Proceedings of the

Annual Stability Conference

Structural Stability Research Council
Atlanta, Georgia, April 21-24, 2020

Post-buckling strength and ductility evaluation of thin-walled steel tubular

columns with graded thickness under cyclic lateral loading

Iraj H.P. Mamaghani 1, Wiriyachai Roopkumdee2, Qusay Al-Kaseasbeh3

Abstract
Thin-walled steel tubular columns either with circular or stiffened box cross sections are widely
used as cantilever piers in bridges due to their geometric efficiency, aesthetic appearance, and
high earthquake resistance. However, local buckling, global buckling or interaction between both
is usually the main reason of significant strength reduction in these members, which eventually
lead to structure failure. This paper investigates the behavior of graded circular and stiffened box
cross-sectional thin-walled columns under combined axial and horizontal cyclic loading. Graded
sections improve the strength and ductility capacities, and post-buckling behavior as compared to
an equivalent (with equal size and volume of material) conventional thin-walled steel columns
under large plastic deformations. The analysis carried out using a finite-element numerical model
(FEM) which takes into consideration both material and geometric nonlinearities. First, the
accuracy of the numerical model employed in this study is validated in comparison with
experimental data available in the literature. Then an extensive parametric study is carried out
using the validated FEM. The results from parametric study revealed that, a significant
improvement in both strength and ductility, and post-buckling behavior of the steel columns
obtained using graded circular and stiffened box columns.

1. Introduction

Civil engineering structures are exposed to an increasing earthquake risk, especially, in severe
seismic regions. Their integrity is always challenged due to extreme uncertainties of severe
earthquakes, (Miller 1998, Mahin 1998, Nakashima et al. 1998). Thin-walled steel tubular
columns either with circular or stiffened box cross sections are widely used in modern building,
offshore platforms, elevated storage tanks, and transmission towers. In addition, they can be used
as cantilever piers in bridges and in wind turbines in severe earthquake regions due to their
geometric efficiency, aesthetic appearance, and high earthquake resistance. Thin-walled tubular

1
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota,
Email: iraj.mamaghani@und.edu
2
Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota
3
Formerly Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota
steel columns may be a superior to their counterparts of reinforced concrete due to their stiffness
to cross-sectional area ratio, light-weight, and ductility, especially when limited construction
space is preferable. However, local buckling, global buckling or interaction between both is
usually the main reason for strength reduction in these members, which eventually leads to
member failure (Ucak and Tsopelas 2009). After the Kobe 1995 earthquake, engineers
recognized that the thin-walled structures are susceptible to damage when subjected to cyclic
loading. Permanent deformation of steel bridge piers due to inelastic behavior and severe local
buckling, were reported in many studies (Bruneau 1998). As a result, many experimental and
analytical investigations were carried out to determine the factors which might improve ductile
behavior under combined axial and horizontal cyclic loading. In Usami and Ge 1998, a
numerical study has been conducted to investigate factors that affect strength and ductility
capacities of circular and unstiffened box sections. In Gao et al. 1998a and 1998b, studies of
finite element (FE) analysis concluded that the ductility of the pipe sections is sensitive to the
radius-to-thickness ratio (Rt). Moreover, decreasing Rt and the slenderness ratio (λ) resulted in an
improvement on both strength and ductility of cross sections. An experimental investigation on
the effectiveness of retrofitting the stiffened box and circular cross sections was carried out by
Nishikawa et al. 1998. They concluded that all retrofit schemes have improved the strength and
ductility of cross sections. New thin-walled corrugated and cellular steel columns have been
introduced in Ucak and Tsopelas 2006. It is found that these new types of sections have a
superior performance in both strength and ductility properties, and buckling behavior.

In this paper, two tested conventional thin-walled steel columns with circular and stiffened box
cross sections were numerically studied under combined axial and lateral cyclic loading. The
results obtained from FE analysis was compared with the experimental results from literature to
confirm the validity of geometrically and materially nonlinear FE analysis. Moreover, graded
thin-walled steel columns were used with the same steel material (i.e. with equal size and volume
of material) in attempt to improve the strength, ductility, and post-buckling behavior of
conventional thin-walled steel columns. This might be obtained by adjusting some structural
parameters i.e. Rt and λ, which account for strength and ductility behavior of the columns.

2. Numerical Method

There is no doubt that full-scale testing results in a better insight into understanding the
structures’ behaviors, however, physical experimentation is expensive, and time consuming.
Moreover, conducting some extensive parametric studies is difficult by experiments. For this
purpose, a series of finite-element analyses on the cyclic behavior of thin-walled steel piers were
carried out using the commercially available finite-element software ABAQUS Ver 6.14 (Hibbitt
2014). The FE numerical model takes into consideration both material and geometric
nonlinearities. The accuracy of the thin-walled steel columns FE model is validated in
comparison with the experimental data available in the literature (Nishikawa et al. 1998). The
most important parameters for tested specimens considered in the design of thin-walled cross-
sections are width-to-thickness ratio of box sections (Rf), radius-to-thickness ratio of the circular
sections (Rt), and column slenderness ratio (λ) (Mamaghani and Packer 2002). Rf and Rt are
concerned with the local buckling behavior of thin-walled columns, while λ controls the global

2
stability (Mamaghani and Packer 2002, Mamaghani 2008). These parameters are defined as
follows:

y
3 1  2 
b 1
Rf  (For box cross-section) (1)
t n E

D y
Rt  3 1  2  (For circular cross-section) (2)
2t E

2h 1  y
 (3)
r  E

Where h = column height; r = radius of gyration of cross section; σy = yield stress; E = Young’s
modulus; v = Poisson’s ratio; D = Diameter of circular cross-section; b = width of box cross-
section side; n = number of subpanels divided by longitudinal stiffeners; and t = plate thickness.
Under the test, the column is subjected to a constant axial load of (P)
and cyclic horizontal displacement at the top of the column. FE model parameters are calibrated
using the stress-strain relations shown in Fig. 1, which are reported in the literature (Nishikawa
et al. 1998).

Figure 1. Uniaxial Stress-Strain relations (Nishikawa et al. 1998).

3. Graded Cross-Sectional Thin-walled Steel Columns

Conventional circular and box thin-walled steel columns are experiencing premature buckling
behavior (local buckling, global buckling or interaction between both), near the base of the
column, under combined axial and lateral cyclic loadings. This buckling behavior makes these
members unable to fully utilize their strength and ductility capacities. To overcome these
shortcomings, graded thin-walled columns of circular section (St-No.8), and box section (St-
No.2) are used as alternatives for the conventional (No.8, and No.2) thin-walled steel columns.
The column height and width/diameter were kept the same for both conventional and graded
columns. The graded column is divided into three segments of constant cross sections. The first

3
and second segments have the same height that is equal to the diameter of circular section or the
width of the box section from the base. The third segment has a height of (h-2D). As shown in
Fig. 3, a thicker cross section (t 1=1.25t) was used along the first segment, and the original
thickness (t2= t) was kept for the second segment. Finally, the remaining material volume was
distributed on the third segment with (t3 = 0.86t). The above configurations of graded sections are
chosen by which achieved better behavior. Table 1 shows the geometrical and material properties
of conventional (No.8, and No.2) and graded (St-No.8, and St-No.2) thin-walled columns. As
can be seen, same material and geometrical properties (except the plate thickness) were used for
both conventional and graded thin-walled columns.

Table 1. Geometric and material properties of the specimens.

Box Section Circular Section

Specimen
No. 2 * St-No.2 (Graded) No. 8 * St-No. 8(Graded)
Steel tube material SM490 SM490 SS400 SS400
h (mm) 3403 3403 3403 3403
D/b (mm) 900 900 900 900
t1/t2t3 (mm) 9 11.25/ 9/ 7.75 9 11.25/ 9/ 7.75
bs/ ts (mm) 80/6 80/6 --- ---
(ns +1) x l 4  225 4  225 --- ---
λ 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26
Rt/ Rf -- /0.56 -- /0.56 0.115/ -- 0.115/ --
Hy (KN) 1039 1039 414.9 414.9
δy (mm) 13.8 13.8 10.6 10.6
P/ σy As 0.122 0.122 0.124 0.124
σy (MPa) 378.6 378.6 298.6 298.6
σu (MPa) 630 630 495 495
*
Nishikawa et al. 1998
Note: E = 206 MPa and v =0.3 for all specimens.

4. Finite-Element Analysis

Local buckling effect is expected to occur near the base of thin-walled steel columns of circular
or stiffened box cross sections when they are subjected to constant vertical load and cyclic lateral
displacement (Nishikawa et al. 1998). For this purpose, as shown in Fig. 2, two-node beam
element (B31) is employed for the upper part of the column, whereas 4-node shell element
(S4R), which considers accurately the localized deformation, is used for the lower part of the
column. All used elements are available in the ABAQUS library. The analyzed cantilever
column is fixed at the base and subjected to a constant axial load and cyclic lateral displacements
at its top.

For computational efficiency, the bottom half of the lower part (D or b) is divided into 26 shell
elements, while the remaining height (D or b) is only divided into 14 shell elements. Forty
elements for both segments are used in the circumferential direction. The upper part of the

4
column is divided into 14 beam elements. The above stated mesh divisions are determined by
trial-and-error approach, where the density of the mesh was defined with no further improvement
achieved after many successive discretization. The displacement convergence criterion is
selected in the analysis and the convergence tolerance is taken as 10 -5. The initial geometrical
imperfection and residual stresses are not considered in the analysis (Gao et al. 1998). For thin-
walled steel piers, horizontal cyclic load is more dominant than the axial load, which implies that
the effect of the initial imperfections is negligible (Goto et al. 1998).

5. Cyclic Loading Program

The schematic presentation of the displacement-controlled unidirectional cyclic loading is

illustrated in Fig. 2(d) adopted herein as the lateral loading programs. The unidirectional cyclic
loading is quasi-statically applied to the top of the specimen with constant axial compressive
load (P) throughout the loading history. The displacement
amplitude of the cyclic displacement is increased as multiples of the yield displacement (δ y)
which is defined by Eq. (4):

H y h3
y  (4)
3 Es I s

Where H y  ( y  p / As )Z / h = initial horizontal yield force and As , h, Es I s , and Z = cross-

sectional area, the height, the bending

Figure 2. Analytical model: (a) Bridge pier; (b) FE Model; (c) Cross sections; and (d) Loading
program.

5
Figure 3. Analytical model: (a) Bridge pier, (b) Graded circular sections, and (c) Graded box
sections.

stiffness, and the plastic section modulus, respectively, of the column (Goto et al. 2010). The
values of the yield displacement and lateral yield load for all tested specimens are listed in Table
1. The specimens are made of carbon steel pipe SS400 (equivalent to ASTM A36) and SM490
(equivalent to ASTM A242).

6. Comparison of Numerical and Experimental Results

In this section, the numerical results of the cyclic behavior of thin-walled steel piers are
compared with the experimental data of the cyclic loading test on hollow steel piers (Nishikawa
et al. 1998).

6.1 Hysteresis Curves of Conventional Thin-walled Steel Columns

The normalized horizontal load-horizontal displacement curves of the analyses, determined from

6
one-cycle unidirectional lateral load (see Fig. 2(d)) are shown in Fig. 4. In these figures, Hy and
δy denote the lateral yield load and the yield displacement, respectively. Initially, the hysteresis

Figure 4. Comparison of Horizontal Load-Horizontal Displacement Hysteretic Curve of: (a)

No.8; (b) No.2; (c) St-No8; and (d) St-No.2.

loops from FE analyses predications are compared with experimental results available in the
literature (Nishikawa et al. 1998). From Fig. 4(a, and b), the comparison of horizontal load-
displacement curves of circular (No.8) and stiffened box (No.2) cross sections, shows a relatively
good agreement with the experimental results. This indicates that FE analysis, using kinematic
hardening material behavior, gives a reasonable accuracy to describe the material behavior with
consideration of local buckling of thin-walled sections. However, the specimens’ stiffness with
reversal loading at large lateral displacements is slightly overestimated. The reason is that the
kinematic hardening model does not consider the Bauschinger effect (Goto et al. 1998).
Moreover, the boundary conditions at the column base were assumed to be fully rigid, which
might be a little different from the real boundary conditions during the experiment procedure.
This is probably attributed to slight differences in the elastic stiffness results between the
experimental and numerical results. Similar findings have been reported in other studies (Ucak
and Tsopelas 2006, Goto et al. 1998). As shown in Fig. 5, the deformed shapes of specimen No.
8 (Fig. 5(a)), and No.2 (Fig. 5(b)) at the end of the FE analysis were compared to the deformed
shape at the end of the experiment (Goto et al. 1998). The deformed shapes were captured
relatively well in the analyses.

7
6.2 Hysteresis Curves of Graded Thin-walled Steel Columns

Based on the Fig. 4, the comparison between the numerical and experimental results indicates
that the FE analytical model can predict the structural non-linear behavior with a reasonable
accuracy. Using the same FE model, a comparison study has been performed between the
behavior of conventional (No.8, and No.2) and graded (St-No.8, and St-No.2) thin-walled steel
columns under the same axial and cyclic lateral

loading. Fig. 4(c) compares the hysteretic behavior of No.8 and St-No.8 thin-walled columns
obtained from the analysis. In No.8 specimen, the buckling initiates when the displacement is
between 2δy and 3δy. A strength drops of 17.6% of the ultimate column strength (observed at δ =
+2.16δy) occurs at δ = +4δy. As the displacement increases, the column strength decreases in a
rapid pattern to be only 38% of its ultimate strength at δ = +8δ y. On the other hand, St-No.8
column shows a maximum load capacity at δ = +3δ y. Only 8.4% strength drop of the ultimate
strength took place at δ = +4δy, which gives an indication that the local buckling started between
3δy and 4δy. As the displacement amplitude is increased, more strength deterioration was
observed. The residual strength of the St-No.8 column was 51.6% of its ultimate strength at δ =
+8δy. It is worth mentioning that the strength significantly drops at δ = -4δy, and δ = -8δy for both
specimens. Fig. 4(d) compares the hysteretic behavior of No.2 and St-No.2 obtained from the
analysis. Similar strength deterioration (17% of its ultimate strength) observed in both columns
at δ = +4δy, while only 15% of the maximum strength of No.2 (at δ = +2.19δ y) is obtained at the
end of analysis (δ = +8δy) compared with 22% for the St-No.2 column. In the No.2 column, the
buckling has been observed when the displacement is between δ = +2.19δy and 3δy, which is
earlier than in the St-No.2 column (δ = +2.92δy and 3δy). It should be noticed that, the strength
drop rate was smaller in the St-No.2 column compared to No.2 column. Generally, strength
capacity improvement of 19.4% was obtained with the proposed graded column in comparison
with the conventional column. Looking at the residual strength at the end of the analysis,
circular cross sections show a better behavior as compared with box sections under the same
loading conditions. Fig. 5 shows the final deformed shapes of graded sections compared to the
conventional sections at δ = +8δy. For circular cross sections, buckled shape of the No.8 section
occurs close to the base (which is excepted), while buckling took place at height more than 900
mm from the base in the St-No.8 section. Similarly, graded box section shows buckling in a
distance higher than that for the conventional section.

7. Energy Absorption Capacity

Ductility is defined as the ability of a structure to resist large deformations. Energy absorption
through hysteretic damping can reduce the amplitude of seismic response and, in turn, reduces
the ductility demand on the structures (Mamaghani et al. 1996). The dissipated energy is
considered as an objective measure of the cyclic hysteretic performance of the member.

8
 (a)

Experiment (Circular) No.8 (Circular) St-No.8 (Circular)

(b)

Experiment (box) No.2 (box) St-No.2 (box)

Figure 5. Deformation of Specimens: (a) Circular and (a) Box sections.

Therefore, the energy absorption capacities of the columns under cyclic loading have been
investigated. A normalized energy absorption (E) is defined as follows (Mamaghani et al. 1996):

n
I
E
E
E
i 1
i (5)

I
E  H y y (6)
2
In Eq. (5), Ei = energy absorption in the i-th half-cycle, n = number of half-cycles (one cycle
defined from any zero-lateral load to the subsequent zero-lateral load). Using the above
equations, Figs. 6(a and b) compares the normalized cumulative energy absorption versus the
number of half-cycles, obtained from the experiment and analysis results of circular (No.8) and
stiffened box (No.2) columns. The normalized energy absorption curves versus the number of
half-cycles obtained from the analysis fit very close to the experiment. For graded sections (St-
No.8 and St-No.2), as shown in Figs. 4(c and d), the strength of graded

9
 Figure 6. Energy Absorption Capacity

sections decrease in a controlled rate from cycle to cycle compared to the conventional (No.8 and
No.2) sections, which is expected to dissipate larger energy than the No.8 and No.2 cross
sections under cyclic loading. Alternatively, and by calculating the area under horizontal load-
displacement curves, Figs. 6(c and d) shows that the dissipated energy of the graded section is
larger in comparison with conventional sections, which is expected to experience higher ductility
in the case of graded columns.

8. Conclusions

In this paper, finite element (FE) analysis has been carried out to evaluate the cyclic behavior of
conventional circular and stiffened box tubular columns. In addition, graded thin-walled columns
are introduced in an attempt to improve the strength, ductility, and buckling behavior of
conventional circular and stiffened box sections. First, the accuracy of the FE model used in this
paper was validated using the experimental data available in the literature for conventional
circular and stiffened box sections. The relatively good agreement between the analysis and
experimental results confirm the ability of the FE model to capture the structural behavior with

10
consideration of local buckling of thin-walled sections. Graded thin-walled columns (St-No.8,
and St-No.2) show a superior strength and ductility performance in comparison with the
conventional sections (No.8, and No.2). An improvement of 19.4 % in the strength was achieved
using the graded sections. Furthermore, improvement in the residual strength at the end of the
analysis in comparison with conventional sections was observed. The dissipated energy of the
graded section is higher which exhibited higher ductility. Buckling behavior of the conventional
sections was captured relatively well by the FE model. Graded section shows a delay in the
buckling that occurred in both circular and stiffened box sections. Moreover, the buckled shape
of the No.8 section occurred near to the base of the column as excepted, while buckling shifted
upward from the base in the St-No.8 column. Similarly, St-No.2 shows buckling in a distance
higher than that for No.2.

References

Bruneau, M. (1998). “Performance of steel bridges during the 1995 Hyogoken–Nanbu (Kobe,
Japan) earthquake—a North American perspective.” Eng. Struct., vol. 20, no. 12.pp.
1063–1078.
Gao, S., Usami, T., and Ge, H.(1998). “Ductility of Steel Short Cylinders in Compression and
Bending.” J. Eng. Mech. vol. 124, no. 2.pp. 176–183.
Gao, S., Usami, T., and Ge, H.(1998a). “Ductility Evaluation of Steel Bridge Piers with Pipe
Sections.” J. Eng. Mech., vol. 124, no. 3.p. 260.
Gao, S., Usami, T., and Ge, H.(1998b). “Ductility evaluation of steel bridge piers with pipe
sections.” J. Eng. Mech.
Goto, B. Y., Wang, Q., and Obata, M.(1998). “FEM Analysis for Hysteretic Behavior of Thin-
Walled Columns.” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 124, no. 11.pp. 1290–1301.
Goto, Y., Kumar, G. P., and Kawanishi, N.(2010). “Nonlinear Finite-Element Analysis for
Hysteretic Behavior of Thin-Walled Circular Steel Columns with In-Filled Concrete.” J.
Struct. Eng., vol. 136, no. 11.pp. 1413–1422.
Hibbitt, K. and S. (2014). “Abaqus 2014 Documentation.” Dassault.
Mahin, S. A. (1998).” Lessons from damage to steel buildings during the Northridge
earthquake.” Eng. Struct., vol. 20, no. 4–6.pp. 261–270.
Mamaghani, I.H.P. (2008). “Seismic Design and Ductility Evaluation of Thin-Walled Steel
Bridge Piers of Box Sections.” Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board., vol. 2050.pp.
137–142.
Mamaghani, I. H. P. and Packer, J. A.(2002). “Inelastic behaviour of partially concrete-filled
steel hollow sections.” in 4th Structural Specialty Conference, June, pp. 1–10.
Mamaghani, I. H., Usami, T., & Mizuno, E. (1996). “Cyclic elastoplastic large displacement
behaviour of steel compression members”. J. Struct. Eng., vol. 42.pp. 135–145.
Miller, D. K.(1998). “Lessons learned from the Northridge earthquake.” Eng. Struct., vol. 20, no.
4–6.pp. 249–260.
Nakashima, M., Inoue, K., and Tada, M. (1998). “Classification of damage to steel buildings
observed in the 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu earthquake.” Eng. Struct., vol. 20, no. 4–6.pp.
271–281.

11
Nishikawa, K., Yamamoto, S., Natori, T., Terao, K., Yasunami, H., and Terada, M.(1998).
“Retrofitting for seismic upgrading of steel bridge columns”. Eng. Struct., vol. 20, no. 4–
6.pp. 540–551.
Ucak, A. and Tsopelas, P. (2009). “Load Path Effects in Circular Steel Columns under
Bidirectional Lateral Cyclic Loading.” J. Struct. Eng. 2014.vol. 141, pp. 1–11.
Ucak, A. and Tsopelas, P.(2006). “Cellular and corrugated cross-sectioned thin-walled steel
bridge-piers/columns.” Struct. Eng. Mech.
Usami, T. and Ge, H. (1998). “Cyclic behavior of thin-walled steel structures—numerical
analysis.”, vol. 32, no. 1–3. Elsevier.

12