Plastic Analysis Beams Frames

PLASTIC ANALYSIS OF BEAMS AND FRAMES
Jrgen Amdahl, NTNU
NUS/Keppel Short Course July 10-12, 2006: Analysis and Design for Robustness of OffshoreStructures Subjected to Accidental Loads
Table of content
1. 2. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................3 PLASTIC BENDING MOMENT......................................................................................5 2.1 Elastic-plastic considerations.....................................................................................5 2.2 Practical calculation of plastic moment ...................................................................10 3. ELASTO-PLASTIC RESPONSE OF BEAMS...............................................................13 3.1 Static calculation of plastic resistance .....................................................................14 3.2 Kinematic calculation of plastic resistance..............................................................23 3.3 Bound theorems .......................................................................................................29 3.4 Plastic mechanism analysis of a portal frame ..........................................................30 4. PLASTIC RESISTANCE UNDER COMBINED LOADING........................................35 4.1 Interaction between bending and axial force ...........................................................35 5. STRAINS IN ELASTIC-PLASTIC REGION.................................................................41 5.1 Strain in cantilever subjected to elastic-plastic bending ..........................................41 5.2 Tensile fracture calculation model..........................................................................43
1. INTRODUCTION
In conventional analysis it is assumed that the response of the structure is elastic to the applied loads. This implies that the structure returns to a stress free state with no deformation if the load is removed. In this section a method which may predict the resistance of the structure will be considered. The method is based upon the introduction assumption that the structure is allowed to deform plastically so that permanent deflections will be developed. The (engineering) stress-strain relationship obtained in tension coupon tests of mild steel is plotted in Figure 1.1
1.3 y max y
y 10-3
10-2
0.20
0.40
Figure 1.1 Stress-strain relationship for mild steel In initial loading the stress-strain relation is linearly elastic described by = E . When the stress reaches the yield stress, y , the stress remain constant for increasing strain (yield plateau). For a strain of 10-20 times the yield strain, y , in the floe stress increases. This is called strain handling. The handling attains a maximum before we get necking and the (engineering) stress level reduces until fracture takes place. In linear analysis it is assumed that the structure works in the elastic range and is only allowed to experience a stress, max , which is lower than the yield stress by a safety factor.
Plastic analysis of beams and frames
1.4
At a strain level of (10 20) y the stress increases. This is denoted strain hardening. The stress reaches a maximum level, before we got necking and finally fracture at a reduced (engineering) stress level. In traditional design it is supposed that the material can only be utilized in the elastic range, with maximum stress, max , less than the yield stress. As illustrated, steel has enormous strength reserves beyond first yield. Under certain conditions, these strength reserves may be taken into account. As a first step, the true stress strain curve is idealized as linearly elastic, perfectly plastic as shown in Figure 1.2 stain hardening is neglected. This is often reasonable if moderate strain is accepted. Sometimes the effective flow stress is increased beyond the yield stress to account for hardening. As will be demonstrated later, it is a paradox that plastic theory cannot be applied if the stressstrain curve is truly linear elastic-perfectly plastic.
y = E
Figure 1.2 Linear elastic-perfectly plastic material behaviour
1.5
2. PLASTIC BENDING MOMENT
2.1 Elastic-plastic considerations Let us first consider the development of the bending moment for a rectangular cross-section when yielding plasticity is accepted. In elastic range ( y ) both strains and stresses are distributed linearly over the height, as shown in Figure 2.1 When the maximum tension in the extreme fiber exceeds the yeild strain,
y , yielding will take place. By further loading the strain distribution will continue to0 be
linearly distributed( plane cross-section remain plane) such that more and more fibers will reach the yield strain. The stress distribution will be as shown in Figure 2.1 . The outer region of the cross-section yields in tension/compression while the central region remains elastic The bending moment for < y
M =
I
h 2
1 3 bh 1 12 = bh 2 = W h 6 2
(1 )
1 where W iselastic section modulus = bh 2 6
1.6
h M M b
< y
> y
y
e>
y < y y y
- y Elastic Elastic-plastic
- y Fully plastick
Figure 2.1 Evolution of plasticity in pure bending The bending moment when > y
h 2 y y y M = y dA = 2 ybdy + y ybdy 0 y y 2 y 1 3 2 1 h y + 2 y b y = 2b 2 4 y 3
( 2)
h2 y 2 2 2 2 h2 = y b y y = y b 4 3 4 3
1.7
Introducing the relationship
y = y h2
Hence, the bending moment becomes
h2 = M = y b 4
1 y 2 1 3
( 3)
As an alternative to maximal strain, the curvature, , may be introduced. The strain and curvature are related through
=
This gives
h 2
h2 M = yb 4
1 y 2 1 3
( 4)
where y is the curvature producing exactly yield in the extreme fiber. The bending moment is plotted versus the normalized curvature y in Figure 2.2
y b 4 y b 6
h2
h2
My
/ y
1.8
Figure 2.2 Bending moment for a rectangular cross-section versus curvature It is observed that the bending moment increases linearly for < y . when = y yielding starts in the extreme fiber. With increasing the yield zone moves towards the neutral axis and the increase in bending moment decreases. When the bending moment approaches asymtotically the value.
M y
bh 2 4
(5)
This value is defined as the plastic bending moment for the cross-section
Mp =y
bh 2 = yW p 4
( 6)
Wp =
bh 2 = Y / y / dA - plastic section modulus 4 A
The relationship between elastic and plastic section modulus is defined as the shape factor for the cross-section
Wp We
Mp My
bh 2 4 = 1 .5 bh 2 6
(7)
and characterizes the ability of the cross-section to carry bending moment beyond the first yield moment. This factor is dependent upon the cross-sectional shape. Bending moment curvature relationships for various cross-sections are shown in Figure 2.3
1.9
M My 1.7 1.5 1.27 1.10 - 1.18 1.125
1.0
0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 2.3 Bending moment versus curvature It is observed that the bending moment is virtually identical to the plastic moment for relatively small strains. The transition region may, hence, be neglected with good accuracy.
1.10
2.2 Practical calculation of plastic moment The plastic section modulus is determined by calculating the moment of the cross-section about the plastic neutral axis.
sy
A1 A2
Tension
strekk
Plastisk axis neutral nytralakse trykk
Plastic
compression
-s y
Figure 2.4 Plastic bending The condition of pure bending moment yields
y A1 = y A2 A1 = A2 = A 2
different from the elastic neutral axis.
(8)
): The plastic neutral axis divides the cross-section into two equal halves and is generally
M = y y dA = y y dA
A A
= yW p W p = y dA
A
(9)
Note the difference between the elastic and plastic neutral axis modulus/section modulus.
1.11
A Elastic neutral axis Plastic neutral axis
Figure 2.5 Elastic versus plastic neutral axis for T-profile Example: Rectangular cross-section: The bending moment in the plastic state
M = y ydA
M h b
Moment distribution
M = Fb = FW p Wp =
hh 1 2 = bh F 22 4
( 10 )
1 2 bh 4
as calculated before.
1.12
Example: Thin walled tubular section

t
r >> t
I = y 2 dA = 4 (r sin ) rdt
2 A 0
/2
q
x
= 4r 3t
= r 3t
I = r 2 t r
2r
We =
Thin-walled tube
2
W p = ydA = 4 r sin rdt = 4r 2t | cos

A 0 0
( 11 )
= 4r t
2
Shape factor :
Wp We
= 1.27
( 12 )
The more the cross-section is optimized with respect to bending, the lesser is the shape factor (area located far from neutral axis): tw 0 x 1
tw
I-profile with small web
1.13
3. ELASTO-PLASTIC RESPONSE OF BEAMS

Let us consider the behaviour of a beam subjected to increasing lateral load. In the elastic range the deformation is smooth and continuous. In the elastic-plastic range the curvature tends to be concentrated under the concentrated load, while the deformations in outside this region- in the elastic range- remains to be described by a 3rd degree function.
Deformation
Deformation
3.degree
3. degree
Moment Moment My M < My Curvature Curvature
(a)
(b)
a) elastic response
b) elastic-plastic response
Figure 3.1 Elastic-plastic response of simply supported beam under concentrated load In order to simplify the analysis the plastic curvature is concentrated in a single point and we will disregard the elastic deformations We get :
1.14
Deformation
Pc
q l
Moment Pc/2 Mp Pc/2
Figure 3.2 The plastic mechanism The deformation field has a denoted a mechanism. The discontinuity, , at mid span, given by
= dl , l p 0
lp
(13)
This deformation figure is denoted a mechanism. The discontinuity is called a plastic hinge. The approach makes it quite simple to calculate the plastic resistance as shown below.
3.1 Static calculation of plastic resistance
Let us consider the simply supported beam in Figure 3.2 The plastic resistance can be found by equilibrium consideration.
Mp =
Pc L 2 2
( 14 )
Pc =
M pL 4
( 15)
1.15
The load at first yield is given by
My =
Py L 2 2
( 16 )
Py =
M yL 4
( 17 )
The resistance beyond first yield is given by
Pc M p = = Py M y
( 18 )
and is solely determined by the shape factor for the cross-section.
Example : Clamped beam subjected to hydrostatic load.
The load is considered to be applied in two step. In step 1 the beam is elastic until yield hinges are formed at the supports, when the moments are longest. From now on the ends can take no more bending moment and the beam acts as if it is simply supported. The beam may be loaded until the total bending moment is equal to M p at mid section. The beam acts as a mechanism and collapses.
1.16
l
q1l 2 M = Mp = 12 q1l 2 M =24
ql M =2 8
M = Mp
M = Mp
Figure 3.3Two step loading of a clamped beam The following relationships apply:
q1 L2 12 q1 L2 q2 L2 In the middle: M p = + 24 8 2 2 q L qL 1 2 = 1 q2 = q1 8 24 3 Beam end: Mp =
( 19 )
The total resistance comes out to be: qc = q1 + q2 = 16 M p 4 q1 = 3 L2

( 20 )
It is observed that a reserve capacity of 1/3 is obtained by redistribution of moments from ends
1.17
to mid section. The total reserve resistance is:
2 qc 16 M p L 4 M p = = = 1.33 q y 12M y L2 3 M y
( 21 )
There are two sources to the reserve resistance: ii ) i) Shape factor for the cross-section, dependent on the cross-sectional shape Redistribution of forces over the beam. This depends on the loads and boundary conditions Let us consider the deformations of the beam in the two stages
Step 1
q1
2 q1 L4 1 M p L q1 w1 = = 384 EI 24 EI qc
w1
q w1 = 2 qc M p L / 24 EI
Deformation in step 1
Step 2
q2
2 5q2 L4 5 M p L q2 = w2 = 384 EI 24 EI qc
w2
q w1 = 2 qc M p L / 24 EI
Deformation in step 2.
The resulting resistance-deformation curve is shown in Figure 3.4. In step 1 the solution is given by that of an elastic, clamped beam. In step 2 the additional deformation is given by the simply supported beam and the stiffness is reduced by a factor of 5. When a plastic hinge is formed at
1.18
mid section the resistance is exhausted and the deformations increase to infinity under a constant level. The same approach may be used to determine the load-deformation relationship for more complex structures. First, a simple elastic analysis may be performed of the original structure. The location of the maximum moment is determined on a plastic hinge is inserted at the actual load level when the plastic bending capacity is attained. The corresponding deformation is also calculated. A new elastic analysis is performed of the analysis is performed of the structure with the inserted hinge. Once again the location of the maximum total moment is determined a new hinge is inserted at the appropriate load level. The process is repeated until a complete mechanism is attained.
q / qc
k=1
k = 0.2
1 Hinge at mid span 0.75 Hinges at ends
0.75 1
w Mpl / 24 EI
2
Figure 3.4 Force-deformation relationship It is evident that such a calculation is cumbersome. If the entire load-deformation relationship is not needed, but only the total collapse resistance, the calculation becomes significantly easier. There is one important reason for calculating the load-deflection relationship. In the example
1.19
with the clamped beam under hydrostatic pressure, hinges are formed at the ends first. It is presupposed that these sections can maintain the fully plastic bending moment until the final hinge is formed at midspan. The required rotational capacity for the ends of the clamped beam in Figure 4.13 may be calculated easily. It is first noticed that there is no rotation in the first phase the ends are considered as simply supported and, hence, free to rotate. This rotation is the sought plastic rotation. The bending moment diagram in the second phase must be used, with M 2,max = at mid section. Using the unit force (moment) method
1 Mp 2
M1
M0 1 l
1/2Mp l
The rotation at ends becomes M 0 M1 1 2 1 1 M pl dx = M p 1 l = EI 2 3 2 EI 6 EI
p = 1 = 2 =
l
For a rectangular cross-section this becomes
p =
fy h 2 / 4 l y l = 6 E h3 /12 2h
It is interesting to compare this required rotation with the available rotation according to the result in Section 4, assuming that one fourth of the beam can be consideredt being a cantilever in the second phase (this is only approximately true); i.e. l l / 2 in the cantilever model
p y l / 2h = = 0.75 This shows that a truly elastic-perfectly plastic material can just ep y 4l / 2 / 3h
almost sustain the required rotation without fracture. Depending on the proportions of the cross-section this may be a problem. By large plastic
1.20
rotations thin-walled cross-sections may experience local buckling on the compression side causing degradation of bending resistance. In the design codes compactness requirements are prescribed for the cross-sections. According to Eurocode 3/Norwegian Standard: Class 1: Fully plastic moment may be maintained during large rotations. Class 2: Plastic moment can be attained, but the rotation capacity is limited. Class 3: Moment capacity is limited to yielding in extreme fibre. Class 4: Local buckling will occur precise (first yield moment to first yield). This must be taken into account in elastic analysis. For traditional plastic analyses the cross-sections must generally satisfy class 1 requirements, except the last hinge which may comply with class 2 requirements only. Compactness requirements for various profiles are given in Figure 3.5.
1.21
TVERRSNITT
ELLER
TRYKKKRAFT
OG / ELLER
TVERRSNITTSKLASSE Lokal knekning Siste flyteledd Flytning ytterste fiber Full plastisk
TVERRSNITTSDEL
MOMENT
b TRYKK t t MOMENT t
b 1.0 t
E fy
b 1.2 t
E fy
b 1.3 t
E fy
b 2.0 t
E fy
b 2.6 t
E fy
b 3.3 t
E fy
a b
t b MOMENT OG
TRYKKRAFT
b 1 t a
E fy
1.2 b t a
E fy
1.3 b t a
E fy
b TRYKK t t b b
b 0.30 t
E fy
b 0.33 t
E fy
b 0.43 t
E fy
a b
MOMENT OG
TRYKKRAFT
b 0.3 t a
E fy
b 0.33 t a
E fy
b 0.43 t a
E fy
b 1.1 t t
E fy
b 1.25 t
E fy
b 1.5 t
E fy
t d E d 0.056 t fy
E d 0.078 fy t
E d 0.112 fy t
t1
b1
t1 t1 b2
b 0.4 t
E fy
KAPASITETEN KAN BESTEMMES ETTER PKT 5.6
1.22
TVERRSNITT LIVPLATE
TRYKKKRAFT
OG
TVERRSNITTSKLASSE Lokal knekning Flytning ytterste fiber Siste flyteledd Full plastisk
MOMENT
1/2d
t MOMENT
d 2.5 t
E fy
d 3.8 t
E fy
d 4.2 t
E fy
Np = fddt
N = s dt
d1 t d2
N = s dt
TVERRSNITTSKLASSE 1 OG 2
N d 2.50(1 - 0.93 ) Np t
N d 2.20(1 - 0.20 ) Np t
N d 3.80(1 - 0.55 ) Np t
TVERRSNITTSKLASSE 3
Figure 3.5 Cross-sectional classification
N d 4.20(1 - 0.59 ) t Np
KAPASITETEN KAN BESTEMMES ETTER PKT 5.6
N 1.0 Np
N 0.10, Np
N 0.15, Np
0.15
E fy
E fy
E fy
E fy
N 0.10, Np
1.23
3.2 Kinematic calculation of plastic resistance
Let us once more consider the simply supported beam with a concentrated load with mid span. Assuming a plastic deformation field as shown in Figure 3.6, energy principles may be used to derive the plastic resistance.
Pc
q
2q
Figure 3.6 Plastic mechanism All elastic energy is neglected. No work is carried out before the beam collapses. The external virtual work is:
We = Pc w
( 22 )
The internal virtual work is related to the plastic moment at mid section and is given by
We = M p 2
when is the discontinuity in the slope at mid section. Further, the geometrical relationship applies:
( 23 )
w=
l 2
( 24 )
The internal virtual work is equal to the external virtual work
1.24
We = Wi
4M p l Pc = M p 2 Pc = 2 L This result is identical to that of elastic analysis. It is noticed that the displacement w remains unknown. It is just the maximum resistance which is determined. The method is generalized through the Principle of Virtual Work. The product is as follows: 1) Assume the structure in static equilibrium 2) Assume a virtual displacement field which satisfies a) boundary conditions b) compatibility (correspondence between displacement and rotations) 3) Calculate internal and external virtual work 4) Equate internal and virtual work whereby the plastic resistance is obtained It is emphasized that the virtual displacement field is not necessarily identical to the true displacement field as in the example above. However, the boundary conditions and the compatibility requirements must be complied with.
Example: Clamped beam under hydrostatic pressure.
( 25 )
qc
dq
dq
2dq
dw l
Figure 3.7 This example was analysed statically above. It is natural to use the deformation field in
1.25
Figure 3.7 with hinges in the middle and at the supports. External virtual work:
We = qc w ( x ) dx = qc l
0
w
2
( 26 )
Internal virtual work:
Wi = M p ( + 2 + ) = 4 M p
Compatibility:
( 27 )
w =
Equilibrium:
l 2
( 28 )
We = Wi L
qc L 4 qc =
= 4M p L2
( 29 )
16 M p
Once again, the same results as in the static analysis is obtained, butt he present method is simpler.
1.26
Structure with unknown hinge position
q B A ql 2 8 x 5 8 l = 0.625 l
l
9 ql 2 128 Elastic bending moment
dq1 dw
x
dq2 dq1 + dq2 l -x

Figure 3.8
Plastic virtual deformation state
The moment diagram in the elastic range is given in Figure 3.8. It is easy to see that 1st hinge occurs in pt. A. The position of the 2nd hinge is, however, not straight forward. It may be natural to assume that the position is at x = 5 / 8l where the elastic moment diagram has a maximum. This is, however, not the case as this position is experiencing the largest increased in moment often the first hinge has been inserted in pt. A. The largest growth takes place in
L 5L x = l / 2 such that the hinge position is expected to be close to x , . Let x denote the 2 8
unknown position to hinge 2. The mechanism is indicated in Figure 3.9. Internal virtual work:
Wi = M p { 1 + 1 + 2 }
Geometry:
( 30 )
1.27
1 x = (l x ) 2
2 = x 1 lx
( 31 )
Wi = M p 2 +
x l x 1
( 32 )
External virtual work:
We = qL
w
2
= qL
1 x
2
( 33 )
We = Wi
q = Mp 2+ x l x = 2M p 2 L x x L (l x )x l 2
( 33 )
It is natural to choose qmin

dq = 0 1(L x )x (L 2 x )(2 L x ) = 0 dx x 2 + 4 xL 2 L2 = 0 4 L 16 L2 8L2 x= = L 2 2 2 x = 0.568L
( 34 )
in the expected interval.
qmin = 11.66
Mp L2
( 35 )
Load at first flow

1.28
q y L2 8
= My 8M y
( 36 )
qy =
L2 qc 11.66 M p = = 1.46 8 My qy
1.46 reserve resistance
- reserve capacity for cross-section

Let us see what the result would have been if we had assumed a given position of the yield hinge without using the minimization procedure. The collapse resistance for a varying x can be determined from Eq. (4.39). The results are given in Table 1. It is observed that for all positions the resistance is larger than the calculated
qc = 11.66M p / l 2 .
Let us consider the moment diagram for the beam. As before it may be split into two contributions, one from the beam in purely elastic state and one contribution from the state after first hinge. This is sketched in Figure 3.9a. By a mechanism analysis it is implicitly assumed that the bending moment equals the plastic moment in the hinges. If the choice of hinge positions is incorrect the bending moment will generally be larger than the plastic moment outside the hinge positions. This is illustrated in Figure 3.9b for the case that hinge no. 2 is assumed to be formed at the section with the largest field moment in the elastic case.
1.29
q1 = 8
Mp
l2
q1 = 8
Mp
l2
0.5 l Mp
0.625 l
0.5 l Mp
0.625 l
q2 = 3.66
l2
q2 = 3.73
l2
qc = 11.66
Mp
l2
Mp
qc = 11.73
Mp
l2
Mp
( a ) x = 0.586 l
( a ) x = 0.625 l
Figure 3.9 Moment distribution for two different mechanisms
3.3 Bound theorems
In sections 4.1. and 4.2 the plastic resistance is calculated by means of a static and kinematic analysis, respectively. In spite of the simplicity of the example it is observed that if an inaccurate mechanism is assumed the kinematic approach will overestimate the resistance. For more complex systems, it is generally more difficult to determine the correct mechanism. It is therefore useful to apply two theorems to determine an upper and lower limit for the plastic resistance. First, a couple of definitions must be introduced.
Definition 1:
A virtual displacement field is kinematically admissable if: a) Geometric compatibility between virtual displacements and virtual rotation exists everywhere b) The moment capacity in the yield hinges is equal to the plastic moment
Definition 2:
A load condition is statically admissible when:

1.30
a) Static equilibrium between external action and internal forces/moment is complied with everywhere b) The bending moments does not exceed the plastic moment anywhere in the structure The following theorems are generally valid for calculations of static resistance of a structure in a given load state.
Upper bound theorem: Of all kinematically admissible mechanisms will all, but the correct
one, give a large plastic resistance than true resistance.

Loer bound theorem: Of all statistically admissable mechanisms will all, but the corrects
one, give a smaller plastic resistance than the true resistance.

Uniqueness theorem: If a mechanism is both kinematically and statistically admissable the
calculated plastic resistance is the true plastic resistance.
3.4 Plastic mechanism analysis of a portal frame
The plastic resistance of the portal frame shown in Figure 3.10 is sought
P
a 2a
2a
Figure 3.10 Portal frame
1.31
0.136
0.205 0.137 P 0.33 ( x Pa )
0.195
0.098
0.353 ( x Pa )
0.33Pa = My a) P = 3My / a
Moment distribution at first yield 0.353Pa = My b) P = 2.83My / a Figure 3.11
The results of elastic analysis are shown in Figure 3.11a for the case the portal frame is foxed at upper right corner and in Figure 3.11b is the corner is free to deform sideways. The plastic resistance is calculated for both cases. Frame with no sidesway Mechanism I
dq
dq
2dq
dw
2a
Figure 3.12 Portal frame with no sidesway External virtual work:
We = Pcw = Pc a
Internal virtual work:
( 37 )
1.32
Wi = M p ( + 2 + ) = 4 M p We = Wi Pc a = 4 M p
Plastic resistance
Pc = 4M p a
( 38 )
( 39 )
Comparison with elastic design:

M maks = yW = M y 0.33Pc a = M y Pc = Pc = Py 4 3 Mp a = 1.33 M p = 1.33 Mp My a 3M y a
( 40 )
1.33 = shape factor = redistribution factor Frame with sidesway Mechanism I as above Mechanism II
dq dw
1/2dq 1/2dq
dq
2dq
dq
Figure 3.13 Portal frame with sidesway

1.33
We = Pcw = Pc a Wi = Pc + + 2 = Pc 3.5
Pc = 1 2 3.5M p a
( 41 )
Reserve resistance:
3.5 M p Pc = = 1.23 Py 2.85 M y
( 42 )
A sidesway mechanism in opposite direction is also possible.. Mechanism III

dq dw
2dq
dq
2dq
dq
Figure 3.14
We = Pa Wi = M p {2 + + 2 } = 5M p
P= 5M p a ) : strre
( 43 )
It is natural to chose mechanism II as the critical one. The moment diagrams for mechanism I and mechanism II is shown in Figure 3.15 and Figure 3.16
1.34
Mechanism I:
Mp
Mp
Mp
Mp a
Mp 2a
SfH # 0
Figure 3.15 Moment diagram mechanism I The assumed deformation field induces reaction forces which do not satisfy the requirement to equilibrium between internal and external forces. Consequently, the mechanism is not admissible statically. Mechanism II:
Mp Mp 2
Mp
Mp 2a
Mp 2a
Figure 3.16 Moment diagram mechanism
1.35
4. PLASTIC RESISTANCE UNDER COMBINED LOADING

So far it has been assumed that the cross-sections are exposed to pure bending moment. Generally they will be subjected to combined bending moment shear and axial force. The presence of shear and axial force will reduce the plastic moment.
4.1 Interaction between bending and axial force
Rectangular cross-section
sy
sy
h M b
e M
sy sy sy
Figure 4.1 Rectangular section exposed to bending and axial force Figure 4.1 shows the stress distribution in a fully plastic utilized section under combined bending and axial force. It is convenient to split the stress distribution into a pure bending contribution and a pure axial distribution as shown in the figure. The bending moment and axial force are given by: e 2 bh 2 be 2 M =y y = M p 1 h 4 4
( 44 )
N = be y = bh y
e e = Np h h
( 45 )
1.36
By combining the two equations there is obtained:
M N =1 + M p Np
( 46 )
The derivation is independent of whether the axial stress is in tension or compression and the direction of the moment. The interaction equation is doubly symmetric with respect to the coordinate axes.
N Np 1
-1
M Mp
-1
Figure 4.2 Interaction curve for rectangular cross-section The combination of bending moment and M and axial forces which fall inside the contours can be resisted by the cross-section. Any point on the contour represents fully cross-section, points outside the contour are inadmissible.
1.37
Circular cross-section
t t << r
sy
sy
q0
d
sy sy
Kombinert
sy
Byning Aksielt
Figure 4.3 Tube under combined bending and axial force From Figure 4.2 the following relationship may be established.
M = 4 y r cos rtd = 4 y r 2 sin 0 =M p cos 0 2 0

2 2 N = 4 y tr 0 = 2rt y 0 = N p 0 2 2 2
( 47 )
( 48 )
By combining Eqs. (5.47) and (5.48) there is obtained:

N M =0 cos 2 N Mp p
( 49 )
The curve lies somewhat inside that of a rectangular cross-section.. I-profile

sy
Af tw t h Aw b e 2 e 2 M N
sy
sy sy sy
1.38
Figure 4.4 I-profile under combined bending and axial force The plastic stress distribution under combined moment and axial loading for a symmetric Iprofile is shown in Figure 5.32. It has to be distinguished between plastic neutral axis in web and in the flange i) Plastic neutral axis in web. twe 2 M = Mp y 4
N = et w y
( 50 )
( 51 )
From these equations there is obtained

N M = M p N p
2 2 A t w hw y A 4 w 2
( 52 )
where Aw , hw area and height of web, respectively. This may also be expressed
M N + M p Np
2
A Ww A W =1 w
( 53 )
where Ww =
2 t w hw plastic section modulus for web og W is total section modulus.. For an I4
profile there is obtained approximately

W = A (h t ) + Ww A Aw Ah hw + w w 2 4 A Ah Ah A = hw w w = w w 2 A 1 2 4 4 w
( 54 )
A = Ww 2 A 1 w
The interaction curve may be expressed as
1.39
M N 1 =1 + M p N p Aw Aw 2 2 A A N A w Np A ii) Plastic neutral axis in flange:

sy
Af tw t h M Aw b N
( 55 )
sy
sy
sy
sy
Figure 4.5 The distance between the flange inside surface and plastic neutral axis is denoted c.
M = M p {bc (hw + c ) + Ww } y N = ( Aw + 2bc ) y
( 56 )
( 57 )
For thin-walled sections c<<hw. This gives:

M =Mp Nhw + Ww y 2
( 58 )
The expression for the plastic section modulus Eq. (5.58) is introduced and using N p = A y there is obtained
1.40
Aw A 1 M N + =1 M p N p Aw Aw A 1 21 2 2A N A w Np A or N Aw M + =1 1 2A M p N p N A w Np A Figure 5.34 shows the yield contours for various values of Aw/A.
N Np 1.0
( 59 )
( 60 )
Parameter Aw / A
0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
IPE - sections (ECCS) HEA, HEB, HEM sections (ECCS)
0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 M Mp
Figure 4.6
1.41
5. STRAINS IN ELASTIC-PLASTIC REGION
5.1 Strain in cantilever subjected to elastic-plastic bending
Figure 5.1 Cantilever beam Consider the cantilever beam in Figure 5.1 The cross-section is elastic when M < M y . Once
M < M y yielding starts in the utmost fiber. For increasing bending moment the plastic zone
spreads towards the neutral axis. At the end the whole cross-section is plastified and the bending moment attains the plastic bending moment.
1.42
Figure 5.2 Strain distribution The distribution of strain in the elastic-plastic section is sketched in Figure 5.2. when 0 y according to the assumptions of linear elastic-ideal plastic behaviour. The corresponding moment is
2 4 y0 2 1 y M = 2 y dy = M p 1 = M p 1 0 3 0 3 h
h 2
( 61 )
where
Mp =
y h2
4
= the plastic bending moment for rectangular cross-section.
The axial variation of the bending moment is expressed as

x M = M p 1 1
( 62 )
From this there is obtained
0 1 = y x
3 1
( 63 )
The rotation in the elasto-plastic zone from the onset of yielding to an arbitrary point, 1 , from the end is given by
2 y 1/ 3 1 41 y 2 0 dx = 1 h 1 x dx = 3h h 3 1
1/ 3
y 1 max
( 64 )
where max denotes 0 at 1 .

1.43
This shows that the rotation in elastic-plastic zone for an ideal plastic material is bounded and approaches asymptotically the value 41 y 3h
ep =
( 65 )
5.2 Tensile fracture calculation model
The rupture criterion is calculated using conventional beam theory. A linear strain hardening model is adopted. For a cantilever beam subjected to a concentrated load at the end, the strain distribution along the beam can be determined from the bending moment variation. In Figure 5.3 the strain variation, = max Y , is shown for a circular cross-section for a given hardening parameter. The extreme importance of strain hardening is evident; with no strain hardening the high strains are very localised close to the support (x = 0), with strain hardening the plastic zone expands dramatically.
50 45 40 35
Hardening parameter H = 0.005 Maximum strain max/Y = 50 = 40 = 20

No hardening
Strain
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.05 0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
x/l
Figure 5.3 Axial variation of maximum strain for a cantilever beam with circular crosssection On the basis of the strain distribution the rotation in the plastic zone and the corresponding lateral deformation can be determined.
1.44
If the beam response is affected by development of membrane forces it is assumed that the membrane strain follows the same relative distribution as the bending strain. By introducing the kinematic relationships for beam elongation, the maximum membrane strain can be calculated for a given displacement. Adding the bending strain and the membrane strain allows determination of the critical displacement as a function of the total critical strain. Figure 5.4 shows deformation as rupture for a fully clamped beam as a function of the axial flexibility factor c..
6
l/D = 30 w/D
3
l/D = 20 c= = = = 0 0.05 0.5 1000
c= 0 = 0.05 = 0.5 = 1000
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
cr/Y
Figure 5.4 Maximum deformation for a tubular fully clamped beam. (H=0.005)
1.45
Y
M
max
Y h
Y h
Strain
Stress distribution
Approximate stress distribution
Figure 5.5 Stress and strain distribution in bending
Figure 5.5 shows the stress distribution during bending. The true stress distribution is approximated by a simple stress distribution with no elastic core. This is a good approximation when the maximum strain is significantly larger than the yield strain. Using the approximate stress distribution the total moment can be expressed as a combination of the fully plastic moment and a hardening moment M max = M P + M h W = Y WP + hWe = Y WP 1 + h e W Y P ( 66 )
where Wp= plastic section modulus, We= elastic section modulus, h= hardening stress. Introducing the hardening modulus, H, this can also be written
W ( Y )H We = Y W P 1 + max 1 e H M max = Y W P 1 + max W Y WP P Y
( 67 )
The length of the plastic zone in the hardening region, where M > MP, is given by max W 1 e H W P = Y W 1 + max 1 e H W Y P
l M max M P = l M max
( 68 )
In this region the strain varies according to

1.46
( x ) = max 1
The rotation in the hardening region becomes
x l
( 69 )
l x l l = 0 dx = max 0 1 dx = max
r r l 2r
( 70 )
and the deformation at the end of the hardening region w = 0 ( x )dx =

l
max l
x2 x dx r 0 2l
max l 2
3r
2 = l 3
( 71 )
If the elastic deformation outside the hardening region is neglected the total deformation at mid-span is calculated from
l 2 l 1 l 2 1 l w0 = (l l ) + l = 1 1 l = max 3 2r l 3 l 3l
( 72 )
This shows that the effective length of the beam from a mechanism point of view is 1 l ( 73 ) l eff = 1 l 3l The deformation can also be made non-dimensional
w0 l l 1 l = max 1 d d l 3 l
2
( 74 )
For a clamped beam l l/4, w0 w0/2, hence

w0 1 l l 1 l = max 1 8d l 3 l d
2
( 75 )
For a simply supported beam l l/2, w0 w0

w0 1 l l 1 l = max 1 4d l 3 l d
2
( 76 )
Both cases are represented by

1.47
w0 1 l l 1 l = max 1 d 4c1 d l 3 l
where c1 = 1 for simply supported conditions and c1 =2 for clamped ends.
( 77 )
In the above equation the plastic rotation in the elasto-plastic region should be included. This can be approximately taken as
= 21 e Y W r P
with a corresponding deformation W l w 41 e Y W d d P Hence the total deformation can be expressed as
2 1 l 1 l We Y l w0 1 1 = max +4 4c1 l 3 l WP max d d
( 78 )
( 79 )
( 80 )
If the member ends experience some restraint membrane forces will develop. Assume that the membrane strain is proportional to the bending strain. This is a reasonable assumption when the membrane force becomes large as indicated in the Figure 5.6.
M/MP Plastic rotation and elongation normal to yield surface
N/NP
Figure 5.6 Yield surface and plastic deformations Since the membrane strain and bending strain varies linearly the elongation in the hardening region the plastic elongation can be expressed as
1.48
u=
1 m max l 2
( 81 )
From pure geometric considerations the elongation for the cantilever beam must be
w u= 0 2l
2
( 82 )
Thus, the displacement can be written
w0 m l l = max l d d
( 83 )
In this case the deformation for the full beam can be expressed as
w0 1 l l m = max d 4 l d
2
( 84 )
regardless of the rotational boundary conditions (clamped/free) The bending strain and the membrane strain ads. Fracture occurs when the total strain becomes equal to the critical strain, i.e.
cr = max + m max
or
2
( 85 )
cr
w0 d = 1 l 1 l We 1 + 41 4c1 l 3 l W P
Y max
w0 d + 2 2 l 1 l l d 4 l d
( 86 )
Except for the term c1 the denominators on the right hand side are of the same order of magnitude. In order to simply calculations the following simplification is done w0 w0 d + d cr = cw c1cw where
2
( 87 )
1.49
cw =
1 l 1 l We 1 + 41 4c1 l 3 l W P
Y max
l 2 d
( 88 )
From this equation the critical deformation is calculated as
w0 c1 = d 2
( 1 + 4c
w cr
/ c1 1
( 89 )
If the ends of the beam are not fully restrained the development of the membrane force is delayed. On the basis of the resistance curve for various restraints it is found that the delay can be estimated by scaling the membrane displacement with the factor c 1+ c where c is the non-dimensional spring stiffness. Introducing this factor in the equation for the critical stress there is obtained w0 c = 1 d 2c f where c cf = 1+ c
2
( 90 )
( 1 + 4c c
w f
cr
/ c1 1
( 91 )
( 92 )
For a stiffened plate, where the effective plate flange is equal to or larger than the area of the stiffener, the plastic neutral axis in bending and combined bending/membrane tension lies in the plate flange. The distance to the plastic neutral axis to the extreme fibre of the crosssection is equal to the web height, hw. Hence, the diameter, d, in the above equation should be replaced by d 2 hw

Plastic Analysis Beams Frames

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Plastic Analysis Beams Frames

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PLASTIC ANALYSIS OF BEAMS AND FRAMES

Jrgen Amdahl, NTNU

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Figure 1.2 Linear elastic-perfectly plastic material behaviour

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

2. PLASTIC BENDING MOMENT

1 where W iselastic section modulus = bh 2 6

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Introducing the relationship

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

bh 2 = Y / y / dA - plastic section modulus 4 A

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

M My 1.7 1.5 1.27 1.10 - 1.18 1.125

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Plastisk axis neutral nytralakse trykk

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

A Elastic neutral axis Plastic neutral axis

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Example: Thin walled tubular section

W p = ydA = 4 r sin rdt = 4r 2t | cos

I-profile with small web

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

3. ELASTO-PLASTIC RESPONSE OF BEAMS

Moment Moment My M < My Curvature Curvature

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

3.1 Static calculation of plastic resistance

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

The load at first yield is given by

The resistance beyond first yield is given by

and is solely determined by the shape factor for the cross-section.

Example : Clamped beam subjected to hydrostatic load.

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

q1 L2 12 q1 L2 q2 L2 In the middle: M p = + 24 8 2 2 q L qL 1 2 = 1 q2 = q1 8 24 3 Beam end: Mp =

The total resistance comes out to be: qc = q1 + q2 = 16 M p 4 q1 = 3 L2

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

to mid section. The total reserve resistance is:

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

1 Hinge at mid span 0.75 Hinges at ends

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

The rotation at ends becomes M 0 M1 1 2 1 1 M pl dx = M p 1 l = EI 2 3 2 EI 6 EI

For a rectangular cross-section this becomes

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

KAPASITETEN KAN BESTEMMES ETTER PKT 5.6

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Figure 3.5 Cross-sectional classification

KAPASITETEN KAN BESTEMMES ETTER PKT 5.6

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

3.2 Kinematic calculation of plastic resistance

The internal virtual work is equal to the external virtual work

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Internal virtual work:

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

Structure with unknown hinge position

dq2 dq1 + dq2 l -x

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

External virtual work:

It is natural to choose qmin

in the expected interval.

Load at first flow

Plastic analysis of beams and frames

1.46 reserve resistance