STUDY OF LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING

FOR VARIOUS STEEL BEAM SECTIONS

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

• When the compression flange of beam is laterally unsupported,

lateral torsional buckling may take place, leading to the failure
at or below the elastic critical moment.

• Elements within a steel frame structure are at risk of buckling

under load. If measures are not taken while designing steel
elements that recognize this risk, then the likelihood of failure is
significantly increased.

• The bending moment at which the beam fails by lateral buckling

when subjected to uniform end moments is called elastic critical
moment (Mcr)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 1

 1.2 Factors affecting lateral torsional buckling :

Some factors that influence the lateral torsional buckling

behaviour of beams are briefly discussed below:

 Location of the applied load

The vertical distance between the load application point and

the shear centre of the section affects the susceptibility of the
section to the effects of lateral torsional buckling. If the load
is applied at a location above the shear centre of a section it
is more susceptible to lateral torsional buckling than if the
load was applied through the shear centre. Applying the
load at a location below the shear centre of a section
reduces the susceptibility of the section to the effects of
lateral torsional buckling. When the load is applied above
the shear centre it is known as a destabilising load, with
loads applied at or below the shear centre called non-
destabilising loads. The effect of a destabilising load is
considered by the use of effective lengths given in Table13
of BS5950-1:2000, where the effective lengths are longer
for destabilising loads compared to the non-destabilising
loads.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 2

  The shape of the applied bending moment

The buckling resistance for a section subject to a uniform

bending moment distribution along its length is less than the
Buckling resistance obtained for the same section subjected to
a different bending moment distribution. Factors are included
In design guidance to allow for the effect of different bending
Moment distributions

 End support conditions

The end support conditions considered during the development

of the basic theory for buckling moments are equivalent to
web cleats that stop the web from deflecting laterally and
twisting. For end conditions where more restraint is given to
the section the buckling moment increases, with the buckling
moment decreasing for end supports that offer less restraint
to the section. BS5950-1:2000 considers effective lengths when
determining the slenderness of a section to account for the effect
of end restraint on lateral torsional buckling

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 3

 Fig.1 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING OF BEAM

1.3 Buckling Modes:

• These modes are defined by the type of loading and the
deformation shape of the member. In a general case, a member
can be subjected to several types of deformations
simultaneously, e.g. bending, torsion, warping etc.

1) Flexural Buckling:
When a member in compression buckles in one plane only, it is called
flexural buckling. The resisting sectional forces that arise in the
member are directly dependent on the flexural stiffness EI.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 4

 2) Torsional Buckling:
When buckling due to compression only twists the member is called
torsional buckling. The sectional resistance is dependent on the
torsional stiffness GIt and the warping stiffness EIw.

2) Lateral Torsional Buckling:

When a member loaded in bending deflects laterally and twists at the
same time, it is called lateral torsional buckling. The resistance to this
buckling mode is governed by the flexural, torsional and warping
stiffness.

1.4 Objectives:

• To study the behaviour of lateral torsional buckling for various I

beam sections.
• To implement the finite element analysis on various I sections
beams to evaluate elastic critical moment Mcr.
• To compare the factor C1 analytically and by using finite
element technique.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 5

Deformations due to flexural, torsional and lateral torsional
buckling.

Flexural Buckling

Torsional Buckling

Lateral Torsional Buckling

FIG .2

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 6

Buckling Modes of restrained and unrestrained beams

No restraints
-Free to buckle due to lateral
torsional buckling

Compression flange restrained

-No lateral torsional buckling is
possible

Flange in tension restrained

-Distortional buckling is possible

No restraints
-Lateral distortional buckling is
possible for beams with slender
flexible webs and rigid flanges

FIG.3

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 7

 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

C. Rebelo ,N. Lopes , L. Simões da Silva , D. Nethercot , P.M.M.

Vila “Real Statistical evaluation of the lateral–torsional buckling
resistance of steel I-beams ” according to them it becomes necessary
to define the partial safety coefficients for the bending resistance of
beams when lateral–torsional buckling is a potential failure mode.
In this paper the methodology for the resistance evaluation of beams
subjected to instability is briefly described and the results are
compared with FEM numerical results for the same elements.
Subsequently, to assess the accuracy of the alternative design
formulae, a statistical analysis of the results is performed on the basis
of EN 1990-Annex D. A methodology is proposed for the evaluation
of the design procedures allowing for the uncertainties in the
resistance model. Results are presented for a wide set of beam
geometries and loading cases and a proposal for the definition of the
partial safety factor rd is presented for the various methods, in line
with the target failure probability of EN 1990

Zdeněk Kala “Elastic Lateral-Torsional Buckling of

Simply Supported Hot-RolledSteel I-Beams with Random
Imperfections” paper deals with the problem of lateral beam

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 8

buckling of simply supported hot-rolled I-beams under major axis
bending. The bending stability problem is analysed by consideration
the minor axis bending and torsion equations. Both perfect straight
beams and beams with initial imperfections are considered. The
mathematical solutions are derived, based on a non-linear stability
model. The attention is paid to virtual computer experiments of beams
with initial random imperfections. Thin-walled elements as beams,
columns, trusses or as sheeting rails are extensively used in
structuralengineering, ranging from residential buildings to industrial
construction. Thin-walled structures such as I-section members
typically exhibit a detrimental imperfection sensitivity, which
drastically reduces their ultimate load bearing capacity compared to
their theoretical strength. The problems of bending stability problem
of simply supported hot-rolled I-beam with equal end moment were
described in the present paper. First, an analysis of idealized perfect
straight elastic beams was carried out. The attention was concentrated,
above all, on a detailed description of buckled shape geometry which
was one of equilibrium. The elastic critical moment Mcr for lateral
beam buckling was determined .

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 9

Ioannis G. Raftoyiannis and Theodore Adamakos
“Critical Lateral-Torsional Buckling Moments of Steel Web-
Tapered I-beams ” This paper deals with the stability of steel web-
tapered I-beams subjected to bending loads. Tapered beams can
carry a maximum bending moment at a single location while in the
rest of the member the moment carrying capacity is
considerably lower. This results in appreciable savings in materials as
well as in construction. In this study, the elastic buckling behavior of
steel web tapered I-beams by means of determining the corresponding
elastic critical moment for lateral-torsional buckling. This critical
moment can be used for the determination of the corresponding
member strength. More specifically, the influence of the taper ratio
and cross-sectional geometry, the boundary conditions and the
loading type on the stability of non-uniform steel members that are
subjected to bending loads is thoroughly investigated.

J. Nseir1, M. Lo2, D. Sonck3, H. Somja2, O. Vassart4,

N. Boissonnade
“Lateral Torsional Buckling of Cellular Steel Beams”
The behaviour of so-called cellular members against lateral torsional
Buckling is studied in this paper. These beams comprising regularly-
spaced web openings are especially used for their high resistance-
weight ratio, the possibility to integrate service pipes within their

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 10

height, and aesthetics. Such profiles usually exhibit a complex
behaviour, since they can experience many modes of failure,
including local instability ones, i.e. those involving an out-of-plane
instability of the web post at high shear locations and/or distortion of
the cross-section. In this respect, both experimental and extensive
numerical parametric studies have been undertaken. First, a series of 3
full-scale tests has been performed, the main goal of which being
the validation of purposely-derived FE models. Since the numerical
models showed a very good agreement with the tests, they have been
further used to gather a large set of numerical reference results where
many parameters were varied:

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 11

 CHAPTER 3

DESIGN METHODOLOGY

3.1 Design with regard to Lateral Torsional Buckling

3.1.1 Design as per IS800:2007
Zp required (As per IS 800 : 2007,Clause No.8.2.2,Page.No.-54 )

Md = b Zp fbd
Md = the design bending strength of laterally unsupported beam

b = 1.0 for plastic and compact sections.

= Ze / Zp for semi-compact sections.
fbd = Design bending compressive stress.

= LT fy /γm0
fy = yield stress = 250 N/mm²
γm0= partial factor of safety for buckling = 1.10

LT = bending stress reduction factor to account for lateral torsional

buckling is given by

1
 LT  0.5
 1.0
[ LT  LT 2  LT 2  ]

 0.5 1   LT  LT MIT-WPU

LTENGINEERING,
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL  0.2   LT 2  Page 12
LT = the imperfection parameter
= 0.21 for rolled section,
= 0.49 for welded section
The elastic critical moment for lateral torsion buckling is given by
general equation:

where,
c1 ,c2 ,c3 = factors depending on the loading and restrained conditions
(Table 42)
K = effective length factor
= 0.5 for complete restraint against rotation about weak axis
= 1.0 for free rotate about weak axis
= 0.7 for the case one end fixed and other end free

Kw = Warping restraint constant =1.0

LLT = effective length against lateral torsional buckling
Iw = Warping constant
hy = distance between the shear centres of the two flanges of cross
sections.
It = Torsion constant
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 13
 b and t are the breadth and thickness of the elements of the
section

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 14

3.2 Evaluation of Mcr with Finite Element Method
The technique used for determining the Mcr in finite element software
is Linearized Buckling Analysis.

3.2.1 Literalized Buckling Analysis:

• Finite element software often provides the possibility of stability

analysis by the implementation of an eigenvalue-problem. Such
analyses can be referred to as eigenvalue buckling, linearized
buckling or just buckling analysis.

• Linearized buckling analysis is a powerful tool for determining

approximate critical loads since it is relatively fast.

• The solution corresponds to the theoretical critical load of an

ideal-elastic structure without imperfections.

3.2.2 Eigenvectors and Eigen values:

• Eigenvalue buckling analysis predicts the theoretical buckling

strength of an ideal elastic structure. It computes the structural
eigenvalues for the given system loading and constraints.

• An eigenvector of a matrix is a non-zero vector that only

undergoes a scalar transformation when multiplied with the
matrix. The corresponding scalar to the eigenvector is called an
eigenvalue, if a nontrivial solution exists.

Az = λz

(A-λI)z = 0
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 15
 z = Eigenvector

λ = Eigenvalue Eigenvectors and Eigenvalues:

• When a matrix is singular, its determinant is equal to zero.

Hence, the eigenvalues of a matrix A can be solved from
following equation.

det(A-λI)=0

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 16

 3.3 Design on software

 LTBeam is a free software developed by CTICM (Centre

Technique Industriel Construction Metallique) in France solely
for calculation of elastic critical moments.

• LTBeam is a software which deals with the elastic

"Lateral Torsional Buckling of Beams" under bending action
about their major axis.

• The program performs a buckling analysis with finite elements,

treating both single spanned beams and cantilevers.

• LTBeam calculates the elastic critical moment Mcr and provides

seful information about the buckling mode for various loading
and restraint conditions.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 17

In first tab, we have to enter the section properties of I section or any
other sections

FIG.4
Lateral Restraint Tab

FIG.5

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 18

Loading Information Tab

FIG.6
Critical Moment Tab

FIG.7
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 19
Deformed Shape

FIG.8

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 20

3.4 Parametric Study
Prerequisites and assumptions:
1. Software
LTBeam version 1.0.11.

2. Material Properties
Steel
Unit mass of steel, ρ = 7850 kg/m3
Modulus of Elasticity, E =200 GPa
Poisson’s ratio, v = 0.3
Modulus of rigidity, G = 76.9 GPa

3. Geometry
Light Weight Beams – (ISLB75 to ISLB600)
Medium Weight Beams – (ISMB100 to ISMB600)
Wide Flange Beams – (ISWB150 to ISWB600*)

4. Point of Load Application

The load is applied at the shear centre.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 21

 5. Lateral Boundary Conditions
The lateral boundary conditions are controlled by the factors Kb
(lateral bending) and Kw (warping). The study is limited to Kb = Kw.
The factor Kb = 1.0 for free to rotate about weak axis. Kw = 1.0 free to
warp.
Thus k = (Kb / Kw) =1.0 for both ends free.

6.load cases
Simply supported beam carrying udl of 50 kN\m over its entire span
of 6m.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 22

3.5 Results:

 Elastic critical moment for ISMB sections

Medium Mcr kN.m Mcr kN.m

Sr.
Weight
No. (IS800:2007) (LTBeam)
Beams

1 ISMB100 6.82 6.80

2 ISMB125 7.86 7.84

3 ISMB150 9.28 9.26

4 ISMB175 15.32 15.28

5 ISMB200 29.11 29.05

6 ISMB225 42.98 42.89

7 ISMB250 63.21 63.11

8 ISMB300 83.38 83.31

9 ISMB350 112.05 111.96

10 ISMB400 145.76 145.65

11 ISMB450 203.57 203.45

12 ISMB500 315.34 315.29

13 ISMB550 452.80 452.77

14 ISMB600 673.21 673.25

TABLE 3.5.1

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 23

 Elastic Critical Moment (Mcr) kN.m

100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800

0
ISMB100

ISMB125

ISMB150

ISMB175

ISMB200

ISMB225

ISMB250

ISMB300

FIG.9
ISMB350

ISMB400

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU

ISMB450

ISMB500

ISMB550

ISMB600
LTBeam
IS800:2007

Page 24
  Elastic critical moment for ISLB sections

Light Mcr kN.m

Sr. Mcr kN.m
Weight
No. (IS800:2007) (LTBeam)
Beams

1 ISLB75 1.70 1.70

2 ISLB100 2.72 2.71

3 ISLB125 6.50 6.48

4 ISLB150 8.43 8.41

5 ISLB175 11.52 11.49

6 ISLB200 16.43 16.42

7 ISLB225 19.94 19.91

8 ISLB250 29.58 29.55

9 ISLB275 43.60 43.52

10 ISLB300 58.40 58.37

11 ISLB325 79.460 79.43

12 ISLB350 107.12 107.10

13 ISLB400 134.92 134.89

14 ISLB450 173.320 173.30

15 ISLB500 228.190 228.20

16 ISLB550 303.35 303.41

17 ISLB600 426.56 426.69

TABLE.3.5.2
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 25
 Elastic Critical Moment (Mcr) kN.m

100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450

0
50
ISLB75
ISLB100
ISLB125
ISLB150
ISLB175
ISLB200
ISLB225
ISLB250
ISLB275
ISLB300

FIG.10
ISLB325
ISLB350

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU

ISLB400
ISLB450
ISLB500
ISLB550
ISLB600
LTBeam
IS800:2007

Page 26
  Comparison of C1 factor for ISMB sections

Sr. Medium Factor C1 Factor C1

No. Weight Beams (IS800:2007) (LTBeam)

1 ISMB100 1.132 1.128

2 ISMB125 1.132 1.129

3 ISMB150 1.132 1.129

4 ISMB175 1.132 1.129

5 ISMB200 1.132 1.129

6 ISMB225 1.132 1.13

7 ISMB250 1.132 1.131

8 ISMB300 1.132 1.131

9 ISMB350 1.132 1.131

10 ISMB400 1.132 1.131

11 ISMB450 1.132 1.131

12 ISMB500 1.132 1.132

13 ISMB550 1.132 1.132

14 ISMB600 1.132 1.132

TABLE 3.5.3

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 27

 IS800:2007 LTBeam
1.133

1.132

1.131
C1 Factor

1.130

1.129

1.128

1.127

1.126

ISMB450
ISMB100

ISMB125

ISMB150

ISMB175

ISMB200

ISMB225

ISMB250

ISMB300

ISMB350

ISMB400

ISMB500

ISMB550

ISMB600
FIG.11

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 28

  Comparison of C1 factor for ISLB sections

Sr. Light Weight Factor C1 Factor C1

No. Beams (IS800:2007) (LTBeam)

1 ISLB75 1.132 1.132

2 ISLB100 1.132 1.128

3 ISLB125 1.132 1.128

4 ISLB150 1.132 1.129

5 ISLB175 1.132 1.129

6 ISLB200 1.132 1.131

7 ISLB225 1.132 1.130

8 ISLB250 1.132 1.131

9 ISLB275 1.132 1.131

10 ISLB300 1.132 1.131

11 ISLB325 1.132 1.132

12 ISLB350 1.132 1.132

13 ISLB400 1.132 1.132

14 ISLB450 1.132 1.132

15 ISLB500 1.132 1.132

16 ISLB550 1.132 1.132

17 ISLB600 1.132 1.132

TABLE 3.5.4

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 29

 C1 Factor

1.126
1.127
1.128
1.129
1.130
1.131
1.132
1.133
ISLB75

ISLB100

ISLB125

ISLB150

ISLB175

ISLB200

ISLB225
IS800:2007

ISLB250

FIG.12
ISLB275

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU

ISLB300

ISLB325
LTBeam

ISLB350

ISLB400

ISLB450

ISLB500

ISLB550

ISLB600

Page 30
 CHAPTER 4
RESULT AND SCOPE

RESULT

• The commercial software LTBeam shows an error of about

0.2% to 0.3% in values.
• The error of 0.3% was seen in Light Beam sections.
• The C1 factor determined for various sections were compared
with the standard results given in IS800:2007 (Table 42).
• The error estimated was nearly in between 0.1% to 0.3%.
• Lighter Beam shows an error of about 0.3% as compared with
Wide Flange Beams.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 31

SCOPE OF WORK

• The 3-factor formula contains so many variables that the

influence of each variable can be hard to grasp. Since the
formula is analytical, solutions of Mcr are sometimes incorrectly
interpreted as exact solutions.

• Linearized buckling analysis is a powerful tool that can provide

almost exact solutions when studying lateral torsional buckling.
However, it is important to remember that this kind of analysis
is approximate and that the accuracy is dependent on the
situation and on how the problem is implemented in the
software.

• LTBeam is a finite element program and calculates Mcr directly.

Thus, the C1 factor is extracted by dividing the critical moment
by the reference moment, Mcr,ref.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 32

 REFERENCES

1. N.Subramainian, “Design of Steel Structures”, Oxford

University Press (2008)

2. M. R. Shiyekar, “Limit State Design in Structural Steel”, PHI

Learning Private Limited (2010)

3. S K Duggal, “Limit State Design in Structural Steel”, McGraw

Hill Education (India) Private Limited (2010)

4. Ioannis G. Raftoyiannis and Theodore Adamakos, “Critical

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Moments of Steel Web-Tapered I-
beams”, The Open Construction and Building Technology
Journal, 2010, 4, 105-112.

5. H. Showkati, “Lateral-Torsional Buckling Of Castellated

Beams”, Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Transaction
B, Engineering, Vol. 32, No. B2, pp 153-156

6. Zdeněk Kala 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier,

“Elastic Lateral-Torsional Buckling of Simply Supported Hot
Rolled Steel I-Beams with Random Imperfections”

7. Ioannis G. Raftoyiannis and Theodore Adamakos, The Open

Construction and Building Technology Journal, 2010, 4, 105-
112 “Critical Lateral-Torsional Buckling Moments of Steel
Web-Tapered I-beams”

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 33

 8. J. Nseir1, M. Lo2, D. Sonck3, H. Somja2, O. Vassart4, N.
Boissonnade , “Lateral Torsional Buckling of Cellular Steel
Beams.”
9. C. Rebelo , N. Lopes ,L. Simões da Silva , D. Nethercot ,
P.M.M. Vila Real ,,Published by Elsevier, “Statistical evaluation
of the lateral–torsional buckling resistance of steel I-beams”

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, MIT-WPU Page 34