Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Full length article

Simplified semi-analytical model for elastic distortional buckling

prediction of cold-formed steel flexural members
S.S. Ajeesh n, S. Arul Jayachandran
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The expressions for elastic distortional buckling stress predictions available in literature are used with
Received 5 February 2016 reasonable accuracy, but are either iterative or involve increased calculation effort for design. It is an
Received in revised form accepted fact among researchers that these expressions are not evaluated enough for the distortional
1 May 2016
stress prediction of sections with complex lip stiffeners. In this paper, a candidate model for distortional
Accepted 20 May 2016
buckling stress predictions is presented which is semi analytical in nature and is simple to incorporate in
the direct strength method (DSM) of cold-formed steel design. The proposed expression incorporates the
Keywords: effect of complex lip stiffeners on the elastic distortional buckling capacities of cold formed steel flexural
Distortional buckling members. In the proposed model, the (i) translational stiffness at lip-flange junction and (ii) rotational
Cold-formed
stiffness at the flange-web junction, are derived from regression analysis of wide range of cross sectional
Beam
dimensions. The proposed method is calibrated with semi-analytical finite strip method presented in the
Analytical
Half buckling wavelength literature and this formulation has been demonstrated to be good in comparison with recently published
Complex lip numerical based distortional buckling predictions.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and post buckling strength of lipped channel compression mem-

The migration in design philosophy of cold-formed steel sec-
tions from traditional effective width method to direct strength
method necessitates the evaluation of elastic buckling stresses
such as (i) local buckling, (ii) distortional buckling and (iii) overall
Euler buckling stress using numerical methods like finite element
method, finite strip method or by using analytical expressions.
Analytical expressions are available in Timoshenko and Gere [1]
for the evaluation of elastic local and Euler (global) buckling
stresses whereas distortional buckling predictions are usually
based on analytical model of flange-lip combination with rota-
tional and translational stiffness at junction point. Distortional
buckling phenomenon is characterized by the rotation of the
flange-lip combination about the flange-web junction and the
analytical model is designed to incorporate this mechanism.
There are several papers on the prediction of distortional
buckling stresses which is applicable for the design procedures
presented in codes of practice. One of the earliest work related to
distortional buckling was on steel storage rack columns by Han-
cock [2], providing design chart for buckling coefficient and half
buckling wavelength for a range of section geometries. Kwon and
Hancock [3] provided design equations for distortional buckling
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ajeeshss.tkm@gmail.com (S.S. Ajeesh).
bers based on experimental investigation. Later Hancock et al. [4]
proposed strength design curves for thin walled sections under
distortional buckling by incorporating the influence of local
buckling on distortional buckling. Modifications to EC3 method for
predicting the distortional buckling stress using generalized beam
theory (GBT) are available in Kesti and Davies [5] and provides
stress values comparable with experimental and theoretical re-
sults. He and Zhou [6] proposed strength design curve for distor-
tional buckling of cold-formed steel columns under axial com-
pression. An effective width formula for distortional buckling was
also proposed in [6], which shows better agreement with current
direct strength method (DSM) predictions than the existing ef-
fective width method.
As far as the efforts to use numerical methods are concerned,
Lau and Hancock [7] analysed the inelastic distortional buckling
strength of thin walled columns using spline finite strip method. A
nonlinear finite element model calibrated using experiments has
been simulated by Yu and Schafer [8] for application in direct
strength method. Jiang and Davies [9] studied the behaviour of
restrained purlins under distortional buckling mode using GBT.
Experimental work on distortional buckling of beams include the
tests by Yu and Schafer [10] on channel and zed section beams
under bending where by the sections are constrained to buckle in
distortional buckling mode by effectively arresting local and lateral
torsional buckling in the testing procedure.
For works related to analytical methods on elastic distortional

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2016.05.015
0263-8231/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427
buckling prediction, Lau and Hancock [11] derived analytical ex-
pression for elastic distortional buckling stress of compression
members using flexural torsional buckling theory developed by
Timoshenko and Gere [1] and Vlasov [12]. The derivations were
based on approximate model of flange-lip combination rotating
about flange-web junction. The theory has been extended by
Hancock [13] to flexural members wherein a design method for
flexural members was provided. Iterative calculations are involved
in the determination of rotational stiffness terms provided in
[11,13]. Analytical expression for sections with laterally un-
supported compression flanges for evaluating elastic distortional
buckling stress based on the assumption of beam on elastic
foundation was presented by Serrette and Pekoz [14]. A closed
form solution for distortional buckling based on a model of flange-
lip system, with tension end of web treated as pinned was pre-
sented by Davies and Jiang [15]. Rogers and Schuster [16] com-
pared various analytical models on distortional buckling of flexural
members and established an improved prediction by Hancock
model on elastic distortional buckling strength. The analytical
model proposed by Schafer and Pekoz [17] considered the inter-
action model of web and flange by incorporating the elastic stiff-
ness and geometric stiffness portion of both flange and web for
distortional buckling strength calculation. The web stiffness con-
tribution for the formulation were derived using numerically
based semi-analytical finite strip method. Teng et al. [18] provided
analytical expression for evaluating elastic distortional buckling
strength of sections subjected to axial compression and biaxial
bending by extending Lau and Hancock [11] method. Silvestre and
Camotim [19] provided analytical formula for distortional critical
length and buckling stress for cold-formed steel channel and zed
section members under uniform compression, pure bending and
both using generalized beam theory. A model for calculating dis-
tortional buckling stress of channel, zed and sigma section under
compression or bending about an axis perpendicular to the web
was proposed by Li and Chen [20]. The analytical model consists of
lip-flange combination incorporating a translational spring instead
of rotational spring as adopted in Lau and Hancock [11] model.
Tong et al. [21] proposed a unified analytical model for the dis-
tortional and lateral buckling analysis of channel beams. Salient
points of development in the analytical models for distortional
buckling stress prediction are briefly compared in the next section.
2. Critical evaluation of existing formulations on elastic dis-
tortional buckling stress
The mechanics involved in the distortional buckling of cold-
formed steel flexural member is shown in Fig. 1. In an analytical
model, the deformation of cross section as a result of distortional
buckling is idealized as flange-lip combination under uniform
compression with rotational ( kϕ ) and translational (kx) stiffness.
The equations of equilibrium by considering forces along x and y
direction and moment about shear centre are formulated using
flexural torsional buckling theory. The partial differential
Fig. 1. Distortional mechanics of cold-formed steel beams under flexure [11]].
421
equations are solved to determine the elastic distortional buckling
load. The role of kϕ is to incorporate the rotational restraint offered
by web on web-flange junction and the resistance offered by web
is also dependent on the fixity at tension flange and stress gradient
in the web. The effect of kx has been neglected in majority of re-
ported research work [11,13,15,20] and its effect on elastic dis-
tortional buckling strength of flexural members has been ne-
glected in this paper also. The existing formulations are based on
flanges under uniform compression and hence the capability of
these formulations to capture the effect of stress gradient in the
flange on distortional buckling is assessed here in this study.
A comparative study of existing analytical models on elastic
distortional buckling prediction of flexural members has been
performed. Two analytical models for distortional buckling of
flexural members; Hancock [13] and Davies and Jiang [15] (which
will hitherto be called as Hancock model and Davies model, in the
present study) are compared for the evaluation of elastic distor-
tional buckling stress under flexure. The geometry of lipped
channel cross sections for the comparison of analytical models are
taken from the work of Hancock [13] and Schafer and Pekoz [17]
and the results are compared with finite strip analysis (FSM) re-
sults using the software CUFSM developed by John Hopkins uni-
versity [22]. The comparison of distortional buckling stress pre-
dictions of analytical models with finite strip results with variation
in flange width to lip depth ratio (b/c) in a non-dimensional form
and the statistical comparison of results is shown in Fig. 2. It
should be noted that the range of sections that are considered for
the comparison has compactness ratio (b/h) varying from 0.13 to
0.75. The flange width to lip depth ratio (b/c) considered is be-
tween 2 and 16. In direct strength method, a value of b/c 4 1.4 is
accepted as within the pre-qualified range.
Elastic distortional buckling calculation using analytical models
are comparable with finite strip results over a range of cross sec-
tion dimensions and relatively better estimate of results are
available for b/c value greater than 5. For b/c value less than 5, the
analytical predictions were mostly lower bound to finite strip re-
sults and the percentage variation is nearly 40%. For a few section
geometries, Hancock and Davies models produces negative rota-
tional stiffness values at web-flange junction resulting in very high
elastic distortional buckling strength prediction. In the expression
presented by Hancock model and Davies Model in literature, one
could see that the multiplier bracketed term for the rotational
stiffness kϕ , represents the reduction in the flexural stiffness of-
fered by the web due to axial stresses. However when this term
becomes negative, the reduction is completely neglected. This in
turn results in prediction of higher capacities, which is evident
from Fig. 2.
Comparative study has been done on lipped channel cross
section to assess the effect of section geometries on distortional
buckling stress with compactness ratio (b/h), by varying the width
(b) of the section keeping other cross sectional dimensions con-
stant (h ¼ 300 mm, c ¼50 mm and t ¼ 1 mm). The values calcu-
lated using theoretical models are compared with distortional
buckling stress calculated using finite strip analysis as shown in
422 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427

3.50 800
σ hancock /σ fsm σ davies /σ fsm
h=200 mm Hancock model (σcrd = 143 N/mm2)
n 42 42 700 b=100 mm
3.00 μ 1.01 0.95 c=50 mm Davies model (σcrd = 154 N/mm2)

Distortional buckling stress (N/mm2)

t=1 mm
σ 0.33 0.24
600 fsm(major bending) (σcrd =266 N/mm2)
cov 0.33 0.26
2.50 max 2.59 2.38 fsm(minor bending) (σcrd = 238 N/mm2)
σanalytical/σfsm

min 0.65 0.64 500 Major axis

bending stress

2.00 400

Hancock model 300

1.50
Davies model
200

1.00
100 Minor axis
bending stress

0.50 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
b/c Half buckling wave length (mm)

Fig. 2. Large variation in prediction of existing analytical models for low flange Fig. 4. Comparison of finite strip analysis for major axis and minor axis bending.
width to lip depth ratio.

1.20

1.00
σanalytical/σfsm

0.80

0.60
Hancock model
0.40
Davies model
0.20

0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
b/h
Fig. 5. Comparison of distortional buckling stress for sections with complex lips.
Fig. 3. Conservatism of existing analytical models for various compactness ratios.

do not adequately capture the effect of complex lip stiffeners in

Fig. 3. The prediction by Hancock model are lower bound to finite
elastic distortional buckling stress. Hence the present study makes
strip results for the considered sections and as the ratio of width of
an attempt to incorporate the effect of complex lip stiffeners on
flange to depth of web (b/h) increases, the variation in results
elastic distortional buckling formulation.
between analytical predictions from finite strip method decreases.
The distortional buckling strength prediction by Davies model
follows the same trend as Hancock model and the variation of
analytical values from finite strip analysis results for the model are 3. Semi analytical model for elastic distortional buckling
less than 10% for b/h ratio greater than 0.5. stress for beams
The effect of stress gradient in flanges on elastic distortional
buckling stress has been evaluated by comparing finite strip ana- A semi analytical model of flange-lip combination (Fig. 6) has
lysis on sections subjected to major and minor axis bending. The been proposed incorporating the effect of lip stiffeners on distor-
stress distribution in the cross section (compression denoted by tional buckling in the form of translational stiffness in addition to
‘ ’ sign and tension by ‘ þ’ sign) subjected to major axis and minor
axis bending and the comparison of finite strip results with the-
oretical predictions for various half buckling wave length for lip-
ped channel section is shown in Fig. 4. Even though the elastic
distortional buckling curve in theoretical predictions and finite
strip method are differing, not much variation has been observed
for sections subjected to major axis and minor axis bending for the
section compared.
The comparison of distortional buckling curve between analy-
tical predictions and finite strip analysis for a variety of cross
sections under flexure has been done and the result corresponding
to a rack section with complex stiffener is shown in Fig. 5. The
distortional buckling curve predicted by analytical models and fi-
nite strip results are not identical for the section compared and
variation in critical buckling stress is also observed. This points to
the fact that the analytical predictions published in the literature Fig. 6. Analytical model for distortional buckling stress calculation.
 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427 423

translational and rotational stiffness available in the existing ⎡ I ⎤

P 2⎢ y02 − 0 + x 02 − hx2⎥
analytical models. The additional translational stiffness (ky) is at- ⎣ A ⎦
tached to the flange-lip junction to take into account the transla- ⎡ π2 π2 π2 2
tional restraint offered by the compound lips. + P ⎢ 2 EIw−2y0 2 EIxy( x 0 − hx) + 2 EIx( x 0 − hx) + GJ
⎣λ λ λ
The axial buckling load, P is determined by three simultaneous
λ2 π2 I π2 π2 ⎤
differential equations by considering equilibrium of forces along x
and y direction and equilibrium of moment about shear centre π
( λ λ
)
+ 2 k yb2 + kϕ + 2 EIy 0 − 2 EIyx 02 + 2 EIyhx2⎥
A λ ⎦
axis. π4 2 π4 π4 2
+ 4
E2Ixy
2
( x 0 − hx ) − 4
E2IyIw − E2IxIy( x 0 − hx)
λ λ λ4
d 4u d 4v ⎡ d2u d2ϕ ⎤
EIy + EIxy + P ⎢ 2 + y0 2 ⎥ + k x⎡⎣ u + yo − hy ϕ⎤⎦=0
( ) π2
dz 4
dz 4
⎣ dz dz ⎦ (1) λ
2
− 2 EIyGJ − EIy k yb + kϕ =0 ( ) (10)

The quadratic equation has to be solved to determine the cri-

d 4v d 4u ⎡ d2v d2ϕ ⎤
EIx + EIxy + P⎢ 2 − x0 2 ⎥ + Q y tical elastic distortional buckling load, P. The critical half buckling
dz 4 dz 4 ⎣ dz dz ⎦ wave length (λcr) is calculated by the procedure discussed below.
+ k y⎡⎣ v + ( b − xo + hx)ϕ⎤⎦=0 (2)

3.1. Calculation of critical half buckling wave length

d 4ϕ ⎛ I ⎞ d2ϕ ⎡ d2v d2u ⎤
EIw 4 − ⎜ GJ − 0 P ⎟ 2 − P ⎢ x 0 2 − y0 2 ⎥ − Q y( x 0 − hx)
dz ⎝ A ⎠ dz ⎣ dz dz ⎦ For the calculation of critical half buckling wave length, as-
+ k x⎡⎣ u + y0 − hy ϕ⎤⎦ y0 − hy
( ) ( ) suming the translational stiffness (kx) as infinity. Then we have
⎛ πz ⎞
+ k y⎡⎣ v + ( b − x 0 + hx)ϕ⎤⎦( b − x 0 + hx) + kϕ. ϕ=0 (3) ϕ = Asin⎜ ⎟
⎝ λ ⎠ (11)

The three differential equations are simplified to obtain the

quadratic equation for distortional buckling stress. (
u=− yo − hy ϕ ) (12)
Let
v = ( x 0 − hx)ϕ (13)
⎛ πz ⎞
ϕ = A1sin⎜ ⎟
⎝ λ ⎠ (4) Substituting Eqs. (11), (12) and (13) in (1), (2) and (3) and
simplifying the equations
⎛ πz ⎞
u = A2 sin⎜ ⎟ π2 ⎡ ⎤
P ⎡⎣ −hy yo − hy ⎤⎦ = 2 E⎢ Iy yo − hy
2
⎝ λ ⎠ (5) ( ) ( ) (
− Ixy( x 0 − hx) yo − hy ⎥ )
λ ⎣ ⎦ (14)
The effect of translational stiffness kx on distortional buckling
π2 ⎡ 2 ⎤ λ2
appears to be small and hence neglected in simplified formulation.
Also the y-direction displacement along elastic support is zero. λ
( )
E⎢ Ix( x 0 − h x ) − Ixy( x 0 − h x ) yo − h y + Iw ⎥ + GJ + 2 k yb + kϕ
2 ⎣ ⎦ π
2
( )
⎡ 2 Ix + Iy ⎤
Therefore = P ⎢ ( x 0 − h x ) −2x 0( x 0 − h x ) − yo yo − h y + ( + x 02 + y02⎥
)
⎢⎣ A ⎥⎦ (15)
⎛ πz ⎞
v = ( x 0 − hx)A1sin⎜ ⎟ From Eqs. (14) and (15)
⎝ λ ⎠ (6)
π 2
λ2 ⎡ Ix + Iy ⎤
Substituting Eqs. (4), (5) and (6) in (1), (2) and (3) and making λ
EI + GJ + 2 k yb2 + kϕ = P ⎢
2 wc
π ⎣ A
( + hx2 + hy2⎥
⎦
) (16)
suitable simplifications
where
⎡ π2 ⎤ ⎡ π2 ⎤ 2
2
ϕ⎢ 2 ( x 0 − hx)EIxy − Py0 ⎥ + u⎢ 2 EIy − P ⎥=0 (
Iwc = Iw + Ix( x 0 − hx) + Iy yo − hy −2Ixy( x 0 − hx) yo − hy ) ( ) (17)
⎣λ ⎦ ⎣λ ⎦ (7)
Therefore
⎡ π2 2 2 π2
ϕ⎢ 2 EIx( x 0 − hx) − P ( x 0 − hx) +2Px 0( x 0 − hx) + EIw 2 + GJ π2 λ2
⎣λ λ P= λ2
EIwc + GJ +
π2
(k by
2
+ kϕ )
Ix + I y
I λ 2
λ 2 ⎤ ⎡ π 2 ⎤ + hx2 + hy2 (18)
− P 0 + 2 k yb2 + 2 kϕ⎥ + u⎢ 2 ( x 0 − hx)EIxy − Py0 ⎥=0 A
A π π ⎦ ⎣λ ⎦ (8)
For the critical buckling load to be minimum, taking derivative

From Eqs. (7) and (8) of P with respect to half buckling wave length; ( ∂P
∂λ
=0) and sim-
plifying
⎡ π2 ⎤2 ⎡ π 2 ⎤⎧ π 2 ⎡ 2⎤
⎢ 2 ( x 0 − hx)EIxy − Py0 ⎥ − ⎢ 2 EIy − P ⎥⎨ 2 ⎣ EIw + EIx( x 0 − hx) ⎦ ⎛ EI ⎞0.25
⎣λ ⎦ ⎣λ ⎦⎩ λ λ cr = π ⎜⎜ 2
wc ⎟
⎟
⎫ ⎝ k yb + kϕ ⎠ (19)
⎡I ⎤ λ2
+ GJ − P ⎢ 0 − x 02 + hx2⎥ + 2 ⎡⎣ k yb2 + kϕ⎤⎦⎬=0
⎣A ⎦ π ⎭ (9) The expression for ky and kϕ has been determined based on
plate theory with appropriate reduction factors which is explained
Simplifying and expressing in the form of quadratic equation in the next section.
424 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427

Table 1
Statistical comparison of proposed model with finite strip method.

sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm

n 80 80 80 80 80 80
μ 0.88 0.92 0.78 0.85 0.94 0.98
σ 0.09 0.16 0.12 0.15 0.12 0.15
cov 0.10 0.17 0.15 0.18 0.12 0.15
min 0.68 0.57 0.51 0.58 0.69 0.53
max 1.08 1.20 1.01 1.17 1.32 1.26

Fig. 7. Experimental sections for comparison (Kesti and Davies [5]).

Fig. 8. Sections with complex edge stiffeners (Schafer et al. [25]).

 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427
3.2. Calculation of kϕ and ky
The rotational stiffness k ϕ and translational stiffness ky depends
mainly on the fixity at flange-web junction on both tension and
compression end and the amount of complexity of lips respec-
tively. The actual rotational restraint offered by flange-web junc-
tion to distortional buckling depends on the b/h ratio, slenderness
of flange and web. To calibrate k ϕ and ky, a range of lipped channel,
rack and hat sections within the bounds of direct strength method
has been analysed using proposed formulation and compared with
finite strip results. A statistical comparison of proposed formula-
tion and finite strip results are made in Table 1 to arrive at an
empirical expression for k ϕ and ky as shown in Eqs. (20)–(23). The
range of sections that are considered for the comparison has
compactness ratio (b/h) varying from 0.3 to 0.7. This range is re-
flected in the cross sections used in practice as given in AISI design
manual [23]. The flange width to lip depth ratio (b/c) considered is
between 1.5 and 10.
⎛ b ⎞1.6 16D ⎛ b ⎞
1.6
For 4⎜ ⎟ <1 kϕ = ⎜ ⎟
⎝ h⎠ h ⎝ h⎠
⎛ b ⎞1.6 4D
For 4⎜ ⎟ ≥1 kϕ =
⎝ h⎠ h (21)
⎛ c ′ ⎞5 5
4D ⎛⎜ c ′ ⎞⎟
For 4⎜ ⎟ <1 ky =
⎝ h⎠ b3 ⎝ h ⎠
⎛ c ′ ⎞5 D parison with finite strip results. The industrial sections used for
For 4⎜ ⎟ ≥1 ky =
⎝ h⎠ b3
here c′ is the total length of the edge stiffener
The proposed model has been compared with the model de-
veloped by Schafer and Pekoz [17] (Schafer model) which is par-
tially based on semi-analytical finite strip method. The calcula-
tions involved in the determination of web elastic and geometric
stiffness terms in Schafer model appears to be lengthy and com-
plex in nature. From the overall comparison of finite strip results
with analytical predictions, it has been demonstrated that the
elastic distortional buckling prediction by the proposed model
provides a close comparison with finite strip method. Another
advantage is the non-iterative nature of the proposed model in the
calculation of rotational stiffness term ( kϕ ). The proposed model
provides un-conservative predictions for certain geometries when
the b/c ratio is greater than 5, where the stiffness contribution by
the lip on to the flange is negligible.
3.3. Simplified expression for elastic distortional buckling
The quadratic expression in Eq. (10) is solved and simplified for
application in design using DSM. The expressions are non-iterative
in nature and a new terminology K (total restraint) is also in-
troduced. A simplified expression for the calculation of elastic
distortional buckling load (Pcr) for cold-formed steel beams is
shown below. The Eq. (24) has been found to be robust as the
terms under square root is always positive for the range of geo-
metries considered.
α3 ± α32−4α1α4
Pcr =
2α1
425
⎛ π ⎞2
η=⎜ ⎟
⎝ λ cr ⎠ (25)
K = k yb2 + kϕ (26)
α1=−
( Ix + Iy) − h 2
x (27)
A
2 GJ K
α2 = Iw + Ix( x 0 − hx) + + 2
ηE η E (28)
α3 = ηE⎡⎣ 2y0 Ixy( x 0 − hx) − α2 + Iy α1 − y02 ⎤⎦
( ) (29)
⎡ 2
( x 0 − hx) − Iyα2⎤⎦
2
α4 = η2E2⎣ Ixy
(30)
The values of ky and kϕ are the proposed translational spring
stiffness in ‘y’ direction at the flange-lip junction and rotational
(20) stiffness at the web-flange junction respectively. These are calcu-
lated as per Eqs. (20)–(23).
4. Application of proposed formulation in the calculation of
distortional buckling stress
To assess the applicability of proposed formulation for sections
(22) available in cold-formed steel industry and literature, a variety of
sections are used for the calculation of elastic distortional buckling
stress of flexural members using the proposed model and com-
(23) comparison has compactness ratio (b/h) between 0.3 and 0.7 and
flange width to web depth ratio (b/c) ranges between 3.1 and 3.3.
The experimental sections by Kesti and Davies [5] shown in Fig. 7
has been analysed for b/h within the range 0.3 and 0.7, whereas
the b/c’ values are between 1.6 and 6.2. The study by Schafer et al.
[25] on cross sections including complex lip stiffeners shown in
Fig. 8 are compared for b/h values between 0.3 and 0.7, whereas
the b/c’ values are within the range 2 and 5.3.
The comparison of proposed formulation with finite strip re-
sults for sections with simple lip stiffeners is shown in Table 2. The
prediction of distortional buckling stress by proposed formulation
is comparable with finite strip results for all the sections demon-
strated in Table 2. The applicability of the proposed model for
section with inclined stiffeners and stiffened web is also verified
here. For experimental hat and CH2 sections (as defined by Kesti
and Davies [5]), and also for sections in [25], the prediction by
proposed formulation is upper bound for certain geometries
which is observable when the b/c’ ratio is greater than 5.
To have a deeper assessment of the distortional buckling
strength prediction of proposed formulation for sections involving
complex lip stiffeners, a range of beam sections having complex lip
geometries are compared with finite strip results and is shown in
Table 3. The proposed model consistently predicts the distortional
buckling stress closer to finite strip results for all the sections
compared. Even though the rack sections shown in [5] are pre-
dominantly for compression members, the distortional buckling
expression for flexure may be applicable for the design of beam-
columns of those sections using direct strength method. From the
comparison of sections in [25], it has been observed that the ac-
curacy of prediction by proposed model increases as the com-
(24)
plexity of the lip stiffeners increases.
426 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427

Table 2
Comparison of proposed formulation for sections with simple lips.

Industrial sections [24] (channel and zed sections Kesti and Davies [5] (C, HAT and CH2 sections) Schafer et al. [25] (section a & b)

sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm

n 22 22 53 53 20 20
μ 0.89 0.96 0.91 0.98 0.87 0.95
σ 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.11 0.06 0.10
cov 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.11 0.07 0.11
min 0.88 0.89 0.83 0.69 0.75 0.77
max 0.90 1.05 0.99 1.16 0.97 1.12

Table 3
Comparison of proposed formulation for sections with complex stiffeners.

Kesti and Davies [5] (Experimental RA and Schafer et al. [25]

RL sections)
Section (c) Section (d) Section (e) Section (f)

sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm sschafer/sfsm sproposed/sfsm

n 14 14 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
μ 0.71 0.86 0.91 0.98 0.90 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.90 0.99
σ 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.07
cov 0.08 0.10 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.07
min 0.64 0.76 0.85 0.87 0.85 0.75 0.87 0.88 0.86 0.90
max 0.80 1.00 0.97 1.12 0.96 1.11 0.97 1.12 0.96 1.10

2 5. Range of validity of the proposed expression

σschafer/
1.8 σfsm
A comparison of proposed formulation with finite strip results
1.6 n 365
μ 0.87
for various cross section geometries having b/h value within the
1.4 σ 0.11 range 0.3 and 0.7 is shown in Fig. 9. Within the range shown in
cov 0.13 Fig. 9, the predictions made by the proposed formulation is mostly
σschafer/σfsm

1.2
conservative and matching reasonably with finite strip analysis
1 μ+σ = 0.98 results. Even though the coefficient of variation of the proposed
μ = 0.87 model is marginally higher than Schafer model (same in the case
0.8 μ-σ = 0.76
of Tables 1, 2 and 3), the mean values (first order variable) are the
0.6
most important parameter to be considered in statistical analysis
0.4 which matches well with finite strip results. The bias in the pre-
sent model is 0.05 whereas in Schafer model it is 0.13. It is shown
0.2
in Fig. 9 that the present model represent the mean of large
0 number of results in the band. Hence the proposed model can be
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
b/h
considered as yet another candidate model for the elastic distor-
tional buckling stress prediction. The proposed formulation is di-
rectly applicable for the evaluation of distortional buckling stress
2 of flexural members in direct strength method of design within
σproposed
1.8 /σfsm this range.
1.6 n 365
μ 0.95
1.4 σ 0.13 6. Conclusions
cov 0.14
σproposed/σfsm

1.2
μ+σ = 1.08 A review of the existing theoretical models for calculating
1
μ = 0.95 elastic distortional buckling stress of cold formed steel beams have
0.8 μ-σ = 0.81 been made and compared with finite strip analysis results. The
0.6
inadequacies in the published theoretical models in calculating
distortional buckling stress has been assessed. A semi-analytical
0.4
model of distortional buckling for flexural member is proposed
0.2 incorporating the effect of lips on elastic distortional buckling
stress. The model involves non iterative calculation and is found to
0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 be satisfactory in predicting the distortional buckling stress of
b/h sections having b/h ratio within the range 0.3 and 0.7 compared to
other theoretical models. The proposed formulation is able to
Fig. 9. Statistical comparison of models within the valid range (a) Schafer model, provide closer comparison with finite strip results for variety of
(b) Proposed model. sections including rack sections and sections with complex lip
 S.S. Ajeesh, S. Arul Jayachandran / Thin-Walled Structures 106 (2016) 420–427
stiffeners. The formulation has been demonstrated to be a simple
and robust tool in predicting elastic distortional buckling of flex-
ural members having generic cross sections.
References
[1] S.P. Timoshenko, J.M. Gere, Theory of Elastic Stability, 2nd ed., Mcgraw-Hill,
New York, 1961.
[2] G.J. Hancock, Distortional buckling of steel storage rack columns, J. Struct. Eng.
(ASCE) 111 (1985) 2770–2783.
[3] Y.B. Kwon, G.J. Hancock, Tests of cold-formed channels with local and distor-
tional buckling, J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE) 118 (1992) 1786–1803.
[4] G.J. Hancock, Y.B. Kwon, E.S. Bernard, Strength design curves for thin-walled
sections undergoing distortional buckling, J. Constr. Steel Res. 31 (2–3) (1994)
169–186.
[5] J. Kesti, J.M. Davies, Local and distortional buckling of thin-walled short col-
umns, Thin-Walled Struct. 34 (2) (1999) 115–134.
[6] Z. He, X. Zhou, Strength design curves and an effective width formula for cold-
formed steel columns with distortional buckling, Thin-Walled Struct. 79 (6)
(2014) 62–70.
[7] S.C.W. Lau, G.J. Hancock, Inelastic buckling of channel columns in the distor-
tional mode, Thin-Walled Struct. 10 (1) (1990) 59–84.
[8] C. Yu, B.W. Schafer, Simulation of cold-formed steel beams in local and dis-
tortional buckling with applications to the direct strength method, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 63 (5) (2007) 581–590.
[9] C. Jiang, J.M. Davies, Design of thin-walled purlins for distortional buckling,
Thin-Walled Struct. 29 (1–4) (1997) 189–202.
[10] C. Yu, B.W. Schafer, Distortional buckling tests on cold-formed steel beams, J.
Struct. Eng. (ASCE) 132 (2006) 515–528.
427
[11] S.C.W. Lau, G.J. Hancock, Distortional buckling formulas for channel columns, J.
Struct. Eng. (ASCE) 113 (1987) 1063–1078.
[12] V.Z. Vlazov Thin walled elastic beams, Israel Program for Scientific Transla-
tions, Jerusalem, Israel, 1961.
[13] G.J. Hancock, Design for distortional buckling of flexural members, Thin-
Walled Struct. 27 (1) (1997) 3–12.
[14] R.L. Serrette, T. Pekoz, Distortional buckling of thin-walled beams/panels. I:
theory, J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE) 121 (1995) 757–766.
[15] J.M. Davies, C. Jiang, Design of thin-walled beams for distortional buckling, in:
Proceedings of the 13th International Speciality Conference on Cold-Formed
Steel Structures, St Louis, Missouri, October 1996.
[16] C.A. Rogers, R.M. Schuster, Flange/web distortional buckling of cold-formed
steel sections in bending, Thin-Walled Struct. 27 (1) (1997) 13–29.
[17] B.W. Schafer, T. Pekoz, Laterally braced cold-formed steel flexural members
with edge stiffened flanges, J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE) 125 (1999) 118–127.
[18] J.G. Teng, J. Yao, Y. Zhao, Distortional buckling of channel beam-columns, Thin-
Walled Struct. 41 (7) (2003) 595–617.
[19] N. Silvestre, D. Camotim, Distortional buckling formulae for cold-formed steel
C and Z section members Part I—derivation, Thin-Walled Struct. 42 (11)
(2004) 1567–1597.
[20] L. Li, J. Chen, An analytical model for analysing distortional buckling of cold-
formed steel sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 46 (12) (2008) 1430–1436.
[21] G. Tong, Y. Feng, L. Zhang, A unified analysis for distortional and lateral
buckling of C – purlins in flexure, Thin-Walled Struct. 95 (10) (2015) 244–254.
[22] CUFSM, Elastic Buckling Analysis of Thin-Walled Members by Finite Strip
Analysis. CUFSM v4.05. 〈http://www.ce.jhu.edu/bschafer/cufsm〉, 2012.
[23] American Iron and Steel Institute, Cold-Formed Steel Design Manual. AISI-
Specifications for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel, American Iron and Steel
Institute, 2003.
[24] Albion Sections Ltd. Product Design Manual. Birmingham, UK, 2006.
[25] B.W. Schafer, A. Sarawit, T. Pekoz, Complex edge stiffeners for thin walled
members, J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE) 132 (2006) 212–226.