Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

Axial strength of slotted perforated cold-formed steel channels under

pinned-pinned boundary conditions
Jinyou Zhao a, b, *, Shuo Liu b, **, Boshan Chen c, ***
a
School of Urban Construction and Safety Engineering, Shanghai Institute of Technology, Shanghai 201418, China
b
School of Civil Engineering, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
c
Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The use of cold-formed steel (CFS) channel sections is becoming popular as the load-carrying members in
Cold-formed steel channel sections building structures, and such channel sections are often perforated for the ease of installation of services.
Web hole However, limited experimental investigation has been reported in the literature for such channel sections under
Buckling behaviour
pinned-pinned boundary conditions. In this paper, a total of 16 CFS channel sections with and without slotted
Direct strength method
Critical elastic buckling stress
web holes were tested under pinned-pinned boundary conditions, and it was shown that all specimens with short
lips failed by distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by distortional buckling and all specimens with
long lips failed by local buckling. Moreover, the slotted web holes caused the axial capacities to decrease slightly
by 2.4% on average for specimens failed mainly by distortional buckling and 6.4% on average for specimens
failed by local buckling. A nonlinear elasto-plastic finite element (FE) model was also validated against the test
results, a parametric study was conducted using the validated FE model. In addition, the results obtained from
the tests and parametric study were compared against the results predicted by the current direct strength method
(DSM) in AISI S100–16 for CFS channel sections with web holes. It indicates that the results predicted by the
DSM are un-conservative for most CFS channel sections with web holes under pinned-pinned boundary condi­
tions, especially un-conservative by 27.0% on average for CFS channel sections failed by local buckling.
Therefore, new design formulas were developed based on the current DSM formulas for CFS channel sections
with web holes.

1. Introduction
The use of cold-formed steel (CFS) is popular in building structures as
load-carrying members due to its high structural efficiency and inherent
favourable characteristics. In engineering practice, the cold-formed steel
channels can be used as a vertical element in the stub wall framing
system, which may be subjected to axial compressive loading (Fig. 1).
Many CFS channels include web holes which have been pre-punched to
accommodate electrical wires and conduits. The stress distribution, ul­
timate strength and failure modes of CFS channels with holes are
different from those of channels without holes [1–4]. In recent decades,
Moen et al. [5,6] carried out experimental research and numerous
parametric analyses on CFS channel sections with industry-standard
slotted web holes under friction-bearing boundary conditions and
extended direct strength method (DSM) to such channel sections with
web holes. Moreover, the DSM formulas of CFS channel sections with
web holes derived by Moen and Schafer have been listed in American
Iron and Steel Institute (AISI S100–16) [7]. Hence, the reliability of DSM
formulas in AISI S100–16 [7] for CFS channel sections with web holes
under pinned-pinned boundary conditions should be assessed.
For CFS channel sections with web holes under friction-bearing or
fixed-fixed boundary conditions, extensive investigations are available
in the literature. Extensive tests and finite element (FE) analyses were
subsequently conducted by Kulatunga and Macdonald et al. [8,9] for
CFS channel sections with web holes under friction-bearing and fixed-
fixed boundary conditions, and the influences of various hole position,
size, shape, quantity and spacing on axial capacity of CFS channel sec­
tions with web holes were obtained. Yao and Rasmussen [10,11]

* Corresponding author at: School of Urban Construction and Safety Engineering, Shanghai Institute of Technology, Shanghai 201418, China.
** Corresponding author at: School of Civil engineering, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150006, China.
*** Corresponding author at: Department of Civil engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China.
E-mail addresses: jinyou@sit.edu.cn (J. Zhao), shuoliu2020@nefu.edu.cn (S. Liu), chenboshan@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn (B. Chen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107673
Received 9 September 2022; Received in revised form 22 October 2022; Accepted 5 November 2022
Available online 16 November 2022
0143-974X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Zhao et al.
Fig. 1. Application of CFS members in stub wall framing system.
performed numerous parametric analyses on CFS channel sections with
holes under fixed-fixed boundary conditions and revised DSM formulas
in AISI S100–16 [7] for such channel sections.
Up to now, a limited number of studies have been performed
investigating the behaviours of CFS channel sections with web holes
under pinned-pinned boundary conditions. Chen et al. [12,13] con­
ducted experimental and numerical investigations on CFS channel sec­
tions with web holes under pinned-pinned boundary conditions and the
failure modes of all specimens displayed global buckling. It was found
that the DSM formulas in AISI S100–16 [7] were conservative to predict
axial capacity of such channel sections failed mainly by global buckling.
However, none of these investigations considered the effect of local
buckling or distortional buckling on the axial strength of CFS channel
sections under pinned-pinned boundary conditions.
Therefore, this paper is aimed at extending the work reported by
Moen et al. [5] and consider the influence of pined-pined boundary
conditions on the axial strength of CFS channel sections with web holes.
The tests of perforated CFS channel sections with four specimen lengths
and two lip widths were carried out under pinned-pinned boundary
conditions, in which specimens failed by local buckling or distortional-
local buckling interaction controlled by distortional buckling. A
nonlinear elasto-plastic FE model was developed, and a parametric
study was conducted using the validated FE models. The parametric
analysis results were used to investigate the axial capacity and critical
elastic buckling stress of such channel sections with different plate
thicknesses, specimen lengths, web widths and lip widths under pinned-
pinned boundary conditions. The results obtained from the tests and
parametric study were compared against the results predicted by current
DSM for CFS channel sections with web holes. Finally, new design for­
mulas were developed based on the current DSM formulas for CFS
channel sections with web holes.
2. Experimental study
2.1. Specimens
A total of 16 CFS channel sections were tested to investigate the
compressive behaviours under pinned-pinned boundary conditions in
this study, including 8 CFS channel sections with industry-standard
slotted web holes and the remaining 8 such channel sections without
web holes. Two kinds of cross sections and definitions of symbols are
illustrated in Fig. 2. In order to study the influences of different buckling
modes on stability behaviour and axial capacity of members, two kinds
of nominal lip widths were selected as 15 mm and 30 mm for each kind
of cross section. The nominal dimensions of H, Bl, Br, t and r were fixed as
180 mm, 80 mm, 80 mm, 2.5 mm and 2.5 mm, respectively.
2
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673
Br Br
Dr
Dr
r r
θr t θr
h
θl θl
r r
Dl
Dl
Bl Bl
(a) Cross section without web hole (b) Cross section with web hole
Fig. 2. Definition of symbols for cross section.
As shown in Fig. 3, the specimen length (L) of each kind of cross
section was selected as 600 mm, 800 mm for short specimens and 1000
mm, 1200 mm for intermediate-length specimens. It should be noted
that the definition of “short specimens” and “intermediate-length spec­
imens” is based on the study reported by Galambos [14]. Those speci­
mens having a length of 600 mm and 800 mm were defined as “short
specimens”, while those specimens having a 1000 mm and 1200 mm
were defined as “intermediate-length specimens”. More details could be
found in Ref. [14]. As can be seen from Fig. 3(b), one slotted web hole
was located at mid-height of the short specimens and two slotted web
holes were placed in the intermediate-length specimens with an
industry-standard spacing of 610 mm. According to the hole sizes pro­
posed by Steel Stud Manufacturers Association (SSMA) (2010) [15],
38.2 mm and 101.6 mm were set as the width and length of web holes,
respectively. The specific dimensions of the hole shape are displayed in
Fig. 3(c).
The end plates with tenon were welded on both ends of all specimens
for loading and connection convenience. The length and width of the
end plate were 20 mm larger than the outline of the specimen cross
section, and its thickness was 10 mm. The actual dimensions measured
by vernier caliper for cross section and web holes are summarized in
Table 1. The specimen labelling rule is given in Fig. 4.
2.2. Material properties
A total of 9 tensile coupons prepared from flat region of 3 cold-rolled
steel plates were tested to determine the material properties of the
specimens. It should be noted that the effects of strength enhancement
caused by the corner region and residual stress were not included in this
paper as the strength enhancement caused by the corner region will
offset the adverse effects of residual stress, which was recommended by
Dubina and Ungureany [16]. Thus only flat coupons were tested in this
study. The MTS universal testing machine was used to conduct the
material tests with a loading rate of 0.3 mm/min, as shown in Fig. 5. The
stress-strain curves and mean values of all tensile coupon test results
obtained from 9 tensile coupons are given in Fig. 6 and Table 2,
respectively.
2.3. Initial geometric imperfections
The compressive behaviours of CFS members are highly sensitive to
the initial geometric imperfections. Therefore, the initial local imper­
fections and the initial distortional imperfections were measured care­
fully using dial gauges for all specimens prior to testing. The
measurement methods and devices in Ref. [17] were used. The defini­
tions of symbols and the measurement locations across the cross section
for the initial geometric imperfections are shown in Fig. 7 and the spe­
cific experimental operation is displayed in Fig. 8. All specimens were
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

1200
1000
800
600

180 180 180 180

(a) Cold-formed steel channel sections without web hole

244.2
144.2

101.6
101.6
349.2

1200.0
508.4

610.0
1000.0

h
610.0
508.4
249.2

800.0
101.6

19.1
600.0
101.6

101.6

101.6
101.6

63 .4

Lh
349.2
249.2

244.2
144.2

19.1

38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2

70.9 70.9 70.9 70.9 70.9 70.9 70.9 70.9
180.0 180.0 180.0 180.0 38.2

(b) Cold-formed steel channel sections with slotted web holes (c) Slotted web hole
The unit of all dimensions is mm

Fig. 3. Specimen length, hole dimension and hole location.

meshed and marked along the longitudinal direction (50 mm apart)
before the imperfection measurement. The end plates welded on both
ends of specimens could cause weld deformation near the specimen
ends. Hence, the initial geometric imperfections were measured at the
marked line 50 mm away from the ends.
The specific initial geometric imperfection distributions along the
longitudinal direction of specimen are presented in Fig. 9 for
L800H180B80D30-NH (positive values represent a convex imperfection
and negative values represent a concave imperfection). The maximum
measurement values of the initial geometric imperfections are listed in
Table 3 for all specimens. The maximum value of the initial local im­
perfections (Δlf and Δrf) is defined as Δmax
f , and the maximum value of the
initial distortional imperfections (Δld and Δrd) is defined as Δmax
d . It is
observed from Table 3 that the initial distortional imperfections are
generally larger than the initial local imperfections. Furthermore, the
mean values of Δmax
w /t, Δf
max
/t and Δmax
d /t are 0.180, 0.236 and 0.369 for
specimens, respectively.
2.4. Test setup and loading procedure
Test setup and knife-edge are shown in Figs. 10 and 11, respectively.
An electro-hydraulic servo universal testing machine was used for
applying axial load to the specimens. Pinned-pinned boundary condi­
tions were achieved by knife-edge which was designed to allow rotations
around weak axis and restrain rotations around strong axis and the
overall height of knife-edge is 110 mm. A hole existed in the center of
knife edge down plate was used for connecting with the tenon of end
plate. The average value of two displacement transducers placed inside
the end plate was taken as the axial displacement of the specimen.
In order to eliminate the gap between the test setup and specimen
and make the test data more accurate, all specimens were preloaded up
to 20% of the estimated ultimate load and then unloaded slowly before
testing. The formal loading including two steps was conducted after
preloading. First, 5% of the estimated ultimate load was applied to the
specimens for each level of loading. Then, the load increment of each

3
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Table 1
Actual specimen dimensions.
Specimen L(mm) H(mm) Bl(mm) Br(mm) Dl(mm) Dr(mm) t(mm) θl(◦ ) θr(◦ ) Above or middle hole Below hole

Lh(mm) h(mm) Lh(mm) h(mm)

L600H180B80D15-H 598.60 180.60 80.41 80.45 14.86 14.88 2.56 91.4 91.7 101.92 39.42 – –
L600H180B80D30-H 598.60 179.40 80.31 80.11 29.42 29.36 2.53 92.2 92.0 101.88 39.00 – –
L800H180B80D15-H 798.20 179.75 80.50 80.42 15.17 15.14 2.54 91.2 91.6 101.60 38.38 – –
L800H180B80D30-H 798.40 179.50 80.37 80.39 29.80 29.78 2.55 92.1 91.8 101.80 39.04 – –
L1000H180B80D15-H 999.10 180.25 80.69 80.59 15.19 15.15 2.54 91.5 92.3 101.70 38.44 101.69 38.46
L1000H180B80D30-H 998.10 180.40 80.89 80.76 29.75 29.69 2.52 92.0 91.6 101.58 39.00 101.69 39.05
L1200H180B80D15-H 1196.60 179.65 80.55 80.48 15.17 15.19 2.54 91.9 92.4 101.78 38.50 101.74 38.52
L1200H180B80D30-H 1197.60 179.75 80.77 80.68 30.07 30.00 2.56 91.5 91.4 101.70 38.40 101.70 38.35
L600H180B80D15-NH 597.60 179.30 80.22 80.14 14.38 14.32 2.56 92.3 92.0 – – – –
L600H180B80D30-NH 598.10 178.85 80.25 80.16 29.61 29.57 2.57 92.6 91.8 – – – –
L800H180B80D15-NH 799.10 181.01 80.50 80.44 14.47 14.33 2.53 91.6 92.7 – – – –
L800H180B80D30-NH 797.60 179.90 80.79 80.77 29.42 29.22 2.53 91.8 92.3 – – – –
L1000H180B80D15-NH 997.60 179.61 80.70 80.48 14.64 14.88 2.55 92.3 2.51 – – – –
L1000H180B80D30-NH 998.40 180.65 80.97 80.88 29.42 29.68 2.55 91.6 2.52 – – – –
L1200H180B80D15-NH 1197.60 180.20 80.71 80.62 14.62 14.89 2.50 91.4 2.49 – – – –
L1200H180B80D30-NH 1198.60 180.90 80.75 80.73 29.46 29.55 2.48 92.3 91.9 – – – –

Specimen with holes (H)

Specimen lenghth Flange width or without holes (NH)
Web width Lip width

L H B D
Nominal web width, mm Nominal lip width, mm
Nominal specimen lenghth, mm Nominal flange width, mm

Fig. 4. Specimen labelling rule.

Fig. 6. Stress-strain curves.

Table 2
Fig. 5. Test setup of tensile coupon test. Mean results of coupon tests.
Yield strength Ultimate Young’s Poisson Elongation
level was 2.5% of the estimated ultimate load when the loading achieved fy(MPa) strength modulus E ratio ν δ(%)
fu(MPa) (MPa)
80% of the estimated ultimate load. The loading of each level was held
for 3 min prior to collecting test data. 383 521 1.97 × 105 0.30 0.38

4
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

hole. For intermediate-length specimens with two web holes, local

buckling deformations were found only near one web hole which had
larger initial local imperfections.
The experimental ultimate loads of specimens with short lips are
listed in Table 4. The ultimate loads of short-lip specimens with web
holes decreased by only 2.4% on average compared with the ultimate
loads of short-lip specimens without web holes. The load versus axial
displacement curves obtained from specimens with short lips are pre­
sented in Fig. 13.

3.2. Experimental results for long-lip specimens

The failure modes of long-lip specimens are given in Fig. 14. Because
Fig. 7. Initial geometric imperfections.
of more constraint of long lips on flanges, all specimens with long lips
exhibited obvious local buckling deformations. As noted by the
Ref. [18], when the lip width is wide enough, it can effectively increase
the web stiffness and restrain the distortional buckling of flange. The
local buckling deformations of long-lip specimens without web holes
occurred near the maximum initial local imperfections. For short spec­
imens with one web hole, local buckling deformations were found near
the web hole. For intermediate-length specimens with web holes, local
buckling deformations were observed near the web hole with larger
initial local imperfections.
The experimental ultimate loads of specimens with long lips are
summarized in Table 5. The long-lip specimens with web holes had a
6.4% reduction on average in the ultimate loads compared with the
long-lip specimens without web holes. Because the web hole restricted
the development of local buckling deformations, the reduction in the
ultimate loads of the specimens with long lips was greater than the
specimens with short lips. The load versus axial displacement curves
obtained from specimens with long lips are presented in Fig. 15.

4. Numerical study
Fig. 8. Measurement of the initial geometric imperfections.
4.1. Development of finite element models

3. Experimental results and discussion

The finite element program ANSYS 20.0 [19] was used to establish a
non-linear FE model of CFS channel sections. The actual dimensions of
3.1. Experimental results for short-lip specimens
specimens listed in Table 1 were used in the FE model. Rigid regions at
the end of FE model were used to simulate the end plates of specimens
The failure modes of short-lip specimens are shown in Fig. 12. All
and the loading point was placed in the master node (centroid point of
specimens with short lips exhibited typical distortional buckling de­
specimen cross section) of rigid region, as shown in Fig. 16. To simulate
formations at the intersecting lines between the flanges and the lips due
pinned-pinned boundary conditions of the tests, the rigid region of
to the limited constraint of short lips on flanges. The local buckling
movable end was restrained rotations around strong axis and twisting,
deformations occurred near the maximum initial local imperfections for
and the rigid region of immovable end was only allowed rotations
short-lip specimens without web holes. For short specimens with one
around weak axis. A schematic diagram of the boundary conditions for
web hole, the local buckling deformations were observed near the web
FE model is displayed in Fig. 17. Considering the accuracy and

Fig. 9. Initial geometric imperfection distributions along the longitudinal direction of L800H180B80D30-NH.

5
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Table 3
Maximum measurement values of the initial geometric imperfections.
Specimen Δmax
w (mm) Δmax
f (mm) Δmax
d (mm) Δmax
w /t Δmax
f /t Δmax
d /t

L600H180B80D15-H 0.32 0.55 0.65 0.128 0.220 0.260

L600H180B80D30-H 0.15 0.74 0.96 0.060 0.296 0.384
L800H180B80D15-H 0.69 0.53 0.84 0.276 0.212 0.336
L800H180B80D30-H 0.74 0.85 0.80 0.296 0.340 0.320
L600H180B80D15-NH 0.28 0.37 0.34 0.112 0.148 0.136
L600H180B80D30-NH 0.23 0.32 0.57 0.092 0.128 0.228
L800H180B80D15-NH 0.38 0.24 0.94 0.152 0.096 0.376
L800H180B80D30-NH 0.17 0.45 0.48 0.068 0.180 0.192
L1000H180B80D15-H 0.25 0.43 1.14 0.100 0.172 0.456
L1000H180B80D30-H 0.52 1.15 0.73 0.208 0.460 0.292
L1200H180B80D15-H 0.34 0.36 1.00 0.136 0.144 0.400
L1200H180B80D30-H 1.20 0.34 1.44 0.480 0.136 0.576
L1000H180B80D15-NH 0.30 0.95 1.02 0.120 0.380 0.408
L1000H180B80D30-NH 0.33 0.73 1.29 0.132 0.292 0.516
L1200H180B80D15-NH 0.89 1.00 1.29 0.356 0.400 0.516
L1200H180B80D30-NH 0.40 0.43 1.28 0.160 0.172 0.512

Loading plate

Knife edge support Top end plate

Specimen

Bottom end plate

Knife edge support

(a) Photograph (b) Schematic diagram

Fig. 10. Test setup.

Knife edge top plate

Knife edge

Knife edge down plate

Tenon

Specimen end plate

Specimen

(a) Photograph (b) Schematic diagram

Fig. 11. Knife-edge support used in this study.

6
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Fig. 12. Failure modes of specimens with short lips.

in FE medel. Considering the influence of the initial geometric imper­

Table 4 fections on specimens, the eigenvalue elastic buckling analysis was
Test and FE analysis results for short-lip specimens.
conducted to obtain the first-order buckling mode of FE model and then
Specimen Test results ANSYS results Pf/Pt the maximum values of the actual initial geometric imperfections listed
Pt(kN) Failure Pf(kN) Failure in Table 3 were incorporated into FE model. The non-linear finite
mode mode element analysis using arc-length method was used to obtain the ulti­
L600H180B80D15-H 178.242 D(L) 182.091 D(L) 1.022 mate loads and failure modes of FE model. Similar modelling techniques
L600H180B80D15- 183.414 D(L) 183.605 D(L) 1.001 were also adopted by Ye et al. [22,23] and Roy et al. [24–26] for
NH modelling of CFS channel sections under axial compression.
L800H180B80D15-H 180.279 D(L) 182.600 D(L) 1.013
L800H180B80D15- 183.492 D(L) 184.519 D(L) 1.006
NH 4.2. Validation of finite element models
L1000H180B80D15- 177.754 D(L) 180.863 D(L) 1.017
H
L1000H180B80D15- 181.433 D(L) 183.258 D(L) 1.010 The FE analysis results are summarized in Tables 4 and 5. For
NH specimens with short lips, the mean ratio of Pf to Pt is 1.011 and the
L1200H180B80D15- 168.654 D(L) 170.766 D(L) 1.013 standard deviation (St. Dev) of Pf to Pt is 0.006. For specimens with long
H lips, the mean ratio of Pf to Pt is 0.998 and the standard deviation of Pf to
L1200H180B80D15- 173.851 D(L) 174.633 D(L) 1.004
Pt is 0.020. The failure modes obtained from the tests and FE analyses
NH
Mean 1.011 are shown in Fig. 18. And the load versus axial displacement curves
ST. DEV 0.006 obtained from the tests and FE analyses are given in Fig. 19. In terms of
the ultimate loads, failure modes and load versus axial displacement
Note: Pt identifies ultimate loads of tests; Pf identifies ultimate loads of FE an­
alyses; D(L) represents distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by curves, the FE analysis results showed good agreement with test results.
distortional buckling. As mentioned previously, the FE model established in this paper could
accurately simulate the compressive behaviours for CFS channel sec­
computation time of FE analyses, the models were divided into meshes tions under pinned-pinned boundary conditions.
with appropriate size of 10 mm × 10 mm for flat parts and finer mesh
sizes for the corner areas and around the web holes, as shown in Fig. 17. 4.3. Parametric study
Similar modelling techniques were also used by Feng et al. [20] and D.
M.M.P. Dissanayake et al. [21]. A simplified bilinear stress-strain rela­ The FE model validated by experimental results was used to conduct
tionship model of material was established, in which the initial slope is E parametric analyses of 80 CFS channel sections with different cross
and the second slope is 0.01 E after yield stress. Both the material section sizes, and the results of parametric analyses were used for the
properties of specimens illustrated in Table 2 and the simplified bilinear investigation on DSM. For the cross section sizes of parametric analyses,
stress-strain relationship model were incorporated into FE model. 160 mm, 180 mm and 200 mm were selected as the web widths and 2.0
The research results in the Ref. [16] indicate that the enhancement of mm, 2.5 mm and 3.0 mm were selected as the plate thicknesses. In order
buckling strength at the corner will offset the adverse effects of residual to obtain different buckling modes, the lip widths were designed as 15
stress for CFS so that the above two mentioned factors were not included mm and 30 mm. Except t represents the plate thickness, the remaining

7
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Fig. 13. Load versus axial displacement curves obtained from specimens with short lips.

Fig. 14. Failure modes of specimens with long lips.

FE analysis member’s labelling rule was the same as the specimen’s one.
For material properties of parametric analyses, the Yield strength was
345 MPa, the Young’s modulus was 2.06 × 105 MPa, and the Poisson
ratio was 0.3. In addition, the initial geometric imperfections of FE
analysis members were set to 1.35 t for the initial local imperfections
and 3.44 t for the initial distortional imperfections referring to the
Ref. [27].
The results obtained from parametric analyses are illustrated in Ta­
bles 6, 7, 8 and 9. It is shown that the failure modes of members with
short lips displayed distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by
distortional buckling and the failure modes of members with long lips
displayed typical local buckling.
5. Current design specifications in AISI S100–16
5.1. Introduction of DSM for channel sections
Current design rules for calculating the axial capacity of CFS channel
sections with web holes are designed on the basis of DSM formulas ac­
cording to the AISI S100–16 [7]. In this section, the design rules of DSM
formulas are discussed next:
The nominal axial design strength of distortional buckling (Pnd) for
channel sections with web holes.

8
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Table 5 load; fcrl = critical elastic local buckling stress; Pne = nominal axial
Test and FE analysis results for long-lip specimens. design strength for global buckling. According to E2 in AISI S100–16
Specimen Test results ANSYS results Pf/Pt [7], Pne can be replaced by Py.
DSM formulas of channel sections without web holes in AISI S100–16
Pt(kN) Failure Pf(kN) Failure
mode mode [7] are similar to the above Eqs. (1) and (2), except Pynet is replaced with
P y.
L600H180B80D30-H 203.267 L 201.294 L 0.990
L600H180B80D30- 207.516 L 206.092 L 0.993
NH
L800H180B80D30-H 201.863 L 196.890 L 0.975 5.2. Critical elastic distortional buckling stress prediction method for
L800H180B80D30- 209.741 L 205.897 L 0.982 members with web holes under compression
NH
L1000H180B80D30- 193.254 L 200.556 L 1.038
H
The critical elastic distortional buckling stress (fcrd) for channel
L1000H180B80D30- 204.796 L 204.753 L 1.000 sections with web holes can be obtained from the following method
NH [28,29]:
L1200H180B80D30- 179.549 L 183.072 L 1.020 ( )
H fcrd = min fcrdg , fcrdh (3)
L1200H180B80D30- 208.757 L 205.096 L 0.982
NH ( )1/3
Lh
Mean 0.998 tr = 1− t (4)
ST. DEV 0.020 Lcrd
Note: Pt identifies ultimate loads of tests; Pf identifies ultimate loads of FE an­
where fcrdg = critical elastic distortional buckling stress with gross cross
alyses; L represents local buckling.
section; fcrdh = critical elastic distortional buckling stress including the
⎧ influence of holes; Lcrd = distortional buckling half-wavelength of
⎪
⎪ Pynet for λd ≤ λd1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ [ ]
⎨ Pynet − Pd2
Pnd = Pynet −
λd2 − λd1
(λd − λd1 ) for λd1 < λd ≤ λd2 (1)
⎪
⎪
⎪ [
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )0.6 ]( )0.6
⎪
⎪ Pcrd Pcrd
⎪
⎪ 1 − 0.25 Py for λd > λd2
⎩ Py Py

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
where λd = Py /Pcrd ; λd1 = 0.561(Pynet/Py); λd2 = 0.561[14.0(Py/
Pynet) − 13.0]; Pd2 = [1 − 0.25(1/λd2)1.2](1/λd2)1.2Py; Py = fyAg; Pynet
0.4

= fyAnet; Ag = gross area of cross section; Anet = net area of cross section
at the location of a hole; fy = yield stress; Pcrd = fcrdAg; Pcrd = critical
elastic distortional buckling load; fcrd = critical elastic distortional
buckling stress.
The nominal axial design strength of local buckling (Pnl) for channel
sections with web holes.
⎧
⎪
⎪ Pne ≤ Pynet for λl ≤ 0.776
⎨[
( )0.4 ]( )0.4
Pnl = Pcrl Pcrl (2)
⎪
⎩ 1 − 0.15 Pne
⎪
Pne
Pne ≤ Pynet for λl > 0.776

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ Fig. 16. Model of the rigid region.

where λl = Pne /Pcrl ; Pcrl = fcrlAg; Pcrl = critical elastic local buckling

Fig. 15. Load versus axial displacement curves obtained from specimens with long lips.

9
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

holes under pinned-pinned boundary conditions.

5.3. Critical elastic local buckling stress prediction method for members
with web holes under compression

The critical elastic local buckling stress (fcrl) for channel sections
with web holes can be obtained from approximate prediction method
proposed by Moen [29], Moen and Schafer [32]. Approximate predic­
tion equations are shown below:
fcrl = min(fcr , fcrh ) (5)

where fcr = critical elastic local buckling stress without the influence of
web holes; fcrh = critical elastic local buckling stress including the in­
fluence of web holes; fcr can be calculated using Eq. (6) and fcrh can be
calculated by Eqs. (7)–(10).

π2 E ( t )2
fcr = k (6)
12(1 − ν2 ) H

where k = plate buckling coefficient for a stiffened element and k = 4; H

= web width.
fcrh = fcrh,net (1 − h/H) (7)
Fig. 17. Boundary conditions and mesh type for FE model.

fcrh,net = min(fcrA , fcrB ) (8)

member with gross cross-section; Lh = longitudinal length of hole; t =
original thickness of web; tr = modified thickness of web. fcrdg and Lcrd π2 E
( )2
t
can be determined by the finite strip analysis with the gross cross sec­ fcri = ki (9)
12(1 − ν 2)
hi
tion. fcrdh can be determined by the finite strip analysis of the cross
section with modified thickness of web (tr) which can be calculated ⎧ /
⎪ 0.2
using Eq. (4). The schematic diagrams of the modified cross section are ⎨ 0.425 + for Lh hi ≥ 1
shown in Fig. 20. ki = (Lh /hi )0.95 − 0.6 (10)
⎪
⎩
The results fcrd-FSM obtained from finite strip analysis can be deter­ 0.925 for Lh /hi < 1
mined by the CUFSM program [30] developed by Schafer et al. [31]. The
mean value of fcrd-FSM to the analysis results fcrd-ANS in ANSYS ratio is where fcrh,net = critical elastic local buckling stress at the location of a
1.036, with the corresponding standard deviation of 0.026, as listed in hole; h = width of hole; i = A or B; fcri = unstiffened strip critical elastic
Table 8. It indicates that finite strip analysis method can replace the local buckling stress; ki = plate buckling coefficient of unstiffened strip.
complex FE analysis method to predict fcrd for channel sections with web The schematic diagram of unstiffened strip “A” and “B” for a plate with
holes is shown in Fig. 21.

(a) L800H180B80D15-H (b) L800H180B80D30-H (c) L1000H180B80D15-H (d) L1000H180B80D30-H

Fig. 18. Deformed shape at failure from experiments and FE results.

10
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

200 220
TEST TEST
180 200
ANSYS
180 ANSYS
160
140 160
Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)

140
120
120
100
100
80
80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Axial displacement (mm) Axial displacement (mm)
(a) L800H180B80D15-H (b) L800H180B80D30-H

200 220
TEST 200 TEST
180
ANSYS ANSYS
160 180

140 160
Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN) 140

120
120
100
100
80
80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Axial displacement (mm) Axial displacement (mm)
(c) L1000H180B80D15-H (d) L1000H180B80D30-H

Fig. 19. Load versus axial displacement obtained from the tests and FE analyses.

Table 6 Table 7
Ultimate loads for unperforated channel sections with short lips. Ultimate loads for unperforated channel sections with long lips.
Specimen Pt or Pf (kN) PDSM (kN) PDSM /Pt or Pf Compression member Pt or Pf (kN) PDSM (kN) PDSM /Pt or Pf

L600H180B80D15t2.0-NH 135.721 125.735 0.926 L600H180B80D30t2.0-NH 177.415 172.034 0.970

L800H180B80D15t2.0-NH 126.570 122.837 0.971 L800H180B80D30t2.0-NH 175.512 169.451 0.965
L1000H180B80D15t2.0-NH 125.162 120.875 0.966 L1000H180B80D30t2.0-NH 175.729 167.858 0.955
L1200H180B80D15t2.0-NH 119.424 119.527 1.001 L1200H180B80D30t2.0-NH 168.951 166.760 0.987
L600H180B80D15t2.5-NH* 183.414 194.470 1.060 L600H180B80D30t2.5-NH* 207.516 201.761 0.972
L800H180B80D15t2.5-NH* 183.492 189.889 1.035 L800H180B80D30t2.5-NH* 209.741 198.277 0.945
L1000H180B80D15t2.5-NH* 181.433 188.181 1.037 L1000H180B80D30t2.5-NH* 204.796 196.208 0.958
L1200H180B80D15t2.5-NH* 173.851 185.139 1.065 L1200H180B80D30t2.5-NH* 208.757 194.833 0.933
L600H180B80D15t3.0-NH 219.022 215.567 0.984 L600H180B80D30t3.0-NH 268.193 287.140 1.071
L800H180B80D15t3.0-NH 215.474 210.767 0.978 L800H180B80D30t3.0-NH 264.442 282.119 1.067
L1000H180B80D15t3.0-NH 211.181 207.790 0.984 L1000H180B80D30t3.0-NH 261.972 279.127 1.065
L1200H180B80D15t3.0-NH 210.847 205.761 0.976 L1200H180B80D30t3.0-NH 259.905 277.122 1.066
Mean 0.999 Mean 0.996
ST. DEV 0.040 ST. DEV 0.052

Note: Pt identifies experimental ultimate loads; Pf identifies FE analysis ultimate Note: Pt identifies experimental ultimate loads; Pf identifies FE analysis ultimate
loads; PDSM identifies DSM prediction loads; channel sections with “*” identify loads; PDSM identifies DSM prediction loads; channel sections with “*” identify
specimens, and the remaining channel sections without “*” identify FE analysis specimens, and the remaining channel sections without “*” identify FE analysis
members. members.

The prediction results fcrl-org calculated by approximate prediction 0.655 and 0.055, respectively. It is found that the original approximate
equations and the analysis results fcrl-ANS in ANSYS are illustrated in prediction equations can not accurately predict the fcrl for channel sec­
Table 9. The mean ratio and the standard deviation of fcrl-org/fcrl-ANS are tions with web holes under pinned-pinned boundary conditions. Hence,

11
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Table 8
Ultimate loads and critical elastic buckling stresses for perforated channel sections with short lips.
Specimen fcrd-ANS (MPa) fcrd-FSM (MPa) fcrd-FSM /fcrd-ANS Pt or Pf (kN) PDSM-org (kN) PDSM-rev (kN) PDSM-org/Pt or Pf PDSM-rev/Pt or Pf

L600H160B80D15t2.0-H 164.664 171.419 1.041 136.593 126.825 114.204 0.928 0.836

L800H160B80D15t2.0-H 163.283 171.419 1.050 133.916 125.853 113.468 0.940 0.847
L1000H160B80D15t2.0-H 169.223 171.419 1.013 126.823 127.017 114.350 1.002 0.902
L1200H160B80D15t2.0-H 160.940 171.419 1.065 115.860 125.727 113.373 1.085 0.979
L600H160B80D15t2.5-H 234.995 242.276 1.031 181.952 191.763 170.480 1.054 0.937
L800H160B80D15t2.5-H 235.457 242.276 1.029 183.314 190.167 169.238 1.037 0.923
L1000H160B80D15t2.5-H 236.597 242.276 1.024 168.806 192.741 171.242 1.142 1.014
L1200H160B80D15t2.5-H 232.290 242.276 1.043 167.067 190.256 169.307 1.139 1.013
L600H160B80D15t3.0-H 323.573 314.859 0.973 240.792 273.485 227.118 1.136 0.943
L800H160B80D15t3.0-H 318.382 314.859 0.989 235.935 271.637 225.719 1.151 0.957
L1000H160B80D15t3.0-H 325.190 314.859 0.968 236.283 275.387 228.563 1.165 0.967
L1200H160B80D15t3.0-H 319.142 314.859 0.987 237.990 271.909 225.925 1.143 0.949
L600H180B80D15t2.0-H 149.007 156.422 1.050 116.726 115.605 111.734 0.990 0.957
L800H180B80D15t2.0-H 151.835 156.422 1.030 118.229 114.834 111.115 0.971 0.940
L1000H180B80D15t2.0-H 153.441 156.422 1.019 120.464 116.380 112.357 0.966 0.933
L1200H180B80D15t2.0-H 150.768 156.422 1.038 116.882 114.784 111.075 0.982 0.950
L600H180B80D15t2.5-H* 184.161 194.795 1.058 178.242 181.409 163.729 1.018 0.919
L800H180B80D15t2.5-H* 185.144 194.795 1.052 180.279 180.267 162.849 1.000 0.903
L1000H180B80D15t2.5-H* 188.323 194.795 1.034 177.754 183.344 165.221 1.031 0.929
L1200H180B80D15t2.5-H* 183.097 194.795 1.064 168.654 180.213 162.807 1.069 0.965
L600H180B80D15t3.0-H 256.539 266.497 1.039 245.921 224.255 224.255 0.912 0.912
L800H180B80D15t3.0-H 253.693 266.497 1.050 240.878 223.278 223.278 0.927 0.927
L1000H180B80D15t3.0-H 265.432 266.497 1.004 219.641 227.258 227.258 1.035 1.035
L1200H180B80D15t3.0-H 251.094 266.497 1.061 223.274 221.436 221.436 0.992 0.992
L600H200B80D15t2.0-H 129.818 137.376 1.058 123.630 111.442 105.960 0.901 0.857
L800H200B80D15t2.0-H 131.521 137.376 1.045 124.842 110.873 105.516 0.888 0.845
L1000H200B80D15t2.0-H 133.750 137.376 1.027 118.205 112.708 106.949 0.953 0.905
L1200H200B80D15t2.0-H 128.673 137.376 1.068 117.528 110.618 105.316 0.941 0.896
L600H200B80D15t2.5-H 169.792 176.206 1.038 186.807 172.726 158.342 0.925 0.848
L800H200B80D15t2.5-H 170.972 176.206 1.031 171.555 178.494 162.783 1.040 0.949
L1000H200B80D15t2.5-H 173.319 176.206 1.017 176.903 175.385 160.390 0.991 0.907
L1200H200B80D15t2.5-H 168.747 176.206 1.044 167.256 171.828 157.650 1.027 0.943
L600H200B80D15t3.0-H 217.569 230.217 1.058 248.285 243.353 217.822 0.980 0.877
L800H200B80D15t3.0-H 214.825 230.217 1.072 244.469 242.313 217.017 0.991 0.888
L1000H200B80D15t3.0-H 217.639 230.217 1.058 218.979 248.109 221.505 1.133 1.012
L1200H200B80D15t3.0-H 213.944 230.217 1.076 214.409 241.940 216.729 1.128 1.011
Mean 1.036 1.020 0.932
ST. DEV 0.026 0.080 0.051

Note: fcrd-ANS represents critical elastic distortional buckling stress obtained from ANSYS; fcrd-FSM represents critical elastic distortional buckling stress obtained from
CUFSM; Pt identifies experimental ultimate loads; Pf identifies FE analysis ultimate loads; PDSM-org represents prediction loads calculated by original DSM (Eq. (1));
PDSM-rev represents prediction loads calculated by revised DSM (Eq. (14)); channel sections with “*” identify specimens, and the remaining channel sections without “*”
identify FE analysis members.

the revised prediction equations were developed based on fcrl-ANS and channel sections without web holes were compared to the results Pt or Pf
original prediction equations. The revised prediction equations are obtained from tests or FE analyses, as shown in Fig. 22. For unperforated
given in Eqs. (11)–(13). channel sections failed mainly by distortional buckling, the mean value
( )3 of PDSM to Pt or Pf ratio is 0.999 and the corresponding standard devi­
1.8 HB B ation is 0.040, as illustrated in Table 6. For unperforated channel sec­
k = 7− − 1.43 (11)
0.15 + HB H tions failed by local buckling, the mean value of PDSM to Pt or Pf ratio is
( )2 0.996 and the corresponding standard deviation is 0.052, as listed in
fcrh = fcrA = kA
π2 E t
(12) Table 7. It is found that the DSM formulas for channel sections without
12(1 − ν 2) hA web holes are suitable for calculating the axial design strength of
channel sections without web holes under pinned-pinned boundary
kA = 0.575 +
0.2
(13) conditions.
0.9
(Lh /hA ) − 0.6 The prediction results PDSM-org calculated by the original DSM of Eqs.
(1) and (2) were compared against the results Pt or Pf obtained from the
where B = flange width. tests or FE analyses. For perforated channel sections failed mainly by
The prediction results fcrl-rev calculated using revised prediction distortional buckling as shown in Fig. 23(a), it is found that PDSM-org is
equations were compared to fcrl-ANS, as listed in Table 9. The fcrl-rev to fcrl- slightly un-conservative by 6.7% on average when the value of λd is less
ANS mean ratio and the standard deviation are 1.002 and 0.014, than 1.3 while it is slightly conservative by 1.7% on average when the
respectively. The maximum deviation value is only 4%, which also in­ value of λd is more than 1.3. For perforated channel sections failed by
dicates that revised prediction equations can accurately predict fcrl of local buckling as shown in Fig. 23(b), the PDSM-org to Pt or Pf mean ratio is
channel sections with web holes under pinned-pinned boundary 1.270 with the corresponding standard deviation of 0.050. As listed in
conditions. Table 9, the maximum deviation value is up to 34.7%, indicating that
the current DSM rules are un-conservative, when determining the axial
5.4. Comparison of the prediction results of DSM with the results of tests capacity of such sections with slotted web holes.
and FE analyses

The prediction results PDSM obtained from the DSM formulas for

12
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Table 9
Ultimate loads and critical elastic buckling stresses for perforated channel sections with long lips.
Specimen fcrl-ANS fcrl-org fcrl-rev fcrl-org/fcrl- fcrl-rev/fcrl- Pt or Pf PDSM-org PDSM-rev PDSM-org/Pt PDSM-rev/Pt
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) ANS ANS (kN) (kN) (kN) or Pf or Pf

L600H160B80D30t2.0-H 159.288 94.203 155.315 0.591 0.975 130.055 171.283 132.544 1.317 1.019
L800H160B80D30t2.0-H 156.768 94.203 155.315 0.601 0.991 128.361 170.328 131.734 1.327 1.026
L1000H160B80D30t2.0-H 156.786 94.203 155.315 0.601 0.991 127.088 170.334 131.740 1.340 1.037
L1200H160B80D30t2.0-H 155.336 94.203 155.315 0.606 1.000 129.929 169.780 131.269 1.307 1.010
L600H160B80D30t2.5-H 244.713 147.193 242.679 0.601 0.992 208.417 248.327 194.755 1.191 0.934
L800H160B80D30t2.5-H 241.737 147.193 242.679 0.609 1.004 203.778 247.296 193.880 1.214 0.951
L1000H160B80D30t2.5-H 243.660 147.193 242.679 0.604 0.996 190.275 247.964 194.447 1.303 1.022
L1200H160B80D30t2.5-H 241.405 147.193 242.679 0.610 1.005 189.971 247.181 193.782 1.301 1.020
L600H160B80D30t3.0-H 353.892 211.957 349.458 0.599 0.987 250.923 337.115 266.824 1.344 1.063
L800H160B80D30t3.0-H 347.166 211.957 349.458 0.611 1.007 249.993 334.995 265.037 1.340 1.060
L1000H160B80D30t3.0-H 348.544 211.957 349.458 0.608 1.003 248.933 335.432 265.405 1.347 1.066
L1200H160B80D30t3.0-H 345.786 211.957 349.458 0.613 1.011 250.639 334.556 264.666 1.335 1.056
L600H180B80D30t2.0-H 124.995 78.051 122.340 0.624 0.979 133.203 163.364 125.432 1.226 0.942
L800H180B80D30t2.0-H 123.217 78.051 122.340 0.633 0.993 130.421 162.534 124.730 1.246 0.956
L1000H180B80D30t2.0-H 124.237 78.051 122.340 0.628 0.985 129.039 163.012 125.134 1.263 0.970
L1200H180B80D30t2.0-H 121.876 78.051 122.340 0.640 1.004 128.932 161.903 124.196 1.256 0.963
L600H180B80D30t2.5-H* 194.452 121.954 191.156 0.627 0.983 203.267 241.582 188.170 1.188 0.926
L800H180B80D30t2.5-H* 191.322 121.954 191.156 0.637 0.999 201.863 240.230 187.020 1.190 0.926
L1000H180B80D30t2.5- 193.099 121.954 191.156 0.632 0.990 193.254 240.999 187.674 1.247 0.971
H*
L1200H180B80D30t2.5- 189.238 121.954 191.156 0.644 1.010 179.549 239.320 186.247 1.333 1.037
H*
L600H180B80D30t3.0-H 278.044 215.530 275.265 0.775 0.990 266.631 325.335 258.686 1.220 0.970
L800H180B80D30t3.0-H 273.145 215.530 275.265 0.789 1.008 264.689 323.396 257.026 1.222 0.971
L1000H180B80D30t3.0-H 276.340 215.530 275.265 0.780 0.996 250.887 324.663 258.111 1.294 1.029
L1200H180B80D30t3.0-H 270.154 215.530 275.265 0.798 1.019 246.452 322.200 256.002 1.307 1.039
L600H200B80D30t2.0-H 101.103 67.420 101.097 0.667 1.000 123.151 161.085 122.613 1.308 0.996
L800H200B80D30t2.0-H 100.153 67.420 101.097 0.673 1.009 125.153 160.539 122.153 1.283 0.976
L1000H200B80D30t2.0-H 101.560 67.420 101.097 0.664 0.995 129.424 161.347 122.833 1.247 0.949
L1200H200B80D30t2.0-H 98.588 67.420 101.097 0.684 1.025 125.291 159.631 121.388 1.274 0.969
L600H200B80D30t2.5-H 157.175 105.344 157.964 0.670 1.005 189.520 235.535 182.182 1.243 0.961
L800H200B80D30t2.5-H 155.393 105.344 157.964 0.678 1.017 185.959 234.594 181.384 1.262 0.975
L1000H200B80D30t2.5-H 157.879 105.344 157.964 0.667 1.001 193.604 235.905 182.496 1.218 0.943
L1200H200B80D30t2.5-H 153.087 105.344 157.964 0.688 1.032 183.442 233.366 180.342 1.272 0.983
L600H200B80D30t3.0-H 224.911 151.696 227.468 0.674 1.011 268.921 320.019 250.372 1.190 0.931
L800H200B80D30t3.0-H 221.963 151.696 227.468 0.683 1.025 265.790 318.577 249.147 1.199 0.937
L1000H200B80D30t3.0-H 225.963 151.696 227.468 0.671 1.007 252.691 320.530 250.807 1.268 0.993
L1200H200B80D30t3.0-H 218.579 151.696 227.468 0.694 1.041 244.230 316.904 247.726 1.298 1.014
Mean 0.655 1.002 1.270 0.989
ST. DEV 0.055 0.014 0.050 0.042

Note: fcrl-ANS represents critical elastic local buckling stress obtained from ANSYS; fcrl-org represents critical elastic local buckling stress calculated by original
approximate prediction formulas; fcrl-rev represents critical elastic local buckling stress calculated by revised approximate prediction formulas; Pt identifies experi­
mental ultimate loads; Pf identifies FE analysis ultimate loads; PDSM-org represents prediction loads calculated by original DSM (Eq. (2)); PDSM-rev represents prediction
loads calculated by revised DSM (Eq. (15)); channel sections with “*” identify specimens, and the remaining channel sections without “*” identify FE analysis members.

unstiffened strip "A"

hA

H h
tr hB
unstiffened strip "B"
t
Fig. 21. Definition of unstiffened strip “A” and “B” for a plate with hole.
t t
original DSM in AISI S100–16 [7]. The revised DSM formulas are given
below:
The nominal axial design strength of distortional buckling (Pnd) for
(a) Original cross section (b) Modified cross section channel sections with web holes under pinned-pinned boundary
conditions.
Fig. 20. Modified cross section.

6. Proposed design formulas

The revised DSM formulas for channel sections with web holes under
pinned-pinned boundary conditions were developed based on the

13
J. Zhao et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673

Fig. 22. Comparison of the ultimate loads obtained from test and FE analyses with DSM curves for unperforated channel sections.

Fig. 23. Comparison of the ultimate loads obtained from tests and FE analyses with DSM curves for perforated channel sections.

⎧
⎪ Pynet for λd ≤ λd1 failed mainly by distortional buckling, it is found that PDSM-rev is more
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ conservative than PDSM-org. For perforated channel sections failed by
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ [ ] local buckling, the PDSM-rev to Pt or Pf mean ratio and the standard de­
⎨ Pynet − Pd2
Pnd = Pynet − λd − λd1 for λd1 < λd ≤ λd2 (14) viation are 0.989 and 0.042, respectively, as listed in Table 9. And the
⎪
⎪
⎪
λd2 − λd1 deviation value does not exceed 10%, which indicates that the revised
⎪ [ ]
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
(
Pcrd
)0.48 (
Pcrd
)0.48 DSM formulas are more accurate in predicting the ultimate loads.
⎪
⎪ 0.8 1 − 0.18 Py for λd > λd2
⎩ Py Py
7. Conclusions
0.4
where λd1 = 0.513(Pynet/Py); λd2 = 0.513[14.0(Py/Pynet) − 13.0]; Pd2
This paper has reported the results of 16 new laboratory tests on the
= 0.8[1 − 0.18(1/λd2)0.96](1/λd2)0.96Py. The application range of revised
axial strength of CFS channel sections with slotted web holes. The ulti­
DSM formulas for distortinal buckling is that the value of λd is more than
mate axial strength and failure modes were recorded and discussed in
1.0 but less than 2.0.
this paper. Following conclusions can be drawn from the outcome of this
The nominal axial design strength of local buckling (Pnl) for channel
study:
sections with web holes under pinned-pinned boundary conditions.
⎧
⎪
⎪ Pne ≤ Pynet for λl ≤ 0.518 (1) The test results show that the specimens with short lips displayed
⎨ [ ( )0.45 ]( )0.45 distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by distortional
Pnl = Pcrl Pcrl
⎪
⎩ 0.82 1 − 0.18 Pne
⎪ Pne ≤ Pynet for λl > 0.518 buckling, while those with long lips displayed local buckling. The
Pne
existence of industry-standard slotted web holes changed the
(15) location of local buckling from near the maximum initial local
imperfections of web to near the slotted web holes, and caused
The application range of revised DSM formulas for local buckling is
the axial capacities to decrease slightly by 2.4% on average for
that the value of λl is more than 0.9 but less than 2.0.
specimens with short lips and 6.4% on average for specimens
The prediction results PDSM-rev obtained by the revised DSM of Eqs.
with long lips.
(14) and (15) were compared to the results (Pt or Pf obtained from tests
or FE analyses, as shown in Fig. 23. For perforated channel sections

14
J. Zhao et al.
(2) A numerical model is then developed and validated against the
corresponding results obtained from laboratory tests, which
showed good agreement in terms of ultimate strength, failure
modes and load versus axial displacement curves . A parametric
study comprising 80 FE models was conducted based on the
validated FE model.
(3) The caculation results of critical elestic buckling stress obtained
from the finite strip method and the revised prediction equations
agreed well with the analysis results in ANSYS. It indicates that
the finite strip method and the revised prediction equations could
be used to predict critical elastic buckling stress for channel
sections with industry-standard slotted web holes under pinned-
pinned boundary conditions.
(4) For CFS channel sections failed by local buckling, the current
DSM formulas in AISI S100–16 for CFS sections with web holes
are demonstrated to be un-conservative by 27.0% on average,
when determining the axial capacity of such CFS sections under
pinned-pinned boundary conditions. For CFS channel sections
failed mainly by distortional buckling, the current DSM formulas
are slightly un-conservative by 6.7% on average when the value
of λd is less than 1.3, while they are slightly conservative by 1.7%
on average when the value of λd is more than 1.3.
(5) The new design formulas were developed based on the current
DSM formulas for CFS channel sections with web holes. The
comparison indicates that the proposed design formulas can
accurately determine the axial capacity of such CFS sections.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. There are no financial
and personal relationships with other people or organizations that can
inappropriately influence the work. There is no professional or other
personal interest which could be construed as influencing the position
presented in or the review of the manuscript.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
This study is financially supported by the Talent Introduction Project
of Shanghai Institute of Technology(YJ2022-24) and the Natural Science
Foundation of Heilongjiang Province (LH2019E006), which are grate­
fully acknowledged.
References
[1] J.Y. Zhao, K. Sun, C. Yu, J. Wang, Tests and direct strength design on cold-formed
steel channel beams with web holes, Eng. Struct. 184 (2019) 434–446, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.062.
[2] Z. Fang, K. Roy, J. Mares, C.W. Sham, B. Chen, J.B.P. Lim, Deep learning-based
axial capacity prediction for cold-formed steel channel sections using deep belief
network, Struct. 33 (2021) 2792–2802, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
istruc.2021.05.096.
[3] Z. Fang, K. Roy, B. Chen, C.W. Sham, I. Hajirasouliha, J.B.P. Lim, Deep learning-
based procedure for structural design of cold-formed steel channel sections with
edge-stiffened and un-stiffened holes under axial compression, Thin-Walled Struct.
166 (2021), 108076, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.108076.
[4] P. Gatheeshgar, H. Alsanat, K. Poologanathan, S. Gunalan, N. Degtyareva,
S. Wanniarachchi, I. Fareed, Web crippling of slotted perforated cold-formed steel
channels under EOF load case: simulation and design, J. Build. Eng. 44 (2021),
103306, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103306.
[5] C.D. Moen, B.W. Schafer, Experiments on cold-formed steel columns with holes,
Thin-Walled Struct. 46 (10) (2008) 1164–1182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tws.2008.01.0210.
[6] C.D. Moen, B.W. Schafer, Direct strength method for design of cold-formed steel
columns with holes, J. Struct. Eng. 137 (5) (2011) 559–570, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000310.
15
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 200 (2023) 107673
[7] American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), North American Specification for the
Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members AISI S100–16, 2016.
[8] M.P. Kulatunga, M. Macdonald, Investigation of cold-formed steel structural
members with perforations of different arrangements subjected to compression
loading, Thin-Walled Struct. 67 (2013) 78–87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tws.2013.02.014.
[9] M.P. Kulatunga, M. Macdonald, J. Rhodes, D.K. Harrison, Load capacity of cold-
formed column members of lipped channel cross-section with perforations
subjected to compression loading - part I: FE simulation and test results, Thin-
Walled Struct. 80 (2014) 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2014.02.017.
[10] Z. Yao, K.J.R. Rasmussen, Perforated cold-formed steel members in compression. I:
Parametric studies, J. Struct. Eng. 143 (5) (2017) 04016226, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001635.
[11] Z. Yao, K.J.R. Rasmussen, Perforated cold-formed steel members in compression.
II: Design, J. Struct. Eng. 143 (5) (2017) 04016227, https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001636.
[12] B. Chen, K. Roy, A. Uzzaman, G.M. Raftery, D. Nash, G.C. Clifton, P. Pouladi, J.B.
P. Lim, Effects of edge-stiffened web openings on the behaviour of cold-formed
steel channel sections under compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 144 (2019), 106307,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.106307.
[13] B. Chen, K. Roy, A. Uzzaman, G.M. Raftery, J.B.P. Lim, Parametric study and
simplified design equations for cold-formed steel channels with edge-stiffened
holes under axial compression, J. Constr. Steel Res. 172 (2020), 106161, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2020.106161.
[14] T.V. Galambos, Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures, 5th ed.,
John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1998, pp. 78–143.
[15] Steel Stud Manufacturers Association (SSMA), Product Technical Information,
Steel Stud Manufacturers Association, Chicago, 2010.
[16] D. Dubina, V. Ungureany, Effect of imperfections on numerical simulation of
instability behavior of cold-formed steel members, Thin-Walled Struct. 40 (3)
(2002) 239–262, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-8231(01)00046-5.
[17] C.G. Wang, Z.N. Zhang, D.Q. Zhao, Q.Q. Liu, Compression tests and numerical
analysis of web-stiffened channels with complex edge stiffeners, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 116 (1) (2016) 29–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.08.013.
[18] T.P. Desmond, Edge stiffeners for thin-walled members, J. Struct. Div. Proc. 107
(2) (1981) 329–353.
[19] ANSYS Inc, ANSYS Mechanical APDL Structural Analysis Guide: ANSYS Release
13.0, USA, 2010.
[20] R. Feng, X. Mou, Z. Chen, K. Roy, B. Chen, J.B.P. Lim, Finite-element modelling and
design guidelines for axial compressive capacity of aluminium alloy circular
hollow sections with holes, Thin-Walled Struct. 157 (2020), 107027, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.107027.
[21] D.M.M.P. Dissanayake, K. Poologanathan, S. Gunalan, K.D. Tsavdaridis, K.
S. Wanniarachchi, B. Nagaratnam, Numerical investigation of cold-formed stainless
steel lipped channels with longitudinal stiffeners subjected to shear, Thin-Walled
Struct. 158 (2021), 107179, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.107179.
[22] J. Ye, I. Hajirasouliha, J. Becque, Experimental investigation of local-flexural
interactive buckling of cold-formed steel channel columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 125
(2018) 245–258, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.01.020.
[23] J. Ye, S.M. Mojtabaei, I. Hajirasouliha, Local-flexural interactive buckling of
standard and optimised cold-formed steel columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 144 (2018)
106–118, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.01.012.
[24] K. Roy, C. Mohammadjani, J.B.P. Lim, Experimental and numerical investigation
into the behaviour of face-to-face built-up cold-formed steel channel sections under
compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 134 (2019) 291–309, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tws.2018.09.045.
[25] K. Roy, T.C.H. Ting, H.H. Lau, J.B.P. Lim, Experimental and numerical
investigations on the axial capacity of cold-formed steel built-up box sections,
J. Constr. Stell Res. 160 (2019) 411–427, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jcsr.2019.05.038.
[26] K. Roy, T.C.H. Ting, H.H. Lau, J.B.P. Lim, Effect of thickness on the behaviour of
axially loaded back-to-back cold-formed steel built-up channel sections-
experimental and numerical investigation, Struct. 16 (2018) 327–346, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.istruc.2018.09.009.
[27] B.W. Schafer, T. Peköz, Computational modeling of cold-formed steel:
characterizing geometric imperfections and residual stresses, J. Constr. Stell Res.
47 (3) (1998) 193–210, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0143-974X(98)00007-8.
[28] C.D. Moen, B.W. Schafer, Elastic buckling of cold-formed steel columns and beams
with holes, Eng. Struct. 31 (12) (2009) 2812–2824, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2009.07.007.
[29] C.D. Moen, Direct Strength Design of Cold-Formed Steel Members with
Perforations, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 2008.
[30] Z. Li, B.W. Schafer, Buckling analysis of cold-formed steel members with general
boundary conditions using CUFSM: conventional and constrained finite strip
methods, in: Proceedings of the Twentieth International Specialty Conference on
Cold-formed Steel Structures, Louis, Missouri, USA, 2010.
[31] B.W. Schafer, T. PekÖz, Direct Strength Prediction of Cold-Formed Steel Members
Using Numerical Elastic Buckling Solutions, Second International Conference on
Thin-Walled Structures: Thin-Walled Structures Research and Development,
Elsevier Science Ltd, Singapore, 1998, pp. 137–144.
[32] C.D. Moen, B.W. Schafer, Elastic buckling of thin plates with holes in compression
or bending, Thin-Walled Struct. 47 (12) (2009) 1597–1607, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tws.2009.05.001.