Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Equivalent geometric imperfection definition in steel structures

sensitive to flexural and/or torsional buckling due to compression
A. Agüero ⇑, L. Pallarés, F.J. Pallarés
Universitat Politècnica de València, c/Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain

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

Article history: The purpose of this paper is to present a proposal for the design of steel structures sensitive to buckling
Received 4 July 2014 due to compression in order to fill in the gaps in the current Standard EN 1993-1-1 guidelines for
Revised 1 December 2014 obtaining the magnitude of the geometric equivalent imperfection. The proposal generalizes the
Accepted 30 March 2015
approach provided in Clause 5.3.2(11) of EN 1993-1-1 (EC-3) for cases in which a torsional or flexural–
Available online 17 April 2015
torsional buckling mode may occur. The extension of the procedure also allows designers to obtain the
magnitude and shape of the imperfection as well as the worst direction of the imperfection due to
Keywords:
the external loads applied. It also identifies the cases in which it is necessary to consider the shape of
Buckling
Torsional–flexural
the imperfection given by higher buckling modes.
Steel design Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Geometric imperfection
Nonlinear analysis

1. Introduction – Buckling is considered at the section level as additional

displacements and forces that verify the compatibility and
In the design of slender steel structures the nonlinear equilibrium equations, instead of stability checks at the
behavior, i.e. amplification of primary internal forces and geo- member level reducing the strength of the members.
metric equivalent imperfections, needs to be taken into – The buckling problem is understood as a global issue and
account. As outlined in the EN 1993-1-1 (EC-3) [1], the design is analyzed by considering the interaction of all members
of steel structures with compression elements must consider of the structure rather than only by the members under
the existence of residual stresses and geometric imperfections compression, which means that secondary internal forces
such as initial out-of-plumbness, flatness and fit tolerances. will also appear in the stabilizing beams or tension
EC-3 allows for two methods to consider those imperfections members.
(see Fig. 1):
Method 1-Indirectly, performing a linear analysis and using These imperfections can be expressed in two ways:
interaction formulae at the member level as proposed by vari-
ous authors (Greiner and Lindner [2], or Boissonade et al. [3]). Method 2.1, based on initial global sway imperfections and local
This method includes geometric and material nonlinearity by bow imperfections defined in 5.3.2(3) or
means of buckling curves, obtaining the reduction factor v Method 2.2, based on a single imperfection, akin to the buckling
(Clause 6.3 of the EC-3, by default in this article the clauses mode (gcr ) of the structure(5.3.2 (11)).
and nomenclature refer to EC-3)) from the non-dimensional
slenderness  k. In Method 2.2, for structures sensitive to flexural buckling due
Method 2-Directly, including equivalent geometric imperfec- to compression, the EC-3 proposes the imperfection ginit obtained
tions in the nonlinear analysis [1]. by scaling the buckling mode [4–6], given by:
This method has the following theoretical advantages compared
to Method 1: e0 N
ginit ðxÞ ¼  RK gcr ðxÞ ð1Þ
k2 EIg00cr max
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 608625908; fax: +34 963879679. vk2 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1c ault;k
E-mail address: anagra@mes.upv.es (A. Agüero). k  0:2Þ M
where e0 ¼ að N
Rk
1v
M1
k2
, for 
k P 0:2; 
k¼ acr ,
Rk

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.065
0141-0296/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 161

Nomenclature

a is the imperfection factor (Tables 6.1 and 6.2 of EC-3) re- It is the torsional constant
lated to each buckling curve Iw is the warping constant
acr is the minimum force amplifier for the axial force con- KB is the generic element of the structure
figuration in members to reach the elastic critical buck- ½K L  is the linear stiffness matrix
ling load ½K G  is the geometric stiffness matrix taking into account ax-
ault;k is the minimum force amplifier for the axial force con- ial forces
figuration in members to reach the characteristic resis- L is the total length of the structure
tance N Rk of the most axially stressed cross section M Rk is the characteristic moment resistance of the critical
without taking buckling into account cross section(Mel;Rk in class 3, Mpl;Rk in class 2)
cM1 is the partial safety factor for the resistance of members M pl;y;Rd ; M pl;z;Rd are the plastic moment resistance about y and z
to instability assessed by member checks axes
cM0 is the partial safety factor for the resistance of cross sec- Ncr;T is the elastic torsional buckling force
tions whatever the class is Ncr;TF is the elastic torsional–flexural buckling force
v is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling curve NB is the number of elements

k is the nondimensional slenderness N0 is the reference axial design force (NEd;0 according to
 
ginit is the vector of imperfections [1]), related to one section of the member
gcr is the shape of the elastic critical buckling mode t is the thickness of the flange/web
EIg00cr;max is the bending moment due to the buckling mode gcr T is the torsional moment
at the critical cross section Tt is the internal St. Venant torsional moment
xðy; zÞ is the warping function Tw is the internal warping torsional moment
hx is the torsional rotation. u is the displacement in direction x of the centroid
A is the cross sectional area Vy, Vz are the shear forces in y and z directions
Bpl;Rd is the plastic bimoment resistance v; w are the displacements in the principal directions y and z
fdNL g is the vector of nonlinear displacements of the shear center
ec is the magnitude of the imperfection Wz is the bending section modulus about z axis
E is the modulus of elasticity for steel Wy is the bending section modulus about y axis
fF ext g is the vector of external forces Wx is the bimoment section modulus
G is the shear modulus for steel x is the axis of the member
is is the radius of gyration related to centroid ysc; zsc are the coordinates of the shear center
Iy; Iz are the second moment of area with respect to y, z axes y, z are the coordinates of the check point

The disadvantages of Method 2.1 are:
– A large number of combinations of local and global imperfec-
tions are possible, and the designer must find the worst [7,8]
from all the likely combinations. (See example of a pitched roof
frame Fig. 2.)
– The buckling resistance obtained with Method 2.1 (Clause 5.3.2)
is not consistent with the buckling resistance obtained using
Method 1 (Clause 6.3.1) and therefore with the numerical and
experimental studies on which this standard is based.
– The method is easily applied to building frames but might be
difficult to apply to other structural geometries. Additional
recommendations for arch imperfections are provided in
Clause D.3.5 (Annex D of EN 1993-2 steel bridges EN-1993-2
[9]).
The advantages of Method 2.2 are:
– The nonlinear geometric analysis with an imperfection given by
the elastic buckling mode is easy to perform (see Section 2.2 of
the article).
– The method can easily be applied to any structural type or
geometry (see Figs. 3 and 4) since a unique global and local
imperfection can be obtained from the buckling mode.
– In single members the imperfection is calibrated to ensure that
the buckling resistance with method 2.2 is equal to the buckling
resistance computed by method 1 (Clause 6.3.1).
sensitive to flexural and/or torsional buckling; the worst direction
of the imperfection to be considered; the number of buckling
modes to be considered in order to define the imperfection and
the way to deal with structures formed with tapered columns, arch
geometry, or members under non uniform axial internal force.
Several authors have tried to improve the methods proposed in
the EC-3. Chladný and štujberová [10] proposed modifying Clause
5.3.2(11) to deal with structures sensitive to flexural buckling with
tapered columns and/or non-uniform distribution of the compres-
sion force along their length and/or arch geometry. Marques et al.
[11] proposed a design consistent with current rules for uniform
columns provided in EC-3, i.e. Clause 6.3.1. for the relevant case
of in-plane flexural buckling of linearly tapered columns subject
to constant axial force. Agüero and Pallarés [8] proposed a simpli-
fied method of obtaining the geometric equivalent imperfection in
structures sensitive to flexural–torsional buckling due to either
bending or compression where shear stress due to Saint Venant
torsional moment could be neglected, scaling the first buckling
mode. The general method for flexural and lateral torsional buck-
ling checks in accordance with clause 5.3.2(11) and 6.3.4 was
developed by Bijlaard et al. [12], Wieschollek et al. [13] and
Naumes [14] considering the flanges as members under compres-
sion sensitive to flexural buckling.
1.1. Research significance
The main innovations in this research are (Fig. 1):

However, Method 2.2, provided by the EC-3 for flexural buck- – A procedure to assess the imperfection for structures sensitive
ling, presents some uncertainties from a practical point of view, to flexural and/or torsional buckling due to compression, con-
such as: the definition of the imperfection (ginit ) in structures sistent with the buckling load obtained from EC-3. Like the
162 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177
Fig. 1. Summary of the methods to obtain the buckling resistance and the scope of this research.
method proposed by Chladný and štujberová [10], the approach
described in this paper can be used for tapered columns and/or
arch geometry and/or nonuniform normal forces distribution
(Fig. 4).
– An energy method to estimate the worst direction of the imper-
fection with regard to the external loads.
– An approach to establish the shape of the imperfection that
should be considered if the first buckling mode is not the most
adverse shape for the design.
Several examples of the application of these proposals are given
in Section 7 of this paper.
1.2. Basic assumptions
In this work two assumptions are considered:
The first is that Clause 6.3.1.4 allows designers to use the v fac-
tor, originally deduced from compression–flexural buckling
experiments, for members under a torsional and flexural–torsional
buckling load. The approach proposed in this paper is valid if dif-
ferent v factors were taken into account, which are better adjusted
to torsional and flexural–torsional buckling [15–19].
The second assumption is that the basis of the proposal is the
same as in the method given in Clause 5.3.2(11), using the elastic
buckling mode as the shape of the imperfection and assuming
the results of the equivalent member method, which extracts an
equivalent member with the same buckling length but with pin-
ended boundary conditions, and computes its buckling strength
on the basis of column buckling curves. Quoting Chladný and štu-
jberová [4], where experimentally established values are unavail-
able, the amplitude of the equivalent imperfection in the shape
of the elastic buckling mode may be determined assuming that
buckling resistance of a structure with axially loaded members is
equal to the buckling resistance of the equivalent member. The
buckling resistance of axially loaded columns for EC-3 is defined
in 6.3.1.1–6.3.1.4. and the non dimensional slenderness 
k is defined
 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 163

Fig. 2. Out of plane imperfections according to EC-3 in a pitched roof frame.

Fig. 3. Out of plane imperfections for a pitched roof frame according to the present proposal.
164 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Fig. 4. In plane and out of plane imperfection according to the present proposal.

2 !2 !2
at the critical section [4,5]. This proposal is also included in EN Z  2 2 2

1999-1-1:2007 [20]. U1 ¼
1 4EA du þ E  Iy  d w þ E  Iz  d v
2 dx 2 2
Chladný and štujberová [4,5] concluded that the differences in L dx dx
imperfection effects according to Method 2.1 and Method 2.2  2 !2 3
2
dhx d hx 5
(5.3.2(3) and 5.3.2(11) in EC-3) are small for continuous frames þG  It  þ E  Iw  2
dx ð2Þ
and, if Method 1 (5.2.2(3) c) is used, a good agreement with the dx dx
aforementioned methods is obtained, leading to conservative
"
 2  2 
results in most cases. 1
Z
dwL
dv dh 2
2 x
U2 ¼  þ N þ is þ y2sc þ z2sc
2 0 dx dx dx
   

2. Buckling study and analysis of the structure with a geometric dhx dv dhx dw T
þ2zsc  2ysc dx  fdNL g fF ext g ð3Þ
imperfection ginit dx dx dx dx

The present methodology has the same basis as that proposed 2 Iy þ I z

is ¼ ð4Þ
in EC-3, defining the geometric imperfection from the buckling A
mode, obtained performing a linearized buckling analysis (LBA) According to Chen and Atsuta [22], the sum of the first variation of
which is used to carry out an advanced analysis of the imperfect the potential for all the elements is:
structure. The method is therefore based on:
X
NB
dV KB ¼ ð½K L  þ N0 ½K G ÞfdNL g  fF ext g ¼ 0 ð5Þ
1. A linear analysis (LA) of the structure to obtain the primary
KB¼1
axial forces.
2. A linearized buckling analysis (LBA) to obtain the secondary So the equilibrium equation can be written as:
internal forces. ð½K L  þ N0 ½K G ÞfdNL g ¼ fF ext g ð6Þ
3. The method provided in EC-3 (6.3) to assess the buckling load of
the structure that will be taken as a reference to calibrate the
magnitude of the imperfection consistent with EC-3. 2.1. Buckling load and mode

The analysis presented in this paper is limited to Class 2 and 3
sections in terms of EC-3 nomenclature. Class 1 and 4 are excluded
for simplicity.
On the other hand, the equilibrium of the structure can be
addressed using the finite element method and imposing the first
variation of the total potential is zero, i.e. the sum of the first varia-
tion of the potential of all the elements is zero. According to the
energy approach, the global balance of a structure sensitive to
buckling due to compression can be written in weak form
[21,22] adding the strain energy and the potential of external
forces as follows:
The value of the critical buckling load N cr cancels the determi-
nant of the stiffness matrix of the structural system,
j½K L  þ N cr ½K G j ¼ 0. The critical buckling coefficient (acr ) can be
defined as the ratio between the critical buckling load and the
reference load acr ¼ N cr =N 0 ; the first buckling mode fgcr g is asso-
ciated with the first critical buckling load, so can be written:
ð½K L  þ acr N0 ½K G Þfgcr g ¼ 0 ð7Þ
The following sections describe the procedures to obtain the magni-
tude of the imperfection according to the type of buckling mode,
specifying whether the expressions of the warping constant (Iw )
 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 165

and/or if the shear stress due to Saint Venant torsional moment can Bimoment:
be neglected. Since the field of steel structures distinguishes 2
between open and closed thin-walled sections, flexural or torsional d gcr;hx
Bg ¼ EIw 2
ð16Þ
buckling may take place. Closed sections are only sensitive to flexu- dx
ral buckling (due to their high torsional stiffness) and open sections Torque:
are sensitive to flexural and/or torsional buckling. For isolated
3
members, three buckling cases are usually studied: dgcr;hx d gcr;hx
T g ¼ T t;g þ T w;g ¼ GIt  EIw 3
ð17Þ
dx dx
1. Flexural buckling about y, z axis and torsional buckling are
uncoupled. The member can buckle in the xy plane, xz plane Saint Venant Torsional moment:
or can develop a torsional buckling mode. The buckling load dgcr;hx
and related modes can be obtained. The minimum buckling T t;g ¼ GIt ð18Þ
dx
load will define the buckling mode of the column.
Shear force in y and z direction:
2. Flexural torsional buckling. Bending about z axis is coupled
with torsions. 3 3
d gcr;v d gcr;w
3. Flexural torsional buckling. Bending about y and z axis are cou- V y;g ¼ EIz 3
and V z;g ¼ EIy 3
ð19Þ
dx dx
pled with torsions.
Due to an imperfection given by the first buckling mode the stress
As an example, Fig. 1 shows the buckling mode of different cross resultants will be obtained by amplifying the previous equations,
sections for an isolated member under compression with fork sup- according to the load level NðN Ed according to [1]), by the factor
1
port at both ends. To calculate the buckling load and mode in acr 1, where acr ¼ N cr =N.
tapered beams the recommendations given by Trahair [23] have
to be taken into account.
2.2.2. General imperfection
2.2. Analysis of the imperfect structure Generally, any imperfection fginit g can be expressed as a
n o
combination of the buckling modes gj taking into consideration
The equilibrium equation of the imperfect structure is given by:
the orthogonal properties of the buckling modes [22] (i.e.
ð½K L  þ N 0 ½K G ÞfdNL g ¼ fF ext g  N0 ½K G fginit g ð8Þ n o
T
if i – j ! fgi g ½K L  gj ¼ 0), so:
n o
2.2.1. Imperfection defined by the first buckling mode X
n n o fginit gT ½K L  gj
To obtain the displacements in the imperfect structure one fginit g ¼ bj gj ; where bj ¼ n oT n o : ð20Þ
must solve ð½K L  þ N 0 ½K G ÞfdNL g ¼ N 0 ½K G fginit g. If the imperfection j¼1 gj ½K L  gj
is defined by the first buckling mode fginit g ¼ fgcr g, the solution to
the aforementioned equation is fdNL g ¼ qfgcr g. The displacements associated with the imperfection are given by
Pn bj n o 1
This yields: fdg ¼ j¼1 aj 1 gj . For larger critical loads (aj "), the term aj 1

ð½K L  þ N 0 ½K G Þqfgcr g ¼ N0 ½K G fgcr g; ð9Þ becomes very small and related imperfections should not be consid-
ered in the analysis.
and taking into account that:
ð½K L  þ N cr ½K G Þfgcr g ¼ 0 ! ½K L fgcr g ¼ Ncr ½K G fgcr g ð10Þ 3. Procedure to assess the imperfection fginit g
then
The expressions obtained in Section 2 are defined in shape but
q  Ncr ½K G fgcr g þ q  N0 ½K G fgcr g ¼ N0 ½K G fgcr g ð11Þ not in magnitude. The scale factor ec , by which the first buckling
mode should be multiplied to completely define the imperfection
from which one can obtain
fginit g ¼ ec fgcr g ¼ ec fgg, is obtained by imposing the restriction
1 that the buckling resistance of the structure, obtained according to
q¼ ; ð12Þ
acr  1 Clause 6.3 EC-3 derived in Section 3.1 ab ¼ ault;k  v=cM1 , is equal to
the buckling resistance obtained by applying the criterion of collapse
and therefore:
to the imperfect structure:
1
fdNL g ¼ fgcr g ð13Þ
acr  1 – In Class 2 sections the plastic resistance is reached.
Likewise, associated with the imperfection or buckling mode, the – In Class 3 sections the maximum von Mises stress reaches the
stress resultants are: bending moments about y, z axis (My;g ; Mz;g ) yield strength (6.2.1 EC-3).
bimoment ðBg Þ, torque (T g ) and shear (V y;g ; V z;g ) where g is asso-
3.1. Buckling resistance of the structure
ciated to the buckling mode:

Considering axial forces (ab ), the load level that makes the
bending moment about y axis:
structure collapse can be obtained following the next three steps
2
d gcr;w consistent with Chladný and štujberová [4], Bijlaard et al. [12],
My;g ¼ EIy 2
ð14Þ Wieschollek et al. [13] and Naumes [14]:
dx
 
bending moment about z axis: 1. From a linear analysis, ault;k ¼ min AðxÞ  f y ðxÞ=NðxÞ is the mini-
2
mum force amplifier for the axial force configuration in mem-
d gcr;v bers to reach the characteristic resistance of the most axially
Mz;g ¼ EIz 2
ð15Þ
dx stressed cross section without taking buckling into account.
166
According to Chladný and štujberová [4], Bijlaard et al. [12],
Wieschollek et al. [13] and Naumes [14] ault;k must be defined
by ault;k ðxcr Þ ¼ Aðxcr Þ  f y ðxcr Þ=Nðxcr Þ, where xcr is the critical
section carrying out the nonlinear analysis of the imperfect
structure. Further details about the iterative procedure to find
the critical section are described by Baláž [24–27], there is also
graphical interpretation of the imperfection amplitude and the
location of the critical section [25,27].
2. Then, one can obtain the reduced slenderness of the structure
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
from the expression  k ¼ ault;k =acr , and
3. Finally, the last step is to obtain the coefficient v associated
with the EC-3 buckling curves, which will depend on the type
of section, whether it is rolled or welded and the buckling mode
A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177
On the other hand, in open thin-walled sections due to Saint
Venant torsional moment, shear stress generated in the imperfect
structure can be obtained as:
n  ec T t;g  t
s¼  ð22Þ
ðw  1Þ It
n value between [0, 1] and depends on the check point.
For thin-walled sections, it can be assumed that shear stresses
related to shear forces and warping torsion due to the imperfection
can be neglected.
To obtain Cðx; y; zÞ which defines the magnitude of the
imperfection to reach the yield stress at point (x, y, z), the
 2
of the member in which xcr takes place. Hence, the collapse load restriction r2 þ 3  s2 ¼ f y =cM0 must be imposed substituting r
level of the structure will be ab ¼ ault;k  v=cM1 . and s:
  2
N Cðx; y; zÞ Mz;g My;g Bg
3.2. Procedure to assess the magnitude ec for Class 3 sections ab þ þ þ
A w1 Wz Wy Wx
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  2  2
First of all, checkpoints where the von Mises stress r2 þ 3  s2 n  Cðx; y; zÞ T t;g  t fy
þ3  ¼ ð23Þ
is expected to be highest should be chosen in the structure (x, y, z), ð w  1Þ It cM0
with engineering criterion.
For Class 3 sections, the magnitude of ec is obtained restricting
to the yield strength the largest von Mises stress in the structure
that takes place at one of the aforementioned checkpoints (x, y, z); This equation can be written as:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
this condition can be expressed as max r2 þ 3  s2 ¼ f y =cM0 .
a  Cðx; y; zÞ2 þ b  Cðx; y; zÞ þ c ¼ 0 ð24Þ
To obtain the value of ec , it is possible to define a function
Cðx; y; zÞ that provides the magnitude of the imperfection to reach The solution to this equation is:
the yield stress at a generic point (x, y, z). The value of ec will be pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
given by the minimum of Cðx; y; zÞ, hence ec ¼ min jCðx; y; zÞj ¼ b 
2
b  4a  c
Cðxcr ; ycr ; zcr Þ. Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ ð25Þ
2a
To obtain von Mises stress in the imperfect structure, the
normal and shear stresses must be previously computed. The where
internal forces are then obtained at the buckling load consistent !2
with the EC-3 primary axial forces (ab  N) and stress resultants cM0

related to the imperfection, which can be obtained scaling a¼ x21 þ 3x23 ;
f y ðw  1Þ
ec
{M y;g ; M z;g ; Bg ; T t;g } by the factor w1 , where w ¼ aacr .
b cM0
On one hand, normal stresses generated (Fig. 5) in the imperfect b¼2 x1 x2 ; c ¼ x22  1 ð26Þ
f y ðw  1Þ
structure can be obtained as:
 where
N ec Mz;g M y;g Bg
r ¼ ab þ yþ z þ xðy; zÞ
A w  1 Iz Iy Iw Mz;g My;g Bg ab  N  cM0
 x1 ¼ þ þ ; x2 ¼ ;
N ec Mz;g My;g Bg Wz Wy Wx A  fy
¼ ab þ þ þ ð21Þ
A w  1 Wz Wy Wx n  T t;g  t
x3 ¼ ð27Þ
It
Iz Iy Iw
where W z ¼ ; W y ¼ ; W x ¼
y z xðy;zÞ

Fig. 5. Stresses in the imperfect structure.

 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 167

Table 1
Definition of x1 as a function of the stress resultants and the displacements of the buckling mode.

Buckling mode x1 for Iw – 0 x1 for Iw  0

   
Flexural torsional buckling. Bending about y and z axis coupled with torsions M y;g
þ
M z;g
þ
Bg I d2 g 2
d g d2 g
¼ E Wyy 2w þ WIzz 2v þ WIwx 2hx
M y;g
þ
M z;g
¼E
I y d2 g w
þ WIz z
2
d gv
Wy Wz Wx dx dx dx Wy Wz W y dx2 dx
2

 
Flexural torsional buckling. Bending about z axis coupled with torsions M z;g B 2
d g d2 g
þ Wgx ¼ E WIz z 2v þ WIwx 2hx
M z;g
¼ EI z
2
d gv
Wz Wz Wz 2
dx dx dx
a
Torsional buckling Bg
¼ EI
2
w d ghx 0
Wx Wx 2
dx
Flexural buckling M z;g
¼
2
EIz d gv
Wz W z dx2

a
In case of torsional buckling if the warping constant is negligible Iw  0, the shear stresses cannot be neglected; otherwise it is not possible to obtain the magnitude of the
imperfection ec . This particular case is developed in Section 3.2.2.

Simplifying: 3.2.2. Torsional buckling and Iw  0

 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi Taking into account that x1 ¼
Mz;g
þ
M y;g B
þ Wgx  0 the expression
fy Wz Wy
ð w  1Þ c x1  x2  x21 þ 3x23 1  x22
Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ M0 of Cðx; y; zÞ can be further simplified to:
x21 þ 3x23
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðw  1Þ f ypffiffi
ð28Þ cM0 3
Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ 1  x22 ð34Þ
x3
In Table 1 the value of x1 is simplified taking into account the type
of buckling mode and whether Iw can be neglected or not. A typical case of this situation is the cruciform cross section [19],
where shear stress due to Saint Venant torsional moment cannot
s0
3.2.1. Shear stresses may be neglected be neglected in order to obtain the magnitude ec .
nT t
When s may be neglected, i.e., x3 ¼ It;t g ¼ 0, the function This equation can be expressed in terms of the displacements of
the buckling mode and establishing a parallel with the expression
Cðx; y; zÞ is simplified to:
presented in the EC-3:
f qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ðw  1Þ c y 0   pffiffiffi 1
2
Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ ð1  x2 Þ  M0
ð29Þ a k  0:2 1  k2 v=cM1 1  ðv  cM0 =cM1 Þ cM1 f y = 3
x1 eC ¼ min @ A
k2 1  k2 v 1v cM0 G  t  dghx
Af y v dx
Using the relationships w ¼ ckM1
2v
; ab  N ¼ cM1 , it is possible to com-
ð35Þ
Aðxcr Þf y ðxcr Þ
pute ault ¼ N ðxcr Þ
at ðxcr Þ as suggested by Chladný and štujberová cM1
considering cM0 ¼1
[4]:
    pffiffiffi sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi!!
 1
1
fy a k  0:2 1  k2 v=cM1 f y = 3 1þv
v  cM0 k2 v=cM1 cM0 eC ¼ min ghx 1v
ð36Þ
Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ 1   k2 1  k2 v G  t  ddx
cM1 x1
 
 1k2 v=cM1 fy
v  cM0 k2 v=cM1 cM0
3.2.3. Proposal to implement in EC-3
¼ 1 
cM1 x1 Table 2 summarizes the equations to obtain Cðx; y; zÞ. These
 
1 v  cM0 1  k2 v=cM1 cM1 f y equations have been implemented in a computer program to
¼ 1  ð30Þ obtain ec ¼ min ðCðx; y; zÞÞ.
k2 cM1 v cM0 x1
The equation provided for the case x3 ¼ 0 can be applied in
cM1
considering cM0 ¼1 most practical cases and is the same as the one provided by EC-3
  ! d2 gv
in case of flexural buckling x1 ¼ EI z
. However it is suggested
1 ð1  vÞ 1  k2 v 1  k2 v=cM1 f y Wz dx2
Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ 2  ð31Þ to implement in the EC-3 the general case to solve any type of
k v 1  k2 v x1
problem.
and applying the buckling coefficient expression given in 6.3.1.2 of
ð1vÞð1k2 vÞ   3.3. Procedure to assess the magnitude ec for Class 2 sections
EC-3: v ¼ a k  0:2 the magnitude of the imperfection ec ,
is equal to: First of all check sections at (x) position where the structure
0   1 could plastify should be chosen, with engineering criterion.
 k2 v 
 a k  0:2 1  cM1 f y  For Class 2 sections, the magnitude ec is obtained imposing that
ec ¼ min @ A ð32Þ
 k2 1  k2 v x1  the stress resultants reach the plastic resistance in the most
adverse section ðxcr Þ [28]. This condition can be expressed as a non-
This equation might be expressed in terms of the displacements of linear function that depends in general on the stress resultants,
the buckling mode (Table 1) and a parallelism with the expression type of section and steel grade,
presented in Clause 5.3.2.11 in the EC-3 may be established. In case  
f N  ab ; acr ; Mz;g ; M y;g ; Bg ; T g ; ec ; type of section; steel grade ¼ 0:
of flexural buckling the expression given by EC-3 is obtained:
fginit g ¼ ec  fgcr g Table 2
0   1
 k2 v  Definition of function Cðx; y; zÞ:
 a k  0:2 1  cM1 W z  f y 
¼ min @ A  fg g General fy
 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1  k2 v E  Iz  d g2v 
2 cr ðw1Þc ðx1 x2 Þ x21 þ3x23 ð1x22 Þ
 k2 Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ M0
case x21 þ3x23
dx
If x3 ¼ 0 fy k2 v
  k2 v Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ ð1  x2 Þ 
ðw1Þc
M0
! Cðx; y; zÞ ¼
aðk0:2Þ 1cM1 f y
a k  0:2 1  cM1 Wz  f y x1 k2 1k2 v x1
¼  2   fgcr g ð33Þ If x1 ¼ 0 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðw1Þ f ypffi k2 v pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
aðk0:2Þ 1cM1 1þv f y
1 2v
2  k E  Iz  max ddxg2v
cM0 3
k Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ 1  x22 x3 ! Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffi
2 2
k 3x 1k v 1v 3
168 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Considering a linear interaction formula and neglecting torque 4.3. Several buckling loads close to the first buckling load
effects, a simplified expression can be used to obtain the plastic
resistance in the most critical section: On the other hand, when several independent buckling modes
n o
  gj have their buckling loads (aj ) very close to the first buckling
N  ab eC M z;g M y;g Bg
max þ þ þ ¼1 ð37Þ load (a1 ), it is also possible to estimate the worst direction apply-
Npl;Rd w  1 M pl;z;Rd M pl;y;Rd Bpl;Rd n o
T P
ing the energy method: U ¼ fkgggk fF EXT g, where fgg ¼ nj¼1 cj gj
To obtain the value of ec , a function XðxÞ may be defined that gives  2 n oT n o
the magnitude of the imperfection that makes the section located in  
and gj  ¼ gj ½K L  gj , where (cj ) are defined as the magni-
position (x) reach the plastic strength. The value of ec will be given tudes that lead to maximum work.
by the minimum of XðxÞ, hence ec ¼ min jXðxÞj ¼ Xðxcr Þ.

N  ab 1
XðxÞ ¼ 1  ð w  1Þ   ð38Þ 5. Number of buckling modes to define the imperfection shape
Npl;Rd M z;g
þ
My;g
þB
Bg
M pl;z;Rd M pl;y;Rd pl;Rd

A check must be carried out to verify whether one buckling

This expression can be simplified into:
mode is enough to properly define the imperfection or whether

k v 2 other imperfections should be considered.
a k  0:2 1  cM1
XðxÞ ¼
k2 1  k2 v
1 the structure when studying the strength of shell structures.
 
d2 gv Iy d2 gw
E M Iz dx2
þM dx2
þ B Iw
pl;z;Rd pl;y;Rd pl;Rd
and therefore implemented in the EC-3.
4. Procedure to estimate the most adverse direction
The direction that defines the most adverse imperfection must
be used in order to obtain the worst effects of the external loads
on the imperfect structure. Following a proposal to provide a
suggestion of the worst direction of the imperfection is explained.
4.1. The first buckling load is related to one buckling mode
Once the magnitude and shape of the buckling mode is
obtained, it is necessary to choose the direction among the two
 
likely buckling shape modes gþ1 ; g1 (see Fig. 1).
To estimate the most adverse direction an energy method is
proposed, obtaining the work ðU Þ of the external loads when the
structure undergoes displacements defined by the imperfection.
U ¼ fginit gT fF ext g. If this value is positive the chosen direction
provides the most adverse case, but if it is negative, the opposite
direction should be considered. The criterion gives good results
in the cases tested (see Section 7).
If the strength of the structure without considering the imper-
fection is smaller than considering the imperfection, designers
must consider changing the direction of the imperfection [7],
so that it is always recommended to check the strength of the
structure without imperfections.
4.2. The first buckling load is related to several independent buckling
modes
It may be possible that the first buckling load (a1 ) has asso-
n o
ciated j independent buckling modes gj , as can happen in sym-
metrical structures like towers, masts, chimneys (EN 1993-3-1) or
silos (EN 1993-4-1). In this case the analysis of the structure
considering infinite imperfections with the shape associated to
different buckling modes has to be performed and the strength of
the structure will be the minimum. This option is not acceptable
from a practical point of view, as only a few imperfections could
be checked. It is suggested that one of the shapes to estimate the
worst imperfection is given by the buckling mode that maximizes
the aforementioned work.
Rotter [29] also pointed out the importance of taking into
account the different imperfection sensitivity in different parts of
 ð39Þ
d2 ghx
dx2
5.1. Checking if the imperfection is the most adverse for all the
members under compression
In some structural systems, considering a single imperfection
defined by the first buckling mode can lead to incorrect designs.
To illustrate this, a simple example is shown in Fig. 1, where it
can be seen that we need to define the imperfection using several
buckling modes. For example, this may occur in cases in which two
or more substructures buckle independently, perhaps due to the
existence of moment releases. If when the first buckling mode is
obtained, one finds compression members ðKBÞ for which the
strain energy related to the buckling mode is close to zero
 
fg1 gT ½K L fg1 g  0, this means that the imperfection considered
KB
is not producing any adverse effect on this compression member,
but there may be another imperfection that could have an adverse
effect on this column. If both imperfections are not taken into
account the structure could collapse because of poor design.
Another example is if the imperfection related to the first buckling
mode is affecting a part of the structure, and the most severely
loaded bar bearing external loadings is somewhere else. It should
be ensured that there is an imperfection that affects the most
severely loaded bar.
5.2. Criterion to use higher buckling modes to define the imperfection
n o
The lowest buckling mode j gj for which the strain energy
related to the buckling mode in member ðKBÞ is greater than zero
n o n o
T
gj ½K L  gj > 0 must therefore be found. If the critical load
KB
level associated aj to this buckling mode is less than 25, (aj < 25)
(the value of 25 was taken from the EC-3 recommendation in
Clause 6.3.1.2 (4) NNcr < 0:04 ! acr ¼ NNcr > 25), the imperfection
should be taken into consideration as calculated by the method
described in Sections 2 and 3 of this paper, using the corresponding
critical load and buckling mode.
An extended criterion of the EC-3 applicable to all structures
could be to consider all the imperfections associated with a buck-
ling mode whose critical load is lower than 25 (aj < 25). It must be
remembered that the computation of imperfections should be
performed for each significant load combination and cannot be
considered simultaneously.
 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 169

6. Simplified geometric nonlinear analysis of imperfect Table 3

Examples of obtaining the geometric equivalent imperfection.
structures
Type of buckling mode Iw – 0 Iw  0
Once the imperfection has been obtained according to the pre- Flexural torsional buckling. Bending about y Example 1 Example 2
vious sections, a simplified proposal for analyzing slender struc- and z axis coupled with torsions
tures can be found in Agüero and Pallarés [8] (which can be Flexural torsional buckling. Bending about z Example Example 6
axis coupled with torsions 3ðx3 – 0Þ, 4
applied to Class 3 and Class 2 sections), where the non-linear dis-
and 5
placements fdNL g of the imperfect structure are obtained from the Torsional buckling Example 8 Example 7
n o
linear displacements fdL g and the buckling modes gj are prop- ðx3 – 0Þ
Flexural buckling Example 9
erly scaled:
X
n
aj n o eC
fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ   gj þ fg g Example 1. Column under compression with fork support at both
j¼1
aj  1 ða1  1Þ 1
ends and the coordinates of the shear center are not zero
a1 þ eC fysc – 0; zsc – 0g (Fig. 6):
 fdL g þ fg g ð40Þ
ða1  1Þ 1 The buckling mode is:
Taking into consideration the orthogonal properties of buckling Ncr;TF  ySC px Ncr;TF  zSC px
modes [22], the coefficients aj are: gw ¼ sin ; gv ¼ sin ;
Ncr;TF  Ncr;y L Ncr;TF  Ncr;z L
n oT px
gj fF ext g ghx ¼ sin  ð43Þ
L
aj ¼ n oT n o ð41Þ
gj ½K L  gj The buckling load is N cr;TF ¼ min ½N cr;1 ; N cr;2 ; Ncr;3  , where
Ncr;1 ; N cr;2 ; N cr;3 are the roots of the following cubic equation:
The nonlinear effects due to axial forces (possible amplification of      
2 2
bending and twisting moments) shall be obtained for all buckling y2SC þ z2SC  is  N3cr þ is Ncr;y þ Ncr;z þ N cr;T  y2SC N cr;y  z2SC Ncr;z N 2cr
modes whose critical load level minus one is less than 10 2  2
  þ is Ncr;y Ncr;z  N cr;z Ncr;T  Ncr;y Ncr;T  Ncr þ Ncr;y Ncr;z Ncr;T is ¼ 0
(aj  1 6 10) (this recommendation is taken from EC-3 Clause
ð44Þ
5.2.1(3)). If the imperfection used is related to another buckling
mode fginit k g the following expression can be used: 
p2 EIy p2 EIz 1 p2 EIw
X
n n o fg Ncr;y ¼ ; Ncr;z ¼ ; Ncr;T ¼ þ G  It ð45Þ
aj g L2 L2 2
is L2
fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ   gj þ init k ð42Þ
j¼1
aj  1 ðak  1Þ
In order to illustrate the process of obtaining the equivalent imper-
fection, the normal, shear and von Mises stress in the imperfect
7. Examples beam can be found in Fig. 6. It can be seen the critical section with
the maximum von Mises stress.
Some illustrative examples are solved by applying the present To obtain ec the minimum value of Cðx; y; zÞ (see expression for
proposal and using the finite element method or closed form solu- the general case in Table 2 where the value of x1 is given by
tions in order to: Table 1) must be computed. In this particular case since the
minimum value is reached at midspan, where s ¼ 0 the simplified
– Obtain the geometric equivalent imperfection (Section 7.1) expression given for x3 ¼ 0 in Table 2 can be used leading to the
Examples 1–9. same result. The magnitude of the imperfection is ec:

  k v 2
a k  0:2 1  cM1 fy
ec ¼      ð46Þ
k2 1  k v ðNcr;TF  ySC Þ= W y Ncr;TF =N cr;y  1 þ ðNcr;TF  zSC Þ=ðW z ðNcr;TF =Ncr;z  1ÞÞ þ p22 EIw
2
L Wx

– Estimate the most adverse direction of the imperfection Example 2. Unequal angle section (LD) column under compres-
(Section 7.2) Examples 10 and 11. sion (Fig. 7) fysc – 0; zsc – 0g.
– Prove the need to consider higher buckling modes to define the The buckling mode and load are given by the same expressions
shape of the imperfection (Section 7.3) Example 12. as in Example 1.
– Apply the simplified nonlinear analysis of the imperfect struc- The maximum von Mises stress is reached at midspan,
ture (Section 7.4) Example 13. where s ¼ 0 (Fig. 7), so that the same expression can be obtained
– Obtain the amplification of linear effects in a structure sensitive for the scale factor ec as in Example 1, but neglecting the term
to flexural–torsional buckling (Section 7.5) Example 14. p2 EIw  0.
2
L Wx

7.1. Examples of obtaining the geometric equivalent imperfection
Nine examples illustrate the definition of the geometric imper-
fection. Table 3 classifies the examples according to the type of
buckling mode and whether or not Iw can be neglected.
Example 3. I-section column under compression with the sup-
ports and shape of the imperfection shown in Figs. 8 and 9.
To see how the equivalent imperfection is obtained, the normal,
shear and von Mises stress in the imperfect beam can be seen in
Fig. 9.
170 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Fig. 6. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 1).

Fig. 7. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 2).

Fig. 8. Lateral imperfection at the shear center, top and bottom flange (Example 3).

Fig. 9. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 3).

 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 171

Table 4 Example 6. T-section column under compression with fork sup-

Magnitude of the imperfection depending on the slenderness Example 3. ports. Section dimensions: width (b) and depth (h).
L k v eSC L/ eSC L=eSC eBF L/
The buckling mode and load are given by the same expressions
(mm) (mm) eSC (mm) (mm) eBF
as in Example 5.
2000 1.44 0.33 12 171 18 114 22 93 The maximum von Mises stress is reached at midspan, where
3000 1.52 0.31 15 195 19 160 26 116
4000 1.63 0.28 19 216 21 195 28 142
s ¼ 0 (Fig. 13). Therefore as in Example 1 the general expression
5000 1.80 0.24 22 232 23 219 30 168 (Table 2) lead to the same result than using the simplified
6000 2.00 0.20 25 242 26 233 32 190 expression for x3 ¼ 0.
The scale factor ec is:
Numerical tests were performed using the finite element
 
method (FEM) for a profile HEB240 steel S355, in order to obtain a k  0:2 1  k2 v=cM1 f y 2  L2
the imperfection in millimeters at the shear center (eSC considering eC ¼ ð52Þ
k2 1  k 2 v E b  p2
shear stress, eSC neglecting s shear stress), and at the bottom flange
(eBF). The results can be seen in Table 4.
For this case, the ratio of length to imperfection can be Example 7. Cruciform section column under compression with the
formulated as: supports and shape of the imperfection shown in Figs. 14 and 15.

L The buckling mode is:

¼ 330k2 þ 1200k  920;
esc px
L ghx ¼ sin ð53Þ
¼ 250k2 þ 1100k  870 ð47Þ L
eBF
In Fig. 15 it can be seen that the von Mises simultaneously
reaches maximum at the supports, and only shear stress appears
Example 4. I-section column under compression with the sup-
due to the imperfection. To obtained ec the minimum value of
ports and shape of the imperfection shown in Figs. 10 and 11.
Cðx; y; zÞ has to be found the simplified expression given for
The von Mises stress is maximum at midspan, where s ¼ 0, as x1 ¼ 0 can be used.
shown in Fig. 11. Therefore as in Example 1 the general expression The scale factor ec is:
(Table 2) lead to the same result than using the simplified
expression for x3 ¼ 0.   k v2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffi
a k  0:2 1  cM1 1 þ v f y = 3 L
Numerical tests were performed using the finite element ec ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð54Þ
method (FEM) for a profile HEB240 steel S355, in order to obtain k2 1  k2 v 1  v G t  p
the imperfection in millimeters at the shear center (eSC) and at the
bottom flange (eBF). The results can be seen in Table 5. Example 8. I-section column under compression with the sup-
Then, the ratio length to imperfection can be approached by: ports shown in Fig. 16.
L L The maximum von Mises stress is reached at midspan, where
¼ 1300k þ 2200; ¼ 670k þ 1100 ð48Þ
esc eBF s ¼ 0. Therefore as in Example 1 the general expression (Table 2)
lead to the same result than using the simplified expression for
Example 5. Mono-symmetric I-section column under compres- x3 ¼ 0.
sion with fork supports (Figs. 1 and 12). Section dimensions: top
The buckling mode is:
width (Bs ), bottom width (Bb ), depth (h), distance from the shear
center to the top flange (ds) and to the bottom flange (di), (zSC – 0). px
ghx ¼ sin : ð55Þ
The buckling mode is: L
px   The scale factor ec is:
Ncr;TF  zSC  sin pLx
gV ¼ sin ; ghx ¼ ð49Þ  
L 2
is ðNcr;TF  Ncr;T Þ a k  0:2 1  k2 v=cM1 f y 4  L2
ec ¼ ð56Þ
k2 1  k2 v E b  h  p2
The buckling load is:
0 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
  2 1
Example 9. I-section column under compression with the sup-
BN cr;z þ Ncr;T  ðNcr;z þ Ncr;T Þ  4Ncr;z Ncr;h 1  ziscs C
B C ports shown in Figs. 1 and 17.
Ncr;TF ¼ min B
B   2 C
C
@ 2 1 zsc A The maximum von Mises stress is reached at midspan, where
is
s ¼ 0. Therefore as in Example 1 the general expression (Table 2)
ð50Þ lead to the same result than using the simplified expression for
x3 ¼ 0.
The maximum von Mises stress is reached at midspan, where s ¼ 0
The buckling mode is:
(Fig. 12) and it will take place at the top or bottom flange, where the
value of (C) has to be computed and ec will be the minimum of: px
gV ¼ sin ð57Þ
  L
k2 v 2
a k  0:2 1  cM1 2L f y The scale factor ec is:
eC ¼ min
k2 1  k2 v E  p2  
8   9 a k  0:2 1  k2 v=cM1 f y 2  L2
>    > ec ¼ ð58Þ
< 
> 



>
= k2 1  k2 v E b  p2
   1   

1 
 ð51Þ
> Bb 1 Ncr;TF zSC di  >
: Bs 1þ 2 cr;TF SC
>  > The stresses in the imperfect structure are given in Fig. 17. The sym-
N z ds

is ðNcr;TF Ncr;T Þ   s ðNcr;TF N cr;T Þ

i2 ;
bolic expression obtained for ec is the same as in Example 6.
172 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Fig. 10. Lateral imperfection at the shear center, top and bottom flange (Example 4).

Fig. 11. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 4).

Table 5 The first works combining a first-yield strength criterion with a

Magnitude of the imperfection depending on the slenderness Example 4. second-order analysis of a geometrically imperfect column were
L (mm) k v eSC (mm) L/eSC eBF (mm) L/eBF carried out by Ayrton and Perry [30]. Rondal and Maquoi [31] and
Maquoi and Rondal [32] expressed the buckling curves mathe-
2000 0.47 0.86 2 1164 3 582  
3000 0.66 0.75 3 899 7 450 matically in terms of a function v k .
4000 0.81 0.66 5 770 10 385
5000 0.93 0.58 7 679 15 339
6000 1.02 0.53 10 607 20 303 7.2. Example of estimating the most adverse direction
7000 1.09 0.49 13 546 26 273
8000 1.15 0.46 16 493 32 247
9000 1.19 0.44 20 449 40 224 Example 10. Given a hollow circular section column under
10,000 1.23 0.42 23 431 46 216 compression (Fig. 18) subjected to a Moment M and a force Q at
11,000 1.26 0.41 26 427 52 213 the free end, the angle b that defines the most adverse imperfec-
tion is estimated.

Fig. 12. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 5).

 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 173

Fig. 13. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 6).

Fig. 14. Lateral imperfection at the shear center, top and bottom flange (Example 7).

Fig. 15. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 7).

Fig. 16. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 8).

174 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Fig. 17. Stresses in the imperfect structure (Example 9).

Analyzing the results that could be obtained for M = 0 trying

different values of b:

1. For b between 90° and 270° the strength of the structure could
be increased, leading to unsafe designs, and the maximum
strength is obtained for b = 180°. If the energy method is
applied, U becomes negative.
2. For b between 90° and 90° the strength of the structure is
reduced, the minimum strength is obtained for b = 0°, so the
worst imperfection is that obtained with the energy method
proposed. In this case allowable values of b to define the imper-
fection will be those very close to 0. If the energy method is
applied, the work U is positive.

In order to obtain further details, let us consider M = 0 and the

Fig. 18. Worst direction of the imperfection (Example 10).
structure with in-plane behavior, then the allowable values for b
are 0° and 180°. If the imperfection given by b = 180° is considered,
the work will be negative, therefore, as stated at the beginning of
this section, the direction of the imperfection should be changed
and the proper direction will be given by b = 0°.

Example 11. The previous example (Fig. 18) can be analyzed but
For the cantilever there are infinite buckling modes related to considering an elliptical section where the major and minor axis
the first buckling load. The buckling mode i, depending on b is: have very similar lengths. In this case the first and second buckling
 px modes have almost the same buckling load. Solving the problem,
ginit v ðxÞ ¼ ec 1  cos cos ðbÞ; the same conclusions are obtained as in Example 10.
2L
 px
ginit w ðxÞ ¼ ec 1  cos sin ðbÞ ð59Þ 7.3. Example of proving the need to consider higher buckling modes to
2L
define the imperfection
Applying the energy method suggested in Section 4, the work
(U) is given by:
Example 12. Given a frame with out-of-plane buckling restrained
U ¼ fginit gT fF ext g ¼ M  ginit hy þ Q  ginit v ð60Þ (Fig. 19a), we check whether the design of the structure can be
done using only the first buckling mode to define the imperfection.
The displacement at the free end is:
The imperfection related to the first buckling mode (Fig. 19b)
ginit ðLÞ ¼ eC ð61Þ does not affect the column on the right; this can be numerically
detected as the strain energy related to this buckling mode at this
At the free end, the imperfection in direction y is given by:    
column is zero g1 T ½K L  g1  0. Nevertheless, the imper-
ginit v ðLÞ ¼ ec cosðbÞ ð62Þ KB
fection related to the second buckling mode (Fig. 19c) has the
The rotation about y axis is given by: worst effect on the design of this column. So both imperfections
p  ec must be considered for a proper design of the structure.
ginit hy ðLÞ ¼ sinðbÞ ð63Þ
2L
The work is provided by: 7.4. Example of applying the simplified nonlinear analysis of the
 imperfect structure
M  p  sin ðbÞ
U ¼ ec þ Q  cos ðbÞ ð64Þ
2L
Example 13. Given a frame with out-of-plane buckling restrained,
And the angle that makes the work maximum is: TanðbÞ ¼  p2LQ
M
. the expression for the nonlinear displacements is obtained.
 
If Q = 0 then b=-90°, and if M = 0 then b=0°. Considering that the first buckling mode is a sway mode gS
 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177 175

Fig. 19. Frame definition (a), first buckling mode (b) and second buckling mode (c) (Example 12).

 
and the second buckling mode is a nonsway mode gNS , as shown 7.5. Example of obtaining the amplification of linear effects in a
in Fig. 20, their corresponding buckling loads (aS ) and (aNS ) are structure sensitive to flexural–torsional buckling
lower than 10 and the other buckling modes have a critical load
larger than 10. Example 14. Given a HEB240-section column (length, L = 6 m)
The expression of the nonlinear displacements of the imperfect with the supports shown in Fig. 21, the system is analyzed when
structure is given by: the critical load level is 1.4 (a1 ¼ 1:4), subjected to the four
load cases shown in Fig. 21. The linear out-of-plane displacements
fgS gT fF ext g 1 fgNS gT fF ext g
fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ fgS g þ are obtained and compared with the exact nonlinear and the
fgS g ½K L fgS g ðaS  1Þ
T
fgNS gT ½K L fgNS g approximate nonlinear displacements using one buckling
1 fg g  
 fg g þ init k ð65Þ mode fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ ða1a1 1
Þ g1 , and two buckling modes
ðaNS  1Þ NS ðak  1Þ    
fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ ða1a1
1
Þ g 1 þ a2
ða2 1Þ g 2 .
The second term in the above equation includes the amplifications
In the simplified procedure the displacements are obtained
related to the sway mode known as P–D effect. The third term in the P n o
aj
above equation includes the amplifications related to the non-sway using: fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ nj¼1 a 1 g thus the designer must
ð j Þ j
mode known as P–d effect, usually included as an interaction compute the buckling modes associated with critical loads
formula.  
aj  1 6 10. Fig. 22 shows the first five buckling modes (the first
The fourth term is the imperfection, and the buckling modes      
g , third g3 and fourth g4 are torsional modes, the second
associated with critical loads lower than 25 (aj < 25) should be  1  
considered, as mentioned in the previous example. g2 and fifth g5 are flexural modes), and for each external load
T
If the case in which only the sway mode has a critical load lower fgj g fF ext g
the coefficients aj ¼ T are computed.
than 10 is considered, only P–D effects are considered: fgj g ½K L fgj g
From Fig. 21 it can be concluded that if two buckling modes are
fgS gT fF ext g 1 fg g
fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ fgS g þ init k ð66Þ used, the results can be accepted as exact. With one buckling mode
fgS g ½K L fgS g ðaS  1Þ
T ðak  1Þ
the displacements in the top flange are the same as in the linear
The EC-3 in Clause 5.2.2 proposes calculating the nonlinear dis- case, due to the fact that in the first buckling mode the top flange
placements associated with horizontal loads by scaling the linear does not have any displacements. To make a good guess at the
displacements by 1=ð1  1=aS Þ. This can be deduced from the above nonlinear displacements due to the Bimoment (Load Case 4) only
equation, since linear displacements fdL g are almost proportional to one buckling mode has to be taken into account.
the sway mode displacements fgS g Once the displacements are obtained the stress resultants
torque, bimoment and minor axis moment are computed using
fdL g fdL g
fdNL g ¼ fdL g þ ¼ ð67Þ mechanics of materials equations.
ðaS  1Þ ð1  1=aS Þ

Fig. 20. Nonlinear effects related to sway and nonsway mode (Example 13).
176 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177

Fig. 21. Comparison of displacements: linear, nonlinear exact and approximated (Example 14).

Fig. 22. Nonlinear effects related to the buckling modes (Example 14).

8. Conclusions – A criterion to check whether it is necessary to define the shape

In this work, proposals are made to fill in the gaps in the current
Standard EN 1993-1-1 for the design of slender steel structures, i.e.
structural systems sensitive to buckling with compressed ele-
ments. These proposals are summarized as follows:
– An approach to assessing the imperfection of structures sensi-
tive to flexural and/or torsional buckling, taking into account
References
shear stresses due to Saint Venant torsional moment, providing
a generalization of Clause 5.3.2(11) EN 1993-1-1. Table 2 gives a
summary of the equations needed to obtain the imperfection of
Class 3 sections, while Section 3.3 provides a formula for Class 2
sections.
– A procedure to estimate the direction of the most adverse
imperfection according to the external loads.
of the imperfection by a higher buckling mode, in order to
ensure the safe design of all the structural members or
substructures.
– An implementation of the recommended procedure into a sim-
plified method for the design of steel structures, performing the
analysis of the imperfect structure consistent with EN 1993-1-1.
[1] EN 1993-1-1:2005. Eurocode 3: design of steel structures. Part 1.1: General
rules and rules for buildings.
[2] Greiner R, Lindner J. Interaction formulae for members subjected to bending
and axial compression in Eurocode 3—the Method 2 approach. J Constr Steel
Res 2006;62:757–70.
[3] Boissonade N, Jaspart JP, Muzeau JP, Villette M. Improvement of the interaction
formulae for beam columns in Eurocode3. Comput Struct 2002;21(80):
2375–85.
 A. Agüero et al. / Engineering Structures 96 (2015) 160–177
[4] Chladný E, štujberová M. Frames with unique global and local imperfection in
the shape of the elastic buckling mode (part1). Stahlbau 2013;8:609–17.
[5] Chladný E, štujberová M. Errata: frames with unique global and local
imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode. Part 1. Stahlbau
2013;82:H. 8, S. 609–617. Part 2. Stahlbau 2013;83:H. 9, S. 684–694. Stahlbau
2013;82:H. 9 S. 684-694, Stahlbau 2014;1:64-64.
[6] Gonçalves R, Camotim D. On the incorporation of equivalent member
imperfections in the in-plane design of steel frames. J Constr Steel Res
2005;61:1226–40.
[7] Clarke MJ, Bridge RQ, Hancock GJ, Trahair NS. Advanced analysis of steel
building frames. J Constr Steel Res 1992;23:1–29.
[8] Agüero A, Pallarés FJ. Proposal to evaluate the ultimate limit state of slender
structures. Part 1: Technical aspects. Eng Struct 2007;29:483–97.
[9] EN 1993-2. Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures. Part 2: Steel bridges.
[10] Chladný E, štujberová M. Frames with unique global and local imperfection in
the shape of the elastic buckling mode (Part 2). Stahlbau 2013;9:684–94.
[11] Marques L, Taras A, Simões da Silva L, Greiner R, Rebelo C. Development of a
consistent buckling design procedure for tapered columns. J Constr Steel Res
2012;72:61–74.
[12] Bijlaard F, Feldmann M, Naumes J, Sedlacek G. The ‘‘general method’’ for
assessing the out of plane stability of structural members and frames and the
comparison with alternative rules in EN1993 – Eurocode3 – Part1-1. Steel
Constr 2010;3(1):19–33.
[13] Wieschollek M, Schillo N, Feldmann M, Sedlacek G. Lateral–torsional buckling
checks of steel frames using second-order analysis. Steel Constr 2012;5(2):
71–86.
[14] Naumes J. Biegeknicken und Biegedrillknicken von Stäben und Stabsystemen
auf einheitlicher Grundlage. RWTH Aachen University, doctoral thesis, Aachen,
Shaker Verlag, Institution series – steel structures, no. 70; 2009.
[15] Taras A, Greiner R. Development of consistent buckling curves for torsional
and lateral–torsional buckling. Steel Constr 2008;1:42–50.
[16] Taras A, Greiner R. Torsional and flexural–torsional buckling – a study on
laterally restrained I-sections. J Constr Steel Res 2008;64:725–31.
[17] Taras A, Greiner R. New design curves for LT and TF buckling with consistent
derivation and code-conform formulation. Steel Constr 2010;3(3):176–86.
177
[18] Taras A, Gonzalez M, Unterweger H. Behaviour and design of members with
monosymmetric cross-section. Proc ICE: Struct Build 2013;166(8):413–23.
[19] Trahair NS. Strength design of cruciform steel columns. Eng Struct
2012;35:307–13.
[20] EN 1999-1-1:2007. Eurocode 9: design of aluminium structures. Part 1.1:
General structural rules.
[21] Trahair NS. Flexural–torsional buckling of structures. E&Fnspon; 1993.
[22] Chen WF, Atsuta T. Theory of beam–columns. McGraw-Hill; 1977.
[23] Trahair NS. Bending and buckling of tapered steel beam structures. Eng Struct
2014;59:229–37.
[24] Baláž I. Determination of the flexural buckling resistance of frames with
members with non-uniform cross-section and non-uniform axial compression
forces. Zborník z XXXIV. Aktívu pracovníkov odboru OK so zahraničnou
účast’ou ‘‘Teoretické a konštrukčné problémy ocel’ových a drevených
konštruckcií a mostov’’. 16.–17. 10. 2008, Pezinok. p. 17–22.
[25] Baláž I, Koleková Y. Metal frames with non-uniform members and/or
nonuniform normal forces with imperfections in the form of elastic buckling
mode. Engineering research. Anniversary volume honoring Amália and Miklós
Iványi. Pollak Milhaly Faculty of Engineering. Univeristy of Pécs; October 25–
26, 2010. p. B:3–B:15.
[26] Baláž I, Koleková Y. In plane stability of two hinged arches. In: Proceedings of
European conference on steel and composite structures, Eurosteel 2011. 31.
August – 2. September 2011. Budapest, vol. C. p. 1869–74.
[27] Baláž I, Koleková Y. Structures with UGLI imperfections. In: CD proceedings of
18th international conference engineering mechanics 2012. Svratka, Czech
republic, May 14–17, 2012, paper no. 233. p. 61–86.
[28] Trahair NS, Pi YL. Torsion, bending and buckling of steel beams. Eng Struct
1997;19(5):372–7.
[29] Rotter M. Shell buckling design and assessment and the LBA-MNA
methodology. Stahlbau 2011;80(11):791–803.
[30] Ayrton WE, Perry J. On struts. Engineer 1886;62:464–5. a. p. 513–5.
[31] Rondal J, Maquoi R. Formulation d’Ayrton–Perry pour leflambement des barres
métaliques. Constr Métall 1979;4:41–53.
[32] Maquoi R, Rondal J. Mise en équation des nouvellescourbes européennes de
flambement. Constr Métall 1978;1:17–30.