Chapt5-9 Eng

Global analysis of steel structures

• Modelling of framed buildings
– Beams Beam Joint
– Beam‐column
– Joints
Beam‐column
Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 54

Modelling of framed structures/ joints

‐ simple pinned joints
‐ continuous rigid joints
‐ semi‐continuous semi‐rigid joints

Load Displacement Elastic response

Maximum load
Load parameter
Elasticity limit
Frame
Displacement parameter
Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chap.t 5 56
• Linear frame behaviour for low intensity of loads
• Increasing the loads:

‐ Geometric nonlinear behaviour occurs due to deformation
of structure
‐ Nonlinear behaviour of joints
‐ Yielding of material

Isostatic structure: Hyperstatic structure:
• Global elastic analysis • Global elastic analysis
• Global plastic analysis
Global analysis: (Allowance for imperfections is obligatory!)

• 1st order analysis
• 2nd order analysis

Continuous beams:
• Global elastic analysis, elastic design of cross‐section;

• Global elastic analysis, plastic design of cross‐section;
• Global elastic analysis with redistribution of moments
and plastic design of cross‐section (for class 1 and 2
sections);
• Global plastic analysis, with plastic design of cross‐
section.

Global analysis of steel structures Global analysis of steel structures
Frames: 2nd order effects: P‐ e P‐
Sway displacement
Load P P
H 
H
x x
h 
Frame M(x) = Hx M(x) = Hx + P  + P x / h

M(h) = Hh M(h) = Hh + P
EMM‐ Chapt. 5 60
• P ‐  effect :
– Due to sway displacement
– Is dominant
• P ‐  effect:
– Due to beam‐column deflections
– Only relevant in slender structures

L eo,d
 
Frame imperfections: Member imperfections: straightness

verticality e0/L=1/350 a 1/100
EMM‐ Chapt. 5 62
 = 0 h m
0 base value: 0 = 1/200

h reduction coefficient,
calculated as a function of h:
2 2
h    h  1,0
h 3
h‐ total height of buildingmeter
m‐ reduction coefficient related
with the number of columns per
floor:  1
 m  0,5 1  
 m
  m‐ number of columns per floor,
including only those with axial force
NEd equal or higher than 50% the
Equivalent global imperfection: average force per column in the
vertical plane considered;
verticality deviation  (can be
neglected when HEd>0.15VEd EMM‐ Chapt. 5 63
Elastic analysis Plastic analysis N
Buckling curve
defined in Table 6.1
EC3 e0 / L e0 / L
a0 1 / 350 1 / 300
a 1 / 300 1 / 250 L eo,d
b 1 / 250 1 / 200
c 1 / 200 1 / 150
d 1 / 150 1 / 100
Local imperfections of members:

e0/L=1/350 a 1/100
EMM‐ Chapt. 5 64
F1
• The effects of global and F1
local imperfections can be
replaced by equivalent
horizontal forces applied
F2
on the top of columns  F2
 (F1+F2)/2 (F1+F2)/2
Equivalent loads
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 65
• The effects of global and
local imperfections can be
replaced by equivalent
horizontal forces applied
on the top of clumns
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 66
• Methods of analysis
Material behaviour
Elastic Plastic
1ª order Section with

Geometric capacity to
effects form plastic
hinges
2ª order
Redistribution
of 15%
(maximum)
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 67
Elastic 2nd order analysis
 cr
• Members and nodes with
elastic behaviour and
undefined resistance
• Equilibrium established
2nd order elastic analysis
• Allows consideration of P‐ e

P‐ effects
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 68
Rigid plastic analysis
Rigid plastic analysis

M M Mpl.Rd
pl.Rd Rigid plastic
M
pl.Rd p Mj,Rd
p
Plastic hinge
p
Moment rotation relation for a member is identical to the one
adopted in joints
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 69
Load
Rigid‐plastic analysis parameter 1

2
3
 LRP3
Critical colapse load
• First order analysis Yielding mechanism
• Determination of
colapse mechanism
• Easy application in WW W 
B B Dhh D
industrial buildings HH B
  Dw  w
• Deformation needs to CC
be addressed for 132  

service limit states EE
AAA E
Combined
Bending mechanism
mechanism
Sway mechanism
Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 Choice of location of plastic hinge
70
71

Elastic‐perfectly plastic analysis of members and joints

Mj.Rd
Mj
M Mpl.Rd 
M pl.Rd Mj.Rd
Plastic hinge Plastic hinge


EMM‐ Chapt. 5
71
Elastic‐ perfectly plastic analysis of members and joints
Load parameter
• Normaly, 2nd order

analysis is Elastic buckling load of
conducted frame
L2EPP
• Loads are applied
by increments 2nd hinge maximum load
• The stability of the 1st hinge 4th branch
frame is 3rd branch
progressively 2nd branch
affected with the
birth of plastic 1st branch
hinges
Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 Displacement parameter 72
• Classification of structure/ Type of analysis imposed
BRACING
BRACED UNBRACED
SWAY
LATERAL
DISPLACEMENT
NON SWAY
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano
73
• Braced structures
Braced frame Unbraced frame

(may be sway if bracing is very flexible) (may be non-sway if it is insensitive to horizontal loads)
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
74
• Classification of structures
Fcr
αcr   10 for elastic analysis
FEd
F Non‐sway frame
αcr  cr  15 for plastic analysis
FEd
where:
cr load multiplication factor to reach global
elastic instability;
FEd design load;
Fcr critical load associated with global elastic
instability instabilidade in a sway mode
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
75
• Classification of frame
 H Ed  h 
 cr     
 
 VEd   H ,Ed 
where:
HEd Design value of horizontal reaction at the storey level,
caused by horizontal applied and equivalent loads, see
5.3.2(7);
VEd Design value of vertical load above the storey level;
dH,Ed Horizontal sway referred to storey level, corrsponding to a
load, defined by the horizontal design and equivalent
force values applied at storey level;
h height of stoery.
EMM‐ Chapt. 3
76
For one‐storey frames calculated on the basis of an elastic global analysis,
second order effects associated with lateral sway due to vertical applied
loads can be calculated by amplification of the horizontal loads HEd (for
example, due to wind), of the equivalent imperfection loads VEd  (see
5.3.2(7)) and of all other possible first order effects due to sway, by simple
amplification of those loads by the factor:
1
1
1
As long as cr  3,0,  cr
the slope of the inclined members is not too high, and the axial compression
in beam members is not relevant
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
77
• Unbraced frame
• Braced frame
– Sway frame, if : br  0,2 unbr
– Non‐sway frame,   0,2

br unbr
if :
With br and unbr being

the flexibilities of the strucuture
including or not the bracing
system
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 78
Structure analysis
‐ 2nd order analysis, including global and local imperfections.

Application of loads by increments. Iterative process.
‐ 1st order analysis, adding 2nd order effects (normally, only
Simplification
global imperfections). Possibility of including global

imperfections by means of equivalent loads. In this case, it
is necessary to complementary verify the individual stability
of members
‐ Elastic analysis with no inclusion of second order effects,
followed by individual verification of members according to
the instability mode of the structure.
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 79
• Summary:
‐ Idealisation of frame and joints
‐ Classification of frames as braced or unbraced
‐ Analysis of the capacity to form plastic hinges and choice
of plastic or elastic analysis
‐ Selection of analysis
1st order, 2nd order, without or with imperfections and
with or without complementary verification of members
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano 80
Traditional analysis
Preliminary design of members and joints

Joints, assumed as rigid or hinged
Analysis and design of

structure
No
Structure O.K.?
Yes
Design of joints
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
Elsa Caetano STOP 81
Consistent analysis
Preliminary design of members and joints
Characterisation of joints
(Hinged, Rigid, semi-rigid)
No
Analysis and design of structure
Structure and joints O.K.?

Yes
Elsa Caetano
STOP
EMM‐ Chapt. 5
82
Members in compression
• Class 1, 2 e 3 cross sections are not affected by local buckling
•The design compression resistance Nc,Rd is based on the plastic capacity Npl.Rd
Design of structural members
Nc,Rd = Afy /

•Class 4 cross sections are subject to local buckling before yielding and the
compression resistance is limited and determined on the basis of an effective
elastic capacity
Nc,Rd = No.Rd = Aefffy /
Aeff : effective area of the cross section

NOTE: In class 4 cross sections, the eccentricity of compression forces arising from
the modification of the position of the centre of gravity of the effective cross
section should be considered
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 83
Slender members: Elastic Critical buckling load (Euler load)
 EI 2
N
cr  2
L

e0
2
E
cr  2
e 
=L/i
i – radius of gyration i  I A
L- buckling length
Elsa Caetano N EMM‐ Chapt. 6

84
Euler curve and collapse modes
Collapse due
 to yielding
Collapse due to
elastic buckling
Euler curve
E LE
1    
fy i
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 85
Limit slenderness 1
• 1 is determined obliging cr = fy

 1   [ E / f ]0,5  93,9
y
/fy
0, 5
 [ 235 / fy ]
1

– 1=
93,9 , steel S235.
76,4, steel S355.
1 /1
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 86
Compression members in real structures:
• Imperfections and residual stresses may anticipate the critical

Euler load
•Medium slenderness columns are the most affected members
 Medium
slenderness
Large
slenderness

EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 87
Normalised slenderness
• 0, 5
 Afy 
   A  • A = 1 classes 1 ‐ 3
 Ncr 
• A = Aeff/A class 4
 
0, 5
     A 
 1 
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 88
Verification of buckling resistance (buckling in bending):
NEd
 1,0
N b ,Rd
 A fy  Aeff f y
N b ,Rd  classes 1, 2 and 3 N b ,Rd  class 4
 M1  M1
 Reduction factor applied to the yield resistance as a function of the slenderness

1

2
  1,0
   2 para
 
Af y

  0,5 1     0,2    2 
N cr class 1,2, 3
Aeff f y

4 curves defined for different profiles are associated N cr class 4
with different imperfection factors 
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 89
Verification of individual members in compression: european buckling
curves

‐Based on experimental testing:
1 more than 1000 sections (I H T 
 )
a ‐Slenderness varying in the range
55 to 160
b ‐ Numerical simulations
0.5 c
d
1

2
  2
1 2 3 
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 90
  
Definition of imperfection factor :   0,5 1     0,2  
2

Buckling curve a0 a b c d
Imperfection factor  0,13 0,21 0,34 0,49 0,76
Great slenderness members:

‐Are not significantly affected by imperfections
‐ Have a resistance close to the critical Euler load (Ncr)
‐ Do not depend on the yield strength of the material
Medium slenderness members:

‐Are significantly affected by imperfections
‐Have a resistance lower than the critical Euler load
‐ Are affected by residual stresses
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 91
Residual stresses due to the hot rolling:
~ 0,3 f y
Compression
~ 0,2 f y
tension
~ 0,2 f y
compression
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 92
Effect of residual stresses:
The combination of axial stresses with residual stresses leads to

zones of early yielding
+ = ou =
N/A n <f fy
y
n attains fy
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 93
Effect of local imperfections
P
N
B
e0
+
e
P
Elsa Caetano N EMM‐ Chapt. 6
94
Combination of axial stresses N/A with residual stresses R and
with stresses due to local imperfections B
N/A R B max
+ + =
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 95
Note:  depends on the imperfection factor :
   
2
  0,5 1     0,2  
These curves include the effect of a sinusoidal deformation with

amplitude L/1000
They include the effects of residual stresses, which depend on

the cross sections
5 curves are defined, depending on the cross section and steel

category (a0‐ high resistance stress)
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 96
Buckling
curve
Buckling
Cross section Limits referring S 235
to axis
S 275
S 460
S 355
S 420
tf z
y–y a a0
tf  40 mm
h/b > 1,2

z–z b a0
Hot rolled profiles
40 mm < tf  y–y b a
h y y 100 z–z c a
y–y b a
tf  100 mm
h/b  1,2
z
z–z c a
b
y–y d c
tf > 100 mm
z–z d c
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 97
Members in compression: Design steps
1‐ Determination of the buckling length along the two
planes of instability
2‐ Determination of the normalised slenderness  ,

considering the cross section form and the steel category
3‐ Selection of the buckling curve, considering the cross

section characteristics and the steel class
4‐ Determination of the reduction factor  corresponding

to λ
5‐ Determination of the buckling resistance Afy

Nb. Rd 
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
A M1
Elsa Caetano 98
Members in compression:
Determination of the buckling length
Definition of the buckling length:
Af y LE 1 LE 1 235
Class 1,2 ou 3 cross sections: 
N cr
 
i 1
 
i 93 ,9 
, with   fy
Aeff Aeff
Aeff f y L A  LE 
Class 4 cross sections: 
N cr
 E 
i 1 i
A
93 ,9 
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 99
Individual members: Length of fictitious pinned member with
critical load identical to the one of the member under analysis
Latticed structures:
Chord and web members: LE=L, in and out of plane
Chord members with sections I or H in plane: LE=0,9L
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 100
Frames: Length of ficticious pinned member with critical load
identical to the one of the frame for a certain load
Method of Wood: Determination of LE as a function of 1 and 2

Non‐sway frames
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 101
Sway frames
Restriction to rotation in opposite end K ij

Clamped
K c  I ; K1  I1 ; K 2  I 2
L L1 L2 Hinged
Equal rotation (single curvature)
Equal rotation, but opposite
General case (Rotations a and bdouble
curvature)
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 102
Non‐sway frames
Sway frames
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 103
In general, and unless a lower value can be justified(see Annex BB EC3‐1‐1):
‐ Out of plane buckling of chord and web members:

Lcr=L
‐ In plane buckling of chord members made with I or H sections:
Lcr=0.9 L
‐ In plane and out of plane of chord members made with hollow sections:
Lcr=0.9 L
‐ In plane buckling of web members:
Lcr=L
when using bolted joints with at least 2 bolts, Lcr=0.9 L
when using angles with 1 bolt in the end connection, Lcr=L
when using angles with 2 or more bolts in the end connection, clamping of the
ends can be considered and so:
 eff ,v  0.35  0.7  v
 eff ,y  0.50  0.7  y
 eff ,z  0.50  0.7  z
EMM‐ Chapt. 6
Elsa Caetano 104
Laterally unrestrained beams
Clamp
Members with open sections
may buckle with a torsional

mode or with a combined
torsion bending mode undeformed
position
Lateral
buckling
Lateral torsional Load is apllied

In bending plane
buckling
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 105
Bending of laterally unrestrained beams
• Simply supported elastic
M M
beam submitted to end
moments L
•Support conditions: Elevation Section
‐Longitudinal displacement
is free
‐Warping and bending is Plan
allowed in the web plane z
and transversally x
u
‐Lateral displacements and
twisting are prevented at
y
the supports
Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 7  106

Critical moment for lateral buckling in uniform bending_
 2 EI z  I w L2 GI t 
M cr    2 
L2  I z  EI z 
EIz- Lateral stiffness in bending
GIt and EIw Torsion and warping stiffness (depend on the characteristics of the
cross section)
Mcr depends: z
x
‐Load, support conditions, u
distance between braced sections,
y
lateral bending stiffness
lateral, torsion and warping stiffness,
Position of loads
Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 7  107
Effect of slenderness:
Small(  LT <0,4) not

 Nondimensional
M
affected by lateral flexural- Mpl resistant moment
torsional buckling
1,0
 Large(  LT >1,2) Resistance Mcr
is close to the critical moment Mpl
Mcr
 Intermediate: Resistance is affected
by nonlinearities and geometric
imperfections
 EC3 uses a reduction factorLT of Small Intermediate Large
the plastic moment valid for all 0 1,0
slenderness values  LT = Mpl
Mcr
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 108
Conditions for the non‐verification of the lateral‐torsional
buckling:
‐ Cross sections of I or H type bending around the weak axis;

‐ Laterally braced beam by means of steel profiles or of
reinforced concrete slab
‐ Cross sections with high torsion and bending stiffness , as
hollow sections
‐  LT  0.2 or M Ed  0.04
M cr
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 109
Critical lateral‐torsional buckling in uniform bending:
 LT
Evaluation of reduction
Reduction factor
coefficient of plastic
moment 1,0
M Ed
 1 .0 Welded sections
M b.Rd
0 1,0 2,0  LT
M b.Rd   LT  w W y f y /  M1 Slenderness
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 110
Lateral‐torsional buckling resistance resistance of a beam:
M b.Rd   LT  w W y f y /  M1
LT is the reduction factor due to lateral buckling

1
χ LT  W y fy

 LT   LT  LT
2

2 0,5  LT 
M cr
 2
 LT  0,51  LT (LT  0.2)  LT 
 
Buckling curve a0 a b c d
Imperfection factor  0,13 0,21 0,34 0,49 0,76
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 111
Recommended lateral buckling curves
1
χ LT 

 LT   LT  LT
2

2 0,5
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 112
Nondimensional slenderness: LT  LT  M pl .Rd / M cr
Can be evaluated as:
 LT  0.5 E

0 .5
LT   w with 1    
 1   fy 
Apêndix F.2.2 provides simplified L / iz
definitions of LT as a function of the LT 
2 0.25
cross section  1  L / iz  
Cross sections of I or H type simply 1    
supported and submitted to uniform  20  h / t f  
moment can be calculated according to
 
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 113
Effect of loading:
 Uniform moment:   2 EI w
M cr  EI z GI t 1 
L L2 GI t
M M
 Concentrated load:
4,24  2 EI w
M cr  EI z GI t 1  2
L L GI t
M
… Comparing with the standard load (uniform moment) , the
critical bending moment increases by C1=4,24/=1,365
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 114
Effect of loading: Factor C1
Mcr for different load conditions Bending
Mcr= C 1  1+  EIw
2
Loads EI GJ
L M L 2max C1
moment GJ
M M
1,00
  2 EI w M
M cr  C1 EI z GI t 1 
L L2 GI t M
M 1,879
M -M
In the expressions to calculate 2,752
M
LT, C1 should be introduced as
1/ C10.5 F
FL/4 1,365
F
FL/8 1,132
F F
FL/4 1,046
= = = =
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 115
Effect of support condition
• In the standard case, the support conditions ared defined so that lateral and
torsion movements are prevented, but rotations are allowed in the plane of the
web.
 Other support M conditions preventing plane rotations

M lead to an
increase of the buckling resistance
L
 The effect of support conditions

Elevation
may be inserted Section
by means of an
Effective length
 The constants k and kw refer to the effective length
 These constants are related with the buckling mode: lateral bending
or torsion. Plan
 Note: generally, it is recommended that kw =1.0 unless the warping
restriction is guaranteed. O EC3 recommends to use k = 0,5 for
clamped ends and k= 0,7 if only one end is clamped.
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 116
Effect of the position of the loads
• Loads applied in C1,4

2 depende do carregamento e das condições
the upper flange F
de apoio (ver Tabela F.1.2)
are de‐stabilising a=d/2
1,2 C2
• This effect
E quiv ale nt uniform m o m e nt

increases with the Apoio simples uniform. Dist. 0,459
1,0 F
beam height a=0Carga
F conc, 0,553
• O EC3 introduces 0,8
Encastramento uniform. Dist 1,562
the factor C2 to
determine cr 0,6 F Carga conc
a=d/2
1,267
0,4
1 10 100 1000
2
L GI t
EIw
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 117
Design of structural members Bending of laterally unrestrained beams
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 118
Inclusion of the load, support and position of the load effects
 1 
 EI z  k  Iw kL  GI t 
2 2
   
2 2
M cr  C1 2  
    C2 zg  C3 z j 
2
 C2 zg  C3 z j 
kL   kw  Iz  EI z
2

 
 
k=kw=1 (see C1, C2, C3 pp. 141 book CMM)

zg=za‐zs
zs‐ coordinate of the shear centre
za – coordinate of the load point (positive in the compression zone)
zj is zero for beams with doubly symmetric cross section
z j  zs   0.5  y 
 z 2 z dA  I y
2
 A 
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 119
 
1
 EI z  k  Iw kL  GI t 
2 2
   
2 2
M cr  C1 2  
    C2 zg  C3 z j 
2
 C2 zg  C3 z j 
kL   kw  Iz  EI z
2

 
 
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 120
Determination of LT
k  L / iz
LT  0.25
 k 
2
1 k L / iz 
2
C1       
 kw  20  h / t f  
 
k=1, simply supported beam; k=0.5clamped beam; k=0.7, beam clamped in

one end and hinged in the other
C1=1.132, simply supported beam, uniformly distributed moment
h‐ height of profile; tf‐ flange thickness; iz‐ radius of gyration of section about z
LT  LT 93.9   LT M b.Rd   LT  w W y f y /  M1
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 121
Continuous beams
• Different spans studied isolated
• The critical spanconditions the design

• The effective length of the spans is calculated using a factor k
of 1,0
In the buckling configuration, the adjacent span

is deformed
support support   support
k = 1,0
Top view of beam
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 122
Continuous beams
Different spans are studied isolated, using a coefficient C1

determined as a function of the bending moment diagram
C1 = 1,88 ‐  CC

1=1,88 1
=2,927
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 123
EC3 alternative method can be applied to hot‐rolled and welded
profiles
1  LT 1.0
 LT 

LT  LT 2   LT 2 
0 ,5
but  LT 
1 .0
2
 LT
 
LT  0 ,5 1  LT ( LT  LT ,0 )   LT 
2
 
It is recommended that LT ,0  0.4   0.75
The verification of lateral buckling can be ignored if LT  0.4

or else M
Ed
 0.16
M cr
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 124
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
EC3 alternative method can be applied to hot‐rolled and

welded profiles
Adopt the follwoing buckling curves
Curva de
Secção transversal Limites
encurvadura
Secções em I h/b  2 b
laminadas h/b > 2 c
Secções em I h/b  2 c
soldadas h/b > 2 d
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 125

welded profiles
The shape of the bending moment diagram between braced

sections can be taken into account by considering
 LT
 LT ,mod 
f com  LT , mod 1.0
f  1  0 ,5(1  k c )[ 1  2 ,0(  LT  0 ,8 )2 ] but f  1,0
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 126
welded profiles
Distribuição de momentos kc
1,0
=1
1
1,33  0,33
-1    1
0,94
0,90
0,91
0,86
0,77
0,82
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 127
Summary:
‐Beams loaded in the strong plan can suffer lateral instability.
‐ The critical lateral moment is the moment that initiates the

bifurcation
‐The resistance to lateral buckling depends on the following aspects:
cross section type, support conditions, degree of constraint of the
compression flange, type and position of load, initial imperfections
and residual stresses
‐Great slenderness beams have a critical moment similar to the
critical theoretical moment, although lower (due to imperfections)
‐ O EC3 defines a verification procedure to the lateral buckling based
on the application of a reduction coefficient LT to the plastic
resistant moment in bending
EMM‐ Chapt. 7
Elsa Caetano 128
Design of structural members Beam columns
 M ( x )  M 0 ( x )  P .y ( x )
y' ' ( x )  
EI EI
– Verification of the resistance of extreme cross‐sections

needed
– Complementary verification of the stability of the
structural element
EMM‐ Chapt. 8
Elsa Caetano 129
Beam columns: Axial compression and uni‐axial bending
Elastic behaviour
Loading Linear elastic beam

M,N
Critical elastic load(M=0)

Ncr N
M
V
Elastic beam‐column
interaction
M
N
O
In‐plane displacement ‐ v
Elsa Caetano 130
EMM‐ Chapt.8
Elasto‐plastic behavious
Loading
M,N N
Plastic behaviour in bending(N=0) M
Mpl
V
(N,M)max
M
N
Yielding
O
In‐plane deformation ‐ v
Elsa Caetano 131
EMM‐ Chapt.8
Local verification of cross‐sections:

Class 1 and 2 cross‐sections
• As long as the buckling stability is ensured, the cross

section can fully yield with different combinations of the
bending moment (M) and axial force (N), depending on
the cross‐section
– N = 0, M = Mply.Rd
– M = 0, N = Nply.Rd
Elsa Caetano 132

EMM‐ Chapt.8
Class 1 and 2 cross‐sections:
• Neutral axis in web b
fy
NM= 2fytwyn
tf NM
MN= fybtf(h‐tf)+ fy{(h‐ 2tf)2 y y yn
h
/4yn2}tw MN
tw
NM, MN according to
Eq. (1)
–fy
(a) yn < (h‐2tf)/2
b fy
• Neutral axis in flange
NM
NM= fy{tw(h‐2tf)+2b(tf ‐ tf
h/2+yn)} y y
h MN
tw yn
MN=fyb(h/2‐yn)(h‐yn}tf NM, MN according to
(b) yn > (h‐2tf)/2 –fy Eq. (2)
Elsa Caetano 133
EMM‐ Chapt.8
• Interaction formulae (Approximated formula EC3):

– MNyRd = Mpl.y(1‐n)/(1‐0,5a) but  Mpl.yRd
With n = NSd/Npl.Rd and a = (A‐2btf)/A  0,5
• I cross‐sections:
– Bending along the strong axis
MN,y = 1,11 Mpl.y(1‐n).
– Bending along the weak axis
MN,z = 1,56 Mpl.z(1‐n)(0,6+n).
Elsa Caetano 134

EMM‐ Chapt.8
• Interaction formulae (Approximated formulae EC3):

Cross ‐section Shape Interaction formula
Hot‐rolled em I ou H
Hollow, square
Hollow, rectangular
Hollwo, circular
EMM‐ Cap. 5
Elsa Caetano 135
N/Npl
Plastic neutral axis
1.0
Iyn
0.8 Centre of gravity
0.6
Neutral axis in flange
0.4
0.2 Exact eq.

Approximation EC3 Neutral axis in web
Elsa Caetano
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 M/Mpl 136
EMM‐ Chapt.8
• Elastic analysis required

• Yield criterion defined by yielding of extreme fibre
• In class 3 cross‐sections the yield stress is c + b=fyd
Mh / 2
c  N / A b 
I
• Class 4 cross‐sections can suffer local buckling
• The properties of the effective cross‐section should be
used in the assessment of the local resistance of the
cross‐section: c + b  fyd
Elsa Caetano 137

EMM‐ Chapt.8
Stability verifications
N
M
• The total moment M

of the beam‐column y
is given by the sum x
of:
– The 1st order Nv M
v
L
bending moment
M. Moment
– The 2nd order d2 v
= EI –––
bending moment dX2
Nv.
M
M
Elsa Caetano
N
EMM‐ Chapt.8 138
• The maximum displacement, vmax, and the maximum

bending moment, Mmax, are related with the Euler critical
load PEy by expressions:
M  N
v max  sec 1
N 2 PEy
 N
M max  M sec
2 PEy
Elsa Caetano 139

EMM‐ Chapt.8
• Using the 1st order deformation(due to end moments) and

the amplified end moment de 1/(1‐N/PEy)
results in:
2
ML 1
v max 
8EI y 1  N / PEy
1
M max M
1  N / PEy
EMM‐ Chapt.8
Elsa Caetano 140
Stability verifications: comparison between exact and
approximated formulae
1.0
N/PEy Approximation
0.8
Exact for bending moment

0.6
Exact for deformation
0.4
0.2 vMAX MMAX

or
ML2/8EIy M
0
0 1 2 3EMM‐ Chapt.48 5 6 7 8
Elsa Caetano 141
Beam columns: Axial compression and bi‐axial bending
Stability verifications according to EC3
N Ed M y ,Ed  M y ,Ed M z ,Ed  M z ,Ed

 k yy  k yz 1
 y N Rk M y ,Rk M z ,Rk
 LT
 M1  M1  M1
N Ed M y ,Ed  M y ,Ed M z ,Ed  M z ,Ed

 k zy  k zz 1
 z N Rk M y ,Rk M z ,Rk
 LT
 M1  M1  M1
EMM‐ Chapt. 8
Elsa Caetano 142
Stability verifications according to EC3, method 1
Hipóteses de cálculo
Factores de propriedades elásticas das secções propriedades plásticas das secções
interacção transversais transversais

Classe 3, Classe 4 Classe 1, Classe 2
y y 1
C my C mLT C my C mLT
kyy N N C
1  Ed 1  Ed yy
N cr , y N cr , y
y y 1 wz
C mz C mz 0,6
kyz N N C wy
1  Ed 1  Ed yz
N cr ,z N cr , z
z z 1 wy
C my C mLT C my C mLT 0,6
kzy N N C wz
1  Ed 1  Ed zy
N cr , y N cr , y
z z 1
C mz C mz
kzz N N C
1  Ed 1  Ed zz
N cr ,z N cr , z
Termos auxiliares:
N Ed  1,6 2 2   Wel, y
C yy  1  w y  1  2 
1 1,6 2
N cr , y C my  max  C my  max n pl  b LT  
y   wy wy 
  Wpl, y
N Ed
1 y 2 M y ,Ed M z ,Ed
N cr , y com b LT  0,5 a LT  0
 LT M pl, y ,Rd M pl,z ,Rd
N Ed
1  2
 
N cr ,z  C 2mz  max  n  c   0,6 w z Wel,z
z  C yz  1  w z  EMM‐
1  2 Cap.
14 8 5
  pl LT
Elsa Caetano N wz
  w y Wpl,z 143
1   z Ed  
N cr ,z 2
 M
 y
 max  max 
 z
0 = esbelteza normalizada relativa à encurvadura lateral para o caso de momento flector uniforme,
ou seja, y =1,0 no Quadro A.2
 LT = esbelteza normalizada relativa à encurvadura lateral
 N Ed  N 
Se  0  0,2 C1 4 1  1  Ed  : Cmy = Cmy,0
 N cr ,z  N 
  cr ,TF 
Cmz = Cmz,0
CmLT = 1,0
  N   y a LT
C my  C my, 0  1  C my, 0 
N Ed
Se  0  0,2 C1 4 1  1  Ed  :
 N cr ,z  N  1   y a LT
  cr ,TF 
C mz  C mz,0
a LT
C mLT  C 2my 1
 N  N 
1  Ed 1  Ed 
 N  N 
 cr , z  cr ,T 
M y ,Ed A
y  para as secções transversais de Classes 1, 2 e 3
N Ed Wel, y
M y ,Ed A eff
y  para as secções transversais da Classe 4
N Ed Weff , y
Ncr,y = esforço normal crítico relativo à encurvadura elástica por flexão em torno do eixo y-y
EMM‐elástica
Ncr,z = esforço normal crítico relativo à encurvadura Cap. 8 por flexão em torno do eixo z-z
Elsa Caetano 144
Ncr,T = esforço normal crítico relativo à encurvadura elástica por torção
Diagrama de momentos C mi, 0

M1 M1 N Ed
C mi,0  0,79  0,21 i  0,36( i  0,33)
1    1 N cr.i
  2 EI i  x N
M(x) C mi, 0 
 1 2  1 Ed
 L M i ,Ed ( x )  N cr.i
 
M(x)
Mi,Ed (x) é o momento máximo My,Ed ou Mz,Ed
|x| é a flecha máxima ao longo do elemento
N Ed
C mi, 0  1  0,18
N cr.i
N Ed
C mi ,0  1  0,03
N cr.i
EMM‐ Cap.8
Elsa Caetano 145
Cross‐sections
non‐susceptible
to suffer torsion
deformations
EMM‐ Cap. 8
Elsa Caetano 146
Cross‐sections susceptible to suffer torsion deformations
Hipóteses de cálculo
Factores de propriedades elásticas das secções
propriedades plásticas das secções transversais
interacção transversais
Classe 1, Classe 2
Classe 3, Classe 4
kyy kyy do Quadro B.1 kyy do Quadro B.1
kyz kyz do Quadro B.1 kyz do Quadro B.1
 0,05 z N Ed   0,1 z N Ed 
1   1  
 C mLT  0, 25   z N Rk /  M1   C mLT  0 , 25   z N Rk /  M1 
 0,05 N Ed   0,1 N Ed 
 1    1  
kzy  C mLT  0,25  z N Rk /  M1   C mLT  0,25  z N Rk /  M1 
para λ z  0,4 :
0,1 z N Ed
k zy  0,6   z  1 
C mLT  0,25  z N Rk /  M1
kzz kzz do Quadro B.1 kzz do Quadro B.1
EMM‐ Cap. 8
Elsa Caetano 147
EMM‐ Chapt. 8
Elsa Caetano 148
Shear buckling
Enfunamento
A verificação à encurvadura por esforço transverso é necessária em
almas sem reforços intermédios quando
hw 
 72
tw 
Em almas reforçadas, a verificação é necessária quando

hw 31 k

tw 
  1 .2 para aços S235 a S460

hw
5.34
k  4  2
, a hw  1
( a / hw ) a
4
k  5.34  2
, a hw  1
( a / hw )
EMM‐ Chapt. 9
Elsa Caetano 149
Shear buckling
Shear buckling
REAE:
If tw 0.014hw vertical stiffeners should be used and spaced at
a hw 2 100tw
Additionally, a verification of each panel between stiffeners

should be verified for shear buckling
EMM‐ Chapt. 9
Elsa Caetano 150

Chapt5-9 Eng

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapt5-9 Eng

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global analysis of steel structures

Global analysis of steel structures

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 54

Modelling of framed structures/ joints

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 55

• Increasing the loads:

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 57

Global analysis: (Allowance for imperfections is obligatory!)

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 58

• Global elastic analysis, elastic design of cross‐section;

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 59

Frame M(x) = Hx M(x) = Hx + P  + P x / h

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 5 61

Frame imperfections: Member imperfections: straightness

0 base value: 0 = 1/200

Local imperfections of members:

1ª order Section with

• Allows consideration of P‐ e

Rigid plastic analysis

Rigid‐plastic analysis parameter 1

Global analysis of steel structures

• Normaly, 2nd order

Braced frame Unbraced frame

– Non‐sway frame,   0,2

With br and unbr being

‐ 2nd order analysis, including global and local imperfections.

global imperfections). Possibility of including global

Preliminary design of members and joints

Analysis and design of

Preliminary design of members and joints

Analysis and design of structure

Structure and joints O.K.?

Nc,Rd = Afy /

Nc,Rd = No.Rd = Aefffy /

Aeff : effective area of the cross section

Elsa Caetano N EMM‐ Chapt. 6

• 1 is determined obliging cr = fy

• Imperfections and residual stresses may anticipate the critical

 Reduction factor applied to the yield resistance as a function of the slenderness

Great slenderness members:

Medium slenderness members:

The combination of axial stresses with residual stresses leads to

These curves include the effect of a sinusoidal deformation with

They include the effects of residual stresses, which depend on

5 curves are defined, depending on the cross section and steel

h/b > 1,2

2‐ Determination of the normalised slenderness  ,

3‐ Selection of the buckling curve, considering the cross

4‐ Determination of the reduction factor  corresponding

5‐ Determination of the buckling resistance Afy

Method of Wood: Determination of LE as a function of 1 and 2

Restriction to rotation in opposite end K ij

‐ Out of plane buckling of chord and web members:

may buckle with a torsional

Lateral torsional Load is apllied

•Support conditions: Elevation Section

Elsa Caetano EMM‐ Chapt. 7  106

Small(  LT <0,4) not

‐ Cross sections of I or H type bending around the weak axis;

LT is the reduction factor due to lateral buckling

Can be evaluated as:

 LT  0.5 E