DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Limitation of effective length method and codified second-order analysis and design

  • Chan, S.L. (Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) ;
  • Liu, Y.P. (Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) ;
  • Zhou, Z.H. (Southeast University)
  • Received : 2004.08.12
  • Accepted : 2004.11.15
  • Published : 2005.04.25

Abstract

The effective length method for flexural (column) buckling has been used for many decades but its use is somewhat limited in various contemporary design codes to moderately slender structures with elastic critical load factor (${\lambda}_{cr}$) less than 3 to 5. In pace with the use of higher grade steel in recent years, the influence of buckling in axial buckling resistance of a column becomes more important and the over-simplified assumption of effective length factor can lead to an unsafe, an uneconomical or a both unsafe and uneconomical solution when some members are over-designed while key elements are under-designed. Effective length should not normally be taken as the distance between nodes multiplied by an arbitrary factor like 0.85, 1.0, 2.0 etc. Further, the classification of non-sway and sway-sensitive frames makes the conventional design procedure tedious to use and, more importantly, limited to simple regular frames. This paper describes the practical use of second-order analysis with section capacity check allowing for $P-{\delta}$ and $P-{\Delta}$ effects together with member and system imperfections. Most commercial software considers only the $P-{\Delta}$ effect, but not member and frame imperfections nor $P-{\delta}$ effect, and engineers must be very careful in their uses. A verification problem is also given for validation of software for this type of powerful second-order analysis and design. It is a trend for popular and advanced national design codes in using the second-order analysis as a norm for analysis and design of steel structures while linear analysis may only be used in very simple structures.

Keywords

References

  1. American Institute of Steel Construction (1986), Load and Resistance Factor Design, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, AISC, Chicago.
  2. AS-4100, Australian Standard for Steel Structures (1998), Sydney.
  3. BS5950, British Standards Institution (2000). Structural Use of Steel in Building, Part 1, U.K.
  4. BS 5973 (1993),"Code of practices for access and working scaffolds and special scaffold structures in steel", BSI, London, UK.
  5. Chan, S.L. (1990),"Strength of cold-formed box columns with coupled local and global buckling", The Structural Engineer, 68(7), 125-132.
  6. Chan, S.L., Koon, C.M. and Albermani, F.G. (2002),"Theoretical and experimental studies of unbraced tubular trusses allowing for torsional stiffness", Steel and Composite Structures, 2(3), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2002.2.3.209
  7. Chan, S.L. and Zhou, Z.H. (1994),"A pointwise equilibrating polynomial (PEP) element for nonlinear analysis of frames", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 120(6), 1703-1717. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:6(1703)
  8. Chan, S.L. and Cho, S.H. (2002),"Design of steel frames using calibrated design curves for buckling strength of hot-rolled members", Proceeding, 3rd Int. Conf. on Advances in Steel Structures ICASS'02, Elsevier, 2, 15-17 December, 1193-1199.
  9. Eurocode 3 (2003),"Design of steel structures", Draft, DD ENV, 1993-1-1.
  10. Trahair, N.S. and Chan, S.L. (2002),"Out-of-plane advanced analysis of steel structures", Research Report, Centre for Advanced Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Sydney University.

Cited by

  1. Advanced design for trusses of steel and concrete-filled tubular sections vol.33, pp.12, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.08.002
  2. Design and construction of long-span single-layer dome structures by direct analysis vol.25, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/1023697X.2017.1409663