) Document 3198-2-10 (CTICM) Some numerical tests for checking the influence of yield strength on limiting b/t ratios

Annex 5

Annex 6 Annex 7 Annex 8 Annex 9 Annex 10

Annex 11 Annex 12

39

Complete set of distributed documents

Pate: 14.12.95) Concerning: ECSC research project: ** 3198: "Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections New rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4" ** 3198-1. From ProfilARBED-Recherches : 3198-1-1 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 20 (1991) published in 1992: "Local Buckling Rules for Structural Steel Members", S. Bd et G.L. Lulak. 3198-1-2 paper issued from the journal "Construction mtallique" nr. 1,1991: "Application de 1'Eurocode 3: Classement des sections transversales en I", MM. A. Bureau et Y. Galea. 3198-1-3 a few pages issued from a publication of the TC 11 technical committee on the classification of composite cross-sections according to Eurocode 4 3198-1-4 proposal of "Improvements of Eurocode 4" (TC 11-7-92) presented to the TC 11 technical committee about thew maximum width-to-thickness ratios for steel webs in composite cross-sections. 3198-1-5 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 23 (1992) published in 1992: "Plate slendemess limits for high strength steel sections", K.J.R. Rasmussen and G.J. Hancock. 3198-1-6 paper issued from "Structural Engineering International" n 4 / 91: "Local buckling and moment redistribution in class 2 composite beams", R.P. Johnson and S. Chen. 3198-1-7 paper issued from "IABSE Proceedings P-125/88": "Strength of continuous composite beams designed to Eurocode 4", R.P. Johnson and C.K.R. Fan. 3198-1-8 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 27 (1993) published in 1993: "Effect of reinforced concrete between theflangesof the steel profile of partially encased composite beams", R.Kindmann, R. Bergmann, L.-G. Cajot and J.B. Schleich. 3198-1-9 Background Documentation to Eurocode 3, Annex D, Document D.01, April 1990: "Background document for design rules specific for high strength steels according to EN 10113", Eurocode 3 Editorial Group. 3198-1-10 Report n MT 187 from CRIF - Lige, November 1993, about stub-column tests and buckling tests on steel H section with fy = 550 Mpa: "Essais de flambement sur profils de classe 4 en acier trs haute rsistance,"J. Janss. 3198-1-11 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 31 (1994) published in 1994: "Local Buckling of I-Sections Bent about the Minor Axis", by Bradford M.A. & Azhari M.

42

Complete set of distributed documents

(Date: 14.12.95)

3198-1-12 RPS report n 108/91, Journes ATS 1991: "Acier HLE pour ponts mixtes portes moyennes de 20 50 m", ,by MM. Schleich J.B. & Witry . 3198-1-13 RPS report n 106/91, about tests on composite bridges: "Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern - Versuch Nr. 2: Realisticher Verbundbrckentrger", by MM. Schaumann P. & Steffen A, "HRA" engineering office. 3198-1-14 Study submitted to the Editorial Panel of Eurocode 4, in September 1989: "Comparison between Eurocodes 3 and 4 of classification for local buckling of class 1 and 2 sections", by Kemp A. R. 3198-1-15 working document from ProfilARBED: "Proposals for improvements of EC3 and EC4: classification of cross-sections", by Chantrain Ph. & Klosak M. 3198-1-16 paper issued from the journal "Construction mtallique", n 1-1995 : "L'influence des dfauts de planit de l'me des profils reconstitus souds sur leur rsistance en flexion et compression", M. Braham, R. Maquoi, N. Rangelov & C. Richard. 3198-1-17 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 32 (1995) published in 1994: "Resistance of Plate Edges to Concentrated Forces", B. Johansson & O. Lagerqvist, 3198-1-18 paper presented in Odense conference (1991): "Stability of composite bridge girders near internal support", P. Schaumann & J.B. Schleich.

31982. From CTICM 3198-2-1 list of papers / references from Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Revue Construction Mtallique and Background Documentation. 3198-2-2 additional information of the paper 3198-1-2 about the classification of cross-sections according to Eurocode 3: practical tables for steel sections with the steel grade S 460 (yield strength = 460 N/mm2). 3198-2-3 paper issued from the journal "Construction mtallique" nr. 1,1983: "Etude de la possibilit d'un relvement des lancements limites de parois en calcul plastique", Plumier A. et Richard C. 3198-2-4 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 7 (1987) published in 1987: "Inelastic local buckling of fabricated I-beams", M.A. Bradford. 3198-2-5 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 19 (1991) published in 1991: "Local buckling of semi -compact I-beams under biaxial bending and compression", M.A. Bradford.

43

Complete set of distributed documents

(Date: 14.12.95) 3198-2-6 paper issued from the JCSR Journal ("Journal of Constructional Steel Research") nr. 26 (1993): "Research on elastic buckling of columns, beams and plates: focussing on formulas and design charts", CM. Wang, S. Kitipornchai and K.M. Liew. 3198-2-7 official offprint of the document 3198-1-2: paper issued from the journal "Construction mtallique" nr. 1-1991: "Application de l'Eurocode 3: Classement des sections transversales en I", MM. A. Bureau et Y. Galea. 3198-2-8 work paper from CTICM: "Some numerical tests for checking the influence of yield strength on limiting B/T ratios for webs in pure bending","Working document for ECSC Project n 3198". 3198-2-9 work paper from CTICM: "Note on possible modifications of EC3 classification'V'Working document for ECSC Project n 3198", 20th March 95. 3198-2-10 work paper from CTICM: "Some numerical tests for checking the influence of yield strength on limiting b/t ratios","Working document for ECSC Project n 3198", June 1995.

3198-3. From LABEIN 3198-3-1 work paper from LABEIN: "New series 5: Class 2&3 limit, Class 3&4 limit", Ensidesa - Labein, June 1995. 3198-3-2 work paper from LABEIN: "Class 3&4 limit from simulation results", Ensidesa Labein, September 1995. 3198-3-3 work paper from LABEIN (given in December 1995): "Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections -New rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4: Technical report n 4 , Period from 01.01.95 to 30.06.95 (Ensidesa Labein contribution)".

44

Annex 2 Final report (excerpts) (10 pages) "Simplified version of Eurocode 3 for Usual buildings" (ECSC agreement 7210-SA/513) : Chapter V rules for classification of cross-sections

45

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification :

Table V.2

Determinant dimensions of cross-sections for classification

Webs (internal elements perpendicular to axis of bending)(see tables V.3 and V.4) :
1

sf

'
iL

Axis of .. bending t w ~^
!
'

d
tw

*)

-Ih.
tw"*

ir
1

' d=h-3t ( t - t f s t . )

fc

Rolled sections - Outstand flanges (see tables V.3, V.4 and V.5) +SL

Welded sections

rx

i.
c **)

c **)

Rolled sections

Welded sections

- Internal flange elements (internal elements parallel to axis of bending)(see table V.6)

Axis of bending

i.
.
b

Rolled sections Circular tubes and angles (see table V.7)

Welded sections

t=
Hf*
*) **) For a welded section the clear web depth d is measured : . between welds for section classification . between flanges for shear calculations (see chapter VBT) For welded sections the outstand dimension c is measured from the toe of the weld.

46

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification

Table V.3 Types of loading N,compression

Classification of cross-section : limiting width-to-thickness ratios for class 1 & class 2 I cross-sections submitted to different types of loading Class 1 Class 2 Stresses distribution for Web Flange Web Flange d/t ^ d/t < c/u< class 1 & class 2 c/tf< ' M W
' MW

IE=] fy
N 33

10

38

11

Mv

+
+

I
fy

W R 72 W

9 10 83 9 10 9 10

W R

10 11

-xM y

W i? W a > 0,5 : ? 456 13a-1

10 11 10 11

M,

#-7'
^~l fy
ad

R W a > 0,5 : /?

Ncomp. " My

5
fy

396 13a-1

R W R W

9 10 9 10 9

10 11 10 11 10

Ntens. - M y

~7pp
+

<0,5
36

<0,5: R 41,5 W W

'

Ncomp. "

33

38

Ntens. -

Values of d, t w , c, and tf + : stresses m compression are defined in table V.2 - : stresses in tension fy (N/mirP) = = /235~7 (<40) (if 40 mm < t < 100 mm)

HL

fy

~A2

R 10/

R /

W 9/ W 10/ R = rolled sections ; V welded sections 235 420 275 355 460 0,92 0,81 0,75 0,71 0,96 0,84 0,78 0,74

47

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification

Table V.4 Types of loading N compression

Classification of cross-section : limiting width-to-thickness ratios for class 3 I crosssections submitted to different types of loading Stresses Class 3 distribution for Web Range class 3 d/t < /Vj
' M W

I fy

R N 42 W

15 14 15

I
Mv

+
3EZH

l
fy

-*\My
124

W R W

14

-7
3
'llf

23057 21EJOJ
15

comp. " My

Mv

>-1

( & < |fy| ) Ntens. - Mv -tI ( lfy/ < ffy| )

42 W 0,67 + 0,33 <-1

62(1 - )/-

14

-*JVly

15

fy 1

V7 i?

14

N comp. ~

rFf

3
b

23^(&)

42 W

2le^(b)
23e,<a)

Ntens. - M ,

Values of d, t w , c, and tf are defined in table V.2

IX
fy ( N / m m Q

M,

w 21e*Jk(a)
+ : stresses in compression - : stresses in tension R = rolled sections; W = welded sections k is defined in table V.5 235 275 355 420 460 0,92 0,81 0,75 0,71 0,96 0,84 0,78 0,74

. = fi35T}

(if t < 40 mm) (if 40 mm < t < 100 mm)

48

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification :

Table V.5 B uckling factor ka for outstand flanges ka Stress distribution (compression positive) ka Stress distribution (compression positive)

-1,0 -0,9 -0,8 -0,7 -0,6 -0,5 -0,4 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 -0,0

0,85 0,82 0,78 0,75 0,72 0,69 0,67 0,64 0,61 0,59 0,57
(a)
/

.<h.
+ /

23,80 2 < -_-. TensionV

\ \
1

Tension /
/ /

i
z

20,05 /Compression 16,64 / 13,58 10,86 8,48 6,44 4,74 3,38 2,37 1,70
(c)
.J
f

+\Compression
1 \ - *

! : '

\
1

+
\
'..

+0,0 +0,1 +0,2 +0,3 +0,4 +0,5 +0,6 +0,7 +0,8 +0,9 +1,0

0,57 0,55 0,53 0,51 0,50 0,48 0,47 0,46 0,45 0,44 0,43
(b)

(Compression ,
Gl

r / /

1,70 1,31 1,07 0,90 0,78 0,69 0,61 0,56 0,51 0,47 0,43
(d)

( Compression

. 2
' "\

/
/

A
\

_JL, J"
* * .

J
'\

,\.
\

+/

Note 1 : Note 2 :

= 2

and

1 2 I ^ 1

The diagram shows a rolled section. For welded members the outstand dimension c is measured from the toe of the weld (see table V.2).

49

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification

Table V.6

Classification of cross-section : limiting width-to-thickness ratios for internal flange elements submitted to different types of loading Stresses distribution classes 1,2 and 3

Type of loading

]fy N R O

internal flange

N,compression

+;

(b-3tf)/tf b/tf class 1

<42 <42 class 2

internal flange R 0-3)<33 R 0>-3)<38 M O b/tf <33 O class 3 b/tf <38

+
I I I 1 1 1 r 1 1 1

fy

internal flange R O (b-3tf)/tf b/tf <42 <42

Values of b and tf are defined in table V.2 + : stresses in compression - : stresses in tension fy (N/mm2) = /235? ( <40mm) (if 40 mm < tf < 100 mm) R = rolled hollow sections O = other sections 235 275 0,92 0,96 355 0,81 0,84 420 0,75 0,78 460 0,71 0,74

50

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification :

Table V.7 : Classification of cross-section : limiting width-to-thickness ratios for angles and tubular sections submitted to different types of loading Angles Note : this table does not apply to angles in continuous contact with other components Type of loading Stresses distribution class 1 class 2 class 3

+
1

1 fy
>

h/t < 10

h/t < 11

h / t < 15 and

N compression

D +

11 c

< 11,5 2t M and, (N,M) see table V.3 (classes 1 and 2) and table V.4 (class 3) with limiting width-to-thickness ratios concerning outstand flanges. Tubular sections Type of loading
^compression

class 1

class 2

class 3

M and, (N,M)

O'

d/t

<

50 2

70 2

90 2

Values of h, b, t and d are defined in table V.2 fy (N/mm2) zQt<4Qmm) z= ^235ly (40<< 100 mm) 2 (1<40) 2 (If 40 mm < t < 100 mm)

+ : stresses in compression 235 1 1 1 1 275 0,92 0,96 0,85 0,92 355 0,81 0,84 0,66 0,70 420 0,75 0,78 0,56 0,60 460 0,71 0,74 0,51 0,55

51

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification

Table V.8 Effective cross-sectional data for symmetrical profiles (class 4 cross-sections) Members in compression (N) gross cross-section
pi

effective cross-section

vb

b 1 t. 56,8
il

Aeff

1 b . 18,6

!
il

A
+

-t

<

*
T- +

b 1 t. 56,8

"tt
II II *

Aeff

tL.zzcu
Members in bending (My, Mz)

1 t. 138,8 T-b b 1 . 18,6

- 4 %f b b -=t0-6-p42" (

Wdt

F'

-3

-*Mz

Jb_ 1 .'21,4

.zXp\
T'p-b

Weff

1 t- 138,8

fb
b 1 t. 56,8 fy (N/mm*) = /23573 (if t < 40 mm) (if 40 mm < t < 100 mm) 235

tt
-6-p-i-b 275 0,92 0,96 355 0,81 0,84 420 0,75 0,78

Weff

460 0,71 0,74

52

In general the determination of the effective width of a class 4 element may be carried out as follows (see [5.3.5(3)] of EC3) :

a)

determination of buckling factor k corresponding to the stress ratio (see [table 5.3.2] and [table 5.3.3] of EC3),

b)

calculation of the plate slendemess given by : b/t

28,4^

in which t k
=

is the relevant thickness of the elements, is the buckling factor corresponding to the stress ratio , 235 (with fy in N/mm2), is the appropriate width as follows : b= d for webs, b= b for internalflangeelements (except RHS), b= b - 3t forflangesof RHS, b= c for outstand flanges, b= b = h or for equal-leg angles, for unequal-leg angles.

c)

calculation of reduction factor with the following approximation ([formula (5.11)] of EC3) : when < 0,673: p = l (-0,22) when > 0,673 : = v _ 2 '-

d)

determination of the effective width beff.

53

<

o*
a

e.
e O
ss
co
h

o Cl
a? -t
o et 3

f, Ui

[> O

Ol Ui

SJ Ui

lo to
4*.

r~>
Ui O

3 VO VO co CO 0 0 J O -o J < l U i O U i O U i O J o 0 0 ON 4 ^ to o

as co

\ o\

Os 4^

as to

Os U i U i U i U l U l 4^ 4*. O oo Os J > to oo Os

it

4^

to

4* OJ OJ t>J OJ /\ 0 0 Os 4 ^ to

VO

c*

v2>

&

*s:3
i l 5

ci Pu

TENSION

O O
"j>

COMPRESSION
o o o o O o o o o o o > lo J > ) to U l oo O OJ Os -o U 4* i OJ o < _ > J > l_> ~J Os Os VO o
I

o1

gr
)

F
o \
O
J>

!
"( f") 0 0 \ ) "/ o> o\ -O -.1 tO >> r-> 4. - 4S. vo O 4s. U i 4*.
J >

> O.

g EL
EL

CI

et" <:

O "4a.

p o "

To O ( (O O oo .p. o O to o O J O J o
O
I"

"to OJ 4^ co to o to J OJ to to U l to OJ co co

O O K> O J

o o o o o "-o vo 0 0. U l "Os Os J>

o -o J> J
Ui J

s
Vi

Os

4* Os

* ^^

^ > *>
\

o o
ih

53"

ie & 1
,
CL

> II
D
r*

TENSION

I I

COMPRESSION
o o O o o o o o O O O O r~> to to M o o o I I ^ 1 to ^1 OJ U i J O to U i CO Ul h- OJ Os as O O CO ON 4 > to co o o o -o
I I I

S1 2 >
00

/ ^ et
c*
> II
CI

cr

fi J

O O Is f\ M o CO J

I I I O O O O O O ( 0 >1 ' >) 1 0 1 O Vi no rt\ (O ' O () ~o U i to Os H-> co co I

IO 4s Ui

O O O

I*

O o O o o IO OJ OJ 4S. J > 0 0 to Os O U l U i OJ OJ O OJ

O o U i U l Os O U l I" OJ ~ J U l

O o o o Os -o 0 0 VO * # * # O 4 * to *' **~*^ ' ' VO co 4*. o 00

S?
VJ

Is
era <%
"^ o

Cl <~s 3 CP

K>

* >

V * 81 *
(ra g
&.0

^ s
3i
l-t .

o g: o **

TENSION
O
I

COMPRESSION
O o o o o o O O h - I ' to to to ON o VO to U i VO LO U i co O) 1> I * U I to J > to O o o o O O) OJ OJ OJ OJ O to & . os vo H-* S ) U i vo J >

S1

cr. o 3 Ei
et

o co
Ui

-1

o o O o o r~> <s o o o o o ' 1 r M ri o ( OJ o o O J 4 ^ o U i CO

o o o
J>

l o '

O o o o o o o O o o J > U l U l U l Os Os ^ 1 co 0 0 vo -o ^J >* J > co to Os U l - Os OJ VO VO U l to -' OJ o VO 0 0 I oo 1'

I
Oj

V,
o. >

B. s co g
^ S S
O

^5

<*

Eurocode 3 rules for cross-sections classification

Table V.10 Examples of shift of centroidal axis of effective cross-sections 1. in case of monosymmetrical class 4 cross-sections submitted to uniform compression
(N compression)

113

e
x.Sd Ti-j

It
'N

I I

2. in case of class 4 cross-sections submitted to bending (My.Sd)

eMf

:i: = :=D
A

My.Sd

My.Sd

Mf

:=

!)'

Notes -1-1 -2-2 - elements

I i:

centroidal axis of gross cross-section centroidal axis of effective cross-section

non-effective zone of the element, taking into account the occurence of local buckling.

55

Annex 3 Document 3198-1-1 (Ref. 15) (excerpts) (9 pages) "Local buckling rules for structural steel members"

57

TABLE 1 Specifications Reference no. 1 Country Specification Year 1981 Abbreviation DK

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

J. L.Dawe, G.L.Kulak: Local Buckling of W Shapes used as Columns, Beams and BeamColumns, Structural Engineering Report No. 95 ISO/TC167/SC1, Steel Structures, Materials and Design (N 236E) EUROCODE 3, Common Unified Code of Practice for Steel Structures Canada CAN/CSA-S16.1-M89, Steel Structures for BuildingsLimit States Design USA AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design) USA AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings Germany DIN 18800Teill, Stahlbauten, Bemessung und Konstruktion (Steel Structures; Design and Construction) Switzerland SIA 161, Steel Structures United Kingdom BS 5950 P a r t i , Structural Use of Steelwork in Building Australia AS 4100, S A A Steel Structures Code

Canada

1990 1990 1989 1989 1986 1990 1979 1985 1990

ISO EC CSA AISC LRFD DIN SIA BSI AS

This table lists the specifications and identifies them by an abbreviation and a reference number.

58

TABLE 2 Sections Section I-shape Element Range in compression Web in axial compression Web in bending Web in combined axial compression and bending Range in compression Range in compression Section in bending and/or compression Range in compression Stem in bending Channel section Angle section Range in compression Leg in bending or compression Contained in specification DK, ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI, AS DK, ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI, AS DK, ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI, AS DK, ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, SIA, BSI ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI, AS ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI ISO, EC, CSA, AISC, LRFD, DIN, SIA, BSI, AS Case no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Box section Rectangular HSS Circular HSS Tee section

This table identifies the examined structural shapes and notes the loading condition for the various components of the cross-section.

59

TABLE 3 Format of Local Buckling Rules Formats: Maximum bit Plate Sections Circular Sections Dimensions Used in specifications

fy 235

a fy ' 235

,/,[MPa]

ISO, SIA

fy 1

/y[MPa]

EC, DIN, BSI, AS

vZT

Ty
1 ' fy

A[MPa]

CSA

/[ksi]

DK, AISC, LRFD

Conversion factors: Plate sections (= all sections except circular sections) a a=

= y = =

00334522 1 153297 583814

7
000218218 00652328 1 0380838

000572994 0171287 262579 1

1
298934 458258 174522

Circular sections

a' a' =
' = y' = ' =

'
000111905 1 235 340839

y'
000000476190 000425532 1 0145038

'
00000328322 00293394 689476 1

1
893617 210000 304579

Note: , , , are arbitrary format factors. This table gives the formats used by the various specifications. In addition, conversion factors are listed which relate one specification and format to another.

60

TABLE 7.1 Pictorial Representation of Local Buckling Rules: Case No. 1 Section: Element: I-Shape Flange in compression

Rcf. No.
(see Table 1)

Specification
0 0 0.1
1
I . I

0.2
,

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6 C C
. l

1
5

'

'

10

15

1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

DK ISO EC CSA AISC LRFD DIN SIA BSI AS

0 0 50 100 150 60 200 80 250 100
1 . 1

'

'

20

40

Legend:

Class 1 D

Class 2 ,-

Class 3

61

TABLE 7.2 Pictorial Representation of Local B uckling Rules: Case No. 2 Section: Element: I-Shape Web in axial compression

Ref. No. (see Table 1)

Specification
0
1

OS

1.0
1 1 .

1.5
1

I'

,
30

40

10

20

50

... .'
60

1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

DK ISO EC CSA AISC LRFD DIN SIA BSI AS

0 0

200 100

400
i

.
!

600

800

300

200

Legend:

Class' 1

Class 2

Class 3

62

TABLE 7.3 Pictorial Representation of Local Buckling Rules: Case No. 3 Section: Element: I-Shape Web in bending

Ref. No. (see Table 1)

Specification

0 0

2 .

50

, '

100

'

5 150

1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

DK ISO EC CSA AISC LRFD DIN SIA BSI AS

0 0
Legend: Class 1 D

500 200 Class 2 '

1000 400 '

1500 600 '

2000 800

2500

loco S

Class 3

63

TABLE 7.4a Pictorial Representation of Local B uckling Rules: Case No. 4, Class 1 Section: Element:

I-Shape Web in combined axial compression and bending

90.0

3.0

1400
. 500

80.0

2.5

70.0

1200-.

400

1000 2.0

- 60.0 50.0
800
300

1.5

40.0
600

200

1.0

30.0
400

0.5

20.0
100

10.0

200

0.0

0.0

1_

0.0

0.1

0.2
=

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

axial capacity in presence of moment product of yield strength limes area

64

TABLE 7.4b Pictorial Representation of Local Buckling Rules: Case No. 4, Class 2 Section: Element: I-Shape Web in combined axial compression and bending

110.0

3.5

1600 100.0

- 600

3.0

90.0

1400.-500

25

80.0 1200
70.0

400

1000ZO
60.0

50.0
1.5
40.0

800

300

600

200

1.0

30.0
400

20.0

0-5 0.0

- 100

10.0

200

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

axial capacity in presence of moment product of yield strength times area

65

TABLE 7.4c Pictorial Representation of Local Buckling Rules: Case No. 4, Class 3 .Section: Element: I-Shape Web in combined axial compression and bending

900

5.0
4.5

800

4.0

700

3.5
3.0

600

500

2.5
2.0

-"
400 300

1.5
200
1.0

0.5
0.0

--

100

0.2

0.3 0.4 03 0.6 0.7 0.8 axial capacity in presence of moment product of yield strength times area

0.9

1.0

n=

66

Annex 4

Document 3263-1-27 (ProfilARBED) (7 pages) Available rotation capacity of plastic hinges Ravailable Tests results and models. (Excerpts of Chapter 5)"

67

4. Comparison of Kemp's simplified model and Feldmann's model with experiments (3-point bending tests)

4.1 Tables of experimental data (RWTH Aachen, CRM Lige, Roik-Kuhlmann, Lukey-Adams)

68

Ref.
: : : , : : : . . . . ; : : , : : : : , , : , : : '

.y.:::-,-".**.*---:-::-

Design.

tw

tf

fy flange [Mpa] 284,9 284,9 373,0 373,0 373,2 373,2 373,2 285,6 301,5 280,8 305,5 301,5 281,2 289,6 305,5 245,0 245,0 298,0 298.0 298,0 298,0 298,0 298,0 245,0 346,0 346,0 346,0 346,0 346,0 346,0 346,0 346,0

fy web [Mpa] 309,3 309,3 396,5 396,5 352,0 352,0 352,0 369,6 373,4 382,3 380,3 373,4 366,1 376,5 380,3 226,0 226,0 270,0 262,0 270,0 262,0 262,0 262,0 226,0 737,0 737,0 737,0 737,0 737,0 363,0 363,0 363,0

b/(tf.e )

. d/ Flange (tw. ) Class

Web Class

Section Class

... V : ^ : S : : i : i : i

N [ m m ] [ m m ] [ m m ] [ m m ] [ m m ] [mm]

illfifftii!
. : Lukoyf| ; :Lukeyj|: A2 Lukoy 82 VLukoyW; B3 ::::>'.:-::-;:-.- -: : :': : : : Lukey C2 C3 Lukoy
, :

llll

;':.>':.';:.:::.

::::

Lukey Lukey Lukoy Lukoy Lukey Lukey Lukoy

ON NO

C5
::^:::::-:'^_-:-:>';^:-:-.
. . . . . : . - . . . . . . . . . '

250,4 203,5 250,4 176,0 200,2 73,9 200,2 86,1 250,4 73,7 250,4 85,9 250,4 89,9 201,7 67,4 201,7 201,7 201,4 201,7 201,4 201,4 201,4 294,0 294,0 277,0 274,0 275,0 67,5 67,5 67,1 87,9 87,9 87,9 87,9 141,0 150,0 160,0 160,0 160,0 160,0 160,0 160,0 170,0

7,6 7,6 4,4 4,4 4,6 4,6 4,6 4.6 4,6 4,7 4,6 4,8 4,6 4,6 4,6 5,0 5,0 6,0 5,0 4,0 5,0 5,0 5,0 5,0 5,5 5,5 5,5 5,5 5,5 6,0 6,0 6,0

10,8 10,8 5,3 5,3 5,3 5.3 5,3 4,8 4,9 4,9 4,8 4,9 4.8 4,8 4,8 8,0 8,0 8,0 8,0 8,0 8,0 8,0 8,0 8.0 10,2 10,0 10,4 10,2 10,0 10,0 10,0 10,0

10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

208,9 208,9 169,6 169,6 219,9 219,9 219,9 172,0 172,0 171,9 171,9 171,9 171,8 171,9 171,8 266,1 266,1 248,5 247,2 249,3 269,0 269,0 268,0 267,2 228,6 228,0 226,1 139,1 189,4 265,5 266,5 266,5

D3 D5 D6
:.;?; F. : : : : : : : ; : : ;

20,8 18,0 17,6 20,5 17,7 20,6 21,6 15,4 15,8 15,1 16,0 20,4 20,0 20,4 20,9 17,7 18,8 22,1 22,1 22,1 22,1 22,1 22,1 .21,3 16,5 17,9 18,3 18,7 19,0 19,0 19,0 19,0

0,5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0,5

15,7 15,7 24,8 24,8 29,3 29,3 29,3 23,3 23,4 23,3 23,5 22,6 23,2 23,5 23,5 26,1 26,1 22,2 26,1 33,4 28,4 28,4 28,3 26,2 36,8 36,7 36,4 22,4 30,5 27,5 27,6 27,6

2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2

2f 1 1 2f 1 2f 2f 1 1 1 1 2f 2f 2f 2f 1 1 3f 3f 3f 3f 3f 3f 2f 2w 2W 2W

Lukoy Lukey RoTk & Kuhlm Rok & Kuhlm RoiK & Kuhlm RoTk & Kuhlm Rolk&Khirn : Rok & Kuhlm Roik& : kuhlm Rolk & Kuhlm Rok & Kuhlm Rom&Kuhim: Rok & Kuhlm Rolk & Kuhlm Rok & Kuhlm :Rok;&: Kuhlm Rok & Kuhlm RoikAKhim Rotk& Kuhlm

E3 5 E6
;V:;::S ; :-'? :: '

1
o
4

5 6
.o:::::v::::::^.:::vw::::: ASfi/SS:

8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 9 20 21

296,0 296,0 295,0 295,0 260,0 141,0 259,0 150,0 258,0 160,0 169,0 220,0 298,0 299,0 299,0

160,0 160,0 160,0 160,0 160,0

Ref. N

Test N

L [mm]

A [mm*2] 6228,1 5635,8 1709,5 1838,4 1963,5 2091,7 2134,4 1624,2 1628,1 1646,2 1618,1 1864,6 1816,6 1812,4 1821,2 3650,0 3790,0 4130,0 3850,0 3600,0 3960,0 3960,0 3960,0 4120,0 4190,0 4310,0 4630,0 4080,0 4300,0 4870,0 4870,0 4870,0

iy

lz [mm] 49,3 41,8 14,5 17,5 13,4 16,3 17,3 12,4 12,4 12,4 12,3 17,3 17,4 17,3 17,3 32,6 35,1 37,1 38,4 39,7 37,9 37,8 37,9 40,6 34,3 36,8 39,9 42,1 40,6 38,2 38,1 38,1

Ll/(lz . )

Mpi [MN.mm]

<p r
exp.

Feldmann

exp.

R available predicted Kemp simp.

predicted Feldmann

[mmM]
71827311,0 63318047,1 10675688,5 11898980,2 18124108,0 20051209,7 20693576,9 9786987,5 9823136,0 9899431,8 9682127,0 11885863,5 11631423,2 11592901,9 11644005,2 55100000,0 58040000,0 55210000,0 52450000,0 51430000,0 62240000,0 62240000,0 61780000,0 65070000,0 51200000,0 52780000,0 57150000,0 22110000,0 38970000,0 77120000,0 77700000,0 77700000,0

[rad]

[rad]

[rad]
0,1877 0,1916 0,0793 0,0782 0,0600 0,0591 0,0589 0,1120 0,1042 0,1173 0,1020 0,1057 0.1117 0,1071 0,1002 0,0686 0,0678 0,0737 0,0655 0,0585 0,0603 0,0603 0,0606 0,0660 0,0936 0,0920 0,0945 0,1608 0,1113 0,0741 0,0738 0,0738

:'>-:-:;:'::0:-;::::::-::::::';:

M
11.9 14,5 10,6 6,8 13,8 8,1 6,6 3,9 0,0 2,2 15,9 4,3 1.0 1,9 7.2 8.1 7.0 12,6 8,6 4,6 13,6 11,6 7,8 5,5 5,1 3,8 3.6 10,5 9,5 12,0 8.6 7.2

8.9 11,0 6,6 5.2 5.7 4.6 4.2 4.4 2.6 3,5 9.1 2.8 1.9 2,1 6,1 4,7 4.2 5.8 5.1 4,3 8,0 6.1 4.8 6,1 3,6 3,2 3,1 9.1 7.1 8.1 6.2 5,1

["]
9,0 10,7 7,4 6,1 7.4 6.1 5.8 8.0 4.7 6.6 13.5 5.2 3.9 4.2 9,7 7,5 6,8 7,3 6,2 5,4 9,1 7.4 6.3 8.9 4,6 4,3 4,1 7,3 6,6 7.5 6.5 5,5

Lukey

^keyapI
Lukey Lukey Lukey Lukey

A1 A2 2 B3 C2 C3
: - .

3479,8 2946,4 1036,3 1254,8 960,1 1168,4 1239,5

38,8 38,9 45,1 45,1 45,0 45,1 45,1 77,9 120,4 99,9 41,1 81,3 117,2 102,2 40,8 53,3 53,9 38,6 38,7 38,5 26,7 32,7 38,6 35,2 53,0 52,7 53,3 33,2 32,9 31,8 38,2 44,6

29,1 25,2 35,6 41,5 39,0 45,4 47,6 46,8 65,2 54,6 28,7 63,4 80,3 75,7 37,2 44,7 48,0 38,7 42,0 47,3 31,1 37,5 43,6 37,2 53,5 57,6 59,3 28,6 33,8 31,0 36,8 42,3

0,1839 0,1637 0,0451 0,0498 0,0598 0,0656 0,0676

0,0218 0,2600 0,0187 0,2720 0,0113 0,0135 0,0081 0,0096 0,0103 0,1200 0,0920 0,1120 0,0780 0,0680 0,0640 0,0000 0,0470 0,1360 0,0980 0,0540 0,0330 0,0830

.-.v...-....
: : : : :

.--.;:;.
. : : . . - . .

1752,6 D1 ;: :v.D3 M 2646,7 Lukey 2270,8 D5 ;;:v.;;Lkey3?|; : 883,9 ;i;; ;;Luky::::| D6 ::::"::;:::-:::-.-:-:-:-:-::-: ::'' 2479,0 ^|;Lky||| E1 3718,6 E3 ^pL^keypl;; M lukey MM: &W5? 3190,2 1239,5 E6 :;:;;||Lukyy|i
:: :

Lukey ^PL^keyltlf

C5

Rok & Kuhlm; RoIk&Khirh:

JBiM
2 4 5 6

RoTk & KuhIm!

Rok & Kuhlm;

Rok& kuhlm; Rlk&khlm R O T H ii:Khtm

Rok & Kuhlm Rok & Kuhlm

lllfif
8 9
; > : v : v : : ' : ' : : :'. . . ' ; : :

3404.0 3704,0 2540,0 2636,0 2716,0 1796,0 2196,0 2598,0 2802,0 3000,0 3200,0 3508,0

Rok & Khlm. Rok & kuhlm; Rok & Kuhlm: Rok & Kuhlm RoTk"&: Kuhlm RoTk&KuHmi; Rok &Kuhlm

10 13 14 15

2304,0 16 '2204,0 17 ; 19 2000,0 2402,0 20 2804,0 Rok & Kuhlm WW

0,0971 0,1020 0,1257 0,1187 0.1155 0,1305 0,1305 0,1300 0,1132 0,1756 0,1801 0,1921 0,1078 0,1509 0,1939 0,1947 0,1947

0,0070 0,0076 0,0068 0,0070 0,0p72 0,0044 0,0054 0,0064 0,0057 0,0121 0,0128 0,0138 0,0132 0,0100 0,0059 0,0071 0,0082

0,0564 0,0535 0,0858 0,0603 0,0331 0,0598 0,0624 0,0501 0,0315 0,0615 0,0486 0,0499 0,1386 0,0952 0,0708 0,0614 0,0594

Ref. yWmfm

Test

Design.

tw [mm] 6,0 6,0 6,0 9,8 10,0 9.4 9.7 9,8 9.4 9,6 9,4 7,5 7,5 7,4 7,5 7,5 7,5 10,5 10,9 10,8 11,5 11.4 11,5 7,8 8.0 7,5 8.8 9.0 9.3

tf

d [mm] 266,5 265,5 266,5

fy flange

fy web [Mpal 363,0 363.0 363.0 348,5 348,5 541,3 541,3 531,7 531,7 286,1 286,1 308,0 308,0 308,0 437,5 437,5 437,5 252,5 252,5 252,5 539,0 539,0 539,0 311,5 311,5 311,5 535,0 535,0 535,0

b/(tf. )

. d/ (tw.8)

Flange Class

Web Class

Section Class

::::>;:^:.;.-: : ; : :-. ::. ..: :-::::':-: ::.::::, ; : ::: . . .'. Y':: : . : V: : /' :

lrl
22
, : . : : ; .

[mm] [mm] 299.0 170,0 299,0 183,0 299,0 190,0 HE 220 HE 220 HE 220 HE 220 HE 220 HE 220 HE 220 HE 220 220,0 219,5 220,4 220,0 219,1 217.3 218,7 217,4 220,5 220,6 219,2 219,4 218,8 218,6 219,0 218,4 220,5 220,0 221,0 225,5 225,5 222,0

[mm] [mm] 10,0 10,3 10,2 15,5 15,7 16,0 15,9 16,3 16,2 16,3 16,1 10,5 10,5 11,0 11,0 11,0 10,7 17,6 17,8 17,7 17,4 17.4 17,4 12,7 12,6 12,8 12,6 12,6 12,7 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24

[Mpa]
346,0 346,0 346,0 274,5 274,5 525,2 525,2 486,2 486,2 278,5 278,5 282,5 282,5 282,5 420,5 420,5 420,5 248,5 248,5 248,5 489,0 489,0 489,0 276,5 276,5 276,5 504,0 504,0 504,0

RoTk & Kuhlm :Rok;& Kuhlm Roik&Kuhlm RWTH RWTH

20,2 21,1 22,2 15,4 15,2 20,5 20,6 19,3 19,4 14,6 14,8 23,0 23,0 22,0 27,4 27,4 27,8 16,3 16,1 16,2 23,3 23,5 23,5 23,9 24,1 23,7 32,6 32,7 32,4

, : . - ; , : , : : : : ;

Mm 1 24
;.:-::.:::,::;-

0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0,5 0.5 0,5

27,6 27,5 27,6 9.5 9,3 12,3 11,9 11,5 11,9 8,6 8,8 11,5 11,6 11,8 14,3 13,9 14,2 9,6 9.2 9,5 13.2 13,2 13,3 13,4 13,9 15,0 17,4 17,0 16,4

2 2 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4

2f 2f 3f 1 1 2f 2f 1 1 1 1 3f 3f 3f 3f 3f 3f 1 1 1 3f 3f 3f 3f 3f 3f 4f 4f 4f

:
. ; : ; : : : : : : ; . : : : . . : : : : : : : : ; ; : :

RWTH RWTH RWTH RWTH RWTH RWTH

::::vv::-::;::,:-..;-:::'::.::;.

d15a3m d16t53m d19a4m d20b4m d01a4m d09a3m d10b3m

153,0 152,1 152,4 152,2 150,5 148,9 150,1 149,2 151,3 152,0 153,0 157,5 152,3 156,6 194,8 193,2 198,6 200,2 198,4 201,7 181,8 192,8 195,4 202,9 202,4 201,6

. - . - . : ; . ; . ; . : .

-.-

. . . . . ' . . . - ; . ; . ; . ; . ; . ; . , ; ; .

:|&ERVyTrM nwTH
RWTH
: : . : . : : . : : . : : : : : : - . : : . : : : ; :

RWTH RWTH RWTH

...-. -y.-.;. . . . . : . . . . ; . . ; . . ; . : : . . . . . ; . ; . : . .

EA22312 HE 220 A 208,3 I$233j. HE 220 A 209,0 fA22l HE 220 A 211,0 EA22412 HE 220 A 215,5 EA2243 HE 220 A 210,3 2244: HE 220 A 214,0 iMmMMy

O 3 3

o o a ,* 5" c .

;"';'::': ::. :::- ''' : y <::::':::'

RWTH RWTH RWTH

EB28312 HE 280 278,0 279,0 HE 280 276,8 279,3 HE 280 282,0 279,0 iEB28412 HE 280 283,0 281,3 EB2843 HE 280 281,2 283,3 EBlif; HE 280 284,5 284,0

Ifltlli

HIS!

;I : :F#H1|1;

E28312 HE 280 A 255,2 280,0 HE 280 A 266,0 280,0 MHWIH^ m.mm?m :;2'834;; HE 280 A 269,0 280,0 E2842 HE 280 A 276,1 280,5 RWTH |A2843: HE 280 A 275,6 281,0 RWTH 5E2844'; HE 280 A 275,0 281,0 RWTH

pApfi

: :; :

'; -' .".::;:0"'- "

Ref.

Test N ' 22

L [mm] 2406,0 2500,0 2700,0 1200,0 1200,0 1200,0 1200,0 3500,0 3500,0 3500,0 3500,0
:

A [mmA2] 5070,0 5440,0 5550,0 8965,8 9086,0 9063,5 9080,6 9238,7 9098,8 9204,1 9051,5 6313,4 6308,1 6538,7 6690,4 6651,4 6473,4

iy [mmA4] 81880000,0 89370000,0 91670000,0 79392787,4 79868183,0 80913958,9 80451046,0 81009884,5 78889079,5 80636429,0 78551976,4 51675380,0 51956689,3 55109126,6 58837226,0 55745432,0 55967617,2

Iz [mm] 41,0 44,9 46,7 55,6 55,6 55,7 55,6 55,5 55,7 55,7 55,6 54,6 54,4 55,0 56,1 56,3 54,9 70,4 70,4 70,2 70,2 70,8 70,9 70,4 69,8 70,3 68,9 68,9 68,7

Ll/(lz )

Mpi [MN.mm]

[rad]

<p r
exp.

-;i!|:
:

Feldmann

9r

exp.

R available predicted Kemp simp. [1 6,3 6,3 5,6 111,9 116,3 37,4 37,7 10,1 9,8 27,8 27,0 50,1 13,5 9.7 25,5 7,2 4,5 153,8 42.7 27.4 43,0 11.7 7,8 62,3 15,8 10,3 20,1 5,5 3,9

predicted Feldmann [] 6,4 6.3 5.7 50,4 52,3 10,2 10,7 4,6 4,3 16,6 16,1 29,0 11,6 8.6 11.4 4.6 3,4 60,2 25,6 18,6 13,7 5,5 4.1 30.4 12.2 8.6 8,1 3,3 2,6

' : ' * * .-.:":^:,':.:':-:':'Vii

[rad]

[rad] 0,0731 0,0737 0,0728 0,4124 0,4304 0,1549 0,1624 0,1898 0,1805 0,3931 0,3826 0,2440 0,2427 0,2389 0,1371 0,1427 0,1371 0,3354 0,3589 0,3419 0,1504 0,1501 0,1488 0,2010 0,1938 0,1791 0,0901 0,0927 0,0972

9,9 6,7 5,2 13,1 22.5 20,0 13,2 6,4 7,8 18,9 19,8 32,9 12,0 9.3 15.4 2.8 1,5 45,4 34,1 20,5 15,8 9,5 8,3 50,4 19,0 6,4 16.5 6,4 4.1

Rok & Kuhlm Rok&Kuhlm Rok & Kuhlm RWTH RWTH RWTH RWTH RWTH

35,6 33,8 35,1 11,7 11,7 16,1 16,1 45,3 45,2 34,2 34,3 12,1 30,2 39,8 14,3 35,7 48,7 8,8 21,9 29,3 12,3 30,5 40,7 9.3 23,3 30,9 12,7 31,9 42,6

36,7 36,5 39,6 5,4 5,2 11,2 11.1 26,7 27,2 13,6 13,9 9.2 22,1 27,5 14,4 33,6 45,5 4,3 10,2 13,7 10,2 24,3 31,7 7,9 19,8 26,4 16,9 39,9 50,5

0,2044 0,2218 0,2270 0,2276 0,2299 0,4296 0,4286 0,4050 0,3969 0,2294 0,2241 0,1520 0,1523 0,1601 0,2476 0,2405 0,2370 0,3627 0,3661 0,3720 0,7450 0,7428 0,7560 0,2742 0,2872 0,2922 0,5511 0,5526 0,5574

0,0071 0,0705 0,0073 0,0488 0,0079 0,0408 0,0082 0,0472 0,0082 0,0810 0,0152 0,1260 0,0152 0,0858 0,0417 0,1344 0,0419 0,1638 0,0237 0,2268 0,0238 0,2376 0,0084 0,2616 0,0209 0,2578 0,0277 0,2656 0,0120 0,1696 0,0308 0,0885 0,0403 0,0626 0,0056 0,1702 0,0140 0,4780 0,0183 0,3835 0,0109 0,1339 0,0275 0,2632 0,0363 0,3053 0,0066 0,2563 0,0159 0,3071 0,0209 0,0111 0,0279 0,0374 0.1385 0,1493 0,1846 0,1609

123||
24

d15a3m d16b3m d19a4m d20b4m dQ1a4m d02b4m d09a3m d10b3m

i :RWTH 1 1
VWFWTH!
; RWTH RWTH. FTWTH RWTH
:

E A 2 2 3 1 2 1200,0 EA2233 i ; EA2234 EA2243 EA2244 EB28312

3000,0 4000,0 3000,0 4000,0

RWTH RWTH RWTH

E A 2 2 4 1 2 1200,0

;{RWTH ;:

RWTH RWTH RWTH RWTH V RWTH V RWTH RWTH

RWTH

1200,0 12864,6 185917989,8 EB2833 3000,0 13066,6 186322650,9 EB2834 4000,0 13034,3 193112959,9 EB28412 1200,0 13138,0 194512289,5 EB2843 3000,0 13162,2 192846398,8
EB2844

4000,0 13249,2 198501630,5 9398,9 9476,8 9487,9 9771.0 9829,2 9953.1 118473640,1 129214326,4 133426416,4 141503655,1 141419405,3 141966284,6

EA28312 1200,0

'

EA2833 EA2834

3000,0

i|^.RWTH'f| y RWTH
RWTH
:

4000,0 E 2 8 4 1 2 1200,0 EA2843 3000,0 EA2844 4000,0

wmmmt
Test "

Design.

tw

tf

fy flange

fy web [Mpa]

b/(tf.e )

a . d/ (tw. e )

Flange Class

Web Class

Section Class

[ m m ] [mm] [ m m ] [mm] [ m m ] [mm]

IflllfS
:

>:v::;W : :i: : : : :' : : : :?:

^1

19
ii -k-k

21

SS:

IP
CFW

cai

kMZM.. 29 30
kikifXOMSk

HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200 HE 200

199,7 200,4 198,0 197,6 199,7 204,3 198,4 200,5 198,2 198,5 203,1 195,8 204,5 198,6 197,5 197,5 198,9 204,5 197,6 198,6 197.8 198,2 198,2 198,8 199,1 197,9 203,6 201,8 197,4

201,5 200,4 200,2 200,5 201,5 199,9 200,4 200,6 200,4 200,3 199,8 200,1 199,9 200,2 200,3 200,3 200,3 200,0 200.3 200.4 200.2 200.4 200,2 201,2 201,1 200,8 200,2 199,9 200,3

9,5 9,6

9.5
8.8 9.5 9.4 9,5

9.5
9,0 9,1

9.6 10.0
9,4 9,2 8,8 8,8 9,2 9,4 8,9 9,2 9.1 9.1

9,0 9,3
9.2 9,0 9,4 9.1 8.7

15,1 14,6 14.7 14,6 15,1 14,9 14,7 14,6 14,5 14,7 14,5 15,3 14,8 14,8 14,6 14,6 14,8 14,8 14,5 14,8 14,7 14,8 14,8 15,0 15,1 14,5 15,1 14,3 14,5

18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18

133,5 135,2 132,6 132,4 133,5 138,5 133,0 135,3 133,2 133,1 138,1 129,2 138,9 133,0 132,3 132,3 133,3 138,9 132,6 133,0 132,4 132,6 132,6 132,8 132,9 132,9 137,4 137,2 132,4

445,0 261.0 375,0 303,0 445,0 409.0 375,0 261,0 303,0 375,0 261,0 375,0 409,0 375.0 303,0 303,0 375,0 409,0 303,0 375,0 375,0 375,0 375,0 445,0 445,0 303,0 409,0 261,0 303,0

462,0 291,0 421,0 342,0 462,0 426,0 421,0 291,0 342,0 421,0 291.0 421,0 426,0 421,0 342,0 342,0 421,0 426,0 342,0 421,0 421,0 421,0 421,0 462,0 462,0 342,0 426,0 291,0 342,0

18,4 14.5 17.2 15,6 18,4 17,7 17,2 14,5 15.7 17.2 14,5 16,5 17,8 17,1 15,6 15,6 17,1 17.8 15,7 17,1 17,2 17,1 17,1 18,5 18,3 15,7 17,5 14,7 15,7

0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0.5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5

9,9 7.8 9.3 9.1 9,9 9,9 9.4 7.9 8,9 9,8 8,0 8,6 9,9 9.7 9,1 9,1 9.7 9.9 9,0 9,7 9,7 9,8 9,9 10,0 10,1 8,9 9.8 8.4 9,2

o o
3
w*

3' c

SL
o
3 3 } ta

OO (

ill''

kk kk

Rel.

Test
::: S: iiii.: :' '-: : :'::- -:: :-:: -: :' :-: ': :
;-:^:::Xy::;::;:;;;i;:::;:;'.::^:
: :; : : :; : : ;: :

L [mm]

A [mm 2]
A

iy [mm 4]
A

lz
[mm]

Ll/(iz . )

Mpi [MN.mm]

[rad]

!?
exp. [rad]

N
: : ;::;i:yXy:y:>.;;:;:v;:.::::y ;v:::;:;.;x':.

Feldmann

exp.

R available predicted Kemp simp.

predicted Feldmann

[rad]

[1

[1

[1

:>:>-::::<::-:!:::!^:;:

CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM
CRV1

3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 2000,0 2000,0 2000,0 2000,0 2000,0 2800,0 2390,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3000,0 3800,0 3800,0 3800,0 3800,0 3800,0 3800,0

7973,7 7773,3 7765,7 7614,6 7965,2 7875,4 7775,4 7763,0 7612,5 7705,8 7743,7 8053,2 7839,2 7758,8 7607,9 7607,9 7756,1 7842,2 7587,4 7764,8 7696,4 7735,8 7721,4 7884,0 7905,2 7621,4 7954,1 7571,4 7551,9

56803440,0 55586421,0 54355584,0 53562004,0 56979367,0 58709275,0 54804294,0 55742352,0 53880942,0 54594652,0 56901292,0 54875046,0 58809476,0 54926922,0 53376779,0 53391822,0 55164066,0 58755458,0 53407445,0 54796179,0 54042000,0 54568645,0 54423749,0 55971068,0 56289825,0 53832413,0 58935499,0 55455652,0 53175832,0

50,9 50,2 50,4 50,8 50,9 50,2 50,4 50,3 50,6 50,6 49,9 50,4 50,2 50,6 50,7 50,7 50,6 50,2 50,6 50,6 50,6 50,7 50,7 50,9 50,9 50,7 50,4 50,2 50,8

40,6 31,5 37,6 22,4 27,0 26,3 25,1 20,9 31,4 29,8 31,7 37,6 39,4 37,5 33,6 33,6 37,4 39,4 33,6 37,4 37,5 47,3 47,4 51,4 51,3 42,5 49,7 39,9 22,4

21,3 11,8 18,1 10,0 14,7 13,8 12,5 8,1 13,7 15,0 12,1 16,7 20,2 18,2 14,5 14,5 18,3 20,2 14,6 18,2 18,4 22,6 22,7 26,6 26,6 18,0 24,3 15,5 10,1

0,2867 0,1655 0,2356 0,1873 0,2876 0,2666 0,2371 0,1658 0,1881 0,2356 0,1672 0,2356 0,2661 0,2370 0,1868 0,1867 0,2373 0,2659 0,1869 0,2364 0,2340 0,2357 0,2350 0,2834 0,2846 0,1881 0,2680 0,1634 0,1860

0,0318 0,3582 0,0212 0,4968 0,0308 0,3752 0,0166 0,4734 0,0240 0,4260 0,0216 0,3814 0,0206 0,4794 0,0142 0,0233 0,0307 0,0214 0,0313 0,0329 0,0314 0,0255 0.0313 0,0344 0,0255 0,0314 0,0309 0,5718 0,3537 0,3513 0,4606 0,4207 0,3071 0,3636 0,3265 0,2987 0,2856 0,3655 0,4056 0,3881

3 4 5

0,2387 0,4964 0,3097 0,3641 0,2366 0,2525 0,3085 0,4866 0,3747 0.2868 0,4823 0,3516 0,2514 0,2925 0,3645 0,3645 0,2890 0,2514 0,3700 0,2924 0,2887 0,2858 0,2832 0,2319 0,2277 0,3757 0,2555 0,4429 0,3572

11,3 23,4 12,2 28,4 17,7 17,6 23,3 40,4 15,2 11,4 21,5 13,5 9.3 11.6 11,5 12,8 9.5 8.3 14.4 12.9 12,5 8,6 8,7 6,1 6,8 8,5 5,7 15,3 28,0

14,2 34,3 18,1 44,3 24,7 27,2 31,7 60,2 27,6 24.1 33,2 20,4 15,3 17,9 25,1 25.1 17,8 15,3 25,0 17,9 17,7 13,0 12,9 10,1 10,2 18,2 11,6 22,9 43,5

6,6 23,3 10,0 21,9 9,8 11,7 15,0 34,4 16,1 11.7 23.0 11,5 7.8 9.5 14.6 14,6 9,4 7,8 14,8 9.5 9.3 7.3 7,3 5,1 5,0 11,9 6,2 16,6 21,4

IllUlllt
7 8 q 10 11 12 13 15

::'"'\::;:::;::;: ' : '::':.:::.;::::::

17 :'\.;:;i8 : ,V. 19 CFM 20 ';SICW||| 21 CR/ :.WO 0 kk: CFM 23 CFM 24 CFM CFM CFM CFM
; : ' ; : : : . : ; : . : : : : : : : : : : : : :

CFM CFM

0,0255 0,2935

25
26 27 * 28 29 30

0,0398 0,3422 0,0390 0,3410 0,0467 0,2853 0,0466 0,3144 0,0322 0,2738 0,0419 0,2391 0,0272 0,4148 0,0170 0,4750

CFM

CFM

:IiCFMi ; i:|i; CFM

CFM
'.'.:!^<^^::;-::-:::';':;.:::::'::-:":'

3800,0 list |:;3j'|| 2000,0

Annex 5 Document 3263-1-27 (ProfilARBED) , (14 pages) Available rotation capacity of plastic hinges Ravailable Tests results and models. (Excerpts of Chapter 5)"

75

5. Classification of cross sections

76

5.1. Experimental data compared to EC3 rules.

Experimental data: 3-point bending tests, M y $ (Lukey/Adams, Roik/Kuhlmann, RWTH CRM); EC3 classification for cross-section submitted to M y gj : flange in compression, web in bending; Selection of experimental data: a) the sensitivity of cross-section to local buckling is estimated without LTB effects => experimental results presented in chapter 5.1 exclude cases with Lj/(i2-e) > 60; b) The cases with Mpi influenced by high shear forces (Vsd > 0.5 Vpj R d ) are also not considered in this chapter, because the values of available rotation capacities depend on the model chosen to evaluate M p l V R d (< MpI) and because those values of available rotation capacity (RaV) are always very hign; c) Roik and Kuhlmann tested welded sections, so they are not taken into account, because we only consider limits of EC3 classification for hot-rolled sections. Graphs: page 109 (1 graph) Ravailable = f(ctd/twE) where cc=0.5 (pure bending), = f(fy.Web) page 110(1 graph) Ravailable = f(b/tfs) where = fCfy.flange) Q) pages 111-113 (3 graphs) b/tfs = f(ad/tws) where Rav is measured between [0,2] (2,6] ( class 2 ?) > 6 (= class 1 ?) pages 114-116 (3 graphs) b/tf=f(fy) where fy = f(fy.flange) with RaV between [0,2] (2,6] (= class 2?) > 6 (= class 1 ?) pages 117-119 (3 graphs) ad/t w s = f(fy) where fy = f(fy.web) with RaV between [0,2] (2,6] (= class 2?) > 6 (= class 1 ?) N.B. in the last 6 graphs and , the plain curves represent the relation = -

77

Conclusions: a) No test results were available with slender webs for hot-rolled sections: all webs are in class 1 (see ^ values in graphs , and ). b) In graph , it can be seen that tests furnished results conflicting with assumptions of EC3 rules: - high rotation capacities (> 6) for EC3 class 2 and class 3 cross-sections, - rotation capacities > 0 for EC3 class 3 and class 4 cross-sections. c) In general, for elastic global analysis of a structure, the resistance of cross-sections and members are directly related to the class of the concerned cross-sections: plastic resistance is allowed for class 1 and 2 cross-sections, elastic resistance for class 3 cross-sections and effective resistance for class 4 cross-sections. If tests results on 3-point bending beams give available rotation capacity greater than zero, then we can say that the concerned cross-sections are in class 1 or 2, because the plastic bending moment resistance have been reached and passed over. In view of the 3 graphs N 0 , the influence of factor which is enclosed in rules of EC3 classification has been highlighted. d) The main preliminary conclusion of those 3 graphs is that could be forgotten (=1) for flange classification fb/tf) in case of hot-rolled cross-sections which are in class 1 or 2 for fy=235 MPa. More development (tests or simulations) are necessary to help draw final conclusion.

78

R av. experiments 45,0

40,0

35,0

class 1

class 2

30,0 - -

25,0
-J VO

--

20,0

RExp

15,0

3 10,0

t :"

5,0

0,0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 alpha.d/(tw.epsilon)

R av. experiment 45

40

class 1
35 --

cl. 2

class 3

class 4

30

25 RExp
00

20

--

15

:
--

10

10

15

20

25

30

35 b/(tf.epsilon)

b/(tf.epslon) 35 r

R av. [0; 2]

RWTH

10

15

20

25

30

35

40 alpha.d/(tw.epsilon)

b/(tf.epsilon) 35

R av. [2; 6]

oo to

10

15

20

25

30

35

40 alpha.d/(tw.epsilon)

b/(tf.epsilon) 40 -r R av. [6; infini]

35

30

class 3
25
D -00

oD

Lukey
D

20

class 2
CP

RWTH CPM

J
15 class 1

10

--

10

15

20

25

30

35 alpha.d/(tw.epsilon)

b/tf 35,0 r

R av. [0; 2]

30,0
RWTH EA2244 R= 1.5 M u /Mp|= 1.04

class 4 25,0

20,0 class 3
00 p.

15,0

class 2

10,0

class 1

5,0

0,0 235 285 335 385 435 fy flange

b/tf 35 -r

R av. [2; 6]

30 RWTH EA2243 R=2.8MU/Mp|=1.09 25 -RWTH EA2844 R=4.1MU/Mp]=1.12

class 4

20 class 3 15 --

oo

class 2

10

--

class 1

235

285

335

385

435

485

535 fy flange

b/tf 35 -r RWTH EA2833 R= 19.0 Mu/Mp|= 1.13 30 RWTH EA2843 R=6.4M u /M pI =1.16 25 -class 4 R av. [6; infini]

20 class 3 15 -class 2

00

ON

10

--

RWTH EB2843 R=9.5M U /M p |=1.27

RWTH EB2844 R= 8.3 Mu/Mp|= 1.25

class 1
5 --

235

285

335

385

435

485

535 fy flange

alpha.d/tw 40,0

R av. [0; 2]

35,0

30,0

class 2

25,0

--

20,0

--

2 3
class 1 15,0

10.0

--

5,0

--

0,0 235,0 285,0 335,0 385,0 435,0 485,0 535,0 fy web

alpha.d/tw 40

R av. [2; 6]

35

30

--

class 2

25

--

oo oo

20

15

-class 1

10

--

235

285

335

385

435

485

535

585

635

685

735 fy web

alpha.d/tw 40

R av. [6; infini]

35

30

class 2

25

oo
VO

20

--

15

--

class 1
10 --

235

285

335

385

435

485

535

585

635

685

735 fy web

Annex 6 Document 3198-1-18 (ProfilARBED) (24 pages) "Stability of composite bridge girders near internal support", by Schaumann P. and Schleich J.B.

91

STABILITY OF COMPOSITE BRIDGE GIRDERS NEAR INTERNAL SUPPORT

Dr.-Ing. Peter Schaumann Ing.-Bro HRA, Kohlenstrae 70, D-4630 Bochum 1, Germany Dipl.-lng. J.B. Schleich ARBED Research, P.B. 141, L-4002 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

Summary
The design of composite bridges in the hogging moment reaion n n u 0 m ^ ^ and global instabilities. Stability failure occurs in form C ^ S ^ M Z ^ V ^ V ' ' 0 C a l form of lateral-torsional buckling of the lower flange Comoosite h r i S ' f WGb a n d in beams have a very compact steel section. In this case cune'nt Sestamies S f***" ^ results. Two full scale tests on composite bridge q i r d e r s h t S I s^ to uneconomic h B Chum Germany, in 1990. In the tests the hogging momem reaion of simulated. The experimental investigatef d e m o n s a d ^ , 1 " ^ specimen, although geometric and material properties teve been chn^n T L t h e t6St type of composite bridge. The full p.astic K ^ Tornent t S S ^ S ^ ^ ^ calculations could be verified by the tests. Considering the t e s t S K n d ? * ^ recently developed computer program some additional proposals for te d S of * f * p r p O S a l s for tne desi n bridges in the hogging moment region are presented 9 of composite

Introduction
The stressing at internal supports of continuous beams is characterized by a combina tion of high shear forces and high hogging moments. comoma Thus, the design of composite bridges in this region is governed bv effects nf ior a i a , global instabilities. Local instability occurs in form of plate buck"no 1 1 . whereas global instability is a result of lateral-torsiona'. bucWing of he l o w f l a n S ' Both effects are interdependent. Normally these stability p 9 ro lem S TeaJeTe H provision of stiffeners and bracings. require tne Recent improvements in rolling technology result in the production of verv laroe hot rolled steel sections with high strengths applicable for brige structures Roa b r i d o u based on rolled shapes connected to a concrete roadway'pla*"have a ver^ compac steel section. In this case current design codes lead to uneconomic results with qard to detailing and overall design. " n re9ara In 1989 a research program was initiated by ARBED, one of Europeans oreatP^t min mills, to optimize design and construction of composite bridges ustaa h S rSSri J girders Within the scope of this research work two'ful. scale tests L b g,rders have been earned out in Bochum, Germany, in 1990. In the tes*the hooaino no moment reg.on of continuous beams has been simulated (see Fig. 1) 99'ng

92

Specimen 1
25CO

Specimen 2

mmsswM^^M

I
9500 9500

fc_

Fig. 1

Elevation and cross-sections of the full scale tests

Composite bridges using hot-rolled steel girders

The research program, which is still in progress, is titled 'Composite bridges based on hot-rolled steel girders'. The main purposes of research are: Buckling behaviour of rolled shapes in composite sections in negative moment regions Application of high strength steel (FeE 460) in bridge building Structural behaviour of the deck when using prefabricated concrete elements as composite formwork Demonstration of construction principles

The application of special hot-rolled steel beams as one part for composite girders led to the developments of new structural concepts for bridges. This modular design system using completely prefabricated and finished steel beams and precast concrete elements acting compositely with the in situ concrete deck slab facilitates the development of more economical erection procedures for bridges.

93

Fig. 2 shows a typical cross-section of multi-beam composite bridge deck with universal beams. The rolled l-shapes with a depth up to 1100 mm, a width up to 450 mm and a flange-thickness up to 50 mm are suitable for composite bridges of spans up to about 45 m. With regard to generally approved technical standards yield strengths of 460 N/mm 2 can be provided.
13.60

Fig. 2

Typical cross-section of a composite bridge with hot-rolled steel beams

The workshop finishing of the beams like cambering, welding of vertical stiffeners at the supports, welding of the stud shear connectors, preparation of the field connections (bolted type) and corrosion protection

is provided by ARBED. The prefabricated beams are delivered directly to the construction site. AH connections are of bolted type to facilitate the work on site. In order to improve the construction procedures of this type of bridge a contracting company WIEMER&TRACHTE was involved in the research program. One reason to use prefabricated concrete elements in bridge construction is linked to the following advantages: They represent an efficient bracing against wind loads and provide lateral stability for the rolled shapes during erection. By their high quality due to the advanced fabrication technologies they quickly provide a safe working area on top of the steel structure. The erection time on the building site can be considerably reduced.

94

On September 12 th , 1990, a symposium was organized at the RuhrUniversity Bochum with the support of TradeARBED Germany.The first part of this symposium contained a number of lectuVs from designers, scientists and contractors to present related, existing bridge structures, the purposes of research and other aspects like overall cost saving and maintenance of composite bridges. In the presence of more than 200 guests from industry, science and administrations the second of two full scale ultimate load tests was carried out.

Test p r o g r a m
The total test program consists of different tests on five test specimen. This paper deals with two full scale tests on composite bridge girders in which the hogging moment region of continuous beams has been simulated [1]. The test specimen had a length of 20 m; the first one with a single beam, the second one, which had a total weight of nearly 1001, comprising three beams in the cross section. The rolled shapes were chosen to be HE 900 A, FeE460. The thickness of the slab was 28 cm. A typical span of a multispan beam with this crosssection is about 20 m. In the tests hogging regions of length half of this span were used to create moment gradients more adverse for the stability problems than it would occur in practice. The crosssections and the material strengths are given in Fig. 3.
2S 1417 [ M l H/'l

! ; ) ' / .' > ' X \ / / / / / / \ \ / , / k \ / .'I -

<D

Specimen 1

yoo>.
tl, . " l

\ l l IP, .S43I . . 0 2 1(1, taei

I I s , .SOI

3 0 1 . 10 I f , . L I O

I, /

C7 012 iPsxC98 I 7*12 I,. H i l

A

61*16 ( 637N/mm2l

7 * ips.sai
; . \ V U .

;>

i l l

) I?

>

Ar1

Specimen 2

s s

/-'/.-

S \.' / /.-

ffT

Tu >

II,-I1 \3or-30

Fig. 3

Crosssections of the test specimen

95

The preparation of the test specimen, especially the concrete work was done by WIEMER&TRACHTE. The second specimen contained three main girders in the crosssection spaced at 2,30 m. The rapid and easy erection with prefabricated concrete elements with a thickness of 8 cm used as permanent formwork to the in situ deck slab was monitored. Fig. 4 shows both the static system and the load during concreting and in the tests. The test specimens were supported at midspan and tied down at one end. The load was introduced at low increments at the opposite cantilevering end.

1 i i iJ I I M I
_3 JIT _9,50_ 20.00

I i i i

50

10,00

+a) Static system: Steel beam

Load: Self-weight and concrete slab

22 rzn
Fig. 4

9,50

4-

9,50 Load: Test load

s-t-

50

b) Static system: Composite beam

In Test 1 the load has been introduced directly to the concrete slab in the axis of the steel web whereas in Test 2 the load has been introduced by a very rigid transverse beam to simulate a line load at the cantilever end (see Fig. 5).

96

Fig. 5

Load introduction at test 2

At more than 100 measuring points deflections and strains were registered. The data transmitted by the measuring indicaters have been recorded by PCs. The progression of cracks and crack width in the concrete slab hs been recorded. By these tests the stability of the lower flange under compression, the buckling of the web and the rotation capacity under negative moments were studied. In both tests the ultimate load was determined by the local buckling of the web aocvcthe midspan support. For the purpose to emphasize this effect the web was markeo b\ a mesh. Fig. 6 shows the buckling pattern of the web at ultimate load leve!.

97

Fig. 6

Plasticity and local buckles at interior support specimen 2

Fig. 7 and 8 show the deflections of the beams below the hydrolic iack durino th* ultimate load tests as function of the ratio M / M p , Taking into a c ^ u n L moment due to self-weight of the specimens the curves start at a value of M/M - 0 . 1 4

selfweighfti 0.0 Fig. 7 0 100 200

"^^4w
300 400 500 600 Deflection [mm] Deflection history of beam 1 including deloading branch 700

98

300 400 Deflection [mm]

Fig. 8

700

Deflection history of beam 2 including deloading branch

The experimental investigations demonstrated a ductile behaviour of the beams, although geometric and material properties have been chosen unfavourable for this type of composite bridge. In both tests the full plastic moment capacity predetermined by calculations could be verified by the tests. The tests proved that no complementary transverse girders are required to guarantee the stability of hot-rolled steel sections at ultimate load levels adjacent to internal supports of multi-span composite bridges.

Comparison between test results and design ace. to Eurocode 4

According to Eurocode 4 [2] the design of composite sections in hogging moment regions is linked to a classification based on the slendemess of steel elements in compression (here: web and lower flange). The classification system defines four classes: . Class 1 - plastic moment resistance with high rotation capacity Class 2 - plastic moment resistance with limited capacity Class 3 - yield strength in the extreme compression fibre, local buckling Class 4 - resistance is governed by effects of local buckling

99

As the cross-section is classified according to the least favourable class of its elements in compression, the test specimens had to be classified Class 3 due to their width-tothickness ratio of the web (d/t=48). Using an effective web with a reduced width the section could be lifted into Class 2. This method leads to a moment resistance, M . Rd , which lies inbetween the elastic moment for a Class 3 section governed by yield of'the steel bottom flange, Me( Rd , and the plastic moment, M ( Rd , for a Class 2 section.
Moment resistance Class 3: M e l ? R d [kNm] Class 2 with eff.web
M

Specimen 1 5460 6295 7300 7190

Specimen 2 15580 18410 20860 21145

pl,Rd E

kNm

Class 2: pl,Rd [kNm3

test result M e x p [kNm]

Table 1

Calculated and measured moment resistances

In the test a typical Class 2 behaviour of the beams could be observed. The theoretical plastic moments , have been reached. The deflection history reflects an impressive ductile behaviour ofthe composite sections together with a high rotation capacity.

Fig. 9

Eigenform ofthe test specimen calculated by the program BDK2 [3]

These results point out that the classification system of Eurocode 4 leads to conserva tive and uneconomic results especially in those cases where actual conditions do not fit the assumptions taken into account when drafting the code regulations. For the

too

given parameters all influences like vertical stiffeners at the support, the restraint by the cracked concrete slab, combined stressing due to shear and bending and the non linear elasticity of the bottom flange have been taken into consideration when calculating the buckling load of the beam with a recently developed computer program [31 (see Fig. 9). With a more sophisticated calculation the cross-section can be classified into Class 2. Furthermore a proposal has been worked out for the maximum width-to-thickness ratios for steel webs in composite beams taking into account the restraint of the concrete slab (see Fig. 10).
Webs: (Internal elements perpendicular to axis bending)

A i U el banolng

Class

Bending

Compression

Combined bending and compression

Stress distribution in clement (compression positive)

+
when < r > 0,5: d/t 6S4e/(17a
d/t s 72e d/t s3Se when o < 0,5: d/t s 36 e/a

* D

when a > 04: d/t s 730e/( 15,6 + 1)

d/t 83e d/t s 44

when a < 0,5: d/t i 41,5e/a

Stress

distribution in element (compression positive)

d/t i 124
d/t s' 49e

LY

cr I

when > -1: d/t s 49e/(0,7 + 0,3 )

when i - 1 : d/t s 62e (1-) / ( - ) '

i/235/

235

275 0,92

355 0.81

Fig. 10

Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for steel webs in composite beams

According to Eurocode 4 the design buckling resistance moment M b R d of laterally unrestrained beams shall be taken as

Mb.Rd = XLT * Mpl,Rd ' < V W

for Class 1 and Class 2 cross-sections with T R d = 1.10, where . T ,R d is the reduction factor for lateral-torsional buckling is the plastic resistance moment.

According to Eurocode 4 values of x L T for rolled sections (buckling curve a) may be determined for the appropriate slendernessl LT from

XLT-^LT+^-V)^2.
where tpLT = 0.5 [ 1 + 0.21 (XLT - 0.2) + 7 L T 2 ].

The slendemess is taken from

\
where M

- (VV 1 7 2
is the value of M , R d when the factors 3 , 7 C and are taken as 1.0, is the elastic critical moment for lateral-torsional buckling.

cr

1.0' 0.9 0.8

o

testno.2(1.014) 'testno.1 (0.985) 0.83 0.73 lateraltorsional

0.7-I 0.6

rx

buckling ace. to DIN 18800

0.5
rr

0.4
0.3 0.2H

buckling curve a ace. to EC4 P.1

0.1 0.0

0.3(3
i I : ~l 1 1 1 1 ! "

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5 _

3.0

\T
Fig. 11 Lateraltorsional buckling Comparison between design curves and test results

102

A simplified analytical model for the determination of M c r taking into account profile deformation in the beam and crack formation in the concrete slab [3,4] has been used when calculating 1 L T . This simplified method has been inserted into Eurocode 4 as Annex . 1. The ultimate loads measured in the tests demonstrated, that the regulations for lateral torsional buckling according to Eurocode 4 are too conservative. Considering the test results the following equation for the reduction factor x L T is suggested according to the lateraltorsional buckling curve ofthe German DIN 18800 P.2[5] (see Fig. 11). XLT=1 XLT = t i
+

forX L T <0.4 \2)1/

for

> 0.4

where = 2.5.

References
[1] Schaumann, P., Steffen, .: Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch 1 Einstegiger Verbundtrger, Nr. A 88199, Versuch 2 Realistischer Verbundbrckentr ger, Nr. A 891992, im Auftrag von ARBED Recherches, Luxembourg (unpublished) Eurocode 4 Editorial Group: Eurocode 4, Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, Part 1 General Rules and Rules for Buildings, Revised draft, Issue 1, Commission ofthe European Communities, Oct.1990 Kina, J.: Zum Biegedrillknicken von Verbundtrgern, TechnischWissenschaftliche Mit teilungen des Instituts fr Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau der RuhrUniversitt Bochum, Heft 916,1991 Roik, K., Hanswille, G., Kina, J.: Zur Frage des Biegedrillknickens bei Stahlverbundtr gern, STAHLBAU 59, H. 11, S. 327 bis 333, 1990 DIN 18800 Stahlbauten Teil 2, Stabilittsflle, Knicken von Stben und Stabwerken, Ausgabe 11.90, Beuth Verlag, Berlin, 1990

[2]

[3]

[4] [5]

103

HAENSEL ROIK ALBRECHT & PARTNER

Vorschlge zur Ergnzung bzw. nderung von Eurocode 4 P.1

auf der Grundlage des ARBED-Forschungsprogramms

Verbundbrcken auf der Basis von Walztrgern

Erstellt von

Dr.-lng. P. Schaumann
Bochum, im Januar 1991

Dr.-lng. J. Haensel Dr.-lng. G. Albrecht Dr.-lng. P. Schaumann

WVssonscricnilcriei Barsler:

Prof. Dr.-lng. Dr.-lng. E A K. Roik

Kohlenstr. 70 * D-*630 Bochum 1

104

1.

Einleitung

Im Rahmen des Arbed-Forschungsvorhabens 'Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern' wurden zwei Groversuche an Verbundbrckentrgern durchgefhrt. Eine spezielle Fragestellung dieser Versuche war das Stabilittsverhalten der Verbundtrger im Bereich negativer Momente. Dabei ging es einerseits um das lokale Beulverhalten des Stahltrgersteges' und andererseits um das globale Biegedrillknickproblem des Stahltrgeruntergurtes, die miteinander in Interaktion stehen. Im folgenden werden Verbesserungsvorschlge 'fr' die Bemessungsverfahren nach Euroebde 4 1 vorgestellt';'. die durch die";Ve'rsuchsergebnisse begrndet sind. Die Verbesserungsvorschige betreffen'die. . und . Kapitel 4.6 (Lateral-torsional buckling of composite beams for buildings). Kapitel 4.3 (Classification of cross-sections of beams) und dort speziell das Kapitel 4.3.3 (Classification of steel webs')

Fr die Klassifizierung der Stege von Verbundtrgerquerschnitten wird eine ergnzende Tabelle vorgeschlagen. Beim Nachweis des Biegedrillknickens wird vorgeschlagen, die Reduktionsfaktoren der Biegedrillknickkurve der 2 DIN 18800 Teil 2 anzupassen.

Eurocode 4 Editorial Group: Eurocode 4, Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, Part 1 - General Rules and Rules for Buildings, Revised draft, Issue 1, Commission of the European Communities, Oct.1990 DIN 18800 - Stahlbauten - Teil 2, Stabilittsflle, Knicken von Stben und Stabwerken, Ausgabe 11.90, Beuth Verlag, Berlin, 1990

105

2. 2.1

Klassifizierung der Querschnitte Generelles Vorgehen Klassifizierung der stahlernen

Der Eurocode 4 P.l bietet zunchst die

Gurte und Stege ber Grenzverhltnisse von Breite zu Dicke an. Prinzipiell mglich ist die Hherstufung von gedrckten sthlernen Querschnittsteilen' ber das Verfahren der wirksamen Querschnitte (Ch. 4.3.1 (4)). Die vorliegende Fassung bietet fr die Klassifizierung des Querschnitte Anwendungsregeln, die z.B. fr den Brckenbau unzureichend sind. Grundstzlich sind hier Mglichkeiten vorzusehen, die eine differenzierte Bercksichtigung des Beulverhaltens einzelner steifen bercksichtigt werden knnen. An dieser Stelle sei beispielhaft auf die Ermittlung wirksamer Querschnitte in der DIN 18800 Teil 2 Abs. 7 verwiesen. Querschnittsteile gewhrleisten. Dabei mssen z.B. auch individuelle Randbedingungen, Belastungen und Beul-

2.2

Nachweis fr den Steg mit Hilfe von d/t-Verhltnissen

2.2.1

Ergnzungsvorschlag

In Ergnzung der Tabelle 4.2 (Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for steel webs) wird fr Verbundtrger, die schubfest mit einer aufliegenden Stahlbetonplatte verbunden sind, die nachfolgende Tabelle 4.2a vorgeschlagen.

2.2.2

Begrndung sich der Steg von Verbundtrgern

Im Bereich negativer Momente befindet 2, 3 oder 4 ist erforderlich.

berwiegend im Druckbereich. Die Einstufung in die Querschnittsklassen 1,

Im Eurocode 4 P.l sind in der Tabelle 4.2 die maximal zulssigen Verhltnisse von Breite zu Dicke fr die Stege von Stahltrgern angegeben. Diese Tabelle ist vollstndig aus Eurocode 3 bernommen worden. Der Tabelle liegt die Annahme allseitig gelenkiger Lagerung des Steges zugrunde.

106

Webs: (Internal elements perpendicular to axis of bending)

A*U o( banalnq

Class Stress distribution in element (compression positive)'

Bending

Compression

Combined bending and compression

ad
.

+
+ 1)

when a > 0,5: '"" d/t : ''684e7(17a d/t . 72e d/t s 3 8 e when a < 0,5: d/t 36 e / a

when c > 0,5: d/t i 730e/(15,6a + 1) d/t ^ 83e d/t 44e when a < 0,5: " d / t <;41,5e/a j^cr

Stress distribution in element, (compression positive)

Tcr

when > - 1 : d/t 5 49e/(0,7 + 0,3 ) d/t <. 124e d/t 5 49e when s - 1 : d/t s 62e (1-) ^(-)' 235 275 0,92 355 0,81

= V235/

EC4 - Table 4.2a Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for steel webs in composite beams

107

Bei Verbundtrgern, die schubfest mit einer aufliegenden Stahlbetonplatte verbunden sind, kann der Steg an der Oberseite als eingespannt betrachtet werden. Die Klassifizierung unter Zuhilfenahme der Tabelle 4.2 liefert somit Stegschlankheiten, die zu sehr auf der sicheren Seite liegen. Daher wurde vom Verfasser die leicht vernderte Tabelle 4.2a erarbeitet, die den speziellen Bedingungen der Verbundtrger, insbesondere die Steifigkeit der aufliegenden Betondeckenplatte bercksichtigt. Die Begrenzung der d/t-Verhltnisse ist eine Begrenzung der Stegschlankheiten mit dem Ziel, den Steg entsprechend seiner Beulgefhrdung zu klassifizieren. Die Beultragspannung ist eine Funktion des bezogenen Schlankheitsgrades

*PB - (Viki*1 mit der ideellen Beul normalSpannung

. = k / 18980 (t/d) 2 [kN/cm 2 ]. ?lki . Die vernderten d/tVerhltnisse der Tabelle 4.2a ergeben sich bei Auf rechterhai tung des bezogenen Schlankheitsgrades aus den Beul werten k , fr die allseitig gelenkig gelagerte Platte und den Beulwerten ko fr die ein seitig eingespannte Platte wie folgt: ( d A h a b l e 4.2a = W ^ T a b l e 4.2 * (k2/kl) Die Berechnung der Beulwerte k0 erfolgte, soweit die Lsungen nicht aus der ^Literatur entnommen werden konnten, mit Hilfe eines FEMRechenprogramms; .'" siehe auch nachfolgendes Bild. \

108

buckling factors k
for different boundary conditions
1.18

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

0.2

stress ratio

Beulwerte I

allseitig gelenkig
k

einseitig . eingespannt k2

Druck (elastisch und plastisch) Biegung (elastisch) T> = -1.0 Biegung (plastisch) = 0.5

4.0 23.94 10.1

5.41 23.88 10.1

109

3. 3.1

Biegedri11 knicken nderungsvorschlag

Beim Nachweis gegen Biegedrillknicken (lateraltorsional buckling) darf das Tragmoment bei Querschnitten der Klassen 1 und 2 nach Eurocode 4 Ch. 4.6.3 zu
H

b,Rd = *LT ' Hpl,Rd ' ( V ? R d > Reduktionsfaktor fr Biegedrillknicken

mit X[_j

und Mpj Rd plastische Grenztragfhigkeit und Y R d = 1,10.

ermittelt werden. Der Reduktionsfaktor x LT ergibt sich in-Abhngigkeit des bezogenen Schlankheitsgrades X Q Anstelle.'des in der vorliegenden Fassung von Eurocode 4 P.l angegebenen Reduktionsfaktors

X L T = [<PLT

^LT 2

"

^ " ^

mit und

_ = 0,5 [1 + aLT . (XLT - 0,2) + , 2 ] a LT = 0,21 fr Walzquerschnitte (Knickspannungskurve a)

wird gem DIN 18800 der Reduktionsfaktor XLT = 1 XLT = [1 + \)1/ mit = 2,5 vorgeschlagen; siehe dazu auch folgendes Bild. fr I L T < 0,4 fr XLT > 0,4

110

Lateral-torsional buckling
1.0 0.90.80.7-

5
D.

0.6

lateral:torsional
buckling a c e t o DIN 18800

1 .5-|
cc .d 0.4 0.30.2-

buckling curve a a c e t o EC4 P.1

'6.10.0

1-1 rr " 0.02

0.5

-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

--..3.0

LT
3.2

Begrndung

Beim Nachweis gegen Biegedrillknicken wird der bezogene Schlankheitsgrad Lj bei Querschnitten der Klassen 1 und 2 zu % ." ( M pl/ H cr)*

mit M pl - Mp-|_Rd mit -t-Faktoren , und 5 gleich 1,0 und M c r - kritisches Biegedrillknickmoment (elastisch) ermittelt. Das kritisches Biegedrillknickmoment M c r wurde bei der Einordnung der Versuchsergebnisse wurde auf zwei verschiedenen Wegen ermittelt: Nherungsverfahren nach Eurocode 4 (Annex B) Computerprogramm BDK2

In der nachfolgenden Tabelle sind die Zahlenwerte der bezogenen Schlankheiten, die mit den beiden Berechnungsmethoden ermittelt wurden, gegenbergestellt. Es ist erfreulich, da das Nherungsverfahren ein
3

Kina, \: Programmbeschreibung BDK2, Biegedrillknicken, Institut fr Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Ruhr-Universitt Bochum

111

Ergebnis l i e f e r t , das auf der sicheren Seite liegt, whrend mit der Computerberechnung eine gnstigere Schlankheit ermittelt wurde. Es lohnt sich also, genauer zu rechnen. Die Tabelle enthlt gleichzeitig die Reduktionsfaktoren x L j nach EC4 bzw. nach DIN 18800, die sich in Funktion der bezogenen Schlankheit ergeben.
Methode zur B estimmung des k r i t i s c h e B iegedrillknickmomentes Nherung nach EC4 Computerprogramm B DK2 curve a Al 0,693 0,734 18800
XLT

hi
0,95 ' 0,90

0,788 0,'831

Obwohl' durch die Wahl der Versuchsparameter fr den Anwendungsbereich der Walztrger-im Verbundbrckenbau extreme Verhltnisse im Hinblick auf die Schlankheit- des Untergurtes vorgegeben wurden, konnte im Versuch nahezu (98,5%) des vollplasti sehen'Momentes erreicht werden. Der Versuchstrger zeichnete sich durch ein gutmtiges, d.h. duktiles Verhalten, und durch hohe Rotationskapazitt im Nachtraglastbereich aus. Dieses Ergebnis -wurde durch einen weiteren Groversuch mit drei Haupttrgern voll besttigt.

Lateral-torsional buckling
Comparison to test result
1 ,

I .

0.90.80.75
CL

test no.1 (0.985) 0.83 0.73 \ \

"\ \

0.6-

1 0.55 0.40.30.20.1u.u- 0 .0
I 'I

lateral-torsional buckling a c e t o DIN 18800

r
V

buckling curve a ace. to EC4 P.1

*"*^>^w

0.5

30 1.0

1 ^~\

1.5

2.0

2.5

LT

3.

Die Bemessungswerte liegen gegenber dem Versuchsergebnis deutlich auf der sicheren Seite. Das Bemessungsergebnis nach Eurocode 4 P.l l i e g t noch
112

einmal 12% unter dem Wert nach DIN 18800. Die Bochumer Versuchsergebnisse liegen auf einer Ebene mit den Ergebnissen von Johnson/Fan^ und untermauern daher die Forderung nach einer Vernderung der z.Zt. gltigen Reduktionsfaktoren des Eurocode 4 P.l.

Bochum, 25. Januar 1991

Dr.-lng. Peter Schaumann

Johnson, R.P., Fan, C.K.R.: Distorsional Lateral Buckling of Continuous Composite Beams. University of Warwick, Research Report CE 30, Jan. 1990

113

Statile und Stabilitt der Baukonstruktionen

Elasto- und plasto-statische erechmings verfahren drackbeansprachterTragwerke : Nachweisformen gegen Knicken, Kippen, Beulen

Dr.-Ing. Christian Petersen Professor an der Hochschule der Bundeswehr Mncheni

V
Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn B raunschweig/Wiesbaden

114

Talet 8.1 Beulwerte unterschiedlich g e l a g e r t e r R e c h t e c k p l a t t e n

Porameler
Oucl

i g | =
=0

Se il en s r hol Im i

a :
b

Sponnungserhallnis u s den Oiagrommen wird l 0 a b geg rill r ideale B eulspannung "Ui1

l

Gelenkige Quer rander

\/

o
rt'K

b't Lagerung der l o n g s r u n d t r . gelenkt ger t a n d eingespannter Rand freier Rand

Oie j e w e i l s k l e i n s i e n B euUerle min k 0 gelistet.

s i n d lr 8 Lagerlalle in n a c h s t e h e n d e r Tabelle

auf

1 1

m
b

,,

CD
l l.tt 1.59 5.E! 6.0J 5.59 7.10 7.11 1.55 5.19 10.57 11.96 13.10 15.13 17.10 19.73 71.51 73.JJ 76.35 75.93 31.67 JIJLJ 37.35 10.11 13.57 (6.17 50.76 53.7

m
6.9t 7.71 1.70 9.90 10.63 11.16 17. t7 13.55 H.I5 16.31 11.77 70.73 ' 73.73 75.57 7J.66 32.07 35.71 39.S6 11.06 (0.10 57.36 56.9! 61.99 6635 77.10 77.55 13.01 19.72 5.li 5.9t 6.57 7.35 7.10 1.31 1.19 9.51 10.71 11.13 13.11 13.73 11.57 15.99 17.67 19.51 71.67 73.9t 36.3! 21.31 31.6S 3t.lt 37.36 10.13 13.57 11.97 50.77 53.79

0.125 0.125 1.71 1.33 1.3S 1.16 1.19 1.S3 1.57 1.51 1.65 l./O 1.71 1.79 1.15 1.90 1.96 7.02 2.09 7.15 2.23 2.30 3.3S 27 7.56 7.66 2.77 7.11 7.93 3.11 1.7! 1.57 1.97 7.13 7.96 3.t5 1.36 5.15 5.50 13.15 15.01 19.06 77.11 75.73 79.SI 37.02 35.69 39.56 13.61 17.96 57.36 56.9! 61.39 57.33 72.10 77.55 63.21 19.22

1 O.J 0. E 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.7 -0.3 -0.1 -0.5 -0. -0.7 -0.1 -0.9 -1 -1.1 -1.7 -1.3 -1.1 -1.5 -1.5 -1.7 -1.0 -1.5 -7

5.11 6.01 (.9t 9.07 1.77 9.59 10.56 11.73 13. 11.15 16.91 19.36 22.15 35.23 29.51 32.03 35.20 39.56 tt.CS 19.10 52 J 6 56.91 61.99 66.95 77.10 77.63 93.21 99J2

0.567

1.71

0.550

....
(r 0 . 3

9.31 10.93 13.03 15.05 17. IO 19. 21 21.19 23.95 26.33 26.91 31.63 31.11 37.35 10.13 13.57 16.9t 50.53 5t .71

Oie T a l e l w e r t e

und die Diagramme

gelten

115

Annex 7 Document 3263-2-12 (CTICM) (8 pages) "Required rotation capacity for a 15% redistribution of elastic peak moment"

117

ECSC PROJECTS SA 319-SA 321 Working Document

Required rotation capacity for a 15% redistribution of elastic peak moment

Following a n elastic analysis, the paragraph 5.2.1.3 of Eurocode 3 allows to redistribute up to 15% of the elastic peak moment, provided that - the internal forces a n d moments remain in equilibrium with the applied loads - all the members in which the moments are reduced have Class 1 or Class 2 crosssections This procedure is equivalent to a plastic analysis, in which the redistribution of moments would be limited a n d compatible with the reduced rotation capacity of Class 2 cross-sections. The question which comes up is : is this allowance of 15% redistribution always safe for Class 2 cross-sections, that is to say, is the required rotation capacity always small? The required rotation capacities for two common cases are studied hereafter.

A - Two span continuous beam with an uniform distributed load

q k
I

III

immun

II
1

I <1
1

XL

Figure 7 The first plastic hinge always occurs at the central support for : 8 Mp|
q

" (2-+1)

and the mechanism (2nd plastic hinge in span 1) for : 2 Mp|

118

Required plastic rotation Between these two levels, at q = (1 + ) q , , the required plastic rotation in the first hinge is
e

Mpi L p.req = 3 0 + ) ,

pjeq ' s plotted versus a n d .

\

0.14

\
V

0.12

\ \
X

1
1
1

0.1

<>'e<MplL

0.0

- -

mechanism

z^U-
/

' H

0.2 0.1765
0,15 0,12
0,1

X
^

0.0s

^^
0.1

0.04

ru--- - '
1

^ 1t ! XjhnC
1 J 1
0.7 0.8

1
0.6

.
0,9

0.05

0.02

0,2

0.3

0.4

03

Figure 2 Of course, this expression is valid if

q<q,j

that is to say if < 2 (3 + 2/2) (2 +1 ) 1 (dotted line in figure 2)

The limiting value of is plotted versus on the figure below. For example, with 1 fl85 (max value allowed by EC3)

1 = a l 7 6 5

the valid range of is < 0.2604 or 2:0,7396

119

0.5

1 1
i l

\l

s
I

I
l i l

0,1765

V I IHvl ih^Ki I I I I
C ) 01
0.2

I I

m c c hanism

1 1

// / 7^ /

1 1/ A
1

1 1
1 1
1

1
3
0.4

0,2604

o.s

0.6
1

0,7

0.9

0.9

0,7396

Figure 3 Required rotation capacity The plastic rotation of reference | is given by : = 2 El

where
d = d] +d2 is assumed to be the distance between zero moment points at the current load level q = (1 +

^Kuiii[ij|iiJijJ^

^^liUiULu^A
XL

Figure 4 L 2 - + 1
d

4 T T T

and

and

L 1 +=> d = ^(l+T|)

with

d d j +XL

The rotation capacity at q = (1 + T|).qi is given by : 6 r 'p.req

Rreq

120

that is to say r X<V21

8 Rreq = 3 ^

(1 +

1 +X ^ 4 ( 1 + ) + 2 + 1 (1 + ) 1 + 3

>/21

8 Rreq = 3 ( 1

+ )

R r e q is plotted on the figure below.

0.6
1

0,5

0,4

k K
VI

\!

1\
^ \

req 0.3
0,2

0,1

I V. ^ I ! 1 ^U-"-T" 1 ^ V 'hO""*^. /' J-i" i 1 ^ L \ * -^ ,, ^. ~^4-~4^---"^ 1 1" 1 _J I rT 1 ! 1 ! 1

~~~

mechanism

1 i

l'I 1 1 0,1765 """ i 1 1.'

1 '

1'

1 ___L

! 0,12 1

0,14

0,10 0.08 0,05

0.1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0.5

0.6

0.7

O.B

0.9

Figure 5 Noies - The parts of curves above the dotted line are invalid because in this zone, the mechanism occurs before the load (1 + n j . q i is reached. For < /2 1, d2 is limited at XL.

Conclusion For this sketch, the required rotation capacity is quite limited ( R r e q < 0,6). Therefore, Class 2 crosssections may be used in that case.

121

 Two span continuous b e a m with a point load

al
H

I
' L L X Figure 6 first plastic hinge at loading point first plastic hinge at central support

Two ranges for a are to be considered a < \^2(+ 1) 1 a > -\J2{X+ 1) 1

B.l

a <\J2(\ + 11 1

first plastic hinge at loading point

The first plastic hinge occurs at Mp| F!=^f(a,X)

For F = (l +T\).F-{ :

The plastic rotation in this hinge is given by Mp,L p.req = ~ E T )(.,) The distance d between zero moment points each side of the plastic hinge is d = L g(aXTi) a n d the required rotation capacity is given by 1 f(a,X).h(a,X,T|) req = 3 (..)

where :
(

' '~(-1)

2(+1) ((+1)-2(+1)]

9(..)=

a j l +)

^TTJ

1+

2(+1)

(.,) = (1 - ) [2 + 3(1 - a J + J ( l - ) ( + 1 - ) ]

122

All these expressions are valid if the mechanism is not reached, that is to say

and this condition becomes

Tl^CaHHljXTjl1
B.2 a > \]2(X +1) - 1 first plastic hinge at support

a(a+1)

The first plastic hinge occurs at Mp| F1=Lf(a,X)

For F = (1 + T\).F-[ :

The plastic rotation in this hinge is given by

e

Mp,L p.req = ~

^^MO-.T])

The distance d b e t w e e n zero moment points each side of the plastic hinge is : d = L g(a,X,T|) a n d the required rotation capacity is given by 1 f(a,X).h(a.,X,T|) req = 3 (.,)

where : 2(+1) a^=a(la2) 1 j

1+

9(.) =

2(+1)(1+)

(,,) = (1 2 ) All these expressions are valid if the mechanism is not reached, that is to say Fu *1 '1 and this condition becomes
2

*1 2 ( + 1 ) ]

123

For the max value of allowed by EC3 (c 1 = 0,1765), R r e q is plotted on the figure below for the values : 0,1 1 1,5 2. The range of a values is limited to [0,2 0,8].
12

11

il I Ml 1 1 TT IM I t i l i I 1 1 II

II

10

JIlVl II ll M
UIIVJII I

1 1 1 I Il l l i -1

ui

III 1 1 I II I MM

Ml M I M I 1 l| M M

req

/
6

1 I I I URI 1 1 iu Xi 1 II m i for UHKUI I II w.\ ;I"

I'! 11 K1>IL
\\\j \

Tt
~

I T I TT

= 0,1765 (15% Mpeak)

^__,
/

!
|

I I

IM\ \ N v 1 1 2 MlK MX, M \\U l 1 1 J1 1 : 1.5_

IL \rr M s

I
1
^

Ml

11 IM K Jil

_Sp^ ^L:^___:::.^_t WW *. '. :::: l s

'-.

\J\IW. 'v WU$L2 2 :J

1 "0.5

iir-k.
Ill 1 III 1
1

"
i

f'r. Ir~^H ? lij44ddlLL_ "" . _F'T I II I f f" L L LI TTT~rrB:^^^=====i!xt.

i i i I I I I

n
0,2

0,25

0,3

0.35

0,4

0.45

0,5

0.55

0,6

0,65

0.7

0,75

0.8

Figure 7

Conclusion For values of > l a n d if the point load acts in the left halfspan of the first span, the required rotation capacity may be very large (> 4), and the use of Class 2 cross sections with a 15% redistribution of peak moment may be unsafe regarding the rotation capacity.

124

Example :

i
XL fy=235N/mm2 F-j = 1,95 kN Fu - 73,3 kN

Section IPE 270 L = 1 0 m =1.5 a = 0,27 Mp| =113,74 kN.m I = 5790 c m 4 E = 21000kN/cm 2 The first plastic hinge occurs at the loading point for :

The second plastic hinge (mechanism) occurs at support for : The peak moment is at the loading point.

The maximum allowable moment redistribution (15% of peak moment) is given for : F = 61,95/0,85 = 72,88 kN At this load level F : plastic rotation : | = 0,189 rad d = 640 cm

length of equivalent isostatic beam : Mpi d nM 1= " g =0,03

R r e q = 0,189/0,03 = 6,3 At SLS (F,j/1,5), the maximum deflection is in the first span 'max = 5 < 0 5
c m

L 20

a) It should b e noted that the available plastic rotation * calculated with the Feldmann's model for IPE 270 is = 0,11 rad which is m u c h lower that r e q = 0,189 rad Therefore, the 15% redistribution is not valid in that case, although IPE 270 is a Class 1 crosssection. b) It w o u l d be possible to find Class 2 (near Class 3) cross-sections with the same characteristics Mpi and I as IPE 270 for which the rotation capacity or available plastic rotation c o u l d be still lower. For e x a m p l e : h = 26 c m - b =17,5 - t w = 0,6 - tf = 0.85 > Class 2 flanges and Class 2 w e b r=l,5

125

Annex 8 Document 3263-2-15 (CTICM) - (33 pages) Required rotation capacity for continuous beams"

127

CENTRE TECHNIQUE INDUSTRIEL DE LA CONSTRUCTION METALLIQUE

ROTREQ.DOC

ECSC Research Project P3263

REQUIRED ROTATION CAPACITY FOR CONTINUOUS BEAMS

Working document
(based upon document 3263-2-13)

128

CONTENTS

Notations 1 2 Introduction Two span b e a m with a concentrated load 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 3 Ultimate load Required plastic rotation Required rotation capacity Examples

Two span b e a m with uniform distributed load 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Ultimate load Required plastic rotation Same uniform distributed load for both spans Examples

Two span b e a m with a concentrated load a n d a n uniform distributed load Two span b e a m - General case 5.1 5.2 Principle Example

How to perform a plastic analysis using a elastic analysis program 6.1 Scope

6.2 Methodology 6.3 Example 6.4 Remarks Annex : continuous b e a m with three spans

129

NOTATIONS

E
f

Young modulus Yield strength Second moment of area Plastic moment resistance Length of span Required plastic rotation Required rotation capacity

Mpi L
e

req

Rreq

130

INTRODUCTION This document gives formulas for the required plastic rotation 0 r e q a n d the required rotation capacity R r e q when the collapse is reached by performing a n elastic perfectly plastic analysis. The formulas are exact. Abacuses may help the designer to determine either the required plastic rotation or the required rotation capacity. Results issued from a n analysis with PEP micro program are supplied in order to check the validity of the formulas.

TWO SPAN BEAM WITH A CONCENTRATED LOAD

aL

0< a <1

7
XL Figure 1

2.1

Ultimate load Only one plastic mechanism may be reached. The ultimate load F y c a n be determined by using the kinematic theorem : the external work W e done by the load as it moves through a virtual displacement is equal to the internal work W absorbed at the plastic hinges as they rotate through corresponding angles (see figure 2).

W e = W
with : and :

W e = Fy
= | ( 1 + 2 ) + | 2 aL

Figure 2

From a b o v e expressions a n d geometrical considerations, w e c a n obtain

M

Fu = Note Fu does not depend on

pl a + 1 L a (1 - a )

131

Let us assumed that the first plastic hinge occurs for the load Fi. The expression of this load c a n b e derived by considering that the maximum moment in the beam calculated from an elastic analysis, reaches the plastic moment M p |. Two cases must be investigated in so far as the maximum moment c a n be reached :

At the loading point if : then

a < V 2 ( X + 1) 1 2(+1)

(case A)

F1,.a " L a ( a l ) [a(a+ 1)2(+1)]

At the intermediate support if :

a > /2(+)

[case B)

Mpi 2 ( + 1 )

then

FT = ,
1

a(la2)

r-

For the particular case = 1 : (</2(+1) 1 = 1)

Fi = '

pl 4 , ; .. ; y L a (a I ) [a/- + a 4)

Figure 3 The ratio Fu/F] is an indicator for the interest of the plastic analysis. This ratio is easy to be expressed from the previous expressions. F,, (A) a < /2(+1) 1 a (a + 1 )

7(+1)(12(,
F

()

a > /2( + 1) 1

u (a+1)2 Fi"2(X+l)

For = 1 With the restriction : a*0

=0.25(a+1) ( 4 a a 2 ] and a *

132

Fu / F l
0.1

0.2

0.3 0,4 0.5 0,6 0.7 0.8 0,9 1,0

*
2

Figure 4 Noie : Figure 4 shows that the loading capacity is increased up to about 22% for equal spans owing to a plastic analysis, when the concentrated load is near the middle of the span.

2.2

Required plastic rotation 9 r e q : The required plastic rotation may be obtained by integrating the bending moment under the load increment (F y Fi) along the beam in which a perfect hinge has been introduced t the plastic hinge location. Therefore the required plastic rotation is the rotation in the perfect hinge under (Fa F|).

I f a < V 2 ^ + l ) 1

(A : 1st plastic hinge at loading point)

Mp,L . a2 2 + 2 + oreq " 6EI a

If a > 2 (+) - 1
(B:

1st plastic hinge at support]

oreq =
= = 1

Mp|L

6ETla2 +

2-2-1]

, L

( a + 3)(1 - a )

oreq -

6 E

133

Figure 5 shows curves giving kr versus for various values of the ratio . 0 r e q may be expressed by :

kr
3.0-,

req ~ k r

M P | L

g|

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0.6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1,0

Figure 5

2.3

Required rotation capacity R re q : The required rotation capacity is defined as the ratio of the required plastic rotation over the sum <pp| of the elastic rotations at the ends of a n equivalent single b e a m (see figure 6) whose span is equal to the length between zero moment points e a c h side of the first plastic hinge : ^req veq

If L e q is the length of the equivalent single beam, then :

M

p l L eg 2EI

The equivalent length is taken as the distance between zero-moment points (see figures 6 a n d 7).

134

Plastic Hinges
<s

^p|

A : First plastic hinge at loading point < - \ / 2 ( + 1) - 1

()

Equivalent single beam

Figure 6

Rreq

2 a2 + 2a - 2 1 3 a (a +

Plastic Hinges

Mpi

: First plastic hinge at support > / 2 ( + 1) - 1

Equivalent single beam

"

Figure 7

2 a2 + 2 a 2 - 1 req " 3 1 - + 2

For the particular case = 1

2 (a + 3 ) ( 1 - a ) Rreq 3a(a+l)

135

Rreq

See Figure 9

Figure 8

Note :

The required rotation capacity can be very high if the load is close to the first support, but the Influence of shear force on plastic resistance has to be taken Into account.

0.8

0.9

1 ->a

Figure 9

The following examples allowed us to apply the previous formulas a n d to c o m p a r e them with the results given by PEP micro.

136

2.4

Examples Example 1 Data : IPE 270 steel S235 (M p) = 1,1374 106 daN.cm. I = 5790 cm4) L= 1000 cm =1 F=1000daN a = 0,35 A) First plastic hinge Formulas F] = 5669,24 daN PEP micro Fi = 5669 d a N

Ultimate load

Fu = 6749,4 daN

Fa = 6749 d a N

Fu/h
Required rotation

1,1905

1,1905

9 r e q = 0,096996 rad

req = 0,096993 r a d

Required rotation capacity

req = 3.0723

req = 3.0724

Table 1

Example 2 Data : IPE 270 steel S235 L= 1000 cm = 0,5 F =1000 daN a = 0,8

m
First plastic hinge

Formulas F] = 11847,9 daN

PEP micro F] = 11847 d a N

Ultimate load

Fu= 12795.7 daN

Fu= 12795 d a N

fu/h
Required rotation

1,08

1.08

e r e q = 0,0037417 rad

0 r e q = 0,0037438 rad

Required rotation capacity

R r e q = 0,1333

R r e q = 0,1334

Table 2

137

TWO SPAN BEAM WITH UNIFORM DISTRIBUTED LOADS 0< < 1 >0 yq

TS
L Figure 10

3.1

Ultimate load
Three possible mechanisms may occur (see figure 11), but we assumed that s 0. Therefore the mechanism C has not to be considered. Depending on the values of a n d , mechanism A or mechanism will be formed (see figure 12).

Figure 11

The methodology is similar to the one described in 2.1 for a concentrated l o a d . If 2 < 1 Mechanism A : The mechanism occurs in the first span

a) First plastic hinge on the intermediate support The first plastic hinge occurs on the intermediate support if the following condition is fulfilled :

4(3-2V2)< i f^|-<4(3 + 2V2)

or

0,6863 <

1 +3
. ' 1 +

< 23,3137

138

Let us assumed that q ] is the loading for which the first plastic hinge occurs, then : 8 M pi 1 + 0.1= 2 L 1 + 3 so 3 _ 3 + 2/2 1 + 3 q] 4 1+

b) First plastic hinge in the first span If the first plastic hinge occurs in the first span, then : 128 M
q i

el

1 + 3 + 4-3

so

3 _ 3 + 2/2 3 + 4 - 3 ' 1 + qy~ 64

If 2 > 1

Mechanism : The mechanism occurs in the second span

q U = ^ [ ( o + 4%/2)-4

a) First plastic hinge on the intermediate support The first plastic hinge occurs on the intermediate support if the following condition is satisfied :

4(3-2V 2 )<
or

2(1+)

V",!\

<4(3 + 2>/2)

1 + 1 3 0,6863 < T2T < 23,3137 (1 +)

Let us assumed that q-j is the loading for which the first plastic hinge occurs, then : _8
q i = M

pl
2

1+ 1+3 1+3 2 (1+)

so

q u _ 3 + 2>/2 < = ~
4

139

b) First plastic hinge in the second span If the first plastic hinge occurs in the second span, then
=

^pj,
2 2(4 (4

128

qi

" L

y 3 2(1+
1+3 ~ (1+)
2

so

% _ 3 + 2/2 ^1
64

If 2 = 1

Plastic resistance is reached in the two spans at the same time. y

io
9 8 7
6 S A

V V \

"""
\

Mechanism

V
Mechanism A

3 2 1 0

s^
0.5 0,6 0.7 0.8 0.9

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Figure 12

Figure 13 shows the evolution of the ratio qulq] related to for various values of (boxed values). The curve peaks indicate the limit between mechanism A a n d mechanism B.

qu/ql
1 s

M e e n ar i i s m , < \

Mec :ncamsm B /

1 4 10,0 4.00 3,00 2,00

/
1.00

\
13-

0.75 s

11 -

0,10 0,25 ' 0,50

1 0.1

04

0.3

0,4

0.5

0.

0,7

0,8

0,9

Figure 13

140

3.2

Required plastic rotation Mechanism ( 2 < 1) If the first plastic hinge occurs on the intermediate support, then

_ *req E I

+ 1 3 + 2/2
12

(1+ 3 )]

If the first plastic hinge occurs in the first span, then :

M

plL

+1

'req

^D[I<W^]

Mechanism ( 2 > 1) If the first plastic hinge occurs on the intermediate support, then

If the first plastic hinge occurs in the second span, then

ereq = ^ . ^ [ - > - < ^ i4 , ^] '

Figure 14 shows curves giving the factor kr versus the ratio for various values of the ratio . The required plastic rotation 9 r e q c a n be obtained with :
9

r e q ~ ^r

Mp[L f

141

req = ^r

Mp|L EI

kr
0,4

[0 un

0,3

^' - - r ? ' _. ,~-.

J
- - -~"y
Jo ini

___; ""
0,2

___ ' ' "

0,1

__- / /

IC

_--

SOjrXZ ol

2 01

/ '

1.5-

1.0 f

y
"jT1
/ V / >'
F=^ 0,1

Jf/ ^ -5 / rz_
/ .
0.6
0,7 0,8

LT

04

0,3

0.4

0,5

</
0,?

Figure 14

Note :

In the case of Increasing the loading from zero to reach the plastic mechanism, the first plastic hinge may occur in one of both spans. This first plastic hinge is accurately located at the maximum moment location which Is determined from an elastic analysis. While the loading Increases to reach the ultimate loading, the first plastic hinge moves to reach its final location at collapse, at the distance d given by :

A
0.414 XL

Mechanism A

Mechanism XL Figure 15

142

3.3

Same uniform distributed load for both spans (y = 11 For this case, the mechanism A always occurs since : 2 < 1 The first plastic hinge always occurs at the intermediate support : 8 Mp|
q i

(2-+1)

The collapse is o b t a i n e d for the load qu :

q u = f - ( 3 + 2V2)
The second plastic hinge is located at the distance [y2 1) L = 0,414 L from the origin of the first span.

2 Mp|

The following ratio is a n indicator for the interest of the plastic analysis :

\>

1.4

2u = 2 | 2 . + 1 1
qi 4
l

r- 1,0

1 -

0.1 0.2 0,3 0,4

0.5 0.6 0,7 0.8 0.9

Figure 16 Required plastic rotation 6 r e q

M D | L 3 + 2 J2 _ r Qreq = " f j y (1+) ( * 1 1 +8^/2)

Mp|L e r e q = 0,4857 -=j- (1 + ) ( 2 + 0,3137 ) Mp|L .

or :

The curve 0 r e q = f (a) is given at figure 17 : 9 r e q = kr

143

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

Figure 17

Required rotation capacity R req : The required rotation capacity c a n be calculated by dividing 0 r e q by the sum of the elastic rotations at the ends of a single equivalent b e a m . The lengtn of this b e a m c a n b e taken as the distance between zero-moment points of e a c h side of the intermediate support, when the collapse is reached.

0,4142 L

vj?

Equivalent single beam

Figure 18 If > /2 - 1. a zero moment point is located between the second a n d the third support of the b e a m . In this case, R r e q is given by :

32_&(2__11+8^)

*req
Or: R r e a = 5,6618 ( 2 - + 0,3137 )

144

If , /2 1. the total length of the second span must be taken into a c c o u n t for the calculation of |. In this case, R r e q is given by :

Rreq

3 + 2 ^ 2 + ) ( 2 + 8 / 2 ) 6 + 32/2
071, 9714

Or:

req'

( 1 + ) ( 2 + 0,3137 + 0,1716

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

Figure 19 Note The maximal required rotation capacity of a two span continuous subject to an uniform distributed load is 1,78. beam

145

3.4

Examples The following table gives the results for values of the ratios a n d . These results are c o m p a r e d with results issued from PEP micro program. For all the cases, the basic data are : Cross-section Steel Length of the 1st span Note : Mpi = J, I374.106 = 0,0935438 IPE 270 S235 L = 1000 c m daN.cm Wp| = 484 c m 3 pl.y fy = 235 MPa ly = 5790 c m 4 E = 210000 MPa

El

Results from Formulas PEP micro Formulas PEP micro Formulas PEP micro Formulas PEP micro Formulas PEP micro Formulas PEP micro

mechanism

qi (daN/cm) 10,115 10,114 8.092 8,091 12,476 12,525 12,132 12,131 6,066 6,066 9,099 9,098

3u (daN/cm) 13,258 13,269 10,358 10,366 13,258 13,269 13,258 13.269 6,629 6,635 13.258 13,269

Qu/qi

^req (rad) 0.013080 0,013127 0.015717 0.015779 0.020196 0,020820 0.005789 0.005850 0.005789 0,005850 0.028506 0.028583

0,35 0,80 0,80 1.00 1,00 1,00

5,0 2.0 0.1 0.5 2.0 1,00

A A A A A A A-B A-B Table 3

1,311 1.312 1.280 1.281 1,063 1,059 1.093 1,094 1,093 1,094 1,457 1,458

For example 3, the first plastic hinge occurs in the span. Examples 4 a n d 5 are similar since the span lengths are equal a n d the loading ratios between the spans are inverse.

146

TWO SPAN BEAM WITH A CONCENTRATED LOAD AND AN UNIFORM DISTRIBUTED LOAD In order to evaluate the relative influence of a concentrated load a n d a n uniform distributed load, the following example has been studied :

Crosssection Steel grade L= 10m

IPE 270 S235

7
172 172

4
Figure 20

In figure 21, the required rotation at collapse 6 r e q is plotted as a function of the ratio : = qL
0.06-

Oreq (rad)

0.05-

0.04-

0.03.

0.02-

0.01.

F/qU
n.
0
" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

10

Figure 21 In the first part of the curve, the distributed load is predominant and the first plastic hinge occurs on the intermediate support. In the second part, the concentrated load becomes predominant a n d the plastic hinge occurs at the l o a d location. It is rather difficult to give formulas a n d abacuses to deal with this case for which parameters could be : Span length ratio Relative position of the concentrated load Ratio of the distributed loads for the first span a n d the second one Ratio between the concentrated load o n the distributed load

A more general method is given in the next paragraph.

147

5 5.1

TWO SPAN BEAM - GENERAL CASE Principle After a n elastic analysis, w e assume that the maximum moment M m a x exceeds the plastic moment M p | a t a distance L from the origin of the b e a m .

0< <1

"

XL Figure 22

So = M m a x - Mp| is to be redistributed. For this, the following diagram has to be a d d e d to the one resulting from the elastic analysis.

Figure 23 This diagram is obtained by considering the beam with a perfect hinge at the maximum moment location, and moments applied e a c h side of this hinge. The required plastic rotation is the rotation in this hinge subjected to . Therefore the expression of the required plastic rotation is given by :

Note

This expression does not depend on the loading, but only on .

It must be checked that the plastic moment is not exceeded somewhere else in the b e a m : the mechanism must not be reached. If a is the loading factor of all the applied loads, = | ( ^ 1 )
a

ai

Loading factor for the first plastic hinge Loading factor at collapse

148

req ~ Kr El

A f A l

O.I

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.7

0,8

0.9

Figure 24

Note :

The required rotation capacity Rre can not be expressed directly AM because it depends on the shape of the moment diagram.

from

This a p p r o a c h allows the designer to calculate the required plastic rotation for a load level between the first plastic hinge a n d the second one.

5.2

Example Let us apply this method to a particular case of the load configuration given in Paragraph 4.
5200 daN 2.6 daN/cm

lllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

, 500 cm , 500 cm
I

, 1000 cm

,
1

Figure 25

An elastic analysis gives the moment diagram plotted in figure 26. The maximum moment is l o c a t e d a concentrated load location a n d it exceeds the plastic moment.
-812500

1218700

45500

Figure 26

149

We c a n calculate : = 1218700 1137400 = 81300 daN.cm = 1,0 a n d = 0,5: L + 1 El 3 2

req=

= a 0 1 7 8 3 r a d

AMLX+ 1
Note : PEP micro program gives : fyeq = ~~. 3 In order to check that the plastic moment is not reached in another crosssection after moment redistribution, the following moment diagram must be a d d e d to the first one :
.
0.5 L

j = 0,01786 rad

"
Hinge 1626 - M = -81300

Zssstiti
Figure 27

In the most critical section, that is : On intermediate support : M^ = 812500 2 81300 = 975100 daN.cm < M p |

6 6.1

HOW TO PERFORM A PLASTIC ANALYSIS USING AN ELA STIC ANALYSIS PROGRAM Scope A plastic analysis of a frame c a n be performed with the help of a simple elastic analysis program provided the following assumption is satisfied. Assumption : The axial force a n d the shear force must not reduce the plastic bending moment resistance.

6.2

Methodology The method consists in a succession of elastic linear analyses. This method is known as the stepbystep method. Each step is limited by the occurence of a new plastic hinge : the plastic moment is reached in a new crosssection somewhere in the structure.

150

Figure 28 shows flowchart of the methodology, considering that the loading increases in proportion to a load factor a. This method allows the designer to calculate the required plastic rotation in the plastic hinges just before collapse a n d even for e a c h step of the incrementation.

I Geometry Steel Support conditions Loading j Initializations i=0 Moment diagram : Mo = 0 Shear force diagram : Vo = 0 Displacements : Do = 0

ELASTIC ANALYSIS

If i = 0 : Support conditions are not valid If > 0 : A plastic mechanism is reached Results of the elastic analysis i Moment diagram : m Shear force diagram : Displacements : d Rotations in i h hinges : Elastic return Suppression of the hinge Research of the crosssection for which = (Mpi Mi)/m is minimum 1 = 1+1 Load factor : a i = ai1 + State of the structure at the end of the step (for the loading a i F) Moment diagram : Mi = M(i1) + m Shear force diagram : Vi = V[i1 ) + Displacements: Di = D(il)+ d Rotations tn t h hinges = +

A new hing Is Introduced in t h structure

Figure 28 Note : This method is rather easy to apply to a simple struture (Simple frame. Continuous beam, ... ) . For other cases, a specific program as PEP micro is necessary.

151

6.3

Example We propose to make a plastic analysis of a continuous b e a m with three spans, as shown in figure 29. For this example, an elastic analysis program c a n be used, but the elastic calculations could also be made with the help of a manual method. The results c a n b e c o m p a r e d with PEP micro results (see Annex). Crosssection Steel IPE 270 S235
30 kN/m

25 kN/m

6 m

8m

6 m

Figure 29 First step Elastic calculation

1368900 1233900

L
748450 698610

586450

Figure 30a First plastic hinge The moment is maximum on the second support, so : ] = 11374000 = 0,8309 1368900 and a] = a 0 +

- = 0,8309
Then, the state of the structure can easily be determined at the end of this step, by multiplying the moment, the shear force, the deflections .... by the load a So the moment diagram is :
1137400 1025247

621887

580475

487281

Figure 30b At the end of the first step, there is no plastic rotation to calculate.

152

Second step An hinge is introduced in the b e a m , a new elastic analysis is performed on the following structure.

30 kN/m

25 kN/m

25
-1625000

/$.

1350000

1270000

457500

Figure 30-c We must check that the rotation in the first hinge has the same sign as the moment : = -0,04825 rad. So, . > 0. This means that there is no elastic return. Four cross-sections must be investigated : First span Second span Third support Third span = = = = ( 1137400 - 0.8309 748450) / 1350000 = 0,3819 (1137400 - 0,8309 698610) / 1270000 = 0,4385 ( 1137400 - 0,8309 1233900) / 1625000 = 0,0690 ( 1137400 - 0,8309 586450) / 457500 = 1,4210

Therefore, the second plastic hinge is located on the third support a n d it is o c c u r e d for a2 = a] + ] = 0,8309 + 0,0690 a 2 = 0.8999 At the end of step 2, the moment diagram is :
-1137400 -1137400

715037
668105

4
518848

Figure 30-d

At the e n d of step 2, the plastic rotation is the rotation in the hinge given by the analysis : 9 r e q = = 0,0690 0,04825 = 3,3292.IO3 r a d

153

Third step A new hinge is introduced in the beam and a new elastic analysis is performed o n the following structure.
30 kN/m

Ill i l

lilllilllllllililil lil...

25 kN/m

il il limililiilllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllin
-0

1350000

2000000

1125000

Figure 30-e The rotations in the hinges have the same sign as the moments : 1st plastic hinge (second support) : 2nd plastic hinge (third support) : = 0,066069 rad = 0,062368 rad

Now, only three crosssections must be investigated in order to know where the last plastic hinge occurs : First span Second span Third span = (1137400 715037) / 1350000 = 0,3129 = ( 1137400 668105) / 2000000 = 0,2346 = (1137400 518848) / 1125000 = 0,5498

Therefore the last plastic hinge occurs in the middle of the second span for the load factor a3 = a 2 + 2 = 0,8999 + 0,2346 a 3 = 1,1345
1137400 1137400

A
1031747 1137400

A
782773

Figure 30-f Plastic rotation in the hinge on the second support :

e

req = 3.3292.103 + 0.2346 0,066069 e r e q = 0,018829 rad

Plastic rotation in the hinge on the third support :

e

req = < 2 3 4 6

0.062368

6 r e q = 0.014631 rad The plastic analysis is now complete in so far as a plastic mechanism is now obtained in the second span.

154

6.4

Remarks This methodology may be applied to some simple structures such as continuous beams or simple frames. However the designer must take care to the behaviour of the structure during such a design. Some particular phenomena may occur a n d they must be taken into account. We give some examples hereafter.

Elastic return During the step-by-step procedure, the sign of the rotation in an hinge may c h a n g e . This c a n be explained by the fact that a plastic hinge takes a n elastic behaviour again. It is usually assumed that the plastic rotation remains. Then the structure must be modified by suppressing the hinge a n d the elastic analysis is to be m a d e again.

2)

M-N interaction In a frame, a reduced moment resistance must be taken into account if the influence of axial force c a n not be neglected. Then an interaction curve has to considered. During the step-by-step method, moment a n d axial force may vary in such a way that they remain on the interaction curve. Moreover, axial elongation and rotation have to be evaluated with respect to the normality law.

3)

Modification of the type of plastic hinge In a plastic hinge which has been formed without taking into the axial force, the axial force c a n increase and it may reach a value that it is not without influence on the moment resistance anymore.

The designer must keep in mind the real plastic behaviour of a steel frame, a n d it is r e c o m m e n d e d to use a specific program such as PEP micro which a c c o u n t for all these phenomenas. F igure 31 gives examples of the evolution of the forces in a crosssection.

/N N/Npl
Interaction curve

Isteo'l

>Jsieo3l

Elastic Return

"V AS.
|Slep2f ^

^Usieol

. ISlDSl
^^~ rjirojj r

Figure 31

155

ANNEX : Continuous beam with three spans * * * * * * * * * * * * =* *= * PEP m i c r o * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

C.T.I.CM.

V e r s i o n 2.02 - 06/94

DATA FILE : C:\PEP2\RON\BEAM.PEP Date: 14/03/1995 Continuous beam Coordinates 1 0.0. 2 600. 0. 3 1400. 0. 4 2000. 0. incidence 1/1 to 4 characteristics 1 2 3 catalog IPEX 270 supports 1 y, 2 3 4 y loads/member 1 uniform fy -30. loads/member 2 3 uniform fy -25. analysis plastic stop failure output after factor 0. Plot deflected, events End Time: 9:30:03

GENERAL PARAMETERS Units : daN cm rad Number of nodes : 4 Number of members : 3 Modulus of elasticity : .210E+07 Yield strength : 2350.00 Coefficient de dilatation..: .120E-04 SIGN CONVENTION FOR THE FORCES , , : action of the right part on the left part in the initial local system of the member consequence : compression : N<0 tension : N>0 ANALYSIS PLASTIC ANALYSIS End calculations factor : COLLAPSE

156

Step:

Load factor:

.831

Units :

daN cm

rad

DISPLACEMENTS OF NODES (Global system of the frame) Node 1 2 3 4 X Disp .O00O0E+00 .OOOOOE+OO .00000E+00 .00000E+00 Y Disp .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+OO , 00000E+00 Rot -.90954E-02 -.25814E-03 .14881E-02 .69430E-02

SUPPORT REACTIONS (Global system of the frame) Node 1 2 3 4 X Force .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+OO .00000E+00 Y Force .55818E+04 .17821E+05 .16108E+05 .45225E+04 Moment .OOOOOE+OO .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+OO .00000E+00

GLOBAL STATIC EQUILIBRIUM (Global system of the frame) Loads Reactions Horizontal .00000E+00 .00000E+00 Vertical -.44033E+05 .44033E+05 Overturning 1 -.42288E+08 .42288E+08 Overturning 2 -.42288E+08 .42288E+08

MEMBER FORCES AND ROTATIONS (Initial local system of members) Member Node/Pos 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 .400 M 2 2 .500 M 3 3 .600 M 4 .+00 .+00 .+00 .+00 .+00 .+00 .OOOOOE+OO .+00 .+00 -.55818+04 .40002+03 93728+04 -.84483+04 -.14020+03 .81679+04 -.79396+04 -.46233+03 .45225+04 .00000+00 .62182+06 -.11373+07 -.11373+07 58042+06 -.10251+07 -.10251+07 .48723+06 .00000+00 End.Rot. .+00 .00000+00 .00000+00 .00000+00 .00000+00 .00000+00 .00000+00 .00000+00 Glob.rot. .+00

PLASTIFICATION

Member 1 Position 1.000 Node 2 Number of plastic events in the frame:

Type M 1

157

Step:

Load factor:

.900

Units :

daN cm

rad

DISPLACEMENTS OF NODES (Global system of the frame) Node 1 2 3 4 X Disp .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .OO0O0E+00 .00000E+00 Y Disp .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 ,00000E+00 Rot -.10629E-01 -.20574E-02 .20562E-02 .72981E-02

SUPPORT REACTIONS (Global system of the frame) Node 1 2 3 4 X Force .OOOOOE+OO .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 Y Force .62036E+04 .18993E+05 .17644E+05 .48536E+04 Moment .00000E+00 .0000OE+OO .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00

GLOBAL STATIC EQUILIBRIUM (Global system of the frame) Loads Reactions Horizontal .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 Vertical -.47694E+05 .47694E+05 Overturning 1 -.45805E+08 .45805E+08 Overturning 2 -.45805E+08 .45805E+08

MEMBER FORCES AND ROTATIONS (Initial local system of members) mbe:c Node/'Pos 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 .400 M 3 2 1 2 .500 M 3 3 .600 M 4 .OOOOOE+00 .+00 .OOOOOE+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 -.62036E+04 .27566+03 .99945+04 -.89988E+04 .12835E+00 .89991E+04 -.86449E+04 -.54580E+03 .48536E+04 M .00000E+00 .71135E+06 -.11373E+07 -.11373E+07 .66245E+06 -.11374E+07 --11374E+07 .51693E+06 .00000E+00 End.Rot. .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 Glob.rot. .00000E+00

PLASTIC DEFORMATIONS IN MEMBERS Member Node/Pos 1 2 Plast.Rot. -.33333E-02 Plast.Elong. .OOOOOE+00

PLASTIFICATION : Member 2 Position 1.000 Node 3 Number of plastic events in the frame:

Type M 2

158

Step:

Load factor:

1.137

Units:

daN cm

rad

DISPLACEMENTS OF NODES (Global system of the frame) Node 1 2 3 4 X Disp .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 Y Disp .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 Rot --15902E-01 -.12473E-01 -.23377E-02 .11692E-01

SUPPORT REACTIONS (Global system of the frame) Node 1 2 3 4 X Force .OOOOOE+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 Y Force .83406E+04 .23505E+05 .21799E+05 .66344E+04 Moment .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .00000+00

GLOBAL STATIC EQUILIBRIUM (Global system of the frame) Loads Reactions Horizontal .00000E+00 .OOOOOE+00 Vertical -.60279E+05 .60279E+05 Overturning 1 -.57891E+08 .57891E+08 Overturning 2 -.57891E+08 .57891E+08

MEMBER FORCES AND ROTATIONS (Initial local system of members) Member Node/Pos 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 .400 M 2 2 .500 M 3 3 .600 M 4 N .00000E+00 .00000E+00 OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00O00E+O0 .OOOOOE+00 -.83406E+04 -.15174E+03 .12132E+05 -.11373E+05 .12835E+00 .11374E+05 -.10426E+05 -.18963E+03 .66344E+04 M .00000E+00 10191E+07 -.11373E+07 -.11373E+07 .11374E+07 -.11374E+07 -.11374E+07 .77338E+06 .00000E+00 End.Rot. .0OOOOE+00 OOOOOE+00 .00000E+00 .000O0E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 .00000E+00 Glob.rot. .00000E+00

PLASTIC DEFORMATIONS IN MEMBERS Member Node/Pos 1 2 2 3 Plast.Rot. -.19021E-01 -.14809E-01 PIast.Elong. .OOOOOE+OO .OOOOOE+00

PLASTIFICATION : Member 2 Position .500 Type M Number of plastic events in the frame:

159

UNSTABLE STRUCTURE TESTING FOR ELASTIC RETURN AFTER COLLAPSE UNSTABLE STRUCTURE CONFIRMED FAILURE ...

REVIEW OF PLASTIC EVENTS Factor : Factor : Factor : .831 .900 1.137 Member : Member : Member : 1 2 2 Node : Node : Posit : 2 3 .500 Type: M Type: M Type: M

Total calculation time : END

.72 seconds

160

Annex 9 Document 3263-1-29 Mr. Couchman's thesis (excerpts) (Ref. 7) (9 pages) Design of continuous beams allowing for rotation capacity"

161

b) Semi-compact sections (according to EC4): - Determine 0 a v . This is a function of the sections, spans and loads, and is either given by equation 7.1 or taken as 2.0.

AVAILABLE ROTATION CAPACITY

REQUIRED ROTA TION CA PA CITY Oreq

[,-t, f t : ! * i i A " : - : v . . .'

ff'T

-'"I -.

jy

-LL

M'

PLASTIC or COMPACT
F.g.7.2

M
SEMI COMPACT

M
=

M' M

JJ
EQ7.1 or 2.0

Hg. 7.5

Fig. 7.3

0 a -~ = :

Hg. 7.6

; av

COMPARISON OF

VERIFICATION OF SECTION

Resistance moments > applied redistributed moments

Figure 7.1 Overview of design method.

162

Web or flange slender? no Calculate Mp| and M p l

yes

Design method not applicable

Preliminary calculations

Calculate MeI and Mei

J
no Web or flange N. semi-compact? / yes Calculate Available rotation capacity Determine

Calculate

Determine \ > Identify req vs. () curve Required rotation capacity

Determine from req vs. f(A) curve > Allow for and propping Comparison of rotation capacity

Calculate applied moments Verification ofthe section Revise section no Resistance moments > Applied moments yes Section OK

Figure 7.7- Flowchart ofthe detailed procedure used to verify that a given beam can support a given load.

163

Table 7.1 Identification of curves in Figure 7.2 tobe usedfor different combinations of L u and a.
L

LT= (m)

1 . 0 1 4 8

1.25

1 . 5 3 8 11

1.75

2 . 0 5 10 15

2 . 5 7 11 17

3.0 8 13

3 . 5 9 15

4 . 0 10 16

5.0 11 17

6 . 0 12

8 . 0 14

10.0

a=0.50 a=0.75 a=1.00

2 6 10

4 9 13

14

Note : values are not given for cases where 0 a is less than 2.0, since plastic or compact sections will normally exceed this value. Available rotation capacity of steel section alone ( )
1 2 3

20.0

/
18.0

16.0 14.0

y
^ ^

12.0

10.0

8
8.0
9 6.0

10 11 12 13 14 15 17

4.0 2.0

0.0
200 250
2

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

f = 235 N/mm

Steel section (IPE)

Figure 7.2 Relationship between and steel section. Example for IPE sections with Fe E 235 steel. Curves showing a as a function ofthe steel section are not only useful in simplifying the new design method, they also enable the influence on a of changing the steel section or the proportion ofthe web depth in compression to be appreciated. For curves 11 to 17 a small change in section size does not

164

produce much change in a , whereas this is not the case for curves 1 to 7. For a given curve there is generally an increase in a as steel section size increases, but because section size is related to span length the same curve would not normally be used for a wide range of sections. Curves are given in Figure 7.2 for values of equal to 0.50, 0.75 and 1.00. Definitive design curves would consider smaller intervals of a, and because it is possible to group curves this would not lead to a large increase in the number of curves needed. / ~ d, = 175 mm d, = 100 mm - d. = 50 mm

0.95 - ,

For Fe E 355 increase ^/* ^y:

a.

0.6

0.7

0.8

1.0

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Steel section (IPE) Figure 7.3 - Relationship between ^/ and steel section. Example for IPE sections. Figure 7.3 gives values of the adjustment factor a v /a as a function of the steel section for IPE sections. This adjustment factor takes into account the influence of composite action on the steel section. Values of a v / a depend on the slab reinforcement lever arm (dg), the proportion ofthe web depth in compression (a) and the yield strength ofthe steel (fy). Curves are given for Fe E 235 steel. To allow for the use of Fe E 355 steel, values of a v /a c a n D e increased by an amount which is independent ofthe section and given for each curve on the figure. For example when = 0.6 values of a v / a can be increased by 0.05, 0.04 or 0.03 depending on the reinforcement lever arm, as noted on the respective curves. In deriving the curves in Figure 7.3 it was assumed that S500 reinforcing steel is used. Separate curves are needed for different families of sections.

165

beam load capacity, so an exact knowledge of the length which influences inelastic rotation is not required.

7.3.2

Semicompact sections

It is shown in chapters 4 and 6 that to enable calculation of load capacity for beams with semi-compact sections it is necessary to calculate either the peak resistance moment Qsiri2}) at which buckling occurs, or the post-buckling resistance moment which corresponds to an available rotation capacity of the composite section ( av ) of 2.0. a v and the resistance moment of the section are dependent not only on the section properties but also on the arrangement of spans and loads. As explained in chapter 6, two distinct cases can be identified. When the arrangements of spans and loads give an elastic moment ratio of 1.3 the shape ofthe curve showing required rotation capacity as a function of moment redistribution is such that, as required rotation capacity increases from 0.0 to 2.0, the gain in moment redistribution leads to an increase in beam load capacity which is balanced by the loss in load capacity due to the decrease in section resistance moment. For an elastic moment ratio greater than 1.3 there is a greater increase in moment redistribution, and for an elastic moment ratio less than 1.3 there is less increase in redistribution. The consequences of this are that: - When span and load arrangements give an elastic moment ratio less than 1.3 ultimate load may be assumed to be reached when the section buckles, so the resistance moment ofthe section is taken as the peak resistance moment ( ^ 1 ) which is given by equation 4.11, 4.13, 4.15 (LRFD), or 4.2 (EC4). The value of a v which corresponds to the rotation at which buckling occurs is derived from equation 4.21 and given by: M.
M

=2
**

(7.1)

pl'

available rotation capacity ofthe composite section av peak resistance moment M, max plastic resistance moment M, Pi - When span and load arrangements give an elastic moment ratio equal to or exceeding 1.3 ultimate load may be assumed to be reached when the rotation capacity equals 2.0. The resistance moment which corresponds to this value of a v is the post-buckling value M21, given by equation 4.17. A summary ofthe values of resistance moment and available rotation capacity to be used for different cases with semi-compact sections is given in Table 7.3. Table 7.3 - Values of resistance moment and ^ to be usedfor different cases with semicompact sections. Elastic moment ratio Resistance moment av Mel < 1-3 ^max f^max'.Mpf) [Equation 7.1] Pel * 1.3 M2' 2.0

In conclusion, using the procedure described above a v and resistance moment can be determined for a beam with a semi-compact support section. B ecause these are the same two parameters which define

166

X1 LLJ iz

: largest value of for which buckling is inelastic : unrestrained length of beam in hogging : radius of gyration about minor-axis

- Flange local buckling,

M^ivy-tiv-M^)
=

-1
=-^

(4.13)

(4.14)

The elastic resistance moment again allows for a residual stress of 69 N/mm^ in the flanges. - Web local buckling,

M _ ' = M ^ ' - ( M ^ - ! ^ )

^=";

(4.15)

(4.16)

d : depth of web. No allowance is made for residual stresses in the steel section when calculating the elastic resistance moment for this failure mode. The resistance moment ofthe section is taken as the lowest ofthe three values for these failure modes, i.e. it is determined by the most critical of lateral torsional buckling, flange local buckling or web local buckling. Kubo and Galambos Kubo and Galambos [33] showed that resistance moments calculated using the LRFD model agree well with peak moments measured in tests. They also considered results from three-point bending tests to show that a linear falling branch on the moment vs. rotation curve may be used to represent postbuckling behaviour. The form of this linear falling branch is given by:

M'=Mpl' M' Mpi' M max '' d'

M , ' Mpl'

0.1

'1

M ^

eel' M P1

(4.17)

support moment plastic resistance moment, calculated using a stress-block model peak resistance moment, calculated using LRFD model rotation at the support rotation at the support which corresponds to the attainment of Mpi', assuming elastic rigidity.

A typical moment vs. rotation curve predicted by this model is shown in Figure 4.3.

167

behaviour of a beam with a plastic or compact support section, the same design method can be used for beams with any of these three types of section.

7.4

REQUIRED ROTATION CAPACITY

The graphical representation of required rotation capacity ( r e q ) as a function of moment redistribution () is considered in detail in chapter 6. The use of r e q vs. curves is an effective way of allowing for all the parameters which affect the rotation capacity required by a beam to achieve a given moment redistribution. These parameters are: - Elastic moment ratio (^) and span type (external or internal). These two parameters affect the basic form of re q vs. curves. - Plastic moment ratio (|Xpi), which affects values of moment redistribution but not the form of req v s ^ c u r v e s - Degree of shear connection and construction method (propped or unpropped). These two parameters may necessitate modifications to the value of moment redistribution which is given by a r e q vs. curve. The way in which they are taken into account is discussed in section 7.5. To identify the appropriate r e q vs. curve for a given example, the distribution of "uncracked elastic" moments must firstly be determined. This distribution shows whether a mechanism would form first in an external or internal span, and gives the elastic moment ratio. Knowledge ofthe span type and the elastic moment ratio allows the moment redistribution which corresponds to a required rotation capacity of 1.0 to be found from Figure 7.5. This figure shows moment redistribution as a function of elastic moment ratio, and is basically the same as Figure 6.4 except that specific Compcal results are not presented. Two curves are shown, one for external spans and the other for internal spans, for beams with a plastic moment ratio of 0.57. Curves are given for this value of plastic moment ratio so that they agree with the choice of axis used for the curves shown in Figure 7.6. Any value of plastic moment ratio could have been used to establish these curves provided the two figures are in agreement. Curves shown in Figure 7.5 can be used for a beam with any plastic moment ratio. As stated above, both curves in Figure 7.5 relate to a required rotation capacity of 1.0, but any value of rotation capacity could have been chosen since the purpose of Figure 7.5 is merely to fix both co-ordinates of a point on Figure 7.6. The required rotation capacity value of this point is not important, provided that it corresponds to the correct value of moment redistribution. Knowing the value of moment redistribution which corresponds to a required rotation capacity of 1.0 for a plastic moment ratio of 0.57 enables the appropriate curve to be chosen from Figure 7.6 a) for external spans, or 7.6 b) for internal spans. These figures are derived from Figures 6.3 and 6.5 respectively, and the form ofthe curves is fully described in section 6.3.1. So that the curves shown in Figure 7.6 are applicable to beams with any value of plastic moment ratio, required rotation capacity is not simply given as a function of moment redistribution, rather required rotation capacity is shown as a function of: -(.57-)' (7.2)

Mpi *

moment redistribution plastic moment ratio constant given in Table 7.4 as a function of &\. The derivation of this constant is explained below.

The choice of abscissa comes from the fact that curves shown in Figure 7.6, although being re n vs. curves for a plastic moment ratio of 0.57, may be used for beams with any value of plastic moment ratio. This is possible because changes in plastic moment ratio merely lead to a series of parallel curves

168

on a re q vs. diagram, as discussed in chapter 6. These parallel curves can all be represented by the same curve if the abscissa is revised to allow for the differences in moment redistribution between them. Moment redistribution () at ^=1.0 [%] 50 40 30 External span 20 10 Internal span

V/0.0 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Elastic moment ratio () Figure 7.5- Moment redistribution vs. elastic moment ratio for required rotation capacity of 1.0. Firstly it is necessary to calculate the rate of change in moment redistribution with plastic moment ratio, given by the parameter *. Knowing this rate of change, differences in moment redistribution can be calculated for given differences in plastic moment ratio. To establish values of * for various arrangements of spans and loads, the difference in moment redistribution between curves for plastic moment ratios of 0.5 and 0.6 was calculated using equation 6.5. Plastic moment ratios of 0.5 and 0.6 were chosen since they are representative of values likely to be found in practice. Values of * were then calculated by dividing the difference in moment redistribution by the change in plastic moment ratio, i.e. 0.6 - 0.5. It was found that * varies as a function ofthe elastic moment ratio (Hgi) ofthe beam. Results are presented in Table 7.4, which gives * for various values of elastic moment ratio. Linear interpolation is possible to calculate * for other arrangements of spans and loads. It should be noted that values of * given in Table 7.4 are only valid when the elastic moment ratio exceeds the plastic moment ratio, so that redistribution is away from the support. Having calculated * for different arrangements of spans and loads, the value of plastic moment ratio can be calculated for a given beam from a consideration of span and support resistance moments. Knowing * and the plastic moment ratio, allowable moment redistribution can be calculated from the value of -(0.57-)* derived from Figure 7.6. Table 7.4 - Values ofA*as a function of elastic moment ratio.

H\ *

1.8 65

1.6 69

1.4 74

1.2 82

1.0 92

0.8 108

0.6 133

169

Required rotation capacity ( )

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

a)
Required rotation capacity ( ^ )

-(0.57-[)* [%]

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

-(0.57-)* [%]

b)
Figure 7.6 - Required rotation capacity as a function o/A-(0.57-Upi )* a) external span, b) internal span. Curves shown in Figure 7.6 represent the results of specific calculations using Compcal. These differ from definitive design curves which would be based on a large number of simulations, adopting small load steps, using the procedure described in section 6.3.3 to group the curves. Definitive curves would not contain the irregularities evident in the curves shown for specific cases. However, definitive curves

170

Annex 10

Document 3198-3-3 (LABEIN) (50 pages) "Technical report n 4 : Numerical simulations of class 2 & 3 limit and class 3 & 4 limit"

171

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL INTRODUCTION These series of simulations have been carried out with the aim of providing information about class limitations in order to verify the EC3 2&3 and 3&4 class limits. 2&3 class limit has been obtained only for extreme values of b/tf and d/tw, although 3&4 class limit has been verified for full range of b/tf and d/tw values. Both limits have been obtained for S235 and S460 steel grades. MODELLING Cross sections * TPEA500, HEA200, HEAA300, HEA280, IPE300, IPEA400, and HEA450 with flange and web thickness modified * Span: 6 m Meshing 616 elements and 1913 nodes. Element type S8R-Abaqus (parabolic 8-node shell element) Load application * Constraints: Vertical displacement of the central section upper flange nodes linked together Boundary conditions * Vertical supports: both ends * Lateral restrains: both ends, central section, and L ^ specified in CM66 in accordance with the
RESTRAINS LOAD

172

Analysis conditions * h-tf= cte for full range of values * tf/tw= 1.5 for the central values of b/tf and d/tw * Fillet radius modelled by means of the following overthicknesses in each case: 500 L l = R = 21mm L2= 4/5 R + tfaverage/2 = 26.805 mm tfaverage= 20.01 mm HEA200 Ll= 4/5 R + twaverage/2 = 16.26 mm L2=R = 18 mm HEAA300 Ll= 4/5 R + twaverage/2 = 25.35 mm L2= R= 27 mm HEA280 Ll= 4/5 R + twaverage/2 = 23,2 mm L2= R= 24 mm IPE300 Ll= R= 15 mm L2= 4/5 R + tfaverage/2 = 17,35 mm IPEA400 L1=R=21 mm L2= 4/5 R + tfaverage/2 = 22,8 mm twaverage= 3.72 mm

173

HEA450 Ll= 4/5 R + twaverige/2 = 27,35 mm L2= R= 27 mm These values have been taking into account in order to evaluate Mel and Mpi Mel,Mpl = (Ll,L2,Section)

. L1

1
L2

RESULTS Linear analysis The evaluation of each point in the figures has been performed by searching the tw and tf values which give a critical buckling moment equal to the elastic moment of the section. The calculation of the critical buckling loads has been done assuming a linear behaviour. The class 3&4 limits for S235 and S460 steels obtained in the simulation are showed in figures 1 to 3. The simulation results show that central zone of the class 3&4 limit could be adjusted to a straight line, which brings into line with the EC3 classification method. In this area the EC3

174

limit between class 3 and 4 seems to be on the safe side comparing to the simulation results. A safety coefficient of approximately 2 would be obtained. The web-flange combined buckling mode obtained in the simulation for the central zone of the class 3&4 limit is showed in Fig. 13. As far as the extreme values of b/tf and d/tw are concerned, the EC3 limit between class 3 and 4 seems to be on the safe side too. There is a quite wide band of values considered class 4 by the EC3 , which would be considered as class 3 according to the simulation results. On the other hand for high values of d/tw the class 3&4 EC3 limit the results of the simulation show that a local web buckling appears and, therefore, the critical buckling load becomes independent on the flange thickness tf. The local web buckling is showed in Fig. 14. As a consequence of this, an increase on tf does not affect the critical load while the elastic moment rises leading to a lower buckling factor (M^/M^). For example in the case L4_D26 (IPEA500, tf=28.6 mm, tw=2.6 mm): Mel= 661390.2 N-m Vzel= Pe/2= 220500 N M*d= 202 MPa Normal stress

V = = 192 MPa Shear tress

A web

Assuming the following elastic critical buckling stresses as a reference, corresponding to a rectangular plates with all edges simply supported :
a=b= 0.439 re; i= 0.0026 , E= 205000 MPa; v=0.285;

C= 202 MPa= 1.2*a

i/b=l; K=21.1; rcrit=(K*E*(l/b)')/(l-v')= 60 MP i/b=l; K=7.75

T= 192 MPa= 3.2*1,.

175

The web local buckling seems to be produced by the shear stresses rather than by normal stresses. Then a symmetrical web buckling (see fig. 14) can be expected. This is the situation in the case of profiles with a very small value of the web thickness tw and with a very high value of the ratio tf/tw. To sum up, the EC3 classification method can be considered on the safe side for all of b/tf and d/tw values. Non-Linear Analysis The evaluation of each point in the figures has been performed by searching the tw and tf values which give a maximum moment equal to the elastic moment of the section for the 3&4 class limit, and equal to the plastic moment for 2&3 class limit. The stress-strain curves used to characterize the material behaviour for the non-linear analysis are shown on the figures 6 and 7. The class 2&3 and class 3&4 limits for S235 and S460 steels obtained in the simulation are showed in figures 9 to 12. The results seem to present the same tendency that those obtained from the linear analysis, although additional analysis would be required to deduce the conclusions.

176

LINEAR ANALYSIS

Class 3&4 Limit (S235.S460)

IPEA500_460 HEA200_460 o * : IPEA500_235 HEA200_235 Limit 460 Limit 235 EC3

- EC3

20

40

60

80 alprv d/tw-eps

100

120

140

160

Figure 1

LINEAR ANALYSIS

Class 3&4 Limit (S235)

a
-1 00

IPEA500_235 HEA200.235 Limit 3&4 EC3.235 EC3_235

o *

20

40

60

80 0.5 d/tw

100

120

140

160

Figure 2

LINEAR ANALYSIS

Class 3&4 Limit (S460)

70 r

60

50 IPEA500_460 40
VO

HEA200_460 Limit 3&4 EC3_460 * EC3_460

b/tf 30

20 +

10

1
0 10 20 30 40 50 0.5 d/tw

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 3

CLASS 3 AND 4 LIMIT LINEAR ANALYSIS EXTREME VALUES HEA 200 Point la 2a 3a 4a 5a lb 2b 3b 4b 5b tw 8 5.5 3.72 2,68 2 8 5,5 3,72 2,68 2 tf 2,25 2,3 2,3 2,5 2,7 3,35 3,35 3,8 4,1 4,85 f y (MPa) alphad/tw 8,85 235 12,88 235 19,04 235 26,39 235 35,325 235 8,79 460 12,78 460 18,84 460 26,1 460 34,78 460 b/tf 88,88 86,95 86,95 80 74,07 59,7 59,7 52,63 48,78 41,23 Load Factor 1,05 1,04 0,977 1,03 1,02 1,06 0,971 0,99 0,943 1,04 h-tf Buckling Mode 144 Antimetrical 144 Symmetrical 144 Symmetrical 144 Antimetrical 144 Antimetrical 144 Symmetrical 144 Antimetrical 144 Antimetrical 144 Antimetrical 144 Antimetrical Acronym L1_D23 L2_D23 L3 D25

L1_D335 L2.D38 L3 D41

oo o

IPEA500 Point 6a 7a 8a 9a 10a 11a 12a 6b 7b 8b 9b 10b lib tf 28,6 20,01 14,5 10 8 5 3 28,6 20,01 14,5 10 8 5 tw 2,6 2,3 2,1 1,9 1,75 1,65 1,75 3,45 3,1 2,85 2,6 2,5 2,85 fy (MPa) alpha-d/tw 235 87,28 100,54 235 111,42 235 124,34 235 135,57 235 144,69 235 137 235 65,78 460 74,59 460 82,1 460 90,86 460 94,9 460 83,77 460 b/tf 7 10 13,8 20 25 40 66,66 7 10 13,8 20 25 40 Load Factor 1,04 1,03 1.06 1,07 1,01 0,978 0,955 1,05 1,05 1,07 1,04 0,988 0,962 h-tf 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 Buckling Mode Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Acronym L4_D26 L5_D23 NL6 D21

L4.D345 L5_D31 L6 D285

Figure

CLASS 3 AND 4 LIMIT LINEAR ANALYSIS CENTRAL VALUES

oo

SECCIN IPEA500 HEA200 HEAA300 HEA280 IPE300 IPEA400 HEA450 IPEA500 HEA200 HEAA300 HEA280 IPE300 IPEA400 HEA450

fy (MPa) 235 235 235 235 235 235 235 460 460 460 460 460 460 460

tf(mm) 2.75 2.7 4.25 4.0 2.15 2.25 4.5 4.75 4.25 6.8 6.5 3.5 3.75 6.75

tw (mm) 1.8 1.8 2.83 2.66 1.43 1.5 3.0 3.16 2.68 4.53 4.33 2.33 2.5 4.5

tf/tw 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

b/tf 72.32 74.07 70.58 70.0 69.76 80.0 66.66 42.1 47.05 44.11 43.07 42.85 48.0 44.44

0.5-d/tw 133.26 39.25 47.39 47.55 100.4 127.48 69.08 75.59 26.05 29.32 28.92 61.33 76.25 45.8

Load Factor 0.95 0.98 1.02 0.97 1.09 1.08 1.05 0.94 0.98 1.09 1.08 1.09 1.02 0.99

Buckling Mode Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Symmetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical

Figure 5

IN^INUINCMK /MNMLTOI

ty= 235
400 350 300 250
/

() 200 150 100 50 0< 0.05

0.15 Strain

02

025

0.3

Figure 6 182

NONUNEAR ANALYSIS

fy= 460
600 500 400 Stress () 300 200 100 + 0 0,05 0,1 0,15 Strain
--

02

0,25

0,3

183

CLASS 2 AND 3 LIMIT CLASS 3 AND 4 LIMIT NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS IPEA500 Point 6a 7a 8a 6a 7a 8 6b 7b 8b 6'b 7'b 8'b
4^.

tf (mm) 28,6 20,01 14,5 28,6 20,01 14,5 28,6 20,01 14,5 28,6 20,01 14,5

tw (mm) 3.4 2,55 2 3,65 2,7 2,1 3,575 2,875 2,45 3,85 3 2,57

fy (MPa) 235 235 235 235 235 235 460 460 460 460 460 460

Mel ( t m ) 68,3 49,2 36,6 68,6 49,3 36,6 134,2 96,8 72,4 134,7 97,1 72,7

Mpi ( t m ) Mmax (t-m) 68,3 73,9 49,9 52,4 36,4 38,6 73,9 74,3 52,9 52,6 38,9 38,8 134,7 145,2 96,3 103,5 72,3 76.9 146,5 146.2 103,1 103,8 77,5 77,3

alpha-d/tw . 66,75 90,68 117 62,17 85,64 111,42 63,48 80,43 95,51 58,94 77,08 91,05

b/tf 7 10 13,8 7 10 13,8 7 10 13,8 7 10 13,8

Buckling Mode Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical Antimetrical

Acronym <2lass Lirr NL4_D34 3&4 3&4 NL5.D255 3&4 NL6_D2 NL4.D365 2&3 NL5.D27 2&3 NL6.D21 2&3 3&4 NL4.D357 3&4 NL5_D287 3&4 NL6.D245 2&3 NL4.D385 2&3 NL5_D3 NL6_D257 2&3

HEA200 Point la 2a 3a l tf(mm) 1,7 1,8 2 2,6 3 2,8 2,95 3,6 4,3 4,2 4,4 4,8 tw (mm) 5,5 3,72 2,68 5,5 3,72 2,68 5,5 3,72 2,68 5,5 3,72 2,68 f y (MPa) 235 235 235 235 235 235 460 460 460 460 460 460 Mel ( t m ) 2,1 2,03 2,05 2,71 2,82 2,59 5,8 6,33 7,05 7,43 7,37 7,71 Mpi ( t m ) Mmax (tm) 2,18 2,36 2,08 2,2 2,03 2,21 3 3 3,09 3,05 2,75 2,77 5,93 6,38 6,35 6,83 7,05 7,52 8,15 8,14 7,91 7,94 8,2 8,21 alpha-d/tw 12,93 19,11 26,49 12,85 18,95 26,34 12,82 18,87 26,06 12,71 18,76 25,97 Buckling Mode b/tf 117,64 Antimetrical 111,11 Symmetrical 100 Antimetrical 76,92 Symmetrical 66,66 Antimetrical 71,42 Antimetrical 67,79 Antimetrical 55,55 Antimetrical 46,51 Antimetrical 47,62 Antimetrical 45,45 Antimetrical 41,66 Antimetrical Acronym <wlass Lirr 3&4 NL1_D17 3&4 NL2.D23 3&4 NL3.D2 2&3 NL1_D26 2&3 NL2.D3 2&3 NL3_D28 3&4 NL1_D295 3&4 NL2_D36 3&4 NL3_D43 2&3 NLLD42 2&3 NL2.D44 2&3 NL3.D48

2
3 lb 2b 3b l'b 2'b 3'b

Figure 8

CLASS 2 A N D 3 LIMIT CLASS 3 A N D 4 LIMIT EXTREME VALUES

NonLinear Analysis
120 o IPEA500_el_235 IPEA500_pl_235

IPEA500_el_460 100 o
~A

IPEA500_pl_460
HEA200_pl_460 HEA200_el_460 HEA200_pl_235 HEA200_el 2 3 5

80

oo

b/tf 60

40

20
orj=*==i5

20

40

60 d/tw

80

100

120

Figure 9

CLASS 2 AND 3 LIMIT CLASS 3 AND 4 LIMIT

Non-Linear Analysis (fy= 235 MPa)

120

100 80 a
oo

IPEA500_el_235 IPEA500_pl_235 HEA200_el_235 HEA200_pl_235

o b/tf 60

40

20

20

40

60 0.5-d/fw

80

100

120

Figure 10

CLASS 2 AND 3 LIMIT CLASS 3 AND 4 LIMIT

Non-Linear Analysis (fy= 460 MPa)

70 -r

60 -- - 40
oo

50

IPEA500_el_460 IPEA500_pl_460 HEA200_el_460

-J

b/tf 30

-o

HEA200_pl_460

20 --

10 --

0 10 20 30 40 50 0.5-d/tw 60 70 80 90 100

Figure 11

>
3 Cl

CLASS 2 AND 3 LIMIT CLASS 3 AND 4 LIMIT EXTREME VALUES

NonLinear Analysis
00

D;
o
90 r 80 70 60 50
00 oo

o -* b/tf 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80 d/tw 100 120

IPEA500_el_235 IPEA500_pl_235 IPEA500_el_460 IPEA500_pl_460 HEA200_pl_460 HEA200_el_460 ' HEA200_pl_235 HEA200_el 235

140

160

Ensidesa/Labein

Figure 12

TOSSUSI
etnei
iiffgSiia^!! '?,. 'ynAia^asKaswp

'T)

00 VO

VO

TI
00.

ABACUS

VO

PLACEMENT EIGEHMODE 3

MflGH IF IC AT I OH FACTOR = EIGENVALUE 5.4-1 1 = 1.04 2S-MAY-95 TIME! 16856 DATE!

\ 3

ABAQl/S VERSION! STEP 1 INCREMENT

ABACUS

VO

LACEMENT MAGNIFICATION FACTOR = EIGENMODE 2 ABAQVS VERSION! STEP 1 INCREMENT EIGEHVALVE 5.4-1 1 = 1.03 2$-MAY-35 TIME! 09i10:50 DATE!

BAQUS1

VO Ul

PLACEMENT EIGEHMODE 3

MAGNIFICATION FACTOR = EIGENVALUE = 1.0S 26MA9S I M E!

ABAQUS VERSION! 5 . 4 1 STEP 1 INCREMENT 1

DATE!

ABACUS

PLACEMENT EIGENMODE STEP 2

MAGNIFICATION FACTOR = EIGENVALUE 5.4-1 1 = 1.04 DATE!

200. TIME! 13:0129

ABAQUS VERSION! 1 INCREMENT

26-MAV-95

ABAQUS

VO

MENT MAGNIFICATION FACTOR = EJTMODB STEP 1 EIGENVALUE 5.41 1 = 1.04 22--95 TIME! 13 ! 10 ! 4 9 ABAQUS VERSION! 1 INCREMENT DATE!

ABAQUS!

VO ON

MAGNIFICATION FACTOR = NMODE 1 ABAQUS VERSION! STEP 1 INCREMENT EIGENVALUE 5.41 1 = 1.05 DATE !

250, TIME! 11; 0923

2395

Klaifc

80 < v
^;"-|V-jf O t * vl-^.lsi^ .vf.
1
-UL.

-O

&*
,+

*^5

1 ;.'

Tik

'* -H-*+H+*
60

M O

M E N t

40 L4_D2 6 NL4_D3 4 NL4_D3 6 5 MEL D2 6 20

o-

-A MEL_D3 4 - MPL D3 6 5

0. 0

1.0 ANGLE (deg)

1.5

2 .0

2 .5

150

100
M O M E N
VO

oo

t n m

50

L4_D345 NL4_D3 57 1 0"o NL4 D3 85 MEL_D3 4 5 A MEL_D3 5 7 J o e > MPL D3 85

I I
I '

2. ANGLE (deg)

0. o

0.5

1.0 ANGLE (deg)

1.5

2 .0

2 .5

^^^yr^^^wK^^...**^^^

uaacPciu0oaKoflcaaccxxj5aiiaQflaaui0Stt^

ttm&a*emaaammoa

100

80

M O M E

60

40

-1 O I <S>

h O .! e>

L5_D31 NL5 D2 87 NL5_D3 MEL_D31 MEL_D2 8 7 MPL D3

20

ANGLE

(deg)

40

30

M O M E N
K)

20 X13-

m
10

-X NL6_D2 -+ NL6 D21 - MEL_D2 , < MPL D21

0. 0.0

0. 5

1.0 ANGLE

1.5 (deg)

2 .0

2 .5

80

60

K) o SJ

M O M E N t

40
>^

20

l i O

L6_D2 85 + NL6 D 2 4 5 NL6_D2 57 i ! MEL_D 28 5 MEL_D2 4 5 < 0 MPL D 2 5 7

1 2.

I 3

ANGLE (deg)

M E N t

m -

X L1_D2 3 NLl_Dl7 O NL1_D2 6 t i MEL_.D2 3 A MEL_D17 O MPL D2 6

4.

8.

10.

ANGLE (deg)

M O M E N

Ll_D335 NL1_D2 95 NL1_D42 MEL_jD3 35 MEL_D2 9 5 HPL D42

4. ANGLE (deg)

6.

*- "

A* - * -

-*

'

*[ ~

rr-v

.....> ^..,....... _ _ .

---"- -rnri

3.

-dfe
A-)-. R .

--

i.rv-

M O M E *

frH-4-

m 1 .

i, O

h . O

L2_D23 NL2 Dl 8 NL2_D3 MEL_D2 3 MEL_D18 MPL D3

2 .

4 . ANGLE (deg)

8.

IO

8. <r=-

7t

v.'Si,

^--

6. M 0 M E N t

X L2_D38 NL2 D3 6 O NL2_D44 : MEL_D3 8 MEL_D3 6 O MPL D44

4.

10

ANGLE (deg)

2 . 8

K)

10. ANGLE (deg)

0
r

6.

M 0 M E N
O
00

-f - : - -O

L3_D41 NL3 D 4 3 NL3_D48 MEL_D41 MEL_D4 3 MPL D4 8

0.

4. ANGLE (deg)

10

Beete

2 5 1

to K)

K)
Ul

to

to

to

5\

to
>

^1

IO oo

to
VO

to to

Annex 11

(24 pages) Exploitation of Labein numerical simulations (ProfilARBED) presented in Document 3198-3-3 (Annex 10)

221

ANNEX 11

Exploitation of Labein numerical simulations (ProfilARB ED) presented in Document 3198-3-3 (Annex 10)

1. Tables exploiting numerical simulations about borders between class 3 & 4 crosssections (Mei): In following 4 tables, different calculations have been carried out about the cases simulated for evaluation of borders between class 3 & 4 cross-sections submitted to M y (see Annex 10; document 3198-3-3). The details of formulas used in those tables are presented hereafter : 1.1 Values of geometrical and statical characteristics (table 1) : - PARE = h - tf - 2L-2 , - ocd/tw (LABEIN) = 0,5(h - 2tf )/t w , - d/tw (PARE) = dpARE / t w = (h - tf - 2L 2 )/t w , - c = b/2, - Li and L2 = length of overthickness (a) (see Figure 1),
tf

+ 2a
'

ia

K J ^

'

"T' 1

- - - -7 i

L2 U + 2a a h

/s

/\

a a .

Figure 1 : Modelization of root fillet - R = radius of root filet, overthickness of finite elements in the web and in the flanges for modelization of web-flange connections with root fillets (see figure 1) (Ref. 19) : -(tf+t w -2.L 2 -4L 1 )-J(tf + t w -2L2-4.L 1 ) 2 -8. -2.L1.tf + l,5.tf.t w -t w l2 + 2.tfJv + t w . R + R 2 / ^ ^ ] a= sectional area of the cross-section : A = 2bt f + ( h - 2 t f )t w +4L 1 a+2a(2L 1 - t w ) + 4a(L 2 - a ) shear area for the load parallel to the web Avz = (h-tf)t w
tf

222

radius of gyration about minor axis z-z

i

z = V I Z/A

- moment of inertia according to the minor axis z-z : il6L3 a + t f b 3 + ( t w + 2 a ) 3 L 2 - a - ^ 3 Iz - * 6 " ^ + ^ ( h - t f -2L2) , - moment of inertia according to the major axis y-y : Iy=^(h-tf-2L2)3+I(.w+2a)(L2-t-a)

+ L 1 (t f + 2a)3 + L 1 (tf+2a)(h-tf) 2

- elastic section modulus according to the major axis y-y : 2I V

WeLy.
- plastic section modulus according to the major axis y-y : WpLy =2aL 1 (h + a) + tfb(h-tf) + 2aL 1 (h-2tf - a ) + (2L 2 - t f -2a)(t w +2a)-(2h-3tf - 2 a - 2 L 2 ) + ^tw(h-tf-2L2)2 1.2 Values about bending resistance of crosssection (table 2): - elastic bending moment resistance about major axis y-y : Mei.y = Wei.y fy (= maximum bending moment applied to the cross-section = Ms<j), - plastic bending moment resistance about major axis y-y : Mpl.y = Wpl.y fy , - concentrated load related to M e i y for the 3-point bending beam : Pei = 4Mei.y / L (with L = beam span = 6m), - shear force related to Pei : Vei = Pel / 2 (= maximum shear force applied to the cross-section = Vsd),

223

1.3 Values about elastic critical stresses on isolated flange (table 2): - maximum normal stress in flange : max = fy > - maximum critical slendemess of isolated flange (for a rectangular plate with one simply supported edge) : tf V12(l-vz)amax , with ko = 0,43,

- critical normal stress in isolated flange (for a rectangular plate with one simply supported edge) : 2 ft^2 -,withko = 0,43,

1 2 ( 1 - v z ) *v.C

1.4 Values about elastic critical stresses on isolated web (table 3) : - maximum normal stress in web : ^max

(h-tf-2L2) *y

maximum shear stress in web -max el tw(h-tf-2L2)

V

'

maximum crital slendemess of isolated web (for a rectangular plate with two simply supported edges) :
(

= minimum
L

kT

12(1 - 2 ) o m a x l 2 ( l - v 2 ) x m a x

.with 1^ = 2 3 , 9 , ^ = 9,34 and d = h - t f - 2 L 2 ,

critical normal stress in web (for a rectangular plate with two simply supported edges) :
G

crit

.2C

/.

\2

12(1 v )V d J 12a -v*y

2 f-T-1 ,withk{J = 23,9(a = l > 2 / 3 ) , z

critical shear stress in web (for a rectangular plate with two simply supported edges) : ^crit - ^ 2 3L| 12(1-Vz) k d
2c /j.
\2

, with kt = 9,34 ( < x = l ) ,

224

1.5 Values about shear buckling of web according to postcritical method (see Eurocode 3) (table 3) : - web slendemess : if d

,we

(h-tf-2L2) ; < 69 , then no shear buckling occurs in web.

t w J

- web slendemess for post-critical method : Xy, = , , with kT = 5,34 and d = h - tf - 2L237,4 ^/kT '
w

- simple post-critical shear strength of the web :

z

ba=~7x

fy

,^,,

f _ _ = - ^ ( , 5 - 0 , 6 2 5 ) , if 0,8 < * 1,2, fv 0 9 = -j=^V3 Aw ,ifXw>l,2,

- design shear buckling resistance of the web : Vba.Rd = t w ( h - t f - 2 L 2 ) - ^ - , with TMI = 1,0, 1 - design plastic moment resistance of a cross-section consisting of the flanges only :
M

f f.Rd = b t f ( h - tf ) , withYMO = 1,0,

- reduced design shear buckling resistance of the web allowing for bending moment interaction : i f M S d / M f - R d > 1,0 and, ifVSd/Vba.Rd>0,5, then, VM-ba_Rd * 0 _ vba.Rd I li 1M
M

M Sd~ f\Rd JU lJsa

ply-Mf.Rd

+1
J

withy M 1 = 1,0,

1.6 Values about bending and shear resistance of the cross-section (table 3): - plastic shear resistance of cross-section (for shear parallel to web) : Vpi.z.Rd=
VZ

%m

with 7M0 = 1,0,

225

- reduced design plastic resistance moment Mv.Rd allowing for the shear force
ifV

z.Sd/ v pl.z.Rd > 0 ' 5 then Myjt 0

w

pi.y -

z.Sd

pl.z.Rd

' ,withyMO=l,0 , vz 4t w 0

l-

1.7 Values about lateral-torsional buckling (table 4) : - CM66 rules for lateral-torsional buckling (Ref. 18) : In the case of the member in bending which contains at one of its ends the plastic hinge allowing for redistribution of bending moments, the conditions of lateral restraints given by 5.21 of Additif 80 - DPU 22-701 (CM66) should be satisfied in the neighbourhood of the plastified section to avoid the lateral-torsional buckling (LTB). If the moment varies linearly along a member with the length Lj which is free to buckle laterally, the conditions are as follows : ^<35 if ) if 0,625 < < 1 -1 < < 0,625

h_< < (60-40

where : Lj iz

is the length of the member or of the portion of that member where the linear distribution of bending moment is applied, is the ratio of bending moments at both ends of the member or of the portion of that member (-1 < < 1), is the radius of gyration about minor axis (/1 / A ), with : I z - moment of inertia about minor axis of the cross-section, A - total area of the cross-section.

In tables, we have : . in h/ize , L = 3 m because lateral restraints were introducced at least at both supports and at concentrated load position, . if 60 > 3 m , then no need of supplementary lateral restraints, 3m

= 0

226

if 60 < 3 m, then the length for which more lateral restraints should be introduced is ( L L R ) ^ = 3- 60

L y(CM66)-'

60i

(klOreal A

]
should

(LLR)

maximum length between lateral restraints for (CM66) according to CM66 rales, (if 60 < 3 m). (LLR)max t*5 - (LLR)real t 0 a v o i d L T B P r o b l e m s

Eurocode 3 rules for lateral-torsional buckling (Ref. 1) : . elastic critical moment of cross-section for lateral-torsional buckling : Mcr (see Ref. 1, Annex F) with either LLR = 3 m or LLR = (LLR) ^ (if 60 < 3 m). . non-dimensional slendemess for LTB : LT = i- , (see Ref. 1, 5.5.2(5)), should be < 0,40 if sufficient lateral restraints are V M cr ensured. . design buckling resistance moment of member in bending : M b R d = X L T pLy , (see Ref. 1 (5.48)), with YMI = 1,0. Y Ml 1.8 Comments on results in tables : (1) The very conservative approach of elastic buckling theory of separate part of cross-sections, highlights critical parts of different simulated cases (see in table 2 : ratios of maximum applied stresses ( ^ and/or xma3[) and elastic critical stresses (,^, and/or Tcrit)) : - high ( ^ / acrit ) (> 2) values on isolated flange for S235 simulations n "IL" to " 13L" and for S460 simulations n "IH" to "13H", - high (cmn I acrit) and (xmax / ^) values (> 1,15) on isolated web for S235 simulations n "11L" to "19L" and for S460 simulations n "14H" to "18H". (2) Per definition the classification of cross-sections (as presented in Eurocode 3) is determined by local buckling only induced by normal stresses () in part(s) of cross-sections. The resistance of cross -sections to shear forces has to be checked further: shear resistance Vp^, shear buckling V ^ ^ i f too high web slendemess meaning d/(t,) > 69 : see table 3), interaction with bending moment resistance,... (3) Finite elements numerical simulations do not separate each phenomenon and take into account all effects interacting together. According to the comment of clause (2), the following
Mply

227

simulations should be rejected to evaluate the border between class 3 and class 4 cross-sections because shear effects show a big influence or a clear predominancy on the failure mode : - two S235 simulations (n "18L" and "19L") do not fulfill requirements of Eurocode 3 about shear resistance of the cross-sections (see (VSd/VpLRd) ratios in table 3), - S235 simulations n "11L" to "19L" and S460 simulations n "13H" to "18H" do not fulfil requirements of Eurocode 3 about shear buckling resistance Vte Rd interacting with bending moment (see (VsJVm Rd) ratios in table 3). For high values of d/tw the results of the simulation show that a local web buckling appears and, therefore, the critical buckling load becomes independent on the flange thickness tf. As a consequence of this, an increase on tf does not affect the critical load while the elastic moment rises leading to a lower buckling factor (Mcrit / Mei). The web local buckling seems to be produced by the shear stresses rather than by normal stresses. Then a symmetrical web buckling can be expected. This is the situation in the case of profiles with a very small value of the web thickness tw and with a very high value of the ratio tfAw (4) Against lateral-torsional buckling (LTB), lateral restraints have been introduced at both supports and at concentrated load position (mid-span). For several simulations supplementary lateral restraints were introduced because of requirements of CM66 rales (Ref. 18) : cases where 60 is lower than 3 m (see table 4). In spite of those conditions, several numerical simulations are sensitive to LTB and should be checked with LTB problems according to : - CM66 (Ref. 18) : (L L R) m a x < (LLR) real in table 4, for S235 simulation n "10L" and, for S460 simulations n "IH", "2H" and "10H", - Eurocode 3 (Ref. 1) : > 0,40 in table 4, for S235 simulations n "16L" and "17L", for S460 simulations n "7H", "10H" and "12H".

+
if60U>3m: if 6 0 U < 3 m

y
Lateral restraints A 3m

Xr

X X X X x
eoi^ 60^

3m

3m

3m

228

The following simulations should be rejected according to Eurocode 3 rules because the applied bending moment MSd (= Md) is greater than the allowed bending resistance considering the effect of lateral-torsional buckling M,^ (see (MSd/MbRd) ratios in table 4): - for S235 simulations n "16L" and "17L", - for S460 simulations n "7H" to "10H" and "12H". But if more lateral restraints were introduced along the simulated beams LTB should not be anymore a predominant failure mode (^. < 0,40) and the results could be improved: local buckling - which interacts with LTB conditions - should be related to higher load level (Md) with same values of ((c/tf), (d/tj). In fact because of sensitivity to LTB, present results are conservative and better results (greater values of ((c/tf), (d/tj)) could be expected if better provisions were taken against LTB. (5) All the simulated points for the borders between class 3 & 4 cross-sections are plotted in

c i d i
graphs = f presented in chapter 2. tf [t^ej

229

Geometrical and statical characteristics

Points
1L 2L 3L 4L 5L 6L 7L 8L 9L 10L 11L 12L 13L 14L 15L 16L 17L 18L 19L 1H 2H 3H 4H 5H 6H 7H 8H 9H 10H 11H 12H 13H 14H 15H 16H 17H 18H

Simulations LABEIN 1a 2a 3a 4a 5a 14a 15a 16a 19a 17a 18a 13a 12a 11a 10a 9a 8a 7a 6a 1b 2b 3b 4b 13b 15b 14b 5b 18b 16b 12b 17b 11b 10b 9b 8b 7b 6b

h
mm 146,3 146,3 146,3 146,5 146,7 146,7 280,3 261,0 423,5 291,5 387,3 485,3 485,5 487,5 490,5 492,5 497,0 502,5 511,1 147,4 147,4 147,8 148,1 148,3 263,5 282,8 148,9 425,8 292,8 487,3 388,8 487,5 490,5 492,5 497,0 502,5 511,1

b
mm 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 300,0 280,0 300,0 150,0 180,0 198,9 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,1 200,1 200,2 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 280,0 299,9 200,0 300,0 150,0 200,0 180,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,1 200,1 200,2

tw
mm 8 5,5 3,72 2,68 2 1,8 2,83 2,66 3 1,43 1,5 1,8 1,75 1,65 1,75 1,9 2,1 2,3 2,6 8 5,5 3,72 2,68 2,68 4,33 4,53 2 4,5 2,33 3,16 2,5 2,85 2,5 2,6 2,85 3,1 3,45
-T-I_

t f

Q PARE oc.d/tw mm 108,0 108,0 108,0 108,0 108,0 108,0 222,0 209,0 365,0 254,6 339,4 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 108,0 108,0 108,0 108,0 108,0 209,0 222,0 108,0 365,0 254,6 428,9 339,4 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 428,9 LABEIN 8,85 12,88 19,04 26,39 35,325 39,25 47,39 47,55 69,08 100,4 127,48 133,26 137 144,69 135,57 124,34 111,42 100,54 87,28 8,79 12,78 18,84 26,1 26,05 28,92 29,32 34,78 45,8 61,33 75,59 76,25 83,77 94,9 90,86 82,1 74,59 65,78

d/tw b/t,
PARE 13,5 19,6 29,0 40,3 54 60,0 78,4 78,6 121,7 178,0 226,3 238,3 245,1 259,9 245,1 225,7 204,2 186,5 165,0 13,5 19,6 29,0 40,3 40,3 48,3 49,0 54,0 81,1 109,3 135,7 135,8 150,5 171,6 165,0 150,5 138,4 124,3 88,88 86,95 86,95 80 74,07 74,07 70,58 70 66,66 69,76 80 72,32 66,66 40 25 20 13,8 10 7 59,7 59,7 52,63 48,78 47,05 43,07 44,11 41,23 44,44 42,85 42,1 48 40 25 20 13,8 10 7
1

c/t,
44,44 43,475 43,475 40 37,035 37,035 35,29 35 33,33 34,88 40 36,16 33,33 20 12,5 10 6,9 5 3,5 29,85 29,85 26,315 24,39 23,525 21,535 22,055 20,615 22,22 21,425 21,05 24 20 12,5 10 6,9 5 3,5

ht,
mm 144 144 144 144 144 144 276 257 419 289,3 385 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 144 144 144 144 144 257 276 144 419 289,3 482,5 385 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5 482,5

L1
mm 16,26 16,26 16,26 16,26 16,26 16,26 25,35 23,2 27,35 15 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 16,26 16,26 16,26 16,26 16,26 23,2 25,35 16,26 27,35 15 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21
/ . .

L2
mm 18 18 18 18 18 18 27 24 27 17,35 22,8 26,805 26,805 26,805 26,805 26,805 26,805 26,805 26,805 18 18 18 18 18 24 27 18 27 17,35 26,805 22,8 26,805 26,805 26.805 26,805 26,805 26,805

R
mm 18 18 18 18 18 18 27 24 27 15 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 18 18 18 18 18 24 27 18 27 15 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21

a
mm 2,00 1,85 1,75 1,71 1,68 1,67 2,40 2,07 2,18 1,10 1,56 1,43 1,44 1,50 1,61 1,69 1,90 2,21 2,84 2,24 2,02 1,94 1,88 1,89 2,40 2,75 1,89 2,40 1,19 1,53 1,66 1,53 1,65 1,75 2,02 2,41 3,20

A
mm 2382 2031 1767 1695 1676 1646 4009 3452 4603 1251 1767 2330 2413 3172 4431 5311 7231 9562 13203 2847 2470 2388 2355 2416 5324 6062 2559 6612 1922 3796 2701 3749 4796 5655 7606 9970 13652
2

Avz z
mm 1152 792 536 386 288 259 781 684 1257 414 578 869 844 796 844 917 1013 1110 1255 1152 792 536 386 386 1113 1250 288 1886 674 1525 963 1375 1206 1255 1375 1496 1665
2

I z
mm 3030970 3090686 3087413 3353644 3619168 3618956 19224813 14705099 20365039 1219072 2225990 3641353 4034914 6704281 10706938 13375811 19410220 26775771 38319435 4501190 4493100 5089891 5488809 5685978 23853364 30708940 6485447 30502474 1979040 6370726 3686982 6706116 10708762 13378055 19414007 26781814 38329810
4

m m N/mm 2 2,25 235 235 2,3 235 2,3 235 2,5 235 2,7 235 2,7 4,25 235 235 4 235 4,5 2,15 235 2,25 235 2,75 235 235 3 235 5 8 235 235 10 14,5 235 235 20 28,6 235 3,35 3,35 3,8 4,1 4,25 6,5 6,8 4,85 6,75 3,5 4,75 3,75 5 8 10 14,5 20 28,6
l_

'y
mm 8212322 7648122 7168626 7315441 7556015 7501376 65572507 48936883 164052909 20230518 50640612 100969364 106738256 152766767 224132129 272579745 380643198 512757224 719910395 10616626 9917302 10384802 10730277 11049072 75087642 98664498 12130752 233791818 30634673 160825393 75698582 163877004 231326443 279451766 388391628 521543132 730173958
4

We,. y
mm3 11230 10455 9799 9987C 10301 10226 46795 37499 77474 13882 26154 41615 43970 62673 91389 110692 153176 204078 28171C 14410 13460 140521 144901 149061 569921 69776! 16299: 109825 20925: 660131 389441 672311 94322 113483 156294 207575 285726

mm 35,7 39,0 41,8 44,5 46,5 46,9 69,3 65,3 66,5 31,2 35,5 39,5 40,9 46,0 49,2 50,2 51,8 52,9 53,9 39,8 42,6 46,2 48,3 48,5 66,9 71.2 50,3 67,9 32,1 41,0 36,9 42,3 47,3 48,6 50,5 51,8 53,0

460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460 460

. ! . . . _ . _ ft

Bending resistance of crosssection Points Simulations Mel.y = M S d

LABEIN 1L 2L 3L 4L 5L 6L 7L 8L 9L 10L 11L 12L 13L 14L 15L 16L 17L 18L 19L 1H 2H 3H 4H 5H 6H 7H 8H 9H 10H 11H 12H 13H 14H 15H 16H 17H 18H 1a 2a 3a 4a 5a 14a 15a 16a 19a 17a 18a 13a 12a 11a 10a 9a 8a 7a 6a 1b 2b 3b 4b 13b 15b 14b 5b 18b 16b 12b 17b 11b 10b 9b 8b 7b 6b

Elastic critical stresses on isolated flange

G

Elast c critical stresses on isolated web

Mp|.y N.m
30275 27407 25112 25164 25671 25410 116549 93389 194973 35349 66517 106997 112390 156777 226747 274612 380717 510117 712581 74636 68156 69710 71078 73114 280663 343450 79470 544895 105176 335732 195783 338785 464272 556909

Pel
N 17594 16380 15353 15646 16139 16022 73313 58749 121377 21750 40975 65197 68887 98189 143176 173418 239976 319723 441346 44191 41280 43094 44438 45712 174777 213982 49985 336799 64171 202441 119430 206177 289256

Ve.=V s d
N 8797 8190 7677 7823 8069 8011 36657 29375 60689 10875 20487 32599 34444 49094 71588 86709 119988 159861 220673 22095 20640 21547 22219 22856 87389 106991 24992 168400 32085 101221 59715 103088 144628 174007 239651 318282 438114

max
2

C/t f
max 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 18,6 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3 13,3

max'crlt < 1,0 5,69 5,44 5,44 4,61 3,95 3,95 3,59 3,53 3,20 3,50 4,61 3,76 3,20 1,15 0,45 0,29 0,14 0,07 0,04 5,02 5,02 3,90 3,35 3,12 2,61 2,74 2,40 2,78 2,59 2,50 3,25 2,25 0,88 0,56 0,27 0,14 0,07

13

^max N/mm 10 14 19 27 37 41 58 53 55 30 40 42 46 69 95 106 133 162 198 26 35 54 77 79 97 106 116 103 54 75 70 84 135 156 196 239 296
2

d/tw max
161,7 161,7 161,7 161,8 161,9 161,9 156,1 155,3 149,7 148,7 148,4 147,8 147,8 148,1 136,3 129,1 115,4 104,6 94,6 116,0 116,0 116,2 116,3 116,3 111,5 112,1 116,6 107,3 106,5 105,8 106,3 105,9 106,2 106,4 95,1 86,1 77,4

crlt N/mm
2

crlt
2

/ 0 |,
S 1,0 0,01 0,01 0,03 0,06 0,11 0,14 0,25 0,26 0,66 1,43 2,32 2,60 2,75 3,06 2,72 2,30 1,86 1,54 1,18 0,01 0,03 0,06 0,12 0,12 0,19 0,19 0,21 0,57 1,05 1,64 1,63 2,02 2,61 2,40 1,98 1,66 1,32

t/tcrlt
1,0 0,00 0,00 0,01 0,02 0,06 0,08 0,20 0,18 0,46 0,53 1,16 1,35 1,55 2,64 3,23 3,06 3,13 3,18 3,04 0,00 0,01 0,03 0,07 0,07 0,13 0,14 0,19 0,38 0,36 0,78 0,73 1,08 2,24 2,40 2,50 2,58 2,58

N.m
26392 24570 23030 23469 24208 24033 109970 88124 182066 32624 61462 97796 103331 147283 214765 260127 359964 479584 662019 66286 61920 64642 66657 68568 262166 320974 74977 505199 96256 303662 179145 309265 433884 522022 718954 954846 1314342

N/mm

235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 235,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0 460,0

N/mm 41 43 43 51 60 60 66 67 73 67 51 62 73 204 522 816 1714 3265 6662 92 92 118 137 147 176 168 192 165 178 184 142 204 522 816 1714 3265 6662

N/mm
173,5 173,5 173,5 173,2 173,0 173,0 186,2 188,2 202,5 205,3 206,0 207,7 207,6 206,7 205,5 204,6 202,8 200,6 197,2 337,2 337,2 336,1 335,4 335,1 364,9 361,1 333,8 394,4 400,0 404,9 401,6 404,7 402,2 400,6 397,0 392,6 386,0

N/mm
9727 4597 2103 1092 608 492 288 287 120 56 35 31 30 26 30 35 43 51 65 9727 4597 2103 1092 1092 761 738 608 269 148 96 96 78 60 65 78 93 115

24890 11764 5382 2793 1556 1260 737 735 306 143 89 80 76 67 76 89 109 130 167 24890 11764 5382 2793 2793 1947 1889 1556 689 380 246 246 200 154 167 200 237 294

348014 766727 479303 1022436 636564 1421927 876228

Table 2:

numerical simulations about borders between Class 3 and 4 crosssections (2/4)

Shear buckling post critical method Points

1L 2L 3L 4L 5L 6L 7L 8L 9L 10L 11L 12L 13L 14L 15L 16L 17L 18L 19L 1H 2H 3H 4H 5H 6H 7H 8H 9H 10H 11H 12H 13H 14H 15H 16H 17H 18H

Bending and shear resistance of the crosssecti VpLz.Rd

N 156300 107456 72680 52361 39075 35168 105975 92752 170546 56130 78354 117836 114563 108016 114563 124382 137475 150568 170207 305949 210340 142266 102493 102493 295541 332051 76487 500753 179020 404932 255622 365207 320357 333172 365207 397243 442093

Simulations d/t w .
LABEIN 1a 2a 3a 4a 5a 14a 15a 16a 19a 17a 18a 13a 12a 11a 10a 9a 8a 7a 6a 1b 2b 3b 4b 13b 15b 14b 5b 18b 16b 12b 17b 11b 10b 9b 8b 7b 6b
<. 69

Ay, 0,156 0,227 0,336 0,466 0,625 0,694 0,908 0,909 1,408 2,060 2,618 2,757 2,836 3,008 2,836 2,612 2,363 2,158 1,909 0,219 0,318 0,470 0,652 0,652 0,781 0,793 0,874 1,313 1,769 2,197 2,198 2,436 2,777 2,670 2,436 2,240 2,012

tba Vba.Rd Vsd/Vba.Rd N N/mm 2

135,7 135,7 135,7 135,7 135,7 135,7 126,5 126,4 86,7 59,3 46,6 44,3 43,1 40,6 43,1 46,8 51,7 56,6 64,0 265,6 265,6 265,6 265,6 265,6 265,6 265,6 253,3 182,0 135,1 108,8 108,8 98,1 86,1 89,5 98,1 106,7 118,8 117225 80592 54510 39270 29306 26376 79505 70284 94981 21581 23745 34193 32320 28732 32320 38098 46540 55827 71341 229462 157755 106700 76870 76870 240343 267084 54706 298994 80158 147439 92282 119930 92282 99812 119930 141893 175742 0,08 0,10 0,14 0,20 0,28 0,30 0,46 0,42 0,64 0,50 0,86 0,95 1,07 1,71 2,21 2,28 2,58 2,86 3,09 0,10 0,13 0,20 0,29 0,30 0,36 0,40 0,46 0,56 0,40 0,69 0,65 0,86 1,57 1,74 2,00 2,24 2,49

Mf.Rd N.m
15226 15565 15565 16920 18273 18273 82687 67642 132914 21923 36642 62014 68026 113388 181420 226775 328988 454004 649225 44380 44380 50341 54316 56293 215126 258954 64242 390259 69854 210826 119543 221950 355120 443900 643977 888688 1270824

M S d/M,. R d VM.ba.Rd Vsd/Vwi.ba.Rd N < 1,0

1,73 1,58 1,48 1,39 1,32 1,32 1,33 1,30 1,37 1,49 1,68 1,58 1,52 1,30 1,18 1,15 1,09 1,06 1,02 1,49 1,40 1,28 1,23 1,22 1,22 1,24 1,17 1,29 1,38 1,44 1,50 1,39 1,22 1,18 1,12 1,07 1,03 * * * * * * * * 69148 15651 16756 24829 23462 21086 24469 29531 38009 48504 67536 * * * * * * 225241 * 111074 67696 90106 70487 77635 97374 121381 162016 * * * * * * 0,88 0,69
1,22 1,31 1,47 2,33 2,93 2,94 3,16 3,30 3,27

Vz.sd/Vp|.z.Rd
S 1 , 0 0,06 0,08 0,11 0,15 0,21 0,23 0,35 0,32 0,36 0,19 0,26 0,28 0,30 0,45 0,62 0,70 0,87
1,06 1,30

Mv.Rd N.m

Mz.sd/Mv.i
< 1 , 0 * * * * * * * * * * 0,97 0,98 1,00
1,01 1,01

13,5 19,6 29,0 40,3 54,0 60,0 78,4 78,6

121,7 178,0 226,3 238,3 245,1 259,9 245,1 225,7 204,2 186,5 165,0

220769 264367 359302 474776 655933

18,9 27,5 40,6 56,4 56,4 67,5 68,6

75,6 113,5 152,9 189,9 189,9 210,5 240,0 230,8 210,5 193,6 173,9

* * * 0,75 * 0,91 0,88

1,14 2,05 2,24 2,46 2,62 2,70

0,07 0,10 0,15 0,22 0,22 0,30 0,32 0,33 0,34 0,18 0,25 0,23 0,28 0,45 0,52 0,66 0,80 0,99

* * * * * * * * * 553808 742889 972435 1331224 0,94 0,97 0,98 0,99

Lateral-torsional bucklinq resistance

Points
1L 2L 3L 4L 5L 6L 7L 8L 9L 10L 11L 12L 13L 14L 15L 16L 17L 18L 19L 1H 2H 3H 4H 5H 6H 7H 8H 9H 10H 11H 12H 13H 14H 15H 16H 17H 18H

Simulations
LABEIN 1a 2a 3a 4a 5a 14a 15a 16a 19a 17a 18a 13a 12a 11a 10a 9a 8a 7a 6a 1b 2b 3b 4b 13b 15b 14b 5b 18b 16b 12b 17b 11b 10b 9b 8b

L/(iz.e) 60..
<, 60 84,1 76,9 71,8 67,4 64,6 64,0 43,3 46,0 45,1 96,1 84,5 75,9 73,4 65,3 61,0 59,8 57,9 56,7 55,7 105,6 98,4 90,9 86,9 86,5 62,7 59,0 83,4 61,8 130,8 102,5 113,6 99,2 88,8 86,3 83,1 81,0 79,2 3m 2,14 2,34 2,51 2,67 2,79 2,81 4,16 3,92 3,99 1,87 2,13 2,37 2,45 2,76 2,95 3,01 3,11 3,18 3,23 1,71 1,83 1,98 2,07 2,08 2,87 3,05 2,16 2,91 1,38 1,76 1,58 1,81 2,03 2,09 2,17 2,22 2,27

(L LR )real
[m] If 60.l z .e < 3 m 0,86 0,66 0,49 0,33 0,21 0,19

(CM 66)
(-1 * 1 ) 0,71 0,78 0,84 0,89 0,93 0,94

(l_LR)max
[m] 2(LLR)real
1,25 1,37 1,46 1,56 1,63 1,64

Cf
1,168 1,124 1,092 1,062 1,040 1,035 1,879 1,879 1,879 1,233 1,170 1,118 1,103 1,045 1,009 1,879 1,879 1,879 1,879 1,273 1,243 1,207 1,185 1,182 1,024 1,879 1,163 1,016 1,363 1,261 1,302 1,247 1,195 1,181 1,161 1,148 1,137

Mer N.m
731390 1197421 2082837 4853235 12549872 16084277 1157538 825617 1854109 355004 1371523 5162381 7450702 60047687 2121193598 1437996 2150833 3113810 4885289 530438 616720 886928 1129880 1193557 388625061 1872531 1601525 1767966900 308635 2602360 958543 2975411 6767278 9479818 16309971 L 25638174 41741787

LT S 0,40 0,19 0,14 0,11 0,07 0,04 0,04 0,31 0,33 0,31 0,30 0,21 0,14 0,12 0,05 0,01 0,43 0,41 0,39 0,37 0,35 0,32 0,27 0,24 0,24 0,03 0,41 0,22 0,02 0,56 0,34 0,43 0,32 0,25 0,23 0,21 0,19 0,18

LT

XLT
1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 0,95 0,95 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 0,95 1,00 1,00 0,91 1,00 0,94 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

Mb.Rd N.m
26392 24570 23030 23469 24208 24033 109970 88124 182066 32624 61462 97796 103331 147283 214765 246079 342101 479584 662019 66286 61920 64642 66657 68568 262166 304623 74977 505199 87119 303662 169127 309265 433884 522022 718954 954846 1314342

M Sd /M bi
S 1,0 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,06 1,05 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,05 1.00 1,00 1,10 1,00 1,06 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

*
1,13 0,87 0,63 0,55 0,24 0,05

* * *
0,62 0,71 0,79 0,82 0,92 0,98

*
1,09 1,24 1,38 1,43 1,61 1,72

* * * *
1,29 1.17 1,02 0,93 0,92 0,13

* *
M

0,57 0,61 0,66 0,69 0,69 0,96

* *
0,99 1,07 1,15 1,21 1.21 1.67

0,61 0,61

* * . * *

*
0,84 0,09 1,62 1,24 1,42 1,19 0,97 0,91 0,83 0,78 0,73

*
0,72 0,97 0,46 0,59 0,53 0,60 0,68 0,70 0,72 0,74 0,76

*
1,26 2,91 1,38 1,76 1,58 1,81 2,03 2,09 2,17 2,22 2,27

0,61

* *
0,69

*
0,62

* * *
w

7b
6b

* *

Table 4:

numerical simulations about borders between Class 3 and 4 cross-sections (4/4)

2. Graphs exploiting numerical simulatoins about borders between class 3 & 4 crosssections (Me) and borders between class 2 & 3 (Mpi) : 2.1 EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between class 3 & 4 crosssections (Mei) : c (1) The evaluation of each point in the graphs = f has been performed by searching the tfE tw and tf values which give a critical buckling moment equal to the elastic moment of the section (Mei) The calculation of the critical buckling loads has been done assuming a linear behaviour. (2) The class 3 & 4 limits for S235 and S460 steels obtained in the simulations are showed in Figure 1 (lines respectively called "S235 - simulation border" and "S460 - simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor"). |235 The factor is issued from present Eurocode 3 mies : = ni , with = 2. Figure 1 also includes other results : - the simulations numbers (la to 19a and lb to 18b) and the points numbers defined in tables (IL to 19L and IH to 18H), respectively for S235 and S460 steel grades; - the simulations governed by shear buckling failure mode (see chapter 1.2 : comments on results in tables), have been excluded (see specific tines between concerned points in Figure 1); because of these excluded simulations, new limits have been proposed (see specific lines in Figure 1); - a new border for class 3 & 4 cross-sections is proposed; - present mies of Eurocode 3 are provided; - the safety reserve between present mies and new proposal is highlighted by hatching; for flange slendemess, a safety coefficient of 1,7 to 2,3 can be obtained; for web slendemess, a safety coefficient of 1,3 can be obtained. (3) In the upper graphs of Figures 2 to 8 the results shown in Figure 1 are presented with characteristic values of (c/) ; d/(tv\)) for standard I or hot-rolled profiles and for both steel grades S235 and S460 : respectively, IPE, IPEA, IPEO, HEAA, HEA, HEB and HEM. For those standard profiles, the web slendemess (d/(twe)) is not determinant (see Figure 2 with IPE profiles for the worst cases of slender web) but the flange slendemess (c/t)) is more relevant (see Figure 5 with HEAA profiles for the worst cases of slender flanges). 2.2 EC3 borders and simulated borders (nonlinear analysis) between class 2 & 3 crosssections (Mpi) : c f d (1) The evaluation of each point in the graphs = f has been performed by searching the tfe ^wey tw and tf values which give a maximum moment equal to the plastic moment (Mpi) for class 2 & 3 limit. (2) The class 2 & 3 limits for S235 and S460 steel grades obtained in the simulations are showed in lower graphs of Figures 2 to 8, with characteristic values (c/(tfjE) ; d/(tv^)) for standard I or hot-roUed profiles : respectively, IPE, IPEA, IPEO, HEAA, HEA, HEB and HEM. Those lower graphs of Figures 2 to 8 also includes other results :

234

- the simulations governed by shear buckling failure mode have been excluded (see specific lines between concerned points with high d/(tw) web slendemess and low c/t) flange slendemess); - a new border for class 2 & 3 cross-sections is proposed; - present rules of Eurocode 3 are provided; - the safety zone between present rules and new proposal is highlighted by hatching; for flange slendemess a safety coefficient of 1,8 to 32 can be obtained; for web slendemess a safety coefficient of 1,5 could be probably obtained. Although additional analysis would be required for class 2 & 3 limits in order to draw final conclusions. (3) As mentioned in chapter 2.1 (class (3)), the flange slendemess c/t) is more relevant for standard profiles given in Figures 2 to 8. Therefore these simulations results are interesting even if they are not complete. 2.3 Influence factor : The figure 9 shows the results of simulations (linear analysis) about borders between class 3 & 4 cross-sections for S235 and S460 steel grades. In graphs (c/t) ; d/(twE)) both simulated curves for S235 and S460 steel grades (where factor according to Eurocode 3 : [235 = J , with = 2) should fit together if factor expressed correctly the dependence of local buckling in function of the yield strength fy. But factor does not seem to be correct : for instance, the same formula with = 1,8 should be preferable to present = 2, for cases of linear analysis with high c/t) and low d/(tw).

235

3. Summary of results : (1) On the basis of these numerical simulations presented in details in Annex 10 (see working document 3198-3-3) and exploited in present document, Eurocode 3 present rules for classification of steel cross-sections submitted to bending about major axis yy (My), are shown to be too conservative for all values of flange slendemess (c/t)) and web slendemess (d/(tv\)), in cases of borders between class 3 & 4 cross-sections (Mel is reached) and borders between class 2 & 3 cross-sections (Mpi is reached). At present state, following improved mies could be proposed : Present EC 3 mies class 2 web d/tw< flange cAf< web d/tw^ New proposals class 2 flange c/tf<

83

11

124

35 -

6,2t w

Present EC 3 rules class 3 web d/tw^

I + I fy

New proposals class 3 web oVtw^ flange c/tf<

flange
C/tf<

NMy

124

15

165

max (25 ; 35 -

_ / - 1

8t w

(2) B ut more developments should be necessary to reach general and safe conclusion and to define precisely new improved limits.

236

Linear Analysis - Border Class 3&4 elastic cross-sections (= M.IRd is reached) |

S 235 - Simulation border *S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposed limits of simulations Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 Simulations numbers related to points of enclosed tables

45

t f .E L 2.U 3L
2A.

ML
J2<L

^1

Figure 1

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus IPE profiles \
S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) - Simulations excluded bv by shear buckling failure mode Proposed limits of simulations lula Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 E C 3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 A IPE profiles - S 235 IPE profiles - S 460 B

c 45-r

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus IPE profiles |
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor - Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 IPE profiles - S 235 IPE profiles - S 460

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

OHH * 0 20 40 60 80 100

120

140

Figure 2

238

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus IPE A profiles]
S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) - Simulations excluded bv shear buckling failure mode Proposed limits of simulations Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 - - E C 3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 A IPE A profiles-S 235 D IPE A profiles-S 460

45-r

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus IPE A profiles |
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 IPE A profiles-S 235 IPE A profiles-S 460

A D

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

100

120

140

180

260

Figure 3

239

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus IPE O profiles I
S 235 - Simulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor in = 2) Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure moae - - Proposed limits of simulations - -Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 A IPE O profiles - S 235 D IPE O profiles-S 460

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus IPE O profiles!
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 IPE O profiles - S 235 IPE O profiles-S 460

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Figure 4

240

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus HE AA profiles I
t^~S
c

235 - Simulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode by! Proposed limits of simulations nula Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 E C 3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 A HE AA profiles - S 235 D HE AA profiles - S 460

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus HE AA profiles!
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor - Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 HE AA profiles - S 235 HE AA profiles - S 460

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

20

40

60

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Figure 5

241

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus HE profiles]
S 235 - Sjmulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) Simulations excluded by by;shear buckling failure mode Proposed limits of simulations Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 - - E C 3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 A HE profiles - S 235 HE profiles - S 460

20

40

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus HE profiles |
A S 235 - Simulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor -Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 HE profiles - S 235 HE profiles-S 460

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

20

40

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Figure 7

242

EC3 borders and simulated borders (linear analysis) between Class 3&4 versus HE M profiles!
A~~S 235 - Simulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode by Proposed limits of simulations nula Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 - EC3 limits border class 2&3 -EC3 limits border class 1&2 A HE M profiles-S 235 D HE M profiles-S 460

c tfX

20

40

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

EC3 borders and simulated borders (non-linear analysis) between Class 2&3 versus HE M profiles \
A S 235 - Simulation border "S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor - Simulations excluded by shear buckling failure mode Proposal of new border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2 HE M profiles-S 235 HE M profiles - S 460

Border meaning that MpLRd is reached

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Figure 8

243

Linear analysis - Border Class 3&4 elastic cross-sections (= MtlRd is reached) : influence of factor I
AS 235 - Simulation border S 460 - Simulation border with EC3 epsilon factor (n = 2) HIS 460 - Simulation border with = 1,5 HIS 460 - Simulation border with = 1,8 -DS 460 - Simulation border with = 3 Proposal of new border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 3&4 EC3 limits border class 2&3 EC3 limits border class 1&2

235 460

SJ

120

140 Figure 9

160

240

260

280

Annex 12

Document 3198-2-10 (CTICM) (13 pages) "Some numerical tests for checking the influence of yield strength on limiting b/t ratios"

245

ECSC Project n3198

IMPROVED CLASSIFICATION OF CROSS-SECTIONS WORKING DOCUMENT N ..^F.z.T^O

SOME NUMERICAL TESTS FOR CHECKING THE INFLUENCE OF YIELD STRENGTH ON LIMITING RATIOS
CONTENT Page 1. 2. 3. GENERAL STRESSSTRAIN BEHAVIOUR OF STEELS WEB 3.1 Numerical model 3.2 Results FLANGE 4.1 Numerical model 4.2 Results 13 1 2 3

4.

ANNEX : fable of numerical simulations

1.

GENERAL

A c c o r d i n g t o Eurocode 3 (Table 5.3.1), the influence of yield strength on limiting b/t ratios of section elements is generally taken into a c c o u n t through the parameter fy in N/mm 2

Except for circular hollow sections, the limiting b/t ratios are proportional In . The following study is a tentative to check the relevancy of the choice of this proportionality in for high strength steels. For S420 a n d S460 steels, these criteria seem to b e t o o severe because o n o n e h a n d t h e plastic plateau is shorter than for S235 a n d the strain hardening m a y increase the rotation capacity in appreciable proportions, a n d on the other h a n d , weakest residual stresses m a y lead to Initial equivalent imperfections smaller than for S235. This study deals with webs in pure bending a n d flanges in pure compression. It Is based o n numerical simulations with the ANSYS program.

246

simply supported

simply supported

Figure la : web

Figure lb : flange

In Table 5.3.1 (Sheet 1) of Eurocode 3, the limiting b/t ratio between Class 1 a n d Class 2 is : b/t = 72 b/t = 10 for a w e b in pure bending for a flange in pure compression (rolled profiles)

We chose to study plate behaviour just a t these limits. In order to initiate the local plate buckling, this study takes into a c c o u n t an initial out-ofplane imperfection. The shape of this imperfection is d e d u c e d from the first p l a t e elastic buckling m o d e with a magnitude w 0 . The effect of residual stresses is also investigated.

2.

STRESS-STRAIN BEHAVIOUR OF STEELS

The t w o extreme grades S235 a n d S460 are studied. The material characteristics for e a c h of them are described below in figure 2 a n d Table 1 a n d their resulting - curve are plotted in figure 3.

Steel grade S235 S460

fv (MPa) 235 460

f (MPa) 360 552

Ev

Est

Eu

0.001119 0.002190 Table I

0.02238 0.02190

0.04024 0.04380

,/^ 20 10

E/Ert 30 50

For b o t h steel grades : E = 210000 MPa

247

600 500 400 300

rj (MPa)

S460

S235 200 100 0

I
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05

0.06

Figure 3

Note : the yield criteria is isotropic (based on von Mises equivalent stress) 3. WEB

3.1

Numerical Model

In order to optimize the meshing a n d the run time, it has b e e n taken into a c c o u n t that, for a long simply supported plate subject to pure bending, the buckling m o d e has a "free" halfw a v e length (that is to say giving the smallest critical bending stress - see figure 4) equal to 2/3 of the width of the plate.

\
28 26 24 22
23.9

v
\ rr = "

\ \

m - umi>er of flalf-\ vav es *', m =2

s.

= k.-

V 12(l-v ) lb,
E

* *" ^^

<

m=3

0.4

0. 6 ;

0.8

1.0

1.2

| 1.4

1.6

1.8

2/3

4/3 = 2*2/3

So, a n d with symmetry considerations more, the studied model is the one shown in figure 6.

Dimensions
The plate dimensions are: Thickness : . a/2 = 334 m m b = 1000 mm . Class 1 / Class 2 limit : t = 1000/72=13.89 m m t = 13.89/^235/460 = 19.43 mm for S235 for S460

(a = 2/3)

Meshing The meshing is : 1 6 x 1 6 = 256 finite elements (4 nodes shell elements Element n43 in ANSYS).

248

Initial plate imperfection An initial plate imperfection is introduced according to the first buckling m o d e (without initial stresses) : the first buckling m o d e of the plate is firstly determined by ANSYS a n d the n o d e coordinates are then modified.

Residual stresses It is not possible to directly input initial stresses with ANSYS program. So the influence of residual stresses has b e e n taken into a c c o u n t through stress-strain curves. The diagram of residual stresses has a linear variation as shown in Figure 5, with t w o cases : 0 = 2 3 5 / 2= 117,5 MPa 0 = 460 / 2 = 230 MPa (with grades S235 a n d S460) (with steel grade S460)

Residual stresses

Figure 5 The plate is divided into 16 bands. For e a c h b a n d , the stress-strain curve is a d a p t e d in such a w a y that the sum of the residual stresses a n d the bending stresses reaches the yield strength for the same imposed displacement. This led to define 8 new curves.

Support conditions The support conditions are described o n figure 6 (restraint degrees of freedom are boxed).

Loading The b e n d i n g stress diagram is introduced by imposing DX displacements at the nodes of the extreme left section of the plate. The imposed DX displacements are linear through the height of the plate. In the extreme horizontal fibers of the plate, the DX displacement increases gradually from 0 up to 20 m m .

249

1000

axis of Symmetry Figure 6 DX, RY

3.2

Results

3.2.1 Influence of initial plate imperfection magnitude In order to evaluate the influence of the magnitude of the plate imperfection, 4 values of w 0 have b e e n studied for a w e b with a slendemess b/t = 72 (steel grade S235), without residual stresses : w0/b w0/b w0/b w0/b = 1/10000 = 1/1000 =3/1000 =1/100 " w. M

The results are plotted in figure 8 where M is the moment corresponding to the current imposed displacement dx Mpi is the rotation a t left support is the theoretical plastic moment of the plate (Mp, = f y .tb 2 /4) is the rotation a t left support corresponding t o M ,pi

Figure 7

250

/ I
o.yo -

(5) 1/1000

~
,

-QJt

f n i/ioooo

~i

./ 0.60 " u.ou " 0.40 " O.JO " 0.20 " 0.10 "

S235
I I 1

b/t = 72

o.oo 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

/,PI
6.00
7.00

Figure 8 - Influence of plate Imperfection

magnitude

For perfectly flat plate, the - curve should begin to leave the elastic range a t M = M e i (M e | = elastic moment) that is M/M p i = 0,667 for a rectangular cross-section. Because of the initial plate imperfection which generates plate bending stresses, draws aside the elastic curve before this loading level, especially for w 0 / b = 1/100. The biggest the w 0 / b ratio is, the biggest the plate bending stresses are, the smallest M m a x is. For hight values of dx or , all the curves converge because the influence of the initial plate imperfection decreases more a n d more. The magnitude of geometrical imperfection is normally between b/100 a n d b/1000. Theoretically, the - curve is asymptotic to the theoretical value M p! . The local buckling occurs at a point whose position is governed by the steel grade a n d the b/t ratio of the plate.

3.2.2 Influence of steel grade

The figure 9 shows the influence of the steel grade on the rotation c a p a c i t y of the plate the w 0 / b ratio of which is fixed to 1/10000 a n d for b/t = 72. As expected in that case, this rotation c a p a c i t y is much smaller for S460 than for S235 steel grade (without residual stresses).

251

1.00

//Ipl
1
MUU

0.90

an IA

0.80

460 ilt = 7i

~~

0.70

0.40

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

J y

0.00

/ / / / / / /

wo/b = 1/10000

0.00

/ pi
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

Figure 9 3.2.3 Influence of residual stresses The influence of residual stresses has been investigated for the steel grade S235 (see Figure 10). Residual stresses seem to have influence if imposed rotation is greater than 4 |. For steel grade S235, the level of residual stresses is 117,5 MPa.
on -r

W/Mpl
~^}*L
_ j ( s ) '

wo/b-1 /10000 S 11

flO

.'I
) I C I wo/b-3/1000 v \J '

0 70 -

l_

1 With raxlriunl <tr I

V \ IX \

~,

S235

0.00 0.00

/ pi
2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00

Figure 10

252

3.2.4 Test of validation of the linear variation of b/t ratio in at the limit Class 1 / Class 2 On the figure 9 are plotted the results of the two following simulations : - S235 a n d b/t = 72
- S460 a n d b/t = 72. = 7 2 / 2 3 5 / 4 6 0 = 51,5

A c c o r d i n g Eurocode 3, for both cases, t h e plate is a t the limit Class! / Class2 a n d should have t h e same rotation capacity. This is nearly the case as the figure11shows a very g o o d fit up to / = 6. For greater values, the strain hardening which occurs earlier for S460 steel g r a d e becomes more a n d more influent.

/ Pi
S440 - b / i = 51 5

n R -

. / -

o.o U.1 -

/ / / 0. / / \j. / / . / -/
J

/ / / / / / / wo/b = 1/10000 , I I

Ss1 J - b/*- " ~

I
4 5 Figure 11 6 10

/ pi

The same comparison is m a d e for w o / b = 1/100, a n d for w o / b = 3/1000 for both cases. The results are plotted o n figures 12 a n d 13. M/Mpi
0.900

( > S 4 i O - b / t - 5 1 . 5 .
0.BOO 0.700 ( t ^S23S-b/t"72

0.600

0.400 0.300 0.200 0.100 0.000

J
0.000

/ / / / / /

wo/b = 3/1000 *. ssiau ai siresses i y /

1 1
1.000 2.000 3.000 5.000 6.000 7.000 8.000 9.000

/|
10.000

Figure 12

253

M7M
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1

Pi S4160 b/t = 51, 5

S235 b/t = 72

"

wo/b = 1/100

10

/ Pi

Figure 13 3.2.5 Conclusions This study constitutes preliminary study of the problem of relevancy of b/t ratios given in EC3 for high strength steels. The influence of the steel grade is taken into a c c o u n t through a proportionnality with the parameter. For a very small initial plate imperfection, the figure 9 shows that this assumption seems to be valid as long as the plastic rotation involves moderate influence of strain hardening. For greater initial plate imperfection, the figure 10 shows that for a given loading level (M given), the difference between the - curves for S235 a n d S460 becomes more important. In that case, this comparison is more difficult because the curves are very flat.

4. 4.1

FLANGE Numerical model

Dimensions The plate dimensions are Thickness a/2 = 100 m m - b = 100 mm Class 1 / Class 2 limit : t = 100/10 =10 mm forS235 t = 10/235/460 = 13,99 m m for S460

Meshing The meshing is : 1 6 x 1 6 = 256 finite elements (4 node shell elements - Element n43 in ANSYS)

254

Infilai plate imperfection An initial plate imperfection is introduced according to the first buckling m o d e (without initial stresses) : the first buckling m o d e of the plate is firstly determined by ANSYS a n d the n o d e coordinates are then modified. The m a g n i t u d e of the intial imperfection is : w o / b = 6/1000.

Residual stresses
DX Imposed DI

v\

100

o
100 Residnal stresses

Figure 14 4.2 4.2.1 Results Influence of residual stresses

Figure 15 a n d 16 show the influence of residual stresses for steel grades S235 a n d S460. Residual stresses reduce the deformation c a p a c i t y in a significative way. For steel grade S460, it is important to consider that the residual stresses do not e x c e e d 235 / 2 = 117,5 MPa. Therefore, curve 23 is nearer to the real behaviour than curve 18 a n d the deformation c a p a c i t y is better.

N/Npl

/ f
|w

1
L

_|_WHtioutrlidual!ft.i!.

rth reiidual s t r e u j

S235

/ / / / / / / / \

d/dy
Figure 15

255

 / ol
RO-

// // / / / /

hf

h 'ff /
iMktuol ifreiit-i : 230 MFc
I 1

WVttout mtduol t t i M M i

/ /

[T7~

=-<7U =-^7> Grlie

7 r ^

l*4duoJ i h * : 117J

ACV

I y /
/ / / / / / /

S460

0.00-/
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

d /dy
6.00
7.00 8.00

Figure 16 4.2.2 Influence of the expression of Figure shows the curves obtained by calculating with the following formula ,235,1/n = fv,

with = 1,2,3,4

These numerical simulations take into a c c o u n t residual stresses with 0 = 230 MPa. Simulations have also b e e n m a d e for = 2, 3 a n d 4, with 0 = 117,5 MPa.
N/Npl = ^ ^p^=r ^^

> ^ /*"*
rsnc curv(1 il V

>

~~~

. -/Ta .

KL

?5<

S460

0.00 1.00 2.00 4.00

d/dy

Figure 17

256

M/Mpl 1 00
f S

0 90 0 80 0 70 0 60

^*fc_
" " " " " ^ ^ ^

;^-_
* * " ^ _

X^ z^z^ _

-@-n2
1-4

li

Reference curve\\)

I
/ / / / / /
0 10 /

S460 ' : 117,5 ' Residual stresses

0.00 / 0.00

d/dy 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00

Figure 1

CONCLUSIONS All simulations are c o m p a r e d to a reference simulation with steel grade S235 taking into a c c o u n t residual stresses (simulation 16). On figure Yfy the level of the residual stresses is assumed to be half the yield strength for the steel grade S460 : 230 MPa. Curve 18 is the nearest curve to the reference curve : = 2 seems to be the best value for . If w e assumed that the level of residual stresses does not d e p e n d on the yield strength, w e must take 0 = 117,5 MPa (see Figure 15). Then = 3 seems to be the best value for calculating the factor . These simulations only allow us to make comparisons, but it is not possible t o d e d u c e general conclusions, for many reasons : residual stresses d e p e n d on the shape of the crosssection simulations c o u l d be d o n e with more realistic stressstrain curves comparisons h a v e been only with steel grade S460, a n d not with steel g r a d e S355.

257

ANNEX Table of numerical simulations

Steel

n 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3

b / t
72 72 72 72 72 72 72
51,5 51,5 51,5 51,5 51,5 57,5 60,9

w0/b

0 (MPa)

WEB 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14
FLANGE

S235 S235 S235 S235 S235 S235 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S235 S235 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460 S460

4 2 2 2 2 1 3 4 2 3 4

1/10000 1/1000 3/1000 1/100 1/10000 3/1000 1/10000 1/10000 3/1000 1/10000 3/1000 3/1000 3/1000 3/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000 6/1000

0 0 0 0
117.5 117,5

0 0 0 230 230
117.5 117,5 117,5

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

10 10
7,15 7,15 5,11 7,99 8,45 7,15 7,99 8,45

0
117,5

0 230 230 230 230

117,5 117,5 117,5

258

CORDIS
The Community Research and Development Information Service

Your European R&D Information Source

CORDIS represents a central source of information crucial for any organisation - be it industry, small and medium-sized enterprises, research organisations or universities - wishing to participate in the exploitation ofresearchresults, participate in EU funded science and technology programmes and/or seek partnerships. CORDIS makes information available to the public through a collection of databases. The databases cover research programmes and projects from their preparatory stages through to their execution and final publication of results. A daily news service provides up-to-date information on EU research activities including calls for proposals, events, publications and tenders as well as progress and results of research and development programmes. A partner search facility allows users to register their own details on the database as well as search for potential partners. Other databases cover Commission documents, contact information and relevant publications as well as acronyms and abbreviations. By becoming a user of CORDIS you have the possibility to: Identify opportunities to manufacture and market new products Identify partnerships for research and development Identify major players in research projects Review research completed and in progress in areas of your interest

The databases - nine in total - are accessible on-line free of charge. As a user-friendly aid for on-line searching, Watch-CORDIS, a Windows-based interface, is available on request. The databases are also available on a CD-ROM. The current databases are: News (English, German and French version) - Results Partners - Projects - Programmes - Publications Acronyms - Comdocuments - Contacts

CORDIS on World Wide Web

The CORDIS service was extended in September 1994 to include the CORDIS World Wide Web (WWW) server on Internet This service provides information on CORDIS and the CORDIS databases, various software products, which can be downloaded (including the above mentioned Watch-CORDIS) and the possibility of downloading full text documents including the work programmes and information packages for all theresearchprogrammes in the Fourth Framework and calls for proposals. The CORDIS WWW service can be accessed on the Internet using browser software (e.g. Netscape) and the address is: http://www.cordis.lu/ The CORDIS News database can be accessed through the WWW.

Contact details f or further Information

If you would like further information on the CORDIS services, publications and products, please contact the CORDIS Help Desk : CORDIS Customer Service B.P. 2373 L-1023 Luxembourg Telephone: Fax: E-mail: WWW: +352-441012-2240 +352-441012-2248 helpdesk cordis.lu http://www.cordis.lu/

European Commission EUR 18404 Properties and in-service performance Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections: new rules for local buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4 J. B. Schleich, . Chabrolin, F. Espiga Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 1998 258 pp. 21 29.7 cm Technical steel research series ISBN 92-828-4466-8 Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: ECU 43

In each specification detailing the design of structural steel members there are usually rules about the local buckling. These rules are based on the combination of cross-sectional dimensions (slendemess of different parts of profiles, b/t for the web and the flange) and on the yield point; for these combinations a critical level is defined over which local buckling appears (classification of cross-sections). Thus, this classification does not take into account the real stresses of the cross-sections which are rarely equal to the yield point. Besides, for high strength steels (yield point = 460 MPa), these rules have been extrapolated without verification and because of their definition, they discriminate against these steels. For a designer the usual procedure is to choose a cross-section in such a way that the maximal capacity is not controlled by local buckling but is associated with the bearing load of a particular member of the structure (column, beam, beam-column). Therefore, the local buckling rules play an important part in the design of structural steel and composite members. In this research we propose to evaluate the local buckling problem for all main steel grades (S 235, S 355 and S 460 steels) with a more realistic approach based on test results and numerical simulations. This approach should take into account the existing stresses in members submitted to global buckling (cross-sections loadded by centred and also eccentric compression) and should also take into account the real boundary conditions of the cross-sections (for instance, in a composite cross-section the collaborating concrete slab greatly influences the stability of the steel beam web). The aim of this research is to improve the classification of steel and composite crosssections in Eurocodes 3 and 4 by taking a more realistic approach. The practical result of this research consists of new rules of classification of cross-sections which will be introduced in both Eurocodes 3 and 4 with the support of experts. In such a way, the competitiveness of steel and composite (steel-concrete) cross-sections will be improved and these sections will not be evaluated too conservatively as is done presently because of a lack of knowledge in the field of local buckling problems.

BELGIQUE/BELGI Jean De Lannoy Avenue du Rol 202/Konlngslaan 202 B-1190 Bruxclles/Brussel Tl. (32-2) 538 43 08 Fax (32-2) 538 08 41 Email: joan.de lannoy nfoboard.be URL: http://www.jean de-lannoy.be La librairie europenne/De Europea Boekhandel Rue de la Loi 244/Wetstraat 244 -1 040 Bruxolles/Brussel Tl. (32-2) 295 26 39 Fax (32-2) 735 08 60 E-mail: mallOllbeurop.be URL- http://www.libeurop.be Moniteur beige/Belgisch Staatsblad Rue de Louvain 40-42/Leuvenseweg 40-42 B-1000 Bruxelles/Brussel Tl. (32-2)552 2211 Fax (32-2) 51101 84 DANMARK J. H. Schultz Information A/S Herstedvang 10-12 DK-2620 Albertslund TK. (45) 43 63 23 00 Fax (45) 43 63 19 69 E-mail: schultzOschultz.dk URL http://www.schultz.dk DEUTSCHLAND Bundosanzelger Verlag GmbH Vortriebsabteilung Amsterdamer Strae 192 D-50735 Kln ~

NEDERLAND SDU Servicecentrum UKgeve Christotfei Plantjjnstraat 2 Postbus 20014 2500 EA Den Haag Tel. (31-70) 378 98 80 Fax (31-70) 378 97 83 E-mail: sduOsdu.nl URL http://www.sdu.nl STERREICH Manz'sche Verlag- und Universittsbuchhandlung GmbH Kohlmarkt 16 A-1014 Wien Tel. (43-1)5316 1100 Fax (43-1) 53 16 11 67 E-Mail: bestellen O manz.co.at URU hrtp://www.austria.EU.nol:B1/manz PORTUGAL Distribuidora de Livros Bertrand Ld.' Grupo Bertrand, SA Rua das Terras dos Vales, 4-A Apartado 60037 P-2700 Amadora Tei. (351-2)495 90 50 Fax (351-2) 496 02 55 Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda, EP Rua Marques S da Bandeira, 16-A P-1050 Lisboa Codex Tel. (351-1)353 03 99 Fax (351-1) 353 02 94 E-mail: del.incm@mail.telepac.pt URL: http^www.incm.pt SUOMI/FINLAND Akateeminen Klr|akauppa/A kademlska Bokhandeln Keskuskatu 1 /Centralgatan 1 PL/PB 128 FIN-00101 Helsinki/Helsingfors Pytfn (358-9) 121 44 18 FTfax (358-9) 121 44 35 Shkposti: akatilausOstockmann.fi URL httpy/www.akateeminen.com SVERIGE BTJAB Traktorvgen 11 S-221 82 Lund Tfn. (46-46)18 00 00 Fax (46-46) 30 79 47 E-post: btjeu-pub@btj.se URL: http:/fwww.btj.se UNITED KINGDOM The Stationery Office Ltd International Sales Agency 51 Nine Elms Lane London SW8 5DR Tel. (44-171)873 90 90 Fax (44-171) 873 84 63 E-mail: ipaenquiries@theso.co.uk URL: http://www.the-stationery-orfico.co.uk ISLAND Bokabud Larusar Blndal Sklavrdustig. 2 IS-101 Reykjavik Tel. (354) 551 56 50 Fax (354) 552 55 60 NORGE S wets Norge AS stenjoveien 18 Boks 6512 Etterstad N-0606Oslo Tel. (47-22) 97 45 00 Fax (47-22) 97 45 45 SCHWEIZ/SUISSE/SVIZZERA Euro Info Center Schweiz c/oOSEC Stampfenbachstrae 85 PF 492 CH-8035 Zrich Tel. (41-1) 365 53 15 Fax (41-1) 365 54 11 E-mail: elcsOosec.ch URL: http://www.osoc.ch/oics BLGARIJA Europress Euromedia Ltd 59, btvd Vtosha BG-1000 Sofia Tel. (359-2) 980 37 66 Fax (359-2) 980 42 30 E-mail: MilenaOmbox.cit.bg CESKA REPUBLIKA USIS NIS-prodejna Havelkova 22 CZ-130 00Praha3 Tel. (420-2)24 2314 86 Fax (420-2) 24 23 11 14 E-mail: nkpospOdec.nis.cz URL http://www.nis.cz ~ ~ ~ ~

CYPRUS Cyprus Chamber of Commerce and Industry PO Box 1455 CY-1509 Nicosia Tel. (357-2 66 95 00 Fax (357-2) 66 10 44 E-mail: infoOccci.org.cy EESTI Eesti Kaubandus-Tstuskoda (Estonian Chamber of Commerce and Industry) Toom-Kooli 17 EE-0001 Tallinn Tel. (372) 646 02 44 Fax (372) 646 02 45 E-mail: elnfoOkoda.ee URL: http://www.koda.ee MAGYARORSZAG Euro Info Service Europa Haz Margitszigel PO Box 475 H-1396 Budapest 62 Tel. (36-1)350 80 25 Fax (36-1 ) 350 90 32 E-mail: euroinlo@mail.matav.hu URL http://www.euroinfo.hu/index.htm MALTA Miller Distributors Ltd Malta International Airport PO Box 25 Luqa LOA 05 Tel. (356) 66 44 88 Fax (356) 67 67 99 E-mail: gwirthOusa.net POLSKA Ars Polona Krakowskio Przedmiescie 7 Skr. poeztowa 1001 PL-00-950 Warszawa Tel. (48-22) 82612 01 Fax (48-22) 826 62 40 E-mail: ars_poiObevy.hsn.com.pl ROMANIA Euromedia Str. G-ral Berthelot Nr 41 RO-70749 Bucuresti Tel. (40-1)315 44 03 Fax (40-1) 315 44 03 SLOVAKIA Centrum VTI SR Nam. Slobody, 19 SK-81223 Bratislava Tel. (421-7)531 83 64 Fax (421-7) 531 83 64 E-mail: europOtbbl.sltk.stuba.sk URL: http://www.sllk.stuba.sk SLOVENIA Gospodarski Vestnik Dunajska cesta 5 S LO-1000 Ljubljana Tel.(386)61133 03 54 Fax (386) 61133 91 28 E-mail: repansekj@gvestnik.si URL: http:/Avww.gvestnik.si TURKIYE DOnya Infotel AS 100, Yil Mahallessl 34440 TR-80050 Bagcilar-lstanbul Tel. (90-212)62946 89 Fax (90-212) 629 46 27 AUSTRAUA Hunter Publication PO Box 404 3067 Abbotsford, Victoria Tel. (61-3)9417 53 61 Fax (61-3) 94 19 71 54 E-mail: jpdaviesOozemail.com.au CANADA Renouf Publishing Co. Ltd 5369 Chemin Canotek Road Unit 1 K U 9J3 Ottawa, Ontario

INDIA EBIC India 3rd Floor, Y. B. Chavan Centre Gen. J. Bhosale Marg. 400 021 Mumbai Tel. (91-22)282 60 64 Fax (91-22) 285 45 64 E-mail: ebicOgiasbm01.vsnl.net.in URL http://www.ebicindia.com ISRAEL ROY International PO Box 13056 61130 Tel Aviv Tel. (972-3)54614 23 Fax 972-3) 546 14 42 E-mail: royil@netvision.net.il Sub-agent for the Palestinian Authority: Index Information Services PO Box 19502 Jerusalem Tel. (972-2) 627 16 34 Fax (972-2) 627 12 19 JAPAN PSI-Japan Asahi Sanbancho Plaza #206 7-1 Sanbancho, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 102 Tel. (81-3) 32 34 69 21 Fax (81-3) 32 34 69 15 E-mail: books@psi-japan.co.jp URL http://www.psi-japan.com MALAYSIA EBIC Malaysia Level 7, Wisma Hong Ledng 18 Jalan Perak 50450 Kuala Lumpur Tel. (60-3) 262 62 98 Fax (60-3) 262 61 98 E-mail: ebic-kl@mol.net.my PHILIPPINES EBIC Philippines 19th Floor, PS Bank Tower Sen. Gil J. Puyat Ave. cor. Tindalo St. Makati City Metro Manilla

Tel. (49221) 97 66 80
Fax (49-221) 97 66 82 78 E-Mail: vertrieb O bundesanzeiger.de URL http://www.bundesanzeiger.de /GREECE G. C. Elettheroudakis SA International Bookstore Panepistimiou 17 GR-10564 Athina Tei. (30-1) 331 41 80/1/2/3/4/5 Fax (30-1) 323 98 21 E-mail: elebooksOnetor.gr ESPAA Boletn Oficial del Estado Trafalgar, 27 E-28071 Madrid Tei. (34) 915 38 21 11 (Ubros)/ 913 84 17 15 (Suscripciones) Fax (34) 915 38 21 21 Libros)/ 913 84 17 14 Suscripciones) E-mail: cllentesOcom.boe.es URL http://www.boe.es Mundi Prensa Libros, SA Castell, 37 E-28001 Madrid Tel. (34)914 36 37 00 Fax (34) 915 75 39 98 E-mail: HbreriaOmundiprensa.eS URL: httpV/www.mundiprensa.com FRANCE Journal officiel Service dos publications des CE 26, rue Desabe F-75727 Paris Cedex 15 Tl. (33) 140 58 77 31 Fax (33) 140 58 77 00 IRELAND Government Supplies Agency Publications Section 4-5 Harcourt Road Dublin 2 Te). (353-1) 661 31 11 Fax (353-1) 475 27 60 ITALIA Licosa SpA Via Duca dl Calabria, 1/1 Casella postale 552 1-50125 Firenze Tel. (39-55) 64 54 15 Fax (39-55) 64 12 57 E-mail: licosaOflbcc.it URL: httpV/www.ttbcc.il/licosa LUXEMBOURG Messageries du livre SARL 5, rue Raiffoison L-2411 Luxembourg Tl. (352)4010 20 Fax (352) 49 06 61 E-mail: mrJOpLIu URL http/nvww.mdl.lu Abonnements: Messageries Paul Kraue 11, rue Christophe Plantin L-2339 Luxembourg Tl. (352) 49 98 88-8 Fax (352) 49 98 88-444 E-mail: mpkOpltu URL: http://www.mpk lu

Tel. (632) 759 66 80

Fax (63-2) 759 66 90 E-mail: eccpcom globe.com.ph URL http://www.eccp.com RUSSIA CCEC 60-letiya Oktyabrya Av. 9 117312 Moscow Tel. (70-95) 135 52 27 Fax (70-95) 135 52 27 SOUTH AFRICA Salto Salto House NO 5 Esterhyzen Street PO Box 782 706 2146 Sandten Tel. (27-11 883 37 37 Fax (27-11)883 65 69 E-mail: emalstarOide.co_-t URL http:/www.safto.co.za SOUTH KOREA Information Centra for Europe (ICE) 204 Woo Sol Parktel 395-185 Seogyo Dong, Mapo Ku 121-210 Seoul Tel. (82-2) 322 53 03 Fax (82-2) 322 53 14 E-mail: euroinfoOshlnblro.com THAI U N D EBIC Thailand 29 Vanisse Building, 8th Floor Soi Chidlom Ploenchit 10330 Bangkok Tel. (66-2) 655 06 27 Fax (66-2) 655 06 28 E-mail: ebicbkk@ksc15.Ih.com URL http:/www.ebicbkk.org UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Beman A ssodata 4611-F Assembly Drive Lanham MD20706 Tel. (1 -800) 274 44 47 (toll free telephone) Fax (1-800) 865 34 50 (toll free fax) E-mail: queryObeman.com URL http://www.beman.com ANDERE LANDER/OTHER COUNTRIES/ AUTRES PAYS Bitte wandan Sie sich an ein Bro Ihrer Wahl / Please contact the sales office of your cholc / Veuillez vous adrat bureau de vant de votre choix ~

Tel. (1613)745 26 65
Fax (1-613) 745 76 60 E-mail: order.deptOrenoulbooks.com URL http://www.ronoufbooks.com EGYPT The Middle East Observer 41 Sherif Street Cairo Tel. (20-2) 393 97 32 Fax 20-2)393 97 32 HRVATSKA Mediatrade Ltd Pavia Hatza 1 HR-10000 Zagreb Tel. (385-1) 43 03 92 Fax (385-1) 43 03 92

NOTICE TO THE REA DER

Information on European Commission publications in the areas of research and innovation can be obtained from: o CORDIS, t h e Community R & D Information Service For more information, contact: CORDIS Customer Service, BP 2373, L1023 Luxembourg Tel. (352) 44 10 122240; fax (352) 44 10 122248; email: helpdesk@cordis.lu or visit the website at http://www.cordis.lu/ Euroabstracts The European Commission's periodical on research publications, issued every two months. For more information, contact: RTD help desk, European Commission, DG XIII, L2920 Luxembourg Fax (352) 43 0132084; email: rtdhelpdesk@lux.dg13.cec.be

9 >

Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: ECU 43 ISBN OFFICE FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 9 L2985 Luxembourg 789282"844663 > TaEflMMbb

EUR

-k

k o p *