Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Numerical investigation of the plastic behaviour of short welded aluminium

double-T beams
E.K. Koltsakis a, , F.G. Preftitsi b,c
a Civil Engineering Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
b Technological Educational Institution of Serres, Greece
c Technological Educational Institution of West Macedonia, Greece

Received 17 August 2006; received in revised form 2 December 2007; accepted 13 December 2007
Available online 20 February 2008

Abstract
The present work is a numerical approach to the mechanical behaviour of short aluminium beams, both extruded and welded at the webflange
junction. The studied beams were taken to be short so as to ensure that their design is dominated by shear. In order to investigate the effects of the
weld and the consequent existence of a heat-affected zone (HAZ), both welded and extruded beams of identical geometric characteristics were
studied. Three alloys, 6063-T6, 6005A-T6 and 7020-T6, were chosen because of their varying strength characteristics, as well as the different
severity of mechanical degradation that each one undergoes in the HAZ. The numerical investigation is performed in the framework of small
displacements, and the possibility of lateral buckling is excluded. All the studied cases qualify as Class-I cross sections for normal actions. The
RambergOsgood stressstrain relation is used to describe the hardening of the material. The results obtained by means of finite element models
are compared to those of classical beam theory and to the resistance checks of Eurocode 9.
c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Aluminium structures; Heat-affected zone; Short beams

1. Introduction
Unlike steel, where the effect of welding-induced heat leaves
the properties of the surrounding material unaffected (at least
as far as common practice civil engineering applications are
concerned), the case of aluminium calls for a totally different
approach. A severe degradation of the mechanical resistance in
the vicinity of the fusion line, known as the heat-affected zone
(HAZ), appears. This adverse effect is taken quite seriously
in the draft of Eurocode 9 [1], which is structured around the
concept of discriminating the cross sections into welded and
extruded types. Reduced values of proof and ultimate stress
apply for the material in the vicinity of the welds. The fact that
the presence of an HAZ strongly affects the failure mechanism
Corresponding address: Metal Structures Lab., Civil Engineering
Department, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, GR-54124, Greece. Tel.: +30
2310 929476, +30 6946798995; fax: +30 2310 995642.
E-mail addresses: mkolts@civil.auth.gr (E.K. Koltsakis),
fotpreft@otenet.gr (F.G. Preftitsi).

c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0141-0296/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.12.012

of beams is well established in the literature; to mention but a

few, Lai and Nethercot as well as Mazzolani published results
on the effect of HAZ for beams [2,3]; Evans et al. in [4,5]
reported HAZ failures in girder webs; many other studies [6,7]
reported experimental results concerning HAZ-related failures
in connections.
The present work attempts to investigate the behaviour of
short double-T aluminium beams subjected to loading levels
that make them undergo plastic deformation. This is done by
means of numerical simulation based on finite element (FE)
models. The present study does not include geometric nonlinearities.
The computations are performed for welded and extruded
beams of exactly the same geometry so as to assess the effect
of the presence of the HAZ on the resistance of the member.
Finally the results of the FE analysis are compared to the
behaviour predicted by simple beam theory (with material nonlinearity taken into account), as well as to the resistance checks
of Eurocode 9.

2023

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

Table 1
Material resistance characteristics
Alloy

Thickness
(mm)

f 0.2
(N/mm2 )

fu
(N/mm2 )

HAZ
f 0.2
(N/mm2 )

f uHAZ
(N/mm2 )

n/n HAZ
(N/mm2 )

=
HAZ / f
f 0.2
0.2

HAZ
f p / f 0.2 f pHAZ / f 0.2

6063-T6

t 25

160

195

65

110

24/47

0.41

0.831

0.908

t 5
5 < t 10
10 < t 25

225
215
200

270
260
250

115

165

6005A-T6

25/38
24/37
20/33

0.51
0.53
0.58

0.800
0.800
0.800

0.870
0.870
0.870

7020-T6

t 15
15 < t < 40

290
275

350
350

205

280

23/35
19/27

0.71
0.75

0.797
0.797

0.844
0.844

the exponential hardening rule

= Y + Q 1 (1 eC1 p ) + Q 2 (1 eC2 p ),

Fig. 1. RambergOsgood stress strain relations for several aluminium alloys.

2. Modelling of the material in the current study

The present study addresses the behaviour of structural
elements; consequently, the authors decided to keep their
choice of aluminium alloys/tempers combinations among those
considered in Eurocode 9, where values for the conventional
yield stress f 0.2 , the ultimate stress f u , as well as their
HAZ and
counterparts holding inside the heat-affected zone f 0.2
HAZ
fu
are provided. Uniaxial stressstrain curves obtained by
means of the RambergOsgood (RO) relation


n
p = 0.002
,
(1)
f 0.2
for the materials covered in Eurocode 9, are depicted in Fig. 1.
Here, p is the plastic strain, f 0.2 the conventional yield limit
equal to the stress corresponding to 0.2% plastic strain, is
the stress and n the hardening parameter of the alloy. Three
materials (alloy/temper combinations) were selected for the
purposes of the current study as representative of the low (6063T6), medium (6005A-T6) and high (7020-T6) strength variety.
Details of their resistance characteristics are listed in Table 1.
The values of n appearing in (1) are those provided by the
Eurocode 9 for the thermally intact material. The values of n
holding inside the HAZ were obtained by means of the scheme
proposed in [3].
The modelling of the plastic behaviour of aluminium has
drawn much attention in recent years. Anisotropic yield criteria
have been proposed by Hill [8] and Barlat and Lian [9], as
well as Karafillis and Boyce [10]. Also, strain-hardening rules
other than the well known RO relation, such as, for example,

(2)

are used in the literature (see [11,12] and the references

therein), whenever experimental data to determine the
parameters Q 1 , Q 2 , C1 , C2 and Y are available.
As data concerning the parameters of anisotropic yield
criteria are rather difficult to find in the literature, the authors
decided to use the von Mises yield criterion along with isotropic
hardening and the RO hardening rule. The limitations of this
approach are known (see e.g. [12]) but, given the fact that the
loading path in the current study is proportional, the task faced
by the FE model is not as demanding as the sheet metal forming
simulations that seem to have spurred much of the anisotropy
related work. Moreover, simulations based on the RO hardening
model were compared against experimental data in [23] and
were found to be in a very good accord for cases very similar
to those of the present work, i.e. welded aluminium beams and
connections in bending and shear.
As is obvious, whenever a continuous stressstrain relation
is used in conjunction with a yield function, there arises the
problem of determining a proportionality limit f p for the
material; the matter is discussed in some detail in Annex E of
Eurocode 9, where guidelines on the proportionality limit of the
material are given.
A consideration having to do with f p used in an FE
computation is that the choice of too small a value for the
proportionality limit results in load increments that produce an
overall structural behaviour only very slightly deviating from
linearity. Therefore, the authors decided to use a conventional
proportionality limit that was determined as the strain, where
the second derivative of the RO law exceeds 1/10 of its range.
In this way the behaviour of the material is kept elastic,
wherever the RO curve is practically linear. The hence obtained
values of f p and f pHAZ are given in Table 1 as fractions of
f 0.2 . Subsequent points of the law are obtained in an
analogous manner, thus generating a discretized RO law (a
series of i i pairs), where the density of the discretization
is kept proportional to the curvature. This technique was
found to accelerate the convergence of the computation. On
the downside, introducing a conventional f p naturally means
trading the true values of the initial elastic modulus of the
material with secant values E S . However, the deviation of the
initial secant moduli remains within a 0.05% margin from the

2024

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

Fig. 2. (a) RambergOsgood plastic evolution curves. (b) Discretized RO curve and normalized derivatives.

true value of E el = 70 000 N/mm2 . The RO plastic evolution

curves used in the analysis are depicted in Fig. 2a for both
the thermally intact and heat-affected materials. Fig. 2b depicts
a part of the RO curve for the 7020-T6 material (marked
1) focusing at the elasticplastic transition zone, along with
appropriately scaled plots of its first and second derivatives
(respectively marked 2 and 3) to show the resulting density of
points.
3. On the selection of cross sections
Given the lack of a widely accepted standardization for
series of aluminium profiles, especially in Europe (concerning
the US see [13,14]), the authors had to devise some rational
way to generate profiles, whereupon to base the subsequent
numerical investigation.
First, the cross section depth and flange width data of the
SteelHEA series were observed. Next, two requirements were
considered, whereupon the generation of an aluminium series
of profiles was based:

(a) Extruded section.

a. the cross sections had to qualify for Class-I in compression,

and
flg
b. the I y = I y /I yweb ratio had to stay above a minimum value
as h p increases.
Here h p is the depth of the profile (see Fig. 3a) and I y is
the major-axis second moment of inertia of the respective cross
section part. The first requirement is a matter of versatility for
the generated cross section series. The need for the second
requirement arises when one attempts to generate an aluminium
series that complies with the first requirement: as the second
moment of inertia of the web I yweb increases by h 3p and the
flange width b f stays below 300 mm in the HEA series,
requiring the
flange to be Class-I ((b f tw 2w f )/2t f <
2.5, = 250/ f 0.2 ) does not result in any increase of t f past
HEA300. This results in cross sections with very thick webs
and disproportionately thin flanges; the authors dealt with this
problem by bounding I y from below, as follows:
The first AlHEA cross section (AlHEA100) is determined
using the first requirement only. Let h p( j) = h p(1) , h p(2) , . . . be
the heights of the SteelHEA series, whose depths and widths

(b) Welded section.

Fig. 3. Geometric characteristics.

will be used for the AlHEA series (taking h p( j+1) > h p( j) ).

As we seek values of tw , t f for the ( j + 1)-th AlHEA profile,
we first determine the minimum value of tw,( j+1) that will give
a Class-I web. We then determine a flange thickness so that
flg

flg

a. I y,( j+1) I y,( j) and

( j+1)

b. I y

(1)

I y / ,

where the parameter was taken equal to 5, a value that was

chosen by studying I y as a function of h p for the SteelHEA

2025

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

Table 2
Geometric characteristics fulfilling the Class-I requirement (mm)

Table 3
HAZ extents for a 6 mm double fillet weld (mm)
tf

Material

hp

S EC9
f lg

EC9
Sweb

S RD

7.9
9.8

15.3
19.1

6.
6.

6063T6

171
210

35.
35.

30.
35.

10.2
10.2

180
220

8.8
10.7

17.9
20.9

6.
6.

6005AT6

171
210

35
35.

30.
35.

10.2
10.2

180
220

9.9
12.3

19.9
24.8

6.
6.

7020T6

171
210

35.
35.

30.
35.

12.0
12.0

Material

Designation

hp

bf

6063-T6

AlHEA180
AlHEA220

171
210

180
220

6005A-T6

AlHEA180
AlHEA220

171
210

7020-T6

AlHEA180
AlHEA220

171
210

tw

profiles. The complete results of this procedure are presented

in [15]. Table 2 lists the tw , t f values obtained for AlHEA180
and AlHEA220 for the three chosen materials.
As can be seen in Table 2, the higher the strength of an
alloy, the thicker the web and flange turn out to be, due to the
Class-I requirement. In the present analysis, use was made of
the profile data of the 7020-T6 material, as these envelope the
Class-I requirement for the other two, weaker materials.
4. Issues concerning welded aluminium profiles
Welding heat-treated aluminium alloys results in degradation of the additional strength obtained via the heat treatment
process. This adverse effect is caused by the heat released during the welding process and affects a zone around the weld,
known as the heat-affected zone (HAZ). The proof stress f 0.2
and the ultimate stress f u are reduced by a factor ranging from
0.41 to 0.75, whereas the modulus of elasticity E and Poissons
ratio remain unaffected.
Regarding the extents of the HAZ, several approaches exist
such as, for example, the one inch rule, the rules of Eurocode
9, and the RobertsonDwight (RD) method. In the present
work, the extent of the HAZ was computed according to the
RD method [16], which is based on the Rosenthal heat-flow
equations. This approach, although somewhat complicated,
seemed more accurate as compared to the one inch or the
Eurocode 9 rules, where the extent of the HAZ is determined
rather crudely. Following this method, a heat-affected cross
section area Az that primarily depends on the cross section
area of the weld deposit Aw , is computed. The value of
Az is determined by means of a set of rules that take into
account factors as the base material (alloy composition), the
thermal control during the welding, the applied welding method
(MIG or TIG), the weld size, etc. The hence computed Az
is subsequently distributed among the welded elements, in a
manner that the HAZ branches are of the same length S RD for
all the joined elements, as seen in Fig. 3b.
In the present study, MIG double torch welding and normal
thermal control were assumed. The resulting values of S RD are
given in Table 3 along with the corresponding values following
the rules of Eurocode 9. Note that the extent of the HAZ
according to the RD method is distinctively smaller than the
one proposed in Eurocode 9.
We now come to the matter of the residual stresses. First we
note that residual stresses produced by the extrusion process are
generally very low (lower than 20 N/mm2 ), irrespective of the
heat treatment [3,17]. It is also known that the detrimental effect

of residual stresses on the resistance of welded aluminium bars

in compression is smaller than in steel [18], and the zone of
the locked-in longitudinal tension at an aluminium weld is
generally narrower than the HAZ [16].
In addition, as Class-I sections are studied, no second-order
effects are included in our models. Buckling having been ruled
out, the other major effect of residual stresses concerns the
deflection of the beam, their presence having an amplifying
effect [19]. As the present paper attempts to point out a type
of premature failure related to the development of excessive
deformation, neglecting residual stresses constitutes the most
unfavourable conditions under which this unwanted mechanism
might arise. Due to this and the fact that no methodology for
the estimation of residual stresses is given in Eurocode 9, the
authors chose not to include them in the numerical simulations.
Last, concerning the size of the web-flange welds, the
requirements of the U.S. Aluminium Specification [20]
concerning minimum and maximum fillet weld sizes were
followed. The prescribed minimum weld sizes are those used in
the numerical models. A weld radius aw equal to 6 mm covers
all the studied cases. The welds chosen are capable of resisting
the shear strength of the weakest of the welded parts, i.e. the
web, as 2 f w aw > tw f 0.2 , where f w is the strength of the filler
metal 5356.
5. The numerical model
The Castem [21] finite element code was used for the
numerical modelling. The mesh for the models that included
a heat-affected zone is made up of 1190 8-node, reduced
integration, thick-shell elements resulting in 3709 nodes. In
Fig. 4a the mesh used in the FE analysis is depicted. The
structure under study is essentially a cantilever beam supported
at x = L/2 and loaded at the opposite end. The length
of all the models was taken equal to 2.5h p . Considering the
boundary conditions at the fixed end, the following restraints
were considered:
(1) u z restrained along the web (segment BE),
(2) u x restrained along the flanges (segments AC, DF),
(3) u y restrained along the flanges (AC, DF): this restraint
expresses the presence of an end plate,
(4) u x restrained along the height of the web (segment BE).
Applying all four restraints makes up the boundary
conditions type A; using only 1, 2 and 3 makes up the boundary
conditions type B. This differentiation in the type of the

2026

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

Fig. 4. (a) AlHEA220: FE mesh and loading. (b) Shell thickness field [mm].

boundary conditions has a noticeable effect on the behaviour

of the structure, especially in the plastic regime. A linear
load of density f z is applied along a length s L = 0.8h p of
the webplate junction of the model, in order to avoid stress
localizations. The generation of the mesh was based on a set of
parameters that ensure that similar mesh densities are obtained
regardless of the profile height. One can note the refinement of
the mesh along the z-axis near the webflange junction. Two
issues relate to this refinement:
(1) first, the authors felt it would be good for the accuracy of the
computation to include the variation of the shell thickness
in the vicinity of the welds due to the weld material, and
(2) as will become evident in the section describing the results,
this area is one in which severe strain accumulation appears.
The shell thickness fields are depicted in Fig. 4b, where the
increase of the thickness of the web and flange plates around the
webflange junction due to the weld deposit is clearly shown.
Observing Fig. 4b more closely, one can see that the thickness
variation takes place over two elements (web) and can therefore
be considered a meaningful alternative to the option of a 3Dmesh. However, it must be mentioned that this procedure had
to be programmed on a Gauss-point level and is somewhat
complicated and time-consuming.
The simplest way to incorporate the HAZ into the FE model
would be to discretize two separate zones of elements: one
inside and one outside the HAZ. This approach is restrictive
as it requires a different mesh every time that the weld radius or
other qualitative parameters affecting the HAZ extent change.
In addition, exact similarity of the FE meshes was a major
concern in order to exclude differences in plastic regime
behaviour owing to this factor.
The authors chose to generate the field of distances of the
Gauss points of the FE model from the welds and to assign the
property of being inside or outside the HAZ based on the value
of this field: let d1 be the distance of an arbitrary point of the
FE model from the upper-flange/web junction and d2 be the
respective distance from the lower-flange/web junction. Then,
for a web (resp. flange) point to lie outside the HAZ, the index
function web (resp. flg )
web = min(d1 , d2 ) (S RD + w f + t f /2)

(3)

flg = min(d1 , d2 ) (S RD + w f + tw /2)

(4)

will have to be positive. These distance functions are depicted

in Fig. 5a. Note that the concept of the distance field allows
the easy introduction of a transient HAZ around the nominal
boundary of the zone. However, although the concept of a
gradual transition from the heat-affected material to the intact
area away from the weld was easy to implement, the authors
refrained from doing so, due to the scarcity of experimental data
on transient HA zones in the literature.
6. Overview of the results
Before discussing the results of the FE computations, the
authors consider it important to propose a way of comparing
the behaviour of a shell elasticplastic model to the Eurocode 9
resistance checks. The traditional approach is to use the concept
of moment and shear resistance M y,Rd , Vz,Rd and MV,Rd at
critical cross sections and rely on these to provide a measure of
whether a structural element can safely bear the imposed load
or not. However, M y,Rd and Vz,Rd are but measures originating
from classic beam theory: as we model a structure by more
elaborate means, other measures of its response to the imposed
level of loading seem necessary. Our idea is to express the
response of our model as a function gs of the applied load:
u A = gs (PR )

(5)

where u A and PR respectively are displacements and loads

defined in an average sense as below:
R
Z
s L u z dx
, PR=
f z dx.
(6)
uA =
sL
sL
Here u A is the average of the u z displacements over the
length s L of application of the load (see Fig. 4a) and PR the
resultant of the applied load. The function gs will be termed the
structural response function. The derivative Srs = gs / PR
will be referred to as the structural response slope. Our
idea therefore is to compare the traditional concept of cross
section resistance to the results of the elastoplastic FE analysis
as expressed by means of the structural response function gs .
It is rather straightforward that the model can be considered
to approach a state of structural failure if the slope of gs

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

2027

Fig. 5. (a) AlHEA220/7020T6: the field min(d1 , d2 ) (mm). (b) Proportionality stress field (N/mm2 ) for w = 6 mm, S R D = 12 mm.

(a) AlHEA180.

(b) AlHEA220.

(a) AlHEA180.

Fig. 6. Load displacement functions gs for 6063-T 6.

(b) AlHEA220.
(a) AlHEA180.

(b) AlHEA220.

Fig. 7. Load displacement functions gs for 6005A-T 6.

increases significantly with respect to its initial, elastic regime

value Srsel . In fact, Srs was used as a stopping criterion for
the calculations: the load incrementation loop was forced to
exit when the ratio Srs (PR )/Srsel exceeded the value of 10. The
structural response functions of the studied cases are plotted in
Figs. 68. Each sub-figure depicts response functions related
to a single combination of a cross section and a material, and
contains five curves:
(a) the welded beam with restrained u web
(labelled HAZx
BC#A),
(b) the welded beam where u web
is free to develop (labelled
x
HAZ-BC#B),
(c) the extruded beam where no HAZ is present (labelled
NHZ),
(d) a beam theory computation of the deflection (including
shear deformations and material non-linearity) for a welded
cross section (HAZs exist),
(e) a beam theory computation of the deflection (as above) of
an extruded cross section (HAZs are absent).

Fig. 8. Load displacement functions gs for 7020-T6.

In addition to these curves, vertical dashed lines are drawn

showing the maximum value of PR for the welded and the
HAZ and P NHZ ) that
extruded cases (respectively labelled Pmax
max
were computed following the checks of Eurocode 9. Let it be
noted that the Vz,Rd check was the critical one as our models
are rather short. The resulting numerical values of the checks
are given in Table 4.
Curves (d) and (e) were computed by means of elementary
beam theory adapted to the non-linearity of the material. The
procedure is as following:
(1) The cross section was discretized on the yz plane; the
momentcurvature (M) diagram was computed by
means of integration of stresses over the cross section. The
said stresses were obtained via the law corresponding
to each element of the cross section discretization, for a
number of extreme fibre strains; the planarity assumption
was observed.
(2) as the M y (x) diagram of the cantilever is known, the
distribution of the curvature (x) is obtained via the M

2028

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

Table 4
EC9 values: Eurocode 9 shear, moment and interaction checks (kN)
Pmax
Alloy designation

c/s type

P(Vz,Rd )

P(M y,Rd )

P(M y + Vz )

6005AT6-171.

Welded
Extruded

125.
146.

242.
283.

125.
146.

6005AT6-210.

Welded
Extruded

181.
207.

377.
428.

181.
207.

6063T6-171.

Welded
Extruded

89.
109.

181.
221.

89.
109.

6063T6-210.

Welded
Extruded

137.
166.

283.
334.

137.
166.

7020T6-171.

Welded
Extruded

179.
197.

362.
397.

179.
197.

7020T6-210.

Welded
Extruded

274.
300.

555.
600.

274.
300.

diagram and integrated twice producing the displacement

u z (x) due to bending.
(3) additional displacements due to shear, obtained again for
the non-linear law, are superimposed.
Acceptable coincidence appears to have been obtained
between the beam theory and the shell models only for the cases
where an HAZ does not exist. The discrepancy that shows up
for the welded cases will be discussed in what follows.
A first remark regarding the behaviour of the extruded
profiles is that altering the boundary condition type from A
to B produced very close results (curves labelled NHZ);
this is the reason why only response functions for type-A
boundary conditions are plotted to show the behaviour of the
extruded cross sections. However, the type of the web boundary
conditions seems to affect the response of the welded cross
sections in a distinctive manner. A clear divergence of the
response of the welded cross sections with respect to the webu x constraint is rather evident in the plastic regime: the models
where web-u x is free develop a softening behaviour well before
their counterparts where web-u x is constrained. Referring to the
response of the extruded profiles (no HAZ), one can observe
that their gs plots intersect with the respective Eurocode 9
NHZ ), well before any of
strength limit (vertical line labelled Pmax
the softening, characterizing their final load steps, shows up.
This however, is not the case for the welded cross sections,
where a significant reduction of the macroscopic stiffness
HAZ limit is
(1/Srs ) of the models takes place before the Pmax
reached. One can see that the greater the severity of the heat
effect (coefficient in Table 1), the earlier the softening of the
model appears; the effect exists but is clearly milder for the
7020 alloy ( = 0.71).
In order to elucidate this particular behaviour of the welded
cases, Figs. 9 and 10 depict the patterns of the web shear
strain x z at various stages of the loading process for the
AlHEA180/6005A-T6 case. Fig. 9 pertains to type-A boundary conditions (constrained web-u x ), whereas Fig. 10 shows
respective results obtained with the type-B boundary condition (free web-u x ). The plots of the slope of the structural response with respect to the load, are depicted in Figs. 9a, b,

10a, b. The slopes are normalized with respect to Srsel , which is

the slope of gs at the elastic regime of the model; additionally,
the load on the horizontal axis of the S rs plots is normalized
pr
by the PR load value. The upper index pr stands for propr
portionality, hence the value of PR is equal to the maximum
load for which our model remains everywhere elastic.
First, let us observe the field of web-x z depicted in Fig. 9d:
EC9 load of the
it corresponds to a state very close to the Pmax
EC9
extruded cross section (actually Pmax = 146 kN, limited to
this value by the Vz,Rd check; see Table 4).
The pattern of the web shear strain x z is rather expected;
in a state where the shear resistance of the cross section is
reached, the maximum x z value is evenly distributed over the
web. Note also that the x z field of Fig. 9d corresponds to the
point marked 1 in Fig. 9b, which lies well within the horizontal
part of the S rs curve: it would take a further 18% increase of
the load to reach the point marked 2 in Fig. 9b and obtain a
substantial reduction of the structural stiffness (by a factor of
S rs = 2.35; see Fig. 9f). Even at this load, which is well beyond
the Eurocode 9 resistance of the model, the corresponding strain
field shown in Fig. 9f retains, to a reasonable degree, its evenly
distributed form.
Coming now to the web-x z fields of the welded beams
(Fig. 9c, e, g), we see that as the S rs curve departs from its
initial horizontal part, strain accumulates along two slit-like
regions lying in the vicinity of the weld foot, inside the HAZ
(see Fig. 5b, where the HAZ is depicted). This is expected, as
the part of the web between the end of the weld foot and the
fringes of the HAZ is the weakest part of the model, and the
shear flow of the web has to pass through there to ensure the
integrity of the cross section.
The result is that the planarity assumption of the cross
sections is violated and a decoupling of the beam cross section
into three loosely connected elements (lower flange, web and
upper flange) seems to develop [22]. In the authors opinion,
this has to be the reason for the discrepancy between the gs
of welded models obtained via the beam theory and those
of the shell FE models: in beam theory the cross sections

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

2029

Fig. 9. (a) Welded CS: tip compliance evolution. (b) Extruded CS: tip compliance evolution. (ch) Fields of web strains x z for various load intensity levels;
boundary conditions type: A.

are implicitly constrained to remain planar by the Bernoulli

assumption.
The formation of strain accumulation zones is more evident
for the type-B boundary conditions (unconstrained web-u x ). In
fact, as our model is now less constrained kinematically, the
increase of the structural response slope is steeper. Observing
the form of S rs in Fig. 10a against that of Fig. 9a we can see that
in the case of unconstrained web-u x (Fig. 10a), the rise of S rs
pr
takes place over 35% of the plotted horizontal axis range (PR
factor), whereas in the case of type-A boundary conditions,
this rise happens in a milder way, taking almost 60% of the
respective load range. The result obviously is less ductility for
the case of unconstrained web-u x .
One last remark concerns the development of strain
accumulation zones in the case of extruded profiles, like those
showing up in Fig. 10h. One should keep in mind that Fig. 10f
and 10h correspond to load levels 21% and 29% higher than
the Eurocode 9 predicted resistance. In addition, these strain

accumulation zones tend to remain confined in the vicinity of

the support.
7. Conclusions
The present work is an FE study of the behaviour of
welded aluminium beams, where shear is the critical factor.
The presence of the HAZ, an unavoidable consequence of the
weld, seems to have caused premature failure of the models due
to the formation of shear accumulation bands along the foot
of the web-flange welds. For alloy/heat temper combinations
with a low value (less than 0.60), the Eurocode 9 predicted
resistance in shear appears to be optimistic. The authors believe
that further research, both numerical and experimental, is
needed to shed more light on the quantitative aspects of this
unfavourable situation.
Until such results become available in the literature, the
authors propose that such beams be designed in shear using the
HAZ value over the whole area of their cross section.
f 0.2

2030

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

Fig. 10. (a) Welded CS: tip compliance evolution. (b) Extruded CS: tip compliance evolution. (ch) Fields of web strains Yx z for various load intensity levels;
boundary conditions type: B.

Acknowledgements
The authors wish to express their sincere thanks to the
Castem-Code development group as well as to Professor
K. Thomopoulos for his moral support and many helpful
comments.
References
[1] Eurocode 9. Design of aluminium structures, Part 1-1: General structural
rules. European Committee for Standardisation; 2004.
[2] Lai YFW, Nethercot DA. Strength of aluminium members containing
local transverse welds. Engineering Structures 1992;14(4):24154.
[3] Mazzolani FM. Aluminium alloy structures. 2nd ed. E & FN Spon; 1995.
[4] Evans HR, Hamoodi MJ. The collapse of welded aluminium plate girdersan experimental study. Thin Walled Structures 1987;5:24775.
[5] Burt CA, Evans HR, Vilnay O. Further experimental studies of the
collapse of welded aluminium plate girders. Thin Walled Structures 1989;
8:1939.
[6] Chan TK, Porter Goff RD. Welded aluminium alloy connections: Test
results and BS8118. Thin Walled Structures 2000;36:26587.

[7] Efthymiou E, Zygomalas M, Baniotopoulos CC. On the structural

response of aluminium T-stub joints under tension. Transactions of
FAMENA 2006;30(1):4558.
[8] Hill R. The mathematical theory of plasticity. Clarendon Press; 1950.
[9] Barlat F, Lian J. Plastic behaviour and stretchability of sheet metals. Part
I: A yield function for orthotropic sheets under plane stress conditions.
International Journal of Plasticity 1989;5:5166.
[10] Lademo OG, Hopperstad OS, Langseth M. An evaluation of yield criteria
and flow rules for aluminium alloys. International Journal of Plasticity
1999;15:191208.
[11] Moen LA, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS. Elastoplastic buckling of
anisotropic aluminium plate elements. Journal of Structural Engineering
ASCE 1998;124:7129.
[12] Hildebrand BG, Sterling SG, Price MA. An evaluation of three material
models used in the finite element simulation of a sheet stretching process.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2000;103:5764.
[13] Kissel JR, Ferry R. Aluminum Structures: a guide to their specifications
and design. 2nd ed. NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
[14] Engineering data for aluminum structures: Construction manual series.
Section 3. 3rd ed. The Aluminum Association; 1975.
[15] Preftitsi FG, Koltsakis EK, Thomopoulos KT. Considerations on the
configuration of extruded aluminium double-T profiles. In: Proceedings
of the 10th international conference on metal structures, 2003. p. 32330.

E.K. Koltsakis, F.G. Preftitsi / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20222031

[16] Dwight J. Aluminium design and construction. Routledge: E & FN Spon.
1999.
[17] Mazzolani FM, Valtinat G. ECCS activity in the field of buckling of
aluminium alloy members. In: Narayanan R, editor. Aluminium structures: Advances, design and construction (Proceeding of the int. conf. on
steel and aluminium structures). Cardiff: Elsevier Applied Science; 1987.
[18] Canas J, Picon R, Paris F, Blazquez A, Marin JC. A simplified numerical
analysis of residual stresses in aluminum welded plates. Computers &
Structures 1996;58(1):5969.
[19] Barsan GM, Chiorean CG. Influence of residual stress on the carryingcapacity of steel framed structures. In: Dubina D, Ivany M, editors.
Numerical investigation. Stability and ductility of steel structures

2031

(SDSS99). Elsevier Science Pub.; 1999. p. 31724.

[20] American Welding Society. AWS D1.2-97. Structural Welding CodeAluminum. Miami; 1997.
[21] Cast3M: Presentation et utilisation de Castem2000, http://wwwcast3m.cea.fr.
[22] Preftitsi F. Investigation of the mechanical behaviour of welded
aluminium double-T beams by means of computational methods. Ph.D.
thesis. Civil Eng. Dept. of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,
Greece; June 2005.
[23] Matusiak M. Strength and Ductility of welded structures in aluminium
alloys. Ph.D. Thesis. Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and
Technology; 1999.