Lehigh University

Lehigh Preserve
Fritz Laboratory Reports Civil and Environmental Engineering

1-1-1958

The influence of residual stresses on the strength of

structural members, Welding Research Council
Bulletin 44, (November 1958), Reprint No. 132
(58-6)
R. L. Ketter

Follow this and additional works at: http://preserve.lehigh.edu/engr-civil-environmental-fritz-lab-

reports

Recommended Citation
Ketter, R. L., "The influence of residual stresses on the strength of structural members, Welding Research Council Bulletin 44,
(November 1958), Reprint No. 132 (58-6)" (1958). Fritz Laboratory Reports. Paper 1500.
http://preserve.lehigh.edu/engr-civil-environmental-fritz-lab-reports/1500

This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Civil and Environmental Engineering at Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Fritz Laboratory Reports by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact
preserve@lehigh.edu.
Number 44 November J95B

Welding Research Council Bulletin Series

THE INFLUENCE OF RESIDUAL STRESS ON THE

STRENGTH OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS
by

Robert L.Ketter

FRITZ ENGINEERING
LABORATORY LIBRARY

The Bulletin Series of the Welding Research Council

contains reports of.the Council not published in its
regular monthly Research SuppleDlent.
Price: $1.00 a copy

Welding Research Conncil of the Engineering Foundatioll

Sponsored by the A:merican Welding Society, A:merican Institute of Electrical Engineers,
A:merican Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, A:merican Society of Civil Engineers,
A:merican Society of Mechanical Engineers, Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers,
A:merican Society for Metals and American Society ~or Testing Materials

29 West TI"irty-ninth Street New York JB, N. Y.

THE WELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL was organized by Engineering Foundation some 25 years ago to provide
a mechanism for conducting needed cooperative research work in the welding field. It enjoys the cooperation of the
leading interested scientific and technical societies, government departments, trade associations and companies
fabricating and using welding products. The cooperative method enables the Council to bring to bear on the solu-
tion of complex problems the diversified talent of experts representing many branches of science and engineering,
thereby greatly enhancing the chances of fundamental solutions which will be broadly applicable. Moreover the
cost to anyone company is very small and unnecessary duplication is avoided.

OPERATION: The Council operates on annual sub-
scriptions, has no capital and makes no profit.
More than 600 leading scientists and engineers are
affiliated with the work of the Council.
Some 30 laboratories in this country and Canada
participate in the research programs.
Total value of the work cleared through the various
publications of the Council amounts to more than
two million dollars a year.
Total cash budget of the Council is well over $600,000
dollars.
Exchanges reports with the British Welding Re-
search Association and research organizations of
other countries.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT: The Council does not sug-
gest the amount to be subscribed by any corpora-
tion. These amounts depend on size and interest
in the field and vary in size from $150 to more than
$25,000 for the largest corporation. All organiza-
tions using welding should become affiliated with the
work of the Council.
PUBLICATIONS: Welding Research. This publi-
cation is printed monthly and includes practically all
the completed reports of the various project com-
mittees of the Council and affiliated research work.
Reports of Progress. An offset printed Progress
Reports Series issued monthly contains reports of
progress on uncompleted researches, proposed pro-
grams of research, translations of important articles
and other pertinent information helpful to research
worker and Subscriber.
Welding Research News. This is a bi-monthly printed
four-page news letter containing condensed interpre-
tative summations of results of completed researches,
and work under way in the United States and
abroad.
Bulletins. These Bulletins are published at irregular
intervals and contain important papers presented
before engineering societies, and other important
papers which are not published in the Welding
Research Supplement.
Welding Research Abroad. A monthly publication
aimed at keeping Americans informed of the latest
research developments abroad and the activities of
the International Institute of Welding.

For further information address: W. Spraragen, Director

Welding Research Council
29 W. 39th St., New York 18, N. Y.

WELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE ENGINEERING FOUNDATION

Sponsored jointly by American Welding Society, American Institute of Electrical Engineers, American Institute of Mining
and Metallurgical Engineers, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Society
of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, American Society for Metals and American Society for Testing Materials
29 West Thirty-ninth Street New York 18, N. Y.
The Influence of Residual Stress on the
Strength of Strnctnral Members
by Robert L.Ketter

Sunlnlary
Concerned primarily with the stability
of "as-delivered," rolled, structural steel
shapes of the I or WF type, this discussion
considers the influence of residual stresses
on the load carrying capacity of com-
pressed members. Both the pure axial
load case and that of combined thrust and
bending due to end moments, eccentric or
Presented at the Seventh Technical Session of
the Column Research Council of Engineering
Foundation, May 1957.
Robert L. Ketter is Professor and Head of De-
partment of Civil Engineering, University of
Buffalo. Buffalo, N. Y.
lateral loads, ete. have been included,
While the procedures presented could be
extended to include as a basie material
property the influence of a curved type of
stress-strain rehtionship (in addition to
the apparent nonlinearity due to residual
stresses) the numerical work involved in
.obtaining equations or graphs similar to
those shown herein would be mueh greater.
It should be noted at the outset that
the' problem under consideration (that
is, the condition of stability being dis-
eussed) is that of "excessive bending." For
the axially loaded member, a limiting case
of the generalized beam-coluplll, the first
possibility of lateral deformation from the
straight equilibrium position will be con"
sidered, As hltS been demonstrated both
analyticldly and experimentally, this ini-
tiation of bending at the tangent modulus
load is a lower limit to the true carrying
capacity of the member. Further, for
most "as-delivered" rolled shapes it repre-
sents a good approximation to the actual
maximum load the member can sustain.'
For the case of combined bending and
thrust, the problem is somewhat difTerent
in that it is necessary to determine the
maximum load in a 'bent configuration.
Indifference with regard to equilibrium
in the deformed position (as load is held
constant) is then the criterion of the solu-
tion. BecliUse of the manner in whieh
loads "get into a structure," bending

Shape Flange Pattern Web Pattern Shape Flange Pattern Web Pattern

H :J
H 12 VF50
41/F13

T.

T.

t H 81/F24 ]1 ksi
:f
H 121/F65
10
ksi 0
10
C,

H 81/F 3 0
10c,

H 8VF67 J
C.IL_...J..._..J..._...I----J{
c. ,-I- ........_ _L.-_-I...._..JI
T.
20 \0 0 10 20 20 10 0 10 20
ksi ksi

Fig. 1 Residual stress distributions in WF-shapes 6 (schematic)

Resid1wl Stress Influence 1

r
Flange Pattern Web Pattern moments are present in most members.
The problem of importance then is more
often the second of the two.
The problem of lateral torsional types
of instability are not included in this
presentation: These types of problems
are considered by a different research com-

H 6M 15.5 u mittee of the' Counr,il. It should be

pointed out, however, that for a majority
of cases encountered in building construc-
tion the members are laterally restrained
by wall systems, etc. For these and other
cases where adequate lateral support is
provided, the results presented herein di-
rectly apply.
As pointed out by the first speaker this
morning, when discussing problems of

H 14VF43
stability (or more often-lack of stability)
one must talk about ultimate loads rather
than working loads. Correspondingly,
when considering such members in actual
structures, the ultimate loading behavior
of the structure as a whole must be inves-
tigated. A column may be elastically
restrained by.adjoining members at the
working load, but these restrains (due to
yielding) may he absent as the ultimate
load of the structure is approached. Such
a member is then effectively pin-ended at
this ultimate load situation and should be
considered as such when determining the
carrying capacity of the structure.

RESIDUAL STRESSES
C. T.
_-'-_-'-_...J HE existence of residual stresses in
T
1 . . '_ .......

20 0 10
10 20 structural shapes has been known for
ksi many years. As a result of early
Fig. 1 (continued) recognition, in the late '1940's, of the
importance of the residual stress effect
on column behavior, Column Research
Council initiated work on the investiga-
tion of the influence of this variable.
One such study sponsored by the Coun-
cil and others has been underway for
crRC (in ksi) the past four years at Lehigh Univer-
sity. Research Committee A has ac-
·0 tively directed the work. Certain of
the results of that study will be included
in this presentation in order to arrive at a
suitable approximation to the measured
z residual stress distributions.
~ Residual stresses may be the result
ILl
~ of a number of causes. The primary
ones of these are as follows: (1) dif-

Q!
40
~Y~crRC ferential cooling during and after roll-

-
.1=
,..., ing, (2) cold bending, (3) various erec-
c: tion procedures, and (4) welding. In
Q)
(,)
30 general, cold-bending will result in a
~ ~,
I..
Q) magnitude and distribution of "locked-
ll. in" stress whose influence is less than
c: that due to cooling. 4 Therefore, this
20 condition will not be considered in this
>.
(,) discussion. Case (3), erection proced-
c: ures, is too much an individual matter
Q)
::3 to be discussed in detail. "Built-up"
0-
...
Q)

IJ..
10 members fabricated by welding (case 4)
is also not included since insufficient
test data is available to quantitatively
discuss the magnitudes of the developed
stresses. It has been obseryed, however,
o
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4, 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 that these stresses may be larger than
those found in geometrically similar
rolled shapes ..~
O"RC The. typek';of residual stresses to be
(jy = 33 ksi
cry considered in this report then are those
Fig. 2 Histogram of frequency of occurrence of maximum compres- due to differential cooling. For the
sive residual stress analytical work it will be assumed that

2 Resid1lal Stre,~s Influence

 these stresses have complete axial
symmetry.
In Fig. 1 is shown the measured resid-
ual stresses for ten (10) "as-delivered"
rolled WF shapes. 6 While the majority
of these members are of the column type,
two (2) beam sections are included.
The column sections ranged in weight
,
from a 13 lb-ft (4'VF13) member to one
426 lb-ft (14WF426). The two beam
Residual Stress
,, "
members are the 14WF43 and the
36WF150. The residual stress meas-
urements were determined by a sec- ,,
tioning process which relieved the
"locked-in" stresses and thus gave an
indication of the original value. 7 Read-
0.5
"
6M 15.5
ings were made over a 10 in. gage length ,G
,'-
sufficiently removed from the ends to
exclude the possibility of "end effects."
As indicated, in all cases the residual 36 VFI50
stresses at the flange edges are in com- ,,
e
pression. This is as ,would generally
be expected due to the fact that the
rate of cooling is greatest in these re- ""
" " •
14VF43
gions. The distribution of the residual
stress across the flanges is of a general
parabolic form and in most cases has a
tensile residual stress value at the flange
center. Web patterns are quite erratic.
12 J 14 •
It should be remembered, however, that
in column buckling the moment of iner-
tia of the section is of primary impor-
a
tance. Since, as cOlupared to the flanges, o 0.5 1.0
the web contributes relatively 'little (_ bl t )
to this quantity (either for strong or (J'y .. 33 ksi
weak axis), the pattern over the web is (d/w)
not of major concern. Fig. 3 Maxin..,..,n co,npre""i,ve residuul "tress a" u function af flU!
Consider, first of all, the magnitude ratio (b/t)/(d/w)
of the maximum compressive residual
stress at the flange edges. Relating this
stress to the minimum allowed specifica-
tion yield stress level (33 ksi), Fig. (2)
is a histogram of the frequency of 'occur-
rence vs. the ratio" Rcl" v, where
Assumed Pattern
"nc = maximum compressive resid-
ual stress.
rr v = yield point stress (33 ksi).

Twelve specimens were considered: the

ten shown previously in Fig. 1 plus a
junior beam and an additional column
-~----
section. While it is conceded that there
are too few data to go into any rigorous
statistical consideration of the informa- e"
tion, the sampling was sufficiently ran- <....
dom to give a fair indication of the gen-
eral trends to be expected. 'Work is
currently underway to include a larger
amount of information in ,such a histo-
gram.
As shown by the small arrow, the
mean value of the compressive residual
stress at the flange edges is approxi-
mately 0.3.'> "v' The open arrow indi-
ctLtes thtLt value of stress tLssumed in tLll
of the calculations thtLt follow. To af- ---l I
ford a better feeling of the magnitudes 10 0
of the stresses involved, there has been
included an ordinate "RC measured in Scale In ksi
kips per sqUtLre inch. Fig. 4 Measured and us"unled residulll sl;ress paUerns for the 8 IVF31 ,
Attempts were made to determine tL section lO

Residual Strcsslnflucnce 3

1.0
0.5
a
a 0.5
Fi.g ..S St.ress-st,r(li,n (lnd tu.ngent; modulus curves for wide-flange shuJle cont.uining residuul stress
l1ondimensional parameter which gov-
erns the magnitude of this maximum
compressive residual stress, Figure 3 4
relates this stress in a nondimensional
form to the parameter (b/O/(d/w);
where
.arld further that a linear variation in the
b flange width,
t = flange thickness.
d = depth of section.
w = web thickness.
Because of the manner in which mem-
bers are placed on,the cooling bed after
rolling, one would not expect to get too
good a correlation with a given param-
eter. There does, however, seem
to be a trend that as the ratio of (bit)
to (d/w) increases, so also increases the
magnitude of the maximum compressive
residual stress. (It should be noted
from the spacing and general location of
the various members on this plot that
the sampling was quite random.)
Here again is shown by the open arrow
the value assumed in the calculations.
As an approximation to the actual
4 Residual Stress I njluence
Tangent Modulus Curves
Curve
EAve. Et
and ---
€y E
measured res'idual stress distributions
shown in Fig. 1, assume that the value
of the maximum compressive residual
stress is
<rRe = a.3a,
stress occurs between the flange edges
and the flange' center. The web stress
will be assumed to be constant at the
value of the maximum tensile stress in
the flange (at the flange center). Thf;
correlation of this assumption with ac-
tual measurements for the 8WF31 sec-
tion is shown in Fig. 4. It should be
pointed out that this is a different
8WF31 measurement than that shown
in Fig. 1. Obviously, such an assumed
distribution cannot match all cases as
well as it does this one.
If the distribution of residual stress is
assumed as described above with rr]lC
being the maximum compressive resid-
ual stress at the flange edges and rrRr
being the maximum tensile residual
stress at the flange centers, then from
= 1.0
= 3.0
1.0
equilibrium of resulting residual forces
it can be shown that
1
(I)
]. + ZAA w
F
A w and Ai" are the web and flange areas
respectively of the section in question.
BUCKLING OJ<' AXTALLY LOADED
MEMBERS
For a member containing residual
stresses, it is possible to obtain an aver-
age stress~strain curve for the section as
a whole. From the analytic expression
defininll; this relationship the tangent
modulus could be determined which
would include the variable residual
stress. This would be aecomplished by
subjecting the section to a general
strain (€) greater than that required to
start the flange edges to yield due to the
combined residual and applied stresses.
The average stress, (rrAvE = PIA),
would then be written as a function of
this stmin and by differentiating with The attainment of the full yield stress ized by assuming that the cross section
respect to € the tangent modulus would (uAI'Blu y = 1.0) at a value of E,jE consists of two flanges which contain
be obtained. (It should be noted that greater than zero is a direct result of the residual stresses that are self balancing
the material is assumed to have an assumption of the residual stress dis- (i.e., URa = URT)' For this case the
idealized elastic-totally plastic stress- tribution. This can be seen by con- equations corresponding to (2) and (:3)
strain relationship. Tests of coupons sidering a combination of the assumed would be
of rolled shapes indicate that this is
true for A-7 type mild structural steel
members. The method of solution,
however, could be extended to other 1 2
(] + ~) (~) (~Y -(] - ~ Y]
types of materinJs having basically dif-
l a
(4)

()()
ferent properties.) The governing equa- 4 (uu: )
tions are then

+2 + ()O] + (!.) and

l
2 una una ] € ] U RT €.

~
2 ( ) ( )
UAI'B = A F
Uy A
-;;; --;; -

2 (una + unT)
--;;; -;;; Aw
A €y E, 11 + (~) - (;.)]
l
(Ii)
Uy UJI E c
(2) 2 (Uu: )
and residual stress pattern and a stress due

(€)] to an applied external load. In all As before (assuming that URa 0.:3

I
I + URT cases the entire web will remain fully u y), the stress-strain and tangent modu-
AF Uy €y +A w
elastic until the instant the yield load lus curves are as shown in Fig. 6.
A URa + URT A is realized. Only then will it yield (and Regarding the use of these curves
(Ty U 11 (Figs. 5 and 6) in predicting the buekling
as a complete unit). Referring to Fig.
(3) load of a given column, it should be
1, it should be observed that only in realized that these are apparent tangent
where the very exceptional case will this actu- modulus values, ones that would be ob-
It total area of cross section. ally be the case. In general, certain tained from a stub column test of a
€y =nnit strain corresponding to ini- parts of the web will yield before others member which contained the assumed
tial yield. with the end result that the value of the residual stress distribution. The ma-
The curves which would result from as- tangent modulus will approach zero as terial itself would have the full value of
suming ApiA w = ] .0, 2.0 and 3.0 are the average stress approaches the yield Young's'modulus, E, in the regions of
·shown in Fig. 5 for the case U Rcl U y = stress level. the section that are elastic but would
0.3. This same end effect could be real- have a zero value in the yielded zones.
The values of E,jE given in Figs. 5 and
6 are therefore only measures of the
elastic area of the section as compared
to the total area. It should here be em-
Tangent Modulus Curve phasized, however, that it is the moment
of inertia that influences the buckling
load-not the area. For this reason
there will be a difference in the resulting
column curve (even in a nondimensional
form) should buckling occur about the
strong or about the weak axis of a
section.

~r :i~'030---+Y-+-+-~
For buckling about the strong axis of

tfj o~'o~
the member, there exists a linear rela-
tionship between area and the moment
of inertia. (This would be exactly true
for the member composed only of flanges
as in Fig. 6 and would be a good ap-
0.5 proximation for a "real" wide-flange
shape of the type shown in Fig..5.)
The tangent modulus load for this case
is then
Stress-Strain Curve
Elx-x
7r 2

'(kL)2 ('I')

(Strong Axis Buckling) (H)

0 where
0 0.5 1.0 tangent modulus load about
Et the x-x (strong) axis.
EAve.
and E Young's modulus of Elas-
Ey E ticity.
lx-x total moment of inertia of
Fig. (, Stress-s/;ruin antl/;angen/. mOlf"lus curvesfor idealiz"d wicle~llange.,hafJl?
containing residual stress sadion about x-x axis.

Residual Stress Influence 5

r
(kL) effective length of the mem- Strong Axis
ber.
r = EtlE, from Figs. 5 or 6.
In terms of stress, nondimensionalized
1.0
with respect to the yield stress, (IT.),
IT,X-X [1r 2E/lT. ]
-;; = (kL/rx-x) 2 (r)
(Strong Axis Buckling) (7)
Weak Axis
For buckling about the weak axis,
the moment of inertia varies as the cube
of the area. (Here again, this would be
exact for the section which consists only
of flanges and would be an approxima-
tion for a "real" shape.) The buckling 0.5
equation is then
1r 2EJu-·
p,.-. = (kL) 2 (r)3

(Weak Axis Buckling) (8)

where
P ,.-Ii tangent modu.lus load about
the y-y (weak) axis.
Ju-. total moment of inertia of
~ection about the y-y axis. o
Nondimensionalizing as before o
IT,.-. [1r 2E I lT.) ]
---;: = (kLlr.-.) 2 (r)3
(Weak Axis Buckling) (9)
Fig.7 ColuTnn eurllesjor ideulize,l wirIe-flunge shape f;ont:uining residual .• ,re......
Using eqs 7 and 9 and the stress-
tangent modulus curve of Fig. 6 it is
possible to obtain column curves in
terms of the parameters IT ,I IT. and
a(kL/r) , where point of the material. For further in- illustration, however, only that one
creases in load application above this proposed by .Jezek 8 will be considered.
value, deformations increase at a much If it is assumed that (1) the member
greater rate due to the relative decrease is rectangular in cross section, (2)
These column curves are shown in Fig. in stiffness at the yielded sections. lateral deformations can be approxi-
7. As expected, the nondimensional- Eventually a point is reached for which mated by a sine curve controlled in
ized weak-axis solution is the more further increases in load are impossible magnitude by the curvature at the
severe and is approximately a straight and the maximum load has been centerline section, and (3) an idealized
line from IT I IT. = 0.7 on the Euler reached. The member then becomes •elastic-plastic stress-strain relationship,
curve to lTllT. = 1.0 at kLlr = O. The unstable. then it is possible to define the load de-
strong axis column curve in the range Various graphical, semigraphical and for;mation relationship of the member in
in question has a general parabolic analytical methods have been proposed question and thereby determine the
form. for the solution of this problem., For critical load. This would be carried

MAXIMUM CAHHYING CAPACITY

OF BEAM-COI.UMNS
As was pointed out earlier, the prob-
lem of determining the maximum carry- 1.0
ing capacity of a member subjected to
combined bending and thrust is basi-
cally different from that which occurs Elastic Curve
in the case of an axially loaded member. p ..
\~e ~.MaXimum Load
As shown in Fig. 8, an eccentrically
loaded member will start to bend at the f1 0.5 \ 'c
first increment of load application. As Typical Inelastic Curve
loads are increased, deformations con-
tinue at an increasing rate. Assuming
that the material is infinitely elastic,
the maximum load the member can'
theoretically sustain is the Euler load. o
Materials, however, are not infinitely o 5.0 10.0
elastic and at some poi~t on this loacl- ~
deformation curve the stress at the e
eenterline section reaches the yield Fig. 8 Load deflection relationjor eeeentricully loaded eolnmns lO

Residual 8tres,s Influence

 ~;MO
1.0
-f-t-
Rectangular Section

0.5

o
o 0.5 1.0 1.5
Mo
My'
Fig.9 Ultima/;e s/;reng/;h .interaction curves for reetangu.lar cross section, beam-eolumn subjeeted to equal end 1noments

P = 0 out in the following steps:

1. Assume a general stress distribu-
P = 0.2 P tion across the section.
1.0 2. For this distribution, write the
equation for curvature (a
fmi.ction of the strains) as a
function of the moment and
P c 0.4 Py thrust acting on the section.
3. Assuming a sine type of deflec-

-:.r: .
tion curve, determine the cur-
vature at the centerline sec-
tion by differentiating.
'. P • 0.6 Py 4. Equating the curvatures of 2 and
0.5 3, noting that the moment at
the centerline section is not
only a function of the applied
moments but also due to the
P 0.8 Py thrust times the lateral deflec-
- Neglecfing Residual Stress tion, aTelationship can be ob-
tained for load vs. deflection.
---- Including Residual Stress' 5. This load deformation expression
can be maximized to deter-
mine the critical load.
o For the rectangular section the resulting
o 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 equations are
¢
¢y.
Fig.l() M-e/> el/.rvesfor HWF31 sec/.ion incll/.ding the injll/.enee of residl/.al stress
(aRC = 0 ..1 <Tv) strong axis bending"
(10)

Residual Stress Influence 7

r------------------------------

1.0 ~J (11)
depending on whether the member
yielded just in compression or both' in
tension and compression. In eqs 10
and 11
Mo = end moment.
M. = moment corresponding to ini-
tial yield in the absenee of
axial thrust.
0.5 I-~._+_----'''rl-----''~-~ P axial thrust.
p. axial thrust corresponding to
initial yielding in the ab-
sence of' bending moments,
(i.e., P y = Auy).
L ~

r ~ ~:~ (~r
The parameter "~" is a noridimensional
form of the slenderness term which eil-
sures that the intersection of the Euler
curve and the yield value always oecur
a at a value of ~ = 1.0. Relating this
a 0.5 1.0 paraineter to the" a" used previously

Column interaction eurves of eqs

10 and 11 are shown in Fig. 9. The
cry = 33 ksi boundary between the two equations is
shown as a dashed line and is defined
Fig. 11 Ultimate strength interaction cnrces for WP section bearrt-colu.ntns
subjected to equal end montents" (including influence of residual stress) by the equation

MO=3(P)(1_
111.p.
P)
p.
(12)

The first expression holds to the left of

1.0 the das]lCdline, the seeond to the right.
Interaetion curves of the type shown
ean also be used to determine the eriti-
eal loading of eeeentrically loaded mem-
bers. If "e" is defined as the end ee-
.eentricity of load application, then
P M o = (P)(e)
Py
or

0.5 (:J(~) (13)

Collapse Neglecting Residual Stress
Collapse Including Residual Stress
Initial Yield (Secant Solution)
o five equations. To overcome this diffi-
o 0.5 1.0
o-y = 33 ksi •
Fig . .12 Tnl;erae/,ion cruces for I;wo slenderness ratio.•.•howing I,he i.rrjluence of
residual s tre....
That is, a straight line on the interac-
tion curve deseribing eq 13 will inter-
sect the slenderness curve in quest[on at
the critical value of thrust.
The procedure deseribed above fo!'
the reetangular cross section could be
extended directly to the wide-flange
case, however, instead of two equations
defining two regions there would be
culty Jezek proposed the use of an ap-
proximation factor that would indi-
reetly relate the stiffness of the section
in question to that of the rectangle.
Bijlaard, Fisher and Winter9 have
refined these values. .
Sinee it is the purpose of this i)resen-
tation to eonsider the influence of
residual stress, it is neeessary to use the

8 Resirhwl Stress Influence

basic approach as outlined by .Jezek. Collapse NeCjJlectinCjJ Residual Stress
The exceptions that will be made are
(1) the moment-thrust-curvature re- 1.0
lationships will not be given in explicit
analytical form but will rather be de-
fined graphically, and (2) load-deforma-
tion as well as deflection relationship
along the number will be determined
by numerical integration of appropriate
curvature values, P Collapse Including Residual
In reference 10 there is described Py
and demonstrated a general method for Stress (O"RC • 0.3 0"yl
graphically determining the relationship StJeont Solution Unsofe

n
between moment, Al, thrust, P, and 0.5
curvature, ¢, for any given type of
cross section having as an axis of sym- p
metry the plane of the applied inoment.
M-P-¢ curves were given in that report
for the 8WF31 section. These include
the influence of the residual stress
shown in Fig. 4.
Figure 10, reproduced from reference,
-l- ICWp II
ec =
""r2 0.1 II
10, shows the moment-curvature re-
lationships for constant values of axial
thrust ranging from 0 to 0.8P y in 0.2P y 0
intervals. The upper curve in each 0 50 100
case is that neglecting residual stress.
The lower takes into account the L
influence of the initial stress pattern. r
All quantities have been nondimension-
alized with respeet to initial yield values. Fig . .1:J Collllnn cnrves for e(~ = 0.1 showing influence of resic/uul sUess
r
Using these curves it is possible to
numerically integrate and obtain load-
deformation relationships for any given
system of loads. It will be itppre-
ciated that this is a time-consuming
undertaking.
For a beam-column loaded with a
thrust ,and equal end moments, Alo,
which produce single curvature in the 1.0
member, the resulting curves of ulti-
mate strength including residual stress
arc as shown in Fig. 11,11 It is as-
sumed that the yield strength was (Ty = '
33 ksi. The curves, however, can be'
used for other materials by using an
adjusted slenderness ratio

0.5
To give an indication of the influenee
of residual stress on the ultimate
strength of such numbers, Fig. 12
gives the interaction curves for two .1-"
slenderness ratios; Llr =80 and 120. r
In each case three curves are shown.
The upper solid line is the collapse or
maxinwm load curve neglecting re-
sidual stress. The lower. solid line
includes this variable. The range af-
fected is ShOWll- cross-hatched. The o
dashed line is the elastic limit solution.
It should be observed that for higher
o 0.5 1.0
values of axial thrust the initial yield
solution may be unsafe.
Possibl~' a better indication of the
seriousness of not considering residual
stress can be seen from a consideration
of column curves. Figure 13 gives cry = 33 ksi
such curves for [in eelr Z = 0.1. The Fig. 14 Ultimllt.e st.rengt;h interact.ion cnrves for IFF section bealn-column
same. " three comparisons are made. subject. to monwnt at one end onl)'l1 Onclu.ding i.nfluenee of residual stress)

Residual Stress Influence 9

 Here again it is seen that for a major
range of slenderness values, the secant
1.0 solution is unsafe as compared to the
collapse solution including the influence
of residual stress.
Thus far we have considered sym-
metrical t}'Pes of loading and deforma-
tion. The method of solution, however,
is general and in Fig.' 14 is given the
interaction curves for the 8WF31
member subjected to an end moment
applied at one end only, while the
other end is held pinned,u Because
0.5 of the relatively small influence of
slenderness ratio at lower values of
Llr the curve for Llr = 20 has been
omitted.
Figure 15 corresponds to Fig. 12
L and as before the shaded region indicates
= 120
r that area affected by residual stress.
Contrary to what might at first con-
sid eration be assumed, residual stresses
of the type being studied have a more
pronounced relative influence on the
strength of these members than they
o did on the .symmetrically deformed
o 0.5 1.0 ones. It will be noted that the relative
spread of the shaded areas is larger.
Mo This is not to imply that the member is
My weaker when moment is applied only
• Fig. 15 lnwraction cnrves for two slenderness ratio.~ showing inflnence of at one of its ends but rather that re-
. residu.al s t;ress sidual stresses seem to have a relatively
bigger influence for such loadings.
The actual strengths of the members
are best' compared in Fig. 16. Here
for the same slenderness ratios that were
previously considered (Llr = 80 and
120) have been reproduced the collapse
interaction curves. Each case must
yield the same solution when M o = 0
1.0 and this is seen to be the case.
Summarizing, we have for the past
few moments been considering the in-
. fluence of residual stresses on the
strength of structural members. For
axially loaded, pin-ended columns, gen-
eral solutions were presented which in-
clude the influence of an average cool-
ing residual stress distribution. For the
beam-colunln problem, two conditions
of loading were assumed: one which re-
0.5 sults in a symmetrical deformation due
to a symmetrical distribution of. ap-
plied bending moments, and the other-
moment applied at one end of a mem-
ber while the other end is held pinned.
Due to the large amount of time
required to obtain a solution to these
problems, only one cross section was
considered, the 8WF31. This member,
however, has one of the lowest shape
factors of any of the sections rolled
and should therefore result in safe
o usage for other sections.
0.5 1.0
References
1. Shanlc~r, F. R., "Inelastic Colullin The·
on", .Journal of Aeronaut.ical Science, 14 (5L .
26'1-267 (May 1947).
Fig. 16 Ultintate strength interact.ion curves for two slenderness 2. ])uberg, ,r. E., and Wilder, T. 'V., III,
ratios showi.ng i.nfluence of loading condi.tion (including influence of "Inelastic Column Theory," NACA TN 2267
residu.al st;ress) (Januar~' 1951),

10 Residual Stress Influence

 3. Wilder, T. W., III, Brooks, W. A., Jr.,
and IVIathauser, E. E., "The Effect of Initial
Curvature on the Strength of an Inelastic Col-
umn," NACA TN 2872 (January 1(53).
4. Huber, A. \V" "The Influence of Residual
Stress on the Instability of Columns," Ph.D. Dis-
sertation, Lehigh University (May 1(56).
5. Fujita, Y., "Built-Up Column Strength,"
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University (October
19.';6).
6. Fujita, Y., "The ~'Iagnitude and Distl'ihu-
tion of Residual Stress," Fritz Engineering Labo-
ratory Report No. 220,.1..20 (May 19,55).
7. Huber, A. W., "Residual Strain Measure-
ment," Fritz Engineering Laboratory Heport No.
220,.1..17 (March 1(55).
8. Jezek, K., "Die Tragfakigkcit des gleich-
mabig querbclasteten Druekstabes aus ideal-
plastisehen Stahl." Del' Bautcchnik, 5, 33(193.5).
n. Bijlaard, P. P., Fisher, G. P .. and Winter.
G., "Ecccnt.rieally Loaded, End-Restrained
Residual Stress Influence
Columns," Trans. Am. Soc. Civil Enol'S., 120, 1070
(1955).
10. Ketter, R. L., Kaminsky, E. L., and
Beedle, L. S., "Plastie Deformation of Wide-
Flange Beam-Columns," Ibid., 120, 1028 (195.5).
11. Galambos, '1'., and Ketter, R. L., "Further
Studies on the Strength of Columns Subjected to
Combined Bending and Thrust," (Currently being
considered for publication in the Engineering
l\:lechanics Journal of the American Society of
Civil Engineers).
11
 BULLETIN SERIES
No. 1 Steel Compositions and Specifications, by Charles M. Parker, March 1949. $0.50.
No. 2 The Nature of the Arc, by J. D. Cobine, April 1949. $0.50.
No. 3 Burn-Off Characteristics of Steel Welding Electrodes, by D. C. Martin, P. J. Rieppel and C. B.
Voldrich, May 1949. $0.50.
No. 4 Testing Pressure Vessels, by F. G. Tatnall; Effect of Welding on Pressure Vessel Steels, by
A. F. Scotchbrook, L. Eriv., R. D. Stout and B. G. Johnston, February 1950. $0.50.
No. 5 How Plastic Deformation Influences Design and Forming of Metal Parts, by John R. Low,
Jr.; Brittle Fracture in Mild Steel, by J. S. Hoggart, May 1950. $1.00.
No. 6 Stress Corrosion Cracking of Stainless Steels, by Helmer Nathorst; Part I. Practice Experi-
ences; Part II. An Investigation of the Suitability of the U-bend Specimen, October
1950. $1.00.
No. 7 Instrumentation for the Evaluation of the Stability of the Welding Arc, by L. P. Winsor,
L. McDonald Schetky and Robert A. Wyant, November 1950. $1.00.
No. 8 Tests of Columns Under Combined Thrust and Moment, by Lynn S. Beedle, Joseph A. Ready
and Bruce G. Johnston, December 1950. $1.00.
No. 9 Copper in Stainless Steels, by Helmut Thielsch, August 1951. $1.00.
No. 10 Thermal Fatigue and Thermal Shock, by Helmut Thielsch, April 1952. $1.00.
No. 11 Investigations of Effect of Fabrication Operations Upon Pressure Vessel Steels, by S. S. Tor
and R. D. Stout, May 1952. $1.00.
No. 12 An Analytical Study of Aluminum Welding, by C. O. Smith, E. R. Funk and H. Udin, June
1952. $1.00.
No. 13 A New High-Yield Strength Alloy Steel for Welded Structures, by L. C. Bibber, J. M. Hodge,
R. C. Altman and W. D. Doty, July 1952. $1.00.
No. 14 Welding Processes and Procedures Employed in Joining Stainless Steels, by Helmut Thielsch,
September 1952. $2.00.
No. 15 Slag-Metal Interaction in Arc Welding, by Nils Christensen and John Chipman, January
1953. $1.00.
No. 16 Third Technical Progress Report of the Ship Structure Committee; and Research Under
the Ship Structure Committee, by Captain E. A. Wright, Finn Jonassen and H. G. Acker,
November 1953. $2.00
No. 17 A Critical Survey of Brittle Failure in Carbon Plate Steel Structures Other Than Ships, by
M. E. Shank, January 1954. $2.00.
No. 18 Testing of Stainless-Steel Weldments, by Helmut Thielsch, o,ctober 1954. $1.00.
No. 19 Review of Welded Ship Failures, by Harold G. Acker, November 1954. $1.00.
No.20 High-Strength, Low-Alloy St.eels; Analytical Chemistry Fosters Progress in Steelmaking;
Steel Quality; by Charles M. Parker, January 1955. $1.00.
No.21 Coating Moisture Investigations of Austenitic Electrodes of the Modified 18-8 Type, by
K. P. Johannes, D. C. Smith and W. G. Rinehart, February 1955. $1.00.
No.22 Welded Tee Connections, by A. G. Barkow and R. A. Huseby, May 1955. $1.00.
No.23 Cracking of Simple Structural Geometries, by S. T. Carpenter and R. F. Linsenmeyer, July
1955. $1.00.
No.24 Nickel and High-Nickel Alloys for Pressure Vessels, by R. M. Wilson, Jr., and W. F. Burch-
field, January 1956. $1.00.
No.25 Bibliography on The Welding of Stainless Steels, 1926-1955 with Author Index, by Katherine
Janis, March 1956. $1.00.
No.26 Investigation of the Influence of Deoxidation and Qhemical Composition on Notched-Bar
Properties of Ship Plate Steels, by F. W. Boulger, R. H. Frazier and C. H. Lorig, April
1956. $1.00.
No.27 Mechanical Properties and Weldability of Six High-Strength Steels, by R. D. Stout and J. H.
Gross; Economic but Safe Pressure-Vessel Construction, by J. J. Murphy, C. R. Soder-
berg, Jr., and D. B. Rossheim, May 1956. $1.00.
No.28 Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys for Pressure Vessels, by Marshall Holt, June 1956. $1.00.
No.29 Development of Brazing Alloys for Joining Heat Resistant Alloys, by Forbes M. Miller,
Homer S. Gonser and Robert L. Peaslee, July 1956. $1.00.
. No. 30' Oxidation-Resistant Brazing Alloys, by George H. Sistare, Jr. and Allen S. McDonald, Sep-
tember, 1956. $1.00.
No. 31 Stainless Steel for Pressure Vessels, by A. Grodner, November 1956. $1.00.
No. 32 Graphitization of Steel in Petroleum Refining Equipment and The Effect of Graphitization
of Steel on Stress-Rupture Properties, by Joseph G. Wilson, January 1957. $1.00.
No.33 Further Studies of the Hot-Ductility of High-Temperature Alloys, by Ernest F. Nippes,
Warren F. Savage and Gordon Grotke, February 1957. $2.00.
No.34 Computation of the Stresses from Local Loads in Spherical Pressure Vessels or Pressure Vessel
Heads, by P. P. Bijlaard, March 1957. $1.00.
No.35 The Tensile Properties of Selected Steels as a Function of Temperature, by Eugene P. Klier,
April 1957. $1.00.
No.36 Ultra-High-Strength Weld Metal with Low-Hydrogen Electrodes, by D. C. Smith, May 1957.
$1.00.
No.37 The Value of the Notch Tensile Test, by J. F. Baker and C. F. Tipper, June 1957. $1.00.
No.38 Proof-Testing Pressure VesRels Designed for Internal Pressure, by R. W. Schneider, July 1957.
$1.00.
No.39 Plastic Analysis and Design of Square Rigid Frame Knees, by John W. Fisher, George C.
Driscoll, Jr., and Lynn S. Beedle, April 1958. $1.00.
No.40 Design of a Thin-Walled Cylindrical Pressure Vessel Based Upon the Plastic Range and Con-
sidering Anisotropy, by Joseph Marin and M. G. Sharma, May 1958. $1.00.
No.41 Design of Thick-Walled Pressure Vessels Based Upon the Plastic Range, by Joseph Marin
and F. P. J. Rimrott, July 1958. $1.00.
No. 42 Weld Flaw Evaluation, by S. T. Carpenter and R. F. Linsenmeyer, September 1958. $2.00.
No.43 Welding of 347 Stainless Steel Piping and Tubing, by George Linnert, October 1958. $3.50.
No. 44 The Influence of Residual Stress on the Strength of Structural Members, by Robert L.
Ketter, November 1958. $1.00

Requests for single copies should be sent to the

AMERICAN WELDING SOCIETY, 29 W. 39th St., New York 18, N. Y.
Requests for bulk lots, ten or Illore, should be sent to the
WELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL, 29 W. 39th St., New York 18, N. Y.