Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct
A second-order inelastic model for steel frames of tapered
members with slender web
Jin-Jun Li
a
, Guo-Qiang Li
b,
, Siu-Lai Chan
c
a
R&D Department, Shanghai Maglev Transportation Development Company, 2520 Longyang Road, Shanghai, 201204, China
b
College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road, Shanghai, 200092, China
c
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
Received 22 June 2002; received in revised form 29 January 2003; accepted 29 January 2003
Abstract
A concentrated plasticity model is proposed for second-order inelastic analysis of the steel frames of tapered members with a
slender web. Such signicant effects as residual stresses, initial geometric imperfection, gradual section yielding at the element
ends, distributed plasticity within the element and local web buckling are considered in this model. Numerical examples on tapered
compact columns, prismatic beam-columns with local buckling, a prismatic frame with local buckling and a tapered frame with
local buckling are studied in this paper to verify the accuracy and efciency of the proposed analytical model. As an application,
the column curves of tapered steel columns are obtained with the proposed analytical model, both excluding and including the local
buckling effects of slender webs. Some meaningful conclusions are drawn in the end of this paper.
2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Second-order inelastic analysis; Concentrated plasticity model; Steel frames; Tapered members; Slender web
1. Introduction
The present approaches for second-order inelastic
analyses of steel frame structures can be generally cate-
gorized into two types: concentrated plasticity model
(plastic hinge method) and distributed plasticity model
(plastic zone method) [12].
Two different distributed plasticity models exist, 3D
shell FE and plastic zone method based on beam-column
theory. The 3D shell FE is the fundamental distributed
plasticity model in common sense to predict the actual
response of steel frame structures [3], where the web
plate and ange plates are discreted with a large number
of 3D shell elements and non-linearities can be explicitly
and exactly reected. Some widely applied software,
such as ABAQUS and ANSYS are capable of being
tools for these analyses. However, the second-order plas-
tic zone method based on beam-column theory, with

Corresponding author: Tel: +86 21 6598 2975; Fax: +86 21

6598 3431.
E-mail address: gqli@mail.tongji.edu.cn (G.-Q. Li).
0141-0296/03/$ - see front matter 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00043-9
much less degrees of freedom and therefore much less
need for computer effort, is more applicable in practical
analysis of steel frame structures. The plastic zone
method can consider the complex distribution of plas-
ticity through the volume of a structure by discretization
of members along the length and over the cross-section
[8,16,34], including the effects of residual stresses,
initial geometrical imperfection, etc. However, it is still
very time-consuming due to the necessary ne-mesh
discretizations, even based upon present powerful com-
puters [12,19].
The simple plastic hinge method is a simple and
efcient approach for representing the inelastic behavior
of steel frames. The material of a steel frame is assumed
to be elastic-perfectly plastic and a second-order elastic
analysis of the structure is performed until the plastic
moment capacity is reached at the maximum moment
section. An imaginary hinge is then placed in the struc-
ture at this location. This procedure is repeated until a
sufcient number of hinges have formed to produce a
mechanism [12]. However, it is found that the analytical
results of the simple plastic hinge method are over-esti-
mated in certain cases [12,19].
1034 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
Several novel plastic hinge methods, such as the
rened plastic hinge method [29,30], modied plastic
hinge method [20,21], notional load plastic hinge
method [31], quasi plastic hinge method [2], and the
model used in the NIDA (Nonlinear Integrated Design
and Analysis for steel frame structures) software [9,10]
have been proposed in the past decade. These improved
plastic hinge methods seek to be as simple and efcient
as the simple plastic hinge method while as accurate for
the assessment of load-bearing capacity of steel frames
as the plastic zone method. Two modications are made
to account for: (1) the secant stiffness degradation at the
plastic hinge location; and (2) the member stiffness
degradation between two plastic hinges.
The conventional plastic hinge analysis for steel frame
structures assumes the section to be compact, and does
not consider the degradation of the section capacity
caused by local buckling. Blandford and Glass [6] con-
sidered the local web buckling of steel box sections in
the static and dynamic frame analysis with a simple
effective breadth formula and therefore treated the
buckled prismatic members as non-prismatic members.
Based on the rened plastic method, Kim and Lee [18]
proposed the improved rened plastic-hinge method by
introducing the LRFD equations for local buckling
strength, to account for local buckling effects in second-
order inelastic analysis. With the similar form of the
rened plastic hinge method, the pseudo plastic zone
method can consider the local member buckling by
improving the stiffness parameters with accurate stud
beam-column 3D FE analysis and dening some equa-
tions such as the inelastic stability function and imper-
fection reduction equations [5]. Of course, these investi-
gations were initiated for the prismatic steel structures.
Steel frames comprising tapered beams and columns
not only provide even distribution of structural strength,
but also yield a design with less steel consumption. Since
the structural strength along member length is non-uni-
form, the plastic zone method is, strictly speaking,
required to predict the second-order inelastic response
of tapered steel frames. Alternatively, step representation
by dividing the tapered member into a large number of
prismatic elements can be used for the same purpose
[32]. However, both the plastic-zone method and the sat-
isfactory step representation need great computational
efforts and are not convenient for daily use in engineer-
ing design of tapered and non-compact steel structures.
To the authors knowledge, few investigations were
previously conducted on the second-order inelastic
analysis of tapered steel structures. Li [26] conducted a
research study and this paper presents a simplied but
accurate concentrated plasticity model for second-order
inelastic analysis of tapered and non-compact steel frame
structures, where a modied plastic-hinge method is
adapted to tapered member based on the corresponding
elastic stiffness matrix of tapered elements. Effects of
local web buckling on the structural capacity are con-
sidered directly by re-calculating the elemental stiffness
with the effective breadth formula under various stress
states. Numerical examples on a tapered and compact
column, prismatic and non-compact columns, a pris-
matic and non-compact steel portal frame and a tapered
and non-compact steel portal frame are employed to
examine the accuracy and efciency of the analytical
model proposed in this paper. As an application, the col-
umn curves of tapered steel columns are obtained with
the proposed analytical model, both excluding and
including the effects of slender webs.
2. Basic assumption
1. The tapered steel member is shown in Fig. 1 and
frames with such tapered members are studied in this
paper. The height of the web is linearly varied with
the anges symmetric and uniform in width along the
member length.
2. The material of steel members is assumed to be elas-
tic-perfectly plastic.
3. All members are initially straight.
4. The plane section remains plane after deformation.
5. Shear deformation is considered in the elastic stiff-
ness matrix but its contribution to yielding is ignored.
6. Only local web buckling is considered and local
ange buckling is ignored.
7. The frame is braced in such a manner as to preclude
lateral torsional instability of any member.
8. Elastic unloading at plastic hinge is not considered.
3. Proposed concentrated plasticity model
3.1. Elastic stiffness matrix
For the tapered member studied in this paper, the
applied forces and deformations can be modeled as in
Fig. 1. A steel tapered member.
1035 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
Fig. 2. Following the same procedure for prismatic
beams [22,23], the exual equilibrium differential equ-
ation with non-dimensional form of the tapered Timosh-
enkoEuler beam element simultaneously considering
effects of axial forces and shear deformation can be writ-
ten as [24,26,27],
a(z)yb(z)NyNy b(z)Q
1
(M
1
Q
1
z) (1)
where
a(z) EI(z)g(z), b(z) EI(z)
A
w
(z)
GA
2
w
(z)
, g(z) 1

N
GA
w
(z)
,
and A, A
w
and I are respectively the overall area, web
area and inertial moment of the cross-section at the
location of distance from the original point of the
element; and E and G are respectively elastic and
shear modulus.
By the Chebyshev Polynomial to represent functions,
y, a, b can be expressed as,
y(x)

M
n 0
y
n
x
n
(2a)
a(x)

M
n 0
a
n
x
n
(2b)
b(x)

M
n 0
b
n
x
n
(2c)
for the solution of Eq. (1), the elastic stiffness equation
of the tapered beam element could be obtained as,
[k
e
]{d} {f} (3)
where
{d} [d
1
,q
1
,d
2
,q
2
]
T
,
{f} [Q
1
,M
1
,Q
2
,M
2
]
T
Fig. 2. Applied forces and deformation of an element.
[k
e
]

f
1
f
2
f
1
f
3
f
4
f
5
f
4
f
6
f
1
f
2
f
1
f
3
f
7
f
8
f
7
f
9

.
The expressions of f
i
(i = 1,2,...,9) are given in Appendix
A and the detail of derivation of Eq. (2ac) can be found
in the previous publications [24,26,27].
From Fig. 2 the axial force within the tapered
element is
N EA(du/ dx) (4)
and the axial equilibrium differential equation is
dN
dx
E

A(x)
d
2
u
dx
2

dA
dx

du
dx

0 (5)
where u(x) is axial displacement. The element expression
of axial stiffness matrix is given by [17],
k
11
k
22
k
12
k
21

L
0
1
A(x)
dx
. (6)
Thus, the elastic stiffness equation of the tapered column
element could be obtained as
[k]{d} {f} (7)
where
{d} [u
1
,d
1
,q
1
,u
2
,d
2
,q
2
]
T
{f} [N,Q
1
,M
1
,N,Q
2
,M
2
]
T
[k]

k
11
0 0 k
12
0 0
0 f
1
f
2
0 f
1
f
3
0 f
4
f
5
0 f
4
f
6
k
21
0 0 k
22
0 0
0 f
1
f
2
0 f
1
f
3
0 f
7
f
8
0 f
7
f
9

.
3.2. Initial and limit yielding surface equations
It is necessary to provide the initial and ultimate yield-
ing surfaces for cross-sections for second-order inelastic
analysis using the concentrated plasticity model. A fully
yielding limit surface equation for the maximum strength
of I-sections was proposed [13]. This equation for the
case of uniaxial bending about the strong axis of the
cross-section has the simple form as

N
N
y

1.3

M
M
p
1.0. (8)
1036 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
The initial yielding surface including the effect of
residual stresses may be dened as
N
0.8N
y

cM
0.9M
p
1.0. (9)
In the above equations, Nand M are the axial load and
moment applied to the section respectively, N
y
= f
y
A and
M
p
are respectively the axial squash load and limit plas-
tic moment of the section for axial load and moment
applied separately, f
y
is the yield stress of material and
c is the shape factor of cross-section.
3.3. Elastic-plastic incremental stiffness matrix
Following the same procedure as the inelastic
incremental stiffness equation for prismatic element
[22,23], a similar equation for tapered element using the
plastic-hinge model can also be obtained as [25],
[k
p
]{d} {f} (10)
where {d} and {f} are the vectors of incremental
nodal displacements and applied loads, [k
p
] is the elastic-
plastic tangent stiffness matrix, which can be calcu-
lated by
[k
p
] [k
e
][k
e
][G][E][L][E]
T
[G]
T
[k
e
] (11)
where
[L] ([E]
T
[G]
T
([k
e
] [][k
e
])[G][E])
1
, []
diag[a
1
,a
1
,a
1
,a
2
,a
2
,a
2
],
[E]

1 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 1

T
, [G]
diag

1
N
1
,0,

1
M
1
,

2
N
21
,0,

2
M
2

.
In matrix [G],
i
(i = 1,2) is the yielding function at
the end i of the element, dened as,

N
N
y

1.3

M
M
p
. (12)
In matrix[], a
i
(i = 1,2) is the plastic hinge parameter
representing the degree of gradual yielding at the end i
of the element, dened by,
a
i

R
i
1R
i
(13)
where
R
i

1 MM
sN
1
MM
sN
M
pN
M
sN
M
sN
MM
pN
0 MM
pN
M, M
sN
and M
pN
stand respectively for applied moment,
initial yield moment and full plastic moment at the end
i of the element in the presence of axial force.
3.4. Concept of tangent modulus for tapered elements
The concept of tangent modulus for prismatic
elements was proposed to consider the plasticity spread
within the ends of elements [12,29,30], which may be
the results of residual stresses and large axial force to
squash load ratio. The tangent / elastic modulus ratio
based on the CRC column strength equations for pris-
matic members can be expressed as [12,29,30],
E
t
E
1.0 if N0.5N
y
(14a)
E
t
E

4N
N
y

1
N
N
y

if N 0.5N
y
. (14b)
Since the ratios of axial force to squash load calcu-
lated at the two ends of a tapered element are different,
the tangent modulus for tapered elements can be
approximately re-written from Eq. (14a,b) as,
E
t

A
1
A
1
A
2
E
t1

A
2
A
1
A
2
E
t2
(15)
where A
1
and A
2
are respectively the sectional area of
the two ends, E
t1
and E
t2
are representative of tangent
modulus at the two ends and can be determined by
Eq. (14a,b).
3.5. Effects of local web buckling
When a high and thin web plate is used for tapered
members of steel frames, the structural economy may
be enhanced further. Under this circumstance, the ange
outstand breadth-to-thickness ratio should be pro-
portionally large in order that web and ange plates can
provide mutual support in work stresses and sections
have good economy [11]. In the Chinese code [7] for the
design of lightweight steel portal frames, the maximum
permitted web height-to-thickness ratio can be up to 250
for steels with nominal yield strength of 235 MPa and
about 200 for steels with nominal yield strength of 345
MPa. Elastic buckling for slender webs possibly occurs
even when the section is fully elastic. The local web
buckling will generally lead to an evident reduction of
element strength and therefore structural resistance but
not structural failure. Although local ange buckling can
occur after local web buckling and leads to further stiff-
ness reduction [4], for the sake of simplicity only local
web buckling will be considered in this current research.
A series of sophisticated effective breadth formula for
web plates under compression and bending were
reported [33] and are employed in this study. For simply
1037 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
Fig. 3. Simply supported rectangular plate in compression and
bending.
supported rectangular plate shown in Fig. 3, the effective
breadth, dened in Fig. 4, can be determined by the fol-
lowing formulae [33],
b
e1
b

a
4l

bb
2
4l

(16)
b 1 C(ll
0
) l (17)
l
0
ABln

p
b

1.0 (18)
A 0.050.542exp

11.9
s
rc
s
y

(19)
B 0.090.107exp

12.4
s
rc
s
y

(20)
C 157

p
b

s
rc
s
y

43

p
b

1.2

s
rc
s
y

(21)
0.03
a
s
rc
0.3s
y

1 45

p
b
f

1
s
rc
0.3s
y

1
f
2
16

. (22)
If both sides in compression (s
1
,s
2
0),
b
e2
b
(1 hf)
b
e1
b
(23)
Fig. 4. Effective breadth of simply supported plates.
h
s
rc
0.3s
y

0.5986

p
b

1
s
rc
0.3s
y

(24)

0.44 29

p
b

b
e1
b
e2
b. (25)
If one side in compression and the other in tension
(s
1
0,s
2
0),
b
e2
b
(1 h)
b
e1
b
(26)
h
s
rc
0.3s
y

0.6883

p
b

1.27
f
2

(27)

1
s
rc
0.3s
y

0.53 29

p
b

0.97
f
3

b
e1
b
e2

b
f
(28)
where
f
s
1
s
2
s
1
(29)
l

s
1
s
E
(30)
s
E

t
b

Ep
2
k
12(1n
2
)
(31)
k
8.4
(2.1f)
(0f1) (32a)
k 10f
2
13.37f 11.36(1f2) (32b)
1
500

p
b

1
150
(33)
0
s
rc
s
y
0.3. (34)
In above formulae,
p
and s
rc
represent respectively the
effects of initial imperfection and residual stresses on
plate buckling, s
1
and s
2
are the maximum and mini-
mum stresses along the plate sides (positive for tension),
k and s
E
are the elastic buckling factor and the elastic
buckling stress for simply supported rectangular plates.
The above effective breadth formulae are used to re-
calculate the sectional area and inertial moment once the
web boundary stresses are equal to the critical stresses.
1038 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
The reduction of structural stiffness is accomplished
through the re-calculated sectional area and inertial
moment in forming the elemental stiffness matrix for
each element with web buckled. The parameters
p
/ b
and s
rc
/ s
y
in Eqs. (33) and (34) concerning initial geo-
metric imperfection and residual stresses are assumed to
be constants and equal to 1/150 and 0.3 respectively in
the proposed model.
3.6. Numerical scheme for non-linear nite element
solution
Second-order inelastic analysis of steel frames is a
typical nite element non-linear analysis, and best solved
for the incrementaliterative procedure. The modied
NewtonRaphson method is employed to obtain the limit
load of the structures in this paper.
4. Verication
4.1. Mesh convergence test
The taper ratio of tapered columns can be dened as,
r
d
1
d
2
1 (35)
where d
1
and d
2
are respectively the larger and smaller
section height.
Dening the effective length factor K and non-dimen-
sional slenderness parameter l

for tapered columns as,

K
p
L

EI
2
P
cr
(36)
where P
cr
is the elastic critical load of the tapered col-
umn under axial compression, L is the member length
and I
2
is the inertial moment at the smaller end, and
l

l
p

s
y
E

KL
pr
x2

s
y
E
(37)
where r
x2
is the gyrus radii at the smaller end, s
y
is
yielding strength and slenderness parameter
l
KL
r
x2
. (38)
For a tapered compact column with r = 4, l

=
1.265 and subjected to residual stresses, initial geometric
imperfection with sinusoid pattern of L/1000 amplitude
and axial compression, the relationship between element
number and relative error of capacity results by the pro-
posed method and step representation (ten prismatic
elements) are shown in Fig. 5. It can be observed that
even for such sharply tapered columns, i.e. r = 4, four
Fig. 5. Relative error vs number of elements for a sharply tapered
member.
proposed elements are enough to obtain the strength
capacity with sufcient accuracy.
4.2. Prismatic non-compact beam-columns
To examine section capacity of thin-walled I-sections
in combined compression and major axis bending, Test
series I and II were performed at the University of Syd-
ney [15]. The section capacities of eight prismatic beam-
columns with local web buckling were obtained in Test
Series I. These tested steel beam-columns are analyzed
here, both ignoring and considering the effects of local
web buckling. The ratios of analysis-to-test results are
illustrated in Fig. 6.
It can be observed that a great deviation exist in all
cases but the last one with pure bending (moment-to-
thrust ratio being 1) when ignoring local web buckling,
nevertheless good coincidence occurs when considering
those effects.
Fig. 6. Prismatic non-compact steel beam-colimns.
1039 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
4.3. A prismatic non-compact frame
A series of large-scale tests of prismatic steel frames
with non-compact sections were conducted at the
Queensland University of Technology [4] to validate the
distributed plasticity analysis and pseudo plastic zone
analysis. Test Frame 4 is used here to verify the pro-
posed method to prismatic steel frames with local buck-
ling. Fig. 7 gives the horizontal loaddisplacement (for
the top of right column) curves of the test and analytical
results, both ignoring and considering the effects of local
web buckling.
The ratios of analysis-to-test limit loads are respect-
ively 1.20 when ignoring local buckling, and 1.06 when
considering local web buckling. As shown in Fig. 7 the
analytical curve with local web buckling provides a bet-
ter prediction to the test result.
4.4. A tapered non-compact frame
A series of large-scale tests of tapered steel portal
frames with non-compact sections have been conducted
at Tongji University [26,28], where the Test Frame 1 is
presented here to verify the proposed method of the
analysis of tapered steel frames with member local buck-
ling. Test Frame 1 is a full-scale, single-bay and tapered
steel portal frame with sufcient out-of-plane restraints,
rigid knee and ridge joints and pinned column bases, as
shown in Fig. 8. The member sections are non-compact.
The web height-to-thickness ratio and ange outstand
breadth-to-thickness ratio of the members for the frame
are 127 and 10.42 respectively. Such a frame may occur
at local web buckling even in fully elastic state and local
ange buckling in the elasto-plastic state [11].
Vertical loads were only applied to Test Frame 1,
exerted by jacks incrementally till the structural failure.
The general arrangement of the test set-up for Test
Frame 1 is illustrated in Fig. 9. The on-site overview of
the test of Test Frame 1 is shown in Fig. 10. The elastic
modulus and yielding strength of the steel used for Test
Fig. 7. A prismatic non-compact steel frame.
Frame 1 are respectively 197 GPa and 394 MPa, which
were obtained by standard material tension tests.
At a load of 32 kN exerted by each jack, Test Frame
1 began to unload, indicating that the maximum capacity
of the frame had been achieved. Test Frame 1 failed in
the mode of in-plane instability due to the yielding and
spread of plasticity over the frame members caused by
the combination of axial compression force, bending
moment, residual stress and local buckling. Plastic local
buckling deformations were observed at the region
adjacent to the knee beam-to-column connection and the
ridge beam-to-beam connection, as shown in Fig. 11.
Curves of the experimental and the analytical load vs
vertical displacement at the ridge joint are plotted in Fig.
12. A good correlation between the two sets of results
was observed.
5. Application
5.1. Column curves of tapered compact I-columns
Tapered columns are widely used in steel portal frame
structures. For safety, the strength and stability of tap-
ered columns are specied in the codes for steel structure
design. For example, the equation for prismatic column
checks is adapted to tapered columns after introducing
the special effective length factors K
r
in the American
Code [1]. The Chinese Code [7] adopts a similar treat-
ment for the safety check of tapered columns. But the
effective length factors are generally calculated from the
elastic stability analysis, and therefore it is necessary to
exactly predict the actual column capacities of tapered
columns and examine the adequacy of abovementioned
code method.
Adopting the elastic analysis with the obtained elastic
stiffness equation in this paper, the effective length fac-
tor K of simply supported tapered columns dened in
Eq. (36) can be expressed as a function of tapered ratio
[26] as,
K 0.3155 (10.3155)exp(r/ 1.56). (39)
Adopting the second-order inelastic analysis for tap-
ered compact columns with various tapered ratios [see
Eq. (35)] and various slenderness [see Eqs. (37) and
(38)], column curves are obtained and shown in Fig. 13.
All calculated tapered columns are subjected to residual
stresses, initial geometric imperfection with sinusoid pat-
tern of L/1000 amplitude and axial compression, without
consideration of local web buckling. The coded column
curves respectively from LRFD [1] and GBJ 17-88 [14]
for prismatic compact columns are also given in Fig. 13,
which correspond with the curve of r = 0 obtained by
the proposed model.
The approach treating tapered steel columns as pris-
matic columns with specied effective length factor K
1040 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
Fig. 8. The dimensionsof test frame 1 (mm).
Fig. 9. Test set-up fpr test frame 1.
is generally conservative for compact sections in design,
since from Fig. 13 the real column strengths increase
with the taper ratio under the same slenderness factors.
5.2. Column curves of tapered I-columns with slender
web
As previously mentioned, tapered I-columns are
widely used in lightweight steel portal frame structures
and generally comprise a slender web. So, it is more
meaningful to predict the actual column capacities for
tapered columns with slender web than those of tapered
compact ones. To achieve this, a series of tapered col-
umns manufactured with Chinese Q345 steel material,
of maximum web height-to-thickness ratio of 200 and
constant ange outstand breadth-to-thickness ratio of 10
are selected, and the predicted column curves are plotted
in Fig. 14.
Comparing Fig. 14 with Fig. 13 we can see local web
buckling reduces the capacities of tapered non-compact
columns. The maximum possible degradation can be
more than 5% in the cases considered in this paper.
Further, the coded approaches for tapered and non-com-
pact steel columns such as CECS and LRFD are uncon-
servative when the ratio of compression-to-squash load
is larger than 0.8
6. Conclusions
To develop a theoretical approach for second-order
inelastic analysis of steel frames of tapered members
with slender web, a concentrated plasticity model is pro-
posed in this paper. The following concluding remarks
can be drawn.
1. In the proposed analytical model, the effects of
residual stresses, initial geometric imperfection, grad-
ual section yielding at the element ends, distributed
plasticity within the element and local web buckling
can be taken into account.
2. Numerical examples show that the proposed method
has a fast rate of mesh convergence since only four
tapered elements are sufcient even for the analysis
of sharply tapered (r = 4) steel members, while 20
elements are needed for the similar accuracy when
step representation is adopted.
3. Validation of the proposed model is conducted by
1041 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
Fig. 10. On-site overview of test frame 1.
comparing the analytical results with those of experi-
mental dates for prismatic non-compact I-sections, a
prismatic non-compact steel portal frame and a tap-
ered non-compact steel portal frame. Good accuracy
of the proposed model is conrmed.
4. Column curves of tapered compact column are pre-
dicted by the proposed analytical model and com-
pared with the coded prismatic column curves of
LRFD and GBJ 17-88. It can be found from the col-
Fig. 11. Plastic local buckling deformations at the failure of test frame 1.
Fig. 12. A tapered non-compact steel frame.
Fig. 13. Column curves for tapered compact columns.
umn curves that treating tapered columns as prismatic
ones through an appropriate effective length factor is
generally conservative for capacity checks.
5. Local web buckling evidently reduces the capacities
of tapered columns with slender web. The maximum
possible degradation can be more than 5% in the cases
considered in this paper. Although the axial forces in
tapered columns of the steel portal frames are small,
it should be noted that the coded formula for tapered
1042 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
Fig. 14. Column curves for tapered non-compact columns.
and non-compact columns such as CECS and LRFD
are unconservative when the ratio of compression-to-
squash load is larger than 0.8.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the nancial support of the
project Advanced Analysis & Design of Steel Portal
Frames Considering Integrated Limit States, in the
Scheme of University Principle Professor Support, by
the Education Ministry of PR China.
Appendix A
f
1

y
15
y
11
y
15
y
14
y
12
, f
2

y
13
y
15
y
16
y
12
y
11
y
15
y
14
y
12
, f
3

y
12
y
14
y
11
y
15
y
14
y
12
, f
4

1y
11
f
1
y
12
,
f
5

y
13
y
11
f
2
y
12
, f
6

y
11
f
3
y
12
, f
7
f
1
L Nf
4
, f
8
f
2
Lf
5
, f
9
f
3
Lf
6
,
y
1

L
GA
w
(0)g(0)
, y
2

L
g(0)
, y
3

L
GA
w
(1)g(1)
, y
4

L
g(1)
,
y
5

Lb
0
(Ny
1
L)
2a
0
, y
6

L
2
2a
0
, y
7

LNb
0
y
2
2a
0
,
y
8

2(LNb
0
a
1
)y
5
L(b
1
L)(Ny
1
L)
6a
0
, y
9

2(LNb
0
a
1
)y
6
6a
0
y
10

2(LNb
0
a
1
)y
7
LN(b
1
L)y
2
6a
0
, y
11
c
1
y
1
c
2
y
5
c
3
y
8
c
4
, y
12
c
2
y
6
c
3
y
9
,
y
13
(c
1
y
2
c
2
y
7
c
3
y
10
), y
14
c
5
y
1
c
6
y
5
c
7
y
8
c
8
y
3
, y
15
c
6
y
6
c
7
y
9
,
y
16
(c
5
y
2
c
6
y
7
c
7
y
10
)
References
[1] AISC LRFD. Manual of steel construction. Load and resistance
factor design, 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel
Construction, 1994.
[2] Attalla MR, Deierlein G, McGuire M. Spread of plasticity: quasi-
plastic-hinge approach. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE
1994;120(8):245173.
[3] Avery P, Mahendran M. Analytical benchmark solutions for steel
frame structures subjected to local buckling effects. Advances in
Structural Engineering 2000;3(3):21529.
[4] Avery P, Mahendran M. Large-scale testing of steel frame struc-
tures comprising non-compact sections. Engineering Structures
2000;22(8):92036.
[5] Avery P, Mahendran M. Pseudo plastic zone analysis of steel
frame structures comprising non-compact sections. Structural
Engineering and Mechanics 2000;10(4):37192.
[6] Blandford GE, Glass GC. Static/dynamic analysis of locally
buckling frames. Journal of Structural Engineering
1987;113(2):36380.
[7] CECS102: 98. Chinese specication for steel portal frame build-
ings (in Chinese); 1998.
[8] Chan SL. Inelastic post-buckling analysis of tubular beam-col-
umns and frames. Engineering Structures 1989;11:2330.
[9] Chan SL, Chui PPT. Non-linear static and dynamic cyclic analy-
sis of steel frames with semi-rigid connections. Oxford: Elsev-
ier, 2000.
[10] Chan SL. Stability design of steel structurestheory and practice.
In: Proceedings of International Conference on Steel and Com-
posite Structures, June, Korea; 2001: 4355.
[11] Chen SF. Guideline for stability design of steel structures (in
Chinese). Beijing: Chinese Press of Civil Engineering, 1996.
[12] Chen WF, Toma S. Advanced analysis in steel frames: theory,
software and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC PRess, 1993.
[13] Duan L, Chen WF. Design interaction equation for steel beam-
columns. Journal of Structural Engineering 1989;115(5):1225
43.
[14] GBJ 17-88. Codes for steel structure design (in Chinese); 1989.
[15] Hasham S, Rasmussen KJR. Section capacity of thin-walled I-
sections in combined compression and major axis bending. Jour-
nal of Structural Engineering 1998;124(4):3519.
[16] Kanchanalai T. The design and behavior of beam-columns in
unbraced steel frames, AISI project no. 189, report no. 2, Civil
Engineering/Structures Research Lab., University of Texas at
Austin; 1977.
[17] Karabalis DL. Static, dynamic and stability analysis of structures
composed of tapered beams. Computers and Structures
1983;16(6):73148.
[18] Kim SE, Lee J. Improved rened plastic-hinge analysis account-
ing for local buckling. Engineering Structures 2001;23:103142.
[19] King WS. A modied plastic hinge method for second-order
inelastic analysis of rigid frames. Structural Engineering Review
1992;4(1):3141.
1043 J.-J. Li et al. / Engineering Structures 25 (2003) 10331043
[20] King WS, White DW, Chen WF. Second-order inelastic analysis
methods for steel-frame design. Journal of Structural Engineering
1992;118(2):40828.
[21] King WS, Chen WF. Practical second-order inelastic analysis of
semirigid frames. Journal of Structural Engineering
1994;120(7):215675.
[22] Li GQ, Shen ZY. A unied matrix approach for non-linear analy-
sis of steel frames subjected to wind or earthquakes. Computers
and structures 1995;54(2):31525.
[23] Li GQ, Shen ZY. Theory for analysis and calculation of elastic
and elasto-plastic behavior of steel frameworks (in Chinese).
Shanghai: Shanghai Science and Technology Press, 1998.
[24] Li GQ, Li JJ. Effects of shear deformation on the effective length
of tapered columns with I-section for steel portal frames. Struc-
tural Engineering and Mechanics 2000;10(5):47990.
[25] Li GQ, Li JJ. Second-order inelastic analysis of steel gable frames
comprising taper members. In: Zhao XL, Grzebieta RH, editors.
Structural failure and plasticity. Oxford: Elsevier; 2000. p.
795800.
[26] Li JJ. Research on theory of non-linear analysis and integrated
reliability design for steel portal frames with tapered members
(in Chinese). PhD thesis, Department of Building and Structural
Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, P. R. China; 2001.
[27] Li GQ, Li JJ. A tapered Timoshenko-Euler beam element for
analysis of steel portal frames. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 2002;58(12):153144.
[28] Li JJ, Li GQ. Large-scale testing of steel portal frames compris-
ing tapered beams and columns. Advances in Structural Engineer-
ing 2002;5(4):25969.
[29] Liew JYR, White DW, Chen WF. Second-order rened plastic
hinge analysis of frame design part 1 and 2. Journal of Structural
Engineering 1993;119:3196237.
[30] Liew JYR, Chen WF. Implication of using rened plastic hinge
analysis for load and resistance factor design. Thin-Walled Struc-
tures 1994;20:1747.
[31] Liew JYR, White DW, Chen WF. Notional load plastic hinge
method for frame design. Journal of Structural Engineering
1994;120:143454.
[32] Shiomi H, Kurata M. Strength formula for tapered beam-col-
umns. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE
1983;110(7):163043.
[33] Usami T. Effective width of locally buckled plates in com-
pression and bending. Journal of Structural Engineering
1993;119(5):135873.
[34] Vogel U. Calibrating frames. Stahlbau 1985;10:17.