Fachthemen
Eugen Chladný
Magdalena Štujberová
Frames with unique global and local imperfection in
the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)
The principles and applications of the procedure using the equi­
valent unique global and local imperfection hinit,m (x) in the shape
of the elastic buckling mode given in EN1993-1-1:2005, 5.3.2(11) and
EN1999-1-1:2005 are presented here. The maximum amplitude of
such an imperfection is determined from the fundamental require­
ment: the buckling resistance of the frame structure with a­ xially
loaded members only should be equal to the flexural buckling re­
sistance of the equivalent member. The buckling resistance of
such a frame is determined by the resistance of its critical
cross-section m with allowance for second-order effects.
In this paper basic formulas defining the equivalent unique global
and local imperfection are established and other formulas useful for
easier calculations in practical cases are shown too. Numerical ex­
amples provide guidance on the proper application of the procedure
presented. The verification of the buckling resistance for the continu­
ous frame in a numerical example shows good agreement with other
methods from EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.2.2(3) with application of imperfec­
tions according to EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.3.2(3). Full agreement with the
method 5.2.2(3)c) of EN 1993-1-1:2005 is always reached for individual
uniform members with constant axial force along their whole length.
Stabwerke mit einmaliger globaler und lokaler Imperfektion in der
Form der elastischen Knickfigur (Teil 1). Die Prinzipen und An­wen­
dungen des Verfahrens, welches die äquivalente, einmalige globale
und lokale Imperfektion hinit,m (x) in der Form der elastischen Knick­
figur für das gesamte Stabwerk verwendet, wie in EN 1993-1-1:2005,
5.3.2(11) und EN 1999-1-1:2005, werden hier vorgestellt. Die maximale
Amplitude solch einer Imperfektion wird durch folgende grundle­
gende Bedingung bestimmt: Die Biegeknicktragfähigkeit des nur
durch Axialkräfte beanspruchten Stabwerkes soll gleich der Biege­
knicktragfähigkeit des Ersatzstabes sein. Die Biegeknicktragfähigkeit
dieses Stabwerkes ist durch den Widerstand seines kritischen Quer­
schnitts, unter Berücksichtigung der II. Ordnung-Effekte, bestimmt.
In diesem Beitrag werden grundsätzliche sowie auch für praktische
Anwendung nützliche Formeln abgeleitet und dargestellt. Der Nach­
weis der Biegeknicktragfähigkeit des Tragwerkes mit steifen An­
schlüssen in einem numerischen Beispiel bestätigt gute Überein­
stimmung mit anderen Methoden aus EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.2.2(3)
unter Anwendung der Imperfektionen nach EN 1993-1-1:2005,
5.3.2(3). Volle Übereinstimmung mit der Methode 5.2.2(3)c) der
­EN  1993-1-1:2005 ist immer erreicht bei individuellen Stäben mit
konstantem Querschnitt und gleichmäßiger Druckkraft.
1 Introduction
One of the first analyses of frame structures with allow-
ance for inevitable imperfections is given in [1]. The inevi-
© Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin · Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8
DOI: 10.1002/stab.201310080
table eccentricity of the forces acting is allowed for as an
imperfection for the main problem solved here – the buck-
ling resistance of angle chords. The initial out-of-straight-
ness in the form of the buckling mode of a simple uniform
member was allowed for too, but for another problem – the
buckling resistance of portal frames and lateral forces act-
ing on the U-frames of open bridge structures.
The principles of the method using an equivalent ini-
tial imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode
of the structure are developed in [2] and [3], where a more
general solution to the problem of lateral forces acting on
the U-frames of open bridge structures was sought. In these
works it was confirmed that the statement that the simple
prescription of the amplitude for the imperfection in the
shape of the elastic buckling mode is not satisfactory for
general applications. The maximum initial curvature as a
measure of the hypothetic elastic strain energy governs [4].
The results were used in Czechoslovak Bridge Standard
ČSN 73 6205 (1984), cl.  39 (see also [5]).
In the course of preparing DIN 18800:1990 and [6],
equivalent imperfections for columns and frame structures
were established as the bow imperfection of members and
the sway imperfection of sway frames. Two procedures for
calculating the flexural buckling resistance of compressed
members were assumed in 5.5.1 [6]:
a) the direct method for calculating the buckling resist-
ance for uniform members, using the strength format of
the European buckling curves with the reduction factor
c, described in 5.5.1.1 and 5.5.1.2
b) the procedure for verifying the cross-section resistance
using second-order analysis of the compressed mem-
bers with member imperfection according to Fig.  5.5.1
[6] for non-uniform members
In [6] and [7], the design value of the equivalent initial bow
imperfection of members (the amplitude of the imperfection)
for procedure b) was supposed as
λm 2 χ
1−
γ M1
e
0d (
= α λ − 0, 2
Wel
)
A 1 − λm 2 χ
(1)
The statement “the assumed form of imperfections for struc-
tural systems may be derived from the elastic buckling mode
of the structure” is introduced in 5.2.4.3 [7]. The amplitude
of such an imperfection was suggested in the form of Eq. (1).
609
E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

This value was recommended in prEN 1993-1-1 Draft 2000
as the equivalent imperfection of frame structures as well.
The design value for the equivalent initial bow imper-
fection according to Eq.  (1) was derived in [8] based on the
requirement that the buckling resistance of a simple uni-
form member (model member) should be identical irrespec-
tive of whether procedure a) or b) is used. This requirement
using Eq.  (1) is not fulfilled for other members and frames.
These obstacles were announced to Brozzeti [9] with
a proposal for correction in the next draft of prEN 1993-1-
1[10]. The proposal was accepted for prEN 1993-1-1:2002,
but not correctly. Based on the following proposal ad-
dressed to Sedlacek, the correct form was accepted for
5.3.2(11) [11] and later for [12] as hinit (x) – the equivalent
unique global and local initial imperfection. Hereinafter in
this article, the abbreviation “hinit,m imperfection” will be
used for “equivalent unique global and local initial imper-
fection”. This term is intended to distinguish the hinit,m im-
perfection from the initial global sway imperfection f ac-
cording to 5.3.2.3(a) [11] and the relative local bow imper-
fection of the members e0/L according to 5.3.2.3(b) [11].
2 Theoretical background to the hinit,m imperfection in the
shape of the elastic critical buckling mode
2.1 Principles
Where experimentally established values are unavail-
able, the amplitude of the equivalent imperfection in the
shape of the elastic buckling mode may be determined by
the following fundamental requirement: The buckling re-
sistance of the frame structure with axially loaded mem-
bers shall be equal to the flexural buckling resistance of the
equivalent member ([2], [3]). The buckling resistance of
axially loaded columns for Eurocodes is defined in 6.3.1.1
to 6.3.1.3 ([11], [12]).
The equivalent member has pinned ends, its cross-sec-
tion and axial force are the same as in the critical cross-sec-
tion m of the frame and its length is such that its critical
force equals the axial force in the critical cross-section m
at the critical loading of the structure. The length of the
equivalent member is then Lcr,m and the relative slender-
–
ness l m is
A m fy NRk,m
λ = = (3)
m
Ncr ,m Ncr ,m
The position of the critical cross-section m is determined
by the condition that the utilization Um, with allowance
for the effect of the axial force and bending moments due
to imperfections in the critical cross-section m, is

All imperfections of a compressed member or a frame are NII MIIη init ,m,m
Ed,m
expressed by the hinit,m imperfection in the shape of the elas- U m = (4) + = UN,m + UM, η init ,m,m
tic critical buckling mode hcr of the member or the frame. NRd,m MRd,m

The advantages of such an approach are: and is greater than the utilization U(x) at all other cross-sec-
– this form is the most effective compared with other shapes tions of the verified member or frame, where
of the initial lack of straightness
– this form of the hinit,m imperfection can be adopted for
( )
NII ( ) + MIIηinit,m ( x ) = U ( x ) + U
Ed x
U x = M, η init ,m ( x )
NRd ( x ) MRd ( x )
all types and forms of frame structure N
– the shape of the elastic critical buckling mode is very
suitable for second-order calculations of deformations (4a)
and internal forces in compressed members with imper-
fections and in frame structures with such members In Eq.  (4), MII
h init,m,m is the bending moment at the critical
cross-section m of the compressed member or frame due
The deflection hII, as the effect of imperfection hcr on
–  to the imperfection hinit,m (x) calculated using a second-or-
the compressed member, calculated using second-order der analysis. In Eq. (4a), MII h init,m (x) is the same bending
analysis is simply moment but at the arbitrary cross-section x.
Using linear global analysis and the elastic or plastic
( )
ηII x =
ηcr x( ) and
ηcr x ( ) = α −1 (2) resistance of cross-sections, the criterion for the limit state
–  α cr − 1 ηII ( x ) cr of the buckling resistance for an axially compressed mem-
ber with a class 1, 2 or 3 cross-section and imperfections
– where acr  =  Ncr  (x)/NEd  (x) should be taken as

– the members of the frame can be uniform members with Um = 1 (5)

uniform distribution of the compression force along the
length of the member or members with tapered sections For the equivalent member with initial imperfection, the
and/or non-uniform distribution of the compression bending moment MII h init,m,m at the ultimate limit state is
force along the member. MII
h init,m,m = MII
h init,m,max, where

2.2 Amplitude of the hinit,m imperfection in the shape of the  '' 

elastic critical buckling mode for Eurocodes  πx   1
MIIη init = −EIm  e0d,m sin   = (6)
,m,max  Lcr ,m  α cr − 1
  max
The amplitude of the equivalent imperfection in the shape
of the elastic critical buckling mode should be based on the 1
= NEd,m e0d,m
experimentally established and statistically evaluated im- 1
perfections for various types of frame structure.
1−
α cr

610 Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8

 E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

In Eq.  (6), NEd,m is the design value of the axial force in the using acrNEd,m = Ncr,m.
critical cross-section m and e0d,m sin πx is the equivalent
Lcr ,m
The expression EIm|h″cr|m in Eqs. (10) and (11) is the value
geometrical initial imperfection of the equivalent member, at the critical cross-section m for the bending moments
where which would be necessary to bend the structure (in the
λm 2 χ state without internal forces) into the form of the buckling
1− mode. Calculating this value presents no problems in sim-
MRk,m γ M1
(
e0d,m = α λ m − λ 0 )N 1 − λm 2 χ
= e0 k δ e (7) ple cases when the analytical expression for the elastic crit-
Rk,m ical buckling mode hcr is available.
The method of differences can help only if the nu-
is the design value of the bow imperfection for the equiva- merical values of hcr at particular points of the structure
– –
lent member, where e0k = a (l m – l 0) MRk,m/NRk,m is char- are available (e.  g. from a computer analysis). Just 20 por-
acteristic value of bow imperfection for equivalent member tions on the half wave of the buckling mode are satisfac-
tory for reaching the precision of 1  %. A computer proce-
λm 2 χ dure based on the method of differences was performed
1− in [13].
γ M1
δe = f actor transforming characteristic value Another way may be found using the characteristics
1 − λ m 2 χ 
of bow imperfection into its design value of imperfection in the form of the elastic buckling mode

(if gM1  =  1, then de  =  1) Eq.  (2) gives
–
l 0 limit of horizontal plateau of buckling
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
'' ''
curves − EI x  ηcr x  = EI x  ηII x  α cr − 1
c reduction factor for relevant buckling
= MIIηcr ( x ) ( α cr − 1)
–
curve and relative slenderness l m

For the verified member or for the frame, the hinit,m imper- and
fection in the shape of the elastic critical buckling mode
may be expressed as ηcr
max
α cr − 1 = ηII
(12)

( )
ηinit ,m x = ηinit ,m,max
ηcr x ( ) (8)
max

ηcr
max where MII hcr (x) is the bending moment in the frame with
geometry influenced by the initial imperfection in the form
where hinit,m,max is the design value of the maximum ampli- of the elastic buckling mode hcr (x) with an arbitrary value
tude of the hinit,m imperfection and |hcr|max is the maximum for the maximum amplitude |hcr|max. The members of the
amplitude of the buckling mode hcr (x). This amplitude frame are loaded by axial forces NEd corresponding to the
may have an arbitrary value other than zero. set of design actions on the structure.
The bending moment at the critical cross-section m of
the verified member or structure initially bent into the At the critical cross-section, m is
shape of the hinit,m imperfection with allowance for Eq.  (2)
is then ηcr
EIm η''cr = MIIηcr α cr − 1 = MIIηcr
(13)
m m
(
max
) m ηII
MII
ηinit ,m,max EIm η''cr m max

η init ,m,m = (9)

α cr − 1 ηcr Substituting Eq.  (13) into Eq.  (11) defines the alternative
max
formula for the imperfection hinit,m (x) in the shape of the
elastic buckling mode:
The verified member or frame has to satisfy the criterion
of Eq.  (5) too. The values of NII II
Ed,m, NRd,m and M Rd,m for
the equivalent member and the verified member or verified η ( x ) = e0 d , m
Ncr ,m ηII
max
ηcr x ( ) (11a)
init ,m
frame are identical. From the fundamental requirement, MIIηcr ηcr
m max
the equality of MIIh init,m,m in Eqs.  (6) and (9) follows and
consequently is
= e0 d , m
Ncr ,m ηcr x ( )=η ηcr x ( )
init ,m,max
MIIηcr α cr − 1 ηcr
max
Ncr ,m ηcr m
max
ηinit ,m (10)
,max = e0d,m
EIm η''cr where |hII|max is the maximum amplitude of the deflection
m
of the verified member or structure with initial imperfec-
and tion hcr (x), with the arbitrary value of the free parameter
|hcr|max, as the effect of axial forces calculated using sec-
Ncr ,m ond-order analysis (see also Eq.  (2)), |MII
hcr|m is the bending
(11) ( )
ηinit ,m x = e0d,m
''
ηcr x
EIm ηcr
( ) moment at cross-section m for this case and with allow-
m ance for Eq.  (3), then

Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8 611

E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

Ncr ,m ηII 4  Remarks on the use of the hinit,m imperfection in practice

ηinit ,m ,max = e0d,m max
(10a) 4.1  Uniform members
MIIηcr
m
In the uniform member the position of the critical cross-sec-
χλ 2 tion m coincides with the position of the maximum bend-

=
(
α λ m − λ0 ) 1− m M
γ M1 Rk,m η max
II
ing moment MII hcr (x).
λ 2m 1 − χλ m
2
MIIηcr The buckling resistance calculated using second-order
m effects with allowance for the hinit,m imperfection has the
same value as that using the method of the equivalent
is the amplitude of the hinit,m imperfection in the form of member according to 6.3.1.1 and 6.3.1.2 ([11], [12]). This is
the elastic buckling mode. the significant advantage of this approach compared with
applying the bow imperfection according to 5.3.4(2) [11]
3  Effects of hinit,m imperfection for individual members with uniform cross-section.
At the ultimate limit state the axial force NEd for all
Formulas for the effects of the hinit,m imperfection established axially compressed uniform members should be according
based on Eqs. (10a) and (11a) are presented in Table 1. to Eq. (6.46) [11]: NEd = Nb,Rd = NRd × c.

Table  1.  Effects of hinit,m imperfection

Tabelle  1.  Einwirkungen aus der hinit,m-Imperfektion

no. effect of hinit,m imperfection

bending moment
1
( )
MIIηinit ,m x =
ηinit ,m,max
MIIηcr x =( )
ηinit ,m,max
( )
MIIηcr x =
(
α λ m − λ0 )δ MRk,m
( )
MIIηcr x (14)
ηcr
max
ηII
max
( α cr − 1 ) λm
2
(α − 1)
cr
e
MIIηcr
m
2 utilization

( ) ( ) + MIIηinit,m ( x ) = U ( x ) + U
NEd x
U η init ,m x = Mη init ,m ( x ) (4b)
NRd ( x ) MRd ( x )
N,Ed

λm 2 χ

UMη init ,m ( )
x =
(
α λ m − λ0 )
γ M1 MRk,m MIIηcr x
1−
( ) (15)
λm cr m(
2 α −1 1 − λ 2χ
)
MIIηcr MRd x
m
( )
3 utilization at critical cross-section m

λm 2 χ

UMη init ,m,m =

(
α λ m − λ0 γ M1 )
γ M1
1−
(16)
(
λ m α cr − 1
2 1 − λ m χ
2
)
4
σ IIηcr x ( )
( )
UMη init ,m x = UMη init ,m,m
σ IIηcr
(15a)
m
5 maximum normal stress at cross-section x due MII
hinit (X)

λm 2 χ

σ II ( )
x =
(
α λ m − λ0 ) 1−
γ M1 MRk,m MIIηcr x
= UM, η init ,m x
fyk ( ) ( ) (17)
M, η init ,m
( )
λ m α cr − 1 1 − λ m χ M ηcr
2 2 II W x γ M1
m
( )
6 maximum normal stress at critical cross-section m due to MII
hinit,m (x)

fyk
σ II ( )
M, η init ,m,m x = U M, η init ,m,m
γ M1 (17a)

7 amplitude of hinit,m imperfection

fyk × ηcr σ II
M, η init ,m,m
max
ηinit ,m,max = UM, η init ,m,m = ηcr (10b)
max
γ M1 × σ IIηcr σ IIηcr
m m

612 Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8

 E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

The utilization of the critical cross-section m at the
ultimate limit state according to Eqs.  (4) and (5) should be
Um  =  UN,m  +  UM,h init,m,m  =  1, and according to Eq.  (16) is
λm 2 χ
4.2  Frame structures with uniform members
If the position of the critical cross-section m is not unam-
biguously known, then UM,init,m,m or sII h init,m,m according to
Eqs. (16) and (17a) respectively at the critical cross-section

UM, η init ,m,m =

(
α λ m − λ0 ) 1−
γ M1
γ M1 = 1 − UN,m = 1 − χ
m should be determined for all (suspicious) members tak-
ing section 4.1 into account. The critical cross-section of
( )
λ m α cr − 1 1 − λ m 2 χ
2
the structure lies in that member in which Uh init,m,m and
(16a) (sN,m + sIIh init,m,m) respectively is greater than in other
members. Eq.  (11) is presented in 5.3.2(11) [11] in a simpli-
γ M1 − χλ 2
where α cr − 1 = fied form suitable for uniform members and frame struc-
χλ 2 tures with uniform members if the procedure from section
4.2 is taken into account.
 (
Eq.  (16a) with allowance for Φ = 0, 5 1 + α λ m − λ 0 + λ m
2 
) 
(see 6.3.1.2 [11]) could be transformed into 5  Numerical examples
5.1  Buckling resistance of a continuous frame
2Φ − λ 2m 1 2Φ
= 1 − χ and 2 − + λ 2m = 0. The buckling resistance of the columns of the frame shown
1 χ χ
− λm
2 in Fig.  1 will be calculated. Actions on the structure are rep-
χ resented by uniform loading on beams (q2 = q9 = 70  kN/m
and q6  =  50  kN/m) together with the nodal forces given in
Eq,  (6.49) [11] for the buckling factor c results directly from Table 2.
this quadratic equation: EU-IPE A  550 sections are used for the beams and EU-
HEA  300 sections for the columns. The following cross-sec-
1 tional characteristics were used: EU-IPE A 550: A  = 0.01173
χ= m2, Iy = 5.9980.10-4 m4; EU-HEA 300: A = 0.01125 m2, Iy =
Φ + Φ2 − λ m
2
18260.10–4 m4. These sections are susceptible to torsional
deformations and are not restrained against torsion. There-
This confirms the above statement concerning the buck- fore, the method according to 5.2.2 (3)b) [11] with imperfec-
ling resistance of axially compressed uniform members. tions according to 5.3.2(3) or 5.3.2(11) and the method of

Table 2.  Nodal forces acting on structure analysed in section 5.1

Tabelle 2.  Knotenkräfte, die auf das in Abschnitt 5.1 analysierte Tragwerk einwirken

node i
action
2 3 5 6 7 8
FV, i in kN 200 200 160 120 120 160
FH, i in kN 30 22.5 20 15 11.25 15

Fig.  1.  The continuous frame analysed in section 5.1: a) scheme and loading, b) sway imperfection, c) and d) local bow im-
perfections
Bild  1.  Das in Abschnitt 5.1. analysierte Rahmentragwerk: a) Schema und Belastung, b) Anfangsschiefstellung, c) und
d) Vorkrümmungen

Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8 613

E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

5.2.2 (3)c) [11] are appropriate. All three approaches men- 6

tioned above are applied in this numerical example, with the
aim of comparing the various approaches allowed in [11]. 5 7
If the material of the structure is steel S  355, then
–
l 0  =  0.2 Partial factors are gM0  =  gM1  =  1.0.
Elastic global analysis and plastic resistances of mem- 9
bers and cross-sections are applied. For brevity and clarity,
a simplified analysis of the buckling resistance of the col- 4 8
umns according to 6.3.3 [11] will be performed. Only the
buckling resistance in the plane of the frame using Eq.
(6.61) [11] will be analysed, lateral torsional buckling will 2
be neglected (cLT  =  1.0).
Eq.  (6.61) [11] presenting the utilization U under 3
1
these assumptions will be

NEd M y ,Ed
U= + k yy ≤1 (18)
χ y NRd M y ,Rd

According to Table B.1 [11], kyy for plastic design is Fig.  2.  First buckling mode of frame analysed
Bild  2.  Erste Knickfigur des analysierten Stabwerkes
 NEd   NEd 

(
k yy = Cmy 1 + λ y − 0,2 )
 ≤ Cmy  1 + 0,8
χ y NRk  

χ y NRk  Stability analysis of the structure gives the value of the
force amplifier acr  =  8.7834. The resulting characteristics
with Cmy  =  0.9 according to table B.3 [11]. Therefore, only (buckling factor cy for the buckling curve “b” inclusive) are
the greater end moment in each member should be consid- shown in the lower part of Table 3. The shape of the first
ered when verifying the buckling resistance. buckling mode is shown in Fig. 2.

5.1.1  Structural analysis 5.1.1.2 Structural analysis for verifying buckling resistance

The computer program IQ 100 [14] was used to calculate
internal forces, moments and deformations.
5.1.1.1 Structural analysis for verifying buckling resistance
to EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.2.2(3)c)
First-order analysis is satisfactory for calculating internal
forces and moments in this case. Axial forces NEd and end
moments MEd in the columns are shown in the upper part
of Table 3.
to EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.2.2(3)b), with equivalent imper-
fection to (5.3.2(11))
As acr < 10, the internal forces and moments are calculated
allowing for second-order effects.
In the IQ 100 program, structural analysis is performed
separately for the design action combination and for the
imperfection in the shape of a buckling mode. Fig.  3 shows
the diagrams for the deformations and bending moments
MIIEd resulting from the design action combination shown
in Fig.  1a. The values of the axial forces NII
Ed and the bend-

Table  3.  Internal forces and moments calculated using first-order analysis and stability characteristics of structure analysed
in section 5.1
Tabelle  3.  Schnittkräfte nach der Theorie I. Ordnung und die Stabilitätswerte des in Abschnitt 5.1 analysierten Tragwerkes

member no.

1 3 4 5 7 8

axial force NEd in kN –1378.54 –1481.46 –860.067 –364.541 –375.459 –89.933

–81.0747 –235.623 279.385 241.013 –265.175 –342.556

end moments MEd in kNm
–25.9717 278.024 –199.128 –272.516 327.103 319.707

buckling length [mm] 5591 5393 7078 10 872 10 713 6920

buckling length factor b 1.118 1.079 2.359 3.624 3.571 2.307

relative slenderness

Afy 0.5743 0.5540 0.7271 1.1168 1.1005 0.7108

λ=
α cr NEd

buckling factor cy 0.8497 0.8595 0.7682 0.5252 0.5349 0.7776

614 Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8

 E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

6
6
5 7
5 7

9
9
4 8
4 8

2
2

1 3
1 3

a) b)
II
Fig.  3.  Effects due to external loading using second-order analysis: a) deformation, b) bending moments M Ed
II
Bild  3.  Einwirkungen infolge der Belastung gerechnet nach der Theorie II. Ordnung, a) Verformung, b) Biegemomente M Ed

ing moments MII Ed in the frame columns are given in the

11250 × 355
upper part of Table 4. λm = λ3 = = 0.5531
The structural analysis procedure concerning the ef-
8.7834 × 1486.17 · 103
fects of the imperfection in the shape of buckling mode and MIηIcr = 675.44 kNm.
is: m
a) The force amplifier acr  =  8.7834 was calculated in sec-
tion 5.1.1.1 as well as the first buckling mode hcr shown b) Calculation of the maximum amplitude hinit,max accord-
in Fig.  2. The horizontal translation of nodes 6 and ing to Eq. (10a)
7  |hcr|max =  1000 mm taken in the same direction as the
deflection due to external loading was chosen as the
free parameter for the elastic buckling mode. The ade- ηinit ,max =
( )
α λ m − 0.2 MRk,m ηII max

quate computer analysis of the structure with the imper- λm

2
MIIηcr
m
fection defined in this way gives the set of the MII hcr (x)
and hII (x) values with hII max = 128.48  mm = 1000/a cr – =
( )
0.34 0.5531 − 0.2 491.32 · 106 × 128.48
= 36.676 mm
1. The diagram for MII hcr (x) is introduced in Fig. 4. The 0.55312 675.44 ÷ 106
critical cross-section m should be found according to
section 4.2. All columns in this numerical example have with MRk,m  =  My,Rk,pl  =  491.32  kNm for HEA 300.
identical cross-sections. From Fig. 4 it is clear that the c) Internal forces and moments due to the hinit,m imperfec-
position of the critical cross-section m is to be expected tion in the shape of the elastic buckling mode could be
in member 1 or 3 only. The position m in member 3 is obtained – directly using adequate computer analysis as
determined by a greater difference in NEd and a small mentioned in a) (in IQ 100 with f) f = hinit,max/|hcr|max =
difference in MII hcr when comparing these two members. 36.676/1000 = 0.036676 – by multiplying values ob-
–
The relative slenderness l m of the structure is then tained in a) (see Eq. (14), middle term) by f.

Table  4.  Internal forces and moments due to external loading and imperfection according to EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.3.2(11)
using second-order analysis
Tabelle  4.  Schnittkräfte infolge der Belastung und diejenige infolge der Imperfektion nach EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.3.2(11) mit
Theorie II. Ordnung

column no.

1 3 4 5 7 8

axial force NII

Ed in kN –1373.83 –1486.17 –858.86 –364.31 –375.69 –901.14

–97.2197 –253.857 278.439 241.394 –265.532 –344.152

end bending moments MII
Ed in kNm
–4.886 289.494 –194.209 –272.797 329.612 324.568

axial force NII

hinit in kN 5.94 –5.94 1.15 0.17 –0.17 –1.15

–25.215 –24.772 0.078 0.425 0.418 0.012

end bending moments NII
hinit in kNm
24.076 23.966 5.298 0.847 0.847 5.287

Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8 615

E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

6 b) Relative initial local bow imperfections of members for

flexural buckling e0/L  =  1/250 according to Table 5.1
5 7 [11] for buckling curve “b”.

According to 5.3.2(6) [11], these imperfections do not

9 need to be allowed for because also for member 3 applies

4 8 L3 5000 Afy
λ3 = = = 0.5137 < 0.5
i y λ1 127.4 × 76.4 NEd
2
11250 × 355
= 0.5 = 0.8196.
1486.17.103

1 3 Despite this, the local bow imperfections will be al-

lowed for in this numerical example. Shapes c) and d)
respectively shown in Fig.  1 will be used in the struc-
tural analysis.

Fig.  4.  Bending moments Mh IIinit (x) for the frame in the nu- Axial forces and bending moments in the columns were
merical example in section 5.1 calculated for the combinations of actions given in the left
Bild  4.  Biegemomente Mh IIinit für das Tragwerk im numeri- column of Table  5, which also gives the axial forces and
schen Beispiel aus Abschnitt 5.1 bending moments necessary for verifying the resistances.

5.1.2  Verifying the buckling resistance of columns

Axial forces and end moments in columns are presented in
the lower part of Table 4. The shape of hIIinit (x) is of course The utilization of the columns of the frame under consid-
affine with hcr (x) from Fig. 2 (see Eq. (1)). eration as a result of verifying the buckling resistance using
Eq.  (18) are presented in Table  6. The buckling lengths
5.1.1.3 tructural analysis for verifying buckling resistance to based on the global buckling mode of the frame and the
–
EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.2.2(3)b) with equivalent imperfec- associated relative slenderness l and reduction factors c
tion to (5.3.2(3)) are accounted for in the analysis according to (5.2.2(3)c))
[11].
a) Global initial sway imperfection j = j0aham = 2 × 0.866/ The analysis of the buckling resistance according to
3 × 200 = 0.00288667 with (5.2.2(3)b)) uses the reduction factors c based on buckling
2 2 2 length values equal to the system length (see 5.2.2(7)b) [11]).
αh = = 0.603 < and
h ( 5 + 3 + 3) 3 The following applies in this case:

for columns 1 and 3,

 1  1 5.0
αm = 0.5  1 +  = 0.5  1 +  = 0.866. λ= = 0.5137 and χ = 0.8781
 m  2 0.1274 × 76.4

Table  5.  Internal forces and moments due to external loading and imperfections according to EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.3.2(3)
using second-order analysis
Tabelle  5.  Schnittkräfte infolge der Belastung und infolge der Imperfektion nach EN 1993-1-1:2005, 5.3.2(3) mit Theorie II.
Ordnung

member no.
effect internal force
1 3 4 5 7 8

NII
Ed kN –1369.49 –1490.51 –857.16 –363.85 –376.15 –902.84
FEd + F
–110.018 –266.64 275.54 240.40 –266.52 –347.05
MII
Ed kNm
5.415 299.80 –189.01 –270.48 331.89 329.78

NII
Ed kN –1365.85 –1494.15 –857.70 –363.48 –378.52 –902.30

FEd + f + e –94.011 –248.91 272.36 242.38 –264.73 –349.83

MII
Ed kNm
22.93 318.18 –191.50 –268.65 333.80 326.90

NII
Ed kN –1373.1 –1486.86 –856.62 –364.23 –375.77 –903.38

FEd + f – e –126.026 –284.37 276.72 238.41 –268.31 –344.27

MII
Ed kNm
–12.094 281.41 –186.51 –272.31 329.98 332.65

616 Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8

 E. Chladný/M. Štujberová · Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 1)

Table  6.  Utilization of frame columns analysed in section 5.1

Tabelle  6.  Ausnutzung der Stützen des in Abschnitt 5.1 analysierten Stabwerkes

method of verification to 5.2.2(3) + assumption of imperfections

5.2.2(3)b) + 5.3.2(3)
member no. 5.2.2(3)c) 5.2.2(3)b + 5.3.2(11) FEd + f FEd + f + e FEd + f – e
1 0.5784 0.6452 0.6166 0.6506 0.5825
3 1.0159 1.0762 1.0473 1.0141 1.0867
4 0.8676 0.7465 0.7401 0.7480 0.7350
5 0.7525 0.6013 0.5953 0.5988 0.5919
7 0.8697 0.7096 0.7124 0.7087 0.7161
8 1.0101 0.8814 0.8871 0.8820 0.8921

6205. In: Entwurf, Bau und Unterhaltung von Brücken im Do-

for columns 4, 5, 7, 8,
3.0
λ= = 0.3082 and χ = 0.9610
0.1274 × 76.4
6  Conclusions from numerical examples
From the numerical example in section 5.1 it can be seen
that differences in imperfection effects according to
(5.3.2(3)) and (5.3.2(11)) [11] are small for rectangular con-
tinuous frames. The assumption of imperfections accord-
ing to 5.3.2(11) leads to conservative results in the critical
member of the structure compared with 5.3.2(3) only if
initial sway imperfections (FEd + f) are allowed for. The
results are somewhat different if the initial local imperfec-
tions of members (FEd + f ± e) are also allowed for, which
is not necessary for this numerical example according to
5.3.2(6) [11]. Method 5.2.2(3)c) gives relatively good agree-
ment with these methods for column 3 with maximum uti-
lization. The results according to 5.2.2(3)c) are conserva-
tive for other columns.
Literatur
[1]  Faltus, F.: The safety of elastically supported compressed
chords (in Czech: Bezpečnost tlačených pásu poddajně
podepřených). In: Stability of angle chords (in Czech: Stabi-
lita lomených pásu). Transactions of the Czechoslovak Aca-
demy of Sciences, Vol. 65 (1955), Series TV, No. 1, pp. 59–65.
(in Czech: ROZPRAVY ČESKOSLOVENSKÉ AKADEMIE
VĚD, Ročník 65, Řada TV, Sešit 1, 1955; pp. 59– 65).
[2]  Chladný, E.: Nosnost’ tlačených pásov otvorených mostov
(Buckling Resistance of Compressed Chords of Pony Truss
bridges). PhD Thesis , SVŠT Bratislava, 1958.
[3]  Chladný, E.: Vzper pružne podopretých prútov (Buckling of
Elastically Supported Columns). Habilitation Thesis. SVŠT
Bratislava, 1974.
[4]  Sadovský, Z., Ďuricová, A., Ivančo, V., Kriváček, J.: Imperfec-
tion measures of eigen- and periodic modes of axially loaded
stringer-stiffened cylindrical shell. Proc. IMechE, 224(G),
Journal of Aerospace Engineering (2010), pp. 601–612.
[5]  Chladný, E.: Nachweise der Querrahmen von Fachwerktrog-
brücken mit offenem Querschnitt nach EC  3-2 und STN  73
nauraum, eds. Zilch, K., Albrecht, G., Swaczyna, A., Weber, J.,
Local Organization Committee, International Association for
Bridges across the Danube. Düsseldorf: Springer-VDI-Verlag
GmbH & CO.KG1998; S. 146–152.
[6]  ENV 1993-1-1: Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: General
rules and rules for buildings. CEN, 1992.
[7]  ENV 1993-2: Design of steel structures – Part 2: Steel bridges.
CEN, 1997.
[8]  Sedlacek, G., Taylor, C., Ungermann, D., Verwiebe, C.: Im-
perfections for compressed members and sway frames. Euro-
code No. 3. Background Documentation, chap. 5. doc. 08, 1st
draft, Oct 1990, Eurocode Editorial Group.
[9]  Chladný, E.: Comments to ENV 1993-1-1:1992, EN 1993-1-
1: Draft 2000 and ENV 1993-2:1997, Oct 2000 (personal com-
munication).
[10]  prEN 1993-1-1: Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: Gene-
ral rules and rules for buildings. Stage 34 draft, CEN, 2003.
[11]  EN 1993-1-1:2005 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures –
Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings.
[12]  EN 1999-1-1:2005 Eurocode 9: Design of aluminium struc-
tures – Part 1-1.
[13]  Kováč, M.: Buckling resistance of metal members and frame
structures, application of new methods from Eurocodes (in
Slovak: Vzperná odolnost’ kovových prútov a prútových
konštrukcií, aplikácie nových metód z Eurokódov). Edition of
Scientific Works, Vol. no. 115, 2012. Faculty of Civil Enginee-
ring, Slovak University of Technology, Slovak Republic (in
Slovak: Edícia vedeckých prác, zošit č.115, 2012. Slovenská
technická univerzita v Bratislave, Stavebná fakulta, Slovenská
republika).
[14]  Computer program IQ 100 by Prof. H. Rubin, Ass. Prof. Dr.
Aminbanghai and Dipl.-Ing. H. Weier. TU Vienna.
Autoren dieses Beitrages:
Prof. Ing. Eugen Chladný, PhD,
Astrová 46, 821 01 Bratislava 2, Slowakei,
eugen.chladny@gmail.com
Assoc. Prof. Ing. Magdalena Stujberová, PhD,
Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Faculty of Civil Engineering,
Radlinského 11, 813 68 Bratislava 1, Slowakei,
magdalena.stujberova@stuba.sk

Stahlbau 82 (2013), Heft 8 617