2016•Steel ConstructionRequires access

Verification of flexural buckling according to Eurocode 3 part 1‐1 using bow imperfections

Joachim Lindner, Ulrike Kuhlmann, Adrian Just

Open publisher page 31 citations

Abstract

Abstract The resistance of compression members may be calculated by the design buckling resistance based on the reduction factor χ, which depends on the slenderness, or by the cross‐section resistance based on internal forces according to a second‐order analysis taking into account equivalent initial bow imperfections as well. The second way is especially advantageous in the case of axial forces and bending. Values for equivalent initial bow imperfections are given in codes such as Eurocode 3 [5] or DIN 18800 [4]. For comparison, initial bow imperfections are derived here from the buckling curves for compression members with different cross‐sections, buckling directions and steel grades based on different types of cross‐sectional interaction. The results are discussed and commented with regard to the design of compression members. Furthermore, investigations are carried out for cases of axial compression and bending moments My or Mz. Data available from ultimate load calculations are used for comparison. The consequences for the assumed design verification according to second‐order theory are discussed and a proposal is presented.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract The resistance of compression members may be calculated by the design buckling resistance based on the reduction factor χ, which depends on the slenderness, or by the cross‐section resistance based on internal forces according to a second‐order analysis taking into account equivalent initial bow imperfections as well. The second way is especially advantageous in the case of axial forces and bending. Values for equivalent initial bow imperfections are given in codes such as Eurocode 3 [5] or DIN 18800 [4]. For comparison, initial bow imperfections are derived here from the buckling curves for compression members with different cross‐sections, buckling directions and steel grades based on different types of cross‐sectional interaction. The results are discussed and commented with regard to the design of compression members. Furthermore, investigations are carried out for cases of axial compression and bending moments My or Mz. Data available from ultimate load calculations are used for comparison. The consequences for the assumed design verification according to second‐order theory are discussed and a proposal is presented.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 31 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract The resistance of compression members may be calculated by the design buckling resistance based on the reduction factor χ, which depends on the slenderness, or by the cross‐section resistance based on internal forces according to a second‐order analysis taking into account equivalent initial bow imperfections as well. The second way is especially advantageous in the case of axial forces and bending. Values for equivalent initial bow imperfections are given in codes such as Eurocode 3 [5] or DIN 18800 [4]. For comparison, initial bow imperfections are derived here from the buckling curves for compression members with different cross‐sections, buckling directions and steel grades based on different types of cross‐sectional interaction. The results are discussed and commented with regard to the design of compression members. Furthermore, investigations are carried out for cases of axial compression and bending moments My or Mz. Data available from ultimate load calculations are used for comparison. The consequences for the assumed design verification according to second‐order theory are discussed and a proposal is presented.

Key concepts: Eurocode, Buckling, Structural engineering, Compression (physics), Bending, Bending moment, Cross section (physics), Reduction (mathematics)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Verification of flexural buckling according to Eurocode 3 part 1‐1 using bow imperfections — Research Paper | ScholarLens