Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Structural
Available Integrity
online Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274

Fatigue Design 2019

Fatigue Design 2019
Design recommendations for fatigue-loaded hollow section
Design recommendations for fatigue-loaded hollow section
K-joints with gap
K-joints with gap
Jennifer Hrabowskiaa*, Stefan Herionaa
Jennifer Hrabowski *, Stefan Herion
a
KoRoH GmbH – CCTH Center of Competence for Tubes and Hollow Sections, Schoenfeldstrasse 8, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
a
KoRoH GmbH – CCTH Center of Competence for Tubes and Hollow Sections, Schoenfeldstrasse 8, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany

Abstract
Abstract
The existing and approved rules for the fatigue design of hollow section joints have origin in the CIDECT Design
The existing and which
Recommendations, approved rules on
are based forexperimental
the fatigue investigations
design of hollow
made insection joints
the 1990s and have
earlier.origin in the of
Conclusions CIDECT Design
recent research,
Recommendations,
based on fatigue tests which
and are based oninvestigations
numerical experimentalasinvestigations
well, are usedmade in the 1990s
to extend and earlier.
the scope to high Conclusions of recent
strength steels research,
up to S700 and
based
variousonload
fatigue tests
cases. Theand numerical
nominal stressinvestigations as as
method as well well,
the are used tostress
structural extend the scope
method to high strength
is considered. steelsand
Drawbacks upopportunities
to S700 and
various loaddesign
of existing cases.recommendations
The nominal stress aremethod as wellFurther
exemplified. as the structural stress
instructions for method is considered.
fatigue resistant Drawbacks
constructions are and opportunities
given to enable a
of existing design recommendations are exemplified.
safe and economic design of K-joints with gap and its girders.Further instructions for fatigue resistant constructions are given to enable a
safe and economic design of K-joints with gap and its girders.
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2019
© The Authors.
2019 Published
The Authors. by Elsevier
Published by B.V.
Peer-review
Peer-review underunder responsibility
responsibility of Elsevier
of the Fatigue
B.V.
the Fatigue Design
Design 2019 2019 Organizers.
Organizers.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Fatigue Design 2019 Organizers.
Keywords: Fatigue, hollow sections, K-joints, high strength steel
Keywords: Fatigue, hollow sections, K-joints, high strength steel

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
The K-joint with gap made of hollow sections, as defined in Fig. 1, is the most common joint type for lattice girders
The K-joint
as used withrigs,
for jack-up gap wind
madeenergy
of hollow sections,bridges,
converters, as defined in Fig.
crane 1, is theagricultural
structures, most common joint type
machinery for lattice girders
or amusement rides.
as used for jack-up rigs, wind energy converters, bridges, crane structures, agricultural machinery or
The existing and approved rules for the fatigue design of hollow section joints have origin in the CIDECT Design amusement rides.
The existing and approved rules for the fatigue design of hollow section joints have origin in the
Recommendations (Zhao et al., 2001), which are based on experimental and numerical investigations on joints with CIDECT Design
Recommendations
small wall thickness(Zhao
madeetofal., 2001),
steel with which are basedofon235
yield strengths experimental
or 355 MPaand numerical
made investigations
in the 1990s on Since
and earlier. joints then,
with
small wall thickness made of steel with yield strengths of 235 or 355 MPa made in the 1990s and
a lot has changed in the development of materials, manufacturing and computer-aided design and computer-aided earlier. Since then,
a lot has changed in the development of materials, manufacturing and computer-aided design and computer-aided

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-721-8244890-30; fax: +49-721-8244890-99.

* E-mail
Corresponding
address:author. Tel.: +49-721-8244890-30; fax: +49-721-8244890-99.
jennifer.hrabowski@koroh.de
E-mail address: jennifer.hrabowski@koroh.de
2452-3216 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
2452-3216
Peer-review©under
2019responsibility
The Authors. of
Published by Elsevier
the Fatigue B.V. Organizers.
Design 2019
Peer-review under responsibility of the Fatigue Design 2019 Organizers.

2452-3216 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the Fatigue Design 2019 Organizers.
10.1016/j.prostr.2019.12.029
268 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274
2 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

manufacturing. So, for example for high strength steels as well as for sections with large thickness only little
information about the fatigue behavior is available. In addition, today's software and hardware solutions offer a much
wider range of possibilities. Associated with this, there is often a great uncertainty in the design and calculation of
hollow section joints. Preliminary investigations have shown, that in several cases this could lead to very conservative
and uneconomic design on the one hand, or to unsafe constructions on the other hand (Herion et al. 2014). So, fatigue
tests as well as extensive numerical parameter studies are carried out to establish a base for the extension of the
application range of common design rules.

Fig. 1. Hollow section K-joint with gap (Zhao et al. 2001)

2. Recent Research

2.1. General

Since the release of the CIDECT Design Guide 8 in 2001 (Zhao et al., 2001), nearly no further research on the
fatigue behavior of K-joints with gap have been published. To the fatigue behavior of K-joints with normal or higher
strength steel grades only few publications are available, mostly based on finite-element analysis (FEA) (Herion
2018).
To close the lack of knowledge concerning the use of high strength steels, CCTH initiated and coordinated a joint
research project of KIT Steel and Lightweight Structures with TNO Structural Dynamics lab in Delft, Netherlands as
an additional project partner (FOSTA P1132 / CIDECT 7AB). As part of this project TNO performed fatigue tests on
hollow section K-joints on a custom produced test frame with single acting jacks at the two braces and at the chord,
see Fig. 2.
The tests are carried out load and frequency controlled using constant amplitude loads with a stress ratio of
R = +0.2 or R = +0,1. Within the experimental investigations K-joints with gap made of RHS or CHS are examined.
All K-joints have a brace opening angle of 45°. Hereby, the main emphasis is on fatigue tests with constant amplitudes
and axially loaded braces (load case AX). The failure criterion for the tests is a through thickness crack, as usually
defined for hollow sections. To enable the verification of subsequent finite-element analysis (FEA), statically loaded
tests on specimens prepared with strain gauges are carried out, too.

Fig. 2. Test set-up at TNO for K-joints.

 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274 269
Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 3

The designation of the test series follows the rules “Joint__b0_t0_bi_ti_g_steel grade” with “K” for K-joint, brace
opening angle  chord width b0 and wall thickness t0, brace width bi and wall thickness ti, gap size g and steel grade.
For the evaluation the nominal stress range is determined using the section of the loaded member, here the axially
loaded brace (AX). This is general practice (Zhao et al, 2001), although the failure usually occurs at the chord section.

2.2. Fatigue Tests on RHS K-joints

Eighteen fatigue tests on K-joints with rectangular hollow sections made of steel grade S500 and S700 have been
carried out in three different test series to investigate the influence of steel grade, see Table 1.

Table 1. Dimensions of RHS K-joints for fatigue testing.

Series No. of Chord [mm] Brace [mm] Gap g Brace Angle Material
tests Width b0 Thickness t0 Width bi Thickness ti [mm] 
K45_100_6_80_4_g25_S700 9 100 6 80 4 25 45 S700
K45_130_4_80_4_g25_S500 4 130 4 80 4 25 45 S500
K45_130_4_80_4_g25_S700 5 130 4 80 4 25 45 S700

The test results include the secondary bending effects resulting by pure axial load in the braces. As the joint
geometry influences the secondary bending moments, a rough assumption for this influence is given in EN 1993-1-9
(2010) and by Zhao et al (2001). Accordingly, for braces of K-joints with gap made of RHS, the nominal stress range
in the braces must be multiplied by a magnification factor MF = 1.5.
The test results are compared to the standard S-N-curves for detail categories (DC) according to EN 1993-1-9
(2010) in Fig. 3. Outliers or run outs are marked with an arrow in the evaluation.

Fig. 3. Fatigue test results of RHS K-joints.

270 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274
4 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

As illustrated in Fig. 3, the fatigue resistance is strongly dependent on the wall thickness or the wall thickness ratio
=ti/t0, respectively. In EN 1993-1-9 (2010) and by Zhao et al (2001), the detail category (DC) for K-joints with gap
made of RHS is 36 for a ratio t0/ti= 1.0 and 71 for t0/ti= 2.0. Values in between can be interpolated linear. So, for the
series K45_100_6_80_4_g25_S700 a detail category 54 for t 0/ti= 1.5 is relevant. Deviating from the usual slope m =
3.0 for fatigue strength curves, m = 5.0 is used for hollow section joints. This is also reflected in the test results graphed
in Fig. 3, where the specimens of series K45_100_6_80_4_g25_S700 are sufficient for detail category 54 (green). The
test results of series K45_130_4_80_4_g25_S500 and K45_130_4_80_4_g25_S700 are below and one point is even
below the given class of 36 (blue).

Fig. 4. Weld execution for RHS-joints a) recommendation b) implementation.

In addition to load type, dimensions and wall thickness ratio, the weld execution has an influence on the fatigue
resistance, too. This influence is not directly considered in the detail catalogs. The fatigue classes are based on test
results. But it is difficult to understand in retrospect what kind of welds are implied there. For joints made of RHS, it
is recommended not to start or end the weld in the corner areas, since the maximum stress concentration occurs here
(Fig. 4a). However, this is often common practice, as can be seen at the welds of the investigated specimens in
Fig. 4b). The start and end points of the welds in the corner areas of the braces are seen as the main reason for the
scatter of the test results and the partial underrun of detail category 36.

2.3. Fatigue Tests on CHS K-joints

Fourteen fatigue tests on K-joints with circular hollow sections made of steel grade S355 and S700 have been
carried out, see Table 2. Herein, the influence of the steel grade and the weld seam execution is examined. For the
evaluation of CHS K-joints, the nominal stress range is determined for axially loaded braces and the magnification
factor of MF = 1.3 is used according to EN 1993-1-9 (2010) and by Zhao et al. (2001).

Table 2. Dimensions of CHS K-joints for fatigue testing.

Series Number Chord [mm] Brace [mm] Gap Brace Material
of Diameter Thickness Diameter Thickness [mm] Angle
tests d0 t0 di ti g 
K45_193.7_10_114.3_6.3_g25_S355 6 193.7 10 114.3 6.3 25 45 S355
K45_193.7_10_114.3_6.3_g25_S700 8 193.7 10 114.3 6.3 25 45 S700

As already noted for RHS K-joints, the fatigue resistance of CHS K-joints is also dependent on the wall thickness
or the wall thickness ratio =ti/t0, respectively, where t0 is the wall thickness of the chord and ti is the wall thickness
of the corresponding brace. In EN 1993-1-9 (2010) and by Zhao et al (2001), the detail category (DC) for K-joints
 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274 271
Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 5

with gap made of CHS is 45 for a ratio t0/ti= 1.0 and 90 for t0/ti= 2.0. Values in between can be interpolated, so that
for the series investigated, a detail category 71 for t0/ti= 1.6 is relevant.

Fig. 5. Fatigue test results of CHS K-joints.

In the evaluation of the -Nf diagram in Fig. 5, it is noticeable that the test points are far above the red design line
(DC71 according to EN 1993-1-9 (2010)). The fatigue tests resulted in two outliers (marked with an arrow). The
reason for this early cracking will be clarified by a fracture surface analysis. The statistical evaluation of the 12
remaining tests results in a fatigue strength at 2 million load cycles with freely calculated inverse slope of m = 3.8 at
95% survival probability of  N/mm². Based on the given inverse slop m = 5.0, then even an outlier is still above
the notch class 90 (green). This is two detail classes higher than EN 1993-1-9 (2010) and by Zhao et al. (2001) predict.
One possible reason is seen in the welding. As already mentioned, the weld execution has a decisive influence on
the fatigue strength. For the CHS-joints, contrary to the recommendations (Fig. 6a), the weld was not passed around
the brace. But as shown in Fig. 6b), the welding starts at the crown heel and runs in one pass over the saddle and the
crown toe over the gap and over the crown toe and saddle and ends at the crown heel of the second brace. The welding
of the 10 mm thick braces is executed with a root pass and three top layers with a weld preparation according to
EN 1090-2 (2018).

Fig. 6. Weld execution for CHS-joints a) recommendation b) implementation.

The advantage is that in the gap region no start- or stop position of the weld is needed. With this procedure, the
highly stressed gap area is bridged and reinforced by the multi-layer weld. This results in a shift of the crack initiation
272 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274
6 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

from the weld toe on the chord to the weld toe at the brace, as the Mises-stress plot in Fig. 7 (left) shows. The crack
initiation on the brace starts later compared to that the crack initiation on the chord without an over-welded gap. The
crack then initially moves along the weld seam transition of the brace. After about 25 degrees around the brace
circumference the maximum stresses in the chord occurs. At this point, the crack migrates through the weld seam into
the chord, see Fig. 7 (right). As a result, the criterion "through-thickness crack " is fulfilled much later and the lifetime
of the joint is increased.

Fig. 7. Stress distribution (left) and crack (right) in an CHS K-joints with over-welded gap

This shows that the fatigue strength of welded joints can be significantly increased by appropriate designs. In an
earlier research project (Puthli et al. 2006) investigated the fatigue behavior of rectangular hollow sections with
longitudinal stiffeners. Therein, it has been shown that the fatigue resistance of the respective samples could be
considerably increased by shaping the attachment and a specific run of the weld seam. With so-called inward running
welds, where the start point was chosen not in the area of the stiffness change at the begin of the attachment, but a few
centimeters before, the fatigue strength of the samples could be increased by two detail classes.

3. Design recommendations

The first step when planning a structure is the assessment of the state of strain of the framework. Zhao et al. (2001)
give the following possibilities:
• Sophisticated three-dimensional finite element modelling
• Simplified structural analysis using frame analysis for triangulated trusses or lattice girders.
• Rigid frame analysis for two- or three-dimensional Vierendeel type girders.
When using a simplified frame analysis with pinned joints, the nominal stress range must be multiplied with a
magnification factor MF, which accounts for secondary bending moments.
With the knowledge that the geometric design of the joints has a significant influence on the fatigue strength, it is
advisable to consider this already in the planning. The experimental fatigue test results demonstrate that with smaller
wall thickness ratio  the fatigue resistance increases. That is why for fatigue design of hollow section joints not only
dimension values, but also wall thickness ratio =ti/t0, width ratio =bi/b0 as well as the chord slenderness 2 = b0/t0
plays an important role and should already be considered during planning. In the research project FOSTA P1132 /
CIDECT 7AB an extensive parameter study via FEA is carried out, in which also the load cases in-plane-bending
(IPB) and out-of-plane bending (OPB) are considered. Table 3 gives an overview of recommended geometric
parameters, which aim to minimize the SCFs at the chords, which is decisive in most cases.
The maximum SCFs for RHS K-joints result for mean -values from  = 0.50 - 0.60 for the chord and the brace.
It is therefore advisable to aim for larger or smaller -values, with large -values being more advantageous for the
SCF on the brace. Therefore, the small -values are in parenthesis. Outliers to significantly smaller SCFs are obtained
 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274 273
Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 7

for very large eccentricities with e/h0 = 0.35. The influence of  is the opposite for the chord and the braces. For SCFs
of the chord, small wall thickness ratios  are favorable, but larger ones for the braces.

Table 3. Recommendation for geometric parameters of K-joints with gap.

RHS CHS
Brace loading Axial Load In-plane bending Axial Load In-plane bending
Parameter Out-of-plane bending

Wall thickness ratio  = ti / t0 small small small small

Width ratio  = bi / b0 (small or) large (small or) large (large) (small)
Chord slenderness 2 = b0 / t0 small small small small

Brace opening angle  small small small small

For the structural design of the CHS K-joints under fatigue loading, it is recommended to choose the wall thickness
of the brace thin (small -value) in relation to the chord wall thickness, and the chord profile should be thick-walled
(smaller 2 value). The smaller the parameters  and 2 are, the lower are the SCFs and thus more favorable for the
fatigue design for the three load cases AX, IPB and OPB. Regarding the width ratio , which has rather small influence
and is therefore in parenthesis, it is advisable to select large -values for the load case AX and small -values for the
load cases IPB and OPB, so for IPB and OPB the same recommendations apply. For RHS as well as for CHS K-joints
smaller brace angles  are preferable. In addition to the recommendations in Table 3, it is also recommended to keep
the joints’ eccentricities as small as possible. Generally, it is also recommended to perform butt welds with appropriate
profile preparation instead of fillet welds to ensure a full connection of the brace. On the other side, the fillet weld
provides a smoother weld seam transition. Therefore, it may also be useful to weld a fillet weld onto the butt weld
(Kuhlmann et al. 2015).
After the assessment of the state of strain of the framework and selecting the most favorable dimensions, the
decision about the verification method must follow. This is expected to be largely determined by the scope. The
nominal stress approach applies only for wall thicknesses up to 8 mm and is therefore very limited. The detail
categories of EN 1993-1-9 (2010) or FAT of IIW (Hobbacher 2016) and ISO 14347 (2008) represent a lower limit as
they include multiple influences such as weld execution, load introduction and parameter dependency, as the
evaluation of the test results in Fig. 2 shows. The nominal stress approach often cannot meet the complex behavior of
hollow section joints and the available detail catalogues do not provide sufficient categories for hollow sections.
This is why CIDECT (Zhao et al. 2001) and IIW (Hobbacher 2016) as well the offshore industry prefers the
structural stress approach for the fatigue design. It accounts for the uneven stress distribution in hollow section joints.
The structural stress at the decisive position, the so-called hot spot, includes effects from joint geometry, stiffness
distribution and the load cases. In contrast to that the influence of the local weld geometry and imperfections are
considered in the relevant ,hs-Nf diagram. Zhao et al. (2001) offer formulae and diagrams for the determination of
stress concentration factors (SCF). The scope of application is considerably larger and depending on the influencing
parameters, see Table 4. The offshore standard DNV GL-PR-C203 (2016) e.g. offers an even wider range of
applications. However, in the calculated SCFs some discrepancy to Zhao et a. (2001) occur, which makes it clear that
the scope should be strictly respected.

Table 4. Application range for SCFs of K-joints with gap acc. Zhao et al. (2001).
Parameter RHS CHS
Thickness ratio  = t1 / t0 0.25 – 1.0 0.25 – 1.0

Width ratio  = b1 / b0 0.35 – 1.0 0.3 – 0.6

Chord slenderness 2 = b0 / t0 10 - 35 24 - 60

Brace opening angle  30° - 60° 30° - 60°

Non-dimensional eccentricity e / h0 -0.55 – 0.25 0
274 Jennifer Hrabowski et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 267–274
8 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

When designing outside the scope, SCFs can be determined using finite element analysis (FEA); where
Zhao et al. (2001) or Hobbacher (2016) provide good guidance. Generally, FEA result in smaller SCFs than
recommended by Zhao et al. (2001), which is probably due to specimens’ imperfections and safety margins.
In both, the nominal stress as well as the structural stress concept, the previously determined stress range is then
compared to a fatigue strength curve. While the S-N-curve is defined in the nominal stress concept via the DC or FAT-
class, it is specified in the structural stress concept as a function of the wall thickness. These are valid for RHS up to
25 mm and for CHS up to 50 mm (Zhao et al. 2001 and ISO 14347 2008).
As the evaluation in Fig. 5 shows, skillful weld seam guidance and execution can considerably increase the fatigue
strength of a construction. In any case, it is recommended to place value on high quality welds. To further increase
the fatigue strength, it is also possible to apply one of various methods of post weld treatment.

4. Conclusions

The presented fatigue test results for hollow section K-joints made of steel grades up to S700 are in good accordance
with Eurocode 3-1-9 (2010), which is also valid for the investigated joints made of higher strength steel grades. The
fatigue strength curves represent a lower limit for the fatigue design.
Since the fatigue strength of hollow section joints strongly depends on the dimensionless parameters, such as e.g.
the wall thickness ratio , this should already be considered in the planning by selecting appropriate parameters.
Experiments as well as numerical analysis point out, that the fatigue resistance is, beneath the dimensions and the
geometrical parameters, also depending on the weld execution and shape. This is not considered in the design rules
but can be used to build fatigue resistant structures. So, for the CHS K-joints with over-welded gap, the fatigue
resistance could be increased by two classes from DC 71 to DC 90.
By careful planning and execution, fatigue-proof hollow-section constructions can be realized, which is also valid
when using high strength steels.

Acknowledgements

The authors like to thank FOSTA Forschungsvereinigung Stahlanwendung e.V. and CIDECT for funding the
presented research. They also thank the staff members of TNO and the Research Center for Steel, Timber and Masonry
of Karlsruhe Institute of Technology for performing the fatigue tests and the good cooperation in the research project.

References

DNV GL-PR-C203: 2016. Fatigue Design of offshore steel structures, Recommended Practice C203, Det Norske Veritas,
EN 1090-2:2018-09. Execution of steel structures and aluminium structures - Part 2: Technical requirements for steel structures; German version
EN 1090-2, September 2018.
EN 1993-1-9: 2010-12. Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-9: Fatigue; German version EN 1993-1-9:2005 + AC:2009, December 2010
FOSTA P1132 / CIDECT 7AB. Fatigue behaviour of hollow sections joints and high strength steel, running research project
Herion, S., Fleischer, O., Koenig, D., 2014. Comparison of different configurations of thick-walled K-joints with gap made of RHS and CHS.
Proceedings of the 24th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference. Busan, Korea, June 15-20, 2014.
Herion, S., 2018. Fatigue of hollow section structures - Current research and developments. Tubular Structures XVI – Heidarpour & Zhao (Eds)
Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-8153-8134-1.
Hobbacher, A.F., 2016. Recommendations for Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components, Second Edition, IIW-Doc. IIW-2259-15 ex XIII-
2460-13/XV-1440-13, International Institute of Welding (1996) and Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
ISO 14347: 2008-12. Fatigue - Design procedure for welded hollow-section joints – Recommendations, December 2008
Kuhlmann, U.; Mangerig, I., Bucak, O. et al, 2015. Ermuedungsgerechte Fachwerke aus Rundhohlprofilen mit dickwandigen Gurten – Fatigue
resistant trusses of circular hollow sections with thick-walled chords, FOSTA P815. Duesseldorf, Germany.
Puthli, R.S. et al., 2006. Beurteilung des Ermüdungsverhaltens von Krankonstruktionen bei Einsatz hoch- und ultra-hochfester Stähle, Final report
P 512, Forschungsvereinigung Stahlanwendung e.V., Düsseldorf, Germany
Zhao, X.L., Herion, S., Packer, J.A., Puthli, S., Sedlacek, G., Wardenier, J., Weynand, K., van Wingerde, A.M. and Yeomans, N.Y., 2001.
Constructions with hollow steel sections 8: Design guide for circular and rectangular hollow section welded joints under fatigue loading.
CIDECT. TÜV-Verlag, Koeln, Germany.