2-Day In-House Training Course for LTA

5 – 6 March 2020

Analysis and Design of Steel Strutting

System for Earth Retaining or
Stabilizing Structures (ERSS)
Lecture 1

Structural Eurocodes and Structural Analysis

Dr. Chiew Sing Ping

Professor | Programme Director, Civil Engineering
Singapore Institute of Technology

singping.chiew@singaporetech.edu.sg
Structural Eurocodes and Structural Analysis

 Overview and Scope of Structural Eurocodes

(EC0, EC1 and EC3)
 Imperfection and Structural Analysis
 Demonstration of 2nd Order Analysis

3
Overview and Scope
Overview of Eurocodes
• Introduction to EN 1990
Basis of design
Limit state design
Combination of actions
• Introduction to EN 1991
• Introduction to EN 1993
Scope of Eurocodes
• A total of 10 codes comprising 58 parts
The first 2 codes are material-independent:

• EN 1990 - Basis of structural design

• EN 1991 - Actions on structures
4
Remaining 8 codes are material-specific

• EN 1992 - Design of concrete structures

• EN 1993 - Design of steel structures
• EN 1994 - Design of composite structures
• EN 1995 - Design of timber structures
• EN 1996 - Design of masonry structures
• EN 1997 - Geotechnical design
• EN 1998 - Design of structures for earthquakes
• EN 1999 - Design of aluminium structures

5
EN1990 Basis of Design

EN1990 states that a structure shall be designed adequately

and adequacy is required to be demonstrated in:

• Structural resistance
• Serviceability
• Durability
• Fire resistance
• Robustness

6
Eurocodes Subscripts

Extensive use of sub-scripts generally helpful:

Subscript Definition Example

Ed Design value of an effect MEd Design bending moment

Rd Design resistance MRd Design resistance for bending

el Elastic property Wel Elastic section modulus

pl Plastic property Wpl Plastic section modulus

7
Actions, Effects and Resistances

 Actions (F):
• Direct actions - applied loads.
• Indirect actions - temperature changes, vibrations.
• Both essentially produce same effect.

 Effects of action(E):
• On structural members and whole structure.
• For example bending moments, shear forces, deflections.

 Resistance (R):
• Capacity of a structural element to resist bending moment, axial force, shear, etc.

8
Types of Actions (EN 1991)

• Permanent actions (G): are those that essentially do not vary with time such as self-
weight of structure, fixed equipment.

• Variable actions (Q): leading and non-leading actions, and those that can vary with
time such as imposed loads, wind loads and snow loads.

• Accidental actions (A): are usually of short duration, but high magnitude such as
explosion, impact load, loss of a strut, etc.

9
Eurocodes Design Approach

• Outlined in EN 1990 Basis of structural Design

• Based on limit state design
• Principal limit states
Ultimate limit state, concerned with ‘collapse’
yielding; buckling; overturning
Serviceability limit state, concerned with ‘function’
Deflection; vibration
• Other limit states
Fire resistance
Durability
robustness

10
Limit State Design

• Limit States:
states beyond which the structure can no longer meets its original design intention

• Ultimate Limit States (ULS):

states associate with ‘collapse’ or other similar forms of structural failure, for e.g.
strength, fatigue

• Serviceability Limit States (SLS):

states correspond to ‘function’, beyond which specified service requirements cannot
be met, for e.g. deflection, vibration.

11
Limit State Design Principles

• Define relevant limit states

• Determine appropriate combined actions {F}, e.g.
o applied loads
o temperature changes
• Determine design effects {E}
o bending moments
o deflections
• Determine design resistance {R}
• Ensure no limit state is exceeded {E < R}

12
Characteristic and Design Values

• Characteristic values of actions

o Representative value of action above which not more than a small
percentage of the action may exceed during the design working life.
• Design values
o Design values used to check limit state condition.
o Design value of actions
The characteristic value of action multiplied by the relevant partial
factor for action.
o Design value of strength
The characteristic value of strength divided by the relevant partial
factor for material.

13
Partial Factors

• Partial safety factors γ are applied to characteristic values for both actions
material to account for variability.
• The value of γ depends on:
o The limit state under consideration.
o The variable to which it is applied.
o The context – e.g. is an action beneficial in relation to the considered
effect.
• γF for actions (loading).

• γM for resistance (material and modeling uncertainties).

14
Partial Factors

Action Partial factor

Permanent Action (G)
γG = 1.35
Unfavourable conditions
γG = 1.00
Favourable conditions
Ultimate limit state
γF Variable Action (Q)
γQ = 1.50
Unfavourable conditions
γQ = 0.0
Favourable conditions

Permanent Action (G) γG = 0.0

Serviceability limit state
Variable Action (Q) γQ = 1.00

γM EC 3 value (SG NA value) Application

γM0
γM
1.00 (1.00) Cross-section
γM1 1.00 (1.00) Member buckling
γM2 1.25 (1.10 or 1.25) Fracture
15
Ultimate Limit States

EQU Loss of static equilibrium of the structure or any part of it

considered as a rigid body, in which :
- minor variations in the value or the spatial distribution of
actions from a single source are significant ;
- the strengths of construction materials or ground are
generally not governing

STR Internal failure of the structure or structural elements,

including footings, piles, basement walls, etc., in which
the strength of construction materials or excessive
deformation of the structure governs

GEO GEO Failure or excessive deformation of the ground in which

the strengths of soil or rock are significant in providing
resistance

FAT Fatigue failure of the structure or structural elements

16
Ultimate Limit States

EQU STR

GEO FAT

17
Combination of Actions for ULS (EQU) – Set A

18
Combination of Actions for ULS (STR/GEO) – Set B

19
Combination of Actions for ULS (STR/GEO) – Set C

20
Combination of Actions for ULS (Eq. 6.10)

 Static equilibrium (EQU) for building structures should be verified using the design
values of actions in Table A1.2(A).
 Design of structural members (STR) not involving geotechnical actions should be
verified using the design values of actions from Table A1.2(B).
 Design of structural members (footings, piles, basement walls, etc.) (STR) involving
geotechnical actions and the resistance of the ground (GEO) should also be
verified using the design values of actions from Table A1.2(B) or Table A1.2(C).
 By inspection of the 3 Tables, it can be seen that Eq. 6.10 can satisfy EQU, STR
and GEO ULS.
 For simplicity, it is recommended that Eq. 6.10 be used to calculate combination of
actions for ULS. Eq.6.10 is slightly more conservative than Eq. 6.10a or Eq. 6.10b.

21
Combination of Actions for ULS

Combination Reference EN General expression

1990
For each critical load
case design values of the
6.10 � 𝛾𝛾𝐺𝐺,𝑗𝑗 𝐺𝐺𝑘𝑘,𝑗𝑗 + 𝛾𝛾𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃 + 𝛾𝛾𝑄𝑄,1 𝑄𝑄𝑘𝑘,1 + � 𝛾𝛾𝑄𝑄,𝑖𝑖 𝜓𝜓0,𝑖𝑖 𝐺𝐺𝑘𝑘,𝑖𝑖
effects of actions are
𝑗𝑗≥1 𝑖𝑖>1
determined by combining
∑ γ Gj Gkj + γ p P + γ Q ,1ψ 0,1Qk ,1 + ∑ γ Q ,iψ 0,i Qk ,i
Fundamental
the effects of actions that
are considered to  j ≥1 i ≥1
6.10a/b 
∑ ξ jγ Gj Gkj + γ p P + γ Q ,1Qk ,1 + ∑ γ Q ,iψ 0,i Qk ,i
act simultaneously
 j ≥1 i ≥1

Accidental 6.11 ∑G kj + P + Ad + (ψ 1,1orψ 2,1 )Qk ,1 + ∑ψ 2,i Qk ,i

j ≥1 i ≥1

Seismic 6.12 ∑G
j ≥1
k, j + P + AEd + ∑ψ 2,i Qk ,i
i ≥1

22
Combination of Actions for ULS

1.25Gk
23
Combination of Actions for ULS

 Fundamental combinations of actions may be determined from EN 1990

using Equation 6.10:
1.5 × combination factor
× other variable actions

∑γ
j >=1
G, j Gk , j + γ Q ,1Qk,1 + ∑ γ Q ,iψ 0,i Qk ,i
i >1 (6.10)

1.35 × permanent actions 1.5 × leading

combination factor
variable actions

 Load factors 1.35 and 1.5 are applied when actions are ‘unfavorable’

24
Combination of Actions for ULS

 the common actions from Eurocodes:  Identify leading variable action Qk,1
Gk = Dead load (permanent action); • The leading variable action is the one that
Qk = imposed load; leads to the most unfavourable effect (i.e. the
Wk = wind load critical combination)
Load combination Design load
• To generate the various load combinations,
each variable action should be considered in
Dead load & imposed load 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
turn as the leading one.
Dead load & wind load 1.35Gk + 1.5Wk
 Other non-leading or accompanying variable
Dead load, imposed and wind 1.35Gk + 1.50Wk + 1.05Qk actions reduced by a combination factor ψ0
load or
1.35Gk + 1.50Qk + 0.75Wk  Accounts for probability of simultaneous
occurrence of multiple variable loads
*1.05 = 0.7 × 1.50
0.75 = 0.5 × 1.50 • Imposed load ψ0 = 0.7
Leading variable action
• Wind load ψ0 = 0.6 (SS NA = 0.5)

25
Combination of Actions for SLS

 Partial factors for loads (SLS)

γG = 0; γQ = 1.0;
Use this
equation
For details:
Characteristic combination ∑G
j ≥1
k, j + P + Qk ,1 + ∑ψ Q ,i Qk ,i
i ≥1
(irreversible SLS)

Frequent combination ∑G
j ≥1
k, j + P +ψ 1,1Qk ,1 + ∑ψ 2,i Qk ,i
i ≥1
(reversible SLS)

Quasi-permanent combination
∑G
j ≥1
k, j + P + ∑ψ 2,i Qk ,i
i ≥1 ψ0⋅ - combination value
(typically long term effects of the structure) ψ1⋅- frequent value.
ψ2⋅- quasi-permanent26 value.
Combination Factors in SS NA 1990

SS NA values ψ of factors

Table NA. A1.1 Singapore National Annex of EN 1990

27
Overview of EN 1993 (Eurocode 3)

Eurocode 3 (EC3) contains 6 parts:

• EN 1993-1: Buildings

• EN 1993-2: Bridges

• EN 1993-3: Towers, masts & chimneys

• EN 1993-4: Silos, tanks & pipelines

• EN 1993-5: Piling

• EN 1993-6: Crane supporting structures

28
Sub-Parts of EN 1993-1
Eurocode 3 Part 1 has 12 sub-parts:
• EN 1993-1-1: General rules
• EN 1993-1-2: Fire
• EN 1993-1-3: Cold-formed thin gauge
• EN 1993-1-4: Stainless steel
• EN 1993-1-5: Plated elements
• EN 1993-1-6: Shells
• EN 1993-1-7: Plates transversely loaded
• EN 1993-1-8: Joints
• EN 1993-1-9: Fatigue
• EN 1993-1-10: Fracture toughness
• EN 1993-1-11: Cables
• EN 1993-1-12: High strength steels 29
National Standard & National Annex (NA)

• Every Eurocode will contain a National Annex.

• The National Standard implementing Eurocode (e.g. SS EN 1993-1-1: 2010)

must comprise the full, unaltered text of that Eurocode, including all Annexes.

• The National Annex may only include information on those parameters within
clauses that have been left open for national choice (e.g. NA to SS EN 1993-
1-1: 2010).

30
Eurocode 3 Conventions

Major axis y-y Major axis y-y

Minor axis z-z Minor axis z-z
Longitudinal axis of element x-x Longitudinal axis of element x-x

31
 Material Properties

 Nominal values of yield strength fy and ultimate tensile strength fu for hot-rolled structural steel
are given in Table 3.1 of EC3-1-1
 However, National Annex (NA) to SS EN1993-1-1 stipulates these values of yield strength fy
and ultimate tensile strength fu should be obtained from Product Standard EN10025

Nominal Thickness of the Element (mm)

Standard and T ≤ 40 mm 40 mm＜T ≤ 80 mm
steel grade
fy (N/mm2) fu (N/mm2) fy (N/mm2) fu (N/mm2)

EN 10025-2

S235 235 360 215 360

S275 275 430 255 410
S355 355 510 335 470
150 mm thick Grade S460
S460 440 550 410 550 Baseplate
Table 3.1 of EN1993-1-1 32
 NA SS - Material Properties

Yield Strength fy (kN/mm2) Tensile Strength fu (kN/mm2)

Standard Grade >16 > 40 > 63 > 80 > 100 > 150 > 200 >3 > 40 > 63 > 80 > 100 > 150 > 200
≤ 16
≤ 40 ≤ 63 ≤ 80 ≤ 100 ≤ 150 ≤ 200 ≤ 250 ≤ 40 ≤ 63 ≤ 80 ≤ 100 ≤ 150 ≤ 200 ≤ 250

400 to
S275JR 275 265 255 245 235 225 215 205 410 to 560 380 to 540
540
EN10025-2
S355JR 355 345 335 325 315 295 285 275 470 to 630 450 to 600

S275N 275 265 255 245 235 225 215 205 370 to 510 350 to 480

EN10025-3 S355N 355 345 335 325 315 295 285 275 470 to 630 450 to 600

S460N 460 440 430 410 400 380 370 - 540 to 720 530 to 710 -

520 to 500 to 480 to 470 to 460 to

S355M 355 345 335 325 325 320 - - - -
680 680 640 630 620
EN10025-4
540 to 530 to 510 to 500 to 490 to
S460M 460 440 430 410 400 385 - - - -
720 710 690 680 680

Note: TM steel up to 120mm only.

• The National Annex may give the choice for the value of fy and fu which could be
obtained from either the Product Standards (EN 10025 for hot-rolled sections) or by
using Table 3.1.
• The National Annex of Singapore (NA to SS EN 1993-1-1) choose the earlier. The
nominal values of the fy and fu for structural steel should be those obtained from the
product standards.
• In Singapore, non-EN materials are allowed to be used. Further information on the
values of fy and fu for steel grades manufactured to non-EN product standards is given
in BC1: 2012a.
a BC1:2012 Design Guide on Use of Alternative Structural Steel to BS5950 and Eurocode 3, Building
and Construction Authority, Singapore (ISBN: 978-981-05-9754-2)

34
Other Material Properties

 Design values of other material properties from EN 1993-1-1:

• Modulus of elasticity
E = 210 000 N/mm2
• Shear modulus:
G = E/2(1 + ν) = 81 000 N/mm2
• Poisson’s ratio:
ν = 0.3
• Coefficient of thermal expansion:
a = 12 × 10-6/℃
(for temperatures below 100 ℃)

35
Imperfection and Structural Analysis

 Imperfections & Equivalent Forces

 Structural Behaviour & Analysis

36
Material Imperfections

±∆
• Deviations in cross-sectional dimensions and variations in
material properties are taken into account in material
safety factors and should not be included in structural
analysis. ε

• Residual stress (across a section usually considered ≈ fy

uniform along the length of member) due to uneven
σr
cooling in hot-rolled section or welded section should be
included.
BS5950 reduced Py by 20 N/mm2 for welded section. σr

37
Geometrical Imperfections

N 𝑁𝑁

L
𝐿𝐿
eo,d
𝑒𝑒0,𝑑𝑑

Φ Φ

Frame imperfection Member Imperfection

• Global imperfection always • Local imperfection covered in
to be allowed for buckling curves
38
Geometrical Imperfections
F1
 Frame imperfection can be replaced by an equivalent Φ F1
horizontal forces (EHF) applied at the floor levels
(including the foundation level).
 For building frames sway imperfections, Φ, any be
disregarded where: F2
Φ F2
H Ed ≥ 0.15VEd
φ = φ0α hα m
where, Φ0 is the basic value, usually taken as 1/200 (0.5%). Φ (F1+F2)/2 Φ (F1+F2)/2
αh is the reduction factor for height h applicable to columns:
h is the height of the structure in meters
αm is the reduction factor for the number of columns in a row. Equivalent forces

39
Concept of Equivalent Horizontal Force (EHF)

 The building frames sway imperfections, Φ, can be taken as

φ = φ0α hα m
where, Φ0 is the basic value, usually taken as 1/200.

αh is the reduction factor for height h applicable to columns:

2 2
αh = but ≤ α h ≤ 1
h 3
h is the height of the structure in meters

αm is the reduction factor for the number of columns in a row:

 1
α m = 0.51 + 
 m
m is the number of columns in a row
Same EHF Concept for Member Imperfection ?

• The effects of local member bow imperfection can be replaced by an equivalent closed system of
horizontal forces, introduced for each member.

𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
4𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2

𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞2
= 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 . 𝑒𝑒0,𝑑𝑑
𝑒𝑒0,𝑑𝑑 8
𝐿𝐿 8𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2 8𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0,𝑑𝑑
𝑞𝑞 =
𝐿𝐿2

4𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2
𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸

41
Real Structural Behavior

linear analysis
F

geometrically non-linear

δ
e
imperfections

Non-linear behaviour due to:

• Geometrical influence due to actual deformed shape (second order effects)
• Joint behaviour
• Material yielding 42
Second (2nd) Order Effects

P
∆

• Frame P-∆ effect:

– due to floor sway
– 1st order frame stiffness modified
– dominant effect
• Included by:
– Iterative procedure (software)
– or amplification of relevant forces
Note: Frame P-∆ effect ≠ Frame imperfection

43
• Member P- δ effect:
– due to beam-column deflection
– 1st order member stiffness modified

P P
δ
δp
 
 1  π 2 EI
δp =δ  Fcr = 2
1− F F  L
 cr 

amplification factor
Note: Member P-δ effect ≠ Member imperfection
44
Structural Analysis - Terminology

• First-order analysis
Equilibrium equations are written in terms of the
geometry of the undeformed structure, geometrical
non-linearity not considered.

• Second-order analysis
Take into account the influence of the deformation of
the structure, e.g. both the sway effect (P-∆ effect)
and member deflection effect (P-δ effect).

45
What EC3 requires us to do?

• In general, both 1st order and 2nd order analyses are acceptable (EC3, 1-1, 5.2.1(1)).
• However, structural engineer must resolve to 2nd order analysis if the deformed geometry
increases the action effects or modify the structural behaviors significantly (EC3, 1-1, 5.2.1 (2)).

Lowest elastic
buckling load, Fcr
Lowest elastic
buckling load, Fcr
Nonlinear response
of structure
Nonlinear response of Case when 2nd order
Case when 1st order
analysis is sufficient P P structure analysis is needed
Design actions FEd

Design actions FEd

u u

46
Elastic Structural Analysis

Types of elastic global analysis:

LA: Linear elastic analysis (1st);
LBA: Linear bifurcation analysis;
GNA: Geometrically non-linear analysis (2nd);
GNIA: Geometrically non-linear with imperfections analysis (2nd ).

F
LBA
Fcr

GNIA
Simplified scheme of elastic analyses:

e δ

47
How to choose between 1st or 2nd Order Analysis?

• Generally, the 2nd order effects should be considered if they increase the
action effects or modify the structural behaviour significantly.
• According to EC3, 1st order analysis may be used if:
Fcr
For elastic analysis: α cr = ≥ 10 (5.1)
FEd
• If 3 ≤ α cr < 10 , EC3 allows member design using amplified 1st order elastic
analysis.
1
• All the horizontal forces should be amplified by: but αcr ≥ 3.0
1− 1
α cr

48
How to determine 𝜶𝜶𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 ?

The parameter αcr can be evaluated by the simplified expression:

H Ed h
α cr = (5.2)
VEd δ H,Ed

To put it simply, 2nd order effects should be taken into consideration when:
• Large horizontal actions
• Low frame stiffness
• High demand/capacity ratio of members
49
Application of 2nd Order Analysis

Model of Glass Box

268 Orchard Road Member Stress Deflection 50

Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis

Roof member Vertical member buckling

buckling

51
Roof buckling Wall buckling
Other Application – Single Layer Roofs

52
Buckled Mode Shapes
Other Application – 100m Steel Dome

53
Buckled mode shapes

54
Gardens by the Bay
The Cloud Forest and The Flower Dome

Hybrid of Arches and Gridshell

+ 55
Demonstration of 2nd Order Analysis using STAAD.Pro
Imperfection
EN 1993-1-1, clause 5.3.2 (7)
The effects of initial sway imperfection and local bow imperfections may be replaced by systems of
equivalent horizontal forces, introduced for each column.

Initial sway imperfection Initial bow imperfection

𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
4𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2

𝑒𝑒0,𝑑𝑑
𝐿𝐿 8𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2

4𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2
𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸

𝜙𝜙 = 𝜙𝜙0 𝛼𝛼ℎ 𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚 ≈ 1/200 57

for simplicity in this example
 Revision: 1st Order Analysis

In case of the linearly elastic structure, relation between displacement and external
force is proportional.

Contribute to axial deformation!

25 kN 25 kN Contribute to lateral deformation!

0.125 kN 23.8 mm
0.125 kN
Height, L=10000 mm
E=210000 N/mm2
Cross-section: 0.1x0.1 m2
Vertical load: 25 kN
= + Horizontal Load: 0.125 kN

Lateral displacement at top

𝑀𝑀0 𝐿𝐿2
∆0 = = 23.8 mm
3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
𝑀𝑀0

58
Structural Analysis - Terminology

• First-order analysis
Equilibrium equations are written in terms of the
geometry of the undeformed structure, geometrical
non-linearity not considered.

• Second-order analysis
Take into account the influence of the deformation of
the structure, e.g. both the sway effect (P-∆ effect)
and member deflection effect (P-δ effect).

59
2nd Order Analysis in Design Software

A second order analysis is induced by the geometric non-linearity which accounts for both
the P-Large delta ( P-∆ ) and P-small delta (P- 𝛿𝛿 ) effect.

P-∆ Effect
• Iterative Method ∆0 ∆1
A step-by-step incremental manner, using the deformed geometry of
the structure obtained from an iterative cycles of the calculation
• Stiffness Matrix Method
The change in the GEOMETRIC STIFFNESS can be captured by
invoking the KG option intended to modify the Stiffness Matrix [K] to [K
+ KG].
• Amplification Method
simple and approximate way to determine the result of second order
effect is to simply magnify the result reported from the first order
analysis by the amplification factor 1/(1-N/Ncr)
P-∆ effect
P- 𝜹𝜹 Effect
*Equivalent force acting on the element 60
2nd Order Analysis in STAAD.Pro

1. Create primary load cases

for vertical and horizontal
loads
2. Create Primary load case
for repeat load
3. Add new load item under
repeat load case -> select
repeat load
4. Select from available load
cases to create repeat load
combinations
5. Key in the combination
factors
6. Click “add” to confirm

* Alternatively, all loads can be

created under 1 primary load
case, if multiple combination
is not required.

61
 Material Imperfections

Number of iterations to be calculated

Use Geometric Stiffness Method

1. Define commends -> select Activate P- 𝛿𝛿 analysis

PDelta Analysis
2. Define the number of iteration
(iterative method only)
3. Or use Geometric Stiffness Note: when geometric stiffness
(Kg) method (non-iterative) method is turned on for P- ∆
4. Activate P- 𝛿𝛿 analysis or not analysis, iterative method will be
5. Click “Add” to confirm turned off.
6. Run Analysis

62
 P-∆ Analysis - Hand Calculation

Step 0 Step 1 Step 2 Step n

linear elastic analysis Iteration 1 Iteration 2 Iteration n
𝑀𝑀0 𝐿𝐿2 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻�𝐿𝐿2 𝑀𝑀 𝐿𝐿2 𝑃𝑃∆ 𝐿𝐿2 𝑀𝑀 𝐿𝐿2 𝑃𝑃∆ 𝐿𝐿2 … 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 𝐿𝐿2 𝑃𝑃∆𝑛𝑛−1 𝐿𝐿2 …
∆0 =
3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
=
3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
= 23.8 ∆1 = 1 = 0 = 11.3 ∆2 = 2 = 1 = 5.4 ∆𝑛𝑛 = = =?
3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
𝑛𝑛
∆ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = ∆0 + ∆1 = 35.1 ∆ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = ∆0 + ∆1 + ∆2 = 40.5
∆ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = � ∆𝑖𝑖 =?
𝑖𝑖=0
P=25kN
𝑛𝑛−1
∆0 ∆0 ∆1 ∆0 + ∆1 ∆2 � ∆𝑖𝑖
𝑖𝑖=0 ∆𝑛𝑛
H=0.125 kN

… …

𝑀𝑀0 𝑀𝑀1 𝑀𝑀0 𝑀𝑀2 𝑀𝑀1 𝑀𝑀0

63
Iteration and Convergence
50.0
𝑀𝑀4 Converged!
45.0
𝑀𝑀3 = P∆2
∆3
40.0
∆2
𝑀𝑀2 = P∆1
35.0
Total Displacement (mm)

30.0
∆1

25.0 𝑀𝑀1 = P∆0

First order analysis
20.0

15.0

10.0 ∆0

5.0
𝑀𝑀0 = HL
0.0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 64
Total Moment (kNm)
P-∆ Analysis - Spreadsheet
b (mm) h (mm) L (mm) KL (mm) fy (N/mm2)
100 100 10000 20000 355
H (kN) P (kN) E (N/mm2) I (mm4) Pai
0.125 25 210000 8.33E+06 3.14159
Nc,Rd (kN) Pcr (kN) L2/3EI Disp. Total (mm) Incrase from 1st order
3550 43.18 1.90476E-05 45.5 91%

Iteration Delta M (kNm) Total M (kNm) Disp. Inc (mm) Disp. Total (mmIncrement
Result of HL 0 1.25 1.25 23.8 23.8
1 0.6 1.8452 11.3 35.1 48%
2 0.3 2.1287 5.4 40.5 15%
3 0.1 2.2637 2.6 43.1 6%
4 0.1 2.3279 1.2 44.3 3%
5 0.0 2.3585 0.6 44.9 1% Considered as converged
6 0.0 2.3731 0.3 45.2 1%
7 0.0 2.3801 0.1 45.3 0%
8 0.0 2.3834 0.1 45.4 0%
9 0.0 2.3849 0.0 45.4 0%
Result of P-∆ 10 0.0 2.3857 0.0 45.4 0%
11 0.0 2.3860 0.0 45.4 0%
12 0.0 2.3862 0.0 45.5 0%
13 0.0 2.3863 0.0 45.5 0%
14 0.0 2.3863 0.0 45.5 0%
15 0.0 2.3863 0.0 45.5 0%
16 0.0 2.3864 0.0 45.5 0%
17 0.0 2.3864 0.0 45.5 0%
18 0.0 2.3864 0.0 45.5 0%
19 0.0 2.3864 0.0 45.5 0% 65
20 0.0 2.3864 0.0 45.5 0%
 P-∆ Analysis – STAAD.Pro

Iteration 0 Iteration 1 Iteration 2 Iteration 3 Iteration 4 Iteration 5 Iteration 6 Iteration 7

23.810 mm 35.147 mm 40.546 mm 43.117 mm 44.342 mm 44.925 mm 45.202 mm 45.334 mm
+11.337 +5.399 +2.571 +1.225 +0.583 +0.277 +0.132
(23.8 mm) (35.1 mm) (40.5 mm) (43.1 mm) (44.3 (mm) (44.9 mm) (45.2 mm) (45.3 mm)

66
 Case Study: Linear Elastic Analysis

𝑃𝑃 - increasing
50 𝜋𝜋2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
Euler’s Critical Load 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 =
45 (𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾)2

𝜙𝜙𝑃𝑃 40
35
30
Axial Load (kN) Linear elastic analysis
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Lateral displacment (mm)

67
Searching for the Critical Load
H 0.2 P (kN) 40 153.9 0.225 P (kN) 45 278.2 0.25 P (kN) 50 779.6 0.255 P (kN) 51 1693.5
Iteration M (kNm) Disp. Inc ( Disp. Tota % M (kNm) Disp. Inc ( Disp. Tota % M (kNm) Disp. Inc (mDisp. Tota % M (kNm) Disp. Inc (mDisp. Tota %
0 2 38.1 38.1 2.25 42.9 42.9 2.5 47.6 47.6 2.55 48.6 48.6
1 1.5 29.0 67.1 76% 1.9 36.7 79.6 86% 2.4 45.4 93.0 95% 2.5 47.2 95.8 97%
2 1.2 22.1 89.2 33% 1.7 31.5 111.1 40% 2.3 43.2 136.2 46% 2.4 45.8 141.6 48%
3 0.9 16.8 106.1 19% 1.4 27.0 138.1 24% 2.2 41.1 177.3 30% 2.3 44.5 186.1 31%
4 0.7 12.8 118.9 12% 1.2 23.1 161.2 17% 2.1 39.2 216.5 22% 2.3 43.3 229.4 23%
5 0.5 9.8 128.7 8% 1.0 19.8 181.0 12% 2.0 37.3 253.8 17% 2.2 42.0 271.4 18%
6 0.4 7.5 136.2 6% 0.9 17.0 198.0 9% 1.9 35.5 289.3 14% 2.1 40.8 312.2 15%
7 0.3 5.7 141.8 4% 0.8 14.6 212.6 7% 1.8 33.8 323.2 12% 2.1 39.7 351.9 13%
8 0.2 4.3 146.2 3% 0.7 12.5 225.1 6% 1.7 32.2 355.4 10% 2.0 38.5 390.4 11%
9 0.2 3.3 149.5 2% 0.6 10.7 235.8 5% 1.6 30.7 386.1 9% 2.0 37.4 427.8 10%
10 0.1 2.5 152.0 2% 0.5 9.2 245.0 4% 1.5 29.2 415.3 8% 1.9 36.3 464.1 8%
11 0.1 1.9 153.9 1% 0.4 7.9 252.8 3% 1.5 27.8 443.2 7% 1.9 35.3 499.5 8%
12 0.4 6.7 259.6 3% 1.4 26.5 469.7 6% 1.8 34.3 533.8 7%
13 0.3 5.8 265.3 2% 1.3 25.3 494.9 5% 1.7 33.3 567.1 6%
14 0.3 5.0 270.3 2% 1.3 24.1 519.0 5% 1.7 32.4 599.4 6%
15 0.2 4.2 274.5 2% 1.2 22.9 541.9 4% 1.7 31.4 630.9 5%
16 0.2 3.6 278.2 1% 1.1 21.8 563.7 4% 1.6 30.5 661.4 5%
17 1.1 20.8 584.5 4% 1.6 29.7 691.1 4%
18 1.0 19.8 604.3 3% 1.5 28.8 719.9 4%
19 1.0 18.8 623.1 3% 1.5 28.0 747.9 4%
20 0.9 17.9 641.1 3% 1.4 27.2 775.1 4%
21 0.9 17.1 658.2 3% 1.4 26.4 801.6 3%
22 0.9 16.3 674.4 2% 1.3 25.7 827.2 3%
23 0.8 15.5 689.9 2% 1.3 24.9 852.2 3%
24 0.8 14.8 704.7 2% 1.3 24.2 876.4 3%
25 0.7 14.1 718.8 2% 1.2 23.5 899.9 3%
26 0.7 13.4 732.2 2% 1.2 22.9 922.8 3%
27 0.7 12.8 744.9 2% 1.2 22.2 945.0 2%
28 0.6 12.1 757.1 2% 1.1 21.6 966.6 2%
29 0.6 11.6 768.6 2% 1.1 21.0 987.5 2% 68
30 0.6 11.0 779.6 1% 1.1 20.4 1007.9 2%
Case Study: P-∆ Analysis

Linear elastic analysis

50
𝜋𝜋2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
Euler’s Critical Load 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 =
45 (𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾)2

40
35
30
Axial Load (kN)

25 P-∆ analysis
20
15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Lateral displacment (mm)
69
Case Study: P-∆ and P- 𝛿𝛿 Analysis

50Linear elastic analysis Euler’s critical load

P-∆ analysis 𝜋𝜋2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
45 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = (𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾)2

40
35 Design buckling resistance
P-∆ + P- 𝛿𝛿 analysis 𝜒𝜒𝐴𝐴𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦
30 𝑁𝑁𝑏𝑏,𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝛾𝛾𝑀𝑀𝑀
Axial Load (kN)

25
20
15
10
5
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Lateral displacment (mm)
70
Effect of Column Length

• L=10 m • L=0.5 m
𝜋𝜋2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦
• 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = = 43.2 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 • 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐,𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = = 3550 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
(𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾)2 𝛾𝛾𝑀𝑀𝑀

50
1st order analysis
4000
Governed by buckling! Governed by yielding!
45
3500
40
3000
35 1st order analysis
30 2500
2nd order analysis
Axial Load (kN)

Axial Load (kN)

25 2000
2nd order analysis
20
1500
15
1000
10
5 500

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600
Lateral displacment (mm) Lateral displacment (mm)

71
Demonstration: 2nd Order Analysis for Buckling of Strut

𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
4𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2

Length: 10m
Pipe Strut: 406.4x16 CHS
𝑒𝑒0,𝑑𝑑 Material: Steel
𝐿𝐿 8𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0
𝐿𝐿2 Support: Pin-Pin
Vertical Load: 6000 kN/m
Initial bow imperfection: L/500
4𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑒𝑒0 EHF: 9.6 kN/m
𝐿𝐿2

𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸

72
THANK
YOU