Discrete and continuous treatment of local buckling in stainless steel elements
By L. Gardner, M. Theofanous. 2008
164 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Abstract Cross-section classification is an important concept in the design of metallic structures, as it addresses the susceptibility of a cross-section to local buckling and defines its appropriate design resistance. For structural stainless steel, test data on cross-section capacity have previously been relatively scarce. Existing design guidance has been developed based on the limited experimental results and conservative assumptions, generally leading to unduly strict slenderness limits. In recent years, available test data for stainless steel cross-sections have increased significantly, enabling these slenderness limits to be re-assessed. In this paper all available stainless steel test data have been collected and additional moment–rotation curves have been presented. The study covers both cold-formed and welded plated elements as well as CHS. Following analysis of the test results, new slenderness limits for all loading conditions have been proposed and statistically validated. In addition to re-assessment of the current slenderness limits, a new approach to the treatment of local buckling in structural elements–the Continuous Strength Method–has been outlined. The Continuous Strength Method (CSM) is based on a continuous relationship between cross-section slenderness and deformation capacity and is applied in conjunction with accurate material modelling. The method enables more rational and precise prediction of local buckling than can be achieved with the traditional cross-section classification approach, thus allowing better utilization of material and more economic design.
Subfields: Building and Construction, Civil and Structural Engineering
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0506705c7cea10f917599d0e3e11b7b259e6d624
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Building and Construction
In Civil and Structural Engineering
Citations in the corpus
- Cyclic testing and numerical modelling of carbon steel and stainless steel tubular bracing members (2010, methodology): “The revised slenderness limits for stainless steel sections [19] are based on a considerably larger pool of experimental data than was available at the time of preparation of EC3 Part 1-4 [20], and are thus considered more representative of observed physical behaviour.”
- Testing and numerical modelling of lean duplex stainless steel hollow section columns (2009, methodology): “The respective carbon steel Class 3 limit of 42ε is marginally unconservative and does not provide adequate reliability as assessed by the statistical analysis conducted in [9], according to Annex D of EN 1990 [39].”
- Behaviour of structural stainless steel cross-sections under combined loading – Part I: Experimental study (2015, background): “On the basis of the findings, revised slenderness limits for cross-section classification [22] and new effective width formulae for slender sections [13] have been proposed.”
- Reliability analysis of structural stainless steel design provisions (2015, methodology): “The classification of the cross-sections for the treatment of local buckling was based on the recent classification limits and effective width equations proposed by Gardner and Theofanous [13], which will replace”
- Flexural behaviour of hot-finished high strength steel square and rectangular hollow sections (2016, unknown): “In addition, the recently proposed modifications to the Eurocode 3 slenderness limits [49], which are approximately in line with the recently revised limits for stainless steel [50], are also considered.”
- Cross-section stability of lean duplex stainless steel welded I-sections (2013, methodology): “The EN 1993-14 [7] limits for Class 1 cross-sections may be seen to be safely applicable to lean duplex stainless steel, while the more relaxed Class 1 limits proposed in [38] allow for more sections to be classified as Class 1 on the basis of a rotation capacity of R = 3, though as previously menti”
- The continuous strength method for structural stainless steel design (2013, methodology): “Background to the method and detailed descriptions of its development over the past decade are published in [3-5].”
- Stability and design of stainless steel structures – Review and outlook (2019, methodology): “For the former, modified effective width expressions [30] are included in Eurocode 3: Part 1.”
- Structural response and continuous strength method design of slender stainless steel cross-sections (2017, methodology): “The reduction factors used in the European code EN 1993-1-4 [17] and AISC design guide 27 [21] are based on the findings of Gardner and Theofanous [26], as given by Eq.”
- Comparative experimental study of hot-rolled and cold-formed rectangular hollow sections (2010, background): “In one out of the six simple bending tests, the bending moment fell below Mpl on the unloading path prior to the termination of the experiment, whilst for the remaining specimens rotation capacity was calculated on the basis of max (the maximum attained rotation prior to the test being terminated),”