Metode de calcul pentru studiul

stabilitii structurilor metalice

Analysis methods for steel
structures stability study
Cristina Alexandra Topal, Asist. univ. drd. ing. Universitatea Tehnic de Construcii Bucureti (Technical
University of Civil Engineering Bucharest), Facultatea de Hidrotehnic (Faculty of Hydrotechnics), e-mail:
topala_cristina@yahoo.com


Abstract: The behavior of structures is nonlinear. Designing and checking of structures can be made
using first order or second order analysis.
The aim of this study is to compare the results obtained for two steel structures analyzed with five
different methods. The analyzed steel structures have one bay and one or two stories. The used
methods are by hand or computing programs, considering the geometrical nonlinearity effect, the
material nonlinearity effect or both types of nonlinearity mention.

Keywords: Plastic hinge, nonlinear analysis, steel structure, material nonlinearity


1. Introducere

Determinarea eforturilor din structurile de
rezisten se poate realiza printr-un calcul de
ordinul I sau de ordinul II. n unele cazuri,
datorit flexibilitii structurilor, rezultatele
obinute prin calculul de ordinul I nu sunt
suficiente, deoarece a fost neglijat influena
deformaiilor asupra eforturilor. Cum structurile
trebuie s satisfac att cerine de rezisten ct
i de stabilitate apare ca necesar utilizarea
calculului de ordinul II care introduce efectul
modificrii geometriei structurii asupra strii de
eforturi.

In calculul structurilor, n general, se consider
dou tipuri de neliniariti:
- neliniaritatea geometric - se refer la
influena modificrii geometriei structurii (prin
deformarea structurii sub actiunea incarcarilor
exterioare) asupra strii de eforturi; ecuaiile de
echilibru static se scriu pe forma deformat a
structurii. Acest tip de neliniaritate este cuprins
n calculul de ordinul II, calculul structurilor cu
deplasri mari i calculul de stabilitate.

-neliniaritatea fizic (de material) - se refer la
legile constitutive ce descriu comportarea
materialului n timpul exploatrii structurii,
astfel cunoscndu-se capacitatea seciunii de a
disipa energie prin plasticizare.

Calculul neliniar al structurilor poate include una
sau ambele tipuri de neliniariti menionate
anterior.

In calculul elasto-plastic pot fi considerai mai
muli factori pentru caracterizarea comportrii
1. Introduction

The determination of structures efforts can be
realized by an I order or II order analysis. In
some cases, due to the flexibility of the
structures, the results obtained in I order
analysis are not enough, because the influence
of deformations on the efforts has been
neglected. Because the structures have to
satisfy strength requirements, but also stability
requirements is necessary to use II order
analysis that introduce the effect of the
modification of structure geometry on the
efforts values.

In structures analysis, in general, are
considered two types of nonlinearities:
- geometrical nonlinearity meaning that the
modification of the structure geometry (by
structure deformation under the action of the
exterior loads) on the values of efforts have to
be considered; equilibrium equations are
expressed on the deformed shape of the
structure. This type of nonlinearity is contained
in II order analysis, large displacements
structures analysis and stability analysis.
-physical nonlinearity (material nonlinearity)
meaning the constituent laws that describe the
material behavior during the structure
exploitation, in order to know the section
capacity to dissipate energy by plastification.

The nonlinear analysis of structures may
include one or both types of nonlinearity
mention above.

In the elasto-plastic analysis can be considered
more factors for the characterization of
structurii precum: modelul curbei caracteristice a
materialului (curba Prandtl, curba Ramberg-
Osgood), modelarea articulaiilor plastice (zone
plastice, articulaii plastice punctuale),
interaciunea dintre fora axial i momentul
ncovoietor, reducerea modulului de elasticitate
datorit tensiunilor reziduale.
structure behavior like: material characteristic
curve model (Prandtls curve, Ramberg-
Osgoods curve), plastic hinges modeling
(plastic zones, punctual plastic hinges),
interaction between axial force and bending
moment, elasticity modulus reduction due to
residual stress.

2. Metode pentru determinarea comportrii
structurilor

Metodele de calcul utilizate pentru determinarea
rspunsului structurii sunt:
-Calculul de ordinul I elasto-plastic (metoda
plastic simpl sau metoda biografic). Ipotezele
specifice calculului de ordinul I elasto-plastic
sunt: forele cresc toate n funcie de un singur
parametru, momentul ncovoietor nu poate
depi n nicio seciune valoarea momentului
plastic, structura nu i pierde stabilitatea nainte
de formarea mecanismului de cedare elasto-
plastic [2].
-Calculul de ordinul II elasto-plastic prin metoda
deplasrilor. n acest tip de calcul se poate ine
seama att de efectele neliniaritii geometrice
ct i de cele ale neliniaritii de material i se
consider c structura poate ajunge la colaps fie
prin formarea articulaiilor plastice fie prin
pierderea stabilitii prin deformare continu.

Programele utilizate n prezenta lucrare sunt:
-CALESPA I CALculul de ordinul I ElaSto-
PlAstic
-CALESPA II CALculul de ordinul II ElaSto-
PlAstic prin metoda deplasrilor
Aplicaiile CALESPA I, CALESPA II utilizeaz o
modalitate mixt de calcul (programul Mathcad
precedat de o faz manual de calcul).
- PAAP realizat de Seung-Eock Kim, Purdue
University, School of Civil Engineering
(sekim@sejong.ac.kr) [4], acest program este
utilizat pentru calculul elasto-plastic considernd
modelul Prandtl al materialului, metoda
articulaiilor plastice detaliate (cu considerarea
reducerii treptate a rigiditii), interaciunea N-
M, reducerea modului de elasticitate. Pentru
determinarea soluiei utilizeaz metoda pas cu
pas. n acest studiu PAAP este folosit n dou
variante:
-PAAP 1 nu ine seama de existena forelor
axiale acionnd direct pe stlpi (forele
concentrate 2P- fig. 2 i forele concentrate 0.9P,
1.65P - fig. 7)
-PAAP 2 ine seama de efectul forelor axiale
acionnd direct pe stlpi.
-GEONEL realizat de conf. Mireca Teodorescu
2. Methods for determination of structures
behavior

Analysis methods used for determination of
structure answer are:
-I order elasto-plastic analysis (simple plastic
method or biographical method). Specific
hypothesis of I order elasto-plastic analysis are:
forces are rising all according to only one
parameter, the bending moment can not be
bigger than plastic moment in any section,
structure is not losing stability before forming
of elasto-plastic failure mechanism [2].

-II order elasto-plastic analysis by
displacements method. In this type of analysis
can be included the geometrical nonlinearity
effect but also the material nonlinearity effect
and it is considered that structure can reach
collapse by forming of plastic hinges or by
losing stability by continuing deformation.

The programs utilized in the present paper are:
-CALESPA I I order elasto-plastic analysis
-CALESPA II II order elasto-plastic analysis
by displacements method
Programs CALESPA I, CALESPA II are using a
mixed modality of analysis (Mathcad software
preceded by a manual phase of analysis).

-PAAP made by Seung-Eock Kim, Purdue
University, School of Civil Engineering
(sekim@sejong.ac.kr) [4], this program is used
for elasto-plastic analysis considering Prandtls
model of material, refined plastic hinges
method (with accounting for stiffness gradual
reduction), interaction N-M, reduction of
elasticity modulus. For solution determination
uses step by step method. In this study PAAP is
use in two versions:

-PAAP 1 is not considering the existence of
the axial forces acting directly on columns
(concentrated forces 2P fig.2 and
concentrated forces 0.9P, 1.65P fig.7)
-PAAP 2 is considering the effect of the axial
forces acting directly on columns
-GEONEL made by conf. Mircea Teodorescu
(Catedra de Mecanic, Statica i Dinamica
Construciilor, mirceat@mail.utcb.ro) [3], acest
program se bazeaz pe formularea matriceal a
calculului geometric neliniar, utiliznd o metoda
incremental iterativ.

n calculul de ordinul II eforturile sunt funcie de
nivelul forelor axiale din bare. Articulaiile
plastice pot aprea att pe rigle ct i pe stlpi. n
literatur sunt prezentate expresiile momentelor
ncovoietoare pentru tipurile de bare puternic
comprimate utilizate n metoda deplasrilor
pentru diferite tipuri de solicitri (translaii,
rotiri, fore exterioare) [1].

Pentru realizarea aplicaiei CALESPA II a fost
necesar determinarea expresiei momentului
ncovoietor din ncastrare pentru bara ncastrat-
articulat solicitat de momentul plastic n
captul articulat (fig.1).
(Department of Mechanics, Statics and
Dynamics of Structures, mirceat@mail.utcb.ro)
[3], this program is based on matrix
formulation of geometric nonlinear analysis,
using an incremental iterative method.

In II order analysis the efforts are function of
the bars axial forces level. Plastic hinges can
appear both on bars and on the columns. In
specialized literature are presented the bending
moments expressions for types of strong
compressed bars used in displacements method
for different types of loadings (translations,
rotations, exterior forces) [1].

For realizing of application CALESPA II was
necessary the determination of fixed end
bending moment expression for fixed-hinged
bar subjected to the plastic moment at the
hinged end (fig.1).
ntr-o seciune curent momentul ncovoietor are
expresia:
In a current section the bending moment has
the expression:
2
'' 2
2
x pl
pl
x
M M Py Hx
M
d y H
M EI y k y x
dx EI EI
= +
= + =

Se noteaz
2
P
k
EI
= .

The next notation is introduced
2
P
k
EI
= .
H
P
y
M
2 Mpl
P
H
x
x
L
y
P
Mpl
P
Mpl
M
2

Fig. 1 Bara ncastrat-articulat ncrcat cu momentul plastic M
pl

Fig. 1 Fixed-hinged bar subjected to plastic moment M
pl


Soluia ecuaiei este: The equation solution is:
1 2
'
1 2
'' 2 2
1 2
''' 3 3
1
sin cos
cos sin
sin cos
cos sin
y C kx C kx Ax B
y kC kx kC kx A
y k C kx k C kx
y k C kx k kx
= + + +
= +
=
= +

Pentru determinarea constantelor, se utilizeaz
urmtoarele condiii:
For constants determination, the following
conditions are used:
2
2
'
0 0
0
0
0
pl pl
x y
x L y
x L y
d y
x M M EI M
dx
= =
= =
= =
= = =

Se noteaz v kL = parametrul de ncrcare
axial.
The next notation is introduced v kL = axial
load parameter.
2
1 2
1 2
2
2
0
sin cos 0
cos sin 0
pl
C B
C v C v AL B
kC v kC v A
EIk C M
+ =
+ + + =
+ =
=

De unde rezult: It results:
2
1
1 cos sin
sin cos
1 cos
sin cos
pl
pl
pl
pl
M
C
P
M
B
P
M
v v v
C
P v v v
M
v
A k
P v v v
=
=

=

Fora tietoare este: Shear force is:
3
3
d y dy
H EI P
dx dx
= + .
1 cos
sin cos
pl
M
v
H PA v
L v v v

= =

2
2
sin
sin cos
pl
pl
M M HL
v v
M M
v v v
=

La limit, pentru
2
0 0.5
pl
M M = = (cazul
barei nesolicitat la compresiune)


At the limit, for
2
0 0.5
pl
M M = = (case
of not compressed bar)
3. Tema studiului

Scopul lucrrii este compararea rezultatelor
obinute din analiza a dou structuri metalice
prin metodele de calcul prezentate anterior.

4. Cadru C
1


4.1. Descrierea structurii

Cadru C
1
cu un etaj i o deschidere (fig.2) are
caracteristicile geometrice:
- rigle: eav rectangular 200x200x10
3. Study subject

The aim of this paper is the comparison of the
results obtained from the analysis of two steel
structures by the methods presented above.

4. C
1
Frame

4.1. Structure presentation

Frame C
1
with one storey and one bay (fig.2)
has the geometical characteristics:
-beams: rectangular pipe 200x200x10
2
7257 A mm = ,
6 4
42.5 10 I mm = ,
3 3
508 10
pl
W mm = , 119.38
pl pl y
M W f kNm = = ,
1705.395
pl y
N A f kN = =
-stlpi: eav rectangular 160x160x10 -columns: rectangular pipe 160x160x10
2
5657 A mm = ,
6 4
20.5 10 I mm = ,
3 3
311 10
pl
W mm = , 73.085
pl pl y
M W f kNm = = ,
1329.395
pl y
N A f kN = =
-modulul de elasticitate
2
210000000 / E kN m = i rezistena la
curgere
2
235000 /
y
f kN m =

-elasticity modulus
2
210000000 / E kN m =
and flow strength
2
235000 /
y
f kN m =

4.2 Rezultate

Pentru cadrul C
1
s-a obinut ordinea de formare a
articulaiilor plastice prezentat n fig.3.
Conform CALESPA I i CALESPA II cadrul C
1

i atinge limita de rezisten printr-un mecanism
total de cedare.

4.2. Results

For frame C
1
was obtained the order of plastic
hinges apparition presented in fig.3.
According to CALESPA I and CALESPA II
frame C
1
reaches the strength limit by a total
failure mechanism.


Fig. 2 Cadrul C
1

Fig. 2 C
1
Frame





a) CALESPA I, PAAP 1, PAAP 2

b) CALESPA II
Fig. 3 Ordinea de formare a articulaiilor plastice pentru cadrul C
1

Fig. 3 The order of plastic hinges formation for frame C
1


n tabelul 1 sunt prezentate valorile forei
orizontale
1
0.4 P P = i a deplasrilor pe direcie
orizontal
A
u corespunztoare nodului A
obinute cu ajutorul programelor menionate
anterior pentru succesiunea de articulaii plastice
aparute. n fig. 4 este prezentat curba for-
deplasare corespunztoare punctului A.


Fora de cedare plastic obinut prin calculul
biografic este cu 8.7% mai mare dect fora de
In table 1 are presented the values of
1
0.4 P P = horizontal force and of
displacements on horizontal direction
A
u corresponding to the node A obtained with
the programs mentioned above for the sequence
of appeared plastic hinges. In fig. 4 is presented
the load-displacement curve corresponding to
the node A.

Plastic failure force obtained by biographical
analysis is with 8.7% bigger than plastic failure
cedare plastic obinut n calculul elasto-plastic
de ordinul II.

De asemenea se observ c deplasrile obinute
n momentul colapsului structurii prin calculul
de ordinul II (CALESPA II, PAAP 2) sunt mai
mici cu 6-11% dect cele obinute n calculul de
ordinul I (CALESPA I, PAAP 1).

Datorit influenei forei axiale, n CALESPA II
ordinea de formare a articulaiilor plastice este
diferit de cea obinut n CALESPA I (fig. 3
b)).

force obtained by II order elasto-plastic
analysis.

It is also observed that the displacements
obtained in the moment of structure collapse, in
II order analysis (CALESPA II, PAAP 2) are
smaller with 6-11% than those obtained in I
order analysis (CALESPA I, PAAP 1).

Due to axial force influence, in CALESPA II
the order of plastic hinge appearing is different
by the one obtained in CALESPA I (fig. 3b)).

Articulaia/ Hinge 1 2 3 4
P
1
(kN) 36.54 42.34 42.648 46.182 CALESPA I
u
A
(cm) 3.28 4.23 4.52 11.2
P
1
(kN) 25.3 26 27.075 PAAP I
u
A
(cm) 4.87 5.71 11.48
P
1
(kN) 35.76 40.648 41.384 42.47 CALESPA II
u
A
(cm) 3.2 4.585 4.88 10
P
1
(kN) 23.03 24.43 PAAP II
u
A
(cm) 4.85 6.75

Tabel 1 Forele de cedare plastic P
1
i deplasrile corespunztoare pentru cadrul C
1

Table 1 Plastic failure forces P
1
and corresponding displacements for frame C
1


PAAP 1 determin formarea a numai trei
articulaii plastice iar apoi structura i pierde
stabilitatea prin deformare continu.

PAAP 2 determin formarea a dou articulaii
plastice. Acest lucru se ntmpl deoarece
rigiditatea unor elemente a sczut brusc,
structura pierzndu-i stabilitatea nainte de
formarea mecanismului de cedare.

Deoarece programul PAAP consider modulul
de elasticitate tangent i interaciunea N-M,
valorile momentelor plastice sunt corectate n
fiecare pas de calcul [4].

PAAP 1 determinates the apparition only of
three plastic hinges and then structure is losing
stability by continuing deformation.

PAAP 2 determinates the appearance of two
plastic hinges. This is happening because the
stiffness of some elements has decreased
suddenly and the structure has lost the stability
before the total failure mechanism has been
formed.
Because the program PAAP considers the
reduced elasticity modulus and the N-M
interaction, the plastic moments values are
corrected in each analysis step [4].


Fig. 4 Curba P-U pentru cadrul C
1

Fig. 4 The curve P-U for frame C
1

1
2
3
4
AP1
AP4
0
10
20
30
40
50
P
1

(
k
N
)
AP1
AP2
AP3
AP4


1
2
3
4
AP1
AP4
0
5
10
15
D
e
p
l
a
s
a
r
e
a

u

(
c
m
)
AP1
AP2
AP3
AP4

Fig. 5 Forele de cedare plastic pentru cadrul C
1

Fig. 5 Plastic failure forces P1 for frame C
1


Fig. 6 Deplasarea u
A
pentru cadrul C
1

Fig. 6 Horizontal u
A
for frame C
1


Evoluia forei de cedare plastic i a deplasrii
u
A
pe parcursul formrii articulaiilor plastice,
pentru fiecare metoda de calcul sunt prezentate
n fig. 5 i fig. 6.
n fig. 5 i fig. 6 pe direcia x, cifra 1 reprezint
CALESPA I, 2- CALESPA II, 3- PAAP 1, 4-
PAAP 2.
The evolution of plastic failure force and the
displacement u
A
during the plastic hinges
apparition, for each analysis method are
presented in fig. 5 and in fig. 6.
In fig. 5 and fig. 6 on x direction, number 1
represents CALESPA I, 2- CALESPA II, 3-
PAAP 1, 4-PAAP 2.

5. Cadru C
2


5.1. Descrierea structurii

Cadru C
2
cu dou etaje i o deschidere (fig. 7)
are caracteristicile geometrice:
- rigle: eav rectangular 250x250x10
5. C
2
Frame

5.1. Structure presentation

Frame C
2
with two stories and one bay (fig. 7)
has the geometical characteristics:
-beams: rectangular pipe 250x250x10
2
9257 A mm = ,
6 4
87.1 10 I mm = ,
3 3
822 10
pl
W mm = , 193.17
pl pl y
M W f kNm = = ,
2175.395
pl y
N A f kN = =
- stlpi: eav rectangular 300x300x10 -columns: rectangular pipe 300x300x10
2
11257 A mm = ,
6 4
155 10 I mm = ,
3 3
1211 10
pl
W mm = , 284.585
pl pl y
M W f kNm = = ,
2645.4
pl y
N A f kN = =
4m
P
3m 3m
0.25P
1.65P
1.65P
1.2P
0.9P
0.9P
0.55P
4m


P
0.25P
1.65P
1.65P
1.2P
0.9P
0.9P
0.55P
1
2 3
4
5 6
B

Fig. 7 Cadrul C
2

Fig. 7 C
2
Frame
Fig. 8 Ordinea de formare a articulaiilor plastice
pentru cadrul C
2

Fig. 8 The order of plastic hinges apparition for
frame C
2

-modulul de elasticitate
2
210000000 / E kN m = i rezistena la

-elasticity modulus
2
210000000 / E kN m =
and flow strength
2
235000 /
y
f kN m =
curgere
2
235000 /
y
f kN m =

5.2 Rezultate

Pentru cadrul C
2
s-a obinut ordine de formare a
articulaiilor plastice prezentat n fig. 8.


5.2 Results

For frame C
2
was obtained the order of plastic
hinges apparition presented in fig. 8.
Se constat c sub aciunea sistemului de fore
considerat cadrul C
2
ajunge la colaps prin
formarea unui mecanism parial de cedare la
nivelul inferior. Pentru trasarea curbei for-
deplasare s-au nregistrat P2- fora orizontal
aplicat n nodul B i deplasarea orizontal u
B

corespunztoare nodului B (tabel 2, fig. 8).
It is observed that under the action of the
considered system of forces, frame C2 reaches
the collapse by forming of a partial failure
mechanism at the inferior level. For tracing the
load-displacement curve are recorded P2-
horizontal force applied in node B and
horizontal displacement u
B
corresponding to
the node B (table 2, fig. 8).

Articulaia 1 2 3 4 5 6
P
2
(kN) 67.32 73.37 88.275 96.195 96.68 96.91 CALESPA I
u
B
(cm) 4.5 5.3 8.6 12.625 13.035 13.295
P
2
(kN) 76.01 77.11 88.11 91.96 PAAP I
u
B
(cm) 6.418 6.68 10.86 16.26
P
2
(kN) 64.625 70.73 85.58 CALESPA II
u
B
(cm) 4.7 5.6 9.797
P
2
(kN) 75.075 76.175 85.745 86.185 PAAP II
u
B
(cm) 6.673 6.99 12.09 13.54

Tabel 2 Forele de cedare plastic P
2
i deplasrile corespunztoare pentru cadrul C
2

Table 2 Plastic failure forces P
2
and corresponding displacements for frame C
2


Din tabelul 2 se poate observa c doar
CALESPA I furnizeaz informaii despre toate
articulaiile plastice, celelalte metode oprindu-se
n momentul n care structura i pierde
stabilitatea prin deformare continu.

Diferena dintre fora de cedare plastic ultim
din CALESPA I i fora de pierdere a stabilitii
din CALESPA II este de 6%.

From table 2 can be observed that only
CALESPA I gives information about all plastic
hinges, the other methods stopped when the
structure lose the stability by continuing
deformation.

The difference between the last plastic failure
force from CALESPA I and stability loss force
from CALESPA II is 6%.

Fig. 9 Curba P-U pentru cadrul C
2

Fig. 9 The curve P-U for frame C
2


1
2
3
4
AP1
AP4
0
20
40
60
80
100
P
2

(
k
N
)
AP1
AP2
AP3
AP4
AP5
AP6


1
2
3
4
AP1
AP4
0
5
10
15
20
D
e
p
l
a
s
a
r
e
a

u

(
c
m
)
AP1
AP2
AP3
AP4
AP5
AP6

Fig. 10 Forele de cedare plastic pentru cadrul C
2

Fig. 10 Plastic failure forces P1 for frame C
2

Fig. 11 Deplasarea u
B
pentru cadrul C
2

Fig. 11 Horizontal u
B
for frame C
2


De asemenea se observ c deplasrile obinute
n momentul colapsului structurii prin calculul
de ordinul II (CALESPA II, PAAP 2) sunt mai
mici cu 20-35% dect cele obinute n calculul
de ordinul I (CALESPA I, PAAP 1).

Momentul plastic calculat cu PAAP scade cu
pn la 3% fa de momentul plastic de referin
deoarece acesta este corectat n funcie de curba
de interaciune N-M [4].

Dup apariia primelor dou articulaii plastice,
structura devine mai flexibila ceea ce conduce la
creterea mai rapid a deplasrilor.

Fig. 10 prezint evoluia forei de cedare plastic
pe parcursul formrii articulaiilor plastice. Fig.
11 prezint deplasarea pe direcie orizontal a
punctului B.
n fig. 10 i fig. 11 pe directia x, cifra 1
reprezint CALESPA I, 2- CALESPA II, 3-
PAAP 1, 4-PAAP 2.

It is also observed that the displacements
obtained in the moment of structure collapse, in
II order analysis (CALESPA II, PAAP 2) are
smaller with 20-35% than those obtained in I
order analysis (CALESPA I, PAAP 1).

The plastic moment determinated with PAAP
decrease with 3% compared with the plastic
moment of reference, because this is corrected
according to the N-M interaction curve [4].

After the apparition of the first two plastic
hinges, the structures becomes more flexible
that leading to a faster displacements rising.

Fig. 10 presents the evolution of the plastic
failure force during the plastic hinges
apparition. Fig. 11 presents the displacements
on horizontal direction of node B.
In fig.10 and fig. 11 on x direction, number 1
represents CALESPA I, 2- CALESPA II, 3-
PAAP 1, 4-PAAP 2.

5. Concluzii

Metoda plastic simpl n ambele cazuri a
furnizat valoarea cea mai mare pentru fora de
cedare plastic.

Considerarea n calcul a efectului P poate
conduce fie la un alt mecanism de cedare (cadrul
C
1
) fie poate reliefa faptul c structura este
scoas din exploatare nu prin formarea
mecanismului de cedare ci prin pierderea de
stabilitate prin deformare continu (cadrul C
2
).

n concluzie validitatea i precizia rezultatelor
obinute printr-o metod de analiz a structurilor
depinde de:
-respectarea ipotezelor simplificatoare

5. Conclusions

Simple plastic method in both cases gave the
biggest value for the plastic failure force.


Considering in the analysis of the P effect
can lead to another failure mechanism (frame
C
1
) or may show that the structure is taken out
from use not by the failure mechanism
formation but by losing stability by continuing
deformation (frame C
2
).

In conclusion, the validity and the precision of
the results obtained from a structure analysis
method depends by:
-respecting the considered simplified
considerate
-metoda de determinare a soluiei (iterativ,
incremental, mixt)
-factorii care influenteaz sau modeleaz
comportarea structurii
-modul de aplicare a metodei ( calculul se poate
realiza ntr-o secven de ncrcare, aa cum a
fost considerat n acest studiu, sau n dou
secvene de ncrcare, conform normativului
P100, metoda static neliniar [5]).

hypothesis
-the solution determination method (iterative,
incremental, mixed)
-the factors that influence or configure the
structure behavior
-the way of method application (de calculus can
be done in one load sequence, as it was done in
this study, or in two load sequence, according
to P100 Code, static nonlinear method [5]).
BIBLIOGRAFIE
REFERENCES

[1] Bnu, V. - Calculul de ordinul II i de stabilitate al elementelor i structurilor de
rezisten, Ed. Conspress, Bucuresti 2005

[2] Bnu, V., Teodorescu, M. E. Despre limitele metodei plastice simple, Buletinul tiinific nr. 2
UTCB, 2002

[3] Teodorescu, M. E. - Studiu comparativ al metodelor pentru determinarea soluiei n calculul
neliniar al structurilor, Tez de doctorat, 1999

[4] Chen, W. F., Seung-Eock Kim LRFD Steel Design using Advanced Analysis, CRC Press, Florida
1997

[5] Cod de proiectare seismic P1001/2006 Prevederi de proiectare pentru cldiri