Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

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

Review

State-of-the-art review on measurement techniques and numerical

modeling of geometric imperfections in cold-formed steel members
Rafet Aktepe , Burcu Guldur Erkal *
Department of Civil Engineering, Hacettepe University, Ankara 06800, Turkey

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

Keywords: Cold-formed steel (CFS) members are susceptible to geometric imperfections due to the high length-to-thickness
Cold-formed steel ratio of the flat partitions, in other words, high slenderness. Geometric imperfections should be considered in the
Geometric imperfections design and analysis of the CFS members since they significantly affect the structural behavior and performance of
Measurement techniques
the investigated members. Despite its importance and numerous studies performed on this topic, no obvious
Characteristics
guideline presents all the necessary information on the geometric imperfections of CFS members. This review
Numerical modeling
study aims to close this gap resulting from the lack of information by providing a comprehensive review of the
geometric imperfections of CFS members from different aspects, such as measurement techniques, character­
ization, characteristics, and modeling approaches. Additionally, guidelines presented in code provisions for
geometric imperfection modeling are reviewed.

1. Introduction reinforced concrete members, because of the high length-to-thickness

Cold-formed steel (CFS) has a broad area of utilization and can be
used in different industries, such as automotive, transportation lines,
storage, construction, etc. CFS is gaining popularity in the construction
industry as its behavior is understood better and up-to-date design codes
are available. As CFS usage in construction has expanded in recent de­
cades, the number of experimental and numerical studies on CFS
members has also increased. A substantial number of these studies have
focused on geometric imperfections and their effects on CFS members.
Geometric imperfections, which are inevitable properties of artificial
products, are described as deviations from the members ‘perfect’ geome­
try. It is nearly impossible to preserve perfection in the cross-sectional
dimensions of a CFS section employed in construction for various rea­
sons [1], including the coiling and cold-forming process. Geometric
imperfection characteristics (shape, distribution pattern, and magnitude)
are firmly related to the manufacturing processes of the members [2].
Other reasons causing the formation of geometric imperfections on CFS
members can be listed as transportation, storage, and construction pro­
cesses. Even though manufacturing-related geometric imperfections are
easy to control and track, geometric imperfections caused by storage,
transportation, and construction stages are harder to quantify [3].
CFS members are more susceptible to geometric imperfections than
other common construction products, such as hot-rolled steel and
ratio of flat partitions of CFS members. Even though the magnitudes
of geometric imperfections are small, their effect on member behavior is
significant. Following the discovery of the significance of geometric
imperfection in shell structures by Karman et al. [4] and Koiter [5], an
intense amount of studies on geometric imperfections in CFS members
have been carried out. Former studies have also demonstrated that the
geometric imperfections in CFS members significantly affect both ulti­
mate strength and structural behavior; therefore, they should be
considered in the design and analysis of CFS members. The influence of
the geometric imperfections is generally assessed with numerical
modeling and confirmed with experimental results. Thus, the geometric
imperfection implementation methods in numerical modeling are vital
to understanding the effects of geometric imperfections. Numerical
modeling of thin-walled CFS members and systems has been the focus of
several research studies [6–12]. These studies investigate important
aspects of numerical modeling, such as material and geometrical im­
perfections, material properties, element selection, load and boundary
conditions, analysis techniques, etc. Additionally, Koh and Blum [13]
examined the studies and current standards that provide information
regarding the parameters that should be taken into account in testing by
analysis for CFS structures. However, these studies have limited infor­
mation on the geometric imperfection of CFS members, such as detec­
tion and characterization methods, modeling shapes, and imperfection

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: rafet.aktepe@hacettepe.edu.tr (R. Aktepe), burcuguldur@hacettepe.edu.tr (B. Guldur Erkal).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.107942
Received 12 February 2023; Received in revised form 28 March 2023; Accepted 5 April 2023
Available online 5 May 2023
0143-974X/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
magnitudes.
Despite the large number of investigations performed on geometric
imperfections of CFS members, a review that embraces all critical issues
related to geometric imperfections hasn’t been released so far. This
study scrutinizes the geometric imperfections in CFS members con­
cerning measurement techniques (in Section 2), characterization
methods (in Section 3), determination of geometric imperfection char­
acteristics including proposals to predict imperfection magnitudes,
fabrication tolerances, factors influencing geometric imperfections and
imperfection sensitivity (in Section 4), numerical modeling approaches
(in Section 5), and lastly code-based geometric imperfection modeling of
CFS members (in Section 6). A total of 149 studies are investigated from
journals, conferences, standards, and theses which are published in
recent decades. A list of the number of papers according to the selected
journals is given in Table 1.
Google Scholar and Web of Science (WoS) are used to find highly
cited and most relevant references in the literature. The advanced search
option of WoS with keywords: “cold-formed steel” and “imperfections”
is selected to find the most-cited references. To construct a map that
visualizes similarities of the references, the VOSviewer that uses the VOS
Mapping Technique [14] was utilized for the WoS references. The
citation data of the researchers, which are normalized according to
citation numbers of >20, are given in Fig. 1 with the publication years.
As can be seen from Fig. 1, respectively, Schafer and Peköz [6], Gardner
and Nethercot [9], Theofanus and Gardner [15], and Schafer and Moen
[12] are the most cited studies in the area of geometric imperfections of
CFS members. Lastly, it should be noted that the authors aimed to
provide a thorough research on available studies on the geometric
imperfection of CFS members in the literature; however, there may be
relevant studies that are unintentionally overlooked.
2. Measurement techniques
Geometric imperfection measurement has a long history dating back
to at least 1906, when Stewart [16] developed an autographic
measuring apparatus to study the collapse pressure of Bessemer steel
lap-welded tubes. Since then, significant advancements in measurement
techniques have been accomplished.
The selection of the measurement technique plays an essential role in
the quality and resolution of the collected geometric imperfection data.
The performed measurements should be suitable for the decomposition
of geometric imperfections shapes that can afterward be used to
reconstruct the initial deformed shape [17]. Several measurement
techniques have been developed to detect geometric imperfections from
real members in consideration of cost, accuracy, reliability, time, etc.
These factors mainly depend on the measurement apparatus’s compo­
nents, which are classified as the measuring device and measurement
platform. The measurement techniques can be grouped into contact and
non-contact. In the contact measurement techniques, different appara­
tuses such as displacement transducers (dial gauge, linear variable dif­
ferential transformer LVDT) and optical leveling apparatus (automatic
level, theodolite with caliper, total station, etc.) are used (Table 2).
Several available non-contact measurement techniques can be listed as
image processing, two-dimensional (2D) data processing (e.g., 2D laser
scanning), and three-dimensional (3D) data processing (e.g., 3D laser
scanners, 3D optical scanners), etc.
Table 1
Number of papers used in this study according to selected journals.
Journal/Conference Number of papers
Thin-Walled Structures 54
Journal of Construction Steel Research 24
Engineering Structures 12
Journal of Structural Engineering 9 parallel plate micrometer, and (iii) coordinate measuring machine
Others including standards and theses 50
2
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
2.1. Contact measurement techniques
Researchers employed various contact measurement techniques to
extract the geometric imperfections of CFS members, including
displacement transducers (LVDT, dial gauge), optical leveling appa­
ratus, etc. In these techniques, CFS members are generally laid on a
smooth table, and a displacement transducer mounted on specially
designed equipment is moved along the member automatically or
manually to perform measurements along a line or given position. Data
containing the elevation of the points on the CFS member obtained
through the performed measurements are used to get the maximum
imperfection magnitude and imperfection distribution pattern.
In practice, a displacement transducer mounted on milling machines
[6,18–21] or specifically designed measuring frames [3,29–32] are
employed to measure the geometric imperfections of CFS members as
they are affordable and easy to use (Fig. 2). The milling machine pro­
vides a flat reference surface and allows the displacement transducer to
move vertically, laterally, and longitudinally to measure geometric im­
perfections along various routes throughout the length of the test
specimen. When the range of the measurement device is not adequate,
alternatively, a lathe machine [19], an optical leveling apparatus
(automatic level with a parallel plate micrometer [25], a telescope with
an optical micrometer or a ruler [36], a total station [39], and a
theodolite with caliper/ruler [43–45]) (Fig. 3.(a)) may be employed to
measure geometric imperfections at specific locations on CFS members.
On the other hand, the optical leveling technique requires complicated
measuring processes and cannot be used to quantify local imperfections
[25].
Alternative to the measurement techniques mentioned above, the
coordinate measuring machine, which uses a standard touch probe for
inspection and measurement of any object, was used to measure local
geometric imperfection [25,43,44,46] (Fig. 3.(b)).
2.2. Non-contact measurement techniques
A rough characterization of geometric imperfections has typically
been obtained using contact measurement techniques that generally
employ displacement transducers focused on a few sparse spots [48].
Contact measurement techniques are not capable of collecting complete
cross-section information. Therefore, more effective techniques are also
needed for extending imperfection measurements out of the lab into the
manufacturing facilities for quality control. All these factors lead to a
growing interest in full-field non-contact measurement for CFS members
[49].
In the last two decades, technological advancements have made it
possible to use non-contact techniques such as image, 2D, and 3D data
processing techniques to detect geometric imperfections of CFS mem­
bers. Wang et al. [22], Becque and Rasmussen [23], and Niu et al. [24]
used non-contact 2D laser scanners, which work similarly to displace­
ment transducers, to measure geometric imperfections along several
lines around the cross-sections of CFS members.
The geometric data obtained from image and 3D data processing
techniques contain the accurate representation of the entire geometry as
well as the geometric imperfections. In contrast, the data obtained by
less advanced techniques provide partial information about the geom­
etry of CFS members represented with a limited number of points at the
cross-section level. The measurement precision obtained through image
processing is lower than the resolutions obtained from 3D data collected
with devices such as laser scanners [40]. Photogrammetry is an image
processing technique based on the sets of photos taken from multiple
viewpoints around the specimen and then processed to identify all the
target points on the specimen. The final product is a 3D point cloud,
where each point corresponds to a target. Bernard et al. [25] used three
techniques: (i) close-range photogrammetry, (ii) optical leveling using a
(CMM) to measure geometric imperfection in CFS panels. The study
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
Fig. 1. The diaphragm of relative citation index according to WoS references.
Table 2
Summary of geometric imperfection measurement techniques in the literature.
Contact Measurement Techniques
Ref. Measurement apparatus
[6,18–21] Milling machine with displacement transducers
[19] Lathe machine with displacement transducers
[3,29–32] Specifically designed measuring frames with displacement transducers
[25] Automatic level with a parallel plate micrometer
[36] Telescope with an optical micrometer or a ruler
[39] Total station
[43–45] Theodolite with caliper/ruler
[25,43,44,46] Coordinate measuring machine
concluded that photogrammetry is a quick technique but not suitable for
measuring imperfections, even though optical leveling and CMM usage
are satisfactory. McAnallen et al. [20] also compared different imper­
fection measurement devices: (i) cameras, (ii) laser scanners, and (iii)
dial gauge-based devices to investigate the effectiveness of the non-
contact measurement techniques on geometric imperfection detection
of CFS members. This study confirms that the non-contact measurement
techniques can be used as an alternative to manual measurements as the
results are viable and accurate. The non-contact measurement tech­
niques enable a more detailed imperfection analysis for CFS members.
Researchers [20,26,27] also successfully employed photogrammetry-
based image processing techniques for the inspection of the geometric
imperfection of CFS members.
Digital Image Correlation (DIC), which correlates a random pattern
on an object surface during a test, is a relatively new but already well-
established non-contact optical technique to measure contour de­
formations and even strains on most solid objects [50]. Borkowski et al.
Fig. 2. Imperfection measurement techniques: (a) LVDT attached milling machine [21] and (b) dial gauge-based measurement [47].
3
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
Non-contact Measurement Techniques
Ref. Measurement apparatus
[22–24] 2D laser scanner
[20,25–28] Camera
[33] 3D optical scanner
[34,35] 3D laser measurement platform
[37,38] 3D laser scanner
[40–42] 3D handheld laser scanner
[28] employed a DIC system that consists of two cameras and software to
obtain initial geometric imperfections, shortening of a member, and
deformation fields maps of sections during the tests. Also, Cybulski et al.
[33] utilized 3D optical scanners to obtain the precise geometries of
corrugated panels and channel sections, respectively.
3D laser scanning has been used to identify accurate geometry,
including cross-sectional dimension changes along the length of mem­
bers and characterization of geometric imperfections, with high accu­
racy. The laser scanning technique utilizes triangulation methods
through a laser (emitter) and a camera (detector) to achieve the target’s
surface coordinates. Zhao et al. [34,35] developed a 3D laser measure­
ment platform using a 2D laser scanner to obtain highly accurate full-
field geometric measurements (3D point clouds) of target specimens.
The measurement platform consisted of three major components: laser
scanner, rotary stage, and linear motion stage, as shown in Fig. 4. The
point cloud obtained using the measurement platform are suitable for
performing geometric feature and imperfection extraction.
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

Fig. 3. Geometric imperfection measurement with (a) theodolite [45] and (b) coordinate measuring machine [43].

sections. Zhang et al. [40], Tran et al. [41], and Feng et al. [42] used a
3D handheld laser scanner to get the 3D geometric representation of
members in the form of a point cloud. Apart from the previously
employed 3D laser scanners, a 3D handheld laser scanner can be effi­
ciently utilized without the restriction of the support form and rotary
stage. In addition to geometric imperfection detection and quantifica­
tion, Zhao et al. [35,51] and Zhang et al. [40] and have also focused on
procedures for geometric feature extraction and determination of
nominal dimensions, unlike Selvaraj and Madhavan [37] and Erkal and
Çağrıcı [52].
Characterizing geometric imperfections from the point clouds
collected via 3D laser scanners or obtained by image-processing tech­
niques is relatively more demanding than the other techniques. Image-
processing techniques offer the advantage of quick measurements, but
they require advanced post-processing to locate surface point co­
ordinates [25]. The proper algorithms must be selected or developed,
then used with suitable workstations to perform point cloud processing
with improved speed and reliability. The process of geometric imper­
fection detection with a 3D handheld laser scanner has been summarized
as shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 4. Laser-based imperfection measurement platform: (a) laser scanner, (b)

rotary stage, (c) linear motion stage, (d) Z-shape specimen [35]. 3. Characterization of geometric imperfections

Characterization of geometric imperfections, determination of the

Other researchers [37,38] have employed non–contact 3D laser
distribution pattern, and extraction of the magnitude of the corre­
scanners to obtain geometric imperfection information of specimens.
sponding geometric imperfection shapes are essential for understanding
Selvaraj and Madhavan [37] used a 3D non-contact laser scanning
the effects of geometric imperfections on CFS members’ behavior as they
technology to capture complete geometric information and detect geo­
are required for numerically simulating the response of a structural
metric imperfections in 188 instances with 24 different CFS channel
member [11]. The available measured data, which is obtained by

Fig. 5. Geometric information detection steps from a point cloud obtained from a 3D handheld laser scanner [40].

4
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
measurement techniques, needs to be processed to obtain magnitudes
and distribution patterns of corresponding geometrical imperfection
shapes. The knowledge of geometric imperfections distribution pattern
and magnitudes is simply found by calculating the difference between
perfect cross-sectional representations and deviated cross-sections. Two
methods have been used to obtain systematic information about geo­
metric imperfections. These are (i) conventional imperfection charac­
terization and (ii) modal imperfection characterization.
3.1. Conventional imperfection characterization (code-based
characterization)
According to AISI standards [53,54], geometric imperfection classifi­
cation can be roughly categorized into three: (i) sectional imperfection, (ii)
member imperfections, and (iii) dents, as illustrated in Fig. 6. The sectional
imperfections can be further classified as flare, crown, and over-bend.
Likewise, member imperfections are classified as bow, camber, and
twist. The sectional imperfections represent the deviations on the plate
elements composing the cross-sections from ideal geometry. Out-of-
straightness of each element constituting the cross-section is referred to
as a crown. Deviation of the flange in an outward direction from the ideal
position is called a flare. Over-bend represents the deviation of the flange
in the inward direction. On the other hand, the member imperfections
represent deviations from the perfect shape along the length while pre­
serving the ideal cross-section geometry. Bow refers to the out-of-
straightness in the direction of the weak axis. Out of straightness in the
direction of the strong axis of the members is called a camber. The cross-
section rotation along the member’s length is called a twist. Dents are
generally originated from sudden damage due to the impacts that might
occur in any phase, from manufacturing to installation [37]. The shape of
the classified geometric imperfection can follow different distribution
patterns, such as linear, periodic, and irregular.
Fig. 6. Types of geometric imperfection in CFS members: (a) ideal section; (b) crown; (c) dents; (d) twist (2D view); (e) flare; (f) overbend; (g) bow; (h) camber; (i)
twist (3D view) [37].
5
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
3.2. Modal imperfection characterization
The buckling behavior usually governs the strength of CFS members
due to high cross-sectional slenderness [55]. CFS members are sensitive
to geometric imperfections, especially when the imperfection shapes are
reasonably affine to the buckling mode shapes [3]. This behavior
motivated the development of a new method to classify geometric im­
perfections based on buckling mode shapes formally. The conventional
definitions are not properly related to buckling modes, even if they
provide a simple means to characterize errors in member production
[48].
Modal imperfection characterization identifies geometric imperfec­
tions based on buckling mode shapes obtained by linear buckling
analysis. Geometric imperfections are generally decoupled into five
“pure” modes, i.e., buckling modes corresponded to (i) local buckling
and (ii) distortional buckling that are associated with the sectional im­
perfections; and (iii) weak-axis flexural buckling, (iv) strong-axis flex­
ural buckling and (v) torsional buckling that are related to the member
imperfections as shown in Fig. 7. The deformed cross-sections for
investigated buckling modes can be obtained from finite element
methods (FEM) or finite strip methods (FSM). The advantage of modal
imperfection characterization is that it directly uses data related to the
buckling modes to characterize geometric imperfections. The drawback
is that the buckling mode shapes must be extracted in advance to
accomplish the characterization, whereas standard approaches do not
require this calculation [48]. Conventional and modal imperfection
characterization methods differ in the distribution patterns of geometric
imperfections. However, the cross-sectional shapes (as shown in Fig. 6
and Fig. 7) and procedures for determining geometric imperfection
magnitudes and patterns are similar. Thus, the maximum magnitude of
the geometric imperfection determined using modal imperfection
characterization can also be utilized in its counterpart obtained
conventionally (e.g., the maximum magnitude of the local imperfection
can be used as the maximum magnitude of the crown imperfection).
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

Fig. 7. Views of five “pure” buckling mode shapes, (a-e) 3D buckling mode shapes and the corresponding wavelength, (f-j) 2D cross-sectional shapes of modes, λ is
the buckling wavelength [56].

4. Characteristics of geometric imperfections
As mentioned before, the geometric imperfections significantly affect
the behavior and strength of the CFS members depending on the geo­
metric imperfection characteristics: shape, distribution pattern, and
magnitude (Table 3). Characteristics of imperfection are a complex
function of the fabrication processes of the members [1,2,9,57,58].
Geometric imperfections resulting from the fabrication process may
occur due to the coiling or cold-forming processes (i.e., cold-rolling,
press-braking), each introducing different geometric imperfections [3].
Researchers primarily focused on fabrication-related imperfections
since they are easy to control and track.
Conducting an experimental study to examine the consequences of
geometric imperfections on CFS members is complex, time-consuming,
and expensive. Therefore, as a more economical alternative, numerical
models calibrated with experimental results are employed to understand
the effects of the geometric imperfections on CFS members. The char­
acterization of selected inputs significantly impacts the accuracy of the
numerical models [6]. Therefore, the use of appropriate geometric
imperfection characteristics in terms of shape, distribution pattern, and
magnitude, which reflects the actual geometry, is necessary to get reli­
able results from numerical models that conform with the observed
behavior [9,11]. In general, there are two ways available in the litera­
ture to determine the characteristics of imperfections: (i) direct mea­
surements and (ii) predictive models.
The first way is to perform a direct measurement of geometric im­
perfections that provides raw data which contains information on actual
geometric imperfection characteristics of the CFS members. The mag­
nitudes and distribution patterns of geometric imperfections along the
length can be determined by comparing the ideal and actual cross-
sections. Details of example extraction of the distribution pattern and
magnitude of geometric imperfection applications from the measure­
ments are given in Erkal and Çagrıcı [52] and Selvaraj and Madhavan
[37].
Researchers have generally carried out detailed geometric imper­
fection measurements during their experimental studies. However, in
the absence of accurate geometric imperfection information, geometric
imperfections’ magnitude and distribution patterns must be predicted.
The magnitudes of imperfections can be approximated by referring to
predictive models already existing in the literature, which provide the
maximum values of the investigated imperfections. Even though the
largest imperfection magnitudes do not always result in the lowest
strength values, the strength of the CFS members generally decreases as
the magnitude of the imperfection increase [59]. Thus, maximum

Table 3
Summary of main characteristics of geometric imperfections.
Shape Distribution Pattern Magnitude

Conventional Imperfection Modal Imperfection Actual Distribution Pattern Predicted Distribution Pattern Actual Magnitude Predicted Magnitude
Shapes Shapes

Sectional Member Dent Sectional Member

Direct Linear Direct

Flare Bow Dent DB WFB Empirical Equations
measurement Pattern measurement
Periodic
Crown Camber LB SFB Statistical Data
Pattern
Over-
Twist TB Random Pattern Standards
bend
Buckling Mode Shape-based Pattern Results of Parametric Study

LB: Local buckling; DB: Distortional buckling; WFB: Weak-axis flexural buckling; SFB: Strong-axis flexural buckling; TB: Torsional Buckling.

6
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

imperfections magnitudes can be used in numerical models to predict
conservative lower-bound strength [18,59].
The magnitudes of the geometric imperfections can be predicted
based on empirical equations, statistical data, standards, or results of
parametric studies. The most common and straightforward way to es­
timate imperfection magnitudes is the use of simple rules of thumb. In
these methods, sectional imperfection magnitudes are generally
considered a proportion of the thickness or width of the elements
constituting the cross-sections. In contrast, the member imperfections
magnitudes are traditionally considered a function of member length (e.
g. Schafer and Peköz [6]). As an alternative way, researchers have also
proposed empirical equations to estimate the magnitude of geometric
imperfections (e. g. Selvaraj and Madhavan [37]). Thirdly, the magni­
tudes of imperfections are extracted using existing statistical imperfec­
tion data. Because of the complexity and uncertainty of the geometric
imperfections, some studies presented geometric imperfections mea­
surements as a statistical summary (e. g. Schafer and Peköz [6], Zei­
noddini and Schafer [56]). Finally, the results of the parametric studies
can be employed to determine the most suitable imperfection magnitude
corresponding to the predicted behavior and ultimate strength. In
addition, Zhao et al. [60] used the Southwell plot method to predict
imperfection from experimental results.
In addition to the measured imperfection magnitudes, equivalent
geometric imperfections magnitudes provided in standards and the
literature consider not only measured imperfections but also parameters
that may be difficult to model directly. The equivalent geometric im­
perfections may include the effects of residual stresses, non-
homogeneity of materials, load eccentricity, etc., so they are generally
greater than measured imperfections. In these cases, the maximum
imperfection magnitude is determined depending on whether these
other parameters have been directly integrated into the numerical
model [11,61,62]. In some conditions, the use of the proposed imper­
fection magnitudes results in conservative or erroneous strength pre­
dictions [17,37]. In the following subsections, some of the most
commonly used imperfection estimation proposals, including equations
and statistical data, are reviewed. In Section 4.4., the fabrication toler­
ances of the CFS members described by several standards are summa­
rized. Finally, in Section 4.5. and Section 4.6., the influences of different
parameters on characteristics of geometric imperfections and geometric
imperfection effects are reviewed.
4.1. Dawson and Walker (1972)
unsuitable for some CFS sections [63]. So, alternatively, Dawson and
Walker [64] developed two complex equations (Eqs. (1)–(2)) that use
both material and geometrical properties to predict local imperfections
based on thickness (t), yield stress (σy), and critical buckling stress (σcr)
as well as coefficients (α, β) derived from experimental data. It was
suggested that the coefficient (α) would be equal to 0.2 for simply
supported plates and square hollow sections. Furthermore, the authors
noted that an imperfection magnitude of 0.2t (Eq. (3)) may be used to
obtain a conservative fit to test data on CFS sections.
( )0.5
σy
δl = β t (1)
σcr
( )
σy
δl = α t (2)
σ cr
δl = 0.2t (3)
In which,
( t )2
π2 E
σ cr = k (4)
12(1 − υ 2) d′
where k, E, υ, and d′ are the plate buckling coefficient, the elastic
modulus of steel, Poisson’s ratio of steel, and the flat width of the
element of the cross-section, respectively.
The characterization of local imperfection magnitudes proposed by
Dawson and Walker [64] was recalibrated and applied to stainless steel
sections by Gardner and Nethercot [9]. It was stated that, as Dawson and
Walker [64] noted for CFS members, Eq. (1) was found to be unsuitable
for the prediction of imperfection magnitudes in CFS sections. It was
concluded that an imperfection magnitude of the form given in Eq. (2)
was more rational than the other two equations. It should be noted that
the 0.2% proof stress, σ 0.2 has been used in place of the yield stress, σy in
Eqs. (1)–(2) to enable stainless steel applications.
Furthermore, Chou et al. [65] conducted FE analyses of the cold-
formed lipped channel and hat-section carbon steel stub columns with
varying imperfection magnitudes. The study showed that Eq. (1) with β
= 0.3 yielded the most accurate and consistent prediction of experi­
mental behavior as compared to the other three imperfection amplitudes
of 0.1 t, 0.5 t, and 1.0 t. Table 4 summarizes recommended/employed
values for CFS sections in the literature to determine the coefficients of
Dawson and Walker’s [64] proposals.

The simplest way to predict the magnitude of a local imperfection (δl) 4.2. Schafer and Peköz (1998)
is to multiply the plate thickness with a fixed coefficient, i.e., δl = Kt
where K is a constant [9]. However, using the local imperfection Schafer and Peköz [6,18] examined the effect of geometric imper­
magnitude as a proportion of the plate thickness or width can be fections and residual stresses on finite element analysis (FEA) results.

Table 4
Recommended/employed values for coefficients of Dawson and Walker [64] equations.
Ref. Year Exp. / Num. Section Type Coefficients Values

α β

Dawson and Walker [64] 1972 Exp. Simply supported plates, SHS 0.2 –
Chou et al. [65] 2000 Num. Lipped channel, hat-shaped – 0.3
6
Gardner and Nehercot [9] 2004 Exp. and Num. Stainless steel CHS, SHS, RHS 0.023 7.3 × 10−
Ashraf et al. [66] 2005 Num. Stainless steel angle, channel, lipped channel, back-to-back channels G&N (2004) [9]
Max. 0.052
Stainless steel equal angle –
Min. 0.008
Cruise and Gardner [57] 2006 Exp.
Max. 0.111
Stainless steel SHS/RHS –
Min. 0.012
Gardner et al. [67] 2010 Exp. SHS/RHS 0.0680 0.0340
Dobrić et al. [68] 2017 Exp. and Num. Stainless steel channel 0.036 –
Unperforated SHS/RHS 0.0235 0.0167
Singh and Singh [69] 2018 Exp.
Perforated SHS/RHS 0.0303 0.0211
Arrayago et al. [63] 2020 Num. Stainless steel sections 0.023 –

Note: CHS, RHS, and SHS are circular hollow sections, rectangular hollow sections, and square hollow sections, respectively.

7
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

Schafer and Peköz [6] collected the existing data from previous studies
and proposed simple equations. These equations use the width-to-
thickness ratio while determining the maximum imperfection magni­
tudes for type 1 and type 2 imperfections of CFS open sections (Eqs. (5)–
(6)). Type 1 and 2 imperfections can be employed as imperfection
magnitudes for the local and distortional imperfections.
{
0.006d
δl = for d/t < 200 (5)
6te− 2t
{ sions in the literature are summarized in Table 6.
δd = t for d/ < 100
t
where δl, δd, and d refer to local imperfection magnitude, distortional
imperfection magnitude, and the width of the element of the cross-
section, respectively.
Due to the considerable variation of the maximum imperfection data,
the authors also proposed an alternative approach to characterize
sectional imperfection magnitudes. This alternative approach de­
termines the suitable maximum imperfection magnitudes based on the
cumulative distribution function (CDF) to consider the probability of
occurrence of imperfection with a particular magnitude. Zeinoddini
[3,56] later extended Schafer and Peköz’s [6] study for member im­
perfections (bow, camber, and twist). Measured member imperfections
were typically less than L/960 and were statistically summarized as CDF
(Table 5). It was concluded that neither thickness nor cross-sectional
type has a definitive effect on measured imperfection. On the other
hand, McAnallen et al. [20] stated that flexural imperfection magnitudes
increase with sheet thickness due to the plastic strains caused by the
coiling of sheets for transportation and manufacturing.
(11)
◦ 0.816
δθ = 0.3038(J/L)− for channel sections
where δf, and δcr, refer to magnitudes of the flare, and crown imper­
fections, respectively. Also, f, w, ry, rx, and J represent the breadth of the
flange, depth of the web, radius of gyration about a weak axis, the radius
of gyration about a strong-axis and torsional constant, respectively.
Along with the above recommendations for geometric imperfection
magnitude predictions, some of the recommended/employed expres­
(6)
4.4. Fabrication tolerances
There are several standards for the fabrication tolerances of the CFS
members, such as EN 1090–4 [79], EN 10162 [80], AISI 240–15 [54],
and AISI 220–15 [53]. The standards have determined fabrication tol­
erances for cross-sectional dimensions, length, and geometric imper­
fection magnitudes. The fabrication tolerances for geometric
imperfection magnitudes given in the AISI provision are divided into
two categories: structural members and non-structural members. Each
category is also subdivided into categories (studs and tracks) based on
component function. AISI S220 covers fabrication tolerances for non-
structural members, whereas fabrication tolerances for structural
members are covered by AISI S240. EN provisions classify tolerances
into two classes: class 1 and class 2. The critical feature that distin­
guishes tolerance class 2 from class 1 is that class 2 is preferred for
glazed facade works requiring more precise assembly. Table 7 summa­
rizes geometric imperfection tolerances originating from a fabrication
based on imperfection representations given in Fig. 6.

4.3. Selvaraj and Madhavan (2018) 4.5. Factors influencing geometric imperfections characteristics

Selvaraj and Madhavan [37] have carried out a detailed geometric
imperfection investigation using a 3D non-contact laser scanner to
capture the whole geometry and geometric imperfection information of
188 specimens with 24 different CFS channel sections. A new set of
equations (Eq. (7) to Eq. (11)) to predict geometric imperfections
correlated with geometric properties, such as plate slenderness, slen­
derness ratios, and torsional constants, were proposed.
{ tudes of flexural imperfections increase with thickness due to the plastic
δf =
0.1019f + 0.9819 for plain channel sections
(7)
0.1147(f /t) + 1.1306 for lipped channel sections
δcr = 0.0453{(w or f )/t } + 0.9101 for stiffened plates
{ ( / )
0.0755( L/ry ) − 8.5061 for plain channel sections
δb =
0.0304 L ry − 1.8014 f or lipped channel sections
δc = 0.0206(L/rx ) − 0.0274 for channel sections
Characteristics of geometric imperfections are affected by fabrica­
tion, storage, transportation, construction, and operation stages. The
fabrication stage of CFS members, which includes coiling and uncoiling
of steel sheet, cold-forming (i.e., roll-forming, press-braking), cutting,
perforating, and assembling (i.e., welding, screwing, bolting, riveting,
sheathing, etc.), have various effects on the characteristics of the geo­
metric imperfections. McAnallen et al. [20] indicated that the magni­
strains caused by sheet coiling. Additionally, the cold-forming process
creates residual stress and strain responsible for generating various
geometric imperfections shapes, distribution patterns, and magnitudes.
(8) A typical process for the fabrication of CFS sections, the cutting
process, may increase the cross-section distortion and geometric im­
perfections due to the release of residual stresses [81,82]. Wang et al.
(9)
[82] studied the effects of cutting on the initial geometric imperfections
of CFS C-sections and stated that this process produces a distinctive
(10)
cross-section distortion along the length (away from the cuts, these
distortions quickly diminish). Additionally, Singh and Singh [69]

Table 5
Statistical summary of the measured maximum geometric imperfection.
Schafer and Peköz (1998) [6] Zeinoddini and Schafer (2012) [56]

P(Δ < d) Local Distortional Local Distortional Bow Camber Twist

δl/t δd/t δl/t δd/t L/δb L/δc δθ (deg/m)

◦

0.25 0.14 0.64 0.17 0.43 4755 6295 0.20

0.50 0.34 0.94 0.31 0.75 2909 4010 0.30
0.75 0.66 1.55 0.54 1.14 1659 2887 0.49
0.95 1.35 3.44 1.02 3.06 845 1472 0.85
0.99 3.87 4.47 3.87 4.46 753 1215 0.95
Mean 0.50 1.29 0.47 1.03 2242 3477 0.36
St. dev. 0.66 1.07 0.62 0.97 3054 5643 0.23

Note: δb, δc, and δθ refer to magnitudes of the bow, camber, and twist imperfections, respectively. Lastly, L refers to the length.
◦

8
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

Table 6
Recommended/employed imperfection magnitudes for numerical modeling in the literature.
Ref. Year Exp. / Num. Section Type Imperfection Magnitude

Kaitila [70] 2002 Num. Lipped channel δl = w/200

δb = L/500
Gardner and Nethercot [9] 2004 Num. Stainless steel CHS δl = 0.2t
Gardner and Nethercot [9] 2004 Num. Stainless steel CHS, RHS, SHS δfl = L/2000
Ungureanu and Dubina [59] 2005 Num. Channel and lipped channel δfl = L/1500
Stainless steel equal angle δfl = 0.00084L
Cruise and Gardner [57] 2006 Exp.
Stainless steel SHS / RHS δfl = 0.00035L
Dinis and Camotim [71] 2011 Num. Lipped channel δd = 0.01t
δfl = L/1000
δl = w/200, 0.006w, 0.34t
Pastor et al. [72] 2014 Exp. and Num. Rack upright
δd = 0.5t, 0.64t, f/50
δfl = L/1000 − L/500

δl = 0.375t
Cardoso et al. [73] 2019 Num. Mean magnitudes for lipped channel and back-to-back lipped channel δd = 0.81t
δb = L/2250
δc = L/2500
√̅̅̅̅
rt
δθ = L/3845
◦
Chen et al. [74] 2020 Exp. and Num. CHS δl = with Q = 40
Q
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
Meng and Gardner [75] 2020 Num. CHS, EHS δl = 0.01 De t
δfl = L/1000
Stainless steel SHS/RHS δfl = L/3333
Arrayago et al. [63] 2020 Num. Stainless steel CHS δfl = L/3845
Stainless steel-lipped channel δfl = L/5882
Walport et al. [76] 2020 Num. Carbon Steel and Stainless steel sections δb, e = αtL/150
⎧
⎨ 0% λs < 50
Guo et al. [77] 2020 Num. CHS δl/ = 0.15%*(λs − 50) 50 < λs < 150
t ⎩
16% λs ≥ 160

Note: δfl, δb, e, λs, Q, r, De and αt refer to flexural imperfection magnitude, equivalent bow imperfection magnitude, section slenderness, fabrication tolerance quality
parameter set out in EN 1993-1-6 [78], the middle surface radius of CHS, effective diameter, and traditional imperfection factor, respectively.

Table 7
Fabrication tolerances of CFS channel sections according to several codes (dimensions in mm.).
AISI 240–15 / ASTM C955 AISI S220–15 EN 1090–4: 2018 EN 10162:2003

Imperfection Types Structural Studs Structural Track Non-Structural Studs Non-Structural Track Class-1 Class-2 Cold-rolled Sections

±1.59 ±1.59 ±3.18 ±3.18 ±d/125

Crown ±d/50 ±d/100
min 0.50
Sectional
1.59 – 1.59 – 3.00◦ 2.00◦
Flare ±0◦ 45′ to ±3◦
− 1.59 − 2.38 − 1.59 − 4.76 − 3.00◦ − 2.00◦
L/960 L/384 L/384 L/384
Bow ±L/750 ±L/500
max. 12.70 max. 12.70 max. 12.70
L/960 L/384 L/384 L/384
Member Camber ±L/750 ±L/500
max. 12.70 max. 12.70 max. 12.70
L/384 L/384 L/384 L/384 ±1̊ / m
Twist
max. 12.70 max. 12.70 max. 12.70 max. 12.70

examined the change in sectional imperfection due to perforating by the
laser cutting process. It was observed that the introduction of perfora­
tion increases the sectional geometric imperfection of CFS hollow sec­
tions. On the other hand, a clear correlation or trend between
imperfection magnitude and perforation size could not be established.
Similarly, Crisan et al. [83] stated that a perforated section is more
“imperfect” than an unperforated one. In order to minimize geometric
imperfection due to fabrication, adequate measures should be taken
during all fabrication processes. When preventive methods are ineffec­
tive, the methods that reduce geometric imperfection, such as members’
ends being milled to be flat to lessen the effect of cutting, could be used.
Assembling the members into their final form also has the potential
to affect both shapes and magnitudes of geometric imperfections. For
example, welding as a joining method can generate additional geometric
distortion due to the thermal and mechanical stresses formed in the weld
region from the localized application of heat [84]. Furthermore, the
fabrication of built-up members assembled with screws or welds can
change members’ cross-sectional geometry and geometric imperfections
(e.g. [85,86]). The sheathing/bracing also affects the geometric
imperfections. Additionally, a strengthening method, a pre-stressed
carbon fiber reinforced polymer strips system, can be effective to
reduce the geometric imperfection of steel columns [42].
Unlike the fabrication stage, it is hard to control the geometric im­
perfections that occur due to the storage, transportation, construction,
and operation stages. In the storage stage, CFS members should be
appropriately packed and stored to prevent deterioration and corrosion
as well as geometric distortions. The corroded specimens can have more
geometric imperfections than the uncorroded specimens [87]. When the
CFS members are transported from the storage yard to the construction/
testing site, some geometric imperfections may occur due to improper
piling, bad road conditions, and loading and unloading errors. In con­
struction, improper detailing in the design phase and faulty workman­
ship can lead to unexpected geometric imperfections. Lastly, like the
storage stage, corrosion prevention measures should be applied to pre­
vent CFS members from corrosion in the operation stage. Also, Nie et al.
[88] indicated that the CFS member in service for a long time could
produce certain deformations. It is necessary to better understand the
impact of transportation, construction, and operation stages on

9
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
geometric imperfections.
4.6. Factors influencing geometric imperfections effects
As geometric imperfections cannot be avoided and significantly in­
fluence the structural behavior of CFS members, it is essential that one
knows how sensitivity to imperfections changes to obtain CFS members
less sensitive to adverse effects of imperfections. The sensitivity of
structural members to imperfections depends on material properties,
loading arrangement, and the local and global geometric proportions
(slenderness) of the cross-section and member [57]. Using high-strength
steel in construction is one way to reduce the sensitivity to geometric
imperfections and residual stresses [89,90]. Additionally, the sensitivity
to geometric imperfections continuously diminishes with increasing
slenderness [91,92]. At the same time, support conditions have non-
negligible effects on imperfection sensitivity, e.g., Rasmussen and
Hancock [93] and Mesacasa et al. [94] stated that geometric imperfec­
tions have a much stronger influence on pin-ended columns than on
fixed-ended columns.
In addition to the above statements, it is known that a significant
reduction in both measured and predicted strengths are generally
observed if the imperfections resemble the critical buckling modes [95].
Therefore, preventing specific failure mechanisms may be wiser as it
may help reducing the sensitivity to initial imperfections [96]. The
cross-sectional geometry, length, slenderness, restraint availability
(support conditions, bracing configuration), and material properties are
some of the main parameters affecting the critical buckling modes and,
therefore, influence the sensitivity to imperfections. For instance, the
geometry of the cross-section can be modified to obtain CFS members
with higher elastic buckling loads and less sensitivity to imperfections
[96]. The parameters such as length and restraints (e.g., bracing,
sheathing, etc.) can be adjusted to obtain critical buckling mode that is
less sensitive to the imperfections (e.g., [2,97,98]).
5. Modeling approaches
Numerous experimental and numerical studies have shown that CFS
members’ ultimate strength and post-buckling mechanisms are sensitive
to geometric imperfections [72,95,99]. The imperfection sensitivity of
members, which can be stated as the degree of effects of the geometric
imperfections on members’ structural behaviors and strength, varies
according to material properties, loading arrangement, sectional and
member properties [57], and the type of dominant failure mode [100].
Different shapes and magnitudes of geometric imperfections have
different effects on the ultimate strength and failure mode of the
member [55,94,100]. Thus, appropriate identification, selection, and
integration of imperfection shapes, distribution patterns, and magni­
tudes are crucially important to obtain accurate and reliable numerical
models and to understand the geometric imperfection effects on the
member’s behaviors. In recent years, different methods have been
developed to implement measured imperfection data into numerical
models to achieve the most reliable results. These numerical modeling
approaches are roughly reviewed in six categories, including (i) Buck­
ling Mode-Shape Based Modeling Approach, (ii) 2D Spectra Approach,
(iii) 1D Modal Spectra Approach, (iv) Notional Load Approach, (v)
Probabilistic Approach, and (vi) Direct Modeling Approach.
5.1. Buckling mode shape-based modeling approach
CFS members are particularly vulnerable to initial geometrical im­
perfections with buckling mode shapes resembling the deformation
pattern generated by the applied loading [101]. Hence, for the sake of
simplicity, using buckling mode shapes obtained through linear buck­
ling analysis is one of the most common methods used for accounting
shape and distribution pattern of the geometric imperfections in nu­
merical modeling. Generally, using the first buckling mode shape as an
10
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
imperfection shape is sufficient to describe the most influential geo­
metric imperfections [18]. The use of the first buckling mode may result
in the most significant reduction in ultimate strength as this shape is the
most contributing one to the final deformed shape. However, this may
not always be true [11,102]. The use of the first buckling mode as initial
imperfections obtained from linear buckling analysis can lead to inac­
curate results when compared with the experiments [103,104]. By using
a minimal concentrated lateral load, it can be assessed whether the first
buckling mode has the most contributing shape to the final deformation
found using nonlinear analysis [105]. The basic form of the buckling
mode-shaped geometric imperfections is given in Eq. (12).
∑
n
f(x,y,z) = ci δi ϕi,(x,y,z) (i = 1, 2, 3, …, n) (12)
i=1
where f(x,y,z), ci, δi, ϕi, (x,y,z), and n refer to the displacement vector of the
geometric imperfection, the combination coefficient, the magnitude of
ith mode, the displacement vector of ith mode, and numbers of consid­
ered buckling mode shapes, respectively.
In order to simulate the most detrimental buckling mode, different
strategies have been developed based on linear buckling analysis.
Determining the most detrimental imperfection shape, which leads to
the lowest strength, is a challenging task and may significantly affect the
cost of analysis and the accuracy of the results [11,106], but it is
essential [74]. Several studies aim to guide the choice of the most
detrimental geometric imperfections represented by the buckling
modes. Bonada et al. [103] proposed an iterative methodology to find
the buckling mode leading to the lowest ultimate load. This iterative
method predicts the most detrimental geometric imperfection well. Still,
it is computationally inefficient as a certain number of buckling modes
must be checked to guarantee the lowest ultimate load. Sadovský et al.
[107] have suggested two approaches for determining the most detri­
mental geometric imperfection represented by buckling mode shapes. In
the first approach, buckling modes are normalized by the unit magni­
tude, and the energy measure is defined as an indicator of imperfection
susceptibility. In the second approach, buckling modes are normalized
by energy measure, and the magnitudes are used as an indicator. The
proposed methods help expel unrealistic modes and easily set effective
geometric imperfection combinations. The implementation of the two
suggested approaches to find the most detrimental buckling modes
shapes of the CFS channel was presented by Sadovsky and Kriváček
[108,109].
A buckling mode obtained by FEA can be a combination of two or
more pure buckling modes. On the other hand, since magnitudes of the
geometric imperfections are typically described according to pure
buckling mode shapes, the superposition of different buckling modes
will be challenging to implement in numerical simulations
[102,103,110]. In order to find pure buckling modes by FEA, a high
number of bucking modes may be necessary to investigate, which re­
quires considerable computational time [111]. For CFS built-up sec­
tions, researchers [112–114] increased the section thicknesses to
decompose pure member buckling modes from combined buckling
modes and then decreased the section thickness to decompose local
buckling mode from combined buckling modes.
Previously, modal identification primarily relied on the analyst’s
ability to appreciate the buckling mode visually [103]. Ádány and
Schafer [115] proposed an approach for calculating the pure buckling
modes of thin-walled prismatic members with open, single-branched
cross-sections. The basic idea of buckling mode decomposition was
proposed. Ádány et al. [116] demonstrated an approximate method to
quantify the participation of buckling modes obtained from the FEA of
thin-walled sections in terms of the pure buckling modes defined using
constrained finite strip methods (cFSM). Previous studies (Li et al.
[117,118]) that utilize the modal identification method showed how the
participation of a given buckling-associated deformation space evolves
under load.
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
Bonada et al. [103] claimed that the geometric imperfection
magnitude should be determined according to the buckling modes’
composition (pure modes). An imperfection simulation method that
combines linear buckling analysis with the Generalized Beam Theory
(GBT) was developed by Bonada et al. [103], and a Constrained Finite
Strip Method (cFSM) analysis-based version of the simulation method
has been proposed by Deng et al. [119]. In these methods, pure buckling
mode shapes obtained by GBT or cFSM were used to determine the
participation ratio of each pure buckling mode shape on buckling mode
shapes obtained from linear buckling analysis. The obtained buckling
eigenvalues and participation ratios were then used to determine the
proportion and magnitudes of the corresponding buckling modes in the
imperfection field.
Zeinoddini and Schafer [56] proposed a Traditional Modal Approach
(TMA) (Fig. 8. (a)) based on buckling modes corresponding to the lowest
eigenvalue for each of the five modes used to simulate geometric im­
perfections. The buckling mode shapes (as shown in Fig. 7), which are
normalized so that maximum deformation in each mode shape is one,
can be obtained from linear buckling analysis using FSMs or FEMs. The
magnitude of each buckling mode (δi) can be determined based either on
the available statistics of the measurements or direct measurement. This
approach is generally conservative for predicting strength in collapse
modeling. The formulation of the traditional modal approach is given in
Eq. (13).
∑ behavior of the member [56].
5
f(x,y,z) = δi ϕi,(x,y,z)
i=1
5.2. 2D Spectra (Random Field) Approach
The 2D Spectral (Random Field) Approach was proposed by Zei­
noddini and Schafer [56]. It is based on the simulation of geometric
imperfections as two-dimensional spectral representations. This method
generates an artificial geometric imperfection profile based on the
power spectrum (Fig. 8. (b) and (c)). For this, a power spectrum based on
expected imperfections is required to generate new samples. This
spectrum can be obtained from available data. This method is very
complicated for common usage compared to the other modeling ap­
proaches, and assumptions are also needed for folding and unfolding.
5.3. 1D Modal Spectra Approach
It has to be emphasized that the sine-shaped imperfections do not
always represent the appropriate buckling mode shape that should be
Fig. 8. Three imperfection modeling approaches: (a) a mode shape and the corresponding wavelength in the Traditional Modal Approach, (b) a 2D spectrum, (c)
transferring an imperfection field into a 2D field, (d) a cross-sectional shape of a mode, (e) a 1D spectrum [56] (Sf and Sff are the magnitudes of 1D and 2D spectrums,
respectively.).
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
introduced into nonlinear analysis [61,100]. The 1D Modal Spectra
Approach, introduced by Zeinoddini and Schafer [56], is a combination
of the traditional modal approach and the 2D spectral approach (Fig. 8.
(d-e)). It differs from the traditional modal method in two ways: (i) a
cross-sectional shape of buckling mode is a function of x and y co­
ordinates, and (ii) imperfection magnitude is calculated based on a one-
dimensional power spectrum along the length. The cross-sectional
shapes of modes can be derived from FEMs or FSMs. The magnitude of
each five modes along the length can be determined from measurements
or the power spectrum obtained based on expected imperfections. The
representative formula of the 1D Modal Spectra Approach for the five
selected mode shapes is given in Eq. (14).
∑
5
f(x,y,z) = δi,(z) ϕi,(x,y) i : mode shape (14)
i=1
where δi, (z), and ϕi, (x,y) are the magnitude of each mode at location z
along the length of the member, and the cross-sectional shape of ith
mode, respectively.
The method considers the longitudinal frequency in the observed
imperfections more precisely and offers a more formal breakdown of
imperfections into buckling modes. When 1D Modal Spectra Approach is
compared with other modeling approaches (TMA and the 2D Spectra
Approach), it was found that 1D Modal Spectra Approach is more ac­
curate in predicting the ultimate strength, flexibility, and failure
(13)
5.4. Notional load approach
Another approach for introducing geometric imperfections into nu­
merical models is to simulate them by applying notional loads with
appropriate forms. This approach is generally used to simulate flexural
geometric imperfections, but the sectional imperfections were also
simulated by some researchers. Chou and Chai [120], Hühne et al.
[121], and Castro et al. [122] used small perturbation loads normal to
the element surface to impose the local geometric imperfection (Fig. 9).
Equivalent notional lateral loading can be used for modeling the
flexural geometric imperfections at the member and system level (e.g.,
frames). Hassan et al. [58] carried out a parametric study and compared
three geometric imperfections simulation methods: (i) using a half sine
wave for flexural and local imperfections, (ii) applying equivalent
notional lateral load for flexural imperfection, and (iii) combining si­
nusoidal wave with an equivalent notional lateral load for the interac­
tion of local-flexural imperfections. Based on the results, a combination
of sinusoidal wave and equivalent notional lateral load (method iii) was
11
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

Fig. 9. Direction of transverse forces to simulate geometric imperfections [120].

proposed to model the geometric imperfection of hollow sections.
5.5. Probabilistic approach
Geometrical imperfections are one of the largest sources of uncer­
tainty when numerical models of structural elements are generated [58].
In recent years, probabilistic methods have been frequently selected to
simulate and investigate geometric imperfections of CFS members.
Probabilistic methods are employed by stochastically simulating either
magnitude or shape of imperfections for several purposes: (i) to inves­
tigate the effect of geometric imperfections on member’s behavior and
strength [1,123], (ii) to find the most detrimental imperfection shape
[124], (iii) to investigate the impact of the geometric imperfections on
the buckling mode interactions [55], and (iv) to determine the worst
combination of the geometric imperfections [125]. In a recent study by
Zhao et al. [51], a machine learning framework for uncertain modeling
as-is CFS members based on laser measurements is developed. Farzanian
et al. [126] established a probabilistic framework that uses machine
learning and statistical inference to construct consistent stochastic field
models of geometric imperfections. The probabilistic methods require a
large sum of real imperfection and simulation data to obtain reasonable
statistical results. Therefore, these methods are computationally
expensive.
5.6. Direct modeling approach
Another way to introduce imperfections in numerical models is to
directly modify the geometry based either on using the measurements of
geometric imperfections or the predefined functions representing
imperfection shapes. In this method, the geometric imperfections are
incorporated into the numerical models by directly modifying the co­
ordinates of the mesh nodes. When the actual distribution patterns of
geometric imperfections are unavailable, a sinusoidal curve with half
wavelength corresponding to the buckling mode is utilized to simplify
the procedure. Although the models obtained via direct modeling ap­
proaches accurately represent the imperfect member geometry, the
procedure requires a significant amount of pre-processing. There are
four significant direct modeling approaches. These approaches are
detailed in the following subsections.
5.6.1. Point cloud-based modeling approach
Dents and other localized imperfections are generally ignored when
mode shapes are used for geometric imperfections [12]. Geometric
imperfection measurements performed using 3D non-contact measure­
ment techniques provide dense point clouds containing information on
cartesian coordinates of the points representing a member’s true ge­
ometry, including localized imperfections. Zhao et al. [35] and Xu et al.
[127] developed procedures to convert the dense point clouds to FE
models. According to the procedure developed by Zhao et al. [35], after
the four processing steps, the obtained point cloud is converted to mesh
nodes of shell elements to model the geometry of a CFS member that is
close to the real state. Challenges of this approach include creating a
centerline model and mapping the point cloud coordinated to the nodal
coordinates of the model. In Xu et al. [127] procedures, obtained point
cloud is converted to an actual digital geometric model with help of
computer software. The digital geometric model is then directly im­
ported into general FE software.
5.6.2. Pure buckling mode shape-based modeling approach
In practice, pure initial imperfection modes are treated as the most
detrimental shapes as they generally result in the lowest ultimate
strength [71]. A buckling mode obtained by FEA can be a combination of
two or more pure buckling modes. Therefore, FSM-based software, such
as GBTUL [128], and CUFSM [129] can be used to find the shape of the
pure buckling modes. In this approach, the obtained pure buckling mode
shapes are scaled with imperfection magnitude and distributed longi­
tudinally using sinusoidal functions with periods equal to their critical
half wavelengths. Various studies have selected this method while
generating geometric imperfection fields as an alternative to traditional
ones [111,130–132].
5.6.3. Interpolation-based modeling approach
Imperfection measurements generally consist of data series for each
measurement point on a cross-section along several longitudinal lines.

12
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
These imperfections were incorporated into FE models by modifying the
coordinates of the mesh nodes of a geometrically perfect model. Firstly,
discrete imperfection data needs to be processed to obtain a smooth and
continuous imperfection distribution without noise by methods such as
Fourier transform as given in Eq. (15). The number of the Fourier terms
(n) depends on the length of the members and the half wavelength of
local buckling of the section [133,134]. Then, the measured imperfec­
tions are assigned to the nodal points of the perfect model corresponding
to the location of the measurement points. Imperfections of nodes in
between the measurement points are determined by interpolation. This
method has already been effectively used by [133–137]. Fig. 10 visually
summarizes the Interpolation-Based Modeling Approach.
( )
∑n
πix
f(x) = Ki sin (0 < x < L) (15)
i=1
L (in the sense that they correspond to the lowest column strength or
In which
( )
∫
2 L π ix
Ki = f (x)sin dx
L 0 L adverse effects, while in the numerical simulation, they are cumulatively
5.6.4. Function-based modeling approach
The fourth and last direct modeling method, the function-based
modeling approach, is numerically complex to implement, but it
brings the attractive advantage of the freedom to define any shape of
geometric imperfection, including a combination of pure buckling
modes [110]. The measured imperfections can be described by mathe­
matical functions, which allow for the imperfection shape to be scaled
and imperfection values to be computed in arbitrary places to perform
parametric studies [138]. Pavlovčič et al. [139], Cardoso and Rasmussen
[110], and Cardoso et al. [73] used a Function-Based Modeling
Approach to introduce the sectional and member geometric imperfec­
tions to the FE model according to the fitting functions that describe the
shape of the geometric imperfections.
5.7. Combination of geometric imperfections
The use of a single buckling mode shape as an imperfection can cause
an overestimation of the performance of CFS members. Schafer and
Fig. 10. Graphical abstract of the Interpolation-Based Modeling Approach [134] (a combination of three figures).
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
Peköz [6] proposed using different types of geometric imperfections to
get reliable analysis results. Similarly, Crisan et al. [17] and Kaitila [70]
suggested a combination of both sectional and member imperfections
used in ultimate strength analyses, even though neither is critical. Liu
[140] included buckling modes other than the first buckling mode in
numerical modeling if the ratio of the respective eigenvalues to the first
eigenvalue is within 1.6.
The interaction of buckling modes can change a member’s failure
modes and ultimate strength [55]. The interaction of buckling modes
with appropriate combination coefficients and magnitudes was
employed in some applications to simulate a suitable geometric imper­
fection with good agreement between numerical simulations and ex­
periments [9]. The main aims of the use of the combined geometric
imperfection shapes are to find the most detrimental imperfection shape
higher strength erosion) and to investigate mode interaction effects on
numerical modeling results ([17,55,56,71,94,125,141–144]). In real
cases, the imperfections’ randomness partially compensates for their
(16)
applied. So, it is not statistically recommended to combine all imper­
fections to cumulate their adverse effects [17].
Under compressive loading, the sign of flexural imperfection de­
termines the direction of eccentricity that produces additional moments
and may indicate whether lips are under tension or compression. For
sectional imperfections, the sign of the imperfection may imply whether
flange buckling is inward or outward. Additionally, Key and Hancock
[145] discovered that initial plate imperfection opposite to the buckling
mode enhances predicted strength. Similarly, Li et al. [146], and
Mesacasa et al. [94]stated that the imperfection sign is an essential
factor affecting the predicted behavior and strength of numerical
models. On the other hand, according to Lecce and Rasmussen [147],
the imperfection sign is not crucial for nonlinear post-buckling analysis,
so it may be neglected. Despite the opposing views, imperfection di­
rection that depends on the sign of the combination coefficient should be
considered in the modeling.
Combining buckling modes is challenging since the buckling modes
don’t share a common displacement [3]. Different imperfections are
combined by extracting “pure” critical buckling mode shapes, which are
13
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
then scaled using the previously identified imperfection magnitudes. A
linear combination of the selected buckling mode shapes can be used to
generate geometric imperfections. The value of combination coefficients
in Eq. (12), ci, which are used in linear combination generation, pertains
to how combining the imperfections affects the direction and magnitude
of the imperfection. In this review, the Square Root of the Sum of the
Squares (SRSS) Approach and the Maximum (MAX) Approach for
computing ci are investigated in detail. According to the Maximum
Approach, the magnitude of the coefficient of a given mode is set to one
or zero, while the square root of the sum of the squares of the coefficients
of the modes in the SRSS approach is set to one, as shown in Fig. 11. The
Maximum Approach guarantees that modeled imperfection magnitudes
are never less than measurements. In the SRSS approach, when the
magnitude of one mode increases, the magnitude of the other mode
shape decreases. It can be seen that correlating the combinations co­
efficients with the “SRSS” approach might lead to unconservative results
[56] while combining imperfections with the maximum values produces
conservative results [17,37].
6. Code-based geometric imperfection modeling
Codification of both size and shape of imperfections for numerical
analysis is necessary [100]. Two design standards that provide guide­
lines for modeling geometric imperfections are investigated in the scope
of the study: (i) EN 1993-1-5 [148], and (ii) AS/NZS 4600 [149].
The first attempt to codify nonlinear FEA for designing plated
structures belongs to EN 1993-1-5 [148] in 2006. It is recommended that
equivalent geometric imperfections might be employed unless a more
detailed investigation of the geometric imperfections is performed. The
geometric imperfections may be modeled on the shape of the critical
plate buckling modes that scaled with 80% of the corresponding fabri­
cation tolerances. The direction of the geometric imperfection should be
selected such that the lowest strength value is observed. When
combining geometric imperfections, leading imperfections should be
chosen, and accompanying imperfections may have their magnitudes
reduced to 70%. Proposed magnitudes for the local and distortional
imperfections in EN 1993-1-5 [148] are w/200 and f/50.
AS/NZS 4600 [149] also provides a guideline for advanced structural
analysis (geometric and material nonlinear analysis with imperfections)
of CFS-framed systems. According to the AS/NZS 4600 [149], sectional
imperfections shall be included in a numerical model with correspond­
ing local and distortional buckling modes. The proposed imperfection
magnitudes for flexural, local, and distortional modes are equal to δfl =
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
L/1000, δl = 0.3t σy /σol , and δd = 0.3t σy /σ od , respectively (where
σ ol refers to critical elastic local buckling stress and σod refers to critical
elastic distortional buckling stress).
Fig. 11. Two approaches for values of combination coefficients for distortional
and local imperfections: (i) MAX Approach and (ii) SRSS Approach [98].
14
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
7. Conclusions
Geometric imperfections are inevitable properties of CFS members
and significantly affect structural behavior and strength. A large amount
of research has been carried out to understand geometric imperfections
in CFS members through experimental, analytical, and numerical
methods over the years. This study reviews the existing codes, journal
papers, and conference papers focusing on the detection, determination,
prediction, and modeling of geometric imperfections to provide infor­
mation on the factors to be considered in design and analyses. The main
conclusions of the performed review can be listed as follows:
• Every measurement technique has pros and cons regarding equip­
ment cost, accuracy, process complexity, process speed, and post-
processing procedures. A review of existing studies has revealed
that displacement transducer-based measurement is the most com­
mon way of collecting geometric imperfection data due to its low
cost, ease of implementation, and fewer post-processing steps.
However, 3D data capturing will become more common as recent
technological innovations provide additional ease of usage.
• Proper characterization and determination of characteristics of the
geometric imperfection in CFS members is a key point for an accurate
and reliable numerical simulation. Two common characterization
methods for geometric imperfections, conventional and modal
imperfection characterizations, were described. These methods do
not perform well enough to characterize dents properly. Future
research can focus more on the characterization of dents and their
effects on the structural behavior and strength of CFS members.
• The magnitude is one of the key characteristics of geometric im­
perfections. Magnitudes of geometric imperfections can be deter­
mined based either on direct measurement or predictive models
provided in the codes or studies. The different types of predictive
models were proposed by researchers to predict the magnitude of
geometric imperfections.
• Researchers have developed numerous imperfection modeling
techniques to get accurate results from numerical models. It is
revealed that selecting modeling approaches for geometric imper­
fection is critical and mainly depends on the available geometric
imperfection information. The numerical models should include
different types of geometric imperfections to get accurate and reli­
able results.
• Although it is most important to control the geometric imperfections
in the fabrication stage, adequate precautions should be taken in the
stages of storage, transportation, construction, and operation stages
to prevent the occurrence of additional geometrical imperfections.
Also, the effects of these stages on geometric imperfections should be
answered in future research.
Abbreviations and notations
2D Two-dimensional.
3D Three-dimensional.
CFS Cold-formed steel.
cFSM Constrained Finite Strip Method.
CHS Circular hollow section.
CMM Coordinate measuring machine.
DB Distortional buckling.
DIC Digital Image Correlation.
FE Finite element.
FEA Finite element analysis.
FEM Finite element method.
FSM Finite strip method.
GBT Generalized Beam Theory.
LB Local buckling.
LVDT Linear variable differential transformer.
RHS Rectangular hollow section.
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942

SFB Strong-axis flexural buckling. Data availability

SHS Square hollow sections.
SRSS Square Root of the Sum of the Squares. No data was used for the research described in the article.
TB Torsional Buckling.
TMA Traditional Modal Approach Acknowledgments
WFB Weak-axis flexural buckling.
WoS Web of Science. This content is based on research funded by the Scientific and
E Elastic modulus of steel. Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) and Hacettepe
J Torsional constant. University under project number 217M513. Any opinions, findings,
K Constant. conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of
L Length of the member. the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors or
Q Fabrication tolerance quality parameter set out in EC3. other participants.
d Width of the element of the cross-section.
d′ Flat width of the element of the cross-section. References
f Breadth of the flange.
k Plate buckling coefficient. [1] H.S.S. Ahmed, S. Ghosh, M. Mangal, Probabilistic estimation of the buckling
strength of a CFS lipped-channel section with Type 1 imperfection, Thin-Walled
n Numbers of considered buckling mode shapes. Struct. 119 (2017) 447–456.
r Middle surface radius of CHS. [2] S. Torabian, B. Zheng, B.W. Schafer, Experimental study and modeling of cold-
t Thickness. formed steel lipped channel stub beam-columns, in: Proceedings of the Annual
Stability Conference, Structural Stability Research Council, Toronto, Canada,
w Depth of the web. 2014.
α, β Coefficients of D&W’s (1972) equations. [3] V.M. Zeinoddini, Geometric Imperfections in Cold-Formed Steel Members, Ph.D.
λ Buckling wavelength. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 2011.
[4] T.H. von Karman, L.G. Dunn, H.S. Tsien, The influence of curvature on the
υ Poisson’s ratio of steel.
buckling characteristics of structures, J. Aeronaut. Sci. 7 (7) (1940) 276–289.
De Effective diameter. [5] W. Ka, The Stability of Elastic Equilibrium (Translated by E. Riks), Ph.D. Thesis,
Sf Magnitude of the 1D power spectrum. Department of Mechanics, Delft University of Technology, 1945.
[6] B.W. Schafer, T. Peköz, Computational modeling of cold-formed steel:
Sff Magnitude of the 2D power spectrum.
characterizing geometric imperfections and residual stresses, J. Constr. Steel Res.
ci The combination coefficient. 47 (3) (1998) 193–210.
f(x,y,z) Displacement vector of the geometric imperfection. [7] M.C.M. Bakker, T. Peköz, The finite element method for thin-walled
rx Radius of gyration about a strong-axis. members—basic principles, Thin-Walled Struct. 41 (2–3) (2003) 179–189.
[8] A.T. Sarawit, Y. Kim, M.C.M. Bakker, T. Peköz, The finite element method for
ry Radius of gyration about a weak-axis. thin-walled members-applications, Thin-Walled Struct. 41 (2–3) (2003) 191–206.
αt Traditional imperfection factor set out in EC3. [9] L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Numerical modeling of stainless steel structural
components - a consistent approach, J. Struct. Eng. 130 (10) (2004) 1586–1601.
Twist imperfection magnitude.
◦
δθ
[10] D. Camotim, N. Silvestre, P.B. Dinis, Numerical analysis of cold-formed steel
δb, e Equivalent bow imperfection magnitude. members, Steel Struct. 5 (2005) 63–78.
δb Bow imperfection magnitude. [11] M. Ashraf, L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Finite element modelling of structural
δc Camber imperfection magnitude. stainless steel cross-sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 44 (10) (2006) 1048–1062.
[12] B.W. Schafer, Z. Li, C.D. Moen, Computational modeling of cold-formed steel,
δcr Crown imperfection magnitude. Thin-Walled Struct. 48 (10− 11) (2010) 752–762.
δd Distortional imperfection magnitude. [13] H. Koh, H.B. Blum, A review of current practice for testing by analysis of cold-
δf Flare imperfection magnitude. formed steel structures, Structures 37 (2022) 871–880.
[14] N.J. van Eck, L. Waltman, VOS: a new method for visualizing similarities between
δfl Flexural imperfection magnitude. objects, Adv. Data Anal. (2007) 299–306.
δi, (z) Magnitude of each mode at location z along the length of the [15] M. Theofanous, L. Gardner, Testing and numerical modelling of lean duplex
member. stainless steel hollow section columns, Eng. Struct. 31 (12) (2009) 3047–3058.
[16] R.T. Stewart, Collapsing pressure of Bessemer steel lap-welded tubes, three to ten
δi Magnitude of ith mode. inches in diameter, Trans. A.S.M.E. 27 (1906) 730–822.
δl Local imperfection magnitude. [17] A. Crisan, V. Ungureanu, D. Dubina, Behaviour of cold-formed steel perforated
λs Section slenderness. sections in compression: part 2-numerical investigations and design
considerations, Thin-Walled Struct. 61 (2012) 97–105.
σ 0.2 0.2% proof stress.
[18] B.W. Schafer, T. Peköz, Geometric imperfections and residual stresses for use in
σ cr Critical buckling stress. the analytical modeling of cold-formed steel members, in: Proceedings of
σ od Critical elastic distortional buckling stress. Thirteenth International Specialty Conference on Cold-formed Steel Structures,
St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 1996, pp. 649–664.
σ ol Critical elastic local buckling stress.
[19] T. Peköz, Design of Cold-Formed Steel Plain Channels - Report RP01–2, The
σy Yield stress. American Iron and Steel Institue, 2001-2006.
ϕi, (x,y) Cross-sectional shape of ith mode. [20] L.E. McAnallen, D.A. Padilla-Llano, X. Zhao, C.D. Moen, B.W. Schafer, M.
ϕi, (x,y,z) Displacement vector of ith mode. R. Eatherton, Initial geometric imperfection measurement and characterization of
cold-formed steel c-section structural members with 3d non-contact measurement
techniques, in: Proceedings of the Annual Stability Conference, Structural
CRediT authorship contribution statement Stability Research Council, Toronto, Canada, 2014.
[21] X. Meng, L. Gardner, Cross-sectional behaviour of cold-formed high strength steel
circular hollow sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 156 (2020).
Rafet Aktepe: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investi­ [22] X.P. Wang, K.F. Chung, S.S.E. Lam, Effect of cutting on initial geometric
gation, Validation, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – imperfections of cold-formed steel stub columns with lipped C-section, in:
Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Advances in Steel
review & editing, Visualization. Burcu Guldur Erkal: Funding acqui­
Structures, Shanghai, China, 2005, pp. 535–542.
sition, Resources, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project [23] J. Becque, K.J.R. Rasmussen, Experimental investigation of local-overall
administration. interaction buckling of stainless steel lipped channel columns, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 65 (8–9) (2009) 1677–1684.
[24] S. Niu, K.J.R. Rasmussen, F. Fan, Distortional-global interaction buckling of
stainless steel C-beams: part I - experimental investigation, J. Constr. Steel Res. 96
Declaration of Competing Interest (2014) 127–139.
[25] E.S. Bernard, R. Coleman, R.Q. Bridge, Measurement and assessment of geometric
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial imperfections in thin-walled panels, Thin-Walled Struct. 33 (2) (1999) 103–126.
[26] A. Joorabchian, K.D. Peterman, Using photogrammetry-based imperfection
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence measurement tools to determine the impact of corner radii imperfection on cold-
the work reported in this paper. formed steel member strength, in: Proceedings of the Annual Stability

15
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
Conference, Structural Stability Research Council, Baltimore, Maryland, USA,
2018.
[27] B.G. Erkal, R. Aktepe, A.C. Alkoyak, M. Bayraktar, B. Demir, Z. Unsal, Camera-
Based Imperfection Determination of Cold-Formed Steel Members, Structures
Congress 2019: Blast, Impact Loading, and Research and Education, American
Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 2019, pp. 395–404.
[28] Ł. Borkowski, J. Grudziecki, M. Kotełko, V. Ungureanu, D. Dubina, Ultimate and
post-ultimate behaviour of thin-walled cold-formed steel open-section members
under eccentric compression. Part II: experimental study, Thin-Walled Struct.
(2022) 171.
[29] G.P. Mulligan, T. Peköz, The Influence of Local Buckling on the Structural
Behavior of Singly-Symmetric Cold-Formed Steel Columns - Report no 83–1,
Center for Cold-Formed Steel Structures Library, Rolla, MO, 1983.
[30] B. Young, The Behaviour and Design of Cold-Formed Channel Columns, Ph.D.
Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney, 1997.
[31] Y. Shifferaw, L.C.M. Vieira Jr., B.W. Schafer, Compression testing of cold-formed
steel columns with different sheathing configurations, in: Proceedings of the
Annual Stability Conference, Structural Stability Research Council, Orlando, FL,
USA, 2010, pp. 593–612.
[32] K.D. Peterman, Experiments on the Stability of Sheathed Cold-Formed Steel Studs
under Axial Load and Bending, M.Sc. Thesis,, Department of Civil Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University, 2012.
[33] R. Cybulski, R. Walentyński, M. Cybulska, Local buckling of cold-formed elements
used in arched building with geometrical imperfections, J. Constr. Steel Res. 96
(2014) 1–13.
[34] X. Zhao, M. Tootkaboni, B.W. Schafer, Development of a laser-based geometric
imperfection measurement platform with application to cold-formed steel
construction, Exp. Mech. 55 (9) (2015) 1779–1790.
[35] X. Zhao, M. Tootkaboni, B.W. Schafer, Laser-based cross-section measurement of
cold-formed steel members: model reconstruction and application, Thin-Walled
Struct. 120 (2017) 70–80.
[36] D.T. Dat, T. Peköz, The Strength of Cold-Formed Steel Columns - Report no 80–4,
Center for Cold-Formed Steel Structures Library, Rolla, MO, 1980.
[37] S. Selvaraj, M. Madhavan, Geometric imperfection measurements and validations
on cold-formed steel channels using 3D noncontact laser scanner, J. Struct. Eng.
144 (3) (2018).
[38] R. Aktepe, B. Guldur Erkal, Experimental and numerical study on flexural
behaviour of cold-formed steel hat-shaped beams with geometrical imperfections,
J. Constr. Steel Res. 202 (2023).
[39] J.L. Ma, T.M. Chan, B. Young, Cold-formed high strength steel tubular beam-
columns, Eng. Struct. 230 (2021).
[40] Z. Zhang, G. Shi, L. Hou, L. Zhou, Geometric dimension and imperfection
measurements of box-T section columns using 3D scanning, J. Constr. Steel Res.
183 (2021).
[41] A.T. Tran, M. Veljkovic, C. Rebelo, L.S. da Silva, Resistance of cold-formed high
strength steel circular and polygonal sections - part 1: experimental
investigations, J. Constr. Steel Res. 120 (2016) 245–257.
[42] P. Feng, Y. Zou, L. Hu, T. Liu, Use of 3D laser scanning on evaluating reduction of
initial geometric imperfection of steel column with pre-stressed CFRP, Eng.
Struct. 198 (2019).
[43] B. Young, W.M. Lui, Behavior of cold-formed high strength stainless steel
sections, J. Struct. Eng. 131 (11) (2005) 1738–1745.
[44] B. Young, J. Chen, Design of cold-formed steel built-up closed sections with
intermediate stiffeners, J. Struct. Eng. 134 (5) (2008) 727–737.
[45] X. Zhou, Y. Xiang, Y. Shi, L. Xu, Y. Zou, Simplified design method of cold-formed
steel columns with built-up box sections, Eng. Struct. 228 (2021).
[46] E. Ellobody, B. Young, Behavior of cold-formed steel plain angle columns,
J. Struct. Eng. 131 (3) (2005) 457–466.
[47] Y. Xiang, X. Zhou, Y. Shi, L. Xu, Y. Xu, Experimental investigation and finite
element analysis of cold-formed steel channel columns with complex edge
stiffeners, Thin-Walled Struct. 152 (2020).
[48] X. Zhao, M.P. Tootkaboni, B.W. Schafer, High fidelity imperfection measurements
and characterization for cold-formed steel members, in: Proceeding of the 7th
International Conference on Coupled Instabilities in Metal Structures, Baltimore,
Maryland, USA, 2016.
[49] X. Zhao, B.W. Schafer, Laser scanning to develop three-dimensional fields for the
precise geometry of cold-formed steel members, in: International Specialty
Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 2014.
[50] M.A. Sutton, J.J. Orteu, H. Schreier, Image Correlation for Shape, Motion and
Deformation Measurements: Basic Concepts, Theory and Applications, Springer
Science & Business Media, 2009.
[51] X. Zhao, G. Wang, X. Sun, X. Wang, B.W. Schafer, Modeling of uncertain geometry
of cold formed steel members based on laser measurements and machine
learning, Eng. Struct. 279 (2023).
[52] B.G. Erkal, O.G. Cagrici, Automated geometric imperfection detection and
quantification of CFS members from point clouds, KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 26 (9) (2022)
3888–3904.
[53] AISI S220-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing -
Nonstructural Members, American Iron and Steel Institute Committee,
Washington DC, USA, 2015.
[54] AISI S240-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Structural
Framing, American Iron and Steel Institute Committee, Washington DC, USA,
2015.
[55] Z.J. Li, Stochastically simulated mode interactions of thin-walled cold-formed
steel members using modal identification, Thin-Walled Struct. 128 (2018)
171–183.
16
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
[56] V.M. Zeinoddini, B.W. Schafer, Simulation of geometric imperfections in cold-
formed steel members using spectral representation approach, Thin-Walled
Struct. 60 (2012) 105–117.
[57] R.B. Cruise, L. Gardner, Measurement and prediction of geometric imperfections
in structural stainless steel members, Struct. Eng. Mech. 24 (1) (2006) 63–89.
[58] M.S. Hassan, S. Salawdeh, J. Goggins, Determination of geometrical imperfection
models in finite element analysis of structural steel hollow sections under cyclic
axial loading, J. Constr. Steel Res. 141 (2018) 189–203.
[59] V. Ungureanu, D. Dubina, Erosion effect of geometrical and material
imperfections on the buckling strength of thin-walled cold-formed steel members,
Adv. Steel Struct. 1 (2005).
[60] X.Z. Zhao, C. Ren, R. Qin, An experimental investigation into perforated and non-
perforated steel storage rack uprights, Thin-Walled Struct. 112 (2017) 159–172.
[61] M.M. Pastor, J. Bonada, F. Roure, M. Casafont, Residual stresses and initial
imperfections in non-linear analysis, Eng. Struct. 46 (2013) 493–507.
[62] J. Bonada, M.M. Pastor, F. Roure, M. Casafont, Distortional influence of pallet
rack uprights subject to combined compression and bending, Structures 8 (2016)
275–285.
[63] I. Arrayago, K.J.R. Rasmussen, E. Real, Statistical analysis of the material,
geometrical and imperfection characteristics of structural stainless steels and
members, J. Constr. Steel Res. 175 (2020).
[64] R.G. Dawson, A.C. Walker, Post-buckling of geometrically imperfect plates,
J. Struct. Div. 98 (1) (1972) 75–94.
[65] S.M. Chou, G.B. Chai, L. Ling, Finite element technique for design of stub
columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 37 (2) (2000) 97–112.
[66] M. Ashraf, L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Geometric imperfections in stainless steel
cross-sections, in: Z.Y. Shen, G.Q. Li, S.L. Chan (Eds.), International Conference
on Advances in Steel Structures, Shanghai, China, 2005, pp. 105–112.
[67] L. Gardner, N. Saari, F. Wang, Comparative experimental study of hot-rolled and
cold-formed rectangular hollow sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 48 (7) (2010)
495–507.
[68] J. Dobrić, D. Buđevac, Z. Marković, N. Gluhović, Behaviour of stainless steel
press-braked channel sections under compression, J. Constr. Steel Res. 139 (2017)
236–253.
[69] T.G. Singh, K.D. Singh, Experimental investigation on performance of perforated
cold-formed steel tubular stub columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 131 (2018) 107–121.
[70] O. Kaitila, Imperfection sensitivity analysis of lipped channel columns at high
temperatures, J. Constr. Steel Res. 58 (3) (2002) 333–351.
[71] P.B. Dinis, D. Camotim, Post-buckling behaviour and strength of cold-formed
steel lipped channel columns experiencing distortional/global interaction,
Comput. Struct. 89 (3–4) (2011) 422–434.
[72] M.M. Pastor, M. Casafont, J. Bonada, F. Roure, Imperfection amplitudes for
nonlinear analysis of open thin-walled steel cross-sections used in rack column
uprights, Thin-Walled Struct. 76 (2014) 28–41.
[73] F.S. Cardoso, H. Zhang, K.J.R. Rasmussen, S. Yan, Reliability calibrations for the
design of cold-formed steel portal frames by advanced analysis, Eng. Struct. 182
(2019) 164–171.
[74] J. Chen, T.M. Chan, A.H. Varma, Stub column behavior of cold-formed high-
strength steel circular hollow sections under compression, J. Struct. Eng. 146 (12)
(2020).
[75] X. Meng, L. Gardner, Simulation and design of semi-compact elliptical hollow
sections, Eng. Struct. 202 (2020).
[76] F. Walport, L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Equivalent bow imperfections for use in
design by second order inelastic analysis, Structures 26 (2020) 670–685.
[77] C.P. Guo, M. Elchalakani, A. Karrech, M.R. Bambach, B. Yang, Behaviour and
design of cold-formed CHS under static pure bending through finite element
analysis, Thin-Walled Struct. 147 (2020).
[78] EN 1993-1-6, Design of Steel Structures - Part 1–6: Strength and Stability of Shell
Structures, European Committee For Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium,
2007.
[79] EN 1090–-4, Execution of Steel Structures and Aluminium Structures - Part 4:
Technical Requirements for Cold-Formed Structural Steel Elements and Cold-
Formed Structures for Roof, Ceiling, Floor and Wall Applications, European
Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
[80] EN 10162, Cold Rolled Steel Sections - Technical Delivery Conditions -
Dimensions and Cross-Sectional Tolerances, European Committee For
Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2003.
[81] S.S.E. Lam, K.F. Chung, X.P. Wang, Load-carrying capacities of cold-formed steel
cut stub columns with lipped C-section, Thin-Walled Struct. 44 (10) (2006)
1077–1083.
[82] X.P. Wang, S.S.E. Lam, K.F. Chung, Cross section distortion due to cutting of cold-
formed steel lipped C-section, Thin-Walled Struct. 44 (3) (2006) 271–280.
[83] A. Crisan, V. Ungureanu, D. Dubina, Behaviour of cold-formed steel perforated
sections in compression. Part 1—Experimental investigations, Thin-Walled Struct.
61 (2012) 86–96.
[84] A. Murphy, W. McCune, D. Quinn, M. Price, The characterisation of friction stir
welding process effects on stiffened panel buckling performance, Thin-Walled
Struct. 45 (3) (2007) 339–351.
[85] F. Liao, H. Wu, R. Wang, T. Zhou, Compression test and analysis of multi-limbs
built-up cold-formed steel stub columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 128 (2017)
405–415.
[86] D.K. Phan, K.J.R. Rasmussen, B.W. Schafer, Tests and design of built-up section
columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 181 (2021).
[87] B. Nie, S. Xu, Z. Zhang, R. Gu, Experimental investigation on corroded cold-
formed steel beam-columns under compression and major axis bending, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 169 (2020).
R. Aktepe and B. Guldur Erkal
[88] B. Nie, S. Xu, Y. Wang, A. Li, Z. Zhang, Local buckling of corroded cold-formed
steel stub columns, Structures 29 (2021) 1837–1846.
[89] K.J.R. Rasmussen, G.J. Hancock, Tests of high strength steel columns, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 34 (1) (1995) 27–52.
[90] H. Ban, G. Shi, Y. Shi, M.A. Bradford, Experimental investigation of the overall
buckling behaviour of 960MPa high strength steel columns, J. Constr. Steel Res.
88 (2013) 256–266.
[91] O.S. Hopperstad, M. Langseth, L. Hanssen, Ultimate compressive strength of plate
element aluminuinium: correlation of finite element analyses and tests, Thin-
Walled Struct. 29 (1–4) (1997) 31–46.
[92] F. McCann, C. Fang, L. Gardner, N. Silvestre, Local buckling and ultimate strength
of slender elliptical hollow sections in compression, Eng. Struct. 111 (2016)
104–118.
[93] K.J.R. Rasmussen, G.J. Hancock, The flexural behaviour of fixed-ended channel
section columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 17 (1) (1993) 45–63.
[94] E. Mesacasa, P.B. Dinis, D. Camotim, M. Malite, Mode interaction in thin-walled
equal-leg angle columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 81 (2014) 138–149.
[95] C.D. Moen, B.W. Schafer, Experiments on cold-formed steel columns with holes,
Thin-Walled Struct. 46 (10) (2008) 1164–1182.
[96] I. Georgieva, L. Schueremans, L. Pyl, L. Vandewalle, Numerical study of built-up
double-Z members in bending and compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 60 (2012)
85–97.
[97] S. Selvaraj, M. Madhavan, Bracing effect of sheathing in point-symmetric cold-
formed steel flexural members, J. Constr. Steel Res. 157 (2019) 450–462.
[98] M. Almatrafi, M. Theofanous, S. Dirar, M. Bock, Structural response of cold-
formed lipped Z purlins – part 2 numerical modelling and optimisation of lip size,
Thin-Walled Struct. 161 (2021).
[99] B.W. Schafer, T. Peköz, Laterally braced cold-formed steel flexural members with
edge stiffened flanges, J. Struct. Eng. 125 (2) (1999) 118–127.
[100] D. Dubina, V. Ungureanu, Effect of imperfections on numerical simulation of
instability behaviour of cold-formed steel members, Thin-Walled Struct. 40 (3)
(2002) 239–262.
[101] P. Natário, N. Silvestre, D. Camotim, Web crippling failure using quasi-static FE
models, Thin-Walled Struct. 84 (2014) 34–49.
[102] M. Feng, Y.C. Wang, J.M. Davies, A numerical imperfection sensitivity study of
cold-formed thin-walled tubular steel columns at uniform elevated temperatures,
Thin-Walled Struct. 42 (4) (2004) 533–555.
[103] J. Bonada, M. Casafont, F. Roure, M.M. Pastor, Selection of the initial geometrical
imperfection in nonlinear FE analysis of cold-formed steel rack columns, Thin-
Walled Struct. 51 (2012) 99–111.
[104] S. Farzanian, A. Louhghalam, B.W. Schafer, M. Tootkaboni, Geometric
imperfections in shell finite element models of CFS members - A review of current
state of practice, in: Proceedings of the Annual Stability Conference, Structural
Stability Research Council, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 2018.
[105] M. Zeynalian, Structural performance of cold-formed steel-sheathed shear walls
under cyclic loads, Aust. J. Struct. Eng. 18 (2) (2017) 113–124.
[106] A.D. Martins, D. Camotim, P.B. Dinis, Local-distortional interaction in cold-
formed steel beams: behaviour, strength and DSM design, Thin-Walled Struct. 119
(2017) 879–901.
[107] Z. Sadovský, J. Kriváček, V. Ivančo, A. Ďuricová, Computational modelling of
geometric imperfections and buckling strength of cold-formed steel, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 78 (2012) 1–7.
[108] Z. Sadovský, J. Kriváček, Tolerances of imperfections and strength of cold-formed
lipped channel column, J. Constr. Steel Res. 128 (2017) 762–771.
[109] Z. Sadovský, J. Kriváček, Influence of boundary conditions and load eccentricity
on strength of cold-formed lipped channel columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 131
(2018) 556–565.
[110] F.S. Cardoso, K.J.R. Rasmussen, Finite element (FE) modelling of storage rack
frames, J. Constr. Steel Res. 126 (2016) 1–14.
[111] M.R. Haidarali, D.A. Nethercot, Finite element modelling of cold-formed steel
beams under local buckling or combined local/distortional buckling, Thin-Walled
Struct. 49 (12) (2011) 1554–1562.
[112] J.H. Zhang, B. Young, Finite element analysis and design of cold-formed steel
built-up closed section columns with web stiffeners, Thin-Walled Struct. 131
(2018) 223–237.
[113] 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. Steel Res. 160 (2019) 411–427.
[114] S.T. Vy, M. Mahendran, Behaviour and design of slender built-up nested cold-
formed steel compression members, Eng. Struct. 241 (2021).
[115] S. Ádány, B.W. Schafer, Buckling mode decomposition of single-branched open
cross-section members via finite strip method: derivation, Thin-Walled Struct. 44
(5) (2006) 563–584.
[116] S. Ádány, A.L. Joó, B.W. Schafer, Buckling mode identification of thin-walled
members by using cFSM base functions, Thin-Walled Struct. 48 (10–11) (2010)
806–817.
[117] Z. Li, A.L. Joó, S. Ádány, B.W. Schafer, Approximate modal identification in
nonlinear collapse analysis of thin-walled members, in: Proceedings of the Annual
Stability Conference, Structural Stability Research Council, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, USA, 2011.
[118] Z. Li, S. Ádány, B.W. Schafer, Modal identification for shell finite element models
of thin-walled members in nonlinear collapse analysis, Thin-Walled Struct. 67
(2013) 15–24.
[119] L. Deng, J. Li, Y. Yang, P. Deng, Imperfection sensitivity analysis and DSM design
of web-stiffened lipped channel columns experiencing local-distortional
interaction, Thin-Walled Struct. 152 (2020).
17
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 207 (2023) 107942
[120] S.M. Chou, G.B. Chai, Ultimate design load of thin-walled stub columns, Int. J.
Comput. Appl. Technol. 10 (1997) 27–33.
[121] C. Hühne, R. Rolfes, E. Breitbach, J. Teßmer, Robust design of composite
cylindrical shells under axial compression — simulation and validation, Thin-
Walled Struct. 46 (7–9) (2008) 947–962.
[122] S.G.P. Castro, R. Zimmermann, M.A. Arbelo, R. Khakimova, M.W. Hilburger,
R. Degenhardt, Geometric imperfections and lower-bound methods used to
calculate knock-down factors for axially compressed composite cylindrical shells,
Thin-Walled Struct. 74 (2014) 118–132.
[123] V. Ungureanu, A. Madeo, G. Zagari, G. Zucco, D. Dubina, R. Zinno, Koiter
asymptotic analysis of thin-walled cold-formed steel uprights pallet racks,
Structures 8 (2016) 286–299.
[124] D. Cava, D. Camotim, P.B. Dinis, A. Madeo, Numerical investigation and direct
strength design of cold-formed steel lipped channel columns experiencing local-
distortional-global interaction, Thin-Walled Struct. 105 (2016) 231–247.
[125] G. Zagari, G. Zucco, A. Madeo, V. Ungureanu, R. Zinno, D. Dubina, Evaluation of
the erosion of critical buckling load of cold-formed steel members in compression
based on Koiter asymptotic analysis, Thin-Walled Struct. 108 (2016) 193–204.
[126] S. Farzanian, A. Louhghalam, B.W. Schafer, M. Tootkaboni, Geometric
imperfections in CFS structural members, part II: data-driven modeling and
probabilistic validation, Thin-Walled Struct. 185 (2023).
[127] D. Xu, Y. Wang, X. Liu, B. Chen, Y. Bu, A novel method and modelling technique
for determining the initial geometric imperfection of steel members using 3D
scanning, Structures 49 (2023) 855–874.
[128] R. Bebiano, N. Silvestre, D. Camotim, GBTUL – A Code for the buckling analysis of
cold-formed steel members, in: Nineteenth International Specialty Conference on
Cold-Formed Steel Structures, St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 2008.
[129] B.W. Schafer, S. Ádány, Buckling analysis of cold-formed steel members using
CUFSM: Conventional and constrained finite strip methods, in: Eighteenth
International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, Wei-Wen Yu
Center for Cold-Formed Steel Structures, Orlando, FL, USA, 2006.
[130] C. Hui, L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Moment redistribution in cold-formed steel
continuous beams, Thin-Walled Struct. 98 (2016) 465–477.
[131] P. Kyvelou, L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Finite element modelling of composite
cold-formed steel flooring systems, Eng. Struct. 158 (2018) 28–42.
[132] P. Kyvelou, C. Kyprianou, L. Gardner, D.A. Nethercot, Challenges and solutions
associated with the simulation and design of cold-formed steel structural systems,
Thin-Walled Struct. 141 (2019) 526–539.
[133] J. Becque, K.J.R. Rasmussen, A numerical investigation of local–overall
interaction buckling of stainless steel lipped channel columns, J. Constr. Steel Res.
65 (8–9) (2009) 1685–1693.
[134] J. Ye, S.M. Mojtabaei, I. Hajirasouliha, P. Shepherd, K. Pilakoutas, Strength and
deflection behaviour of cold-formed steel back-to-back channels, Eng. Struct. 177
(2018) 641–654.
[135] S. Niu, K.J.R. Rasmussen, F. Fan, Distortional–global interaction buckling of
stainless steel C-beams: part II — numerical study and design, J. Constr. Steel Res.
96 (2014) 40–53.
[136] N. Talebian, B.P. Gilbert, C.H. Pham, R. Chariere, H. Karampour, Parametric
studies and design rules for local and distortional biaxial-bending capacity of
cold-formed steel storage-rack uprights, J. Struct. Eng. 146 (3) (2020).
[137] D.K. Phan, K.J.R. Rasmussen, B.W. Schafer, Numerical investigation of the
strength and design of cold-formed steel built-up columns, J. Constr. Steel Res.
193 (2022).
[138] B. Lechner, M. Pircher, Analysis of imperfection measurements of structural
members, Thin-Walled Struct. 43 (3) (2005) 351–374.
[139] L. Pavlovčič, B. Froschmeier, U. Kuhlmann, D. Beg, Finite element simulation of
slender thin-walled box columns by implementing real initial conditions, Adv.
Eng. Softw. 44 (1) (2012) 63–74.
[140] Q. Liu, Structural Analysis and Design of Cold-Formed Steel Purlins, Ph.D. Thesis,
College of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Birmingham, 2012.
[141] P.B. Dinis, D. Camotim, N. Silvestre, FEM-based analysis of the local-plate/
distortional mode interaction in cold-formed steel lipped channel columns,
Comput. Struct. 85 (19–20) (2007) 1461–1474.
[142] P.B. Dinis, D. Camotim, Local/distortional mode interaction in cold-formed steel
lipped channel beams, Thin-Walled Struct. 48 (10–11) (2010) 771–785.
[143] D. Camotim, P.B. Dinis, Coupled instabilities with distortional buckling in cold-
formed steel lipped channel columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 49 (5) (2011) 562–575.
[144] S. de Miranda, D. Melchionda, V. Ungureanu, D. Dubina, A modified ECBL
approach for cold-formed steel rack section members, Thin-Walled Struct. 130
(2018) 47–56.
[145] P.W. Key, G.J. Hancock, A finite strip method for the elastic-plastic large
dlisplacement analysis of thin-walled and cold-formed steel sections, Thin-Walled
Struct. 16 (1993) 3–29.
[146] Y.L. Li, Y.Q. Li, Y.Y. Song, Z.Y. Shen, In-plane behavior of cold-formed thin-
walled beam-columns with lipped channel section, Thin-Walled Struct. 105
(2016) 1–15.
[147] M. Lecce, K. Rasmussen, Distortional buckling of cold-formed stainless steel
sections: finite-element modeling and design, J. Struct. Eng. 132 (4) (2006)
505–514.
[148] EN 1993-1-5, Design of Steel Structures - Part 1–5: Plated Structural Elements,
European Committee For Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
[149] AS/NZS-4600, Cold-formed steel structures, Australian/New Zealand Standard
Sydney, Australia.