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
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Van Long 2008 Engineering Structures

Van Long 2008 Engineering Structures

Ratings: (0)|Views: 96|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

11/24/2010

pdf

text

original

 
Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 3105–3113
Contents lists available atScienceDirect
Engineering Structures
Local buckling check according to Eurocode-3 for plastic-hinge analysis of 3-D steel frames
Hoang Van Long
, Nguyen Dang Hung
LTAS, University of Liège, Chemin des Chevreuils, 1, B
52
/
3
, 4000 Liège, Belgium
a r t i c l e i n f o
 Article history:
Received 21 January 2008Received in revised form1 April 2008Accepted 1 April 2008Available online 27 May 2008
Keywords:
Local bucklingPlastic-hingesSpace frames
a b s t r a c t
This paper proposes a way to local buckling check according to Eurocode-3 for plastic-hinge analysis of 3-D steel frames with I-shaped sections. A useful technique for determination of stress distribution oncross-sectionsunderaxialforceandbi-bendingmomentsisproposedsothattheconceptofclassificationofcross-sectionsmaybedirectlyused.Cross-sectionrequirementsforplasticglobalanalysisinEurocode-3areappliedforalocalbucklingcheck.Twothree-dimensionsteelframeswithdiverseconfigurationsof membersizeareconsideredbyasecond-orderplastic-hingeanalysiswiththeproposedtechnique.Usefulinformation for checking local buckling of a large number of plastic-hinges is completely presented.
©
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Ingeneral,eithertheplasticzoneor theplastic-hingeapproachis adopted to capture both material inelasticity and geometricnonlinearity of a framed structure. In the plastic zone method,according to the degree of refinement, a structural member isdevised into a mesh of finite elements, composed of three-dimensional finite-shell elements or fibre elements. Thus, thiskind of approach may describe the “real” behaviour of structures,and it is known as the “quasi-exact” solution. However, althoughtremendous advances in both computing hardware and numericaltechnique are achieved, the plastic zone method is still consideredas an “expensive” method requiring considerable computingburden. In the plastic-hinge method, only one beam-columnelement per a physical member can model nonlinear propertiesof structures. It leads to a huge reduction of computation time.With this advantage, the plastic-hinge method is more widelyused in practice than the plastic zone method. However, plastic-hinge analysis embeds some disadvantages when more complexmember behaviour need to be considered, such as: distributedplasticity,strainhardening,warping-flexuraleffect,localbuckling,geometric imperfection, and residual stress. Consequently, muchresearch in recent years[1–12] aims to improve both the plastic zone and plastic-hinge methods. Under the subject of “the nonlinear advanced analysis of steel frames”, one may finddifferent models where the computation cost is reduced while the“real” behaviour of structures is progressively approached.
Corresponding author.
E-mail address:
With an I-shaped section, local buckling may occur inoutstanding flanges or webs under compressive stress. At theplastic-hingewithalargerotation,cross-sectionsareatriskoflocalbuckling, even with rolled sections that are generally consideredas compact sections[13]. Therefore, local buckling needs be taken into account in the analysis and design procedure of structures,especially,withtheframesinwhichsomepartsworkintheplasticrange. There are two directions for the consideration of localbuckling, either by plastic zone analysis or by the application of Standards. The first direction leads to an increase in computationtime, but it is partially improved by the utilization of mixedelement analysis [3]. A way of the latter direction is presented in [10], in which practical equations of Load and Resistance FactorDesignspecificationofAmericanInstituteofSteelconstructionareapplied. Aside from this research, almost all plastic-hinge analysisassume that all sections are compact, and that local buckling willbe examined last in the design procedure.ThelocalbucklingphenomenonofsteelframesisconsideredinEurocode-3 by the concept of classification of cross-section [14].Classification of cross-sections depends on the width-to-thicknessratio of parts subject to compression. It is only achieved when thestress distribution on the cross-section is determined. However,we observe that engineers still need an efficient way to determinethe position of the neutral axis of a yielded I-shaped section (inspace behaviour). On the other hand, local buckling needs to beautomatically verified throughout the process of global analysisof these structures. This is the fundamental reason for our work:an algorithm for determination of stress distribution at a plastic-hinge with special behaviour in such a way that the conceptof classification of cross-sections in Eurocode-3 can be directlyapplied.ThissubroutinehasbeeninstalledintheCEPAOcomputer
0141-0296/$ – see front matter
©
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.04.002
 
3106
H. Van Long, N.D. Hung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 3105–3113
 Table 1
Classification of cross-sectionsClass Web Flange1
d
/
w
396
ε/
(
13
α
1
)
when
α >
0
.
5
b
0
/
 f 
9
ε/α
d
/
w
36
ε/α
when
α
0
.
52
d
/
w
456
ε/
(
13
α
1
)
when
α >
0
.
5
b
0
/
 f 
10
ε/α
d
/
w
41
.
5
ε/α
when
α
0
.
53
d
/
w
42
ε/
(
0
.
67
+
0
.
33
ψ
)
when
ψ >
1
b
0
/
 f 
21
ε
0
.
57
0
.
21
ψ
+
0
.
07
ψ
2
when
3
ψ
1
d
/
w
62
ε
(
1
ψ
)
ψ
when
ψ
≤ −
14 A part which fails to satisfy the limit for Class 3 should be taken as Class 4where:
ε
=
235
/
 f 
 y
,
d
,
b
0
,
 f 
,
w
,
α
,
ψ
are indicated inFigs. 1and2.
Fig. 1.
Stress distribution in outstanding flanges and webs.
program, a package of plastic-hinge analysis and optimization forframeworks [15,16]. Some numerical examples will exhibit the efficiency of the proposed technique.
2. Conception of local buckling in Eurocode-3
Based on local buckling resistance, Eurocode-3 provides aclassification for beams and columns in four classes[14]: – Class 1 cross-section permits the formation of a plastic hingewith the rotation capacity required from plastic analysis;Class 2 cross-section allows the development of a plastic hingebut with limited rotation;– Class 3 cross-section where local buckling is liable to preventdevelopment of plastic moment resistance;Class 4 cross-section where local buckling will occur before theattainment of yield stress in one or more parts of the cross-section.The classification of a cross-section depends on the width-to-thicknessratioofpartssubjecttocompression.Table1presentsthelimited width-to-thickness ratios for compression parts (outstandflanges or web) in which stress distribution is shown onFig. 1.When a local buckling check is taken into account, theprocedure for analysis of a steel frame includes four steps asfollows:1. Selecting member sizes for the structure and assuming that allcross-sections have Class 1.2. Analyzing the structure by the plastic-hinge method anddetermining internal forces at cross-sections.3. Determining stress distribution at cross-sections.4. Classifyingcross-sections;andcheckinglocalbucklingbasedoncross-section requirements for plastic global analysis.Step 3 and step 4 may be realized at any time of the analysis pro-cedure as long as internal forces at cross-sections are computed.In Sections3and4,step 3 and step 4 will be described in detail, respectively.
3. Stress distribution over a cross-section
In principle, the stress distribution over a cross-section may bededucedfromequilibriumandcompatibilityconditions.However,the problem becomes complicated due to the inherent form of I-shaped sections and the inelastic properties of the material.Therefore,itisinterestingtoestablishasimpleandclearalgorithmfor this problem.
3.1. At yield sections (plastic-hinges)3.1.1. Plastic-hinge concept 
Underthecombinedeffectsofaxialforceandbendingmoment,only normal stress is effected on the cross-section. The plastic-hinge concept indicates that a cross-section is fully yieldedby compression
(
 f 
 y
)
or tension
(
 f 
 y
)
separated by a neutralline. In global plastic analysis of structure, the plastic-hinge isassumed to occur when the force point reaches the yield surface:
Φ
(
,
M
 y
,
M
 z
)
=
0. In the present work,
passive
plastic-hingesdefine the plastic-hinges without plastic deformation. Conversely,one has the
active
plastic-hinge.
3.1.2. Assumptions
In Eurocode-3’s guidance, stress distributions over sectionsare simplified (seeFig. 1); it does not include all possibilities of locations of the neutral axis of a section in space behaviour.Moreover, it is complicated to determine the “real” stress stateover sections. Therefore, the following assumptions are made inthe present work.1 The neutral axis is a straight line, it divides the cross-sectioninto two parts, one is in compression and other is in traction.2 The cross-section is idealized as a section composed of threerectangular strips(Fig. 2(a)). 3 The area of the compressed zone and the tensional zone areapproximated as shown inFig. 2(b).4 The bending moment with respect to the weak axis,
M
 z
, is onlysupported by two flanges.5 Residual stress is neglected.
 
H. Van Long, N.D. Hung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 3105–3113
3107
 Table 2
Location of the neutral axis (NA) and corresponding equilibrium equationsLocation of NA Notation Unknowns Equilibrium equationsNA passes through two flanges(Fig. 3(a)) NA1
b
1
,
b
2
M
 y
=
 y
 f 
(
b
1
b
2
)
h
(a1)
|
M
 z
|=
 y
 f 
[
b
1
(
b
b
1
)
+
b
2
(
b
b
2
)
]
(a2)
|
|=
 y
[
2
 f 
(
b
b
1
b
2
)
+
h
i
w
]
(a3)NA passes through the web and a flange(Fig. 3(b)) NA2
b
1
,
 z
1
|
M
 z
|=
 y
 f 
b
1
(
b
b
1
)
(b1)
|
| =
 y
(
2
 z
1
w
+
2
b
1
 f 
)
(b2)
M
 y
=
 y
[
h
 f 
(
b
b
1
)
+
(
h
2
i
/
4
z
21
)
w
]
(b3)NA passes through the web and two flanges(Fig. 3(c)) NA3
b
1
,
b
2
|
M
 z
| =
 y
 f 
[
b
1
(
b
b
1
)
+
b
2
(
b
b
2
)
]
(c1)
|
|=
 y
[
h
w
(
b
1
b
2
)
/
(
b
b
1
b
2
)
+
2
(
b
1
b
2
)
 f 
]
(c2)
M
 y
=
 y
[
h
 f 
(
b
b
1
b
2
)
+
(
h
2
i
/
4
z
21
)
w
]
(c3)Note: With NA1,
b
2
may have disappeared; with NA2,
b
1
or
z
1
may have disappeared.
Fig. 2.
Simplified shape and simplified stress distribution.
3.1.3. Formulation
Sincetheneutralaxisisastraightline,itspositionmaybedeter-mined by two geometry parameters. In principle, the distributionof stress on the cross-section must satisfy three equilibrium con-ditions according to
,
M
 y
,
M
 z
. However, one equilibrium equationamong them is constrained by
Φ
(
,
M
 y
,
M
 z
)
=
0. Therefore, twonecessary parameters to locate the position of neutral axis are de-termined by two suitable equilibrium equations. A way to find theformulas is summarized as follows:First, grouping the location of the neutral axis and writing thecorrespondingequilibriumequations(equilibriumbetweenthestress and internal forces), they are reported inTable 2.The description of the location of the neutral axis is abbreviated to:NA1 or NA2 or NA3.Next,letusintroducethefollowingnon-negativeparametersinaccordance with the given dimensions of the profile(Fig. 2(a)) and the given internal forces.
c
 y
=
M
 y
 f 
 y
h
(
b
/
2
)
 f 
;
c
 z
=|
M
 z
|
 f 
 y
(
b
2
/
4
)
 f 
;
c
n
=|
|
 f 
 y
h
i
w
;
β
=
h
/
h
i
;
γ 
=
bt 
 f 
h
i
w
.
– Finally, the equilibrium equations are solved, taking intoaccount the existential solution condition, we obtain thefollowing results:
Case
1:If 
c
 y
12
c
 y
c
2
 y
+
c
 z
2(1a)then the NA1 is accorded, and:
b
1
=
b
2
1
+
c
 y
2
1
c
 z
2
c
2
 y
4
b
2
=
b
2
1
c
 y
2
1
c
 z
2
c
2
 y
4
.
(1b)
Case
2: If 
c
 z
1
√ 
1
c
 z
(
c
n
+
β
)
+
c
n
β
c
 z
γ 
(2a)then the NA2 is agreed, and:
b
1
=
b
2
1
1
c
 z
 z
1
=
h
i
2
c
n
(
1
1
c
 z
)
γ 
.
(2b)
Case
3:If the both conditions(1a)and(2a)are not satisfied, the NA3 is adopted, and:
b
1
=
b
2
1
1
c
 z
+
ξ
c
 z
b
2
=
b
2
1
1
ξ
c
 z
 z
1
=
h
i
2
1
ξ
c
 z
1
c
 z
+
ξ
c
 z
(
1
ξ
c
 z
+
1
c
 z
+
ξ
c
 z
)
β
.
(3a)with:
ξ
=
12
1
1
1
c
2
 z
[
(
 x
2
2
+
c
 z
)
2
+
4
c
 z
4]
,
(3b)while
x
must satisfy the following equation:
γ 
2
 x
4
+
2
βγ 
 x
3
+
(
c
2
n
+
β
2
4
γ 
2
+
2
γ 
2
c
 z
)
 x
2
+
(
4
βγ 
c
 z
8
βγ 
)
 x
+
2
β
2
c
 z
4
β
2
=
0
.
(3c)Eq.(3c)may be solved by the Newton–Raphson iteration, itbecomes better with the following bounds:
2
c
 z
x
√ 
2
2
c
 z
when
c
 z
1
2
(
1
c
 z
+
1
)
c
 z
x
√ 
2
2
c
 z
when
c
 z
<
1
.
(3d)
Remark
(
The derivation of 

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
zahrul azha liked this
kZAVARAK liked this
jewon liked this

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)//-->