Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Finite element investigation on plate buckling coefficients of tapered steel

members web plates
Mostafa Mohamed Ibrahim, Ihab Mohamed El Aghoury *, Sherif Abdel-Basset Ibrahim
Department of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: An extensive finite element analysis study was conducted to estimate the critical buckling coefficients for tapered
Tapered beams steel webs. Three boundary conditions for the web plate were included: simply supported edges, flange
Buckling coefficients restrained edges and fixed edges. The studied parameters are: the tapering ratio of the panel, the panel’s
Slender web
normalized length and the flange-to-web thickness ratio. Three loading conditions were considered: uniform
Tapered-web girders
Unstiffened web
compression, pure bending and pure shear. New formulas are proposed for the axial, bending and shear buckling
Shear buckling coefficients for tapered plates. The plate tapering increases its resistance to buckle due to the stiffness provided
by the smaller plate width zone to the larger width zone. The presence of the beam’s flanges increases the web
resistance to buckle and the web plate tends to behave more like a fixed edges plate as the flanges thickness
increases. The existing procedure for the combined compression and bending interaction is validated against the
proposed formulas. The proposed formulas were found to be valid for singly tapered members by introducing
newly proposed reduction factors.

limit state of unstiffened webs, the member is checked on a section-by-

1. Introduction and state-of-the-art
Web tapered I-section members are very popular in the construction
industry of both steel buildings and bridges construction because of the
significant material savings they provide by customizing their shape
according to the induced straining actions. Fig. 1 shows schematic ex­
amples for different structural applications of web-tapered members.
Larger web depths are used at location of higher moments; webs are
made thicker in high shear zones. Locations with lower moments and
shears can have shallower and thinner web plates. This customization
often leads to highly slender webs which are more subjectable to local
buckling under different loading conditions. This emphasizes the
importance of studying the buckling behavior of the web plates.
Historically, different steel design codes, such as AASHTO [1] and
AISC [2,3], are based on experimental and theoretical research on
prismatic members to determine axial, bending and shear capacities of
web-tapered members. In the AISC Design Guide 25 “Frame design using
web tapered members”[4], various locations along the unbraced length
are checked to determine the critical section for the slenderness reduc­
tion factor Qa. This factor is to account for the axial local web buckling
while the web bending buckling factor Rpg is used to consider the local
web buckling in the flexure compression region. For the shear buckling
section basis along the member using the AISC specifications for pris­
matic members while for the case of stiffened webs, the member is
checked with the cross section at the middle of the panel.
A lot of effort has been previously conducted to identify and un­
derstand the behavior of web tapered members and/or obtain formulas
for design. Pope [5] presented an analysis of the buckling of a plate of
constant thickness tapered symmetrically and subjected to uniform
compressive loading on the parallel ends. The deflection of the plate was
represented mathematically then solved with a rather complicated set of
mathematical differential equations and the buckling coefficient of plate
was plotted against the normalized plate length and tapering ratio.
Various combinations of boundary conditions were considered.
Salem et al. [6,7] presented an empirical formula to determine the
ultimate axial capacity of tapered slender I sections considering the
interaction between flange-to-web width and thickness ratios along with
member slenderness and tapering ratios. Lee et al. [8] performed a three
dimensional finite element study for the restraining effect provided by
the flange-to-web junction and its influence on the web shear buckling
behavior of the member. New formulas were introduced for shear
buckling coefficient as a function of flange-to-web thickness ratio and is
given in Eq. (1).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ihab.elaghoury@eng.asu.edu.eg (I.M. El Aghoury).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.10.003
Received 29 February 2020; Received in revised form 30 September 2020; Accepted 2 October 2020
Available online 2 November 2020
2352-0124/© 2020 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Nomenclature Qa Net reduction factor for slender stiffened compression

elements as per AISC [2]
a Tapered plate length R Tapering ratio = h/h1
bf flange width RPG The bending strength reduction factor for plate girders as
D Web depth as in AASHTO [1] per AISC [2]
E Steel modulus of elasticity tf Flange thickness
Fy Steel yield stress tw Web thickness
h Tapered web plate larger width α Normalized plate length
h1 Tapered web plate smaller width βat , βbt ,βvt Modification factors for axial, flexural and shear buckling
k Coefficient of plate buckling coefficients to account for the relative flange to web
kv Coefficient of plate shear buckling thickness
katSS , katFF ,katFR Axial buckling coefficient for tapered plate with λr Limiting width-to-thickness ratio of rectangular plate
simply supported, fixed and flange restrained edges λrt Limiting width-to-thickness ratio of tapered plate
k*at Modified axial buckling coefficient for tapered plates ν Poisson’s ratio
kbtSS , kbtFF ,kbtFR Flexural buckling coefficient for tapered plate with σc Axial critical buckling stress
simply supported, fixed and flange restrained edges τc Shear critical buckling stress
kvtSS , kvtFF ,kvtFR Shear buckling coefficient for tapered plate with ψ Ratio between the extreme normal stresses at the loaded
simply supported, fixed and flange restrained edges beam end in transverse direction

Fig. 1. Typical uses of web tapered I-sections in steel buildings and bridges.

Fig. 2. Geometric design parameters considered for tapered plate girders [9].

( )[ ( )]
kv = kss + 0.8 ( ksf − kss ) 1 − 2/3 2 − tf /tw for 0.5 < tf /tw ≤ 2 beam’s web thickness.
kv = kss + 0.8 ksf − kss for tf /tw > 2
5.34
(1) kss = 4 +
α2
if α⩽1.0
(2)
4
where kss and ksf are the shear buckling coefficient for simply supported kss = 5.34 + 2
if α > 1.0
and fixed flange to web connection respectively and calculated as in Eqs. α
(2) and (3), respectively, tf is the beam’s flanges thickness and tw is the

2322
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Table 1 presented simple equations for shear buckling coefficients determina­

Shear buckling coefficient of different typologies of plate girders [11]. tion in stainless steel web, taking into account the real boundary con­
Plate Typology description Shear buckling coefficient,kφα ditions of the web panel. The coefficient of shear buckling krss is given by
Girder (diagonal tension field Eqs. (5) and (6) for web panels where the normalized plate length α⩾
Typology direction, inclined flange 1.00 and α < 1.00, respectively.
stress state)
For web panels α ≥ 1.00
I Short diagonal, inclined kφα = 5.5α0.8 tan(φ) + 8.7α− 0.4
( ) tf tf
flange under compression krss = 0.5kss + 0.05kss + 0.2ksf if <2
II Long diagonal, inclined kφα = 10.6α 0.5 − 0.4
tan(φ) + 8α tw tw
flange under tension ( )( ) (5)
( ) 0.55ksf − 0.6kss tf tf
III Short diagonal, inclined kφα = 47.0α tan2 (φ) +
1.8 krss = 0.6kss + 0.4ksf + − 2 if ⩾2
flange under tension
( ) ( 8 tw tw
0.3 + 3.7α − 0.5α2 tan(φ) + 0.5α2 −
)
4.2α + 13.0 For web panels α < 1.00
IV Long diagonal, inclined kφα = 62.0α1.64 tan2 (φ) +
flange under compression
( ) 0.2kss tf tf
4.6α − 0.7α2 − 2.8 tan(φ) + krss = 0.8kss + if < 3.0
( ) 3 tw tw
0.44α2 − 3.4α + 12.0
( ) (6)
ksf − kss tf tf
krss = kss + − 3 if ⩾3.0
7 tw tw
5.34 5.34
ksf = + − 3.44 if α⩽1.0
α2 α where kss and ksf are the classical coefficient of buckling for plates
(3)
5.61 1.99 loaded in shear simply supported on four edges and for plates clamped
ksf = 8.98 + − − 3.44 if α > 1.0 on two opposite edges and simply supported on the other two,
α2 α3
respectively.
Mirambell et al. [9] presented an analytical study for calculating the
Bedynek et al. [11] conducted a wide parametric finite element study
critical buckling shearing stress and coefficients for tapered steel plates.
of more than 500 samples. Four typologies of tapered plate girders were
Eq. (4) was presented to predict the shear buckling coefficient for
considered. Plate girders were classified according to the direction of the
tapered plate girders considering the effect of flange dimensions. Geo­
diagonal tension field formed during the post-buckling stage and the
metric parameters used are defined in Fig. 2.
state of the stress in the inclined flange. A summary of the four typol­
kf φ = c1 ηc2 − c3 η− c4 λf (4) ogies and their corresponding buckling coefficient is given in Table 1.
Abu-Hamd [12] presented an analytical study to investigate the ef­
where fect of the tapering angle on the combined bending–shear capacity
bf bf a including the effect of residual stresses. They proposed empirical
λf = ,η = ,α = approximate formulae to estimate the combined flexure–shear buckling
tf h1 h1
resistance of the tapered girder. Gendy [13] studied the effect of circular
c1 = 13.45 − 12.70 tgφ web openings on the critical shear buckling load and proposed expres­
sions for calculating the critical shear loads for the tapered plates with
c2 = 0.032 − 0.04 tgφ and without openings. Serror et al. [14] conducted a numerical study to
examine the effect of different geometric parameters of tapered end web
c3 = 0.075 − 0.0081 tgφ panel on the elastic shear buckling and the nominal shear strength. The
authors proposed new design rules for the nominal shear strength of
c4 = 1.39 + 0.76 tgφ tapered web end panels. Studer et al. [15] performed an experimental
program to verify methods of prediction of tapered members shear
Estrada et al. [10] conducted a numerical investigation and
strength. It was found that the modified shear method, where the effect

Fig. 3. Cross sections with different web boundary conditions used in the study.

2323
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 4. Lowest buckling mode deformed shapes for different loading types for bf/h = 1/4.

of the inclined flanges’ vertical force component is considered to affect 2. Finite element modeling technique
the shear force, is the most accurate to predict the shear strength de­
mand in web-tapered girders. Trahair [16] introduced an efficient finite 2.1. General
element method of analyzing the elastic in-plane bending and out-of-
plane flexural–torsional buckling of indeterminate beams of tapered Throughout this study, the finite element program ANSYS [19] is
mono-symmetric I cross-section. Kucukler et al. [17] presented a stiff­ used to execute the finite element Eigenvalue analysis to predict the
ness reduction method for the design of laterally restrained web-tapered theoretical buckling strength of the tapered web plates. The finite
steel structures which eliminates the need for determining effective element model is built up using the 4-node shell elements (SHELL181)
lengths and for conducting member buckling checks. Asgarian et al. [18] with six degrees of freedom at each node: translations in the x, y, and z
investigated a theoretical and numerical model based on the power se­ directions, and rotations about the x, y, and z-axes. (SHELL181) is
ries method for the lateral buckling stability of tapered thin-walled
beams and proposed a method to obtain the beam’s lateral buckling
load. The proposed method can be applied to stability of beams with
constant cross-sections as well as tapered beams.
Despite the widespread use of web-tapered steel members and the
long-used available design guidance, the utilized coefficients of plate
buckling values are basically the same as for constant-depth members.
This is due to either the available procedure for tapered plates are quite
complicated and inconsistent across various types of loading or the
absence of enough research data.
Herein, this study targets to numerically evaluate the elastic buckling
coefficients for prismatic tapered web plates for different loading types
and for various boundary conditions in order to present one and single
simple and consistent procedure for use in the design practice. This is the
subject of an on-going research program that explores the validity, both
numerically and experimentally, of design codes’ equations applicable
to web-tapered members.
Fig. 5. Flange width to web depth ratio study results.

2324
M.M. Ibrahim et al.
Fig. 6. Deformed shape of lowest buckling mode for different mesh sizes.
designed to consider linear, large rotation, and/or large strain, plas­
ticity, creep and accounts for change in shell thickness in nonlinear
applications. The model consists of a tapered plate with length ˝a˝,
variable width ˝h˝ at the larger side and ˝h1 ˝ at the smaller side.
Since Eigenvalue buckling analysis is a linear analysis, steel is
modeled as a linear material with a modulus of elasticity E = 200 GPa.
This linear perturbation analysis procedure requires a pre-loaded envi­
ronment from which it draws solution data for use in the Eigenvalue
problem. This preload is obtained from a prior linear structural analysis
with the described loads and boundary conditions.
2325
Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334
2.2. Boundary conditions
While the transverse edges are mostly considered as simply sup­
ported, three boundary conditions are considered for the panel longi­
tudinal edges: simply supported edges, fixed edges and restrained by
flanges. Fig. 3 shows the cross section for these different boundary
conditions. The flange thickness tf varies from 1.0 tw to 3.0 tw to cover the
practical range of flange thickness used in buildings and bridges.
According to AASHTO [1], minimum flange proportion limits for I-
section are given by Eqs. (7) and (8).
bf ⩾D/6 (7)
M.M. Ibrahim et al.
Fig. 7. Mesh convergence and FEM accuracy results.
tf ⩾1.1 tw (8)
where bf is the flange width, D is the web depth (considered the larger
plate width h in this study), tf is the flange thickness and tw is the web
thickness.
2.3. Finite element model flange sizing
A FE study is conducted to assess the effect of the flanges width on
the buckling load. The FE model tapering ratio ˝R˝ is considered 1.50
and the normalized plate length ˝α˝ is considered 2,3 and 3 for axial,
shear and bending cases of loading, respectively. The flange-to-web
thickness ratio is considered as 1.0. The model is solved for different
load cases and for bf/h values varying from 1/6 to 1/2. Fig. 4 shows a
sample of the lowest buckling mode deformed shape for the utilized
model for different load cases where bf/h = 1/4. Fig. 5 shows the relation
between the critical buckling load for different load cases normalized to
its value at bf/h = 1/6 against the flange width to web depth ratio. It can
be concluded that as the flange width increases from 1/6 to 1/2 of the
Fig. 8. Schematic drawing of the finite element model of uniform compression loading type.
2326
Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334
web depth, the critical buckling load increases for the three cases of
loading.
In order to ensure that the flanges provide the least possible restraint
to the web plate, the restraining flange width bf is chosen as 1/6 of the
larger plate width h throughout this study.
2.4. Finite element model mesh size refinement
Lee [20] conducted a convergence study for a simply supported
panel loaded in shear and found that a mesh divided into 25 elements in
the transvers direction had results within 0.72% of the exact solution for
rectangular plates. The deformed shape of the lowest buckling mode for
each of the cases of loading is shown in Fig. 6 for different mesh sizes.
Fig. 7 shows a convergence study performed for the three cases of
loading considered in this research for a tapered web panel where the
longitudinal edges are restrained by flanges. The number of elements in
the transverse direction ranges from 10 to 50 and the elements have an
aspect ratio of approximately 1.00 to avoid the problem of convergence.
When the number of elements was 25 the percentage of error was
0.42%, 1.1% and 0.75% for axial, shear and bending, respectively. It is
considered that this mesh refinement is acceptable and the same mesh
size to be utilized for flanges where applicable.
2.5. Loading types of finite element model
Three loading cases are considered in this study: uniform compres­
sion, pure bending and pure shear. Figs. 8, 9 and 10 show the schematic
drawing, boundary conditions and loading locations used in the finite
element models for different types of loading, where h is the larger plate
width, h1 is the smaller plate width and a is the plate length. For uniform
compression and pure shear loads, nodal force is applied divided equally
on the edge nodes as shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 10, respectively. For pure
bending load, a rigid multi-point constraint is created and a concen­
trated moment is applied to its pilot node which is located at the middle
of the loaded edge.
For each model, the elastic buckling load is figured out through a
numerical buckling analysis then the critical buckling stress σ c or τc is
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 9. Schematic drawing of the finite element model for pure bending loading type.

Fig. 10. Schematic drawing of the finite element model for pure shear loading type.

Table 2 π2 E
σc = k (9)
Different geometric parameters ranges and increments. 12(1 − υ2 ) (h/t)2
Studied Used Parameter Values
Parameter π2 E
Uniform Compression Pure Bending Pure Shear τ c = kv (10)
12(1 − υ2 ) (h/t)2
Tapering ratio 1.00, 1.25, 1.50, 1.75, 2.00, 3.00, 4.00, 5.00
R
3. Finite element parametric study and results
Normalized 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 3.00, 3.25, 3.50,
plate length 1.25, 1.50, 1.75, 2.00, 1.00, 1.25, 1.50, 3.75, 4.00, 4.25,
α 2.25, 2.50, 2.75, 3.00, 1.75, 2.00, 2.25, 4.50, 4.75, 5.00, 3.1. Overall matrix of numerical models of plates
3.25, 3.50, 4.00, 5.00, 2.50, 2.75, 3.00, 5.25, 5.50, 5.75,
10.00, 30.00 3.25, 3.50, 4.00, 6.00, 8.00, The previous section discussed the finite element modeling tech­
5.00, 6.00 10.00
Flange-to-web 1.00, 1.50, 2.00, 3.00
nique used for the parametric study conducted in this section. The pa­
thickness rameters considered for this study are the tapering ratio R, which is the
ratio tf/tw ratio of the larger plate width to the smaller plate width as given in Eq.
(11). The normalized plate length α is the ratio of plate length to the
plate’s larger width as given in Eq. (12), whereas the ratio of flange
calculated according to the loading type and the corresponding plate
thickness to web thickness tf /tw represents the relative slenderness be­
buckling coefficient is calculated using Eq. (9) for normal stresses and
tween flange and web.
Eq. (10) for shear stresses as listed by Timoshenko and Gere [21].

2327
M.M. Ibrahim et al.
Fig. 11. Deformed shape of lowest buckling mode of uniformly compressed
plate under different boundary conditions.
R = h/h1 (11)
α = a/h (12)
Table 2 illustrates the ranges and increments used for each param­
eter. The tapering ratio R ranges from 1 to 5 for all types of loading to
cover the cases from prismatic rectangular plate (R = 1.00) to highly
tapered web plates (R = 5.00). The normalized plate length α had
different ranges for different types of loading. The range is expanded, for
the uniform compression case, up to 30.00 to resemble longer columns
and the range is limited to no smaller than 3.00, for the case of pure
shear to keep the plate unstiffened for shear as defined in AISC [3].
Flange-to-web thickness ratio (tf /tw ) ranges from 1.00 to 3.00 for all
cases of loading.
3.2. Plate buckling under uniform compression
A total of 858 models are generated and analyzed for uniform
compression loading. Fig. 11 shows the deformed shape of the lowest
buckling mode of a uniformly compressed tapered plate under different
boundary conditions. The buckling wave bulge size of the simply sup­
ported sides plat is larger than that of the flange restrained sides plate
which in turn is larger than that of the fixed sides plate. This decrease in
wave bulge size is accompanied by increase in the critical buckling load.
The calculated buckling coefficient of axial loading (k), according to Eq.
Fig. 12. Calculated axial buckling coefficient versus normalized plate length for different tapering ratios for “simply supported edges” and “fixed edges”.
2328
Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334
(9), is plotted against the normalized plate length for different tapering
ratios and different boundary conditions as shown in Fig. 12 and Fig. 13;
respectively. The calculated coefficient of buckling for prismatic plates
(R = 1.00) matches very well with the closed form solution available,
4.00 for simply supported edges and 6.97 for fixed edges [22]. For flange
restrained boundary conditions, the calculated coefficient of buckling,
for prismatic plates (R = 1.00), is 4.79, 5.67, 6.30 and 6.79 for
tf /tw values of 1.00, 1.50, 2.00 and 3.00; respectively. Fig. 12 and Fig. 13
show that k increases by the increase of the tapering ratio R for various
boundary conditions and, for all R values, k decreases with the increase
of α up to α ≈ 5.00 and then the rate of decrease is significantly lower.
Also k increases with the increase of tf /tw to almost reach the value of
fixed edges buckling coefficient at tf /tw = 3.00.
3.3. Plate buckling under pure bending
A total of 816 models are generated and analyzed for pure bending
loading. Fig. 14 shows the deformed shapes of lowest bucking mode for
pure bending load under different boundary conditions: simply sup­
ported edges, flange restrained edges and fixed edges. The calculated
buckling coefficient of flexural buckling (k) according to Eq. (9) is
plotted against the normalized plate length α for different boundary
conditions and with different tapering ratios in Fig. 15 and Fig. 16,
respectively. The obtained values of k, for all R values and as α increases,
greater than 2.00, have the tendency to reach the case of prismatic
plates, as 23.90 for simply supported edges and 39.60 for fixed edges, as
stated in [22]. For flange restrained case, for all Rvalues and as α in­
creases, k tilted to the lower bound value of 25.70, 28.77, 30.37 and
31.37 for tf /tw values of 1.00, 1.50, 2.00 and 3.00 respectively. At tf /tw
equals 3.00, this lower bound increases to 47% of the difference between
fixed edges and simply supported edges flexural buckling coefficients.
This is unlike the uniform compression case where the flanges
restraining effect increases the coefficient of axial buckling to 100% of
the difference between fixed edges and simply supported edges axial
buckling coefficients at tf /tw equals 3.00.
For the range of α < 2.00 (hatched on Fig. 15 and Fig. 16), the
calculated k values are noticeably lower than expected and lower than
that of prismatic plate especially for higher tapering ratios. This is due to
the interaction with the induced shear stresses developed by additional
shear force results from the vertical component of the flange force [15]
as shown in the free body diagram in Fig. 17a. Fig. 17b shows the finite
element analysis buckled shape of a tapered member (R = 2.00,α = 1.00
and tf /tw equals 2.00) which is an interaction of both flexure and shear
buckling modes. However, it is decided to ignore these deviations as it is
not in the practical range of use for these members.
As well, some of the k values have significantly dropped from their
expected values, see Fig. 16a for R = 3.00, 4.00, 5.00 and Fig. 16d for R
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 13. Calculated axial buckling coefficient versus normalized plate length for different tapering ratios “flange restrained edges”.

Fig. 14. Deformed shape of lowest buckling mode of pure bending load under different boundary conditions.

= 1.25, 1.50. By investigation of these models, it is found that for these
particular models the local flange buckling controls the critical moment
and not the web buckling. So, these models are ignored in the proposed
formulas. Eventually, it is on the safe side and (not exaggeratedly con­
servative) to use the k values calculated for prismatic web (R = 1.00) for
all other tapering ratios as a lower bound value.
3.4. Plate buckling under pure shear
A total of 720 models are solved for pure shear loading. Fig. 18 shows
the deformed shape of the lowest buckling mode for the pure shear load
case under different boundary conditions: simply supported edges,
flange restrained edges and fixed edges. The more edge restraint pro­
vided for the web plate from simply supported to flange retrained to
fixed edges increases the critical buckling load and decreases the size of
the shear buckling wave. The calculated coefficient of shear buckling
(kv ) according to Eq. (10) is shown against the normalized plate length α
for different tapering ratios R with different boundary conditions in
Figs. 19 and 20, respectively. The figures show that the coefficient of
shear buckling (kv ) increases by the increase of the tapering ratio R,

2329
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 15. Calculated flexure buckling coefficient versus normalized plate length for different tapering ratios “simply supported edges” and “fixed edges”.

Fig. 16. Calculated flexure buckling coefficient versus normalized plate length for different tapering ratios “flange restrained edges”.

whereas it decreases by the increase of the normalized plate length α. As
well, it increases by changing the boundary condition of the longitudinal
edges from simply supported edges to flange retrained edges with
increasing tf /tw ratio reaching the fixed edges condition. This increase
reaches 92% from the difference between the fixed edges and the simply
supported edges buckling coefficients at tf /tw = 3. The stiffness pro­
vided by the “more stiff” smaller depth zone to the “less stiff” wider
depth zone leads to the increase of kv value with the increase of the
tapering ratio R. This stiffening effect decreases by the increase of the
normalized plate length α as the “more stiff” zone of the web is separated
from the “less stiff” zone, and hence a different buckling mode may
occur.
4. Proposed formulas for tapered web plates coefficients of
buckling
In order to propose new formulas for the elastic buckling coefficients
for both uniform compression and pure shear types of loading, a
regression analysis is performed on the previous results where a mini­
mum coefficient of determination (R2) value of 0.98 is adopted. Eqs.
(13) to (16) show the proposed axial buckling coefficient formulas for
simply supported edges, fixed edges and flange restrained edges,
respectively.

2330
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 17. Free body diagram and buckled shape of a tapered member with short normalized plate length subjected to pure moment.

Fig. 18. Deformed shape of lowest buckling mode of pure shear load under different boundary conditions.

Fig. 19. Calculated shear buckling coefficient versus normalized plate length for different tapering ratios “simply supported edges” and “fixed edges”.

4.753 0.573 4.474 ( ) ( )2

katSS = 4.295 + − − (13) βat = 1.24 tf /tw − 0.764 − 0.207 tf /tw ⩽1.00 (16)
α0.853 R2.646 αR
Where katSS is axial buckling coefficient for tapered plate with simply
9.903 9.266
katFF = 6.936 + − (14) supported edges, katFF is axial buckling coefficient for tapered plate with
α 0.879 αR
fixed edges, katFR is axial buckling coefficient for tapered plate with
katFR = katSS + βat (katFF − katSS ) (15) flange restrained edges, α is normalized plate length as per Eq. (12), R is

2331
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 20. Calculated shear buckling coefficient versus normalized plate length for different tapering ratios “flange restrained edges”.

the tapering ratio as in Eq. (11) and βat is a modification factor to ac­ ( ) ( )2
count for the relative flange to web thickness. βvt = tf /tw − 0.64 − 0.16 tf /tw ⩽1.00 (24)
Eqs. (17) to (20) show the proposed bending buckling coefficient Where kvtSS is the shear buckling coefficient for tapered plates with
proposed formulas for simply supported edges, fixed edges and flange simply supported edges, kvtF is the shear buckling coefficient for tapered
restrained edges respectively. The buckling coefficients in bending did plates with fixed edges, kvtFR is the shear buckling coefficient for tapered
not significantly vary with different values of tapering ratio R. plates with flange restrained edges, α is the normalized plate length as
kbtSS = 23.90 (17) given in Eq. (12), R is the tapering ratio as in Eq. (11) and βvt is a
modification factor for to account the relative flange to web thickness.
kbtFF = 39.60 (18)
5. Combined compression and bending
kbtFR = kbtSS + βbt (kbtFF − kbtSS ) (19)
( ) ( )2 For the case of rectangular plates, Pekoz [23] presented the
βbt = 0.671 tf /tw − 0.429 − 0.123 tf /tw ⩽1.00 (20) following Eq. (25) for the case of combined bending and compression of
a plate simply supported on all four sides. This equation is currently
Where kbtSS is the bending buckling coefficient for tapered plates
adopted by the AISC specifications.
with simply supported edges, kbtFF is the bending buckling coefficient for
tapered plates with fixed edges, kbtFR is the bending buckling coefficient k = 4 + 2(1 − ψ )3 + 2(1 − ψ ) (25)
for tapered plates with the flange restrained edges, α is the normalized
Where ψ is the ratio between the normal stresses at both ends of the
plate length as in Eq. (12), R is the tapering ratio as in Eq. (11) and βbt is a
plate in transverse direction.
modification factor to account for the relative flange-to-web thickness.
The proposed procedure in this research is to use Eq. (26), which is
Eqs. (21) to (24) show the proposed shear buckling coefficient for­
derived by substituting the previously calculated katFR from Eqs. (13) to
mulas for simply supported edges, fixed edges and flange restrained
(16) for R = 1.00 instead of the value of 4 in Eq. (25) which represents
edges, respectively.
the axial buckling coefficient for prismatic rectangular plate. It has
0.604 8.202 6.748 slightly modified factors which were modified to achieve better agree­
kvtSS = 5.907 − + − (21)
R2 α αR ment with available closed-form expressions for different stress gradi­
ents of rectangular plates.
0.558 13.558 12.358
kvtFF = 9.775 − + − (22)
R2 α αR k = katFR + 1.75 (1 − ψ )3 + 2.05 (1 − ψ ) (26)

kvtFR = kvtSS + βvt (kvtFF − kvtSS ) (23) This procedure is verified against multiple finite element models for
different R, α and ψ values and has shown an acceptable correlation as

2332
M.M. Ibrahim et al. Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334

Fig. 21. Proposed procedure versus current procedure versus F.E.A.

Table 3
Comparison of critical buckling load between experimental and analytical results for axially loaded members.
Flange dimensions Web Height Web thickness Web Height Yield Stress (MPa) Critical Buckling Load (kN) Analytical./Exp.
(mm) h/h1 (mm) (mm)
Experimental Analytical
(mm)

TC-1 70 × 3 400/300 1.5 1000 358 19.70 20.34 1.032

TC-2 70 × 3 400/200 1.5 1000 358 27.90 22.65 0.812
TC-3 70 × 3 450/150 1.5 1000 358 22.60 21.11 0.934
Mean 0.926
Standard deviation 0.09

Table 4
Shear loaded specimens experimental and analytical critical buckling loads.
Flange dimensions Web Height Web thickness Web Length Yield Stress (MPa) Critical Buckling Load (kN) Analytical./Exp.
(mm) h/h1 (mm) (mm)
Experimental Analytical
(mm)

TSP-1 150 × 8 400/303 2.0 1350 282 46.3 46.59 1.006

TSP-2 150 × 8 400/207 2.0 1350 290 N/A 59.91 Shear yielding
TSP-3 150 × 8 450/159 2.0 1350 303 N/A 67.02 Shear yielding

illustrated in Fig. 21 with a mean value of 0.99 and standard deviation of
0.036. the maximum deviation in k value is 6% when ψ approaches − 1
and 13% when ψ approaches unity. It can also be noticed that the error
gets smaller as α increases and when R approaches unity.
6. Comparison with experimental results
An experimental program is performed in the laboratory of steel
structures of the department of structural engineering, Ain Shams
University to investigate the behavior of web-tapered steel members
under different loading conditions. The experimental results in Ibrahim
et al. [24,25] are given for validation of the proposed formulas.
Table 3 presents a comparison between both the experimental and
the analytical critical buckling load calculated using Eqs. (13) to (16) for
axially loaded columns with a mean ratio of 0.92 and standard deviation
of 0.09. The value of the experimentally determined buckling load for
TC-2 (27.90 kN) is 24% higher than the analytically predicted value
(22.65 kN). This can be explained as the installed lateral-displacement

2333
M.M. Ibrahim et al.
LVDT at the anticipated buckling location did not meet the extreme web
imperfection location which caused a slight delay in capturing the
buckling wave formation, thus reporting a higher critical buckling load.
Table 4 gives the experimental and analytical critical buckling shear
loads calculated using Eqs. (21) to (24). Shear buckling occurred for one
specimen, TSP-1, and the experimental value is very close to the pro­
posed equation prediction. The other two specimens TSP2 and TSP-3
experienced shear yielding at 63.2 kN and 60.6 kN, respectively.
7. Summary and conclusions
An extensive finite element study including more than 2400 models
is presented in this research to analyze the effect of different geometric
parameters on the critical buckling stresses of web-tapered steel mem­
bers. The elastic buckling coefficients are calculated for different loading
types and different boundary conditions. The parameters included in
this study are: the tapering ratio (R), the normalized plate length (α) and
the flange to web thickness ratio (tf/tw). The parameters’ ranges are
selected to represent the extreme values for each parameter, yet keep it
within the practical range of use and the specifications limitations when
available. Three loading types are examined: uniform compression, pure
bending and pure shear loads.
The transvers edges of the plate are kept simply supported for all
conditions, whereas three boundary conditions are considered for the
longitudinal edges: simply supported edges, flange restrained edges and
fixed edges. For the flange restrained boundary condition, the longitu­
dinal edges are restrained by a flange whose width is set to 1/6 of the
web’s larger depth and the flange thickness varied from 1.0 tw to 3.0 tw.
Different buckling coefficients are calculated for all models and a
regression analysis is carried out to obtain new formulas for different
loading types. New formulas are introduced for the axial, bending and
shear buckling coefficients for tapered webs.
The existing procedure for combined axial and bending interaction is
slightly adjusted to achieve better correlation with the available closed-
form expressions for different stress gradients. The use of the proposed
formulas with the adjusted procedures for combined axial and bending
interaction is validated. Finally, a comparison is validated with the re­
sults of an on-going experimental program for verification of the pro­
posed formulas conducted in this research.
The main conclusions of this study can be summarized as:
1. The tapering of a web plate increases its resistance to buckle due to
the stiffness provided by the “more stiff zone” near the smaller plate
width compared to the “less stiff zone” at the larger width. This in­
crease diminishes by the increase of the plate length as the “more stiff
zone” gets far from the “less stiff zone” (i.e. higher α values >5α and
>2α for axial and flexural buckling, respectively while no significant
threshold for shear is noticed in the study range).
2. The presence of the beam’s flanges increases the web resistance to
buckle compared to the case of simply supported web plate and the
web plate tends to behave more like a fixed edged plate as the flanges
thickness increases. For tf /tw equal to 3.0, the increase is up to 100%,
47% and 92% of the difference between the fixed edges and the
simply supported edges plate buckling coefficients for axial, pure
bending and pure shear loading conditions, respectively.
2334
Structures 28 (2020) 2321–2334
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, AASHTO
LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1017/
CBO9781107415324.004.
[2] AISC, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, (2010) 1–612.
[3] AISC, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, An American National Standard,
2016. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-817879.
[4] R.C. Kaehler, D.W. White, Y.D. Kim, AISC Design Guide 25: Frame Design Using
Web-Tapered Members, 2011.
[5] [5] G.G. Pope, The Buckling of Plates Tapered in Planform, Ministry of Aviation,
Aeronautical Research Council Reports and Memoranda, London, 1962.
[6] Salem AH, El Aghoury M, Fayed MN, El Aghoury IM. Ultimate capacity of axially
loaded thin-walled tapered columns with doubly symmetric sections. Thin-Walled
Struct 2009;47(8-9):931–41.
[7] El Aghoury IM, El Aghoury M, Salem AH. Behaviour of bi-axially loaded thin-
walled tapered beam-columns with doubly symmetric sections. Thin-Walled Struct
2009;47(12):1535–43.
[8] Lee SC, Davidson JS, Yoo CH. Shear buckling coefficients of plate girder web
panels. Comput Struct 1996;59(5):789–95.
[9] Mirambell E, Zárate AV. Web buckling of tapered plate girders. Proc Inst Civ Eng -
Struct Build 2000;140(1):51–60.
[10] Estrada Imma, Real Esther, Mirambell Enrique. A new developed expression to
determine more realistically the shear buckling stress in steel plate structures.
J Constr Steel Res 2008;64(7-8):737–47.
[11] Bedynek Agnieszka, Real Esther, Mirambell Enrique. Shear buckling coefficient:
proposal for tapered steel plates. Proc Inst Civil Eng - Struct Build 2014;167(4):
243–52.
[12] Abu-Hamd Metwally, El Dib Farah F. Buckling strength of tapered bridge girders
under combined shear and bending. HBRC J 2016;12(2):163–74.
[13] Gendy Bassem L. Critical shear buckling load of tapered plate with circular
opening. HBRC J 2016;12(3):296–304.
[14] Serror Mohammed H, Abdelbaset Basem H, Sayed Hesham S. Shear strength of
tapered end web panels. J Constr Steel Res 2017;138:513–25.
[15] Studer Ryan P, Binion Chad D, Davis D Brad. Shear strength of tapered I-shaped
steel members. J Constr Steel Res 2015;112:167–74.
[16] Trahair NS. Bending and buckling of tapered steel beam structures. Eng Struct
2014;59:229–37.
[17] Kucukler Merih, Gardner Leroy. Design of laterally restrained web-tapered steel
structures through a stiffness reduction method. J Constr Steel Res 2018;141:
63–76.
[18] Asgarian B, Soltani M, Mohri F. Lateral-torsional buckling of tapered thin-walled
beams with arbitrary cross-sections. Thin-Walled Struct 2013;62:96–108.
[19] ANSYS, Theory Manual, Swansea Company, 2009.
[20] Lee Sung C, Lee Doo S, Yoo Chai H. Ultimate shear strength of long web panels.
J Constr Steel Res 2008;64(12):1357–65.
[21] Timoshenko S, Gere J. Theory of elastic stability. McGraw-Hill Book Company;
1936.
[22] Ziemian Ronald D, editor. Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures.
Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010.
[23] Pekoz T. Developement of a unified approach to the design of cold-formed steel
members. Eighth Int Spec Conf Cold-Formed Steel Struct 1986:77–84.
[24] Ibrahim Mohamed Mostafa, El Aghoury Ihab Mohamed, Ibrahim Sherif Abdel-
Basset. Experimental and numerical investigation of ultimate shear strength of
unstiffened slender web-tapered steel members. Thin-Walled Struct 2020;148:
106601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.106601.
[25] M.M. Ibrahim, I.M. El Aghoury, S.A.B. Ibrahim, Experimental and Numerical
Investigation of Axial Compressive Strength of Unstiffened Slender Tapered Steel
Webs, Thin-Walled Struct. (2020) Submitted for Publishing.