Buckling of Prestressed Steel Girders

MARK A. BRADFORD

ABSTRACT

Prestressing

of steel girders, in order to gain economy of

material, is starting to become popular in the United States.
An inherent danger in the stressing operation is loss of
stability of the girder between the points of attachment of the
tendon. The paper presents design charts for the elastic
buckling load induced by stressing an eccentric tendon, and
uses this to obtain a design buckling strength in accordance
with the LRFD Specification.
INTRODUCTION
Prestressing of steel plate girders may lead to substantial
economies of material. Densford et al.1 quote savings of 30%
in steel tonnage and 27% in concrete tonnage gained by
prestressing a short composite steel-concrete bridge that was
designed by the Oklahoma Department of Transportation.
Similar savings may be obtained for steel girders. Although
the use of prestressed steel girders is relatively new in the
United States, the technology is well-established in eastern
Europe.2,3
Perhaps the easiest way to prestress a steel girder is to
use straight high-strength rods, which are anchored at the
ends of the beam as shown in Fig. 1, and stressed in a manner
analogous to that for prestressing concrete beams. These
"hard" anchorages may have a number of "soft" anchorages
between them, allowing relative movement of the tendons.
Other methods of prestressing steel girders are discussed in
Ref. 1. Stressing the high-strength rods induces substantial
compressive stresses in the bottom flange of the beam before
the external loads are applied, and raises the question of the
stability of the girder under this loading. If the attachment of
the tendon to the web is at large spacing intervals, then the
girder may buckle between the points of attachment in an
overall or lateral mode.4 The designer must be certain that the
prestressing force is not large enough to cause buckling of the
girder. The use of LRFD design methods and the method in
this paper may be used to calculate the buckling strength.
The advantages of prestressing are reflected most for
plate girders, and these are most economically fabricated
from thin plate elements. Studies of the stability of plate
girders with thin webs have shown that the overall buckling
Mark A. Bradford is senior lecturer in civil engineering at the
University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales,
Australia. At the time of writing he was on sabbatical leave at the
University of Minnesota.

98

mode is distortional,5,6 rather than flexural-torsional,

characterized by bending or distortion in the plane of the
cross-section, as shown in Fig. 2. Distortional buckling loads
have been shown to be significantly lower than flexuraltorsional buckling loads if the web of the girder is slender.5
This paper uses a method of analysis that was developed
by the author6 to produce charts for the prestressing force
required to cause elastic distortional buckling of slender plate
girders. An example is presented to illustrate the use of the
design charts to calculate the maximum prestressing force in
accordance with the LRFD Specification.7 The use of LRFD
methods is becoming more widespread in the United States,
and the paper illustrates how LRFD design may be used in a
design situation.
ANALYSIS
A straight steel girder prestressed with two tendons at an
eccentricity e to the centroid of the section is shown in Fig. 1.
Provided that the girder is simply supported, the cross-section
is subjected to an axial force P and moment Pe applied at the
centroid, where P is the prestressing force. Of course, this
does not account for the amplification of the moment due to
in-plane bending, but this is taken account of by the
amplification term in the LRFD provisions.7
A computer method designed to calculate the distortional
buckling load factor d for the elastic buckling of these types
of beam-columns is given in Ref. 6. By assuming that the
beam-column buckles as a sine curve, the buckling
displacements uT, uB, T, B representing the displacement u
and twists of the top (T) and bottom (B) flanges may be
obtained from the matrix expression.

(a) Section

(b) Part-elevation
Fig. 1. Prestressed steel beam.

ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

([k] d[g]) { } = (0)

(1)

{ } = {uT, uB,T,B}T

(2)

where
and [k] and [g] are elastic 44 matrices. The buckling load
factor d is the characteristic value of Eq. 1, while the values
of { } represent the buckled shape. The computer method
may also be used for nonsymmetric and composite beams.
In using the computer program, values of the axial force
P and moment Pe were input, along with the section geometry
in Fig. 1. Values of d were obtained, giving the elastic
distortional buckling load Pd as
Pd = dP
(3)
Figures 3a to 3d give values of the buckling load Pd for a
range of geometries typical of plate girders. The values of Pd
are normalized with respect to the Euler buckling load Pe,
where
Pe = 2EIy/L2

(4)

Iy = B3T/6

(5)

and

with E being Young's modulus (29,000 ksi).

Figure 2 shows the buckling mode, obtained from { } in
Eq. 1, for B/h = 0.2, h/t = 200, T/t = 4 and L/h = 6. The

marked nature of the distortion of the web of the girder is

evident in this case.
APPLICATION
The application of the design graphs in Figs. 3a-3d is best
illustrated by an example. It is required to calculate the
design prestressing force that would cause a 100 ft long end
anchored plate girder with a "soft" tendon connection at
midspan to buckle. The buckling length is thus L = 50 ft. The
girder is fabricated from two 12-in. 1.0-in. flange plates and
a 50-in. 0.3-in. web plate. The tendon is located 23.0 in.
from the centroid. Take Fy = 50 ksi and E = 29,000 ksi. For
this problem
h
= 50.0 + 1.0 = 51.0 in.
B = 12.0 in.
T
= 1.0 in.
t
= 0.3 in.
L
= 1200 / 2 = 600 in.
e
= 23.0 in.
h/t = 51.0 / 0.3 = 170
B/h = 12.0 / 51.0 = 0.24
T/t = 1.0 / 0.3 = 3.33
L/h = 600 / 51.0 = 11.8
e/h = 23.0 / 51.0 = 0.45

Fig. 3a. Buckling curves.

Fig. 2. Buckled shape.

THIRD QUARTER / 1991

Fig. 3b. Buckling curves.

99

Hence

By interpolation from the graphs Pd/Pe = 0.74

3

Iy = 12.0 1.0 / 6 = 288 in.

Pe = 2 29,000 288 / 6002 = 229.0 kips
Pd = 0.74 229.0 = 169.5 kips

Kl
r

Fy
E

As Fy

(E2-4)

Pd

(E2-3)

Pn = 39.0 3.79 = 147.8 kips

(E2-1)

so

The elastic buckling load Pd can be used to calculate the

compressive strength Pn and the flexural strength Mn in the
LRFD Specification. Use of Eq. H1-1 in the LRFD for
combined forces will be conservative, since Mn is already
calculated accounting for the axial contribution, and Pn is
already calculated by accounting for the bending
contribution.
In design in accordance with Chapter E of the LRFD
=

.
0877
Fcr =
50 = 379
. ksi
. 2
34

and
Pu = cPn = 0.85 147.8 = 126 kips

In design in accordance with Chapter F, Mcr in Eq. F1-13

is the elastic flexural-torsional buckling moment, which from
the analysis here is Pde. The compressive strength Pn is thus
Pde/e = Pd = 169.5 kips. Because of the effects of in-plane
bending, the moment should be reduced by the reciprocal of
cm
1 Pd / Pe

Now
As = 2 12.0 1.0 + 50.0 0.3 = 39.0 in.
so
=

39.0 50
. > 15
.
= 34
.
1695

(6)

(H1-3)

where cm = 1.0, and Pe is the Euler buckling load in the plane

of bending.
Now
Ix = 5.03 0.3 / 12 + 12.0 1.0 51.02 / 4 = 10,928 in.4
Hence in H1-3 of the LRFD
Pe =

2 29,000 10,928
= 2,172 kips
1200
, 2

so
b Mn = 0.9 169.5 23

(1 169.5 / 2,172)
= 3,235 kip-in.
.
10

giving
Pu = 3,235 / 23.0 = 141 kips

(7)

It is interesting to note that if the interaction equation H1 in the LRFD is used, then
Fig. 3c. Buckling curves.

Pu
Pu 23
8

+
126 9 0.9 169.5 23

1 Pu / 2,172

.
10

giving
Pu = 74 kips

(8)

It is recommended that the lower value obtained by the

compression and bending methods be used, i.e., Pu = 126
kips. The 40% lower strength of 74 kips given in Eq. 8 is a
result of the "double use" of bending and compression
strengths in Chapter H of the LRFD Specifications, as the
buckling curves presented already account for the interaction
of bending and compression.
s.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Fig. 3d. Buckling curves.

100

The work described herein was performed while the author

ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

was on sabbatical leave in the Department of Civil and

Mineral Engineering at the University of Minnesota. The
facilities made available by the Department, and particularly
by Professor Theodore V. Galambos, are acknowledged, as is
the financial support provided by the Universities of New
South Wales and Minnesota.

4.

REFERENCES

6.

1.

2.

Densford, T. A., Hendrick, T. L., and Murray, T. M., "Short

Span Prestressed Steel Bridges," Engineering Journal, 27:No.3
(3rd Quarter 1990) 114-120.
Troitsky, M. S., Prestressed Steel Bridges: Theory and Design,

THIRD QUARTER / 1991

3.

5.

7.

(New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1990).

Belenya, E., Prestressed Load-Bearing Metal Structures, in
Russian, (Moscow: State Edition, 1963).
Trahair, N. S., and Bradford, M. A.,The Behaviour and Design
of Steel Structures, (New York: Chapman and Hall, 1988).
Hancock, G. J., Bradford, M. A., and Trahair, N. S., "Web
Distortion and Flexural-Torsional Buckling," Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, 106:No.ST7 (1980) 1557-1571.
Bradford, M. A., "Stability of Monosymmetric Beam-Columns
with Thin Webs," Journal of Constructional Steel Research,
15:(1990) 323-339.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Load and Resistance
Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
(Chicago: AISC, 1986).

101