Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Tests and direct strength design on cold-formed steel channel beams with T
web holes
⁎
Jinyou Zhaoa, , Kuo Suna, Cheng Yub, Jun Wanga
a
School of Civil Engineering, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
b
Department of Engineering Technology, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76207, United States

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: To investigate the flexural behaviors of cold-formed steel channel beams with web holes and assess the reliability
Cold-formed steel channel beam of the current direct strength method (DSM) for design of cold-formed steel beams with web holes stipulated in
Web hole North American Specification (NAS) (2016), ten groups of specimens with various sizes of web holes and lips
Flexural behavior were tested under four-point bending. Among them, each kind of specimens with short lips or long lips have five
Direct strength method (DSM)
kinds of hole height-to-web depth ratios, 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8. It is shown that the web holes change the failure
Critical elastic buckling stress
modes of beams from only distortional buckling or only local buckling to distortional-local buckling interaction
controlled by distortional buckling or local-distortional buckling interaction controlled by local buckling. It is
found that the moment capacities reduce slightly with a maximum reduction value of 7.0% when the ratio of
hole height-to-web depth increases from 0 to 0.4, and that the moment capacities reduce dramatically with a
maximum reduction value of 16.3% when the ratio of hole height-to-web depth further increases to 0.8.
Moreover, ANSYS finite element (FE) program was used to simulate the beam tests, the simulation results show
good agreement with the test results in terms of moment capacities and failure modes. Extensive ANSYS FE
parametric analysis were carried out to verify the accurateness of critical elastic distortional buckling stress
prediction method using CUFSM finite strip program and to modify the existed approximate prediction formulas
of critical elastic local buckling stress applying to such beams with web holes. Furthermore, the test results and
parametric analysis results were compared with the current DSM prediction results of cold-formed steel beams
with web holes. It is found that the DSM in NAS (2016) provides unconservative predictions for most cold-
formed steel channel beams with web holes, especially for beams failed by local-distortional buckling interaction
controlled by local buckling. Therefore, the modified direct strength method formulas for cold-formed steel
beams with web holes were proposed.

1. Introduction
The discrete holes are commonly placed in the webs of cold-formed
steel channel beams and columns to facilitate the installation of
plumbing, electrical facilities and heating conduits, which have effects
on the failure modes and moment capacities of these structural mem-
bers. A number of researchers such as Yu and Davis [1], Oritz-Colberg
[2], Shanmugam et al. [3,4] and Loov [5] successively conducted nu-
merous experimental and theoretical investigations on the failure
modes and moment capacities of stub columns, medium long columns
and long columns with web holes in recent decades. The bearing ca-
pacity formulas of cold-formed steel channel columns with web holes
were proposed based on effective width method, which were listed in
the relevant specifications. For the past few years, as the DSM being
proposed and applied, Moen and Schafer [6,7] carried out a series of
tests and finite element analyses (FEA) on cold-formed steel channel
columns with web holes, and the DSM was extended to perforated
compression members.
Up to now, there are few reports about the investigations on cold-
formed steel channel beams with web holes. In 2012, Yu [8] conducted
numerous finite element analyses on cold-formed steel C-section beams
with edge stiffened circular web holes to study on the stability beha-
viors of such beams. Corresponding to the significant improvement of
edge stiffened holes on flexural strengths, new design provisions were
proposed based on the DSM in NAS (2007). In 2013, Moen et al. [9]
carried out the tests on cold-formed steel channel beams with web holes
whose failures were controlled by distortional buckling and proposed
the DSM formulas for such beams, whereas the failure mode controlled

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jinyou2000@163.com (J. Zhao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.062
Received 31 July 2018; Received in revised form 14 December 2018; Accepted 15 January 2019
Available online 31 January 2019
0141-0296/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

by local buckling were not presented in these tests. Besides, the sizes of
web holes in this study were much bigger than the sizes recommended

200
by Steel Stud Manufacturers Association (SSMA) (2010) (hole height
h = 1.5 in, hole length Lh = 4 in) [10]. In 2015 and 2017, Wang et al.
[11,12] performed a number of experimental investigations and nu- 1200
merical studies on cold-formed steel built-up section beams with cir-
(a) The ratio of hole height-to-web depth h/H=0 (no holes)
cular web holes to investigate the flexural behaviors and the design
method of this kind of beams. It was found that the DSM in NAS [18] for

80
beams with web holes was suitable to predict the design strength of

200
40
cold-formed steel built-up section beams with circular web holes failed

80
by distortional buckling, but it was conservative to predict the design
strength of this kind of beams failed by local buckling. Nevertheless, it 250 100 200 100 200 100 250
is still necessary to assess the reliability of adopting DSM in NAS [18]
1200
for beams with web holes to predict the design strength of cold-formed
steel channel beam.
Therefore, this study focuses on different failure modes of cold-
(b) The ratio of hole height-to-web depth h/H=0.2
formed steel channel beams with web holes and the effects of hole

60 80 60
height-to-web depth ratio on moment capacities. The tests of cold-

200
formed steel channel beams with various hole heights and lip widths
were conducted under four-point bending. The finite element models
(FEM) validated by tests were utilized to carry out numerous para-
250 100 200 100 200 100 250
metric analyses, and the analysis results were used to verify the accu-
rateness of critical elastic distortional buckling stress prediction method 1200
using CUFSM finite strip program and to modify the existed approx- (c) The ratio of hole height-to-web depth h/H=0.4
imate prediction formulas of critical elastic local buckling stress ap-

40
plying to such beams with web holes. Furthermore, the current DSM
formulas of cold-formed steel channel beams with web holes stipulated

200
120
in NAS [18] were assessed and modified for engineering application.

40
2. Experimental investigation 250 100 200 100 200 100 250
1200
A total of 10 groups of pure bending static tests on cold-formed steel (d) The ratio of hole height-to-web depth h/H=0.6
channel beams with web holes were conducted in structural laboratory
of Northeast Forestry University to investigate the flexural behaviors of

20
this kind of beams and assess the reliability of current DSM for design of

200
160
this kind of beams stipulated in NAS [18].

20
2.1. Test specimens 250 100 200 100 200 100 250
1200
The definitions of geometric parameters of specimen sections are
illustrated in Fig. 1. Two kinds of sections with web holes and without
(e) The ratio of hole height-to-web depth h/H=0.8
web holes were selected for this study, and each kind of section has two Fig. 2. Locations and dimensions of web holes in research span of specimens.
kinds of lengths. The nominal short lip length and the nominal long lip
length of specimens are 20 and 40 mm, respectively. The nominal di-
Web holes were located at the quarter points in the research span of the
mensions of H, Bc, Bt and t for all sections are 200 mm, 80 mm, 80 mm
specimens, as shown in Fig. 2. In accordance with the hole dimensions
and 2.0 mm, respectively.
recommended by SSMA [10], 100 mm was selected as the length of web
The whole length of specimens is 3720 mm, and the middle span
holes. The height of web holes is a variable parameter as the ratio of
under pure bending with the length of 1200 mm is the research span.
hole height-to-web depth varying from 0 to 0.8.
Bc Bc
A total of 10 groups of beam tests were designed, and two identical
beams were tested together at the same time through the back-to-back
connection. The labeling rule of specimens is shown in Fig. 3. The
dc

r r
dc

measured actual cross-section dimensions and web hole dimensions of

each specimen are presented in Table 1.
c c
t

t
H

H
h

2.2. Material properties

t t Cold-rolled steel sheets of grade Q345B were selected to manu-

facture the specimens. Tensile coupon tests were carried out to obtain
r r
dt

dt

the material properties of the specimens. In accordance with the

Chinese Standard GB/T 228-2002 [13], 9 tensile coupons were ex-
Bt Bt
tracted along the longitudinal direction of the specimens on the sheets.
(a) Section with web hole (b) Section without web hole Measured material properties shown in Table 2 are mean values of
results obtained from 9 tensile coupons.
Fig. 1. The definitions of geometric parameters.

435
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Fig. 3. Labeling rule of specimens.

2.3. Initial geometric imperfections Table 2

Results of tensile coupon tests.
Initial geometric imperfections are usually generated in fabrication Coupon fy/MPa fu/MPa E/MPa v/MPa
and transportation which have great influence on the flexural behaviors
5
of cold-formed steel members [14]. Initial local geometric imperfec- 1 406.5 548.2 2.13 × 10 0.244
tions (Δl) and initial distortional geometric imperfections (Δd) of com- 2 386.4 527.9 1.98 × 105 0.261
3 401.3 548.6 1.86 × 105 0.270
pression flanges of all specimens were measured before tests. The il-
4 398.7 550.7 1.92 × 105 0.267
lustration of deviations from flats for each kind of initial geometric 5 408.9 552.0 1.80 × 105 0.260
imperfection is shown in Fig. 4(a) [15]. Referring to the measuring 6 390.3 542.2 2.02 × 105 0.247
method in Ref. [16], the measuring locations across the sections and 7 399.2 544.6 1.93 × 105 0.275
8 405.1 547.4 1.89 × 105 0.276
measuring devices for Δl and Δd are illustrated in Fig. 4(b) and (c) re-
9 389.6 532.1 1.87 × 105 0.300
spectively. The rigid rods using for measuring Δl and Δd are shown in Mean 398 544 1.93 × 105 0.27
Fig. 4(d) and (e) respectively. The cross sections in the research span St. Dev 8 8 0.93 × 105 0.02
were measured with an interval of 60 mm along the specimen length.
Tables 3 and 4 list the average initial geometric imperfection magni- Note: fy is yield strength; fu is ultimate strength; E is Young’s modulus; v is
tudes for all specimens. Poisson ratio.

was used to apply the load to the specimens.

2.4. Test rig and operation

The test rig applied for four-point bending tests was shown in
Fig. 5(a). The beams were simply supported with roller support at one
side and pin support at the other side. Two back-to-back identical
specimens were tested at the same time, which were bolted to the load
transfer blocks at the loading points and end support points as shown in
Fig. 5(b) and (c) respectively. Outside the research span, two specimens
were connected by steel plate at the compression flanges to reduce the
influence of non-research span on research span. A screw hydraulic jack
2.5. Test results for short lip specimens
2.5.1. Failure mode controlled by distortional buckling
Experimental failure modes and ultimate moments for short lip
specimens are summarized in Table 5. Since the restraint of short lip on
compression flange is very limited, typical distortional buckling de-
formation was observed in all specimens with short lips, namely, the
intersecting line between compression flange and compression lip was

Table 1
Actual dimensions of specimen sections and holes.
Specimen H/mm Bc/mm dc/mm θc/(°) Bt/mm dt/mm θt/ (°) Left hole Lh (mm) × h (mm) Middle hole Lh (mm) × h (mm) Right hole Lh (mm) × h (mm)

H200r0d20t2.0-1 199.7 79.6 19.1 93.2 79.6 19.1 92.6 — — —

H200r0d20t2.0-2 199.6 79.8 19.1 93.2 79.4 18.9 92.8 — — —
H200r0.2d20t2.0-1 199.3 79.3 19.2 93.0 79.3 19.1 93.1 100.2 × 40.0 100.1 × 40.1 100.1 × 40.1
H200r0.2d20t2.0-2 199.7 79.4 19.2 93.4 79.5 19.2 92.9 100.1 × 40.1 100.0 × 39.8 100.1 × 40.1
H200r0.4d20t2.0-1 199.3 79.3 19.1 92.5 79.4 19.2 93.3 99.8 × 79.8 100.1 × 80.0 99.9 × 79.9
H200r0.4d20t2.0-2 199.4 79.6 19.4 91.1 79.8 19.6 92.3 100.1 × 80.1 100.1 × 79.9 99.9 × 79.8
H200r0.6d20t2.0-1 199.4 79.9 19.5 91.9 79.5 19.7 91.7 99.9 × 119.9 99.7 × 119.9 99.8 × 120.0
H200r0.6d20t2.0-2 199.4 79.6 19.4 91.9 79.6 19.6 91.9 100.1 × 120.0 100.0 × 119.8 99.8 × 119.8
H200r0.8d20t2.0-1 199.8 79.3 19.2 93.0 79.4 19.3 92.8 99.7 × 159.9 99.8 × 159.8 99.9 × 159.9
H200r0.8d20t2.0-2 199.3 79.3 19.2 93.5 79.4 19.2 93.3 100.0 × 160.1 99.9 × 159.8 99.9 × 159.8
H200r0d40t2.0-1 199.4 79.7 38.9 92.5 79.4 39.2 91.8 — — —
H200r0d40t2.0-2 199.6 79.3 39.1 91.8 79.5 39.2 91.9 — — —
H200r0.2d40t2.0-1 199.5 79.2 39.4 91.8 79.4 39.3 91.7 100.1 × 40.1 100.1 × 40.0 100.1 × 40.1
H200r0.2d40t2.0-2 199.4 79.2 39.4 92.6 79.4 39.3 92.4 100.3 × 40.1 100.0 × 40.1 100.1 × 40.1
H200r0.4d40t2.0-1 199.4 80.0 39.4 91.1 80.0 39.9 92.3 99.9 × 79.9 99.9 × 79.9 99.9 × 79.8
H200r0.4d40t2.0-2 199.2 80.3 39.7 91.6 79.8 39.6 91.9 99.9 × 79.8 100.0 × 80.0 99.9 × 79.8
H200r0.6d40t2.0-1 199.3 79.4 39.5 91.8 79.3 39.4 91.9 99.7 × 119.9 99.8 × 119.8 99.9 × 119.8
H200r0.6d40t2.0-2 199.5 79.3 39.4 92.0 79.4 39.3 91.8 100.0 × 119.8 100.1 × 120.1 100.2 × 120.0
H200r0.8d40t2.0-1 199.8 79.5 39.4 91.5 79.6 39.4 91.6 100.0 × 160.0 100.1 × 160.1 99.9 × 159.9
H200r0.8d40t2.0-2 200.1 79.3 39.5 91.8 79.4 39.3 91.7 99.9 × 159.9 99.9 × 159.8 100.0 × 159.8

Note: Lh is the length of web hole; h is the height of web hole.

436
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Rigid rod Dial gauge Rigid rod Dial gauge

l
d

Specimen Specimen

Magnetic base Magnetic base

(a) Measuring points (b) Measuring local geometric imperfections (c) Measuring distortional geometric imperfections

(e) Rigid rod for measuring initial local (d) Rigid rod for measuring initial
geometric imperfection distortional geometric imperfection
Fig. 4. Measuring locations and devices for initial geometric imperfections.

Table 3 controlled by distortional buckling in which local buckling deforma-

Average initial geometric imperfection magnitudes for short lip specimens. tions occurred in the unstiffened strips of the compression webs above
the holes, as shown in Fig. 6(b)–(d). And the failure mode sketch of
Specimen Δlavg /mm Δavg
d /mm Δlavg / t Δavg
d /t
cross-sections with web holes is shown in Fig. 6(f).
H200r0d20t2.0-1 0.202 3.754 0.101 1.877
H200r0d20t2.0-2 0.202 3.636 0.101 1.818
H200r0.2d20t2.0-1 0.210 3.752 0.105 1.876 2.5.2. Analysis for test moment capacities
H200r0.2d20t2.0-2 0.190 3.890 0.095 1.945 Taking the specimens without web holes as benchmarks, web holes
H200r0.4d20t2.0-1 0.214 3.693 0.107 1.847 reduce the moment capacities of specimens. It is found that the moment
H200r0.4d20t2.0-2 0.177 3.645 0.089 1.823
H200r0.6d20t2.0-1 0.175 3.579 0.088 1.789
capacity reduces slightly with a reduction value of 7.0% when the ratio
H200r0.6d20t2.0-2 0.177 3.563 0.089 1.781 of hole height-to-web depth increases from 0 to 0.4, and that the re-
H200r0.8d20t2.0-1 0.181 3.467 0.090 1.734 duction value of moment capacity is up to 12.8% when the ratio of hole
H200r0.8d20t2.0-2 0.179 3.861 0.090 1.931 height-to-web depth further increases to 0.8.
Mean 0.095 1.842

2.6. Test results for long lip specimens

Table 4
Average initial geometric imperfection magnitudes for long lip specimens. 2.6.1. Failure mode controlled by local buckling
Specimen Δlavg /mm Δavg Δlavg / t Δavg Experimental failure modes and ultimate moments for long lip
d /mm d /t
specimens are summarized in Table 6. Compared with the specimens
H200r0d40t2.0-1 0.186 2.038 0.093 1.019 with short lips, compression flanges of long lip specimens can obtain
H200r0d40t2.0-2 0.184 1.884 0.092 0.942 more restraint from lips. Hence, obvious local buckling deformations
H200r0.2d40t2.0-1 0.182 1.827 0.091 0.914
H200r0.2d40t2.0-2 0.176 2.579 0.088 1.290
were observed in all specimens with long lips. The specimens without
H200r0.4d40t2.0-1 0.176 1.963 0.088 0.981 web holes displayed only local buckling deformation which occurred in
H200r0.4d40t2.0-2 0.181 1.849 0.090 0.924 both compression flanges and compression lips, as shown in Fig. 7(a).
H200r0.6d40t2.0-1 0.205 1.856 0.103 0.928 The specimens with web holes displayed local-distortional buckling
H200r0.6d40t2.0-2 0.184 1.926 0.092 0.963
interaction controlled by local buckling deformations, and the local
H200r0.8d40t2.0-1 0.209 1.860 0.105 0.930
H200r0.8d40t2.0-2 0.204 1.983 0.102 0.992 buckling deformations were found at compression flanges, compression
Mean 0.094 0.988 lips and the unstiffened strips above the holes as shown in Fig. 7(b)–(e).
In contrast to the distortional buckling deformations of short lip spe-
cimens, the intersecting line between compression flange and com-
always up-down-up. The specimens without web holes displayed only pression lip displayed slightly overall downward concave deformation.
distortional buckling deformation, as shown in Fig. 6(a). The specimens The failure mode sketch of cross-sections with web holes is shown in
with web holes displayed distortional-local buckling interaction Fig. 7(f).

437
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Reaction frame carrier plate

Load transducer

Screw hydraulic jack

Spreader beam
Roller support Pin support
Steel plate
Load transfer block
Load transfer block

Roller support Pin support

Specimen Piers
Displacement
tansducer
60 1200 1200 1200 60

3720

(a) Loading rig

12

12
12 High-strength bolt 12
High-strength bolt

Specimen

12
Specimen

300
300

(b) Specimen connection at loading points (c) Specimen connection at end support points

(d) Overall view of loading rig

Fig. 5. Test loading rig.

2.6.2. Analysis for test moment capacities
It is found that the moment capacity reduces slightly with a re-
duction value of 6.2% when the ratio of hole height-to-web depth in-
creases from 0 to 0.4, and that the moment capacity reduces dramati-
cally with a reduction value of 16.3% when the ratio of hole height-to-
web depth further increases to 0.8.
3. Verification of finite element models and parametric study
3.1. Verification of finite element models (FEM)
The SHELL 181 element in FE program ANSYS 12.0 was used to
develop FEM of the test beams for simulation analysis on buckling
behaviors and moment capacities. The steel plate and load transfer
blocks were also modeled. Coupling constraint was used to simulate

438
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Table 5 Table 6
Comparison of test and FEA results for the specimens with short lips. Comparison of test and FEA results for the specimens with long lips.
Specimen Test results ANSYS results Mf/Mt Specimen Test results ANSYS results Mf/Mt

Mt/(kN·m) Failure Mf/(kN·m) Failure Mt/(kN·m) Failure Mf/(kN·m) Failure

mode mode mode mode

H200r0d20t2.0-1 15.227 D 15.586 D 1.024 H200r0d40t2.0-1 17.404 L 16.852 L 0.968

H200r0d20t2.0-2 H200r0d40t2.0-2
H200r0.2d20t2.0-1 14.315 D(L) 14.390 D(L) 1.005 H200r0.2d40t2.0-1 16.684 L(D) 17.682 L(D) 1.060
H200r0.2d20t2.0-2 H200r0.2d40t2.0-2
H200r0.4d20t2.0-1 14.168 D(L) 14.389 D(L) 1.016 H200r0.4d40t2.0-1 16.333 L(D) 17.429 L(D) 1.067
H200r0.4d20t2.0-2 H200r0.4d40t2.0-2
H200r0.6d20t2.0-1 13.800 D(L) 13.656 D(L) 0.990 H200r0.6d40t2.0-1 15.154 L(D) 15.756 L(D) 1.040
H200r0.6d20t2.0-2 H200r0.6d40t2.0-2
H200r0.8d20t2.0-1 13.271 D(L) 12.374 D(L) 0.932 H200r0.8d40t2.0-1 14.565 L(D) 13.576 L(D) 0.932
H200r0.8d20t2.0-2 H200r0.8d40t2.0-2
Mean 0.993 Mean 1.013
St. Dev 0.032 St. Dev 0.054

Note: Mt is test ultimate moments; Mf is FEA ultimate moments; D(L) is dis- Note: Mt is test ultimate moments; Mf is FEA ultimate moments; L(D) is local-
tortional-local buckling interaction controlled by distortional buckling; distortional buckling interaction controlled by local buckling. L is local buck-
D = distortional buckling. ling.

connection between the beams and transfer blocks instead of physically
modeling bolts and holes. The dimensions of FEM cross sections were
identical with the measured results before tests. Considering both the
accuracy and time-efficiency of FEM analysis, an appropriate mesh size
of 10 mm × 10 mm was chosen for models in flat portions, and finer
mesh sizes were used at the round corners. The simply supported
boundary condition was applied to models by controlling the dis-
placements of nodes at the bottom of end load transfer blocks. The
material properties obtained from coupon tests shown in Table 2 were
inputted into FEM, and a bilinear stress-strain curve of material were
set with a slope of 0.01E after the yield stress.
The whole analysis procedure included two phases: eigenvalue
elastic buckling analysis and non-liner buckling analysis. Firstly, ei-
genvalue elastic buckling analysis was performed to extract the most
probable buckling mode (eigenmode 1) of the specimen. Referring to
the average measured results of initial geometric imperfections shown
in Tables 3 and 4, initial geometric imperfections were applied to ei-
genmode 1 to produce geometric imperfection of FEM. Secondly, non-
liner buckling analysis considering both material nonlinearity and
geometric nonlinearity was conducted using the arc-length method to
predict ultimate moments and failure modes of specimens.
The FEA results for ultimate moments and failure modes were
shown in Tables 5 and 6. The mean value of the FEA-to-test ultimate
moment ratios is 0.993 with corresponding standard deviation (St. Dev)
of 0.032 for short lip members, and that the mean value of the FEA-to-
test ultimate moment ratios is 1.013 with corresponding standard de-
viation (St. Dev) of 0.054 for long lip members. The maximum devia-
tion value between the FEA ultimate moments and test ultimate mo-
ments is 6.8%. H200r0.4d20t2.0-1 and H200r0.4d40t2.0-1 were taken
as examples to present failure mode comparisons between FEA and test

Local buckling Local buckling

deformation deformation

(a) H200r0d20t2.0-1 (b) H200r0.2d20t2.0-1 (c) H200r0.4d20t2.0-1

Local buckling Local buckling

deformation deformation

(d) H200r0.6d20t2.0-1 (e) H200r0.8d20t2.0-1 (f) Failure mode sketch of

cross-section with web holes
Fig. 6. Failure modes of specimens with short lips.

439
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Local buckling
Local buckling Local buckling
deformation
deformation deformation

(a) H200r0d40t2.0-1 (b) H200r0.2d40t2.0-1 (c) H200r0.4d40t2.0-1

Local buckling
deformation Local buckling
deformation

(f) Failure mode sketch of

(d) H200r0.6d40t2.0-1 (e) H200r0.8d40t2.0-1
cross-section with web holes
Fig. 7. Failure modes of specimens with long lips.

Local buckling
deformation

Local buckling
deformation

(a) H200r0.4d20t2.0-1 (Short lip member)

Local buckling
deformation
Local buckling
deformation

(b) H200r0.4d40t2.0-1 (Long lip member)

Fig. 8. Comparison of failure modes between test and FEA results.

440
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

results, as shown in Fig. 8(a) and (b). By the above mentioned com- ⎧ Mynet for λl ⩽ 0.776
parison, both the moment capacities and the failure modes obtained Mnl = Mcrl 0.4 Mcrl 0.4
from FEA show good agreement with test results, namely, the FEM ⎨⎡1 − 0.15
⎩⎣
( ) ⎦( )
Mne
⎤
Mne
Mne ⩽ Mynet for λl > 0.776
(2)
developed in this study had been well validated with the tests. Hence,
numerous FE parametric analyses can be carried out using the validated where λl = My / Mcrl ; Mcrl = critical elastic local buckling moment in-
FEM. cluding the influence of holes (Mcrl = Sf fcrl ; fcrl = critical elastic local
buckling stresses including the influence of holes); Mne = nominal
3.2. Finite element parametric study flexural strength for lateral-torsional buckling. According to F2 in NAS
[18], the nominal flexural strength for lateral-torsional buckling (Mne)
FE parametric analyses on 64 perforated cold-formed steel channel in DSM formulas can be replaced by the gross section yield moment
beams with various section profiles and sizes of web holes were carried (My) when beams were fully braced and never failed by lateral-torsional
out using the validated FEM to extend data for the following study on buckling.
DSM. The web height ranges from 180 to 220 mm and the plate
thickness ranges from 2.0 to 3.0 mm. The lips were designed with two 4.2. Prediction method of critical elastic buckling stresses for cold-formed
different sizes of 20 mm and 40 mm to obtain different failure modes. steel channel beams with web holes
The hole height-to-web depth ratio varies from 0.2 to 0.8 corresponding
to test specimens. The labeling rule for FEA members was same as one Although the critical elastic buckling stress can be obtained through
for test specimens as shown in Fig. 3. Yield strength fy = 345 MPa, eigenvalue buckling analysis using FEA, it is difficult to adopt the FEA
Young’s modulus E = 2.06 × 105 MPa and Poisson ratio ν = 0.3 were in engineering practice due to the complexity for developing FEM. In
used in the FE parametric analyses. The initial geometric imperfections accordance with finite strip analysis method and approximate predic-
were applied referring to the average measured results of initial geo- tion method developed by Moen and Schafer [9,19,20], the critical
metric imperfections shown in Tables 3 and 4. elastic buckling stresses of cold-formed channel beams with web holes
During the FE parametric analyses, it was found that the short lip could accurately be readily calculated.
beams failed by distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by
distortional buckling and the long lip beams failed by local-distortional 4.2.1. Prediction of critical elastic distortional buckling stresses
buckling interaction controlled by local buckling. The prediction results The critical elastic distortional buckling stresses of cold-formed
of critical elastic buckling stresses and ultimate moments obtained from channel beams with web holes can be calculated as follow [9,20]:
FEA were listed in Tables 7 and 8. fcrd = min(fcrdg , fcrdn ) (3)
4. Direct strength design for beams with web holes where fcrdg = critical elastic distortional buckling stress for a distor-
tional buckling half-wave occurring in the gross cross section, and
4.1. Introduction of DSM for cold-formed steel beams with web holes fcrdn = critical elastic distortional buckling stress for a distortional
buckling half-wave at a hole. fcrdg is determined by finite strip analysis
It has been twenty years since DSM was proposed in 1998 [17]. of the gross cross section at the half-wavelength Lcrd , and fcrdn can be
However, the DSM formulas for members with web holes were not determined by finite strip analysis of the modified section (See Fig. 9) in
prescribed in the relevant specification until the NAS (2016) [18] which web thickness t is replaced by reduced web thickness tr calcu-
proposed the DSM of members with web holes. DSM of flexural mem- lated by Eq. (4).
bers with web holes can be summarized as follows:
Lh 1/3
tr = (1 − ) t
Lcrd (4)
(a) The nominal flexural strength for distortional buckling (Mnd) of
beams with web holes where Lh is the longitudinal length of hole; Lcrd is the distortional
buckling half-wavelength of the member with gross cross section and
⎧ Mynet for λ d ⩽ λ d1
can be obtained from the finite strip analysis of the member with gross
⎪ M −M
⎪ Mynet − ⎡ ynet d2 ⎤ (λ d − λ d1) ⩽ for λ d1 < λ d ⩽ λ d2 cross section.
⎪
⎪
⎣ λ d2 − λ d1 ⎦ CUFSM prediction results (The full name of “CUFSM” is
0.5 0.5
Mnd = “Constrained and Unconstrained Finite Strip Method” developed by Ben
⎪ ⎣ ⎢ ( ) ( )
⎨ ⎡1 − 0.22 Mcrd
M
y
⎤ Mcrd
⎥ My
⎦
My
Schafer’s in John Hopkins University, and this program provides a full
⎪ 0.5 0.5 suite of finite strip analysis and related tools for thin-walled sections.
⎪⎣
⎩⎢
( ) ( )
⎪⎡1 − 0.22 Mcrd
M y
⎤ Mcrd
⎥
⎦
My
My for λ d > λ d2
(1)
[17]) of fcrd for short lip specimens with various hole height-to-web
depth ratios were compared with the results of eigenvalue elastic
where λ d = My / Mcrd ; λ d1 = 0.673(Mynet / My λd2 = limit of distor-
)3 ; buckling analyses (in ANSYS), as listed in Table 7. The finite strip
tional slenderness transition (λ d2 = 0.673(1.7(My /Mynet )2.7) − 0.7) ; analysis results of critical elastic distortional buckling stresses have
My = Sfy fy ; Mynet = Sfnet fy ; Sfy = elastic section modulus of full un- negligible deviation values with FEA results. The maximum deviation
reduced cross section relative to extreme fiber in first yielding; value is 8% with the corresponding standard deviation of 0.03.
Sfnet = net section modulus referenced to the extreme fiber at first yield;
fy = yield stress; Md2 = (1 − 0.22(1/ λ d2 ))(1/ λ d2 ) My ; Mcrd = critical 4.2.2. Prediction of critical elastic local buckling stresses
elastic distortional buckling moment including the influence of holes Moen [19] proposed the approximate prediction method for critical
(Mcrd = Sf fcrd ; fcrd = critical elastic distortional buckling stress in- elastic local buckling stress fcrl which would be dominated by the
cluding the influence of holes; Sf = gross elastic section modulus re- buckling of a stiffened element without the influence of holes or the
ferenced to the extreme compression fiber). buckling of an unstiffened strip adjacent to a hole. The prediction
equations are as follows:
(b) The nominal flexural strength for local buckling (Mnl) of beams with
fcrl = min(fcr , fcrh ) (5)
web holes
where fcr is the critical elastic local buckling stress for the stiffened
element without the influence of holes, and fcrh is the critical elastic
local buckling stress for the unstiffened strip adjacent to a hole. fcr can

441
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Table 7
Critical elastic buckling stresses and moment capacities for beams controlled by distortional buckling.
Specimen fcrd_ANS /MPa fcrd_FSM /MPa fcrd_FSM Mt and Mf MDSM_org (kN·m) MDSM_mod (kN·m) MDSM_org/ Mt and MDSM_org/ MDSM_mod / Mt and MDSM_mod /
fcrd_ANS (kN·m) Mf Mf

H180r0.2d20t2.0 433.02 429.83 0.99 11.82 12.57 11.30 1.06 0.96

H180r0.4d20t2.0 412.74 429.83 1.04 11.41 12.56 11.29 1.10 0.99
H180r0.6d20t2.0 417.45 429.83 1.03 11.08 12.51 11.25 1.13 1.02
H180r0.8d20t2.0 411.10 429.83 1.05 10.16 10.92 10.68 1.07 1.05
H180r0.2d20t2.5 559.74 539.80 0.96 16.18 16.72 15.00 1.03 0.93
H180r0.4d20t2.5 535.44 539.80 1.01 15.52 16.7 14.98 1.08 0.97
H180r0.6d20t2.5 529.81 539.80 1.02 14.81 16.36 14.94 1.10 1.01
H180r0.8d20t2.5 513.66 539.80 1.05 13.31 13.92 13.61 1.05 1.02
H180r0.2d20t3.0 694.70 650.85 0.94 20.24 20.97 18.80 1.04 0.93
H180r0.4d20t3.0 665.31 650.85 0.98 19.39 20.95 18.78 1.08 0.97
H180r0.6d20t3.0 652.16 650.85 1.00 18.29 19.84 18.73 1.08 1.02
H180r0.8d20t3.0 623.94 650.85 1.04 16.11 16.89 16.51 1.05 1.02
H200r0.2d20t2.0* 388.57 376.87 0.97 14.32 15.11 13.65 1.05 0.95
H200r0.4d20t2.0* 382.99 376.87 0.98 14.17 15.09 13.64 1.06 0.96
H200r0.6d20t2.0* 371.05 376.87 1.02 13.80 15.04 13.60 1.09 0.99
H200r0.8d20t2.0* 367.78 376.87 1.02 13.27 13.82 13.51 1.04 1.02
H200r0.2d20t2.5 530.89 512.66 0.97 18.37 18.88 16.94 1.03 0.92
H200r0.4d20t2.5 504.52 512.66 1.02 17.61 18.86 16.92 1.07 0.96
H200r0.6d20t2.5 503.53 512.66 1.02 16.79 18.66 16.87 1.11 1.00
H200r0.8d20t2.5 495.71 512.66 1.03 15.24 15.87 15.51 1.04 1.02
H200r0.2d20t3.0 659.07 612.58 0.93 22.87 23.67 21.22 1.04 0.93
H200r0.4d20t3.0 629.22 612.58 0.97 22.04 23.64 21.19 1.07 0.96
H200r0.6d20t3.0 620.87 612.58 0.99 20.79 22.63 21.13 1.09 1.02
H200r0.8d20t3.0 604.37 612.58 1.01 18.52 19.26 18.83 1.04 1.02
H220r0.2d20t2.0 382.07 386.55 1.01 14.99 15.76 14.19 1.05 0.95
H220r0.4d20t2.0 357.40 386.55 1.08 14.76 15.74 14.17 1.07 0.96
H220r0.6d20t2.0 374.25 386.55 1.03 13.95 15.68 14.12 1.12 1.01
H220r0.8d20t2.0 377.85 386.55 1.02 12.93 13.96 13.65 1.08 1.06
H220r0.2d20t2.5 499.96 487.3 0.97 20.35 21.07 18.92 1.04 0.93
H220r0.4d20t2.5 473.77 487.3 1.03 19.55 21.05 18.89 1.08 0.97
H220r0.6d20t2.5 478.03 487.3 1.02 18.70 20.97 18.82 1.12 1.01
H220r0.8d20t2.5 474.23 487.3 1.03 16.98 17.87 17.47 1.05 1.03
H220r0.2d20t3.0 621.78 589.11 0.95 25.44 26.55 23.80 1.04 0.94
H220r0.4d20t3.0 592.53 589.11 0.99 24.60 26.52 23.77 1.08 0.97
H220r0.6d20t3.0 589.90 589.11 1.00 23.21 25.56 23.69 1.10 1.02
H220r0.8d20t3.0 578.52 589.11 1.02 20.57 21.75 21.26 1.06 1.03
Mean 1.01 1.07 0.99
St. Dev 0.03 0.03 0.04

Note: fcrd_ANS is analysis results of critical elastic distortional buckling stress in ANSYS; fcrd_FSM is prediction results of critical elastic distortional buckling stress in
CUFSM; Mt is test ultimate moments; Mf is FEA ultimate moments; MDSM_org is prediction moments of original DSM (Eq. (1)); MDSM_mod is prediction moments of
modified DSM (Eq. (14)); beams with “*”are test specimens, and other beams are FEA members.

be determined by Eqs. (6) and (7). local buckling stress for unstiffened strip when a portion of the hole
must lie in the compression region at least (hA < Y); ψA = the gradient
kπ 2E t
fcr = ( )2 of the compressive stress distribution; Lh = length of web hole;
12(1 − ν 2) H (6)
h = height of web hole; kA = buckling coefficient for the unstiffened
H−Y strip.
k = 2(1 + ψ)3 + 2(1 + ψ) + 4 ψ = |f1′ / f1 | = Prediction results of fcrl for long lip specimens with various hole
Y (7)
height-to-web depth ratio were compared with the results of eigenvalue
where k = buckling coefficient for the stiffened element; t = plate
elastic buckling analyses (in ANSYS), as listed in Table 8. The sig-
thickness; H = web depth; ψ = the absolute value of the ratio of tensile
nificant deviations with a maximum value of 24% were presented.
stress ( f1′) to compressive stress (f1) applied to the stiffened element;
Therefore, modifications were proposed for the Eqs. (5) and (10) based
Y = the location of the plate neutral axis (See Fig. 10).
on the eigenvalue elastic buckling analysis results corresponding to
Then fcrh can be determined by Eqs. (8)–(11).
long lip specimens. The corresponding modified equations are as fol-
hA lows:
⎧ fcrA (1 + ψA ) Y
hA + h ⩾ Y
fcrh = h h 790 - 1.5H h/H ⎞
⎨ f ⎡1 − (2ψA − ) hA + h < Y fcrl = min(fcr , fcrh )·⎛ −
⎩ crA ⎣ Y Y ⎤⎦ (8) ⎝ 790 − 1.5H − h 2 ⎠ (12)
kA π 2E t
fcrA = ( )2 0.578 2.70 − 1.76ψA ⎤ (1 + 0.65 Iynet )
12(1 − ν 2) hA (9) kA = ⎡ +
⎢ ψ + 0.34 0.024ψ + 0.035 + (Lh / hA ) 2⎥ Ig (13)
⎣ A A ⎦
0.578 2.70 − 1.76ψA
kA = + where Iynet = the nominal net strong axis centroidal moments of inertia;
ψA + 0.34 0.024ψA + 0.035 + (Lh / hA )2 (10)
Ig = the nominal gross strong axis centroidal moments of inertia.
f2 Y − hA The prediction results using the modified formulas (Eqs. (12) and
ψA = = (13)) show good agreement with FEA results as presented in Table 8.
f1 Y (11)
Except the maximum deviation value is 11%, other deviation values are
where hA = the location of web hole (See Fig. 10); fcrA = critical elastic mostly below 5%. Meanwhile, the standard deviation declines from

442
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

Table 8
Critical elastic buckling stresses and moment capacities for beams controlled by local buckling.
Specimen fcrl_ANS /MPa fcrl_org /MPa fcrl_mod /MPa fcrl _org fcrl _mod Mt and Mf MDSM_org(kN·m) MDSM_mod(kN·m) MDSM_org/ Mt and MDSM_mod/Mt and
fcrl _ANS fcrl _ANS (kN·m) MDSM_org/ Mf MDSM_mod/Mf

H180r0.2d40t2.0 478.11 505.76 492.80 1.06 1.03 14.56 15.30 15.30 1.05 1.05
H180r0.4d40t2.0 467.89 470.35 451.87 1.01 0.97 14.06 14.87 14.87 1.06 1.06
H180r0.6d40t2.0 501.83 487.28 468.83 0.97 0.93 12.56 15.00 12.33 1.19 0.98
H180r0.8d40t2.0 511.50 551.10 541.72 1.08 1.06 10.83 15.61 11.42 1.44 1.05
H180r0.2d40t2.5 731.87 790.25 770.00 1.08 1.05 19.57 19.80 19.80 1.01 1.01
H180r0.4d40t2.5 711.37 734.87 706.00 1.03 0.99 18.89 19.54 19.54 1.03 1.03
H180r0.6d40t2.5 769.65 761.21 732.39 0.99 0.95 16.96 18.83 17.28 1.11 1.02
H180r0.8d40t2.5 784.00 861.09 846.44 1.10 1.08 14.89 17.46 15.60 1.17 1.05
H180r0.2d40t3.0 1038.20 1137.94 1108.79 1.10 1.07 24.45 23.51 23.51 0.96 0.96
H180r0.4d40t3.0 997.39 1058.14 1016.57 1.06 1.02 23.32 23.19 23.19 0.99 0.99
H180r0.6d40t3.0 1080.31 1095.91 1054.41 1.01 0.98 21.60 22.34 22.34 1.03 1.03
H180r0.8d40t3.0 1094.18 1239.97 1218.87 1.13 1.11 19.03 20.92 20.02 1.10 1.05
H200r0.2d40t2.0* 400.09 429.06 405.95 1.07 1.01 16.68 18.24 18.24 1.09 1.09
H200r0.4d40t2.0* 387.82 389.57 387.67 1.00 1.00 16.33 17.95 17.95 1.10 1.10
H200r0.6d40t2.0* 440.20 387.14 396.56 0.88 0.90 15.15 18.03 14.97 1.19 0.99
H200r0.8d40t2.0* 460.42 539.05 445.35 1.17 0.97 14.57 18.61 14.04 1.28 0.96
H200r0.2d40t2.5 679.98 697.49 689.74 1.03 1.01 22.47 22.83 22.83 1.02 1.02
H200r0.4d40t2.5 645.21 652.19 649.01 1.01 1.01 21.78 22.51 22.51 1.03 1.03
H200r0.6d40t2.5 724.52 651.55 667.40 0.90 0.92 19.96 21.63 19.42 1.08 0.97
H200r0.8d40t2.5 774.00 697.49 756.67 0.90 0.98 16.74 19.93 17.54 1.19 1.05
H200r0.2d40t3.0 951.21 1004.38 993.22 1.06 1.04 28.05 27.12 27.12 0.97 0.97
H200r0.4d40t3.0 897.63 939.09 934.51 1.05 1.04 27.03 26.73 26.73 0.99 0.99
H200r0.6d40t3.0 1001.61 938.02 960.84 0.94 0.96 24.91 25.68 25.44 1.03 1.02
H200r0.8d40t3.0 1067.64 1004.38 1089.60 0.94 1.02 22.28 23.64 22.53 1.06 1.01
H220r0.2d40t2.0 406.93 368.92 371.05 0.91 0.91 18.69 18.30 18.30 0.98 0.98
H220r0.4d40t2.0 386.17 368.92 382.41 0.96 0.99 18.28 18.46 18.46 1.01 1.01
H220r0.6d40t2.0 443.08 365.09 402.49 0.82 0.91 16.27 18.71 15.46 1.15 0.95
H220r0.8d40t2.0 484.68 368.92 449.98 0.76 0.93 14.32 19.26 14.33 1.34 1.00
H220r0.2d40t2.5 611.66 576.43 579.76 0.94 0.95 25.24 25.98 25.98 1.03 1.03
H220r0.4d40t2.5 580.13 576.43 597.51 0.99 1.03 24.46 25.59 25.59 1.05 1.05
H220r0.6d40t2.5 672.33 570.33 628.75 0.85 0.94 22.63 24.53 21.74 1.08 0.96
H220r0.8d40t2.5 745.90 576.43 703.09 0.77 0.94 19.25 22.47 19.63 1.17 1.02
H220r0.2d40t3.0 854.46 830.07 834.85 0.97 0.98 31.57 30.87 30.87 0.98 0.98
H220r0.4d40t3.0 808.51 830.07 860.41 1.03 1.06 30.37 30.41 30.41 1.00 1.00
H220r0.6d40t3.0 932.01 821.09 905.20 0.88 0.97 27.99 29.14 28.52 1.04 1.02
H220r0.8d40t3.0 1021.16 830.07 1012.45 0.81 0.99 25.09 26.67 25.25 1.06 1.01
Mean 0.98 0.99 1.09 1.01
St. Dev 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.04

Note: fcrl_ANS is analysis results of critical elastic local buckling stress in ANSYS; fcrl_org is prediction results of original approximate prediction formulas of critical
elastic local buckling stress; fcrl_mod is prediction results of modified approximate prediction formulas of critical elastic local buckling stress; Mt is test ultimate
moments; Mf is FEA ultimate moments; MDSM_org is prediction moments of original DSM (Eq. (2)); MDSM_mod is prediction moments of modified DSM (Eq. (15)); beams
with “*”are test specimens, and other beams are FEA members.

10% to 5%.
4.3. Comparison of design strengths with available test and FEA data
According to finite strip analysis method and modified approximate
prediction method of the critical elastic buckling stresses mentioned,
the nominal flexural strengths were determined by Eqs. (1) and (2) and
compared with the ultimate moments obtained from tests and FE
parametric analyses in Figs. 11 and 12 respectively, and it is shown that
DSM in NAS [18] provides unconservative predictions for most of test

t r

t t

(a) Original section (b) Modified section with reduced web thickness
Fig. 9. Modified section.

443
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

hA prediction-to-test ultimate moment ratio (MDSM_org/Mt) and prediction-

f1 to-FEA ultimate moment ratio (MDSM_org/Mf) is 1.09 with the standard
Neutral axis
H Y deviation of 0.11. However, most of long lip beams with the hole
f2 height-to-web depth ratio of 0.6 and 0.8 have unconservative predic-
h
tion moments compared to the test and FEA results, and the maximum
deviation value is up to 44%.
f1'
4.4. Modified DSM formulas for cold-formed steel channel beams with web
Fig. 10. Illustration of parameters in Equations. holes

Based on the comparison of design strengths determined by DSM in

and FEA results. As listed in Table 7, for short lip beams failed by
NAS [18] with test and FEA data, the predictions in NAS [18] of the
distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by distortional buck-
current DSM formulas for cold-formed steel channel beams with web
ling, the mean value of prediction-to-test ultimate moment ratio
holes are found to be unconservative. Therefore, Eqs. (1) and (2) are
(MDSM_org/Mt) and prediction-to-FEA ultimate moment ratio (MDSM_org/
modified to give more reliable prediction results for design strengths of
Mf) is 1.07 with the standard deviation of 0.03. However, some pre-
cold-formed steel channel beams with web holes. The modified equa-
diction moments display significant deviation values which are beyond
tions are as follows:
10%. As listed in Table 8, for long lip beams failed by local-distortional
buckling interaction controlled by local buckling, the mean value of
(a) The nominal flexural strength for beams with web holes controlled

1.6
Original DSM (Myent=Mg)
1.4 Modified DSM (Myent=Mg)
H=180mm member FEA
1.2
H=200mm member FEA
H=220mm member FEA
1.0
H=200mm specimen Tests
Mu/My

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

(My/Mcrd)0.5
(a) Mynet/My=1

1.6 1.6
Original DSM (Myent=My) Original DSM (Mynet=My)
1.4 Original DSM (Myent=0.95My) 1.4 Original DSM (Mynet=0.85My)
Modified DSM (Myent=0.95My) Modified DSM (Mynet=0.85My)
1.2 1.2
H=180mm member FEA H=180mm member FEA
H=200mm member FEA H=200mm member FEA
1.0 1.0
H=220mm member FEA H=220mm member FEA
Mu/My

Mu/My

H=200mm specimen Tests H=200mm specimen Tests

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 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
0.5 0.5
(My/Mcrd) (My/Mcrd)
(b) Mynet/My=0.95 (c) Mynet/My=0.85
Fig. 11. Comparison of test and FEA ultimate moments with DSM curves for beams failed by distortional-local buckling interaction controlled by distortional
buckling.

444
J. Zhao et al. Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446

1.6
Original DSM(Mynet=My)
1.4 Modified DSM (Mynet=My)
H=180mm member FEA
1.2
H=200mm member FEA
H=220mm member FEA
1.0
H=200mm specimen Tests

Mu/My
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
0.5
(My/Mcrl)
(a) Mynet/My=1

1.6 1.6
Original DSM (Mynet=My) Original DSM (Mynet=My)
1.4 Original DSM (Mynet=0.95My) 1.4 Original DSM (Mynet=0.85My)
Modified DSM (Mynet=0.95My) Modified DSM (Mynet=0.85My)
1.2 1.2
H=180mm member FEA H=180mm member FEA
1.0 H=200mm member FEA 1.0 H=200mm member FEA
Mu/My
Mu/My

H=220mm member FEA H=220mm member FEA

0.8 H=200mm specimen Tests 0.8 H=200mm specimen Tests

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 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
0.5 0.5
(My/Mcrl) (My/Mcrl)
(b) Mynet/My=0.95 (c) Mynet/My=0.85
Fig. 12. Comparison of test and FEA ultimate moments with DSM curves for beams failed by local-distortional buckling interaction controlled by local buckling.

by distortional buckling (Mnd). ⎧ Mynet for λl ⩽ λ a

Mnl = 0.4β 0.4β
Mnd ⎨ α ⎡1 − 0.15
⎩ ⎣
( )Mcrl
Mne
⎤
⎦
( )
Mcrl
Mne
Mne ⩽ Mynet for λl > λ a
⎧ Mynet
⎪ (15)
⎪ for λ d ⩽ λ d1
⎪ 0.45 where α = (Mynet / My )19.4(Mynet / My ) − 14.8; β = (Mynet / My )2.1; λ a = the solu-
⎪ Mynet − ⎡
⎪
Mynet − Md2
⎤ (λ d − λ d1) ⩽ 0.88 ⎡1 − 0.2
⎣ λ d2 − λ d1 ⎦ ⎢
⎣
( )
Mcrd
My
⎤
⎥
⎦ tion of equation
α (1 − 0.15 / λa0.8β )
λa0.8β
=
Mynet
My
.
= 0.45 The prediction moments determined by the modified DSM formulas
⎨
⎪ ( ) M Mcrd
My y for λ d1 < λ d ⩽ λ d2
were compared with the ultimate moments obtained from tests and FE
⎪ 0.45 0.45 parametric analyses, as listed in Tables 7 and 8, and all deviation values
⎪ 0.88 ⎡1 − 0.2
⎪ ⎢
⎣
( ) ⎤⎦⎥ ( ) M
Mcrd
My
Mcrd
My y of prediction moments with test and FEA results are not beyond 10%.
⎪ Figs. 11 and 12 also show that the modified DSM formula curves give
⎩ for λ d > λ d2
lower bounds of the test and FEA results for cold-formed steel channel
(14) beams with web holes.
where λ d1 = 0.538(Mynet / My )3 ; λ d2 = 0.538(1.7(My /Mynet )2.7 − 0.7);
Md2 = 0.88(1 − 0.2(1/ λ d2 )0.9)(1/ λ d2 )0.9My 5. Conclusions

(b) The nominal flexural strength for beams with web holes controlled Experimental investigations on cold-formed steel channel beams
by local buckling (Mnl). with web holes subjected to four-point bending have been presented. It
is found that the web holes change the failure modes of beams from
only distortional buckling or only local buckling to distortional-local
buckling interaction controlled by distortional buckling or local-

445
J. Zhao et al.
distortional buckling interaction controlled by local buckling. The de-
crease of beam capacities are closely related to the hole height-to-web
depth ratio. The influence of web holes on beam capacities is relatively
small with a maximum reduction value of 7.0% when the hole height-
to-web depth ratio increase from 0 to 0.4, and the dramatic reduction in
beam capacities is found with a maximum reduction value of 16.3%
when the hole height-to-web depth ratio further increases to 0.8.
Moreover, FEM were developed and verified against the test results in
terms of failure modes and moment capacities, and the validated FEM
were used to carry out extensive FE parametric analyses for DSM of
cold-formed steel channel beams with web holes. The finite strip ana-
lysis method for critical elastic distortional buckling stresses and the
modified approximate prediction method for critical elastic local
buckling stresses were verified based on eigenvalue buckling analyses
in ANSYS. Furthermore, the beam capacities obtained from tests and FE
parametric analyses were compared with the prediction moments de-
termined by current DSM stipulated in NAS [18]. It is shown that the
current DSM is unconservative to predict moment capacities of cold-
formed steel channel beams with web holes, especially for beams failed
by local-distortional buckling interaction controlled by local buckling.
At last, the modified DSM formulas for beams with web holes were
proposed.
Acknowledgments
This research is financially supported by the Fundamental Research
Fund for the Central Universities of China (2572017CB01), the Natural
Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (Stability beha-
vior and design method on cold-formed steel channel flexural members
with web holes) and the key program of Natural Science Foundation of
Heilongjiang Province of China (The bearing capacity and seismic
performance of Q460 high strength steel reinforced concrete column).
References
[1] Yu WW, Davis CS. Cold-formed steel members with perforated elements. J. Struct
446
Engineering Structures 184 (2019) 434–446
Division 1973;99(10):2061–77.
[2] Oritz-Colberg RA. The load carrying capacity of perforated cold-formed steel col-
umns. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University; 1981.
[3] Shanmugam NE, Thevendran V, Tan YH. Design formula for axially compressed
perforated plates. Thin-walled Struct 1999;34(1):1–20.
[4] Shanmugam NE, Dhanalakshmi M. Design for openings in cold-formed steel channel
stub columns. Thin-walled Struct 2001;39(12):961–81.
[5] Loov R. Local Buckling capacity of C-shaped cold-formed steel sections with pun-
ched webs. Can J Civ Eng 2011;11(11):1–7.
[6] Moen CD, Schafer BW. Experiments on cold-formed steel columns with holes. Thin-
Walled Struct 2008;46(10):1164–82.
[7] Moen CD, Schafer BW. Direct strength method for design of cold-formed steel col-
umns with holes. J Struct Eng 2011;137(5):559–70.
[8] Yu C. Cold-formed steel flexural member with edge stiffened holes: behavior, op-
timization, and design. Steel Construct 2012;71(1):210–8.
[9] Moen CD, Schudlich A, Heyden AVD. Experiments on cold-formed steel C-section
joists with unstiffened web holes. J Struct Eng 2013;139(5):695–704.
[10] Steel Stud Manufacturers Association (SSMA). Product technical information. Steel
Stud Manufacturers Association, Chicago; 2010.
[11] Wang LP, Young B. Beam tests of cold-formed steel built-up sections with web
perforations. J Constr Steel Res 2015;115(12):18–33.
[12] Wang LP, Young B. Design of cold-formed steel built-up sections with web per-
forations subjected to bending. Thin-Walled Struct 2017;120(11):458–69.
[13] Chinese standard for metallic materials-tensile testing at ambient temperature. GB/
T228: 2002; 2002 [in Chinese].
[14] Zeinoddini VM, Schafer BW. Simulation of geometric imperfections in cold-formed
steel members using spectral representation approach. Thin-Walled Struct
2012;60(10):105–17.
[15] Wang HM, Zhang YC. Experimental and numerical investigation on cold-formed
steel C-section flexural members. J Constr Steel Res 2009;65(5):1225–35.
[16] Wang CG, Zhang ZN, Zhao DQ, Liu QQ. Compression tests and numerical analysis of
web-stiffened channels with complex edge stiffeners. J Constr Steel Res
2016(1);;116:29–39.
[17] Schafer BW, PekÖz T. 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. Singapore:
Elsevier Science Ltd; 1998. p. 137–44.
[18] North American specification (NAS). North American specification for design of
cold-formed steel structural members. American Iron and Steel Institute,
Washington, DC; 2016.
[19] Moen CD. Direct strength design of cold-formed steel members with perforations.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University; 2008.
[20] Moen CD, Schafer BW. Elastic buckling of cold-formed steel columns and beams
with holes. Eng Struct 2009;31(12):2812–24.