10.6.

4 Leaning column portal

This example is to demonstrate the concept of an effective length paradox for the
effective length factor, or the K-factor, of a lean column, which is widely taken as 1.0,
but it may be larger or smaller than 1.0 depending on the frame instability. The figure
below shows a two-bay frame using the same sections as those in Example 10.6.3. After
performing a first-order elastic analysis, the frame is classified as sway frames.
Traditionally there are three methods determining the effective length factor.

600kN

200kN 200kN
100kN/m 100kN/m

11kN

4m
sway

6m 6m

Method 1: Chart method

k1 1 for pinned end
k2 1 for pinned end
From Figure 6.5a, the effective length factor is infinity.

Method 2: Idealized column method

Idealizing the two ends of the column is rotation free and transition fixed, the effective
length factor can be taken as 1.00 as recommended in Table 8.6.

Method 3: Elastic critical load factor method

The effective length can be calculated by the following equation,
2
EI
LE
Fc cr

The elastic critical load factor can be calculated by either the deflection method or the
Eigen-buckling analysis.

Copyright 266
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
 Deflection Method Eigen-Buckling Analysis
cr 6.36 cr 6.16

2 2
2.05 11400 2.05 11400
LE 5.30m LE 5.38m
1293 6.36 1293 6.16
5.30 5.38
Effective length factor 1.33 Effective length factor 1.35
4 4

The effective length factor found by Method 1 is totally unacceptable for design. Most
engineers adopt Method 2 for simplicity and take the effective length factor as 1.0.
However, since the lean column is part of the sway frame, its actual effective length
factor must be greater than 1.0. It appears that only Method 3 provides reasonable
estimates of the effective length factor. However, Method 3 is not recommended in the
HK Steel Code because the effective length found from this method is only true for the
most critical column but not for other columns. For other non-critical columns, this
method is inappropriate. The effective length factor can also be traced back from a
second-order P- - elastic analysis. It is found that the failure load of the lean column
is 2308kN. Therefore the compressive strength of the column is 248N/mm2. From Table
8.8(b), the equivalent slenderness ratio is roughly 42.0 meaning an effective length
factor of 1.17. It should be noted that the effective length factor found here is
meaningless to a second-order direct analysis but it is used to support the result found
from Method 3 and for comparison only. To avoid this effective length paradox, the
best way is to adopt second-order direct analysis which avoids the use of effective
length factor in column design.

Copyright 267
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
10.6.5 Braced and unbraced frames

The 4-storey frame shown below is designed. All members are 203 203 60 UC. The
structure is under a pair of factored vertical point loads of 500kN at top, with a notional
force of 0.5% applied horizontally at the same level. The design strength is 275 N/mm2.
In the original study, all members are loaded about their principal minor axes.

4m
4

4m

Copyright 268
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
SECTION PROPERTIES
D 209.6mm , B 205.8mm , t 9.4mm , T 14.2mm , d 160.8mm , I x 6120cm 4 ,
Iy 2060cm 4 , rx 8.96cm , r y 5.20cm , Z x 584cm 3 , Z y 201cm 3 , S x 656cm 3 ,
Sy 305cm 3 , A 76.4cm 2

FRAME CLASSIFICATION
The structure is under a pair of factored vertical point loads of 500kN at top, with a
notional force of 0.5% applied horizontally at the same level. In the first study, the
members are loaded about their principal minor axes, the second and third studies
change the orientation and bracing conditions as shown in Table below.

Using the method of sway index, the elastic buckling load factor, cr, is calculated in
Case 1 as follows.

Deflections (mm) / sway indices s

Storey Case 1 (Bent about Case 2 (Bent about Case 3 (Bent about
minor axis, unbraced) major axis, unbraced) minor axis, fully braced
-3
1 5.923 / 1.481 10 2.027 / 5.180 10-4 0.063 / 1.575 10-5
2 14.99 / 2.267 10-3 5.164 / 7.843 10-4 0.202 / 3.475 10-5
3 24.33 / 2.335 10-3 8.425 / 8.153 10-4 0.392 / 4.750 10-5
-3
4 32.39 / 2.015 10 11.28 / 7.138 10-4 0.611 / 5.475 10-5

Note: The sway index is given by:

i i 1
s
h

Case 1 Bent about minor axis, unbraced

The maximum s is 2.335 10-3 and the cr is given by
1 1 1 1
cr 2.141
200 s 200 2.335 10-3
cr 5 (6.6)
it is a sway l a- en i i e f ame (Clause 6.3.5)

Since cr is less than 5 here, the effective length method cannot be used in the HK Code. There are two
methods to solve this problem. The first is to use the major principal axis of members to resist loads,
which is considered as Case 2. The other option is to add bracings members which is designated as Case
3.

Case 2 Bent about major axis, unbraced

Referring to the table above, the critical s is 8.153 10-4 and the coressponding cr is given by
1 1 1 1
cr 6.133
200 s 200 8.153 10 4
10 cr 5 (6.4)
it is a sway frame (Clause 6.3.4)

Copyright 269
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
 I
Beam iffne in a mode ho ld be aken a 1.5 (Table 6.2)
L
I I
Kc K1 L L
k1 2 / 3.5 0.57 (Figure 6.4)
Kc K1 K11 I I I
1.5
L L L
I I
Kc K2 L L
k2 2 / 3.5 0.57
K c K 2 K 21 I I I
1.5
L L L

Effec i e leng h, LE 1.6L 1.6 4 6.4m (Figure 6.5a)

Slende ne a io, LE 6400
71.4 (Clause 8.7.4)
rx 89.6

Com e i e eng h fo olled H- ec ion i h ma im m hickne le han 40mm bending abo

x-x a i ho ld be ob ained f om b ckling c e b (Table 8.7)

Com e i e eng h, pc 199.2 N mm 2 (Table 8.8(b))

Com e ion e i ance, Pc p c Ag 199.2 7640 1521.9kN Fc (OK) (8.73)

Case 3 Bent about minor axis, fully braced

Referring to the table above, the critical s is 5.475 10-5 and the coressponding cr is given by
1 1 1 1
cr 91.3
200 s 200 5.475 10 5
cr 10 (6.2)
it is a non- a f ame
(Clause 6.3.3)
I
Beam iffne in a mode ho ld be aken a 0.5 (Table 6.2)
L
I I
K c K1 L L 2
k1 0.8 (Figure 6.4)
K c K1 K11 I I I 2.5
0.5
L L L
I I
Kc K2 L L 2
k2 0.8
K c K 2 K 21 I I I 2.5
0.5
L L L

Effec i e leng h, LE 0.86L 0.86 4 3.44m (Figure 6.5b)

Slende ne a io, LE 3440
66.2 (Clause 8.7.4)
ry 52

Com e i e eng h fo olled H- ec ion i h ma im m hickne le han 40mm bending abo

y-y a i ho ld be ob ained f om b ckling c e c (Table 8.7)

Com e i e eng h, pc 188.6 N mm 2 (Table 8.8(c))

Com e ion e i ance, Pc pc Ag 188.6 7640 1440.9kN Fc (OK) (8.73)

Copyright 270
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
10.6.6 3-Dimensional steel building

This example is for the extension to a three-dimensional structure and to demonstrate

the application of a second-order direct analysis dealing on a three-dimensional
problem. The figure below shows a three-dimensional four-storey frame with steel
grade S355. The loadings on the floors and the roof are 24kN/m2 and 8kN/m2
respectively plus the self-weight of the material. The sections used are shown in the
figure. In this example, Column C1 of 203 203 46 UC is to be designed. The frame
is 4-storey high of dimensions 12m(H) 12m(L) 8m(W) with story height of 3m. All
base connections are assumed pinned and beam to column connections are assumed
rigid. Concrete floor is assumed as rigid diaphragm and the stiffness in the Z-axis is
strengthened by cross bracings at the two end bays while the sway stiffness in the X-
axis is provided by moment frame action. The major axis of the columns is located
about the Z-axis in order to provide a larger resistance against sway in the X-axis for
which bracings are not provided.

Col mn C1 i elec ed for demonstration. Other members follow the same procedural
check.

“C1”

Copyright 271
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
DESIGN LOAD
F om linea anal i , he in e nal fo ce of C1 a e:
Fc 824.1kN , M x1 3.9kNm , M x 2 4.1kNm , M y1 12.1kNm , M y 2 12.2kNm

SECTION PROPERTIES
D 203.2mm , B 203.6mm , t 7.2mm , T 11.0mm , d 160.8mm , I x 4570cm 4 , I y 1550cm 4 ,
rx 8.82cm , ry 5.13cm , Z x 450cm 3 , Z y 152cm 3 , S x 497cm 3 , S y 231cm 3 , u 0.847 ,
2
x 17.7 , A 58.7cm

SECTION CLASSIFICATION
De ign eng h, p y 355N / mm 2 fo T 16mm (Table 3.2)
275
0.88 (Table 7.1 Note b)
355

Semi-com ac limi ing al e of b T fo o and flange of an H- ec ion i 15

b 203.6
9.25 15 0.88 13.2 (Table 7.1)
T 2 11
flange i emi-com ac

Pla ic limi ing al e of d t fo eb of an H- ec ion nde bo h a ial com e ion and bending i
80 1 r1
Fc 824.1 103
S e a io, r1 2.01 1 (7.1)
dtp yw 160.8 7.2 355
r1 1
d 160.8 80 0.88
22.33 35.2 (Table 7.1)
t 7.2 1 1
web is plastic

the section is Class 3 semi-compact

FRAME CLASSIFICATION
The elastic buckling load factor for the unbraced plane is 7.20 and for the braced plane is greater than 10
so that bucking about member major x-axis is classified as sway and about member minor y-axis as non-
sway.

MOMENT CAPACITY
Momen pyZx
M cx (8.3)
ca aci ,
355 450 103
159.8kNm
M cy py Z y (8.3)
3
355 152 10
54.0kNm

Copyright 272
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
COMPRESSION RESISTANCE
For bending about major x-axis For bending about minor y-axis
(Designed as sway-frame) (Designed as non-sway frame)
I I
Beam stiffness 1 .0 Beam stiffness 1 .0 (Table 6.2)
L L
I 4570 I 1550
KC K1 15.23 KC K1 5.17
L 300 L 300

I 41000 I 19500
K11 K12 68.33 K11 48.75
L 600 L 400
15.23 15.23 5.17 5.17
k1 0.18 k1 0.17 (Figure 6.4)
15.23 15.23 68.33 68.33 5.17 5.17 48.75
I 11400 I 3910
K2 38.0 K2 13.03
L 300 L 300

I 41000 I 19500
K 21 K 22 68.33 K 21 48.75
L 600 L 400

15.23 38 5.17 13.03

k2 0.28 k2 0.27 (Figure 6.4)
15.23 38 68.33 68.33 5.17 13.03 48.75

LE 1.15L 1.15 3 3.45m LE 0.57L 0.57 3 1.71m (Figure 6.5)

3450 1710
x 39.1 y 33.3 (Clause 8.7.4)
88.2 51.3

p cx 319.6 N mm 2 p cy 316.7 N mm 2 (Tables 8.7,

8.8)
Pcx 5870 319.6 1876.1kN Pcy 5870 316.7 1859.0kN (8.73)

CROSS-SECTION CAPACITY
The cross section capacity check can be carried out as
Fc Mx My
1 (8.78)
Ag p y M cx M cy
824.1 103 4.1 12.2
0.65 1 (OK)
355 5870 159.8 54

MEMBER BUCKLING RESISTANCE

For bending about major z-axis For bending about minor y-axis
3.9 12.1
0.95 0.99
4.1 12.2

mx 0.41 my 0.40 (Table 8.9)

Buckling check using effective length under sway mode to Equation (8.79)
F c m x M x m y M y 824.1 0.41 4.1 0.40 12.2
0.54 1 (OK) (8.79)
Pc M cx M cy 1859 159.8 54

Copyright 273
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
 Buckling check to non-sway mode effective length under amplified moment to Equation (8.80)
Effective length, LE L 3m
Slenderness ratio, LE 3000
x 34.0 (Clause 8.7.4)
rx 88.2

Com e i e eng h, p c 328.6 N mm 2 p cy (Table 8.8(b))

Com e ion e i ance, Pc Pcy 1859kN

Fo a f ame, he P- - amplification factor is given by the larger of:

cr 7.2
1.16
cr 1 7.2 1
1 1
and 1.12
Fc L E2
824.1 3.452
1 1 2
2
EI 2.05 4570
The P- - amplification factor is taken as 1.16

For non-sway frame, the P- can be neglected and the P- amplification factor is given by:
1 1
2
1.08
Fc L E 824.1 1.712 (8.83)
1 2
1 2
EI 2.05 1550

Fc mx M x my M y 824.1 0.41 1.16 4.1 0.40 1.08 12.2

0.55 1 (OK) (8.80)
Pc M cx M cy 1859 159.8 54

B ckling check o la e al- o ional b ckling mode o Equation (8.81)

3.9
0.95
4.1

mLT 0.44 (Table 8.4a)

For finding M b ,
Assumed effective length, LE 0.5L 0.5 3 1.5m
Slenderness ratio, LE 1500
29.2 (8.26)
ry 51.3
1 1
v 0.969 (8.27)
2 0.25 2 0.25
1 0.05 x 1 0.05 29.2 17.7
Zx 450
w 0.905 (8.28)
Sx 497

LT uv w 0.847 0.969 29.2 0.905 22.8 (8.25)

2
pb 355 N mm (Table 8.3a)
Mb pb Z x 159.8kNm (8.21)

Fc m LT M LT my M y 824.1 0.44 1.16 4.1 0.40 12.2

0.55 1
Pcy Mb M cy 1859 159.8 54 (8.81)
(OK)

Copyright 274
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved
We follow a logic of using either the sway effective length (which is greater than
member length) OR the amplified moment in a single equation check, but not both at a
time.

Using Second-order direct analysis, the section capacity factor is 0.76 with
Fc 820.0kN , M x,max 4.4kNm , M y ,max 18.2kNm

It can be seen that the first-order analysis method has underestimated the amplified
moment about the minor axis by 27.6%. Therefore design using first-order analysis can
lead to an unconservative result.

Copyright 275
reserved S.L.Chan et al.
All rights reserved