171 views

Uploaded by Vincent Teng

save

- Torsional Analysis of Steel Members
- Mech206 - 2014-15 Spring - l04 - Pure Bending
- 5 Churchbury Lane 6 - First Floor Structural Calcs
- 2000 - Recent Research Advances in Cold-Formed Steel Structures
- STEEL BEAM DESIGN.docx
- BGSCM14C08ExProb
- SFD-IS-800-2007
- I Beam in Bending and Torsion - Thesis
- Plate Girder Behaviour and Design
- Schaum s - Structural Steel Design (1)
- Example Design of Circular Beam ACI 1999
- A Teaching Guide for Structural Steel Connections
- Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear deformability
- corrugated web beam
- Moment Connections Seismic Applications
- ccx_1.7
- [Ensc 13] Problem Set 4 - Stresses in Beams
- The Cyclic Behaviour of Steel Elements and Connections
- Bunkers
- IREME_2007
- University of British Columbia - Warping Torsion
- www-fgg-uni-lj-si
- CE470 F07 Beam Design
- Shear_and_Moment_in_Beams
- Sn003a - Elastic Critical Moment for LTB
- STRC13 Bridges Steel Members 0715
- Bridge Superstructure Design
- MTech Civil Syllabus 2015 16
- Experimental and Analytical Evaluation of Lateral Buckling of FRP Composite Cantilever I Beams
- SEI November 2010 Complete Issue
- 11777413
- Matriks Edaran Dokumen Pusat Setempat Majlis Perbandaran Selayang
- Hoardings Good Practice
- Dynamic soil behavior and dynamic soil-structure interaction
- Design of Water Retaining Structures to EC
- EC2_M2P_COAB_Multon_2012
- Design Practice to Prevent Floor Vibrations
- Project Management-Harvard Referencing
- Structural Stability From Theory to Practice
- Strut and Tie ModellingNew AS 3600 Provisions
- QLASSIC
- Design of Columns 2
- Bearing Capacity of Soils
- DG 3 Eng 2nd Edt Version 02-12-09
- GPP+Tempat+Letak+Kenderaan
- Strip Footing
- Writing Work Method Statement Plain English Guidelines 0231
- SAMPLE RetainerAgreement
- Bearing Capacity of Unpaved Roads
- COP for Demolition of Buildings 2004

You are on page 1of 29

18

1.0

**BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION AND BENDING - II
**

INTRODUCTION

In the previous chapter, the basic theory governing the behaviour of beams subjected to torsion was discussed. A member subjected to torsional moments would twist about a longitudinal axis through the shear centre of the cross section. It was also pointed out that when the resultant of applied forces passed through the longitudinal shear centre axis no torsion would occur. In general, torsional moments would cause twisting and warping of the cross sections. When the torsional rigidity (GJ) is very large compared with its warping rigidity (EΓ), the section would effectively be in uniform torsion and warping moment would unlikely to be significant from the designer's perspective. Examples of this behaviour are closed hot-rolled sections (e.g. rectangular or square hollow sections) and rolled angles and Tees. Note that warping moment is developed only if warping deformation is restrained. Warping deformation in angle and T-sections are not small, only warping moment would be small. On the other hand, most thin walled open sections have much smaller torsional rigidity (GJ) compared with warping rigidity (EΓ) values and these sections will be exhibiting significant warping moment. Hot rolled I sections and H sections would exhibit torsional behaviour in-between these two extremes and the applied loading is resisted by a combination of uniform torsion and warping torsion.

2.0

DESIGNING FOR TORSION IN PRACTICE

Any structural arrangement in which the loads are transferred to an I beam by torsion is not an efficient one for resisting loads. The message for the designers is "Avoid Torsion - if you can ". In a very large number of practical designs, the loads are usually applied in a such a manner that their resultant passes through the centroid. If the section is doubly symmetric (such as I or H sections) this automatically eliminates torsion, as the shear centre and centroid of the symmetric cross section coincide. Even otherwise load transfer through connections may - in many cases - be regarded as ensuring that the loads are effectively applied through the shear centre, thus eliminating the need for designing for torsion. Furthermore, in situations where the floor slabs are supported on top flanges of channel sections, the loads may effectively be regarded as being applied through the shear centre since the flexural stiffness of the attached slab prevents torsion of the channel. Where significant eccentricity of loading (which would cause torsion) is unavoidable, alternative methods of resisting torsion efficiently should be investigated. These include

©Copyright reserved

Version II

18 -1

BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II

design using box sections, tubular (hollow) sections or lattice box girders which are fully triangulated on all faces. All these are more efficient means of resisting torsional moments compared with I or H sections. Unless it is essential to utilise the torsional resistance of an I section, it is not necessary to take account of it. The likely torsional effects due to a particular structural arrangement chosen should be considered in the early stages of design, rather than left to the final stages, when perhaps an inappropriate member has already been chosen. 3.0 PURE TORSION AND WARPING

In the previous chapter, the concepts of uniform torsion and warping torsion were explained and the relevant equations derived. When a torque is applied only at the ends of a member such that the ends are free to warp, then the member would develop only pure torsion. The total angle of twist (φ ) over a length of z is given by GJ where Tq = applied torque GJ = Torsional Rigidity

φ=

Tq ⋅ z

(1)

When a member is in non-uniform torsion, the rate of change of angle of twist will vary along the length of the member. The warping shear stress (τw) at a point is given by

τw = −

E S wms φ ′′′ t

(2)

where E = Modulus of elasticity Swms = Warping statical moment at a particular point S chosen. The warping normal stress (σw) due to bending moment in-plane of flanges (bi-moment) is given by

σw = - E .Wnwfs . φ''

where Wnwfs = Normalised warping function at the chosen point S.

4.0

COMBINED BENDING AND TORSION

There will be some interaction between the torsional and flexural effects, when a load produces both bending and torsion. The angle of twist φ caused by torsion would be amplified by bending moment, inducing additional warping moments and torsional shears. The following analysis was proposed by Nethercot, Salter and Malik in reference (2). Version II 18 -2

which itself is dependent on the major axis moment Mx and the twist φ. Nethercot. 4. (5) Methods of evaluating φ. φ′′ and φ′′′ for various conditions of loading and boundary conditions are given in reference (2).e.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II 4. φ′. Assuming elastic behaviour and assuming that the loads produce bending about the major axis in addition to torsion. Salter and Malik have suggested a simple "buckling check" along lines similar to BS 5950.1 Maximum Stress Check or "Capacity check" The maximum stress at the most highly stressed cross section is limited to the design strength (fy /γm). part 1 σ byt + σ w ⎡ Mx Mx⎤ + ⎥ ≤1 ⎢1 + 0.5 Mb f y /γ m ⎣ Mb ⎦ ( ( ) ) (6) mx Mx where M x .φ '' ⎪ ⎭ σbyt is dependent on Myt. the longitudinal direct stresses will be due to three causes. the buckling resistance moment = φB + φB 2 − M E M p ( ME M p ) 1 2 Version II 18 -3 . equivalent uniform moment = and Mb . ⎫ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ M yt (3) σ byt = ⎬ Zy ⎪ ⎪ σ w = E. when pb is less than fy) the values of σw and σbyt will be amplified.2 Buckling Check Whenever lateral torsional buckling governs the design (i. σ bx = Mx Zx Myt = φ Mx Thus the "capacity check" for major axis bending becomes: (4) σbx + σbyt +σw ≤ fy /γm.Wnwfs .

the elastic critical moment = Mp π2 E where λLT is the equivalent slenderness.5 ⎥ ≤1 Mb fy Zy /γ m fy /γ m ⎣ Mb ⎦ (7) ( ( ) ) (8) where M y = m y M y σ byt = M y / Z y 4.5 (9) ⎜ Mb ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ This shear stress should be added to the shear stresses due to bending in checking the adequacy of the section.4 Torsional Shear Stress Torsional shear stresses and warping shear stresses should also be amplified in a similar manner: ⎛ Mx⎞ ⎟ τ vt = (τ t + τ w ) ⎜ 1 + 0. the "capacity checks" and the "buckling checks" are modified as follows: Capacity check: σbx + σbyt +σw + σby ≤ fy/γm Buckling check: My σ byt + σ w ⎡ Mx Mx⎤ + + ⎢1 + 0.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II in which φB = M p + (η LT + 1) M E 2 MP . the plastic moment capacity = fy . Also the basic theory of elastic lateral stability cannot be directly used for the design purpose because Version II 18 -4 . 4.0 DESIGN METHOD FOR LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING The analysis for the lateral torsional buckling is very complex because of the different types of structural actions involved. 5. Zp / γm Zp = the plastic section modulus ME .3 λ LT 2 ⋅ fy γm Applied loading having both Major axis and Minor axis moments When the applied loading produces both major axis and minor axis moments.

calculated as given below. Mb. It should be noted that pb = fy for low values of slenderness of beams and the value of pb drops.Mb) = ηLT. Zp / γm Perry coefficient. BS5950: Part 1 uses a curve based on the above concept (Fig. Zp = plastic section modulus. In a manner analogous to the Perry-Robertson Method for columns. as the beam becomes longer and the beam slenderness. increases. λ LT = π 2 E ⋅ λ LT fy (12) where λ LT = Mp ME Version II 18 -5 . the buckling resistance moment. ME Mp ηLT Zp In order to simplify the analysis. Mb is given by. The design method is explained below. The buckling resistance moment Mb is given by Mb= pb . ME Mb As explained in page 3. is obtained as the smaller root of the equation (ME .Zp (11) where pb = bending strength allowing for susceptibility to lateral -torsional buckling. The beam slenderness (λLT) is given by. ME M p Mb = φB + φB2 − M E M p (10) ( ) 1 2 where φB = M p + (η LT + 1) M E 2 = = = = Elastic critcal moment fy .Mb) (Mp . similar to column buckling coefficient Plastic section modulus] [ As defined above.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II • the formulae for elastic critical moment ME are too complex for routine use and • there are limitations to their extension in the ultimate range A simple method of computing the buckling resistance of beams is given below. 1 ) (similar to column curves) in which the bending strength of the beam is expressed as a function of its slenderness (λLT ). This behaviour is analogous to columns.

using hot-rolled sections. viz.4 < λ LT < 1.4. Beams having long spans would fail by lateral buckling and these are termed "slender". for values of λ LT above about 1.1 Bending strength for rolled sections of design strength 275 N/mm2 according to BS 5950 Fig. In Fig. For the practical beams which are in the intermediate range without lateral restraint. Version II 18 -6 . Mp and ME. This corresponds to λLT values of around 37 (for steels having fy= 275 N/mm2) below which the lateral instability is NOT of concern.4 . Slender beams which fail at moments close to ME. 11 permits that the value of fy can be adopted for the full plastic moment capacity pb for λLT < 0.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II 300 Beam fails by yield 200 Beam buckling pb N/mm2 100 0 50 100 λLT 150 200 250 Fig. for values ofλ LT below about 0. 2 three distinct regions of behaviour can be observed:- • • • stocky beams which are able to attain the plastic moment Mp. 2 is plotted in a non-dimensional form comparing the observed test data with the two theoretical values of upper bounds. The test data were obtained from a typical set of lateral torsional buckling data. So lateral stability does not influence their design. design must be based on considerations of inelastic buckling.2 Beams having short spans usually fail by yielding.2 beams of intermediate slenderness which fail to reach either Mp or ME . In the absence of instability. In this case 0. eqn.

6 0.8 0.0 ME / MP 0. the torsional index. For flanged sections symmetrical about the minor axis.4 λ LT = MP ME Fig.2 intermediate slender 0 0.2 1.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Plastic yield 1.566 hs A and J ⎜ A h ⎟ s ⎠ ⎝ For flanged sections symmetrical about the major axis ⎛ I y ⋅ Z p 2γ u = ⎜ ⎜ A2 Γ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 1 4 1 ( ) 1 2 and ⎛ AΓ ⎞ ⎟ x = 1.132 ⎜ ⎜ Iy J ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 1 2 In the above Zp = plastic modulus about the major axis Iy ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ = ⎜1 − ⎜ Ix ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ A = cross sectional area of the member γ Version II 18 -7 .0 1. ⎛ 4 Z p2 γ ⎞ 4 u = ⎜ 2 2 ⎟ x = 0.4 stocky 0.2 Comparison of test data (mostly I sections) with theoretical elastic critical moments For more slender beams.6 M / Mp 0. λLT = uv λ ry (13) u is called the buckling parameter and x.2 0.8 1. pb is a function of λLT which is given by .4 0.

5.2 Evaluation of differential equations For a member subjected to concentrated torque with torsion fixed and warping free condition at the ends ( torque applied at varying values of αL).BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Γ J hs t1. Table 14 of BS5950: Part 1 must now be entered with (λE /ry )/x and N .9 for rolled UBs. eqn. The value of λLT is determined by eqn.13 using the appropriate section properties. t2 b1.0 and v includes an allowance for the degree of monosymmetry through the parameter N = Ic / (Ic + It ) .0 for all other sections.1 Unequal flanged sections For unequal flanged sections. RSJs and channels = 1.a ⎪ α λ⎥ z⎪ z ⎪ ⎪ = + ⎢ − cosh ⎥ sinh ⎬ ⎨(1 − α ) a⎪ a a ⎥ GJ ⎪ ⎢ tanh λ ⎪ ⎪ ⎢ ⎥ a ⎣ ⎦ ⎩ ⎭ Version II 18 -8 . the values of φ and its differentials are given by Tq α λ (1- For 0 ≤ z ≤ α λ. 11 is used for finding the buckling moment of resistance. φ ⎧ ⎫ αλ ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ sinh a Tq . In that equation u may be taken as 1. x ⎟ is given in Table 14 of BS5950: Part I ⎜ ry ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ (for a preliminary assessment v = 1) x = D/T providing the above values of u are used. UCs. b2 We can assume = = = = = torsional warping constant ≅ hs t1 t2 b1 b2 2 3 3 12 t1 b13 + t2 b23 ( ) the torsion constant the distance between the shear centres of the flanges flange thicknesses flange widths u = 0. 5. ⎛ λ ⎞ v = a function of ⎜ .

Version II 18 -9 . Introduction to Steelwork Design to BS 5950: Part 1. 1988. Volume 1 Section properties and member capacities. Steelwork design guide to BS 5950: Part 1 1985. P. (2) for more details. R.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II φ′ ⎧ Tq ⎪ ⎪ = ⎨(1 − α ) GJ ⎪ ⎪ ⎩ Tq ⎫ αλ ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ sinh a α λ⎥ z⎪ ⎪ + ⎢ − cosh ⎥ cosh ⎬ a⎪ a ⎥ ⎢ tanh λ ⎪ ⎢ ⎥ a ⎣ ⎦ ⎭ φ ′′ = αλ ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ sinh a z αλ⎥ − cosh ⎥ sinh ⎢ λ GJa ⎢ a⎥ a tanh ⎢ ⎥ a ⎣ ⎦ αλ ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ sinh a z αλ⎥ − cosh ⎥ cosh ⎢ λ a⎥ a ⎢ tanh a ⎣ ⎦ φ ′′′ = Tq G J a2 Similar equations are available for different loading cases and for different values of αλ. D. A. and Malik. Design of Members Subject to Combined Bending and Torsion . Readers may wish to refer Ref. Salter. Nethercot. S. 1985. 6.. 1985.0 SUMMARY This chapter is aimed at explaining a simple method of evaluating torsional effects and to verify the adequacy of a chosen cross section when subjected to torsional moments. BSI.. The Steel construction Institute .0 REFERENCES (1) (2) (3) (4) British Standards Institution. 7. We are unable to reproduce these on account of copyright restrictions. A. The Steel Construction Institute. The Steel Construction Institute. The method recommended is consistent with BS 5950: Part 1. BS 5950: Part 1: 1985. Structural use of steelwork in Building part 1: Code of Practice for design in simple and continuous construction: hot rolled sections. 1989.

BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. check the adequacy of the trial section. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. 2000 Date Jan. The end conditions are assumed to be simply supported for bending and fixed against torsion but free for warping. comprising a vertical load applied through the shear centre and a torsional moment as shown below. φ = e W W Tq = W. For the factored loads shown. An eccentric load is applied to the bottom flange at the centre of the span in such a way that it does not provide any lateral restraint to the member.e negative angle of twist due to Tq Version II 18 -10 . A B W = 100 kN 2000mm λ = 4000 mm e = 75 mm Stiffener to prevent flange and web buckling W = 100 kN Replace the actual loading by an equivalent arrangement. Sheet 1 of 14 Rev. 2000 Example 1 The beam shown below is unrestrained along its length.

Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan.e Tq = 100 × 75 × 10-3 = 7. Torsional effects ( at U.5 kNm This acts in a negative sense.L. Tq = W. Sheet 2 of 14 Rev. Shear at B. 2000 Date Jan.S) Moment at B. 2000 Loadings due to plane bending and torsion are shown below. e = 75 mm Bending effects ( at U. W z α Tq + λ (i) Plane λ (ii) Torsional Loading (Note: These are factored loads and are not to be multiplied by γf) Point load.S) Torsional moment. W = 100 kN Distributed load (self weight). Shear at A. an ISWB section will be tried. w = 1 kN/m (say) Eccentricity. Try ISWB 500 × 250 @ 95. In this example. Depth of section Width of section D = 500 mm B = 250 mm MxB = 102 kNm FvA = 52 kN FvB = 50 kN Version II 18 -11 .BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. however.L.5 kNm Generally wide flange sections are preferable to deal with significant torsion.2 kg/m Section properties from steel tables. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. ∴ Tq = -7.

9 mm = 14.76 × 1012 mm6 G = E 2 (1 + υ ) 2 × 10 5 2 = 2 (1 + 0. 2000 Date Jan. a = ⎛ EΓ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜GJ ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ 1 2 1 2 = ⎛ 2 × 10 5 × 1.2 cm2 9.7 mm = 52291 cm4 = 2988 cm4 = 49. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN B = 250 mm Date Jan.6 mm = 2092 cm3 = 239 cm3 = 121.3) = 76.7 3 + (500 − 2 × 14.7 ) 4 Γ = I y ⋅ h2 [ 1 2BT 3 + (D − 2T ) t 3 3 [ ] = 682 × 103 mm4 ] Warping constant. = t T Ixx Iyy ry Zx Zy A = 9. = 1. = Shear modulus. 2000 Web thickness Flange thickness Moment of inertia Moment of inertia Radius of gyration Elastic modulus Elastic modulus Cross sectional area Additional properties Torsional constant.9 3 3 4 2 2988 × 10 4 × (500 − 14.9 kN / mm Torsional bending constant.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.9 × 10 3 × 682 × 10 3 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ = 2591 mm Version II 18 -12 .7 ) 9. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.9 mm D = 500 mm 14 7 mm J = 1 2 × 250 × 14. Sheet 3 of 14 Rev.76 × 1012 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 76.

BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.3 × 250 2 × 14. Sheet 4 of 14 Rev.7) × 242. Qf Statical moment for web.3 ⎤ ⎡ ⎢14. Qw = (A/2) × yw yw 235. 2000 Date Jan. 2000 Normalized warping function.7 = 16 = 2787 × 104 mm4 = Af .2 × 103 mm3 Statical moment for flange.3 = 194.7 × 250 × 242.7 + 9.9 × 235.2 mm ∴ Qw = 6061 × 194.7 = 428.05 × 14.9 × 235.7 ) × 250 4 Warping statical moment.2 = 1166 × 103 mm3 Version II 18 -13 . Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.7 × 250 + 9. yf = ( 120. S wms 30331 mm2 h B2 T = 16 485.3 × 2 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ = 14. Wnwfs = = = hB 4 (500 − 14.

0 L The buckling resistance moment. 2000 = 507 kNm Material Properties Shear modulus. 2000 Date Jan. py = 250 / γm = 250 / 1. Mb λE = 4000 mm = φB + φB 2 − M E M p M p + (η LT + 1) M E 2 ( ME M p ) 1 2 φB where ME = elastic critical moment Mp = plastic moment capacity = fy.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.15 ⎡ 250 × 500 2 240.0 ( ) ≤ 1 ∴ M x = 1. Sheet 5 of 14 Rev.15 Check for Combined bending and torsion = 217 N/mm2 (i) Buckling check ( at Ultimate Limit State) σ byt + σ w ⎡ Mx Mx ⎤ + ⎢ 1 + 0.Zp / γm = = BS 5950: Part I App. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN 250 × 1. G = 76.5 ⎥ fy Mb Mb ⎦ ⎣ γm Mx m = m × M xB = 1.9 kN/mm2 Design strength.6 2 ⎤ − ⎥ ⎢ 4 4 ⎥ ⎢ ⎦ ⎣ Date Jan.0 × M xB = 102 kNm Effective length λE = 1.1 × 470.B.2 Version II 18 -14 . Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.

2000 Elastic critical moment.7 u = 0.2 λLT 0.7 / 36.948 = nuvλ = = 2.J ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ 1 2 BS 5950: Part I Table 14 ⎛ 12122 × 1.76 × 1012 ⎞ ⎟ = 1. ME λ LT 2 ⋅ p y λLT λ = the equivalent slenderness = nuv λ = the minor axis slenderness = λE / ry = 4000 / 49.5 ( for equal flanged sections) I cf + I tf x ⎛ AΓ ⎞ ⎟ = 1.2 ME Version II 18 -15 .2.6 × 10 3 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 1 BS 5950: Part 1 App.6 = 80.948 × 80. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.9 BS 5950: Part I App.B.B.2 n = 0.7 = = 583 × 10 6 × π 2 × 2 × 10 5 59.5 2 = 36.6 = 0.86. Sheet 6 of 14 Rev.2 2 × 217 1143 kNm = 59.63 λ/x v = 80.2.132 ⎜ ⎜ 2988 × 10 4 × 681. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN = Mp π2 E Date Jan.132 ⎜ ⎜ I y . 2000 Date Jan.86 × 0.9 × 0.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. v = slenderness factor (according to N and λ/x) I cf N = = 0.

007 ( 59.15 1 1 Limiting equivalent slenderness.3 φB The Perry coefficient.4 ⎜ ⎜ py ⎝ ⎞ 2 ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ 2 ⎟ = 3 8 . 2000 BS 5950: Part 1 App.77 Version II 18 -16 .B. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN M p + (η LT + 1) M E 2 Date Jan.54 α = 0. 2000 Date Jan. Sheet 7 of 14 Rev.4 ⎜ ⎜ 217 ⎝ = 0. λ LO ηLT ∴ ⎛ π 2 × 2 × 10 5 = 0.15 + 1) × 1143 2 ME M p = 911 kNm φB + φB2 − M E M p = 911 + 911 Myt = Mx .2 ) φB Mb = = ∴ 507 + (0.2. = 0. = ηLT = αb ( λLT . φ ( )1 2 ) 1 ( 1143 × 507 2 = 411 kNm − 1143 × 507 2 To calculate φ λ / a = 4000 / 2591 = 1.λLO ) ⎛π2 E = 0.5 z = αλ.2 ⎟ ⎠ = 0. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.2 – 38.5 × 4000 = 2000 α λ / a = 0.

023 M yt Zy = 2.6 × 10 1. Sheet 8 of 14 Rev. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. B φ ⎫ ⎧ αλ ⎤ ⎡ ⎥ ⎢ sinh a Tq . B = = ⎡ sinh0. 2000 Date Jan.36 kNm = 9.6 × 10 3 ⎩ ⎧ ⎡ sinh0.54 ⎦ ⎭ × 681.5 × 10 6 76. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.36 × 10 6 = 239 × 10 3 σw = E .0 App.5 ) 0. 2.φ′′ To calculate φ′′ φ ′′ = αλ ⎡ ⎤ sinh ⎢ Tq α λ⎥ z a − cosh ⎢ ⎥ sinh λ a ⎥ a GJa ⎢ tanh ⎢ ⎥ a ⎣ ⎦ − 7.89 N / mm 2 σ byt = 2.9 × 10 × 681.54 − cosh 0.8 × 10 −8 = 109 N / mm2 3 3 Ref. Wnwfs .77 ⎤ ⎢ tanh1. 2000 Ref.77 + ⎢ ⎣ tanh1.8 × 10-8 Version II 18 -17 . 2.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.023 rads = − 7.77 ⎤ ⎫ Myt = 102 × 0.0 App.a ⎪ αλ z z⎪ ⎪ ⎪ = + ⎢ − cosh ⎥ sinh ⎬ ⎨(1 − α ) GJ ⎪ a a ⎥ a⎪ ⎢ tanh λ ⎪ ⎪ ⎥ ⎢ a ⎦ ⎣ ⎭ ⎩ 76.9 × 10 = − 0.77 ⎥ sinh0.5 × 10 6 × 2591 3 − cosh0.77 ⎬ ⎨ (1 − 0.77 ⎦ × 2591 ⎣ σw = 2 × 105 × 30331 × 1.77 ⎥ sinh0.

Shear stresses due to bending (at Ultimate Limit state) At support:In web. τ bw = FVA .BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.15 ) ) ⎡ 102 × 10 6 ⎢1 + 0. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN ≤ 1 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ Date Jan.5 × ⎢ 411 × 10 6 ⎣ = 0. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. 2000 σ byt + σ w ⎡ Mx Mx ⎤ + ⎢ 1 + 0.9 11.2 = 168 N / mm2 < 217 N / mm2 ∴ O.8 + 9. Sheet 9 of 14 Rev.7 N / mm 2 Version II 18 -18 .2 250 1.86 < 1 ∴ (i) Buckling is O.8 N / mm2 ∴ 48. K Strictly the shear stresses due to combined bending and torsion should be checked. 2000 Date Jan. K Local "capacity" check σbx + σbyt + σw σbx = Mx / Zx ≤ fy / γm = 102 × 106 / 2092 × 103 = 48.5 ⎥ fy Mb Mb ⎦ ⎣ γm 102 × 10 6 411 × 10 6 + ( ) (9. although these will seldom be critical. Qw I x .9 + 109.9 ( + 109.t = = 52 × 10 3 × 1166 × 10 3 52291 × 10 4 × 9.

τ bf = FVA .851. Sheet 10 of 14 Rev. τbf Shear stresses due to torsion ( at Ultimate Limit state ) Stress due to pure torsion.7 2. S wms .B φ ′′′ = At α = 0. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN = = 52 × 10 3 × 428. τbw = = 11.5 × 4000 2591 cosh − ⎤ α λ⎥ z cosh ⎥ cosh a ⎥ a ⎥ ⎦ 0. Stress due to warping.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. αλ a sinh αλ ⎡ ⎢ sinh a ⎢ G J a 2 ⎢ tanh λ ⎢ a ⎣ Tq = 0.3 N / mm2 2.0 App.T At midspan :In web. τt τw = = G. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.77 = 1. 2000 Date Jan.5.8 N / mm2 In flange.2 × 10 3 52291 × 10 4 × 14.t.313.913 = αλ a = 0. tanh λ a = 0. αλ a Version II 18 -19 .φ ′′′ t ⎤ ⎫ z⎪ ⎪ cosh ⎬ a⎪ ⎪ ⎭ To calculate φ′ and φ′′′ ⎧ αλ ⎡ ⎢ sinh a Tq ⎪ ⎪ = φ′ ⎨(1 − α ) + ⎢ GJ ⎪ ⎢ tanh λ ⎪ ⎢ a ⎣ ⎩ − cosh α λ⎥ ⎥ a ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ Ref. 2000 In flange.φ′ − E . Q f I x . 2.9 N / mm 2 Date Jan.

2000 Checked by RN Date Jan.313⎥ × 1⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ Stresses due to pure torsion.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.6 × 10 3 × 25912 0.φ′ 76.913 − 1.9 × (-1. τtf τtf = = = Version II 18 -20 .9 × 10 3 × 681.t.313⎥ × 1 ⎣ ⎦ φ′ ⎡ ⎡ 0. In web.313 At support φ ′′′ ∴ φ ′′′ = = = = −7.5 ) + ⎢ 0. T .19.7 × 10-5) .77) = 1.5 × 106 76.851 ⎤ ⎤ ⎢(1 − 0. 2000 At support.7 × (-1. τtw τtw = = = G.7 × 10 − 5 ⎡ 0.5 × 106 76.9 × 103× 9.812 × 10 −11 − 7.7 × 10-5 ) .12. φ′ 76. Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan.95 N / mm2 G.6 × 10 3 − 1.913 − 1.851 ⎤ ⎢ 0. z = 0 z a = 2000 cosh cosh z a = cosh(0) = 1. z = cosh(0.9 × 10 3 × 681.22 N / mm2 In flange.9 × 103 × 14. Sheet 11 of 14 Rev.0 At midspan.

S wms . In flange.913 ⎦ 1. 2000 Date Jan.φ′ G. Sheet 12 of 14 Rev. Version II 18 -21 .851 − 1. 2000 Stresses due to warping in flange. τtw τtf = = G.6 × 10 × 2591 ⎣ 0. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan.06 × 10 −11 τ wf = 14.T.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.313⎥ × 1. S wms . − E.5 × 10 6 ⎤ ⎡ 0.9 × 10 × 681.t.7 = − 4. − E.7 At midspan = − 3.812 × 10 −11 τ wf = 14. In web. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.φ ′′′ τ wf = T − 2 × 10 5 × 2787 × 10 4 × 1.1 N / mm 2 φ′ φ ′′′ = 0 = = −7.φ ′′′ τ wf = T − 2 × 10 5 × 2787 × 10 4 × 0.φ′ = 0 = 0 Stresses due to warping in flange.02 N / mm 2 By inspection the maximum combined shear stresses occur at the support.313 3 3 2 ⎢ 76.06 × 10 −11 Stresses due to pure torsion.

Sheet 13 of 14 Rev.2 102 ⎞ ⎛ − 3. ∴ − 12.27.3. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.14.6 N /mm 2 This must be added to the shear stresses due to plane bending.9 N / mm2 ( acting left to right) Version II 18 -22 .95 ⎜ 1 + 0.1 N / mm 2 τ = .5 × ⎟ 411 ⎠ ⎝ = − 14.1)⎜ 1 + 0.3 N / mm2( acting downwards) = ± 11.19.5 ⎜ Mb ⎝ = = ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ In web at 3. τ τ = τbw + τvt = . τtf τ wf = .26. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan.2 N / mm2 = . 2000 Date Jan.95 N / mm 2 102 ⎞ ⎛ − 12.5 ⎟ 411 ⎠ ⎝ = − 25. 2000 0 1 2 3 At support τ vt = ( τt τ tw τ vt ⎛ Mx + τ w ) ⎜ 1 + 0.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.7 .6 In the top flange at 1.1 N / mm2 ∴ τ vt = τbf + τvt = (− 19.

6 fy / γm = 0. in this instance the beam is satisfactory. 2000 Shear strength.016 rads = 0.6 × 250 /1. in order to obtain the value at working load it is sufficient to replace the value of torque Tq with the working load value as φ is linearly dependent on Tq.6 = 4. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. fv Since = 0.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. dividing by the appropriate value of γf will give :- ∴ Working load value of Tq is 7.15 = 130 N / mm2 27. Since Tq is due to solely the imposed point load W.7 kNm 0. the corresponding value of φ = Version II 18 -23 .026 = 0. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan.6 On the assumption that a maximum twist of 2° is acceptable at working load.5 1. Sheet 14 of 14 Rev. 2000 Date Jan.9 < 130 N / mm2 τ < fv Section is adequate for shear Referring back to the determination of the maximum angle of twist φ.93° 1.

8) J = = D B t T A Ix ry Zx Zy Zp = 300 mm = 200 mm = 8 mm = 8 mm = 77.8)] = 968 mm Version II 18 -24 .T) (neglecting the corner radii) = ( 200 .t) + ( D . S Section properties.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 Example 2 Redesign the member shown in example 1.t ) (D . Try 300 × 200 × 8 @ 60. h = = 2[(B . Depth of section Width of section Web thickness Flange thickness Area of section Moment of inertia Radius of gyration Elastic modulus Elastic modulus Plastic modulus Additional properties Torsional constant t3 h + 2 K ⋅ Ah 3 Area enclosed by the mean perimeter of the section.8) + ( 300 .23 cm = 653 cm3 = 522 cm3 = 785 cm3 8 mm D = 300 8 mm 200 56064 mm2 The mean perimeter. H. Sheet 1 of 6 Rev.1 cm2 = 9798 cm4 = 8. using a rectangular hollow section. Ah = (B .5 kg / m R.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.T)] 2[( 200 . Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.8 )(300 .

G Design strength.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 2 × 56064 × 8 968 = = = K = 2 Ah ⋅ t h = 927 mm 2 ∴ Torsional constant.5 M x ⎤ Mx + ⎥ ⎢ fy Mb ⎦ Mb ⎣ γm ≤ 1 Since slenderness ratio (λE / ry = 4000 / 82.15 = 217 N / mm2 = 250 / γm = Check for combined bending and torsion (i) Buckling check (σ byt + σ w ) ⎡ 1 + 0. table 38.9 kN / mm 2 2 (1 + 0.6) is less than the limiting value ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ 350 × 275 × 250 = 385 ⎟ ⎟ given in BS 5950 Part 1.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.. Sheet 2 of 6 Rev. lateral torsional ⎜ 250 f y ⎠ ⎝ buckling need not be considered.3) 250 / 1.3 = 48. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. C = = = 840 × 10 3 mm3 Material properties Shear modulus. py = E = 2 (1 +υ ) 2 × 10 5 = 76. J 8 3 × 968 + 2 × 927 × 56064 3 104 × 106 mm 4 J t + K t 104 × 106 8 + 927 8 Torsional modulus constant. Version II 18 -25 .

6 fy / γm . Zp / γm 50 < 363 ≤ 1.2.0 × 102 = 102 kNm The 100 kN eccentric load gives a value of Tq = 100 × 0.75 = 7.5 kNm 100 kN 100 kN 75 mm L T0 = Tq / 2 T0 = Tq / 2 Version II 18 -26 .3. Sheet 3 of 6 Rev.6 Pv = fy.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 Mcx 0.2 × (250 /1.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.7. Zx ( for plastic sections) BS 5950: Part 1 4.1 = 46. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.0 = 1.2 fy / γm.6 × (250 /1.3 cm ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ⎝ 2 = 0.15) × 46.3 × 10 × 10-3 = 604.5 BS 5950: Part 1 4.3 kN < 0.2 table 13 ∴ Mcx M m M To calculate φ = 1.15) × 653× 10-3 = 170 kNm = m ⋅ M xB = 1. Av Hence Mb = = Shear capacity Pv Shear area Av ∴ Pv Since FVB Mcx ⎞ ⎛ ⎛ D ⎞ 300 2 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ D + B ⎟ A = ⎜ 300 + 200 ⎟ 77.

001 × 102 = 0. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 φ T0 = = T0 ⋅z GJ Tq 2 = 7.5 × 170 ⎥ 250 170 ⎣ ⎦ 1.75 × 106 × 2000 76.75 kNm At centre of span.195 ⎡ 102 ⎤ + ⎢ 1 + 0. K (ii ) Local capacity check σbx + σbyt + σw σbx ≤ fy /γm = MxB / Zy Version II 18 -27 .BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.001 radians φ Myt = φ .6 <1 ∴ O. z = = λ / 2 = 2000 mm 3.15 0.9 × 10 3 × 104 × 106 = 0. Sheet 4 of 6 Rev.195 N / mm 2 3 522 × 10 Warping stresses ( σw ) are insignificant due to the type of section employed. MxB M yt Zy = = 0.5 2 = 3.102 kNm σ byt = 0.102 × 10 6 = 0.5 Mb ⎥ ⎢ ⎦ ⎣ = ≤ 1 102 0. Check becomes Mx Mb + σ byt fy γm ⎡ Mx ⎤ ⎥ ⎢ 1 + 0.

5 × 106 = 2 × 837 × 10 3 τt = = = 4.2 < 217 N / mm2 ∴ O. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.1 N / mm 2 Shear stresses due to torsion T0 C ( at Ultimate limit State) Tq 2C 7.195 + 0 196. 200 τ bw Qw A1 = FVA . Sheet 5 of 6 Rev. K Shear stresses due to bending ( at Ultimate Limit state) Maximum value occurs in the web at the support.5 N / mm 2 Version II 18 -28 . Qw I x .BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No.t1 = = A 2 A1 ⋅ y 8 y 150 y = ∴ 150 × 8 × 150 × 2 + 184 × 8 × 146 2 × 10 − 3 = A1 = A1 × 395 A1 = = 395 cm3 395 cm A1 Qw τ bw = 52 × 10 3 × 395 × 10 3 9798 × 10 4 × 2 × 8 13.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 = 196 N / mm 2 = σ bx = 102 × 106 522 × 10 3 196 + 0.

15 = 130 N /mm2 19 < 130 N / mm2 τ < pv BS 5950: Part 1 4.6 fy / γm = 0. 2.5 ⎜ Mb ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ( 4.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 Total shear stress ( at Ultimate Limit State ) τ τ vt = = τ bw + τ vt τ ⎛ Mx ⎞ ⎟ + τ w ) ⎜ 1 + 0.6 × 250 /1.9 = 19 N / mm2 (τ t = 5. Version II 18 -29 .1 + 5. Sheet 6 of 6 Rev.5 × 102 ⎞ = ⎜ ⎟ 170 ⎠ ⎝ = 13.BEAMS SUBJECTED TO TORSION & BENDING-II Structural Steel Design Project CALCULATION SHEET Job No. 3 ∴ the section is adequate for shear. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.9 N / mm 2 Shear strength Since pv = 0.5 + 0 ) ⎛ 1 + 0.

- Torsional Analysis of Steel MembersUploaded bySebastiao Silveira
- Mech206 - 2014-15 Spring - l04 - Pure BendingUploaded byYazan Harb
- 5 Churchbury Lane 6 - First Floor Structural CalcsUploaded bymarkomarkomarkomarko
- 2000 - Recent Research Advances in Cold-Formed Steel StructuresUploaded byJosue Lewandowski
- STEEL BEAM DESIGN.docxUploaded bySyazwi Akram Ab Razak
- BGSCM14C08ExProbUploaded byamachmouchi
- SFD-IS-800-2007Uploaded byahmedsabercg
- I Beam in Bending and Torsion - ThesisUploaded byshish0iitr
- Plate Girder Behaviour and DesignUploaded byayingba
- Schaum s - Structural Steel Design (1)Uploaded bySaulo Lopez
- Example Design of Circular Beam ACI 1999Uploaded byJosé Pablo Rosales Sánchez
- A Teaching Guide for Structural Steel ConnectionsUploaded byv
- Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear deformabilityUploaded byEmir Maslak
- corrugated web beamUploaded byNegin Maleki
- Moment Connections Seismic ApplicationsUploaded byshak543
- ccx_1.7Uploaded byKen Chen
- [Ensc 13] Problem Set 4 - Stresses in BeamsUploaded bylucas
- The Cyclic Behaviour of Steel Elements and ConnectionsUploaded byconeyqu
- BunkersUploaded bychakrapanithota
- IREME_2007Uploaded byபுகழேந்தி தனஞ்செயன்
- University of British Columbia - Warping TorsionUploaded byFrancisco Contreras
- www-fgg-uni-lj-siUploaded by113314
- CE470 F07 Beam DesignUploaded byTanawat Nuch
- Shear_and_Moment_in_BeamsUploaded by062688
- Sn003a - Elastic Critical Moment for LTBUploaded byDarren Thoon
- STRC13 Bridges Steel Members 0715Uploaded byKevin
- Bridge Superstructure DesignUploaded bymikefara
- MTech Civil Syllabus 2015 16Uploaded byRamesh Konakalla
- Experimental and Analytical Evaluation of Lateral Buckling of FRP Composite Cantilever I BeamsUploaded byersen06
- SEI November 2010 Complete IssueUploaded byTomas Merkevicius

- 11777413Uploaded byVincent Teng
- Matriks Edaran Dokumen Pusat Setempat Majlis Perbandaran SelayangUploaded byVincent Teng
- Hoardings Good PracticeUploaded byVincent Teng
- Dynamic soil behavior and dynamic soil-structure interactionUploaded byVincent Teng
- Design of Water Retaining Structures to ECUploaded byVincent Teng
- EC2_M2P_COAB_Multon_2012Uploaded byVincent Teng
- Design Practice to Prevent Floor VibrationsUploaded byVincent Teng
- Project Management-Harvard ReferencingUploaded byVincent Teng
- Structural Stability From Theory to PracticeUploaded byVincent Teng
- Strut and Tie ModellingNew AS 3600 ProvisionsUploaded byVincent Teng
- QLASSICUploaded byVincent Teng
- Design of Columns 2Uploaded byVincent Teng
- Bearing Capacity of SoilsUploaded byVincent Teng
- DG 3 Eng 2nd Edt Version 02-12-09Uploaded byVincent Teng
- GPP+Tempat+Letak+KenderaanUploaded byVincent Teng
- Strip FootingUploaded byVincent Teng
- Writing Work Method Statement Plain English Guidelines 0231Uploaded byVincent Teng
- SAMPLE RetainerAgreementUploaded byVincent Teng
- Bearing Capacity of Unpaved RoadsUploaded byVincent Teng
- COP for Demolition of Buildings 2004Uploaded byVincent Teng