Thin-WalledStructures Vol. 25, No. 1, pp.

61 79, 1996 Copyright @) 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd

"t~ I' ELSEVIER

Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved 0263-8231/96 5;15.00

0263-8231(95)00031-3

An Experimental Verification of the Generalized Beam T h e o r y A p p l i e d to I n t e r a c t i v e B u c k l i n g P r o b l e m s

P. Leach & J. M. Davies

Telford Research Institute for Structures and Materials Engineering, University of Salford, Salford, UK (Received 3 November 1994; accepted 21 December 1994)

ABSTRACT Previous papers (Refs 1-4) have presented a method of analysis for any open unbranched thin walled section considering both rigid body movement and cross section distortion (including local buckling). Reference 1 described how the Generalized Beam Theory (GBT) can be used to calculate generalized section properties for all modes, including each of the four rigid body modes and the distortional modes. The additional section properties evolved from GBT were then used in Ref. 2 to consider second order elastic critical buckling problems. This paper compares the critical buckling predictions of GBT with the results obtained in two series of tests carried out on lipped and unlipped channels subject to a major axis bending moment. These predictions are then combined with the yield criteria of EC3 to allow a comparison with the analysis of these tests carried out by Lindner and Aschinger ( Ref 5). The paper concludes that the Generalized Theory is a powerful and effective analysis tool for the solution of interactive buckling problems where both local and overall buckling can occur.

1 INTRODUCTION The Generalized Beam Theory (GBT) is a method of analysis originally developed by Schardt6 and subsequently by Miosga v for open unbranched members which considers the member to have a deformable cross section. The theory is used to calculate a number of section properties, some rela61

62

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

ted to rigid body deformation modes and others related to cross section distortion modes. For first order problems, these Cross section properties can be used in the normal equations of equilibrium given by the simple Engineers' Theory of Bending to calculate stresses and deflections in the section. 8 Extending the theory to the second order enables GBT to be used to solve second order elastic critical buckling problems by calculating additional section properties and modifying the basic equilibrium equation to incorporate these additional terms. Reference 1 describes the method of calculating the complete second order cross section properties and derives the second order equation of equilibrium. Reference 2 uses these properties in the equilibrium equation to solve a number of critical buckling problems. This paper compares the results of a second order interactive buckling analysis using the finite difference approach in conjunction with GBT to a series of tests carried out at the University of Salford on a number of lipped and unlipped channel sections subject to a major axis bending moment. Using the critical buckling moments obtained in this way, the load carrying capacity of the channels was calculated and compared with the capacity calculated by Lindner and Aschinger, -s who analysed the results using five alternative design procedures. 2 SECOND O R D E R EQUATION OF EQUILIBRIUM According to Ref. l, the following equation can be applied to all first and second order problems in order to calculate the stress distribution in a section subject to an arbitrary load, or in order to calculate the bifurcation load of a section when subject to any load (or series of loads):

j=l

9.[

EJkckv

"t' _

G i k D k v " + /kB k v +
i= I

Uk~c~(iw iV)"

( i w " J V + 2 iW' JV')I = kqQ

(1)

where: JkB - - bending stiffness in mode j with respect to load applied in mode k, Jkc1 - - first order longitudinal stiffness in m o d e j for load applied in mode k, Jkc2 - - second order longitudinal stiffness in mode j for load applied in mode k, Jkc - - ikc1 + jk C2, ikD~ - - first order torsional stiffness in mode j for load applied in mode k, JkD2 - - second order torsional stiffness in mode j for load applied in mode k, ikD - - 2 ( 1 - v)/kDl

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

63

_v(.ikDi + jk D2), E - - Young's m o d u l u s = 20000 k N / c m 2, G - - shear modulus = 7692 k N / c m 2, iJkx,~ - - second order terms arising from longitudinal stresses, iJkx~ - - second order terms from shear stresses, YW - stress resultant in m o d e j, JV - - generalised displacement function for m o d e j, and v - Poisson's ratio.
3 SOLUTION OF THE SECOND ORDER EQUATION OF EQUILIBRIUM In general buckling problems, the shape of the buckling wave in each m o d e is u n k n o w n , as is the contribution of each m o d e to the failure load. In order to solve such problems, finite difference methods can be used in conjunction with eqn (1). To illustrate the method, it is useful to first consider the case of buckling in a single m o d e (in an arbitrary buckling wave shape) and then to extend the m e t h o d to the general case of interactive buckling in two or more modes.

3.1 Buckling without interaction

Consider eqn (1) applied to a buckling m o d e 'k'. For bifurcation situations, the load in the direction of the displacement is zero so that the right h a n d side of the equation vanishes. Furthermore, for buckling in a single mode, j -- k and the summations over 'j' modes are not required. Hence:

Ek~C kV"" -- G /kD kV" + kkB kV = --2 ]~--~ ikkKa(iw kv)t!

L--i=I
-I

+ ik~ K~ (iw" kV + 2 iW' ~V')[.

This can be rewritten in finite difference form for node 'm' as:

(2)

kkS(m) = 2kkF(m)
where:

kkS(rn) = EkkCkV(m) ' ' - G kkD kV(m)" + kkBkV(m)

and:

kkF(rn) = - ~
i=1

[ikkK~ [iwkV(m)]" -ikkx~ [iw"kV(m) + 2iw'kV(m) '] t.

The second and fourth derivatives of V can be replaced by their central finite difference equivalents:

64

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

V(m)" =

V ( m - 1) - 2 V ( m ) + V ( m + l )

dx 2
V(m -

V(m)"

2) - 4 V ( m - 1) + 6V(m) - 4 V ( m + 1) + V ( m + 2)
dx 4

Boundary conditions can be inserted as appropriate to give an equation for each of the 'p' node points along the length of the beam. The boundary conditions relating to simply supported or clamped end conditions can be derived with little effort from first principles. Using these end conditions, all the points along the beam can be combined to give the following eigenvalue equation:
( k * s -- 2 k * F ) * V = 0

where "*ks(1 ) **S(2)

kk S =

**S(p- l)
and "**F(I)

**S(p)

*kF(2)
kkF :

**F(p- 1)

**F(p)

*V = eigenvectors of mode shapes ('p' vectors each with 'p' elements), 2 = multiplier for the applied load (i.e. 'p' eigenvalues). The lowest eigenvalue gives the critical buckling load for a general section with arbitrary boundary conditions for buckling in a single mode. It also give the next ' p - 1' buckling loads with their associated mode shapes. Because of the numerical inaccuracy of the finite difference approximations for the derivatives of V when the mode shape is complex, only the first few buckling loads and modes can be used with confidence. This limitation is insignificant in engineering problems since the higher modes are always associated with correspondingly high critical buckling loads.

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

65

Alternatively, for a more comprehensive treatment, of various end conditions, Ref. 3 considers all possible support conditions and offers a more efficient solution method for the above system of equations.

3.2 Buckling with interaction

When the buckling failure is due to a combination of a number of different modes, the failure load can be calculated by creating an eigenvalue problem which incorporates all of the component modes. The eigenvalue problem then becomes: ([kkS -- 2kkF] ~V) = O.
k=l

The solution of this equation gives (n p) eigenvalues, the lowest of which is the multiplier for the interactive critical buckling load considering as many of the possible individual modes as is required.

4 I N T E R A C T I V E B U C K L I N G B E H A V I O U R OF C O L D - F O R M E D CHANNELS

4.1 Experimental investigation

A number of tests have been carried out on cold-formed steel channel section beams subject to major axis bending moments in order to validate this method of analysis. Lovell 9 carried out a series of tests on both lipped and unlipped channels subject to a uniform major axis bending m o m e n t and additional tests were carried out by Leach, 8 using a rig similar to that used by Lovell. In these latter tests, a series of light gauge steel beams were subject to a major axis bending m o m e n t applied to one end only, thus producing a linearly varying distribution of bending m o m e n t along the length of the beam. Lovell tested six different sections over various lengths, while another four different sections were tested over various lengths in Ref. 8. All of the sections had similar end conditions as detailed in Table 1 below. Thus, the ends of the members under test were simply supported with regard to bending but fully restrained against torsion, warping and cross section distortion. In each test, the load deflection characteristics of the beams were measured, as were the failure loads. In order to define the buckling load, a horizontal deflection of span/1000 was considered to be the maximum

66

P. Leach, J. M. Davies
TABLE 1 End C o n d i t i o n s for Both Test Series

Mode
1 -2 -3 -4 -5 to Axial m o v e m e n t M a j o r axis b e n d i n g M i n o r axis bending Torsion 'n' - - Distortion

End condition
Translational Free Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Rotational Free Free Fixed Fixed

TABLE 2a Sections Tested by Lovell 9

Series Ref.
A B C D E F

Depth ( mm )
90 90 90 122 120 122

Width (ram)
36 50 26 36 50 36

Lip size ( mm )
Unlipped 15 9 Unlipped 15 Unlipped

Thickness ( mm )
1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1-17

Length ( rnrn )
800-2400 900-4400 500 2600 500-2500 600-4500 500-2500

TABLE 2b Sections Tested by Leach 8

Series Ref.
B E H G

Depth (ram)
90 120 90 120

Width (ram)
50 50 40 50

Lip size ( mm )
15 15 Unlipped Unlipped

Thickness ( mm )
1-20 1.20 1.90 1.90

Length (ram)
1500-6000 1500-6000 800-3000 800-3000

allowable deflection before post-buckling effects occurred. In most instances failure occurred before this limit was reached.

4.1.1 Test rig

A photograph showing the general arrangement of the test rig is shown in Fig. 1. In order to achieve the end conditions given in Table 1, the test rig used two turntable support frames as shown in Fig. 2. Translational freedom along the beam was achieved by mounting one turntable on needle

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

67

Fig. l. General arrangement of test rig.

roller bearings. In order to restrain the section against twisting and warping, the ends of the beam were clamped with 12 m m thick mild steel plates onto a box section fabricated from 12 m m steel plates as shown in Fig. 3. Careful observation of the ends of the specimen during the tests indicated that this arrangement was a good approximation to a 'fixed warping' condition whilst the turntables and roller bearings allowed rotational freedom with respect to major and minor axis bending and prevented the development of any catenary forces.

68

P. Leach, J, M. Davies

16mm shatt in roller bearings giving rotational freedom in the major axis

Horizontal turntabh giving rotational freedom in the min( axis direction

Fig. 2. End view of turntable support frame.

12mm plates clamping section to box fabricated from 12mm plate I

U
!

U
m

Fig. 3. Clamping arrangement providing fixed warping restraint.

Load was applied to the section by means of a lever arm system and dead weights to each end of the beam. In the Lovell tests, both ends of the beam were equally loaded to give a constant bending moment along the beam while in the tests carried out by the author, one end was left unloaded in order to create a linearly varying distribution of bending moment along the beam.

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

69

4.2 Theoretical investigation

When carrying out the first part of the theoretical analyses according to GBT in order to determine the generalised set of cross section properties, the node points within the section were taken as follows: (a) Lipped channel: six nodes, one at each edge of the section and at each fold. No intermediate nodes, i.e.

--1

(b) Unlipped channel: six nodes, one at each edge of the section, one at each fold together with intermediate nodes at the mid points of each flange, i.e.

Each of these analyses gave rise to the usual four 'rigid body' modes of axial elongation, bending about each principal axis and torsion, together with two higher order local buckling/distortional modes. In this way, cross section distortion was accounted for an also local plate buckling in the unlipped flanges which were expected to be susceptible to local buckling. Convergence studies indicated that 24 elements along the beam was the optimum number for the finite difference analysis adopted, although it has been subsequently found that the improved solution method of Ref. 8 generally converges with as few as six elements.

5 RESULTS Figures 4-14 show the test results together with a number of theoretical curves. These curves are:
Yield moment: The yield moment of the section calculated using the gross section properties of the beam (independent of length) and a yield stress of 312 N/mm 2 in the Lovell tests and 284 N/mm 2 in the Leach tests.

70 MOMENT (kN.cm) 300

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

GBT Modes t-4 250 200 Yield Moment

150 100
l

-- GBT All Modes x Test Results

" "

"

50 0

50

100

150 LENGTH (cm)

200

250

Fig. 4. Lovell test series 'A'.

MOMENT (KN.CM) 500 GBT Modes 1-4 - GBT All Modes 400 ~ , Test Re.cu's

3OO
L

x x x x

Yield Moment

F
100 0
0

.............
x x

100

200

300

400

500

LENGTH (CM)

Fig. 5. Lovell test series 'B'.

GBT modes 1-4: The elastic buckling curve of the rigid cross section. These curves therefore include modes 2-4. For uniform bending, the curve is identical to that obtained by using the analytical formula of Timoshenko and Gere ~ for a simply supported beam restrained against warping. G B T all modes: The elastic buckling curve of the cross section taking account of cross section distortion as calculated by GBT. Nethercot (Figs 1-4 only). The elastic buckling curve of the cross

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

71

section according to Refs 11 and 12. This m e t h o d does not allow for cross section distortion. It should be noted that the yield curve are each an upper no attempt has been made together with buckling. This this paper. theoretical critical buckling curves and the bound to the real behaviour. In these figures to consider the interactive effects of yield interaction is considered at a later stage in

MOMENT (KN.CM) 300 GBT Modes 1-4 250 200 150 100 50 0 X ~ Yield Moment
Note: All modes curve and modes 1 - 4 curve

coincide

-- GBT All Modes Test Results

50

100

150

200

250

300

LENGTH (CM) Fig. 6. Lovell test series 'C'.

MOMENT (kN.cm) 300 250 200 150 100

X

Yield Moment

GBT Modes 1-4 GBT All Modes Test Results

50 0 0 50

100

150 LENGTH (cm)

200

250

300

Fig. 7. Lovell test series ' D ' .

72 MOMENT (kN.cm) 600

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

GBT Modes 1-4 500 400 300 200 100 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 LENGTH (cm) Fig. 8. Lovell test series 'E'. GBT All Modes Test Results

yield_ Moment
X X

...........

...............

~ ' ~

MOMENT (KN.CM) 350

_

!
Y_i_el=d Moment t GBT Modes 1-4 GBT All Modes Test Results

300 250 200 150 100 50 0 50 100 150 200

250

300

LENGTH (CM)

Fig. 9. Lovell test series 'F'.

6 SIMPLIFIED B I F U R C A T I O N ANALYSIS It is shown in Refs 2 and 4 that a very much simplified analysis for elastic buckling is available if the displacement function for each of the active modes can be assumed to be a half sine wave, thus:
k V = ka

sin ~X. L

With this assumption, and when only a single mode is considered, a simple

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

73

explicit expression is available for the buckling load and, for higher order modes, the buckling wavelength. When two modes are included, it is necessary to solve a quadratic equation and each additional mode merely adds a further variable. Apparently, the fixed boundary conditions for torsion and warping, in particular, preclude this method of analysis of the test results discussed earlier. It is, nevertheless, instructive to apply the simplified procedure and to examine the results. As with all cases of sections suffering lateral torsional buckling as a result of the application of a major axis bending moment, the lateral
MOMENT (KN.CM) 450 400 350 3O0 250 200 150 100 50 0
2OO

~\ X~ \~,~ ,,
Yield Momen_t . . . . . ~-

- G B T Modes 1-4

GBT All Test

-

Modes

Nethercot

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

LENGTH (CM)

Fig. 10. Leach test series 'B'.

MOMENT (kN.cm) 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 LENGTH (cm)

GBT Modes 1-4 .. "~\

x

- GBT All Test

Modes

- Nethercot

Fig. 11. Leach test series 'E'.

74

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

bending mode 3 and the torsional mode 4 have no independent significance and are coupled in the rigid-body lateral torsional buckling mode. This is evident when the iJkx values are considered because 233K 244K = 0. Furthermore, here, the higher-order distortional modes 5 and 6 similarly have no independent significance because 255x = 266K = 0. Indeed, because of the coupled interaction whereby the buckling of the compression flange renders the section doubly unsymmetrical the only mode combinations which give useful solutions are 3 and 4 (rigid body) and 3, 4, 5 and 6 (rigid body plus both cross section distortions). The results of applying this simplified analysis to the unlipped sections of Lovell's test series A and D are given in Figs 14 and 15, respectively.
MOMENT (KN.CM) 1000
GBT Modes 1-4 \, x "\ ?. \ \

800 600 400 200 0

- - G B T All M o d e s Nethercot

X Test

Moment . . . . . . . . . . . . Yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

~-

. . . .

100

150

200 LENGTH (CM)

250

300

Fig. 12. L e a c h test series ' G ' .

MOMENT (KNCM)
6O0
- GBT Modes 1-4

500 400 300 200 100 0 100 150 200 LENGTH(CM) Fig. 13. Leach test series 'H'.

GBT All Modes

Nethercot

250

300

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

75

Because of the implied simply-supported boundary conditions, the moments causing rigid-body lateral torsional buckling are considerably lower than the corresponding values in Figs 4 and 7. However, both Figs 14 and 15 show a clearly defined local buckling mode with a relatively short wavelength which would not be significantly influenced by the boundary conditions in the tests. Thus, section A suffers local buckling at a moment of 101 kNcm with a half wavelength of 9 cm. The corresponding values for section D are 148 kNcm and 10 cm. These buckling moments are, of course, precisely the values influencing the horizontal portions of the 'GBT all modes' lines in Figs 4 and 6.
MOMENT (kN.cm) 700
All

Modes
Body

600 500 400 300 200 100

p

Rigid

Modes

0 0 50 100 150 200 250 BUCKLING LENGTH (cm) Fig. 14. Lovell test series 'A': critical buckling moments.

MOMENT (kN.cm) 1000

All i Rigid

Modes Body Modes

800 600 400 200 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 BUCKLING LENGTH (cm)

Fig. 15. Lovell test series 'D': critical buckling moments.

76

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

The significance of these results is that the extremely complicated buckling behaviour of unlipped channels bent about the major axis, whereby local buckling of the compression flange effectively makes the section doubly unsymmetrical, now admits a relatively simple solution involving four unknowns.

7 INTERACTION OF B U C K L I N G WITH YIELD EFFECTS Lindner and Aschinger 5 have studied the tests carried out by Lovell and evaluated the theoretical failure moment according to the German DIN 18 800 Parts 1, 2 and 3,13-15 Eurocode 3, t6 AIS117 and two modified procedures proposed by Lindner. 18All of these procedures considered the interaction of local and global buckling with yield effects. In each of the design procedures considered (designated A, B, C, D, E) the theoretical overall elastic critical buckling moment was calculated using a computer program based on the finite strip method and then combined with yielding of the section using an interaction equation based on a Perry Robertson type of approach. A summary of the results of the study by Lindner and Aschinger are shown in Table 3 where Mu is the theoretical ultimate moment of the section and Mexp is the moment at which the section failed in the test. Using the buckling moments given in Figs 4-9 (which account for both local and global buckling) in the interaction formula of EC3 Part 1.3, a similar calibration exercise was carried out. The results of this calibration are given in Table 4. The results can be summarized as a mean value of Mu/Mexpof 0-856 and a standard deviation of 0.166. These values can be seen to compare favourably with those given in Table 3. Furthermore, any decision regarding local plate buckling coefficients which was required in the procedures reported by Lindner and Aschinger is not required since local plate buckling is automatically considered by GBT.
TABLE 3 Summary of Results Obtained by Lindner and Aschinger Design method A B C D E Mean value Mu/ M e x p 0-739 0-694 0.786 0.886 0-910 Standard deviation 0-118 0.218 0.171 0.175 0-189

GBT applied to interactive buckling problems

TABLE 4

77

Comparison of Test Results with GBT/EC3 Analysis

GBT/EC3 Comparison Length (m)

Series 'A' 0.801 1.121 1.281 1.439 1.599 1-761 1.905 2-368
Series ' B'

Yield moment Buckling moment (kNm) (kNm)

1-584 1.583 1.581 1.562 1.604 1.545 1.562 2.586 0-870 0-870 0.870 0.870 0.870 0-930 0-940 0-680

Interactive moment (kNm)

0.703 0.703 0.702 0.701 0.704 0.736 0.744 0-573

Test result Mu/Mexp (kNm)

1.029 1.021 1-052 0.994 0-914 0.934 0.856 0-690 0.683 0.688 0-668 0.705 0-771 0.788 0.870 0-830

0-972 1.319 1.520 1.720 1.922 2.119 2-320 2.904 3-399 3-926 4.372 Series 'C' 0.514 0.810 1.123 1.817 2.217 2.533
Series 'D'

2.351 2.358 2.358 2.368 2.322 2-335 2.412 1.952 1.982 2-007 1.999

4.500 3.970 3.720 3.580 3.540 3.440 3.080 2.090 1.550 1.180 0.970

1-967 1-915 1.881 1.866 1.834 1.825 1.794 1.345 1.140 0.939 0.802

2.142 2.170 2.161 2.180 2.152 2.082 2.041 1.407 1-279 1.166 1.074

0-918 0.882 0.871 0.856 0.852 0.877 0.879 0.956 0.891 0-806 0.746

1.463 1.447 1.459 t .436 1.455 1.584

4.200 3.740 2-430 0.970 0.660 0-510

1.307 1.275 1.818 0.746 0.551 0.445

1.506 1.403 1.185 0.779 0.564 0.465

0.868 0.909 0.997 0-958 0-978 0.956

0.485 0.992 1.393 1.739 2.045 2.246 2.508 Section 'E" 0.604 1.090

2.362 2.367 2.388 2.394 2.377 2.412 2.410

1.280 1.270 1.260 1.290 1.350 1.110 0-910

1.037 1.030 1.026 1.046 1.083 0.925 0.780

1.495 I. 328 1.248 1.239 1.106 1.123 0.86

0.693 0-776 0-822 0-844 0.979 0-824 0.898

3.459 3.462

7.540 5.360

2.968 2.747

3.187 3.325

0.931 0.826

78

P. Leach, J. M. Davies

TABLE 4 - - contd
GBT/EC3 Comparison Length (m) Yield moment Buckling moment Interactive moment (kNm) (kNm) (kNm) Test result Mu/Mexp (kNm)

Series 'E' (contd) 1.408 1.885 2.247 2.502 2.925 3.337 3.924 4.421 Series 'F' 0.583 1.003 1.414 2.009 2.507

3.468 3.454 3.481 3.494 3.366 3.502 3.346 3.341 2.999 3.065 3.065 3.057 3.088

4-970 4-540 3-870 3.870 2.900 2.250 1.630 1.190 1.300 1.270 1.260 1.350 0.910

2.687 2-597 2-441 2.446 2-059 1-754 1.346 1.026 1.093 1.075 1.068 1.132 0.800

3.295 3.175 2.755 2.460 1.922 1.908 1.320 1.112 1.206 1.260 1.029 0.920 0.932

0.816 0.818 0.886 0.994 1.071 0.919 1.020 0.923 0.907 0.853 1.038 1-231 0-859

Statistics: Mean; 0.856, Standard Deviation; 0.166. 8 CONCLUSIONS It is clear from Figs 4-16 that G B T gives a good estimate o f the elastic critical loads o f a beam, particularly when local buckling a n d / o r distortional effects are dominant. W h en yield o f the section is considered, again the m e t h o d compares well with other current methods, as illustrated by the c o m p a r i s o n with Ref. 18. It should be noted that, in all the above analyses, local buckling effects were calculated by G B T without recourse to effective width formulae or o th er empirical methods. This is particularly useful in the case o f channel sections c o m p o s e d o f slender elements, since local buckling leads to unsymmetrical bending o f the m e m b e r which is outside the scope o f most analytical solutions. REFERENCES 1. Leach, P., The calculation of modal cross section properties for use in the Generalized Beam Theory. Thin-Walled Structures 19 (1994) 61-79. 2. Davies, J. M. & Leach, P., Some applications of the Generalized Beam Theory. l l t h Int. Speciality Conf. on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University of Missouri Rolla, 1992, pp. 479-501.

GBT applied to &teractive buckling problems

79

3. Davies, J. M. & Leach, P., First-order Generalised Beam Theory. J. Constructional Steel Research 31 (1994) 187-220. 4. Davies, J. M. & Leach, P., Second-order Generalised Beam Theory. J. Constructional Steel Research 31 (1994) 221-241. 5. Lindner, J. & Aschinger, R., Load-carrying capacity of cold-formed beams subject to overall lateral-torsional buckling and local plate buckling. J. Constructional Steel Research 31 (1994) 267 287. 6. Schardt, R., Verallgemeinerte Technische Biegetheorie (Generalized Beam Theory). Springer, Berlin, 1989. 7. Miosga, G., Vorwiegend langsbeanspruchte dunnwandige prismatische Stasse und Piatten mit Endlichen Elastischen Verformungen. Dissertation, Technische Hochschule, Darmstadt, 1976. 8. Leach, P., The Generalized Beam Theory with finite difference applications. PhD Thesis, University of Salford, 1989. 9. Lovell, M. H., Lateral buckling of light gauge steel beams. MSc Thesis, University of Salford, 1983. 10. Timoshenko, S. P. & Gere, J. M., Theory of Elastic Stability, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961. 11. Nethercot, D. A. & Rockey, K. C., A unified approach to the elastic buckling of beams. The Structural Engineer, July 1971. 12. Nethercot, D. A. & Rockey, K. C., Lateral buckling of beams with mixed end conditions. The Structural Engineer, April 1973. 13. DIN 18 800 Teil 1: Stahlbauen; Bemessung und Konstruktion (Steel Structures; design and construction). November 1990. 14. DIN 18 800 Teil 2: Stahlbauten; Stabilitatsfalle, Knicken yon Staben und Stabwerken (Steel Structures; stability, buckling of bars and skeletal structures). November 1990. 15. DIN 18 800 Teil 3: Stahlbauten; Stabilitatsfalle, Plattenbeulen (Steel Structures; stability, buckling of plates). November 1990. 16. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures, Part 1.3, Cold Formed Thin Gauge Members and Sheeting. August 1992. 17. Pekoz, T., Development of a unified approach to the design of cold-formed steel members. Research Report CF 87-1, Advisory Group on the Specification for the design of Cold Formed Steel Structural Members, American Iron and Steel Institute, 1133 15th Street, NW Washington, DC 20005, March 1987. 18. Lindner, J. & Greguli, T., Zur Traglast von Biegetragern, die durch gleichzeitiges Auftreten von ortlichem Beulem und Biegedrillknicken versagen (Load carrying capacity of beams subject to local plate buckling and lateraltorsional buckling). Stahlbau, 61 (1992) 9,15.