Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Gil Martin 2008 Engineering Structures

Gil Martin 2008 Engineering Structures

Ratings: (0)|Views: 51 |Likes:
Published by teodorabogdan

More info:

Published by: teodorabogdan on Apr 05, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/29/2010

pdf

text

original

 
Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 3003–3013
Contents lists available atScienceDirect
Engineering Structures
Proportioning of steel beam–column members based on RSDoptimization methodology
Luisa María Gil-Martín
a
, Mark Aschheim
b
, Enrique Hernández-Montes
a
University of Granada, Campus de Fuentenueva, 18072 Granada, Spain
b
Santa Clara University, 500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA, United States
a r t i c l e i n f o
 Article history:
Received 11 February 2008Received in revised form2 April 2008Accepted 3 April 2008Available online 20 May 2008
Keywords:
Steel structuresStructural optimization
a b s t r a c t
Duetothecostandenergyembodiedinsteelproduction,areductioninthecross-sectionalareaofasteelstructuralmembercouldimplyasignificantsavingofmoneyandreductioningreenhousegasemissions.Hernandez-Montes et al. [Hernández-Montes E, Aschheim M, Gil-Martin LM. The impact of optimallongitudinal reinforcement on the curvature ductility capacity of reinforced concrete column sections.MagConcreteRes2004;56(9):499–512;Hernández-MontesE,Gil-MartínLM,AschheimM.Thedesignof concrete members subjected to uniaxial bending and compression using reinforcement sizing diagrams.ACIStructJ2005;102(1):150–8]proposedananalyticalapproachforreducingtheamountoflongitudinalreinforcementinreinforcedconcretememberssubjectedtotheactionofaxialforceandbendingmomentacting about a principal axis of the cross-section. The approach, which makes use of ReinforcementSizing Diagrams (RSD), makes use of a graphical representation of all possible reinforcement solutionsfor a particular concrete cross-section subjected to a combined loading consisting of bending momentand axial load
(
M
,
)
. The common symmetric solution is recognized as just one of the infinite numberof possible solutions. The RSD methodology used in that approach is extended in the present paper tosteel sections having at least one axis of symmetry, subjected to axial force, bending moment about thestrongaxis,andshearactingintheplaneofthebendingmoment.Specialconsiderationsareintroducedtoaddresstheinstabilitiesassociatedwithslendersteelelements.Themethodologyisdevelopedfollowingthe Eurocode 3 provisions for compact steel members.
©
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Structural members may be present as individual membersor as a part of a sub-assembly of a more complex structuralframework. Members of indeterminate structures interact withone another, with respect to redistribution of loads and thedevelopment of instabilities. Beam–column members, whichare subjected simultaneously to bending and axial force, occurfrequentlyintypicalsteelstructures.Forthisreasonthebehaviourand design of such members has been central to steel design.Beams constitute a special case, where the axial load
(
)
isnegligible or zero, and are considered to be a subset of the moregeneral beam–column design problem.Thepresentpaperconsiderstheoptimaldesignofbeam–columnmembers in which external loading causes an in-plane bendingmoment,
M
, acting about the strong axis of the cross-section, a
Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 958 249965; fax: +34 958 249959.
E-mail addresses:
mlgil@ugr.es(L.M. Gil-Martín),maschheim@scu.edu(M. Aschheim),emontes@ugr.es(E. Hernández-Montes).
shearforce,
,actingintheplaneofthemoment,andanaxialforce,
,consideredtobeappliedatthecentroidoftherectangularwebof thesection,anddirectedalongthelongitudinalaxisofthemember(seeFig. 1). Beam–columns subjected to torsion or biaxial bendingare not considered in the present work. Furthermore, this studyis restricted to compact sections (i.e. Class 1 sections per EC3[3]) that are symmetric about the minor principal axis of the section(Fig. 1). The section is proportioned to provide sufficient strengthto resist these actions (
M
,
,
) and sufficient stiffness to preventpremature buckling. An additional constraint, relating to the stiff-nessnecessarytolimitdeflectionstoacceptablelevels,mayalsobeimposed.It is common in concrete structures to have longitudinalreinforcement arranged symmetrically in the cross-section. Infact, the design of longitudinal reinforcement is often madewith the assistance of 
M
interaction diagrams, which generallyare presented only for symmetric reinforcement. However, itis evident from RSD design approaches that in some cases itis feasible and economically advantageous to use asymmetricreinforcement distributions.Fig. 2illustrates this for an exampledescribed in Hernandez-Montes et al. [1,2]. RSD methodology consists in the consideration of all the possible solutions, for
0141-0296/$ – see front matter
©
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.04.004
 
3004
L.M. Gil-Martín et al. / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 3003–3013
Fig. 1.
Nomenclature.
a design problem, through the representation called RSD, asillustrated for a reinforced concrete section inFig. 2.In steel structures, doubly symmetric cross-sections are fre-quently used, although singly symmetric cross-sections are beingusedforcolumnstoachieveeconomyinlargewarehouses.Thisar-ticle extends the RSD technique to steel construction to provide amore precise and useful design procedure, and demonstrates thatreductions in the area of steel necessary to resist a given combi-nation of axial load and moment (
,
M
) may be achieved with anRSD-type optimization approach. This new approach allows theengineer to choose among all the possible solutions, consideringminimumweight,availabilityofsteelshapes,simplicityonthejobsite, and so on.Fig. 1shows the basic nomenclature for the cross-section. Theweb, having thickness
w
and height,
d
, connects to flanges havingareas
A
1
at the top and
A
2
at the bottom. The moment,
M
, isconsidered positive when the top flange in the cross-section isin compression and the axial force,
, is considered positive intension. To simplify the equations, the fillets in rolled sectionsand throat thickness in welded sections have been ignored in thederivations. The restriction that all sections are compact (Class 1sections per EC3 [3]) implies that the full plastic capacity of thecross-section can be developed; that is, local buckling will notoccur.Fig.3presentstheflowchartforthedesignproceduredescribedin this paper.As was observed with reinforced concrete, an infinite numberof solutions exist for the design of a steel cross-section subjectedto combined loads
and
M
. These solutions can be presentedusinggraphicssimilartothoseusedinthereinforcedconcreteRSDrepresentation (Fig. 2). The extension to steel members requires consideration of buckling modes. The buckling modes considered herein areidentified inTable 1.For members in compression, two types of  bucklings are considered: flexural buckling (i.e. Euler bucklingfor slender members and inelastic buckling for stocky members)and torsional-flexural buckling. In the former, the cross-sectiondoes not rotate about the longitudinal axis; in the latter, rotationoccurs. For members bending about the strong axis, the instabilityphenomena considered is lateral-torsional buckling.The EC3[3] approach for checking buckling of members subjected to axial compression and bending known as the GeneralMethodwasadoptedforthedevelopmentsdescribedinthisarticle.Specifically, the conditions considered are single-span membersof constant cross-section under axial compression, with end-forkconditions (i.e. pin supported without warping restraint).Otherpotentialbucklingmodesinvolvebucklingofthewebduetoshearandlocalbucklingofplatesloadedtotallyorpartially–incompression. The restriction that all sections are compact impliesthatthefullplasticcapacityofthecross-sectioncanbedeveloped;that is, local buckling will not occur. Shear buckling of the web is
Fig. 2.
Example of reinforcement solution for a rectangular cross-section withtop and bottom reinforcement (
 A
s
and
A
s
respectively). (a) Reinforcement SizingDiagram for flexure according to ACI-318, for
φ
n
=
2500 kN and
φ
M
n
=
1000 kN m. (b) Strain diagrams for symmetric reinforcement (point A) and optimalreinforcement (point B).
Fig. 3.
Flow chart of the proposed method.
avoided by enforcing constraints on web dimensions in the designprocess outlined herein.
2. Constraints on web dimensions
The analytical approach developed herein begins with anassumed web thickness,
w
. Given
w
, the height of the web,
d
, islimited as follows:
 
L.M. Gil-Martín et al. / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 3003–3013
3005
 Table 1
Buckling modes consideredMembers in compression
(
M
=
0
,
-
·
-
·
- buckling axis
)
Members in bending about thestrong axisMembers subjected to shear Plates under compressionLateral buckling
(
=
0
,
-
·
-
·
- buckling axis
)
Flexural buckling Torsional-flexuralbucklingLateral-torsional buckling Buckling shear Local bucklingAvoided using a web thickenoughIn order to force Class 1(cross-section can form aplastic hinge with the capacityrequired from plastic analysiswithout reduction of theresistance) thewidth-to-thickness ratios of plates in cross-section(compressed flange and web)are limitedMembers in bending and axial compression: Interaction formulationItem 6.3.1.3 Item 6.3.1.4 Item 6.3.2 Section5Table 5.2Eurocode 3. Part 1-1. Eurocode 3. Part 1-1. Eurocode 3. Part 1-1. Eurocode 3. Part 1-5. Eurocode 3. Part 1-1.
1. Shear strength: To provide sufficient shear strength, EC3[3] provisions for shear strength require that:
d
w
·
 yw
/
√ 
3
=
d
min
.
(1)2. Shear buckling: To prevent shear buckling, the slenderness of the web has to be limited. EC3 [4](Section 5.1(2) of part 1-5) provisions require, where webs are not stiffened, that
¯
λ
w
=
d
/
w
37
.
4
·
ε
·√ 
k
τ 
<
0
.
83
η
or equivalently,
d
<
0
.
83
η
·
37
.
4
·
ε
·
k
τ 
·
w
=
d
1
(2)where
k
τ 
=
the shear buckling coefficient for the web,
η
=
thestrain hardening coefficient and
ε
is given by the followingexpression
ε
=
235
 f 
 y
(
N
/
mm
2
).
An accepted value of 
η
, equal to 1.2, is used herein. Assumingthat there are web stiffeners only at supports results in
k
τ 
=
5.34.Eurocode 3 limits the height of the web for Class 1 members; themaximumheightoftheweb,
d
2
,isdiscussedinTable5.2ofEC3[3]. Thus, the height of the web,
d
, is limited to
d
min
d
d
max
where
d
max
=
min
(
d
1
,
d
2
),
d
1
isgivenbyEq.(2),
d
2
isgivenbyTable5.2 of EC3 [3] and
d
min
is given by Eq.(1).
3. Preliminary proportioning of flanges
This section describes simple approximations that are used toestablish preliminary proportions of the flanges. Equilibrium of forces acting on the cross-section is established for preliminaryproportioning throughout the method assuming that axial load isapplied at the centroid of the rectangular web (Fig. 1). In orderto determine the preliminary proportions of the flanges, as a firstapproximation, the flexural resistance of the web is ignored andtheforcescarriedbythetopandbottomflangesareassumedtoactattheendsoftheweb.Thus,assumingthattheflangesareyielding,summation of moments about either ends of the web results inexpressionsthatmaybeusedtodeterminetheflangeareas,
 A
1
and
 A
2
:
 A
1
·
 yf 
·
d
+
M
·
d
2
=
0
 A
2
·
 yf 
·
d
+
M
+
·
d
2
=
0
.
(3)Once preliminary values of 
A
1
and
A
2
are obtained using Eqs.(3),then the width of the flanges may be determined as follows.Depending on the ratio of axial load to moment, one or bothflanges may be in compression. The aspect ratio (or equivalently,flange slenderness,
b
/
w
) of the compression flange(s) is limited topreventlocalbucklingoftheflangeintheplaneoftheweb.EC3[4] expressions for local buckling of the flange (Section 8 of Eurocode3, Parts 1–5) are used to obtain an upper limit for the thickness of the compression flange in relation to the thickness of the web andthe height of the web, given that
A
1
=
b
 fc
·
 fc
:
d
w
kE f 
 yf 
d
·
w
 A
1
 fc
k
2
·
E
2
·
3
w
 f 
2
 yf 
·
b
 fc
·
d
(4)where
E
=
210,000 N
/
mm
2
and
k
=
0
.
3 for compression flange inClass 1.Once the thickness of the top flange,
 fc
, and bottom flange,
 f
,are established, the corresponding widths are easily determined,given the required areas
A
1
and
A
2
from Eqs.(3).
b
 fc
=
 A
1
 fc
and
b
 f
=
 A
2
 f
.
(5)In the procedure described below,
 fc
is set equal to
 f
, thuseliminating one variable.Since the cross-section is compact (Class 1), the width of thecompression flange is limited to
b
 fc
18
·
ε
·
 fc
+
w
(6)as described in Table 5.2 of Part 1-1 of EC3[3]. In the remainder of the paper, the flanges are assumed to haveidentical thickness (
 fc
=
 f
=
 f 
) and values of 
b
 fc
and
b
 f
obtainedfromEqs.(5)areroundeduptothenearestinteger(inmillimeters).Cross-sections whose neutral plastic fiber (NPF) is locatedoutside the web when subjected to conditions of pure flexure(i.e., for
=
0, the neutral plastic fiber, which divides the cross-section area into two equal areas, is located in a flange) are notconsidered further. Then, with reference toFig. 1,
<
b
 fc
·
 f 
+
w
·
(
d
+
2
 f 
)
b
 f
·
 f 
2
·
w
<
 f 
+
d
.
(7)

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->