See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/230362052

Friction connection in tubular towers for a wind turbine

Article in Stahlbau · September 2010

DOI: 10.1002/stab.201001365

CITATIONS READS

21 329

6 authors, including:

Milan Veljkovic Daniel Pak

Delft University of Technology Universität Siegen
202 PUBLICATIONS 1,005 CITATIONS 47 PUBLICATIONS 213 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Carlos Rebelo Luís Simões da Silva

University of Coimbra University of Coimbra
196 PUBLICATIONS 1,120 CITATIONS 557 PUBLICATIONS 4,250 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

International Symposium on Risk analysis and Safety of Large Structures and Components (ISRAS2017) View project

PROLIFE (2015-2018) Optimal use of High Strength Steel grades within bridges. Fund for Coal and Steel Grant Agreement No. RFSR-CT-2013-00025 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Luís Simões da Silva on 03 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fachthemen
Luis Simões da Silva
Sandra Jordão
Rui Simões
A component model for welded beam-to-column joints
with beams of unequal depth
In many practical situations, internal nodes connect beams with
unequal depth whenever the span lengths are not uniform. Fol-
lowing the methodology defined in EC 3-1-8, this paper presents a
component model that is able to reproduce accurately the com-
plex behavior of welded beam-to-column joints with beams of un-
equal height, which corresponds to a node configuration that is
not yet covered in the EC 3 design rules. Based on an experimen-
tal program carried out at the University of Coimbra, the relevant
components for the column web panel under a non-uniform stress
state are characterized, leading to the development of a new de-
sign procedure that extends the scope of EC 3-1-8.
Ein Komponenten-Modell für geschweißte Träger-Stützen-Ver-
bindungen mit Trägern ungleicher Höhe. In vielen praktischen
Situationen verbinden bei unterschiedlichen Spannweiten innere
Knoten Träger ungleicher Höhe. Entsprechend der in EC 3-1-8
festgelegten Methodik stellt dieser Aufsatz ein Komponenten-
modell für eine genaue Nachbildung des komplexen Verhaltens
geschweißter Träger-Stützen-Verbindungen mit Trägern unglei-
cher Höhe vor, was einer Knotenkonfiguration entspricht, die
durch die EC 3-Bemessungsregeln noch nicht abgedeckt ist. Auf
Grundlage umfangreicher Versuchsserien an der Universität von
Coimbra werden die Komponenten für die Stützenstege unter un-
gleichmäßiger Belastung modelliert, was zur Formulierung eines
neuen Bemessungsverfahrens führt, das den Umfang der im
EC 3-1-8 dargestellten Möglichkeiten signifikant erweitert.
1 Introduction
Internal nodes often connect beams with different depths
because of unbalanced spans. Given the need to maintain
floor continuity, the top flange of the left and right beams
are usually aligned. 2 : 1 ratios between the depths of the
beams are often observed, as in the case of the Cardington
building, for example [1].
Part 1-8 of Eurocode 3 [2] does not provide design
guidance for double-sided beam-to-column joint configu-
rations in which the depths of the two beams are not equal.
However, the principles of the component method [3] are
sufficiently general to cover this situation and may be used
to derive detailed guidance for the design and verification
of such joints.
The component method is based on simplified me-
chanical models composed of extensional springs and rigid
links, whereby the joint is simulated by an appropriate
choice of rigid and flexible components. These components
290 © Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin · Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4
DOI: 10.1002/stab.201201544
represent a specific part of a joint that, dependent on the
type of loading, make an identified contribution to one or
more of its structural properties [4]. Application of the
component method to steel joints requires the following
steps [5]:
(i) selection of the relevant (active) components from a
global list of components
(ii) evaluation of the force-deformation response of each
component (that incorporate the detrimental effect of
stress interactions by means of simplified reduction
parameters)
(iii) assembly of the active components for the evaluation
of the moment-rotation response of the joint, using a
representative mechanical model
The modelling of internal node joints is substantially more
complex than that of joints to external columns. This is be-
cause the contribution of the deformability of the column
web panel must be distributed between the left and right
springs of the structural model [6]. In a simplified manner,
EC 3-1-8 divides this contribution between the two
springs, according to the transformation parameter β [2].
This paper proposes a component model for double-
sided welded beam-to-column joint configurations in which
the depths of the two beams are not equal. It is based on
experimental tests carried out by the authors [7] on four
different configurations for mild steel and high strength
steel complemented by advanced numerical simulations.
The results of the calibrated numerical models were used
to characterize the structural behaviour of the asymmetri-
cal joints, to assess the behaviour of the individual com-
ponents in the column web panel from the stress fields and
to establish the full nonlinear behaviour for each compo-
nent in the column web panel. Finally, the proposed com-
ponent model was applied to the case studies, showing ex-
cellent agreement with the experimental results and the
results of the calibrated numerical model.
2 Review of existing background
The design procedures in EC 3-1-8 [2] are based on the
component method for the design of joints. Its develop-
ment comprised a long path whose beginning may be
traced back to the 1970’s, when several research centres
carried out extensive work focused on characterizing the
behaviour of welded joints (ex.: Lehigh University, from
 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth
a) Total rotation b) Shear rotation
Fig. 1. Column web panel rotational behaviour
Bild 1. Rotationsverhalten des Stützenstegs
1971 to 1976 [8], [9]). The main output was the insight on
the paramount importance of the column web panel on
the behaviour of welded joints, and the fact that stress in-
teractions could reduce its resistance. Furthermore, the
conclusions concerning the stress distribution and the
boundary conditions of the column web panel, led to its
modelling by means of a free body diagram, and to study it
separately from the connection. The joint behaviour is
thus given as the sum of the column web panel and con-
nection behaviours (Fig. 1).
A fundamental work was carried out by Zoetemeijer
[10] who defined the relevant stress interactions to be ac-
counted for in the column web panel (Fig. 2). Jaspart [11]
proposed some simplifications, reducing the number of rele-
vant stress interactions when assessing the column web
panel resistance: τ – σi, interaction when calculating load
introduction resistance and τ – σi, interaction when calcu-
σi horizontal normal stresses associated with the load intro-
duction in the panel
σn vertical normal stress due to axial load and bending of
the column
τ shear stresses associated with shear forced on the con-
tour of the column web panel
a) Free body Scheme: loading b) Stress state compo-
nents: web panel
Fig. 2. Loading and internal forces in the column web panel
Bild 2. Äußere und innere Kraftgrößen des Stützenstegs
c) Load introduction rotation
lating shear resistance (only for high values of axial load
in the column: over 70 % of Npl,Rd).
In 1982, a research project was started at the Univer-
sity of Innsbruck aimed at characterizing separately the
shear and the load introduction rotational components,
by means of experimental tests ([12], [13]). That research
was complemented by numerical and analytical work [14],
leading to the proposal of multi-linear analytical models
for shear and load introduction, accounting for different
joint typologies, loading, steel grade, strain hardening and
instability phenomena ([15], [11]). These models are able
to describe the resistance and deformability of the column
web panel in a very precise way, but require the knowledge
of the stress state in the column web panel. They were sub-
sequently simplified by accounting implicitly for the stress
interactions, by means of appropriate reduction factors,
instead of the explicit use of the von Mises yield criterion
([16], [17]), resulting in the code provisions of EN 1993-1-8
[2]. In the following paragraphs a comparison is established
between the analytical bi-linear formulation for the com-
ponents of the column web panel, and the corresponding
simplified procedure considered in EC 3-1-8 [2].
The explicit model defines the yield point using the
von Mises yield criterion accounting for the stress interac-
tion between shear stresses and normal vertical stresses
(Fig. 3a). EC 3-1-8 (Fig. 3b) describes shear stiffness and
resistance by simplified equations. In these equations the
effect of the stress interactions is also accounted for but by
means of reduction coefficients.
τcy and σcny correspond to the shear stress and vertical
normal stress in the column web panel when it reaches its
plastic resistance. M, N and Vn represent the bending mo-
ment, axial load and shear force in the column web panel.
Wcy, Ac and Avc represent the elastic bending modulus; the
column area and column shear area, respectively. G, E, υ
and fy,wc denote the shear modulus, Young’s modulus,
Poisson ratio and the yield stress in the column web panel,
respectively. Figure 4 depicts the elastic constitutive rela-
tion for pure shear.
In the EC 3-1-8 formulation, the transformation para-
meter β is given by expressions (1) and (2) [2], where Mj,b1,Ed
and Mj,b2,Ed are the moments at the intersection of the
centre line of the column with those of the beam on the
right and on the left, respectively.
Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 291
L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

fy , wc A vc ωbeff ,c, wc t wc fy , wc k wc
Vny = tcy Avc Vwp,Rd = 0.9 Mbe = σciyαtwcdb Fc, wc,Rd =
3γ M 0 γ M0

τcy 0.38 A vc ωρbeff ,c, wc t wc fy , wc k wc

γy = k1 = Fc, wc,Rd ≤
G βz γ M0

( σ ) + 3( τ )
2 2 beff ,c, wc t wc fy , wc
σc = c
ny
c
y = fycw Ft , wc,Rd =
γ M0

M N  Vny d 2b 0.7 beff ,c, wc t wc

σ cny =  cc + c  ; τcy = k bi = kcw α k2 =
 Wy A c  A vc 2 dc
0.7 beff , t , wc t wc
k3 =
Avc = Ac – 2bctfc + (twc + 2rc)tfc Avc = Ac – 2bctfc + (tw + 2rc)tfc dc

( ) + 3( )
≥ ηhwctwc 2 2
σi = σ ciy τcy = fycw
η = 1.2 steel grades below S460

η = 1.0 steel grades above S460 Fyc Vny –-

σ ciy = ; τcy = beff,c,wc = tfb + 2√2ap + 5(tfc + s)
αt wc A vc
a) Explicit model b) Implicit model –-
(EC 3-1-8 [2]) beff,t,wc = tfb + 2√ 2ap + 5(tfc + s)
1 2  1  db
α= + 1+ +
Fig. 3. Formulation for the column web panel shear compo- λ λ 2d b  λd b  6 dc = hc – 2(tfc + rc)
nent (bi-linear model)
Bild 3. Formeln für die Schubkräfte des Stützenstegs Et cw kcw
(bilineares Modell) kcw = ;λ= 4
hcw 4EIf

a) Explicit model b) Implicit model

M j, b 2,Ed
β1 = 1 − ≤2
M j, b1,Ed
M j, b1,Ed
β2 = 1 − ≤2
M j, b 2,Ed
In the case of load introduction components (compres-
sion and tension) similar considerations apply. The explicit
model defines the yield point using the von Mises yield
criterion accounting for the stress interaction between shear
stresses (τ) and normal horizontal stresses (σi) (Fig. 5a),
while EC 3-1-8 (Fig. 5b) uses simplified expressions modi-
fied by reduction coefficients.
τcy and σciy correspond to the shear stress and vertical
normal stress in the column web panel when it reaches its
plastic resistance due to the installed stress state. ω de-
notes the reduction factor to allow for the possible effect
(EC 3-1-8 [2])
(1) Fig. 5. Formulation for the column web panel load intro-
duction components (bi-linear model)
Bild 5. Formeln für die Komponenten der Lasteinleitung
des Stützstegs (bilineares Modell)
(2)
of interaction with shear in the column web panel accord-
ing to Table 1 [2]. Kwc denotes a reduction factor to ac-
count for the possible effect of interaction with vertical
stresses from the column on the resistance of the compres-
sion component [2]. ρ represents the reduction factor for
plate buckling [2]. beff,c,wc, twc and fywc represent the effec-
tive length associated with the compression component, the
thickness of the column web and the yield stress of the
material, respectively. beff,t,wc, represents the effective length
associated with the tension component.
The main difference with the procedure used to as-
sess the shear behaviour is related with the assessment of
the initial stiffness. The deformability due to the load in-

fycw
τy =
3 E
G=
(
2 1+ υ )
Fig. 4. Elastic constitutive relation for
pure shear
fycw Bild 4. Elastische konstitutive Bezie-
γy =
3G hung für reinen Schub

292 Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4

 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

Table 1. Reduction factor ω for interaction with shear [2] longer aligned on both sides, the stress fields are far more
Tabelle 1. Reduktionsfaktor ω für Wechselwirkung mit complex, and the three column web panel components
Schub [2] present a much higher degree of interaction. The follow-
Transformation parameter β Reduction parameter ω ing sections deal directly with this case.
0 ≤ β ≤ 0.5 ω=1
3 Mechanical behaviour of asymmetric joints
0.5 < β < 1 ω = ω1 + 2(1 – β)(1 – ω1)
β=1 ω = ω1 In order to characterize the behaviour of internal asym-
1<β<2 ω = ω1 + (β – 1)(ω2 – ω1) metrical joints, four different node configurations were se-
β=2 ω = ω2 lected. They correspond to external and internal symmet-
rical geometries, and two internal asymmetrical nodes sub-
1 1 jected to symmetrical and asymmetrical loading protocols.
ω1 = ω2 =
( ) ( )
2 2
1 + 1.3 beff ,c, wc t wc / A vc 1 + 5.2 beff ,c, wc t wc / A vc Experimental tests were performed on full scale models
and finite element numerical models for homologous con-
figurations were prepared [7]. The experimental results were
troduction stresses, (normal horizontal stresses due to the used to calibrate the numerical models. Two steel grades
load entering the panel from the beams) is derived from a were used: mild steel grade S355 and high strength steel
physical model of a beam on an elastic foundation (Fig. 6) grade S690. Since high strength steel is a less known ma-
[11]. The beam simulates the behaviour of column flange terial, two tests per configuration were performed in this
in the joint area, and the stiffness of the foundation is com- case, adding up to a total number of tests of 12 (Table 2).
puted from the geometrical and material characteristics of Figure 7 shows the experimental set-up.
the column web. The beam is considered to be rigid along Figure 8 illustrates a prototype for each configuration
the depth of the panel. after testing. Significant ultimate rotations can be observed
Mbe represents the bending moment on the beam for as well as severe deformation of the column web panel due
which yielding of the column web panel begins. The bend- to shear and instability. Figure 9 shows the global behav-
ing inertia of the fictitious beam is described by the fol- iour curves for all configurations.
lowing equation. The global behaviour shows similar tendencies for
2 2 both steel grades, but higher resistance, initial stiffness and
bt 3f  t  t r3  r
If =
12
( )
+ bt f  r + f − y g  + w + t w r  y g −  +
 2  12  2
maximum rotations were observed in the case of the high
strength steel models. A close observation of the results in-
2 dicates that there are two major factors influencing the be-
 4 − π 2  r
+ 0.005r 4 +  r y − haviour of the joints: (i) distribution and magnitude of the
 4   g 2 
shear stress; (ii) the position of the loads entering the col-
where: umn web panel from the beams.
The shear level at the column web panel has a direct
t   r  r2   r 
bt f  f + r  + rt w   + 2  4 − π
2   2  4   2 
( ) influence on the initial stiffness and moment resistance of
the joint. The influence on the initial stiffness is due to a
yg =
bt f + t w r +
4 − π r2 ( ) compatibility deformation, owed to the fact that both joints
share the same panel. The influence of the shear stress on
2
the resistance of the joints is due to the fact that the stress
In spite of the extensive research work that led to the cur- state at the column web panel has several components
rent code specifications of EN 1993-1-8, all those studies and their interaction has a detrimental effect on the final
were always carried out in the context of external nodes resistance. Namely the resistance to the load introduction
or internal nodes with beams of similar depth. However, stresses (normal horizontal stresses) is reduced due to the
for double-sided beam-to-column joints with beams of un- presence of shear. Thus, the higher the shear level the
equal depth, because the load entering the web panel is no more significant the resistance reduction. Figure 10 shows

Fig. 6. Physical model to assess the initial stiffness associated with the load introduction
Bild 6. Physikalisches Modell zur Ermittlung der mit der Lasteinleitung verbundenen Anfangssteifigkeit

Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 293

L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

Table 2. Experimental tests: Main features

Tabelle 2. Experimentelle Tests: Haupteigenschaften

Test Left beam Right beam Column Steel grade Loading

S355 E1 – IPE400 HE240B S355

S690 E1 – IPE400* HE240B* S690

S355 E2 HEB200 IPE400 HE240B S355

S690 E2A HEB200* IPE400* HE240B* S690

S690 E2B HEB200* IPE400* HE240B* S690

S555 E3 IPE400 IPE400 HE240B S355

S690 E3A IPE400* IPE400* HE240B* S690

S690 E3B IPE400* IPE400* HE240B* S690

S355 E4 HEB200 IPE400 HE240B S355

S690 E4A HEB200* IPE400* HE240B* S690

S690 E4B HEB200* IPE400* HE240B* S690

Fig. 7. Experimental set-up [7]

Bild 7. Versuchsaufbau [7]

a schematic representation of the shear distribution on Table 3. Shear level in the column web panel (kN)
the column web panel for each test, and Table 3 lists the Tabelle 3. Niveau der Schubkräfte im Stützensteg (kN)
actual values for each case, sorted according to the shear Test Panel S355 S690 Sorting
stress magnitude in the column web panel. The same se-
E1 single 900 1350 3
quence is observed in terms of initial stiffness and resis-
tance for all tests (Fig. 9). upper 150 175
E2 2
Representing the distribution of the horizontal normal lower 900 1350
strains along vertical lines on the column web (lines 1, 2 E3 single 0 0 1
and 3 in Fig. 11) shows clearly the influence of the posi- upper 1100 1100
tion of the loads entering the column web panel from the E4 4
lower 1200 1200
beams. Figure 12 represents these horizontal normal

294 Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4

 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

a) Test E1 b) Test E2

c) Test E3 d) Test E4

Fig. 8. Deformed prototypes after test [2]

Bild 8. Verformte Prototypen nach Test [2]

a) S355 b) S690

Fig. 9. Comparison among all tests: global behaviour (deeper beam)

Bild 9. Vergleich zwischen allen Tests: allgemeines Verhalten (tieferer Träger)

Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 295

L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth
a) E1 b) E3
Fig. 10. Shear distribution in the column web panel
Bild 10. Schubspannungsverteilung im Stützensteg
Fig. 11. Relative position of lines 1, 2, 3 and k
Bild 11. Relative Positionen der Linien 1, 2, 3 und k
stresses for a load level near the end of the elastic range
(M = 200 kNm). Figure 13 represents the corresponding
stress lines for several load steps, for the two asymmetric
joints considered in the analysis.
It can be observed that in line 1, close to the beam on
the left, its effect is dominant; in fact the influence from
the beam on the right is almost imperceptible. The oppo-
Fig. 12. Strain state in the column web panel (load level = 200 kNm)
Bild 12. Dehnungszustand im Stützensteg (Last = 200 kNm)
296 Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4
c) E2 d) E4
site happens in line 3, where the effect of the beam on the
left is dominant. Therefore, the behavioural model for the
asymmetrical joints must account for the real distribution
of shear stresses in the column web panel and the real
position of the forces entering the column web panel,
from the beams, on each side. This conclusion is in line
with the EC 3-1-8 [2] recommendation (clause 5.3(19))
that states, regarding the β parameter: “In the case of un-
stiffened double-sided beam-to-column joint configuration
in which the depths of the two beams are not equal, the
actual distribution of shear stresses in the column web
panel should be taken into account when determining the
design moment resistance”. Figure 14 presents a structural
scheme that reflects these conclusions concerning the
position of the forces entering the web panel and the
stress distribution in the column web panel for asymmetri-
cal joints.
 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

a) Line 1 b) Line 3

a) Line 1 b) Line 3

Fig. 13. Normal horizontal stress diagrams for the asymmetrical node configurations
Bild 13. Horizontale Normalspannungsverteilung für die asymmetrischen Knotenkonfigurationen

Fig. 14. Structural scheme for internal asymmetrical nodes

Bild 14. Schema für innere asymmetrische Knotenkonfigurationen

4 Component model
The component model depicted in Figure 15 describes the
behaviour of a symmetrical internal joint. However, it fails
to capture some essential features in the case of asymmet-
rical joints, as it was shown experimentally.
The establishment of a component model for a joint
requires the knowledge of: (i) the active deformable ele-
ments; (ii) their position in the joint; (iii) the deformation
interdependencies amongst the several deformable ele-
ments; (iv) their individual deformability laws. Figure 14
brings in fundamental information on the structural behav-
iour of asymmetric joints and helps to clarify which are the
deformable elements and their position on the joint, thus
tackling items (i) and (ii). The referred model also helps to
clarify, to some extent, the deformation interdependencies
amongst them (item (iii)). Figure 16 represents a general
component model able to deal with double-sided nodes with
beams of unequal depths. Table 4 summarizes the equations
used for the calculation of the rotation of the joints on the
left and on the right, for each node type.
The application of the model requires the evaluation of
the behaviour of each component. The evaluation of the
force in the components is accomplished by numerical in-

Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 297

L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

Fig. 15. Component model for internal symmetrical node configuration

Bild 15. Komponenten-Modell für innere symmetrische Knotenkonfiguration

Fig. 16. Component model for internal asymmetrical node configurations

Bild 16. Komponenten-Modell für innere asymmetrische Knotenkonfigurationen

Table 4. Component model rotation formulation used for their calibration. These numerical models were
Tabelle 4. Komponentenmodell – Formeln für Rotation used to extract information leading to the detailed charac-
Node type Formulation of rotations terization of the behaviour of the joints, namely the force-
deformation (F-∆) nonlinear curves for the main compo-
∆T2 + ∆C2 + 2.∆V
external θ2 = nents in the column web panel.
db

∆T2 + ∆C2 + 2.∆V 5.2 Component force assessment (F)

Left θ2 =
internal db
The forces on the main components on the column web
symmetrical ∆T + ∆C1 + 2.∆V
θ1 = 1
panel are assessed directly from the numerical models, by
Right
db means of numerical integration of the stress fields. This is
possible because the load introduction stresses (normal
∆T2 + ∆C2 + 2.( ∆Vsup + ∆Vinf )
Left θ2 = horizontal stresses) have a rather localized effect and the
internal db shear stresses are approximately constant throughout the
asymmetrical ∆T1 + ∆C1 + 2.∆Vsup panel. Although some degree of interference amongst the
Right θ1 = stress fields exists this detrimental effect of the stress in-
db
teractions is duly captured in the integration process. In
the following sub-sections the procedure used to obtain
tegration of the stress fields on the column web panel. The the forces on load introduction components (compression
F-∆ curves for each individual component are assessed in and tension) and shear component is explained.
the next section.
5.2.1 Load introduction components
5 Characterization of the behaviour of the components
5.1 Introduction The forces on compression and tension components are
assessed by means of numerical integration of the normal
A finite element model was prepared for each node con- horizontal stress along a vertical line close to the column
figuration [7]. The results from the experimental tests were web (Line 1). Figure 17 illustrates the procedure and equa-

298 Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4

 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

tions (2) and (3) show the mathematical phrase used. Line 1 horizontal line across the column web (Line a). Figure 18
is not coincident with the Line K (Fig. 11) so to avoid the illustrates the procedure.
perturbation of the stress field due to the circular transi-
tion between the flange and the web.  t fc + R   d + t fc + R 
c 2
 2   
 Lc  Vwc =  ∫ σ xzdx  . e1 +  ∫ σ xzdx  . t wc +
∫
Fcompression =  σ x dz . t wc
0 
(3)  0



 t
 fc + R


  2
 
hc
 LT   

∫
Fttension =  σ x dz . t wc (4)
+

∫ σ xzdx  . e1

(5)
L   dc + t fc + R 
 c  2

σx denotes the normal horizontal stress at the column web
and twc denotes the thickness of the column web, the
other symbols are represented in Figure 17.
5.2.2 Shear components
The force on the shear component is assessed by means of
numerical integration of the stress stresses (eq. 5) on a
σxz denotes the shear stress at the column web, tfc and twc
denote the thickness of the column flange and web respec-
tively, R represents the radius of the transition between the
web and flange of the column. dc and hc stand for the dis-
tance between the flanges centrelines and along the plane
part of the column web, respectively.
Line a is located at mid height of the column web be-
cause it’s the far location from the load introduction influ-

a) Normal horizontal b) Normal horizontal stress along line l c) Force on tension and compression
stress contours components

Fig. 17. Procedure for obtaining the forces on the load introduction components from the stress fields on the column web [7]
Bild 17. Verfahren zur Ermittlung der Lasteinleitungskomponenten aus den Spannungsfeldern im Stützensteg [7]

a) Shear stress contour b) Shear stress across the column web c) Force on shear component
Fig. 18. Procedure for obtaining the force on the shear component from the stress fields in the column web [7]
Bild 18. Verfahren zur Ermittlung der Schubkräfte aus den Spannungsfeldern im Stützensteg [7]

Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 299

L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

ence. In the case of internal node configuration (Fig. 19)
there will be approximately zero shear stress at the web
panel for symmetrical configurations, and for asymmetri-
cal nodes there will be different values of shear stress in
the upper and lower panel, leading to two individual shear
force assessments at the mid-depth of each sub-panel.
5.2.3 Comparison with simplified analytical assessment
Figure 20a compares three different ways to assess the
shear force. The analytical curve represents the shear force
calculated analytically from the static equilibrium of forces
at the borders of the panel; the numerical/web curve rep-
resents the shear force assessed from the numerical inte-
gration of the shear stresses on the column web panel;
and the numerical/web+flanges adds to the latter the nu-
merical shear force assessed from the numerical integra-
tion of the shear stresses on the column flanges, on the
borders of the panel.
The solutions are equivalent in the elastic domain
indicating that the amount of shear force that is carried
by the flanges is negligible. Nevertheless that contribu-
tion increases steadily when progressing into the plastic
domain. For the case of load introduction components
(Fig. 20b) the conclusion also points to the fact that a fair
amount of the load entering the column web from the
beam is carried by the column flanges, particularly when
the deformation of the panel web is significant. This indi-
cates that the forces calculated analytically, from the sta-
tic equilibrium at the borders of the panel, do not com-
pletely represent the real forces on the column web panel
components.
5.3 Component deformation assessment (∆)
The model for the rotational behaviour of the column web
panel depicted in Figure 3 considers that shear deforma-
tion is constant throughout the panel and that the load in-
troduction deformation is localized on the side of the joint
close to the beam flanges. Therefore, the shear deforma-
bility can be assessed from the displacement of the point e
and f in Figure 3, and the load introduction deformation
can be assessed from the difference between the displace-
ments of points e and a and between the displacements of
points f and b in Figure 3. The calculation of each joint de-
formability for the asymmetric joint uses the same concept
with due adaptations for the two subpanel situation oc-
curring in the model depicted in Figure 16.
5.4 F-∆ curves
The component curves were assessed from the numerical
models, by the procedures described above, for a number
of load increments, along the load path. Figure 21 com-
pares the F-∆ individual curves for the components of the
column web panel with the EC 3-1-8 [2] bilinear curves,
showing that these curves are not adequate for the cases
of internal asymmetric joints and for high strength steel.

a) Asymmetrical subjected to b) Symmetrical c) Asymmetrical subjected to

negative moments on both negative moments on one
sides side and positive on the other

Fig. 19. Shear stress contours and location of the line used for the force assessment
Bild 19. Schubspannungsbereiche und Lage der auf die Stützenstege einwirkenden Kräfte

a) Shear force b) Load introduction components

Fig. 20. Calculation of the forces on the column panel components: analytical vs numerical
Bild 20. Berechnung der auf die Stützenstege einwirkenden Kräfte: analytische im Vergleich zu numerischer Berechnung

300 Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4

 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

a) S355 E1 shear b) S355 E1 Load introduction

c) S690 E1 shear d) S690 E1 Load introduction

e) S355 E2 shear Lower panel f) S690 E2 shear Lower panel

g) S355 E2 Load introduction Tension h) S355 E2 Load introduction Compression

i) S690 E2 Load introduction Tension j) S690 E2 Load introduction Compression

Fig. 21. F-∆ curves for the column web panel components [7]
Bild 21. F-∆-Kurven für die Komponenten der Stützenstege [7]

Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 301

L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth

6 Application of the spring model for internal
asymmetric nodes
The calculation of the component model requires solving
the equations in Table 4, using as input the F-∆ curves as-
sessed for each component. Figure 22 illustrates the com-
parison between the results of the application of the com-
ponent model and those of the numerical calibrated
model.
The agreement between the results of the component
model and the results from the numerical model calibrated
with experimental results is good, for all node configurations
considered.
7 Conclusions
This paper presents a component model for internal asym-
metrical joints, which correspond to a typology not yet

a) S355 E1 b) S690 E1

c) S355 E2 d) S690 E2

e) S355 E3 f) S690 E3

g) S355 E4 h) S690 E4

Fig. 22. Application of the spring model and comparison with the results of the calibrated numerical model
Bild 22. Anwendung des Feder-Modells und Vergleich mit den Ergebnissen des kalibrierten numerischen Modells

302 Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4

 L. Simões da Silva/S. Jordão/R. Simões · A component model for welded beam-to-column joints with beams of unequal depth
covered by EC 3-1-8 [2]. The proposed model was based
on evidence and results obtained from experimental tests
and finite element models. The model identifies the loca-
tion of each deformable element and mimics the interde-
pendency amongst their individual deformations. It is able
to accurately reproduce the behaviour of double-sided
welded joints with beams of unequal depth, both in terms
of initial stiffness and moment resistance and rotation ca-
pacity, performing well in the nonlinear range.
The characterization of the behaviour of the column
web panel subject to a complex stress state opens the way
to dealing with bolted joints where load introduction is
not concentrated in three levels. Thus, the proposed com-
ponent model provides a good basis for codification and
consequent extension of EC 3-1-8 to deal with asymmetri-
cal joints in internal nodes, a task that is currently being
actively pursued by the authors.
References
[1] Wald, F., Simões da Silva, L., Moore, D., Lennon, T.,
Chladna, M., Santiago, A., Benes, M., Borges, L.: Experimen-
tal behaviour of a steel structure under natural fire. Fire
Safety Journal 41 (2006), pp. 509–522.
[2] EN 1993-1-8:2005 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures –
Part 1.8: Design of joints, Brussels: European Committee for
Standardization (CEN).
[3] Simões da Silva, L.: Towards a consistent design approach
for steel joints under generalized loading. Journal of Con-
structional Steel Research, 64 (2008), pp. 1059–1075.
[4] Weynand, K., Jaspart, J. P., Steenhuis, M.: The stiffness model
of revised Annex J of Eurocode 3. R. Bjorhovde, A. Colson
and R. Zandonini (eds), Connections in Steel Structures III,
Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Connec-
tions in Steel Structures, Trento, Italy, 1995, pp. 441–452.
[5] Simões da Silva, L., Santiago, A., Vila Real, P.: Post-limit
stiffness evaluation of the ductility of steel joints. Computers &
Structures 80 (2002), pp. 515–531.
[6] Simões da Silva L., Simões, R., Gervásio H.: Design of Steel
Structures. ECCS Eurocode Design Manuals, ECCS Press
and Ernst & Sohn 2010.
[7] Jordão, S.: Behaviour of high strength steel internal asym-
metric welded joint. PhD Thesis (in Portuguese), Department
of Civil Engineering, University of Coimbra, 2008.
[8] Parfitt, J. Jr., Chen, W.-F.: Tests of welded steel beam-to-col-
umn moment connections. Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, 102 (1976), N.º ST1, pp. 189–202.
[9] Bose, S., McNeice, M., Sherbourne, A.: Column webs in steel
beam-to-column connexions. Part I – Formulation and verifi-
cation. Computers and Structures 2 (1972), pp. 253–279.
View publication stats
[10] Zoetemeijer, P.: The influence of normal, bending and shear
stresses on the ultimate compression force exerted laterally to
European rolled sections. Delft University of Technology De-
partment of Civil Engineering, The Netherlands, Stevin Labo-
ratory: Steel Structures, Report 6-75-18, 1975.
[11] Jaspart, J.-P.: Etude de la semi-rigidité des nœuds poutre-
colonne et son influence sur la résistance et la stabilité des os-
satures en acier. PhD Thesis (in French), Faculté des Sciences
Appliquées, Université de Liège, 1990.
[12] Tschemmernegg, F., Humer, C.: The design of structural
steel frames under consideration of the nonlinear behaviour
of joints. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 11 (1988),
pp. 73–103.
[13] Klein, H.: Das elastisch-plastische last-verformungsverhal-
ten M-steifenloser, geschweißter knoten für die berechnung
von stahlrahmen mit HEB-stützen. PhD thesis (in German),
Universität Innsbruck, Austria, 1985.
[14] Sibai, W. A., Frey, F.: Numerical simulation of the behav-
iour of connections. Workshop on Connections and the be-
haviour, strength and design of steel structures. ENSET de
Cachan, France, Mai, 1987.
[15] Sibai, W. A., Jaspart, J. P.: Étude du comportement jusqu’a
la ruine des nœuds complètement soudés. Rapport Interne
IREM 89/7: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Dé-
partement de Génie Civil IREM et rapport interne MSM N
194: Université de Liège Institut de Génie Civil MSN, Octo-
bre, 1989.
[16] Guisse, S., Jaspart, J. P.: Influence of structural frame be-
haviour on joint design. R. Bjorhovde, A. Colson and R. Zan-
donini (eds), Connections in Steel Structures III, Proceedings
of the 3rd International Workshop on Connections in Steel
Structures, Trento, Italy, 1995, pp. 321–330.
[17] Jaspart, J.-P.: Recent advances in the field of steel joints –
Column bases and further configurations for beam-to-column
joints and beam splices. Thèse présentée en vue de l’obten-
tion de grade d’Agrégé de l’Enseignement Supérieur. Faculté
des Sciences Appliquées, Université de Liège, 1997.
Autoren dieses Beitrages:
Prof. Luis Simões da Silva, luisss@dec.uc.pt,
Dr. Sandra Jordão,
Dr. Rui Simões,
University of Coimbra,
R. Luis Reis Santos,
3030-788 Coimbra,
Portugal
Stahlbau 81 (2012), Heft 4 303