Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Design Charts For Flexural and Lateral Torsional Buckling According To DIN 18800 or Eurocode 3
Design Charts For Flexural and Lateral Torsional Buckling According To DIN 18800 or Eurocode 3
Dr. G. Salzgeber
Institute for Steel, Timber & Shell Structures
TU Graz, Austria
1 Introduction
The new design checks for member stability in accordance to the EC 3 as well as DIN 18800
are more general and more complicated than former formulae. So it seems to be necessary to
make them more userfriendly in their use. Therefore a series of design charts were developed
to give a better understanding how the design formulae are working. Some charts are a
graphical representation of the given code checking formulae i.e. for the flexural buckling,
others e.g. for lateral torsional buckling are approximations due to simplifications. Furtheron
different constants – needed in the lateral torsional buckling check for more general loading
conditions – had been established by performing eigenvalue calculations with the program
ABAQUS. The given charts should simplify the member checks performed by hand–
calculation.
In the following the stability checks – flexural buckling and lateral torsional buckling – are
presented in principle in their code format. Afterwards the developed design charts are
discussed. Finally the design process performed with the charts is presented in comparison to
the code procedure.
The list of contents includes
• Flexural buckling according to DIN 18800 / EC 3
• Design charts for flexural buckling
• Lateral torsional buckling according to DIN 18800 / EC 3
• Design charts for lateral torsional buckling
• Examples
1
flexural
buckling
lateral
torsional
buckling
2
The parameters of the reduction factor κ are the
• non-dimensional slenderness λ and
• an imperfection (curve) parameter α - expressing the sensitivity against buckling
and the existing initial stress conditions of the chosen section type.
In the DIN 18800 the flexural buckling check for uni-axial bending is splitted up into two
parts. In in-plane buckling using the reduction factor κ related for the buckling mode in the
bending direction. In the buckling check out–of–plane (perpendicular direction) buckling only
the axial force is considered in the check. In comparison the EC 3 is using the minimum value
of the possible buckling modes as a conservative approach.
The design formula can be written in a different format which is very close to that we had in
former german code (DIN 4114) and in austria (B4600) up to now. For the case of uni-axial
bending the former design formulae are given in the presentation (Fig. 1). Instead of the
reduction factor κ reduced allowable stresses or an amplification factor ω has been used. The
interaction factor k is given by a fixed value by 0.9 which is widely on the unconservative side
in respect to the actual standards. This factor k is rising up to 1.5.
For each material one design chart is necessary to perform the flexural buckling check in
practical cases. For general loading conditions (moment distributions) a further diagram is
useful to determine the uniform moment factor βM. The design chart for flexural buckling will
be discussed using the steel grade 37 in accordance to the DIN 18800. Afterwards a chart
presents the uniformed moment factor is presented.
2.2 Design chart – Flexural Buckling according to DIN 18800 (ST 37)
Representative for the flexural buckling a design chart (Fig. 2) valid for the steel grade 37 with
a yield strength of 240 MPa (corresponding to the classification S235 in the EN 10025) will be
discussed in more detail. Identical charts are given for the steel grade 52 (S355) in accordance
to DIN 18800 (Fig. 3) as well as in accordance to EC 3 (Fig. 4, 5) using the specific material
definition. The charts can be used in uni-axial case as well as in the bi-axial case.
For the uni-axial bending case this formula is given in a slightly modified written format - so
the limit is given by the design value of yield stress fyd (related to the material safety factor γM).
• the reduction factor κ is given as a function of the slenderness and the imperfection
factor α (curve). For practitioner the slenderness is more common than the non–
dimensional slenderness. Therefore a different table (on the left hand side) with the
reduction values for each material is necessary.
• For simple moment cases the equivalent uniform moment factor βM is given on the
right side of the chart.
• For typical rolled cross sections the assign to the relevant buckling curve for in-
plane and out-of-plane buckling is given in the table.
• The formulae in the code determine the interaction factor k are straight lines. In
order to get the value the slenderness and a parameter p are needed. The parameter
is a function of the actual stress caused by axial force amplified by the reduction
factor and equivalent uniformed moment factor βM. For βM greater than 2.0 the
moment part will be reduced, otherwise (in most cases) increased. In plastic design
the interaction factor can be reduced by a factor including the plasticity of the
section (simplified about the strong axis by 14%). The interaction parameter ky is
limited on the lower side by an amount corresponding to the existing of the axial
force and on upper side by 1.5.
3
2.3 Equivalent uniform moment factor βM
In general cases of moment distributions the equivalent moment factor βM (Fig. 6) can be
determined in a simple way. Input parameters are the ratio between both hogging moments (ψ)
and the (sagging) moment due to lateral load only (simple beam). With these parameters the
βM–value can be established with the chart.
Single load and distributed load are covered.
In Austria a very simple check for lateral torsional buckling was used by checking the flexural
buckling of the flange in compression. So the effect of torsion was neglected in general. The
new design format is quite different than the engineers are accustomed to. In order to give a
better understanding to the engineer and to cover a wider field of applications a set of design
charts were developed useable for the widely used double symmetric I–section.
3.2 Design chart (1) – Lateral Torsional Buckling acc. to DIN 18800 / EC 3
In uni-axial bending case the design formula is given on the top of Fig. 8. Bending about weak
axis can be added as in case of flexural buckling check. As a simplification the calculation in
two steps, first the critical moment and in the second step the corresponding nondimensional
slenderness has been brought together. The slenderness for lateral torsional buckling can be
determined as a modified slenderness for flexural buckling about the minor axis by a factor for
the torsional rigidity (kp–factor) and a factor depending on the moment distribution (kc–
factor).
4
First the slenderness about the weak axis determined due to fork bearings (flange buckling) has
to be calculated. Further the effect of warping and torsion can be included in a simplified form
for I sections by the factor kp. This can be done in a good accuracy by the ratio of beam height
over flange thickness. In respect to slenderness and effect of load application point the factor kp
can be determined due to the graphic which is a generalization based on the formulae in the
annex F in EC 3. The value kp is given for plastic design of rolled sections. The value fits with
good accuracy compared with exact formulae. In case of elastic design it is possible to reduce
it by 5%. For welded sections an increase by 5% in respect to the rolled sections is necessary in
order to be not unsafe.
The slenderness can be reduced by a factor kc, which includes moment distribution. (kc is the
inverse of the square root of the constant C1 in EC 3). For simple cases the factor is given in the
table. General moment cases the constants kc and C2 are shown afterwards in Fig. 10 and
Fig. 11.
3.3 Design chart (2) – Lateral Torsional Buckling acc. to DIN 18800 / EC 3
In order to complete the design check the reduction factor κLT for lateral torsional buckling is
needed. In the table in Fig. 9 values according to DIN 18800 are listed. Rolled sections can be
calculated with the parameter n = 2.5. In cases of nearly uniformed moments n has to be
reduced by 20%. In EC 3 the curve a for rolled sections and curve c for welded sections has to
be taken.
The interaction parameter kM is given in a simplified form in this chart. The maximum is given
with 1.0. In some cases the factor can decrease down to 15%, what means, that axial force and
bending moment have less interaction. There are small deviations to the code formula. As
parameter in the diagram an amplified (increased) stress due to axial force multiplied by the
equivalent uniform moment distribution factor βM (see Fig. 6) is used.
The design check in simple cases can be performed. For more complex cases of loading and
support conditions further charts are necessary.
5
• In the left lower area a mixed failure mode of upper and lower flange is given. The
failure mode is influenced by the upper flange (compression in the middle of the
beam) so the reduction of the slenderness is moderate. If the upper flange is
laterally restraint high reductions of the buckling slenderness occur.
6
4 Examples
By the following design examples the usage and the accuracy of the present design charts is
worked out.
7
slenderness occurs from Euler case I with a relevant buckling length of 10[m].
⇒ For this section flexural buckling about major axis curve a has to be taken for IPE
sections and results in a reduction factor of 80%. The amplified stress gets nearly 5.0.
With βM = 1.4 for a triangle moment distribution of the ‘doubled simple beam’ a
parameter p = –3.0 is leading. So the interaction factor ky gets a value of 1.22 in the
elastic case. Using the plastic design check the interaction factor decreases by 3%.
The flexural buckling design check about the major axis leads to an utilization factor of 78%.
In comparison the design check according to DIN 18800 is worked out below. With the non–
dimensional slenderness λ and an imperfection parameter corresponding to curve a the
reduction factor κy can be determined. The same value is leading as above. Including the
plastic section parameter a slight different interaction factor is resulting due to the fact that the
plastic section modulus is 13% higher than the elastic one and in the design charts generally an
amount 14% has been assumed. The utilization factors in the buckling checks are the same in
both cases.
The design check for lateral torsional buckling is done first neglecting the lateral restraint on
the outer flange.
⇒ With the buckling slenderness about minor axis – determined due to the fork bearings –
the resulting reduction factor is about κz = 1/3. With the ratio of height over flange
thickness a profile factor (torsional rigidity) is resulting by kp = 0.74.
⇒ A further reduction due to the moment distribution is possible. With ψ = 0 a moment
factor βM = 1.74 is leading. Therefore an additional reduction by kc = 0.69 is given. With
a buckling slenderness for lateral torsional buckling with 72 the reduction factor κΜ
results to 90%.
⇒ The interaction factor between axial force and bending moment can be determined by the
chart to kM = 0.86. This leads to an utilization factor of about 99%
Nearly the same values are given using the code formulae. Small differences in the check by
the formulae in DIN 18800 were leading due to an approximation of moment distribution
(C1=1.77).
Including the restraining effect due to the claddings the axial part a reduction of the flexural
slenderness results in a buckling length of 109. Performing the lateral torsional buckling check
an utilization factor of 0.87 is carried out.
Doing the check by the formulae shows that the correct torsional buckling length given by the
formulae is 103 therefore slight differences in the design check occur.
5 References
EC 3, Design of steel structures, Part 1.1; General rules and rules for buildings, 1992
DIN 18800 Teil2, Stahlbauten, Stabilitätsfälle, Knicken von Stäben und Stabwerken, 1990
Petersen Chr., Statik und Stabilität der Baukonstruktionen, 2. Auflage, 1982, Vieweg
Greiner R., Unterweger H., Salzgeber G., Bemessungsbehelfe für Biegeknicken und Bieg-
drillknicken nach DIN 18800 bzw. Eurocode 3, Stahlbau 66 (1997) Heft 9, Seiten 606 – 616
ABAQUS Standard 5.7, Users Manual, Hibitt, Karlson & Sorenson, Inc. 1997
8
Fig. 1: FLEXURAL BUCKLING CHECK
according to DIN 18000 / EC 3
plastic design:
N Sd ky ⋅ M kz ⋅ M
y, Sd z, Sd
-------------------------------------------- + -------------------------------------- + -------------------------------------- ≤ 1.0
κ min ⋅ A ⋅ f y ⁄ γ M1 W pl, y ⋅ f y ⁄ γ M1 W pl, z ⋅ f y ⁄ γ M1
µ y ⋅ N Sd
k y = 1 – ----------------------- ≤ 1.5
κy ⋅ A ⋅ fy
W pl, y – W el, y
µ y = λ y ⋅ ( 2β My – 4 ) + ---------------------------------- ≤ 0.80 ( 0.90 )
W el, y
MQ
β M = β M, ψ + --------- ⋅ ( β M, Q – β M, ψ )
∆M
EC 3 λ 1 = 93.9ε
N pl λ λ 24.0
λ = - = ------ = --------------
------- ε = -----------
N cr λ1 92.9ε fy ε =
23.5
-----------
fy
1 curve α
κ = ------------------------------- ≤ 1.0
2 2
φ+ φ –λ a 0.21
2
b 0.34
φ = 0.5 ⋅ [ 1 + α ⋅ ( λ – 0.2 ) + λ ] c 0.49
d 0.76
N Sd N Sd
M Sd , β M
l
ω
zulσ N M
--------------- ⋅ ---- + 0.9 ⋅ ----- ≤ zulσ ..... ÖNorm, (DIN 4114)
zulσ k A W
1 N Sd M Sd
------ ⋅ ----------- + ky ⋅ ----------- ≤ f y, d ..... EC 3, DIN 18800
κy A W
9
Fig. 2: DESIGN CHARTS – FLEXURAL BUCKLING acc. to DIN 18800
N My
ST 37 -------------- + k y, i ⋅ --------- ≤ 21.8 = f y, d [kN/cm2]
κy ⋅ A W yi
ny p = n y ⋅ ( β My – 2 )
k
y
curve parameter p=(βMy-2).ny
-20-15 -10 -8 -6 -5 -4 -3
1,6 ky,max = 1,5
1,5
-2
1,4
1,3
-1
1,2 ky,min
β < 2,0
1,1 M
0
y=0. 1 ny = 0.
2. 2.
0,9
4. β > 2,0 4.
6. 0,8 M 6.
1
8. 0,7 8.
10. 10.
0,6
12. 12.
14. 0,5 2 14.
16. 0,4 16.
18. 18.
20. 0,3
3 20.
22. 0,2 22.
0,1
4
0
11 10 9 8 7 6 5
λy
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
Fig. 3: DESIGN CHARTS – FLEXURAL BUCKLING acc. to DIN 18800
N My
ST 52 -------------- + k y, i ⋅ --------- ≤ 32.7 = f y, d [kN/cm2]
κy ⋅ A W yi
ny p = n y ⋅ ( β My – 2 )
βM–Values
design method E–E: Wyi = Wel kyi = ky
design method E–P: Wyi = Wpl kyi = ky – ny /260 1.10
1.30
Reduction factors κ for ST 52 1.40
λ a b c λ a b c
M ψ.M 1.80 – 0.7ψ
15 1.000 1.000 1.000 135 0.276 0.257 0.239
20 0.986 0.977 0.968 140 0.258 0.241 0.225 2.50
25 0.971 0.953 0.934 145 0.242 0.227 0.212
30 0.954 0.928 0.900 150 0.228 0.214 0.200
35 0.936 0.901 0.864 155 0.214 0.202 0.189 Assign of typical cross section to
40 0.916 0.872 0.828 160 0.202 0.191 0.179 the buckling curves
45 0.893 0.841 0.789 165 0.191 0.180 0.170
50 0.866 0.806 0.750 170 0.180 0.171 0.161 HeightHEA HEB HEM IPE
55 0.836 0.769 0.709 175 0.171 0.162 0.153
60 0.801 0.730 0.668 180 0.162 0.154 0.145 80 - - - ab
65 0.762 0.689 0.627 185 0.154 0.146 0.139 100 bc bc bc ab
70 0.719 0.647 0.586 190 0.146 0.139 0.132 bis
75 0.674 0.604 0.547 195 0.139 0.133 0.126 320 bc bc bc ab
80 0.628 0.563 0.509 200 0.133 0.127 0.120 330 - - - ab
85 0.582 0.523 0.474 205 0.127 0.121 0.115 340 bc bc ab ab
90 0.539 0.486 0.440 210 0.121 0.116 0.110 360 bc bc ab ab
95 0.498 0.451 0.410 215 0.116 0.111 0.106 400 ab ab ab ab
100 0.460 0.418 0.381 220 0.111 0.106 0.101 bis
105 0.426 0.389 0.355 225 0.106 0.102 0.097 1000 ab ab ab ab
110 0.394 0.361 0.331 230 0.102 0.098 0.093
115 0.366 0.337 0.310 235 0.097 0.094 0.090
120 0.340 0.314 0.290 240 0.094 0.090 0.086 Buckling about
125 0.317 0.293 0.271 245 0.090 0.087 0.083 z–z axis
130 0.295 0.274 0.254 250 0.086 0.083 0.080 y–y axis
0,1
0
17.5 15 12.5 10 9 8 7 6 5
λy
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
0
11
Fig. 4: DESIGN CHARTS – FLEXURAL BUCKLING acc. to EC 3
N Sd M Sd f y, d
S 235 -------------- + k y, i ⋅ ----------- ≤ 21.4 = --------- [kN/cm2]
κy ⋅ A Wi γm
n p = n ⋅ ( βM – 2 )
12
Fig. 5: DESIGN CHARTS – FLEXURAL BUCKLING acc. to EC 3
N Sd M Sd f y, d
S 355 -------------- + k y, i ⋅ ----------- ≤ 32.3 = --------- [kN/cm2]
κy ⋅ A Wi γm
n p = n ⋅ ( βM – 2 )
15 1.000 1.000 1.000 135 0.279 0.260 0.242 M ψ.M 1.80 – 0.7ψ
20 0.986 0.978 0.969 140 0.262 0.244 0.228
25 0.971 0.954 0.935 145 0.245 0.230 0.215 2.50
30 0.955 0.929 0.901 150 0.231 0.217 0.203
35 0.937 0.902 0.866 155 0.217 0.204 0.191 Assign of typical cross section to
40 0.917 0.874 0.830 160 0.205 0.193 0.181 the buckling curves
45 0.894 0.843 0.792 165 0.193 0.183 0.172
50 0.868 0.809 0.753 170 0.183 0.173 0.163 HeigthHEA HEB HEM IPE
55 0.838 0.772 0.712 175 0.173 0.164 0.155
60 0.804 0.734 0.671 180 0.164 0.156 0.147 80 - - - ab
65 0.765 0.693 0.630 185 0.156 0.148 0.140 100 bc bc bc ab
70 0.723 0.651 0.590 190 0.148 0.141 0.134 bis
75 0.678 0.609 0.551 195 0.141 0.134 0.128 320 bc bc bc ab
80 0.633 0.568 0.513 200 0.134 0.128 0.122 330 - - - ab
85 0.588 0.528 0.478 205 0.128 0.123 0.117 340 bc bc ab ab
90 0.544 0.490 0.444 210 0.122 0.117 0.112 360 bc bc ab ab
95 0.503 0.455 0.414 215 0.117 0.112 0.107 400 ab ab ab ab
100 0.465 0.423 0.385 220 0.112 0.107 0.103 bis
105 0.431 0.393 0.359 225 0.107 0.103 0.098 1000 ab ab ab ab
110 0.399 0.365 0.335 230 0.103 0.099 0.095
115 0.370 0.340 0.313 235 0.099 0.095 0.091
120 0.344 0.318 0.293 240 0.095 0.091 0.087 Buckling about
125 0.321 0.297 0.274 245 0.091 0.088 0.084 z–z axis
130 0.299 0.278 0.257 250 0.088 0.084 0.081 y–y axis
k
y curve parameter p=(βM-2).n
-30 -20 -15 -10 -8 -6 -5 -4
1,6 ky,max = 1,5
1,5
1,4 -2
1,3
1,2 -1 ky,min
1,1
β < 2,0
M
0
n = 0. 1 n = 0.
n = 4. 0,9 n = 4.
β > 2,0
n = 8. 0,8 M 1 n = 8.
n = 12. 0,7 n = 12.
0,6 2
n = 16. n = 16.
n = 20. 0,5 n = 20.
3
n = 24. 0,4 n = 24.
13
Fig. 6: EQUIVALENT UNIFORM MOMENT FACTOR βM
2.5
Mq/M
2.25
0.0
0.10
2 0.25
0.50
M Mq ψM
βM
1.75
2.0 1.0
5.0 2.0
1.5 10.0
∞ 5.0
10.0
∞
1.25
1
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
ψ
14
Fig. 7: LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING CHECK
according to DIN 18000 / EC 3
N Sd k LT ⋅ M kz ⋅ M
y, Sd z, Sd
-------------------------------------- + ----------------------------------------------------- + -------------------------------------- ≤ 1.0
κ z ⋅ A ⋅ f y ⁄ γ M1 κ LT ⋅ W ⋅ f y ⁄ γ M1 W pl, z ⋅ f y ⁄ γ M1
pl, y
µ LT ⋅ N Sd
k LT = 1 – ------------------------ ≤ 1.0
κz ⋅ A ⋅ fy
1 ⁄ n
EC 3
1
κ LT = ---------------------
- ≤ 1.0 curve a: hot rolled sections
1 + λ M 2n
curve c: welded sections
CRITICAL MOMENT IN DOUBLE SYMMETRIC CASE according to
DIN 18000 / EC 3
2 2
π EI z k 2 I ω ( kL ) ⋅ GI T 2
M cr = C 1 ⋅ --------------- ⋅ ------ ⋅ ----- + ----------------------------- + ( C 2 ⋅ z g ) – C 2 ⋅ z g
2 I
( kL ) kw z
2
π EI z
?
N cr, z
?
UNIAXIAL BENDING – Comparison to former codes
l
N Sd N Sd
M Sd , β M
σ Gurt σN
σM
15
Fig. 8: DESIGN CHARTS – LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING
according to DIN 18800 / EC 3
2
My 21.8 ( 21.4 ) [ kN ⁄ cm ] ST37
N
-------------- + k M ⋅ ---------------------- ≤ f y, d DIN 18800 (EC3)
κz ⋅ A κ M ⋅ W yi 2
32.7 ( 32.3 ) [ kN ⁄ cm ] ST52
nz
L 1
0, 94
0, 86
λM = kc ⋅ kP ⋅ λz 1
M ψ.M ------------------------------------
1, 33 – 0, 33ψ
λz = L ⁄ iz
1 +zp
h
+2 tfl
0.8
+1
0.6 0
–1
0.4 –2
–3
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40
λz / (h/tfl)
16
Fig. 9: DESIGN CHARTS – LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING
according to DIN 18800 / EC 3
1,0
0,75
180 0.245 0.258 0.263 180 0.169 0.175 0.177
185 0.233 0.245 0.249 185 0.161 0.166 0.167
190 0.222 0.233 0.237 190 0.153 0.157 0.159
195 0.212 0.221 0.225 195 0.146 0.150 0.151
200 0.203 0.211 0.214 200 0.139 0.142 0.143
EC 3:
κM acc. to line a: hot rolled section
acc. to line c: welded section
0.8 3
1 Ψ = 1.0
0.7
kc
0.6
4 1
0.5 ang e res
. α = Mh ⁄ Ms
up. fl 2
0.4 ed 3
e re strain α = Ms ⁄ Mh
r flang 4
0.3 uppe
α
0.2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1
0.9
6
0.8 5
Ψ = 0.0
0.7
7
kc
0.6
5
0.5 8 α = M h ⁄ M s ,max
es. 6
a nge r
up. fl ed
0.4 res train 7
fl ange α = M s ,half ⁄ M h
0.3 u pper 8
α
0.2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1
0.9 10
0.8 9
Ψ = – 1.0
0.7
12
kc
0.6
11 9
0.5 α = M h ⁄ M s ,max
es. 10
. fl a nge r .
up res
0.4 nge 11
er fl a α = M s ,half ⁄ M h
upp 12
0.3
0.2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 α
18
Fig. 11:C2–VALUES for I–sections
= =
– hogging bending moment
ψ.Mh Mh + sagging bending moment
Ms,max Ms,half
2.5
u load applied on upper flange
2.25 load applied on lower flange
2
u
1.75
4 Ψ = 1.0
1.5 l l
1
C22
1.25 α = Mh ⁄ Ms
2
1 3
α = Ms ⁄ Mh
4
0.75 3
1
0.5 2
0.25
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 α
1.5
1.25
u u
1
Ψ = 0.0
l l
C22
0.75
8 5
α = M h ⁄ M s ,ma
0.5 5 6
7
0.25 α = M s ,half ⁄ M
6 8
7
α
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0.6
0.5 9 Ψ = – 1.0
0.4 10
C22
9
0.3 α = M h ⁄ M s ,ma
11 10
0.2
11
0.1 α = M s ,half ⁄ M
12
12
α
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
19
Fig. 12:TORSIONAL BUCKLING DUE TO AXIAL FORCE
λZ = L ⁄ iZ
L
1.1
0.9
0.8
b/h tfl
1.0 h
0.75
0.7
0.50
b
kD = λD / λ Z
0.30
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
h 1.0
tfl 0.75
0.2
0.50
b 0.30
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40
λ / (h/tfl)
z
2 2
ip + d
λ D = λ z ⋅ ------------------
2 2
c +d
ip = ( Iy + Iz ) ⁄ A I ω GI T
c = ----- + --------------
I z N cr, z
20
EXAMPLE 1: Girder under transversal loading
dis
tan
dead load: g ≈ 0,5 kN/m2 a= ce
5,0 of
gd = 1,35 · (0,5 · 5,0 + 1,3) = 5,1 kN/m gir
m de
rs
variable load: p ≈ 3,0 kN/m 2
pd = 1,50 · (3,0 · 5,0) = 22,5 kN/m
strugrilla
ctu ge girde
r 2,0m
re L=1 2
span
Due to the grillage structure the effect of load applied on the upper flange will be
neglected in this example.
Loadcase 1:
Ψ = 0 curve 8
α = M s, half ⁄ M h = 249 ⁄ ( – 497 ) = – 0.50 ⇒ k c = 0.67
n = 2.5
λ M = k c ⋅ k p ⋅ λ z = 0.67 ⋅ 0.63 ⋅ 163 = 69 ⇒ κ M = 0.922
Loadcase 2 – span 1:
Ψ = 0 curve 6
α = M h ⁄ M s, max = – 294 ⁄ 361 = – 0.81 ⇒ k c = 0.92
n = 2.5
λ M = k c ⋅ k p ⋅ λ z = 0.92 ⋅ 0.63 ⋅ 163 = 94 ⇒ κ M = 0.749
Loadcase 2 – span 2:
Ψ = 0 curve 8
α = M s, half ⁄ M h = – 55 ⁄ ( – 294 ) = 0.19 ⇒ k c = 0.60 < 0.92
Check with DIN 18800 would be possible only with a conservative value C1=1.0 or
by using the value of the charts.
6
k 2 I ω GI T 2.942 ⋅ 10 8100 ⋅ 190
M cr = C 1 ⋅ N cr, z ⋅ ------ ⋅ ---- + ------------- = 2.23 ⋅ 1232 ⋅ ---------------------------- + ---------------------------
k w I z N cr, z 8560 1232
1 ⁄ n 1 ⁄ 2.5
= -------------------------------------------
1 1
κ M = ----------------------- = 0.919 ( 0.922 )
1 + λ 2n ( 2 ⋅ 2.5 )
M 1 + 0.749
C 1 = 1.0 ⇒ M cr = 49170 ⇒ λ M = 1.12 ⇒ κ M = 0.666
2
My 21.8 ( 21.4 ) [ kN ⁄ cm ] ST37
N
-------------- + k M ⋅ ---------------------- ≤ f y, d DIN 18800 (EC3)
κz ⋅ A κ M ⋅ W yi 2
32.7 ( 32.3 ) [ kN ⁄ cm ] ST52
nz
L 1
0, 94
0, 86
λM = kc ⋅ kP ⋅ λz 1
M ψ.M ------------------------------------
1, 33 – 0, 33ψ
λz = L ⁄ iz
1 +zp
h
+2 tfl
0.8
+1
0.6 0
–1
0.4 –2
–3
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40
λz / (h/tfl)
kc–values for I–sections
ψ.Mh Mh
loading in centre of gravity
= =
– hogging bending moment
+ sagging bending moment
Ms,max Ms,half
1
2
0.9
0.8 3
1 Ψ = 1.0
0.7
kc
0.6
4 1
0.5 ange r
es. α = Mh ⁄ Ms
up. fl 2
0.4 3
rest raint α = Ms ⁄ Mh
e r fl ange 4
0.3 up p
α
0.2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1
0.9 6
0.8 5
Ψ = 0.0
0.7
7
kc
0.6
5
0.5 . 8 α = M h ⁄ M s ,max
ng e res 6
up. fla nt
0.4 strai 7
flang
e re α = M s ,half ⁄ M h
r 8
0.3 uppe
0.2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 α
1
0.9 10
0.8 9
Ψ = – 1.0
0.7
12
kc
0.6
11 9
0.5 α = M h ⁄ M s ,max
res. 10
ange
up. fl es.
0.4
l a n ge r 11
α = M s ,half ⁄ M h
er f 12
0.3 upp
0.2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 α
DESIGN CHARTS – LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING
according to DIN 18800 / EC 3
0,5
1,0
0,75
180 0.245 0.258 0.263 180 0.169 0.175 0.177
185 0.233 0.245 0.249 185 0.161 0.166 0.167
190 0.222 0.233 0.237 190 0.153 0.157 0.159
195 0.212 0.221 0.225 195 0.146 0.150 0.151
200 0.203 0.211 0.214 200 0.139 0.142 0.143
EC 3:
κM acc. to line a: hot rolled section
acc. to line c: welded section
system, loading
g+s+p
internal forces buckling about y- Axis
≈2,0
Nd [kN] My,d [kNm]
fork bearing 11
L = 5,0 m 30
±w
Lk = 10,0
approximation
(linear)
250 82
My,d = 82
z section IPE 330 – ST 37
y IPE 330 h = 330mm b = 160mm
tfl = 11,5mm A = 62,6cm2
Wpl,y = 804cm3 Wel,y = 713cm3
braced centre of rotation iy = 13,7cm iz = 3,55cm
Iz = 788cm4
Iω = 199,1.103cm6 IT = 28,3cm4
curve a
λ y = 2 ⋅ 500 ⁄ 13.7 = 73 ⇒ κ y = 0.804
n y = N ⁄ ( κ y ⋅ A ) = 250 ⁄ ( 0.804 ⋅ 62.6 ) = 4.97
β My = 1.40 p = 4.97 ⋅ ( 1.40 – 2 ) = – 3.0 ⇒ k y = 1.22
k y, i = 1.22 – 4.97 ⁄ 170 = 1.19
2
n y + k y, i ⋅ M y ⁄ W pl, y = 4.97 + 1.19 ⋅ 8200 ⁄ 804 = 17.1 < 21.8 [ kN ⁄ cm ]
UF = 0.78
Ψ = 0 β M, Ψ = 1.8 β M, Q = 1.3
β M = 1.8 + 11 ⁄ 82 ⋅ ( 1.3 – 1.8 ) = 1.73
µ LT = 0.15 ⋅ 1.52 ⋅ 1.73 – 0.15 = 0.24
k LT = 1 – 250 ⁄ ( 0.335 ⋅ 1366 ) ⋅ 0.24 = 0.869 ( k LT = k M )
3
k 2 I ω GI T 199.1 ⋅ 10 8100 ⋅ 28.3
M cr = C 1 ⋅ N cr, z ⋅ ------ ⋅ ---- + ------------- = 1.77 ⋅ 653 ⋅ ---------------------------- + -----------------------------
k w I z N cr, z 788 653
1 ⁄ n 1 ⁄ 2.5
= ---------------------------------------
1 1
κM = ----------------------- = 0.881 ( 0.906 )
1 + λ 2n ( 2 ⋅ 2.5 )
M 1 + 0.82 0.915 for the correct distribution
N Sd k LT ⋅ M
y, Sd 250 0.869 ⋅ 8200
------------------------ + -------------------------------- = -------------------------------- + ------------------------------------ = 1.00 ( 0.99 )
κ y ⋅ N pl, d κ M ⋅ M 0.335 ⋅ 1366 0.881 ⋅ 17540
pl, y, d
N My
ST 37 -------------- + k y, i ⋅ --------- ≤ 21.8 = f y, d [kN/cm2]
κy ⋅ A W yi
ny p = n y ⋅ ( β My – 2 )
k
y
curve parameter p=(βMy-2).ny
-20-15 -10 -8 -6 -5 -4 -3
1,6 ky,max = 1,5
1,5
-2
1,4
1,3
-1
1,2 ky,min
β < 2,0
1,1 M
0
y=0. 1 ny = 0.
2. 2.
0,9
4. β > 2,0 4.
6. 0,8 M 6.
1
8. 0,7 8.
10. 10.
0,6
12. 12.
14. 0,5 2 14.
16. 0,4 16.
18. 18.
20. 0,3
3 20.
22. 0,2 22.
0,1
4
0
11 10 9 8 7 6 5
λy
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
EQUIVALENT UNIFORM MOMENT FACTOR βM
2.5
Mq/M
2.25
0.0
0.10
2 0.25
0.50
M Mq ψM
βM
1.75
2.0 1.0
5.0 2.0
1.5 10.0
∞ 5.0
10.0
∞
1.25
1
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
ψ
TORSIONAL BUCKLING DUE TO AXIAL FORCE
λZ = L ⁄ iZ
L
1.1
0.9
0.8
b/h tfl
1.0 h
0.75
0.7
0.50
b
kD = λD / λ Z
0.30
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
h 1.0
tfl 0.75
0.2
0.50
b 0.30
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40
λ / (h/tfl)
z
2. BERECHNUNGSBEISPIELE -
ANWENDUNG DER BEMESSUNGSBEHELFE
2. Bauteilnachweise Biegedrillknicken
l = 3.50
σN = 0 → ν = 0
M Sd 42000 2
MSd σ M = ----------- = ---------------- = 19, 1 kN ⁄ cm
W pl 2194
42400
βM = 1,8 → α = 0,73
<125 → fplast=1,0
λz = 59 → κz =0,879 (Linie a)