Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

Material properties and residual stresses of cold-formed high strength

steel hollow sections
Jia-Lin Ma a, Tak-Ming Chan b, Ben Young a,⁎
a
Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China
b
Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents the experimental investigation on the material properties and residual stress distributions of
Received 11 December 2014 cold-formed high strength steel hollow sections. The nominal yield stresses (0.2% proof stresses) of the hollow
Accepted 16 February 2015 sections were 700, 900 and 1100 MPa. The sections were composed of 9 square hollow sections, 2 rectangular
Available online 30 March 2015
hollow sections and 6 circular hollow sections. 66 tensile coupons were tested to determine the modulus of elas-
ticity, 0.2% tensile proof stress, ultimate tensile strength and elongation at fracture of the material. The results
Keywords:
Cold-formed steel
were also compared with the American, Australian and European standards. Based on the Ramberg–Osgood ex-
High strength steel pression, a new constitutive model for high strength steel material is proposed. On three of the hollow sections,
Hollow section strength variation and cold-forming effect were studied by testing coupons extracted from different locations of
Material characterization the cross-sections. Residual stresses were also investigated both in longitudinal and transverse directions on
Residual stress three hollow sections using wire-cutting method. A total number of 82 longitudinal strips and 3 transverse
rings were cut from the original sections.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction determined the degree of influence by residual stresses on column

Latest development in material and manufacturing technologies
make it possible to increase the yield strength of steel to more than
1300 MPa. High strength steel (HSS) tubes with nominal yield
strengths of 700, 900 and 1100 MPa are now available in market.
Their potential use should be exploited to achieve more economic
design in steel structures. This paper firstly presents a timely review
on HSS and secondly the experimental findings on material proper-
ties of HSS tubes from a series of tensile coupon tests. The residual
stress distributions over three sections were also investigated using
wire-cutting method.
Various researchers had shown interest in exploring the potential
use of HSS as a new economic building material. Since most HSS prod-
ucts available in the past were supplied in plates, extensive research
has been carried out on fabricated sections like box, I and cruciform sec-
tions. Residual stress distributions, global imperfections, plate slender-
ness limits and buckling behavior have also been studied through
different experimental programs. Among high strength steel products,
A514 plates first came to light in civil engineering application. In Fritz
Laboratory of Lehigh University, by testing stub columns welded from
HSS A514 plates (with nominal yield strength of 690 MPa), Nishino
et al. [1] found that it was the residual-to-yield stress ratio that
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: young@hku.hk (B. Young).
buckling behavior. Same results were observed by Nishino and Tall [2]
and it was found HSS columns had better structural performance than
their counterparts that were fabricated from normal steel A7 (with
nominal yield strength of 250 MPa) on a non-dimensional basis. In
Australia, research on stub columns welded from BISALLOY 80 HSS
plates carried out by Rasmussen and Hancock [3] shown that the yield
slenderness limits on normal strength steel could also be applicable to
high strength steel. Slender columns were also tested and reported by
Rasmussen and Hancock [4]. Studies on ultra-high strength steel
(UHSS) circular hollow sections with nominal yield strength of
1350 MPa were conducted in Monash University. By testing UHSS circu-
lar stub columns, Zhao [5] showed that the currently-adopted D/t limits
in Australian, American and European codes were conservative for
UHSS circular tubes. Jiao and Zhao [6] further studied the ductility of
UHSS circular tubes under tension and found that the values of
ultimate-to-yield strength ratio acquired from tensile coupon tests
and full section tensile tests were around 1.113 and 1.119 respectively,
which were better than the cold-formed steel sheets made from normal
steel and satisfied the requirements in AS/NZS 4600 [7]. Geometric im-
perfections, residual stresses and yield slenderness limits of UHSS circu-
lar hollow sections were also investigated by Jiao and Zhao [8]. It was
pointed out that more research is needed to provide a comprehensive
study on the slenderness limits of high strength steel sections. Recent
research by Chan et al. [9] assessed the current yield slenderness limits
under axial compression for cold-formed and built-up high strength
carbon and stainless steel hollow sections.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.02.006
0143-974X/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165 153

traffic in 2012 as shown in Fig. 1(a). In Europe, S690 was used in appli-
Notation
cations for example, a hybrid girder bridge in Sweden, a composite
bridge near Ingolstadt, the roof truss of Sony Centre in Berlin and so
The following symbols are used in this paper
on. For military purpose, even higher grade S1100 welded sections
A0 original cross-section area of tensile coupon
were used in the Fast Bridge 48 (Fig. 1 b) for Swedish army. It has a
B overall width of cross section
span of 46 m and is designed for a 65 t tank over 1000 crossings [13].
D outer diameter of circular hollow section
From the review, it is shown that investigation on cold-formed HSS
E modulus of elasticity
tubes (e.g. square/rectangular/circular hollow sections: SHS/RHS/CHS)
E0.2 tangent modulus of elasticity at 0.2% proof stress
with nominal proof stress of 700, 900 and 1100 MPa are limited. This
fy yield stress of steel (0.2% proof stress)
paper thus presents an experimental investigation which involves test-
fu ultimate tensile strength of steel
ing HSS tubes in 3 different grades: namely, H-Series, V-Series and S-
H overall depth of cross section
Series (with nominal proof stresses of 700, 900 and 1100 MPa, respec-
K modular coefficient in Ramberg–Osgood expression
tively) having the carbon equivalent value of 0.37%, 0.47% and 0.55%, re-
n strain-hardening exponent
spectively. The tubes were shipped in 3 m long and cold-sawed into
n0 original strain-hardening exponent calculated as
appropriate lengths for testing.
ln(0.2/0.01)/ln(σ0.2/σ0.01)
The chemical composition for the three grades of steel is shown in
n0.2,u strain-hardening exponent for 2nd phase of the stress–
Table 1. It is shown that the carbon and carbon equivalent percentages
strain model
increase with steel grades. Various types of micro-alloy elements are
m exponent for the modified Ramberg-Osgood model
added into the steel to facilitate the manufacturing process and to im-
R outer corner radius of square and rectangular hollow
prove the mechanical properties.
sections
r inner corner radius of square and rectangular hollow
sections
2. Standards on high strength steel
t plate or wall thickness
σ stress
Current design specifications in Australia, America and Europe
σb bending residual stress
apply different ductility limits on the use of steel as summarized in
σbi bending residual stress on inner surface
Table 2. Eurocode EN 1993-1-12 [14] provides supplementary rules
σbo bending residual stress on outer surface
to extend the use of steel up to grade S700. Quenched and tempered
σm membrane residual stress
steel grades (from 460 to 960 MPa) have been standardized in EN
σu static ultimate tensile strength
10025–6 [15] although the constructional steelwork in Europe
σ0.01 static stress at plastic strain of 0.01%
today is limited to the steel grades up to S690 [16]. American Speci-
σ0.2 static 0.2% tensile proof stress
fication ANSI/AISC 360–10 [17] allows the use of HSS with yield
σ0.2c static 0.2% tensile proof stress measured from corner
strength up to 690 MPa, that conforms to the three HSS ASTM stan-
coupons
dards (ASTM A514 [18], ASTM A709 [19] and ASTM A1011 [20]). In
σ0.2f static 0.2% tensile proof stress measured from flat
Australia, latest amendments AS 4100-A1 [21] on AS 4100 [22] ex-
coupons
tend the limit on the use of steel from grade 450 MPa to grade
ɛ total strain
690 MPa. New Australian steel product standard AS 3597 [23] is
εf proportional p elongation
ffiffiffiffiffiffi at fracture based on gauge
found to cover quenched and tempered HSS structural plate. In
length of 5:65 A0
cold-formed steel standards, EN 1993-1-3 [24] has the same require-
εi residual strain on inner surface
ments as in EN 1993-1-12 [14]. Both AS/NZS 4600 [7] and AISI S100
εo residual strain on outer surface
[25] mention the same lower boundaries for the material ductility
εp plastic strain
(fu/fy ≥ 1.08, ε50mm ≥ 10 %), which are also applicable to HSS. The fol-
εpu plastic strain at ultimate strength σu
lowing section presents the experimental findings on material prop-
εu ultimate strain at ultimate strength σu
erties for the batch of HSS in this project. Assessment was also
ε0.2 total strain at 0.2% proof stress
carried out to check the adequacy in strength and ductility.
ε25mm non-proportional elongation at fracture based on gauge
length of 25 mm
ε25mmc non-proportional elongation at fracture based on gauge
3. Tensile coupon tests
length of 25 mm from corner coupons
ε25mmf non-proportional elongation at fracture based on gauge
To examine the material properties of the high strength steel cold-
length of 25 mm from flat coupons
formed structural hollow sections, 66 standard tensile coupon tests
ε50mm non-proportional elongation at fracture based on gauge
were conducted. Depending on the cross-sectional shape, flat and cor-
length of 50 mm
ners coupons were extracted from the SHS and RHS while curved cou-
pons were machined from the CHS as shown in Fig. 2. Tests were
paused near yield and ultimate strength for 90 s to obtain the static
loads. Static stress–strain curves were also derived. The static 0.2%
proof stress (σ0.2), static ultimate tensile strength (σu), modulus of elas-
Similar investigations were also conducted by Hechler et al. [10] to ticity (E), strain at ultimate tensile strength (εu) and elongation at frac-
examine the choice of HSS material according to EN 1993-1-1 [11]. It ture (εf, ε25mm) were also determined. The Ramberg–Osgood parameter
was concluded that steel produced through Thermo-Mechanical (n0) was calculated as ln(0.2/0.01)/ln(σ0.2/σ0.01), in which σ0.01 is the
Controlled Processing (TMCP) have a higher fu/fy ratio and show better static stress at plastic strain of 0.01%. The proportional elongation at
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
ductility. fracture εf, which is based on a gauge length of 5:65 A0 , was deter-
As far as applications are concerned, Steel for bridge high perfor- mined by re-matching the fracture pieces and comparing to the original
mance structures (SBHS) with grade of 500 and 700 MPa were devel- proportional gauge length. The non-proportional elongation at fracture
oped and used in several bridge applications in Japan. BHS500 and ε25mm was captured by an extensometer mounted on the coupons over
BHS700 were used in Tokyo Gate Bridge [12], which was opened to a gauge length of 25 mm.
154 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165

(a) (b)
Fig. 1. High strength steel applications (a) Tokyo Gate Bridge [12] and (b) Fast Bridge 48 [13].

Table 1
Chemical composition of H, V and S-series high strength steel specimens obtained from mill certificates.

Series CEV C Si Mn P S Al Nb V Cu Cr N Ti Mo Ni B

H .37 .06 .20 1.78 .007 .003 .034 .082 .015 .025 .052 .004 .110 .007 .040 .0003
V .47 .08 .20 1.05 .010 .002 .037 .002 .012 .017 .899 .005 .030 .142 .078 .0023
S .55 .15 .22 1.24 .008 .005 .036 .002 .012 .036 .754 .006 .030 .186 .063 .0024

Cast analysis (%).

Note: carbon equivalent value CEV = C + Mn/6 + (Cr + Mo + V)/5 + (Ni + Cu)/15.

3.1. Flat tensile coupon tests fracture is shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 5(a) shows the stress–strain histories of
the flat coupons. It can be seen that V-Series are generally higher in
Fig. 2 shows the flat coupon that was extracted from the web at 90° strength but have lower ductility than H-Series. The flat coupons ex-
angle from the welding seam [26]. The dimensions of the flat coupons tracted from sections of same grades shown similar patterns in the
conformed to the EN ISO 6892–1 [27], AS 1391 [26] and ASTM E8 [28]. stress–strain curves.
The test pieces had 6 mm width along the gauge length of 25 mm. The
test set-up of flat tensile coupon is shown in Fig. 3(a). The measured ma- 3.2. Corner and curved tensile coupon tests
terial properties are summarized in Table 3. Letters ahead of the sections
in the first column indicate the grades of steel. The static 0.2% proof The width of the corner and curved tensile coupons along the gauge
stress (σ0.2) of the coupons is taken as the material yield stress (fy) in length of 25 mm was 4 mm. Two 8.5 mm diameter holes were drilled on
later assessment. The σ0.2 of the flat coupons varies from 663 to both ends of the coupon. The end clearance was 10 mm to avoid block
792 MPa for grade 700 MPa steel (H-Series), and ranges from shear failure near the holes. To test the corner and curved coupons,
960 MPa to 1005 MPa for grade 900 MPa steel (V-Series). Typical tensile two sets of specially designed grips and pins were used to avoid load ec-
centricities which may be introduced by the traditional gripping meth-
od for flat coupon [29]. The set-up and detail of the grip can be found in
Figs. 3(b) and (c) and Fig. 4(b). Corner coupons were machined from
the corner locations as shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 5(b) displays the stress–
Table 2 strain histories of the corner coupons. Measured material properties of
Ductility requirement in steel standards. corner coupons are listed in Table 4. Compared to the flat coupons, the
Code Requirement on material ductility 0.2% proof stresses (σ0.2) of the corner coupons are 18 to 34% and 14
EN 1993-1-12 [14] fu/fy ≥ 1.05, εf ≥ 15 %, εu ≥ 15fy/E
EN 10025–6 [15] εf ≥ 14 % (S690)
εf ≥ 11 % (S890)
εf ≥ 10 % (S960)
ASTM A514 [18] ε50mm ≥ 18 % (t ≤ 65mm)
ε50mm ≥ 16 % (65mm b t ≤ 150mm) R Weld Weld
ASTM A709 [19] ε50mm ≥ 18 % (t ≤ 65mm)
ε50mm ≥ 16 % (65mm b t ≤ 100mm) Curved
ASTM A1011 [20] ε50mm ≥ 12 % (0.65mm b t ≤ 2.5mm) coupon
r
ε50mm ≥ 14 % (2.5mm ≤ t b 6mm)
H

AS/NZS 4600 [7] fu/fy ≥ 1.08, ε50mm ≥ 10 % t Flat t

AS 3597 [23] ε50mm ≥ 18 % (3mm ≤ t ≤ 5mm fy ≥ 650MPa) coupon
ε50mm ≥ 18 % (5mm ≤ t ≤ 65mm fy ≥ 690MPa)
ε50mm ≥ 16 % (65mm ≤ t ≤ 110mm fy ≥ 620MPa)
ε50mm ≥ 13 % (3mm ≤ t ≤ 110mm fy ≥ 890MPa)
Corner
ε50mm ≥ 12 % (3mm ≤ t ≤ 110mm fy ≥ 960MPa) B coupon D
Note: unless specified, all ductility requirements in the table are applicable to steel with
grades up to 690 MPa. Fig. 2. Location of tensile coupons.
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165 155

Special
Extensometer grip

Strain
gauge
Flat
grip
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 3. Tensile coupon test set-up for (a) flat coupon (b) corner coupon and (c) curved coupon.

to 18% higher for H- and V-Series, respectively. The elongations at frac-
ture are lowered by 24 to 40% and 6 to 13%, as shown in the last two col-
umns in Table 4. These observations suggest that the work-hardening
effect is less significant for steel with higher grades.
To characterize the material properties for the circular hollow sec-
tions, curved coupons were extracted at 90° angle from the welding
seam and tested. The test setup is showed in Fig. 3(c) and the corre-
sponding tensile coupon test results are summarized in Table 5. As
shown in Table 5, the 0.2% proof stresses (σ0.2) are 1053 MPa and
1054 MPa for V89 × 3 and V89 × 4 respectively, and vary from 1014
to 1180 MPa for S-Series specimens. Although S-Series have even higher
strength, similar ultimate strain and fracture strains are observed when
compared to V-Series (Fig. 6).
3.3. Half-section coupon tests
To examine the distribution of the yield and ultimate stresses around
the rectangular, square and circular hollow sections, a number of tensile
coupons were extracted for testing from different locations on half of
the sections on H200 × 120 × 5, V120 × 120 × 4 and S139 × 6. The labels
of the coupons are shown in Figs. 7, 8 and 9. The static 0.2% proof stress-
es (σ0.2) and ultimate tensile strengths (σu) are plotted against the loca-
tions where the coupons were extracted. The tensile properties of
Table 3
Flat tensile coupon test results.
different coupons are given in Table 6. The corner coupons (C4, C8 for
H200 × 120 × 5, and C3, C7 for V120 × 120 × 4) possess the highest
0.2% proof stresses σ0.2 and the ultimate stresses σu due to cold-
working. For H200 × 120 × 5, the flat portion material σ0.2 on shorter
side is lower than those on the longer side by 9%, whereas the ultimate
strengths are almost identical. It could be attributed by the larger longi-
tudinal bending residual stresses on the shorter side, which caused early
material yielding. Similarly for S139 × 6, the 0.2% proof stress (σ0.2)
varies but all the coupons show similar ultimate stress (σu), except for
the coupon extracted from the welding seam location (Fig. 9). High fre-
quency welding technique was used in fabricating the V-Series and S-
Series specimens. The heat input may have lowered the parent material
strength for S-Series high strength steel. Further investigation is needed
to characterize this effect.
Summarizing all the test data (flat, corner and curved coupons) from
this investigation, Fig. 10(a) shows the relationship between σu/σ0.2 and
σ0.2. In view of the σu/σ0.2, all the tested coupons fulfilled the require-
ment as stated in EN 1993-1-12 [14] as indicated by the dashed line in
Fig. 10(a), but some of the coupons failed to meet the requirement
from AS/NZS 4600 [7] denoted by the dotted line due to excessive
cold-working. Two V-Series CHS curved coupons (circled in Fig. 10
a) show lower σu/σ0.2 values than flat and corner coupons, which may
be due to the different cold-forming procedure for CHS and SHS, RHS.
Fig. 10(b) shows the trend of decreasing material proportional elonga-
tions at fracture with the increase in 0.2% proof stresses. The ultimate
strains and fracture elongations for some tensile coupons may not satis-
fy the codified ductility requirements (Table 2) as shown in Tables 3, 4
and 5.

Section E σ0.2 σu εu Elongation n0 σu εu 4. High strength steel stress–strain relationship

(GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (%) at fracture σ 0:2 σ 0:2 =E

ε25mm εf 4.1. Ramberg–Osgood model

(%) (%)

H80 × 80 × 4 218 792 888 3.0 14 15 4.3 1.12 8.3 High strength steel has similar rounded stress–strain curves to stain-
H100 × 100 × 4 218 735 841 4.2 14 16 4.6 1.14 12.6 less steel. Ramberg and Osgood [30] proposed an analytical non-linear
H120 × 120 × 4 212 689 813 5.7 17 18 5.0 1.18 17.6 expression (Eq. (1)) for stress–strain relationship of metallic material
H140 × 140 × 5 206 708 844 6.4 20 18 5.1 1.19 18.6
with gradual transitions from elastic phase to plastic phase.
H140 × 140 × 6 201 663 808 3.0 18 16 5.4 1.22 9.2
H160 × 160 × 4 220 744 869 3.8 14 15 6.7 1.17 11.3
σ σ n
H100 × 50 × 4 208 724 831 4.3 17 16 3.6 1.15 12.3 ε¼ þK ð1Þ
H200 × 120 × 5 207 738 846 5.5 18 17 4.4 1.15 15.3 E E
V80 × 80 × 4 210 1005 1187 1.9 11 11 4.4 1.18 4.0
V100 × 100 × 4 207 978 1115 1.7 11 12 4.7 1.14 3.6 Using 0.2% proof stress and the corresponding strain as the key point
V120 × 120 × 4 204 960 1153 2.9 13 12 3.9 1.20 6.2
for the stress–strain model, Hill [31] modified the equation to Eq. (2).
156 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165

Special
grip

Pin

(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Failed specimens (a) flat coupons and (b) corner coupon with grip and pin.

1400 1400
H80×80×4
1200 1200 V-Series H100×100×4
V-Series
Stress σ (MPa)

H120×120×4
1000 1000 H140×140×5
800 800 H140×140×6
H-Series H-Series H160×160×4
600 600 H100×50×4
400 400 H200×120×5
V80×80×4
200 200 V100×100×4
0 0 V120×120×4
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Strain ε (%) Strain ε (%)

(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Static stress–strain curves obtained from tensile coupon tests for SHS/RHS (a) flat coupons and (b) corner coupons.

The equation was proved to match well with the experimental stainless up to the 0.2% proof stress. With the origin shifted to σ0.2, the second ex-
steel stress–strain curves up to the 0.2% proof stress. However, the pression was established to describe the stress–strain behavior beyond
model overestimates the stresses after the material yielding (Mirambell σ0.2.
and Real [32], Gardner and Nethercot [33], Rasmussen [34]).
  8  
σ σ n >
> σ σ n
ε¼ þ 0:002 ð2Þ < þ 0:002 ðσ ≤σ 0:2 Þ
E σ 0:2 E σ 0:2 
ε¼
>
> σ−σ 0:2 σ−σ 0:2 n0:2;u
: þ ε pu þ ε0:2 ðσ Nσ 0:2 Þ
Two-phase Ramberg–Osgood expression (Eq. (3)) was later devel- E0:2 σ u −σ 0:2
oped by Mirambell and Real [32], in which Hill's expression was used ð3Þ

Table 4
Corner tensile coupon test results.

Section E σ0.2 σu εu Elongation at n0 σu Comparison with

(GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (%) fracture σ 0:2 flat coupon results

ε25mm εf σ 0:2c ε25mmc

(%) (%) σ 0:2 f ε25mm f

H80 × 80 × 4 219 933 1005 1.9 10 14 11.4 1.08 1.18 0.75

H100 × 100 × 4 215 931 997 1.4 10 14 9.2 1.07 1.27 0.72
H120 × 120 × 4 217 923 996 1.7 10 14 10.2 1.08 1.34 0.60
H140 × 140 × 5 208 912 1012 1.5 12 18 5.1 1.11 1.29 0.62
H140 × 140 × 6 210 859 959 1.4 11 13 7.1 1.12 1.30 0.60
H160 × 160 × 4 217 910 1002 1.8 10 13 7.9 1.10 1.22 0.73
H100 × 50 × 4 207 859 944 2.1 13 15 6.6 1.10 1.19 0.76
H200 × 120 × 5 205 895 970 1.3 12 14 5.9 1.10 1.21 0.67
V80 × 80 × 4 208 1187 1299 1.8 10 12 8.9 1.09 1.18 0.87
V100 × 100 × 4 213 1114 1197 1.8 10 12 8.8 1.07 1.14 0.90
V120 × 120 × 4 205 1114 1238 2.9 12 14 8.2 1.07 1.16 0.94
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165 157

Table 5 Similar investigations on the two phase Ramberg–Osgood expres-

Curved tensile coupon test results. sions were found in Rasmussen [34], Gardner and Nethercot [33]. The
Section E σ0.2 σu εu Elongation n0 σu εu two-phase expression was found not passing through the ultimate
(GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (%) at fracture σ 0:2 σ 0:2 =E point at σu and εu. Thus for arithmetic consistency, Eq. (4) was proposed
ε25mm εf by modifying the εpu in Eq. (3) (Gardner and Nethercot [33], Quach and
(%) (%) Huang [35]).
V89 × 3 209 1053 1124 2.1 10 14 8.5 1.11 4.35   
V89 × 4 210 1054 1108 2.4 12 15 8.3 1.09 4.94 σ −σ 0:2 σ −σ 0:2 σ −σ 0:2 n0:2;u
ε¼ þ εu −ε0:2 − u
S89 × 4 205 1180 1317 2.5 11 13 5.6 1.12 4.38 E0:2 E0:2 σ u −σ 0:2
S108 × 4 215 1180 1292 2.2 10 12 7.3 1.09 3.97 þ ε0:2 ðσ Nσ 0:2 Þ ð4Þ
S133 × 4 204 1159 1291 2.3 10 13 7.4 1.11 4.00
S139 × 6 194 1014 1382 2.0 10 12 4.9 1.36 3.86
The second phase of the stress–strain models can be transformed
to Eq. (5) when the new coordinate system (ε∗ = ε − ε0.2, σ∗ = σ −
σ0.2) is used. Thus the expression is similar to the original Ramberg–
Osgood equation. However after yielding, typical material stress–
1600 strain curves do not possess the linear-elastic range, thus the
1400 model usually cannot catch up the curves near yielding. Instead, de-
S-Series
viations were found in the transitions for most of the approximations
1200
(Fig. 11).
Stress σ (MPa)

1000 V89×3
V-Series   n
V89×4
 σ  σ σ  0:2;u
800 S89×4 ε ¼ þ εu − u ð5Þ
E0:2 E0:2 σ u
S108×4
600 S133×4
400 S139×6
4.2. New stress–strain relationship model
200
0 Various researchers have tried to establish the two-phase stress–
0 3 6 9 12 15 strain models with different stress and strain values on the test
Strain ε (%) curves. However the strain hardening exponent n was found to be in-
creased with the increase in strains, thus a new model (Eqs. (6),(7))
Fig. 6. Static stress–strain curves obtained from tensile coupon tests for CHS. is proposed for high strength steel in this study. In this model, the

1200
0.2% proof stress
1100
Ultimate Stress
Stress σ (MPa)

1000 C4 C8
F3 F5 F9
900 W1 F2 F6 F7 F10 F11 F12

800

700

600
10 60 110 160 210 260 310 360

Fig. 7. Measured 0.2% proof stress, ultimate stress distributions in H200 × 120 × 5.

1500
0.2% proof stress
1400 Ultimate Stress
Stress σ (MPa)

1300 C3 C7
F2 F4 F6 F9
1200 F5 F8

1100 W1
1000

900
0 50 100 150 200 250

Fig. 8. Measured 0.2% proof stress, ultimate stress distributions in V120 × 120 × 4.
158 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165

1600
0.2% proof stress
1500 Ultimate Stress
C2 C3 C4 C5 C7
1400 C6
Stress σ (MPa)
1300

1200

1100 W1

1000

900
0 50 100 150 200 250

Fig. 9. Measured 0.2% proof stress, ultimate stress distributions in S139 × 6.

strain hardening exponent n is expressed as a function of the plastic n0 is the original strain-hardening exponent which can be calculated
strain εp. as ln(0.2/0.01)/ln(σ0.2/σ0.01). To fulfill arithmetic consistency, stress and
plastic strain at ultimate level were used in the equation to determine
8  n the coefficient K (Eq. (8)). The exponent m is determined by fitting
< εp ¼ ε− σ ¼ 0:002 σ
> the model to the tested stress–strain curve data. The new model corre-
 E σ 0:2 ð6Þ lated very well with the stress–strain curves obtained from tensile cou-
>
: n¼ f ε ¼n þK ε m
p 0 p pon tests (Fig. 12).
ε
log σ  ð0:002Þ −n0
pu

u
σ 0:2
K¼  m ð8Þ
 n m
εpu
σ 0 þKε p
ε p ¼ 0:002 ð7Þ
σ 0:2
The explicit solution from plastic strain εp to stress σ and total strain
ε is given in Eqs. (9) and (10) respectively. Hence an implicit stress–
strain relationship can be determined by a set of material parameters,
Table 6 E, σ0.01, σ0.2, σu, εu, n0 and m.
Half-section tensile coupon test results.  
 
εp
1
Section Coupon E σ0.2 σu εu Elongation n0 n0 þKεp m
σ¼ σ 0:2 ð9Þ
position (GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (%) at fracture 0:002
 
ε25mm εf  
εp
1
(%) (%) σ σ n0 þKεp m
ε ¼ ε p þ ¼ εp þ 0:2 ð10Þ
E E 0:002
H200 × 120 × 5 W1 215 818 880 2.0 15 15 8
F2 211 787 865 4.3 17 16 6
F3 208 806 880 3.2 17 16 5
C4 205 895 970 1.3 12 14 6
F5 196 733 859 4.4 17 16 4 Averaged material parameters based on material tensile coupon
F6 207 738 846 5.5 18 17 4 tests are given in Table 7. The labels of the high strength steel material
F7 197 714 848 4.1 16 16 3 are determined by both the test series (H, V and S) and tested coupon
C8 209 903 985 1.3 11 17 6 types (Flat, corner and curved). Although tensile coupons from H-
F9 211 802 881 2.0 15 14 6
F10 213 785 851 5.4 19 18 6
curved, S-flat and S-corner are not tested, material parameters for
F11 215 767 855 5.4 19 18 6 those series are calculated from H-flat, S-curved according to the ratios
F12 214 775 854 4.9 18 16 5 between V-flat, V-curved and V-corner (Table 8). The material stress–
V120 × 120 × 4 W1 206 996 1120 2.2 11 12 5 strain relationships and curves can thus been established from the aver-
F2 212 1001 1184 2.2 12 14 6
aged and proposed material parameters (Fig. 13).
C3 205 1114 1238 2.9 12 14 8
F4 204 986 1174 1.8 12 13 3
F5 204 960 1153 2.9 13 12 4 5. Residual stress measurements
F6 200 959 1191 N/A N/A N/A 3
C7 206 1122 1237 2.2 11 13 8 Residual stress is an important parameter for the design of steel
F8 209 965 1160 2.6 13 14 3
structural members as within the sections, part of the material may
F9 212 1005 1173 2.6 13 11 4
S139 × 6 W1 194 937 1143 2.1 11 12 4 have premature yielding leading to instability in compression members.
C2 193 1108 1389 2.0 11 12 5 For cold-formed hollow sections, residual stress can be resulted from
C3 203 1160 1368 2.0 10 12 3 cold-bending, welding and flame cutting.
C4 194 1014 1382 2.0 10 12 5
C5 199 1109 1365 2.1 11 11 5
C6 190 1070 1354 2.2 11 11 4 5.1. Measuring method
C7 189 1096 1375 1.9 11 12 5

Note: N/A — not applicable.

There are both destructive and non-destructive methods for deter-
For coupon F6 of V120 × 120 × 4, fracture happened outside the gauge length thus the mining the residual stresses in members. X-ray, neutron or electron dif-
elongation values were not determined. fraction, ultrasonic methods and magnetic methods are classified as
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165 159

1.40 25
H-Series H-Series
23 V-Series
1.35 V-Series
S-Series 21 S-Series
1.30 EC3-1-12
EC3-1-12 19
1.25 AS/NZS-4600
17
σu/σ0.2

ε f (%)
1.20 15

1.15 13
11
1.10 fu/fy ≥ 1.08
9
1.05 7
fu/fy ≥ 1.05
1.00 5
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
σ0.2 (MPa) σ0.2 (MPa)

(a) (b)
Fig. 10. (a) σu/σ0.2 versus σ0.2 (b) εf versus σ0.2 for tested coupons.

non-destructive methods [36]. Sectioning is a popular destructive meth- calculated through Hook's Law. As shown in Fig. 16, the residual stress
od based on measuring the deformations of material when extracted in the sections is divided into membrane σm and bending σb residual
from members [36–38] and was adopted in this investigation. The resid- stresses. Based on the assumption that bending residual stresses vary
ual stress distributions on H200 × 120 × 5, V120 × 120 × 4 and S139 × 6 linearly through the thickness, the magnitude of membrane and bend-
were investigated in this research. The tubes were cold-sawed into ing residual stresses are evaluated from Eqs. (11) and (12). Positive
300 mm long and later marked with strips of 10 mm wide on half of and negative signs indicate tensile and compression residual stresses
the section because the residual stress pattern tends to be symmetric respectively.
about the section axis passing through the welding seam. A transverse ε þ ε 
ring with a width of 10 mm was also marked on top of each tube σm ¼ − o i
E ð11Þ
(Fig. 14). Strain gauges with gauge length of 3 mm were attached on 2
both outside and inside of the strips and rings. Sectioning was conduct-
ed on a GI Agie Charmilles wire-cutting machine with an accuracy of 1400
0.005 mm. Fig. 15 shows the circular tube in wire-cutting. Coolant was
applied while sectioning to remove the additional heat generated. 1300 S133×4
Water proof glue was applied to avoid contaminating the strain gauges.
Initial readings prior to sectioning and final readings after sectioning 1200 V100×100×4-Corner
were recorded.
The residual strains on the outer and inner surfaces (εo and εi) of the
Stress σ (MPa)

1100 V100×100×4-Flat
strips and rings are firstly calculated through subtracting the final read-
ings by initial readings recorded. The residual stresses are then 1000 H160×160×4-Corner

900 H160×160×4-Flat

1400 800

1300 S133×4 700 Tests

Eq.(6) and (7)
1200 V100×100×4-Corner 600
0 1 2 3 4 5
Stress σ (MPa)

1100 V100×100×4-Flat Strain ε (%)

1000 H160×160×4-Corner Fig. 12. Comparing new model to test curves.

900 H160×160×4-Flat
Table 7
Averaged measured material parameters for the new model.
800
HSS E σ0.01 σ0.2 σu εu n m
700 material GPa MPa MPa MPa %
Tests Eq. (3)
H-flat 212 392 719 840 4.28 5.1 0.59
600 H-corner 212 589 897 983 1.63 7.5 0.97
0 1 2 3 4 5 V-flat 208 496 982 1149 2.08 4.4 0.87
Strain ε (%) V-curved 210 736 1054 1116 2.26 8.4 0.55
V-corner 209 804 1138 1245 2.17 8.6 0.72
S-curved 207 727 1152 1317 2.20 6.6 0.64
Fig. 11. Comparing two-phase Ramberg–Osgood model to test curves.
160 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165
ε −ε 
Table 8 σ bo ¼ − o i
E; σ bi ¼ −σ bo ð12Þ
Proposed material parameters for the new model. 2

HSS E σ0.01 σ0.2 σu εu n0. m 5.2. Results

material GPa MPa MPa MPa %

H-curved 214 582 772 816 4.64 9.6 0.37 Residual stresses have been analyzed on H200 × 120 × 5, V120 ×
S-flat 205 490 1073 1356 2.03 3.5 1.02 120 × 4 and S139 × 6 for both longitudinal and transverse directions.
S-corner 206 794 1245 1470 2.12 6.8 0.84
The bending residual stresses on outer surface and membrane residual
stresses are normalized by the 0.2% proof stress. The ratios are then plot-
1600 ted against the distance from the welding seam in graph (a) of Figs. 17,
18 and 19, whereas in (b) and (c), the magnitude of the membrane and
1400 S-Series bending residual stresses are plotted over half of the sections to show
the distribution. The minimum and maximum of membrane and bend-
1200 V-Series ing residual stresses are circled out individually on each of the graphs.
Stress σ (MPa)

1000 5.2.1. Longitudinal residual stresses

H-Series
Longitudinal residual stresses are referring to the stress along the
800 length of the specimens, which have dominant effects on the mem-
bers' structural behaviors. From Figs. 17 to 19, it is shown that the
600 bending residual stresses are higher than the membrane residual
stresses. All results indicate tensile bending residual stresses on
400 outer surface whereas compressive bending residual stress appears
Corner
on inner surface. It may be due to the uncoiling procedures that
200 Curved
give the hollow sections tensile bending stresses on outer surface
Flat
and compression on the opposite along the longitudinal direction.
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 The maximum bending residual stresses can be as high as 80% of
Strain ε (%) the 0.2% proof stress of the material. Fig. 20 shows the extracted
strips from three sections; they are placed in sequence to demon-
Fig. 13. Proposed high strength steel stress–strain curves for H, V and S-Series.
strate the degree of bending. In sections H200 × 120 × 5 and

Transverse
Ring

Longitudinal
Strip

(a) (b)
Fig. 14. Marked tubes with strain gauges and water proof glue (a) S139 × 6 and (b) V120 × 120 × 4.

Deformed
Strip

Wire
Gauge

Coolant

(a) Cutting transverse ring (b) Cutting longitudinal strip

Fig. 15. S139 × 6 during wire-cutting.
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165 161

Fig. 16. Sign convention for residual stress measurement.

V120 × 120 × 4, the corner strips remained visibly straight after cut- flat strips near the corners have larger curvatures than the others,
ting, indicating that the bending residual stresses at the corners for which concur with the measurement of bending residual stresses
RHS and SHS are less significant than those on the flat portions. The in Figs. 17 and 18. Similarly for S139 × 6, larger curvatures are

100
H200×120×5
80
Residual stresses/σ0.2 (%)

60

40

20

0
-50 50 150 250 350
-20
Transverse Membrane
-40
Transverse Bending
-60
Longitudinal Memrane
-80 Longitudinal Bending
Weld Corner Corner
Distance from weld (mm)

(a)

141
100 140 600
50 400
200
0 0
Weld Weld
-50 -200
(MPa) -400 654
-104 Bending
Membrane (MPa)

Longitudinal Longitudinal
Transverse -77 Transverse

-550

-230

106

(b) (c)
Fig. 17. H200 × 120 × 5 residual stress distribution (a) residual stress/σ0.2 versus distance from the weld (b) membrane and (c) bending.
162 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165

100
V120×120×4
80
Residual stresses/σ0.2 (%)
60

40

20

0
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 Transverse Membrane
-20
Transverse Bending
-40
Longitudinal Memrane
-60 Longitudinal Bending
Weld Corner Corner
Distance from weld (mm)

(a)

600
100 400
50 200
0 163
0 0
-50 -200 Weld
Weld -400
(MPa) 851
Membrane (MPa)
-541
Bending

Longitudinal Longitudinal
Transverse Transverse

-100

-214

119

146

(b) (c)
Fig. 18. V120 × 120 × 4 residual stress distribution (a) residual stress/σ0.2 versus distance from the weld (b) membrane and (c) bending.

observed for strips with greater bending residual stresses. On aver-
age, longitudinal bending residual stress is about 46%, 56% and 57%
of σ0.2 for H200 × 120 × 5, V120 × 120 × 4, S139 × 6 sections respec-
tively. In terms of longitudinal membrane residual stresses, the max-
imums are close to 20% of σ 0.2 , which are much lower than the
bending residual stress levels.
It is noted that cold-formed hollow sections have different longitudi-
nal residual stress distributions when compared to the fabricated coun-
terparts. For the latter, the residual stresses are mainly induced by
welding and uneven cooling. Tensile residual stresses with magnitudes
close to material proof yield stresses are found at the welding points and
comparatively low compression residual stresses are distributed on
other parts of the sections to reach an equilibrium over the fabricated
sections [1,2].
5.2.2. Transverse residual stresses
Transverse residual stresses exist along the circumferential direction
of the sections. Differences in transverse residual stress arise from dif-
ferent section types and forming procedures. Transverse strips of
10 mm wide were machined from the tube. A cut was established on
the opposite side of the transverse strain gauges to release the
transverse residual stresses. However, for H200 × 120 × 5 and
V120 × 120 × 4 sections, the transverse rings closed up after cutting,
thus several more cuts were conducted until a clear gap was observed.
Results in Figs. 17 and 18 show that the transverse bending residual
stress on the outer surface of the H200 × 120 × 5 and V120 × 120 × 4
sections are all negative (i.e. compressive), which support the observa-
tion that the rings closed up after cutting. The transverse bending resid-
ual stresses are generally higher than the membrane counterparts, and
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165 163

100
S139×6

Residual stresses/σ0.2 (%)

80

60

40

20

0 Transverse Membrane
-0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Transverse Bending
-20
Longitudinal Memrane
-40 Longitudinal Bending
Weld
Distance from weld normalized to circumference

(a)

255

174 Membrane
82
Longitudinal
Weld Transverse
-224
(MPa)

-200
400

200

(b)
803

418

157

Bending -87

Longitudinal
Weld Transverse
(MPa)

-200
600

400

200

(c)
Fig. 19. S139 × 6 residual stress distribution (a) residual stress/σ0.2 versus distance from the weld (b) membrane and (c) bending.

the averaged magnitude are approximately 48% and 31% of the 0.2%
proof stress respectively for H200 × 120 × 5 and V120 × 120 × 4.
For S139 × 6, only one cut was made after slicing the ring from the
tube because the ring opened and left a gap at the place of cutting. Com-
pared to H200 × 120 × 5 and V120 × 120 × 4, S139 × 6 possesses more
significant transverse membrane residual stresses for the circular hol-
low sections. On average, the magnitude of the transverse membrane
residual stress is approximately 16% of 0.2% proof stress and the sign
is positive, showing that tensile residual stresses were locked in the sec-
tion. This explains the transverse ring opened after cutting.
The deformed transverse rings are shown in Fig. 21. From
Fig. 21(a) and (b), corresponding to H200 × 120 × 5 and
V120 × 120 × 4 respectively, the sides are no longer perpendicular to
each other. The corner angles have deformed to 88.6° on average. The
right flanges are shortened by 39% and 18% respectively due to a com-
bined effect in corner and web deformations. In Fig. 21(c) for
S139 × 6, the diameter is increased slightly by 0.28% and a gap of
2.3 mm is observed at the point of cutting.
6. Conclusions
This paper presents the experimental findings on the material prop-
erties and the residual stress distributions of cold-formed high strength
steel hollow sections. Cold-forming effects on high strength steel rect-
angular, square and circular hollow sections have been investigated.
Strength enhancement (up to 34%) in corner regions was observed in
164 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165
Weld Corner Corner H200×120×5
Weld Corner Corner V120×120×4
Weld S139×6
Fig. 20. Deformed strips cut from H200 × 120 × 5, V120 × 120 × 4, and S139 × 6.
rectangular and square hollow sections. Ultimate strength distribution
on circular hollow section was almost uniform except at the welding
position. In this study, a new constitutive model is proposed for high
strength steel and good correlations between the model and tested
stress–strain curves were achieved. Typical stress–strain curves for
three series of high strength steel were given based on the averaged
and proposed material parameters. The residual stress distributions on
three sections were also studied comprehensively. Illustrations were
given to show both the membrane and bending residual stress patterns
longitudinally and transversely. Due to the presence of residual stresses,
cold-formed high strength steel hollow section members would have
early inelastic behaviors caused by partial yielding. The residual stress
results facilitate further research on the structural behavior of column
and beam made of high strength steel hollow sections.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the technicians
and the final year undergraduate students, Mr. Tsz-Long But and Mr.
Liding Cheng from the Department of the Civil Engineering at The Uni-
versity of Hong Kong for their assistance in the experimental investiga-
tion. The research work described in this paper was supported by a
grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Ad-
ministrative Region, China (Project no. HKU17209614E).
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 21. Transverse ring cut from (a) H200 × 120 × 5, (b) V120 × 120 × 4, and (c) S139 × 6.
References
[1] Nishino F, Ueda Y, Tall L. Experimental investigation of the buckling of plates with
residual stresses. Fritz engineering laboratory report. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania: Le-
high University; 1966.
[2] Nishino F, Tall L. Experimental investigation of the strength of T-1 steel columns.
Fritz engineering laboratory report. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania: Lehigh University;
1970.
[3] Rasmussen KJR, Hancock GJ. Plate slenderness limits for high strength steel sections.
J Constr Steel Res 1992;23:73–96.
[4] Rasmussen KJR, Hancock GJ. Test of high strength steel columns. J Constr Steel Res
1995;34:27–52.
[5] Zhao X-L. Section capacity of very high strength (VHS) circular tubes under com-
pression. Thin Walled Struct 2000;37:223–40.
[6] Jiao H, Zhao X-L. Material ductility of very high strength (VHS) circular steel tubes in
tension. Thin Walled Struct 2001;39:887–906.
[7] AS/NZS 4600. Cold-formed steel structures. AS/NZS 4600 Sydney, Australia and
Wellington, New Zealand: Australian/New Zealand Standards; 2005.
[8] Jiao H, Zhao X-L. Imperfection, residual stress and yield slenderness limit of very
high strength (VHS) circular steel tubes. J Constr Steel Res 2003;59:233–49.
 J.-L. Ma et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 109 (2015) 152–165
[9] Chan T-M, Zhao X-L, Young B. Cross-section classification for cold-formed and built-
up high strength carbon and stainless steel tubes under compression. J Constr Steel
Res 2015;106:289–95.
[10] Hechler O, Axmann G, Donnay B. The right choice of steel — according to the
Eurocode. Use of steel materials in buildings & construction, Hong Kong, China;
2009.
[11] EN 1993-1-1. Eurocode 3: design of steel structures — part 1–1: general rules and
rules for buildings. EN 1993-1-1 Brussels, Belgium: CEN; 2005.
[12] IDI. Tokyo Gate Bridge. Japanese infrastructure newsletter. Japan, Tokyo: Infrastruc-
ture Development Institute; 2012.
[13] Collin P, Bernt J. Bridges in high strength steel. IABSE symposium report. Internation-
al Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering; 2006. p. 1–9.
[14] EN 1993-1-12. Eurocode 3: design of steel structures — part 1–12: additional rules
for the extension of EN 1993 up to steel grades S 700. EN 1993-1-12 Brussels,
Belgium: CEN; 2007.
[15] EN 10025–6. Hot rolled products of structural steels — part 6: technical delivery con-
ditions for flat products of high yield strength structural steels in the quenched and
tempered condition. EN 10025–6 Brussels, Belgium: CEN; 2009.
[16] Günther H-P, Raoul J, International Association for B., Structural E. Use and applica-
tion of high-performance steels for steel structures. Zürich: IABSE-AIPC-IVBH; 2005.
[17] ANSI/AISC 360–10. Specification for structural steel buildings. AISC 360–10 Chicago,
Illinois: American Institute of Steel Construction; 2010.
[18] ASTM A514. Standard specification for high-yield-strength, quenched and tempered
alloy steel plate, suitable for welding. ASTM A514/A514M-13 West Conshohocken:
American Society for Testing and Materials; 2013.
[19] ASTM A709. Standard specification for structural steel for bridges. ASTM A709/
A709M-13a West Conshohocken: American Society for Testing and Materials; 2013.
[20] ASTM A1011. Standard specification for steel, sheet and strip, hot-rolled, carbon,
structural, high-strength low-alloy, high-strength low-alloy with improved form-
ability, and ultra-high strength. ASTM A1011/A1011M-13 West Conshohocken:
American Society for Testing and Materials; 2013.
[21] AS 4100-A1. Amendment no.1 to AS 4100–1998 steel structures. AS 4100-A1
Sydney, Australia: Australian Standard; 2012.
[22] AS 4100. Steel structures. AS 4100 Sydney, Australia: Australian Standard; 1998.
165
[23] AS 3597. Structural and pressure vessel steel — quenched and tempered plate. AS
3597 Sydney, Australia: Australian Standard; 2008.
[24] EN 1993-1-3. Eurocode 3 — design of steel structures — part 1–3: general rules —
supplementary rules for cold-formed members and sheeting. EN 1993-1-3 Brussels,
Belgium: CEN; 2006.
[25] AISI S100. North American specification for the design of cold-formed steel structur-
al members. AISI S100-12 American Iron and Steel Institute; 2012.
[26] AS 1391. Metallic materials — tensile testing at ambient temperature. AS 1391 Syd-
ney, Australia: Australian Standard; 2007.
[27] EN ISO 6892–1. Metallic materials — tensile testing part 1: method of test at ambient
temperature. EN ISO 6892–1 Brussels: CEN; 2009.
[28] ASTM E8. Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic materials. ASTM E8/
E8M-11 West Conshohocken: American Society of Testing and Materials; 2012.
[29] Huang Y, Young B. The art of coupon tests. J Constr Steel Res 2014;96:159–75.
[30] Ramberg W, Osgood WR. Description of stress–strain curves by three parameters.
National advisory committee for aeronautics, technical note no. 902; 1943.
[31] Hill HN. Determination of stress–strain relations from the offset yield strength
values. Technical note no.927. Washington, DC: National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics; 1944.
[32] Mirambell E, Real E. On the calculation of deflections in structural stainless steel
beams: an experimental and numerical investigation. J Constr Steel Res 2000;54:
109–33.
[33] Gardner L, Nethercot DA. Experiments on stainless steel hollow sections — part 1:
material and cross-sectional behaviour. J Constr Steel Res 2004;60:1291–318.
[34] Rasmussen KJR. Full-range stress–strain curves for stainless steel alloys. J Constr
Steel Res 2003;59:47–61.
[35] Quach WM, Huang JF. Stress–strain models for light gauge steels. Procedia Eng 2011;
14:288–96.
[36] Cruise RB, Gardner L. Residual stress analysis of structural stainless steel sections. J
Constr Steel Res 2008;64:352–66.
[37] Weng CC, Pekoz T. Residual stresses in cold-formed steel members. J Struct Eng
1990;116:1611–25.
[38] Huang Y, Young B. Material properties of cold-formed lean duplex stainless steel
sections. Thin Walled Struct 2012;54:72–81.