Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1995 - Lateral Bucling Test of Cold Formed RHS

    Uploaded by

    Felipe Coutinho
    10 views9 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    10 views9 pages

    1995 - Lateral Bucling Test of Cold Formed RHS

    Uploaded by

    Felipe Coutinho

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 9
    LaTERAL-BUCKLING TESTS OF COLD-FORMED RHS BEAMS By Xino-Ling Zhao," Member, ASCE, Gregory J. Hancock,? and Nicholas S. Trahair,* Member, ASCE Aosrract: In this paper, tests on the lateral buckling of cold-formed rectangular hollow sections (RHS) ‘beams under uniform bending moment are described. The section size chosen for testing is 75. 25% 2.5 sim, which is the largest depthiwidth ratio manufactured in Australia. The beam spans varied from 2,000 to 7,000 mm to produce a large range of heam-slenderness ratios. Carefully designed loading and support systems. were used in the tests to apply gravity load through the centroid of the section and to ensure that simply supported end conditions were achieved, The test results are compared with existing design models and Standards, An improved design rule is given for the lateral buckling of cold-formed RHS beams. INTRODUCTION Flexural-torsional (lateral) buckling is a mode of structural buckling in which one or more memibers ofa frame suddenly deflect and twist out of the plane of loading, A beam that is, ‘bent in is stiffer principal plane may buckle out ofthat plane by deflecting laterally and twisting (Trahair 1993), hence the ‘name flexurab-torsional buckling. Research on the elastic lat- eral buckling of beams was summarized by Nethercot (1983), and on the inelastic lateral buckling of hot-olled Lsection ‘beams by Trahair (1983). Rectangular hollow sections (RHS), which have much greater depths than widths, may buckle laterally under pure bending moment, particulary if they are partially plastic, There does not appear to be any published {ala inthe international literature on lateral buckling of RHS. (herman 1993). Therefore, the objectives of this paper are to provide such data, and to compare them with different design models and standards, ‘Many tests have been performed on lateral buckling of hot- rolled [section beams. The tests conducted before 1977 were summaried by Fukumoto and Kubo (1977a, b,c). After 1977, ‘more tests on [section beams were conducted by Fukumoto tal (1980, 1982), Fukumoto and Itoh (1981), and Kubo and Fukumoto (1986, 1988), Tests on the lateral buckling of stain- less-steel channel and Isection beams were conducted 20- cently by Van Wyk etal. (1990), Bredenkamp et al. (1992), ‘and Bredenkamp and Van Den Berg (1994), "The design rules in different standards forthe lateral buck- ling of F-section beams have different formulations (Galam- ‘bos 1989; Lindner 1989; Nishimura and Fukumoto 1989; Sher- bourne and Pandey 1989; Stability 1991), Those in the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) Load Resistance Factor Design (LRED) specification (Load 1993) are based on the means of the test results, those in the Australian Standard ‘AS4100~1990 (Standards 1990) are based on the lower bounds ‘of the test results, those in the Canadian Standard CSA-S16.1- 1989 (Canadian i989) are based on the upper bounds of the test results, and those in the European Standard Eurocode 3 Part 1-1 (1992a) lie between the lower bounds and the means of test resulls. Some of the design rules of the standards "Lect, Depi of Gv. Eagra., Monash Univ, Cayton, Melbourne, VIC S168, Atsraia; formerty. ARC Res. Assoc.. School of CW. and Min, Engi. Uns. of Sydney” NSW 2006, Aust “BHD Stel Prof_of Stel Struct. Sehcol af Cit- and Min. Engr. Uni. of Shaney. NSW 2006, Austeia "Chala Prot of Civ. Engr. School of Civ. and Min. Ener. Univ of Spey, NSW 2006, A ‘Note: Associate Editor: Amde M. Amide. Discusion open until Apri 1, 1986. To extend the closing date one month, 3 ten request must be filed withthe ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript fr this pepe ws sabi or even and pole pbltion on Rover TSPS8200 435 per pe, Popes No [AISC-1993, B85930-Part 1 (British 1990), AS4100-1990)] are also applied to RHS, despite the fact that they are based fn tests of hot-rolled I-sections. Design rules for lateral buck- ling of RHS are also given by Rondal et al. (1992), which are based on Eurocode 3 Part 1-1 (1992). These design rules may bbe conservative andior inappropriate when they are applied to cold-formed RHS beams for the following reasons: 1. The stress-strain curves of cold-formed RHS ate differ ent from those of Fsections due to the different man- facturing process. Increases in the yield stresses ofthe flats and the corners are obtained fr cold-formed RHSs (Key etal. 1988; Zhao and Hancock 1991a, 1992). Dif ferent residual stress pattems are found for cok-formed RHS (Key and Hancock 1985), and colsformed RHS beams may have diferent intial crookedneses and twists. 2. The effect of the prebuckling deflections. whic creases the resistance ofa beam to clastic lateral buck- ling, is neglected in the design rules. For cold-formed HS, the prebuckling effect may be significant because of the large ratio of the out-of-plane rigidities to the i plane flexural rigidity (Vacharajitiphan et al. 1978; P nd Trahair 19923, b) 3. The effect ofthe load height, which reduces the resis- tance of beams with top flange loading to lateral buck: ling, is considered in the design rules. However, this effect is much smaller for cold-formed RHS (PI and ‘Trahair 1994), 4. An RIS has two webs at the maximum distance from the section minor (») axis, whereas an -section has only one web, which lies along the section minor (y) axis ‘When the flanges ofan [section yield, its out-of-plane flexural rigidity 6, reduces significantly, whereas when the flanges of an RHS yield, sls out-of plane flexural diy Ef, reduces slighily due othe fact thatthe webs ae sill mainly elastic (Pi and Trahair 1998), In this paper, tests on the lateral buckling of cold-formed RHS beams under uniform bending moment are described. ‘The section size chosen for testing is 75 x 25 x 2.5 mm, which isthe largest depth/width ratio manufactured in Aus. tralia by Tubemakers of Australia Limited (Tubemakers 1989) to Australian Standard AS/163~1991 (Standards 1991a), which is similar 0 ASTM-A500 (1984). The beam spans varied from 2,000 to 7,000 mm in order to produce a substantial range of Slenderness ratios. Carefully designed loading and support systems were used in the tests to apply gravity load through the centroid ofthe section and to ensure that simply supported end conditions were achieved, The test results are compared with the design rules of existing hot-rolled and cold-formed standards. Comparisons are also made with the predictions given by Pi and Trahair (1994) using the finite-element method. JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING | NOVEMBER 1995/1585 ‘An improved design rule is given for the lateral buckling of cold-formed RHS beams. The applicability ofthe test results to hot-rolled tubular sections may require investigation if it isbelieved that the geometricimperfections and residual stresses ace significantly different from those observed in the cold: Tormed sections used in the study in this paper. MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND SECTION PROPERTIES. ‘Two tensile coupons were taken from the two faces (called the adjacent faces) adjacent to the face containing the seam, and one was taken from the face (called the opposite face) ‘opposite the face containing the seam, The tensile coupons were prepared and tested according to the Australian Stan- dard 91391-1991 (Standards. 1991b), which is similar to ‘ASTM-A370 (1989). All the tensile coupons were tested in a 250-KN-capacity Instron universal testing machine (High ‘Wycombe, England) using friction grips to apply loading Fach tensile coupon was instrumented with two linear strain gauges before testing. The mean tensile yield stress and tensile Strength of the adjacent faces (,, and ¢.,) and these of the ‘opposite face (0, ad dy) ate stmmarized in Table 1, where the average value of all the tensile yield stresses (a, i listed in column 6. The results of tensile coupon tests were pre- sented in detail in Zhao et al. (1994), where the measured dimensions of the tensile coupons, the measured material properties, and the stress-strain curves were reported. It can he found from Table 1 that the tensile yield stress and the tensile strength of the opposite face are higher than those of the adjacent face. This phenomenon of stress variation around a section is similar to that reported by Zhao and Hancock (1993, 1995) ‘Section Properties. ‘The section properties based on the measured dimensions for the 75 x 25 x 2.5 mm RHS are surimaried in Table 2. “The first yield moment of the section (M,,) and the fully plastic moment capacity of the section (M,) are also pre Sented in Table 2, where a, = average measured yield stress Of the flats given in Table'I. The use of the average yield stress of fats complies with the ules for the determination Gf material properties of RHS given in AS/763-1091 (Stan- dards, 19914) and ASTM-AS0O (1984) LATERAL-BUCKLING TESTS General Six specimens were tested under uniform moment. The span of the beams (L,) varied from 2.000 to 7,000 mm in order to produce different slenderness ratios. A label was sgiven t0 each test as shown in Table 3, where UM stands for ‘uniform moment and the number after UM represents the span of the beam. The value of the nondimensional slender- ness ratio (A) for each RHS specimen listed in column 3 of ‘Table 3is calculated using the following (Trahair 1993): A= Vial iL) VELGI (1,2) in which M,, = elastic buckling moment: Mpa. [,, and J are given in Table 2; E (=200,000 MPa) = elastlé modulus; and G (=80,000 MPa) = shear modulus given in AISC- A layout of the test setup is shown schematically in Fig, 1a) for beams with a span less than 5,000 mm and in Fig 1(b) for beams with a span greater than or equal to 5,000 ‘mm. The dimensions in Fig. 1 are summarized in Table 3, For the beams with 2 span greater than or equal to 5.000 mm, ‘an extra length of beam was butt welded to produce a loading arm length of 2,000 mm because the maximum length of RHS manufactured by Tubemakers of Australia Limited is 8,000 rm, The butt welds were performed using the qualified weld- ing procedures described in Zhao and Hancock (1993). The choice of an arm length (C,) around 2,000 mm was based on the following considerations: TABLE 3._Dimensions of TABLE 1. Tenslle-Vield Stresses and Teale Strengths . — Bie ee ae tame vente [eae (ates Seecer’ | tor . (oxo %n | ebay | airy | eH | nee) | aby és 4 ‘i | a | “a _ al @ joj | @ | uszo0 | ~ 2.000 0.49 | 2,000 = Bxvx2s] se Ts aot i620} 406 UM3000, 3.000 0.608 | 2,00 vise | ise | tm | tet |S TABLE 2. Section Properties based on Measured Dimensions and beens | Sou ome im | ae ‘verge Viel Stress unre | ‘tom _| 5 | 2am | _ sm Propery name | Smo | Vawe | Unt th @ @ “ : Oar 7 3520] wm Fee eel wah : iiss | tm ‘Thickness: t 251 mm I \ fen si om ia S5nd moment of ae8 oun 1 cass 1 | mt So a =, Sent ent fae . “oars 1 oss x 10 | sm anon Sate ries

    You might also like