Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jcsr

Structural design of stainless steel members comparison between Eurocode 3, Part 1.4 and test results
B.A. Burgan *, N.R. Baddoo, K.A. Gilsenan
The Steel Construction Institute, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7QN, UK

Abstract The paper describes the test results of an ongoing major European research project which is concerned with the further development and renement of structural design guidance for stainless steel. The paper concentrates on the work carried out to date on the design of beams, columns and beamcolumns and compares the test results with resistances predicted by the design pre-standard for structural stainless steel, ENV 1993-1-4. In general, the design guidance is conservative. The tests on CHS beams indicate that the limiting diameter-to-thickness ratios for section classication can be considerably increased. For welded I-section beams, the ENV 1993-1-4 lateral torsional buckling curve appears very conservative and the less conservative curve adopted in ENV 1993-1-1 for carbon steel appears to give a better t to the data. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Stainless steel; Eurocode 3 Part 1.4; Structural design

1. Introduction The attractive appearance, corrosion resistance, ease of maintenance and low life cycle cost of stainless steels have led to their use within the construction industry for over 60 years. Typical applications include xings, fasteners and cladding. However, structural materials with exceptionally high durability and corrosion resistance are required for certain applications within many industries such as the offshore, nuclear and paper-making industries. In many cases, stainless steel can provide a cost-effective and low maintenance structural solution to meet these demands. Austenitic
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-1344-623345; fax: +44-1344-622944. E-mail address: b.burgan@steel-sci.com (B.A. Burgan).
0143-974X/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 1 4 3 - 9 7 4 X ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 5 5 - 3

52

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

grades of stainless steel also exhibit exceptional ductility, good re resistance and non-magnetic properties, all of which may lead to structural applications in particular circumstances. Despite the fact that around 10% of stainless steel produced is used structurally or architecturally, comparatively little research has been carried out on structural behaviour. This has led to a lack of suitable design guidance for structural engineers, the one notable exception being the American code for cold-formed sections [1]. In 1988, a joint industry project was undertaken by the Steel Construction Institute to develop design guidance for European offshore and onshore stainless steel structural applications. The design recommendations arising from this project were published by EURO INOX in 1994 as the Design manual for structural stainless steel [2].

2. European design standard for structural stainless steel Eurocode 3 deals with the design of steel structures. Part 1.1, containing general rules and rules for buildings, was issued by CEN as ENV 1993-1-1 in 1992 [3]. Around this time, work started on preparing a Eurocode covering the design of structural stainless steel and this was later designated ENV 1993-1-4 (Part 1.4 of Eurocode 3) [4]. The Design manual for structural stainless steel was used as a starting point for ENV 1993-1-4, with modications and additions made to reect the results of ongoing research and the new European material standard for stainless steel, EN 10088 [5]. It was published by CEN in 1996 and gives supplementary provisions for the design of buildings and civil engineering works which extend the application of ENV 1993-1-1 to austenitic and duplex stainless steels.

Fig. 1. Reduction factor, c, versus generalised slenderness l for CHS columns test results and ENV 1993-1-4 design. curve

Table 1 Geometric and material properties of the CHS column specimens 1404-C1 1.4541 2251 P 140 3.99 293 576 195 437 330 236 468 195 193 190 201 278 197 202 1.4541 3350 P 139.1 3.99 293 576 1.4541 4450 P 140.1 3.98 294 576 1.4435 498 F 139.3 2.87 352 577 1.4435 499 F 139.4 1.97 318 598 1.4435 2250 P 139.8 1.95 319 598 144-C2 1404-C3 1403-SC 1402-SC 1402-C1 1402-C2 1.4435 3350 P 139.8 1.95 319 598 197.5 156 1402-C3 1.4435 4449 P 139.9 1.97 318 598 201 122

Specimen reference name

1404-SC

1.4541 499 F 138.6 3.98 294 576

193

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Steel grade to EN 10088 Column length, L (mm) End conditions (pinned/xed) Diameter, d (mm) Thickness, t (mm) Yield strength, fy (N/mm2) Ultimate tensile strength, fu (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2) Measured failure load, Ntest (kN)

665

53

54

Table 2 Section classication and predicted buckling resistance of the CHS column specimens 1404-C1 47.11 1 0.577 0.710 0.890 444.6 0.983 0.975 0.961 1.081 1.028 46.81 1 0.865 0.988 0.682 338.63 47.92 1 1.148 1.343 0.491 245.49 80.35 3 0.071 0.422 1.000 433.00 100.04 4 0.065 0.420 1.000 270.47 144-C2 1404-C3 1403-SC 1402-SC 1402-C1 103.74 4 0.591 0.722 0.881 237.26 0.851 1402-C2 103.48 4 0.879 1.004 0.672 180.98 0.862 1402-C3 100.4 4 1.155 1.352 0.487 132.12 0.923

Specimen reference name

1404-SC

47.4 1 0.065 0.420 1.000 494.87

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

(d/t)/e2 Section class l f c Design buckling resistance, Nb.Rd (kN) Ntest/Nb.Rd

1.344

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

55

Table 3 Geometric and material properties of the I-section column specimens minor axis tests, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference I-16080 name (minor axis tests) C1 Specimen length, L (mm) Web yield strength, fyw (N/mm2) Web ultimate tensile strength, fuw (N/mm2) Flange yield strength, fyf (N/mm2) Flange ultimate tensile strength, fuf (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2) Section depth, H (mm) Section width, B (mm) Web thickness, tw (mm) Flange thickness, tf (mm) Weld throat thickness, a (mm) Measured failure load, Ntest (kN) 650 300 624 I-16080 C2 1248 300 624 I-16080 C3 2046 300 624 I-160160 C1 1248 300 624 I-160160 C2 2049 300 624 I-160160 C3 3347 300 624

299

299

299

304

302

304

609

609

609

614

612

614

200

200

200

200

199

200

158 79.5 6 9.8 3 627

161.7 80.8 6 9.8 3 420

161.4 79.8 6 9.8 3 270

158.3 159.2 6 9.8 3 1120

157.7 159.9 6 9.9 3 745

158 160.1 6 9.8 3 582

The basic approach followed during the preparation of the Design manual for structural stainless steel was to adopt the rules for carbon steel, making modications as necessary where stainless steel test data indicated different behaviour. In the cases where no data were available, the rules for carbon steel were generally suggested. Although this approach almost certainly led to safe designs, the complex material behaviour of stainless steel was not being taken into account and its desirable properties not fully exploited. Since the material cost of stainless steel is high by normal construction material standards, economic design is of paramount importance.

3. Ongoing development of design guidance In January 1997, a major European project started which is concerned with the further development and renement of structural design guidance. The project is

56

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Table 4 Geometric and material properties of the I-section column specimens major axis tests, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference I-16080 name (major axis tests) C1 Specimen length, L (mm) Web yield strength, fyw (N/mm2) Web ultimate tensile strength, fuw (N/mm2) Flange yield strength, fyf (N/mm2) Flange ultimate tensile strength, fuf (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2) Section depth, H (mm) Section width, B (mm) Web thickness, tw (mm) Flange thickness, tf (mm) Weld throat thickness, a (mm) Measured failure load, Ntest (kN) 2048 300 624 I-16080 C2 3343 300 624 I-16080 C3 5031 300 624 I-160160 C1 2025 300 624 I-160160 C2 3348 300 624 I-160160 C3 5145 300 624

299

299

299

300

300

299

609

609

609

610

610

610

200

200

200

198

198

199

157 79.4 6 9.8 3 668

157.6 78.9 6 9.8 3 535

158.5 80.1 6 9.8 3 402

158.3 160 6 9.9 3 1130

158.4 159.8 6 9.9 3 860

158 159.2 6 9.9 3 725

being supported by the European Coal and Steel Community, the Nickel Development Institute and stainless steel producers in the UK, Sweden, Finland, France, Germany and Italy. Both experimental and modern numerical methods (including non-linear nite element analyses) are being utilized to produce the data which is required to develop a structurally efcient design method for stainless steel structures. The tests measure actual resistances which include strain hardening and residual stresses. Numerical methods are used for describing the effects of different material stressstrain curves, for simulating the experimental tests and for analysing the effects of a wider range of parameters than those tested. Design rules are under development which will be suitable for updating ENV 1993-1-4 before it is converted to an EN (European Standard). The scope of work covers static loading on members and connections, cyclic loading on welded connections and the behaviour of stainless steel members in re.

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

57

Table 5 Geometric and material properties of the I-section column specimens major axis tests, grade 1.4462 Specimen reference name (major axis tests) Specimen length, L (mm) Web yield strength, fyw (N/mm2) Web ultimate tensile strength, fuw (N/mm2) Flange yield strength, fyf (N/mm2) Flange ultimate tensile strength, fuf (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2) Section depth, H (mm) Section width, B (mm) Web thickness, tw (mm) Flange thickness, tf (mm) Weld throat thickness, a (mm) Measured failure load, Ntest (kN) I-160160 C1 2050 523 777 522 755 201 162.7 159.8 6.8 10.6 3 1930 I-160160 C2 3348 523 777 522 755 201 161.4 159.5 6.8 10.6 3 1490 I-160160 C3 5046 523 777 522 755 201 160.4 161 6.8 10.6 3 990

Table 6 Section classication and predicted buckling resistance of the I-section column specimens minor axis tests, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference I-16080 name (minor axis tests) C1 d/(twe) c/(tfe) Section class l f c Design buckling resistance, Nb.Rd (kN) Ntest/Nb.Rd 25.1 3.8 1 0.4309 0.6806 0.8282 592.2 I-16080 C2 25.8 3.9 2 0.8156 1.0665 0.5702 415.9 I-16080 C3 25.7 3.9 2 1.3562 1.8590 0.3195 230.9 I-160160 C1 25.1 8.6 1 1.0170 0.64 0.8654 549.4 I-160160 C2 25.0 8.6 1 0.6181 0.8499 0.6977 840.3 I-160160 C3 25.1 8.7 1 1.0105 1.3185 0.4618 555.6

1.06

1.01

1.17

1.08

0.89

1.05

The main objectives of the structural member tests are to provide test data on the effects of: a non-linear stressstrain curve on the cross-section resistance and buckling resistance of different members, higher residual stresses arising from fabricating stainless steel, a non-linear stressstrain curve on member deection. As part of this project, VTT Building Technology in Finland tested over 80 stainless

58

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Table 7 Section classication and predicted buckling resistance of the I-section column specimens major axis tests, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference I-16080 name (major axis tests) C1 d/(twe) c/(tfe) Section class l f c Design buckling resistance, Nb.Rd (kN) Ntest/Nb.Rd 24.9 3.8 1 0.3941 0.6514 0.8547 609.1 I-16080 C2 25 3.8 1 0.6414 0.8734 0.682 484.8 I-16080 C3 25.2 3.9 1 0.9584 1.2475 0.4888 351.6 I-160160 C1 25.2 8.6 1 0.366 0.63 0.875 1049.7 I-160160 C2 25.2 8.5 1 0.6047 0.8367 0.7068 847.2 I-160160 C3 25.1 8.5 1 0.928 1.2072 0.5052 601.8

1.1

1.1

1.14

1.08

1.02

1.2

Table 8 Section classication and predicted compression resistance of the I-section column specimens major axis tests, grade 1.4462 Specimen reference name (major axis tests) d/(twe) c/(tfe) Section class l f c Design buckling resistance, Nb.Rd (kN) Ntest/Nb.Rd I-160160 C1 29.8 10.4 3 0.476 0.7182 0.7962 1808.7 1.07 I-160160 C2 29.5 10.4 3 0.7837 1.0289 0.5898 1335.1 1.12 I-160160 C3 29.3 10.5 3 1.188 1.5806 0.3812 867.8 1.14

steel members under compression, bending and combined compression and bending. A summary of the results of tests carried out on circular hollow sections (CHS) and welded I-section members is given below. The test results are compared with the design curves proposed in ENV 1993-1-4. Stub-column tests were carried out on all the cross-sections to determine the effects of local buckling, strain-hardening (due to cold-forming) and residual stresses (due to welding). A stub-column test gives an average stressstrain curve for a given member. 3.1. Compression members circular hollow sections Nine CHS specimens, three stub columns with xed-end boundary conditions and six columns of varying wall thickness with pin-ended boundary conditions were

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

59

Fig. 2. Reduction factor, c, versus generalised slenderness l for I-section columns test results and ENV 1993-1-4 design curve (grade 1.4301).

tested. A summary of the geometric and material properties of the specimens is given in Table 1. The specimens were manufactured by roll-forming stainless steel strip into tubes and seam welding along the length of the tubes. Four of the specimens were grade 1.4541 (321) and the remaining ve were grade 1.4435 (316L). Table 2 shows the section classication of all the tested specimens calculated in accordance with ENV 1993-1-4 using the measured properties. The 2-mm thick sections are Class 4 and therefore are not covered by the standard (slender CHS being beyond the scope of ENV 1993-1-4). Also in this table, the test results (characterised by the maximum applied load in the test) are compared with the resistances predicted from ENV 1993-1-4. The bold type in the table highlights the specimens for which

Fig. 3. Reduction factor, c, versus generalised slenderness l for I-section columns test results and ENV 1993-1-4 design curve (grade 1.4462).

60

Table 9 Geometric and material properties of the CHS beam specimens

Specimen reference name 1.4301 153 1.3 456 801 200 1.4301 203 1.3 370 739 200 1.4301 219 1.8 332 621 200 1.4462 114.3 2.7 643 836 200 1.4462 168.3 3.7 602 811 200 1.4462 219.1 3 598 824 200 1.4462 219.1 3.76 560 782 200

103 1.5

153 1.5

203 1.5

219 2.0

114.3 3.05

168.3 3.4

219.1 3.0

219.1 3.76

140 4 1.4541 139.6 4 292 573 198

140 3 1.4435 139 2.87 352 577 190 L1=765 mm, L2=500 mm

140 2 1.4435 140.2 2.04 313 602 195

Steel grade to EN 10088 Diameter, d (mm) Thickness, t (mm) Yield strength, fy (N/mm2) Ultimate tensile strength, fu (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2)

1.4301 103 1.3 461 778 200

L1=750 mm, L2=500 mm

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Measured failure load, F (kN)

17.4

35.7

47.1

73.7

58.6

162

167

272

68

51.4

30.3

Table 10 Section classication and predicted moment resistance of the CHS beam specimens

Specimen reference name 163.2 4 4.81 6.18 6.53 1.357 1.055 2 13.39 1.260 0.984 3 17.66 1.157 0.905 3 27.64 1.258 0.983 3 21.98 1.325 1.019 2 13.61 19.52 28.12 21.57 60.21 60.75 1.310 1.009 2 83.99 62.63 0.965 0.746 4 239.8 4 10.62 258.2 4 15.27 180.5 4 21.96 121.6 4 16.59 122.4 4 46.38 196.1 4 65.24

103 1.5

153 1.5

203 1.5

219 2.0

114.3 3.05

168.3 3.4

219.1 3.0

219.1 3.76 145.8 4 75.39 97.41 102 1.353 1.047 2

140 4 45.99 1 16.40 21.43 26.01 1.586 1.214 2

140 3 80.18 3 14.41 18.68 19.66 1.365 1.053 2

140 2 98.58 4 9.44 12.16 11.59 1.228 0.953 3

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

(d/t)/e2 Section class Elastic moment resistance of gross section, Mel.Rd (Welfy) (kNm) Plastic moment resistance of gross section, Mpl.Rd (Wplfy) (kNm) Test moment capacity, Mtest (kNm) Mtest/Mel.Rd Mtest/Mpl.Rd Section classication based on test

61

62

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

the standard is not applicable. It can be seen that overall the standard predicts the exural buckling resistance very accurately. However, the following observations can be made: The design standard underestimates the resistance of the Class 1 stub column section by some 34% as no benet was taken of the strain hardening of the material. The design standard consistently over-estimates the column resistance by a very small margin ( 4%). The results are summarised in Fig. 1 which plots the critical buckling reduction factor, c, as a function of the generalised slenderness l. The gure also displays results from earlier tests by Rasmussen and Hancock [6] on seam welded CHS members in grade 1.4306 (304L). The gure shows that the recommended buckling curve (a=0.49, l0=0.40) represents good agreement with the test results.
Table 11 Geometric and material properties of the I-section beam specimens 16080 and 160160, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference name Specimen length, L (mm) L1 L2 Web yield strength, fyw (N/mm2) Web ultimate tensile strength, fuw (N/mm2) Flange yield strength, fyf (N/mm2) Flange ultimate tensile strength, fuf (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2) Section depth, H (mm) Section width, B (mm) Web thickness, tw (mm) Flange thickness, tf (mm) Weld throat thickness, a (mm) Specimen failure load, F (kN) I-16080- I-16080- I-16080- I-160160- I-160160- I-160160B0 B1 B2 B0 B1 B2 1025 266 493 300 624 299 609 200 161 80.3 6 9.8 3 409 1024 266 492 300 624 299 609 200 158.7 80.6 6 9.8 3 366 2522 266 1990 300 624 299 609 200 158.2 80.6 6 9.8 3 248 1025 266 493 300 624 302 612 199 158.8 159 6 9.9 3 687 2520 266 1988 300 624 302 612 199 158 159.4 6 9.9 3 578 5018 266 4486 300 624 300 610 198 158.5 160 6 9.9 3 396

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

63

Table 12 Geometric and material properties of the I-section beam specimens 160160, grade 1.4462 and 320160, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference name Steel grade to EN 10088 Specimen length, L (mm) L1 L2 Web yield strength, fyw (N/mm2) Web ultimate tensile strength, fuw (N/mm2) Flange yield strength, fyf (N/mm2) Flange ultimate tensile strength, fuf (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity, E (kN/mm2) Section depth, H (mm) Section width, B (mm) Web thickness, tw (mm) Flange thickness, tf (mm) Weld throat thickness, a (mm) Specimen failure load, F (kN) I-160160- I-160160- I-160160- I-320160- I-320160- I-320160B0 B1 B2 B0 B1 B2 1.4462 1027 266 495 523 777 522 755 201 159.2 161.6 6.8 10.6 3 1225 1.4462 2528 266 1996 523 777 522 755 201 158.7 161.2 6.8 10.6 3 955 1.4462 5025 266 4493 523 777 522 755 201 160.2 160.2 6.8 10.6 3 715 1.4301 2025 517 991 300 624 304 614 200 319.6 160.6 6 9.8 3 835 1.4301 2526 517 1492 300 624 304 614 200 318.9 160.5 6 9.8 3 705 1.4301 5028 517 3994 300 624 304 614 200 319.9 159.6 6 9.8 3 444

3.2. Compression members welded I sections Twelve grade 1.4301 (304) column tests with three different heights were performed for two I sections. The exural buckling tests were carried out about both the major and minor axes. A further three tests using one cross-section and three column heights were carried out on specimens fabricated from grade 1.4462 (duplex 2205) stainless steel. The tests were designed with some specimens failing about their major axis and others about their minor axis. A summary of the geometric and material properties of the specimens is given in Tables 35. The specimens were fabricated by continuous submerged arc welding. Tables 68 show the section classication of all the tested specimens calculated in accordance with ENV 1993-1-4, using the measured properties. This shows that ten of the grade 1.4301 specimens were Class 1 and the remaining two were Class

64

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Table 13 Section classication and predicted moment resistance of the I-section beam specimens 16080 and 160160, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference name d/(twe) c/(tfe) Section class Moment resistance of the cross-section, Mc.Rd (kNm) Elastic critical moment, Mcr (kNm) lLT fLT cLT Buckling resistance moment, Mb.Rd (kNm) Test moment resistance, Mtest (kNm) Mtest/Mb.Rd I-16080- I-16080- I-16080- I-160160B0 B1 B2 B0 25.6 3.9 1 44.6 25.2 3.9 1 43.9 25.1 3.9 1 43.7 25.2 8.5 1 79.5 I-160160B1 25.1 8.5 1 79.2 I-160160B2 25.3 8.6 1 79.3

1056.9 0.205 0.52 1.00 44.6 54.4 1.22

1057.0 0.204 0.52 1.00 43.9 48.7 1.11

77.6 0.750 0.99 0.61 26.7 33.0 1.24

8012.6 0.100 0.47 1.00 79.5 91.4 1.15

520.6 0.390 0.65 1.00 79.2 76.9 0.97

123.5 0.801 1.05 0.58 45.9 52.7 1.15

2. The grade 1.4462 specimens were all Class 3. The test results (characterised by the maximum applied load in the test) are also compared with the resistances predicted from ENV 1993-1-4 in these tables. It can be seen that the standard predicts the exural buckling resistance very accurately. The results for grade 1.4301 (304) are summarised in Fig. 2 which plots the critical buckling reduction factor, c, as a function of the generalised slenderness l. The gure also displays results from earlier tests on 3CR12 steel carried out by van den Berg et al. [7] and results from tests on grade 1.4404 (316L) carried out by the Steel Construction Institute [8]. The gure shows that the selected buckling curve (a=0.76, l0=0.20) represents good agreement with the test results. The results for grade 1.4462 (duplex 2205) are summarised in Fig. 3, which also plots the critical buckling reduction factor, c, as a function of the generalised slender ness l. The gure shows that the selected buckling curve (a=0.76, l0=0.20) is about 10% conservative. This may be attributed to the lower residual stresses in duplex stainless steel compared to those in austenitic stainless steel. 3.3. Flexural members circular hollow sections A total of 11 four-point bending tests were carried out on stainless steel CHS of varying cross-sectional slenderness and material grade in order to determine their cross-sectional behaviour and moment resistance. The specimens were manufactured by roll-forming stainless steel strip into tubes and seam welding along the length of

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

65

Table 14 Section classication and predicted moment resistance of the I-section beam specimens 160160, grade 1.4462 and 320160, grade 1.4301 Specimen reference I-160160name B0 Steel grade to EN 10088 d/(twe) c/(tfe) Section class Moment resistance of the crosssection, Mc.Rd (kNm) Elastic critical moment, Mcr (kNm) lLT fLT cLT Buckling resistance moment, Mb.Rd (kNm) Test moment resistance, Mtest (kNm) Mtest/Mb.Rd 1.4462 29.0 10.5 3 134.0 I-160160B1 1.4462 28.9 10.5 3 133.2 I-160160B2 1.4462 29.3 10.4 3 134.0 I-320160B0 1.4301 56.3 8.7 2 188.7 I-320160B1 1.4301 56.1 8.7 2 188.1 I-320160B2 1.4301 56.3 8.6 2 188.0

9011.1

581.8

138.6

4231.4

1867.6

269.7

0.122 0.48 1.00 134.0

0.478 0.72 0.79 105.8

0.983 1.28 0.48 63.7

0.211 0.53 1.00 188.7

0.317 0.59 1.00 188.1

0.835 1.09 0.56 105.0

162.9

127.0

95.1

215.8

182.2

114.8

1.22

1.20

1.49

1.14

0.97

1.09

the tubes. A summary of the geometric and material properties of the specimens is given in Table 9. Three tests were carried out by VTT and the remaining eight were commissioned by SCI at Imperial College. Table 10 shows the section classication of all the tested specimens calculated in accordance with ENV 1993-1-4, using the measured properties. This shows that all but two of the specimens are Class 4 and are therefore predicted to fail by local buckling before reaching the elastic moment of the gross section. The test results (characterised by the maximum moment reached in the tests) are compared with the resistances predicted from ENV 1993-1-4 in the table, assuming that the section was fully effective in all cases. It can be seen that all but one of the specimens with (d/t)/e2 163 did in fact achieve a resistance in excess of the theoretical plastic moment. The one exception ((d/t)/e2=98.6) warrants further investigation. Only one specimen with (d/t)/e2=196.1 failed to reach the elastic moment resistance of the gross section by a margin of 3.5%, although two samples with higher (d/t)/e2 values (239.8 and 258.2) had resistances which exceeded the elastic moment

66

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

resistance by 26% and 16%. The results therefore suggest that the limit on (d/t)/e2 between Class 3 and 4 can be increased substantially for circular hollow sections acting in bending, compared to the present limit in the standard of 90. 3.4. Flexural members welded I sections The cross-sectional behaviour of the I sections in bending was studied by bending tests on short beams. In addition, lateraltorsional buckling tests with two different spans were performed. Nine of the beams were grade 1.4301 (304) and three were 1.4462 (duplex 2205). A summary of the geometric and material properties of the specimens is given in Table 11 and Table 12. The specimens were fabricated by continuous submerged arc welding. Tables 13 and 14 show the section classication of all the tested specimens calculated in accordance with ENV 1993-1-4, using the measured properties. The deepest grade 1.4301 (304) sections were found to be just outside the standard limit for Class 1 based on the web classication and the 1.4462 (duplex 2205) sections were all Class 3 based on the ange classication. The test results (characterised by the buckling reduction factor) are compared with the design curve from ENV 1993-1-4 in the tables and show that the design standard is conservative. The elastic critical buckling moment, Mcr was calculated in accordance with Annex F of ENV 1993-1-1. The results for grade 1.4301 (304) are summarised in Fig. 4 which plots the lateral torsional buckling factor cLT as a function of the generalised slenderness for lateral torsional buckling lLT. The gure also displays results from earlier tests by van Wyk et al. [9] and the Japanese Institution of Architecture [10]. The gure shows that the design curve in the standard (aLT=0.76) is conservative. The carbon steel buckling curve in ENV 1993-1-1 (aLT=0.49) is also shown in the gure and it can be seen

Fig. 4. Reduction factor, cLT, versus generalised slenderness lLT for I-section beams test results and ENV 1993-1-1 and ENV 1993-1-4 design curves (grade 1.4301).

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

67

to be a closer t to the data than the more conservative curve currently adopted in ENV 1993-1-4. In a similar way, the results for grade 1.4462 are summarised in Fig. 5. Again there appears to be a closer t to the carbon steel buckling curve. 3.5. Members subject to combined loading circular hollow sections A total of eight pin-ended specimens of varying wall thickness were tested with an axial load applied eccentrically through the centre of wall thickness. The specimens were manufactured by roll-forming stainless steel strip into tube and seam welding along the length of the tube. Four specimens were grade 1.4541 (321) and four were grade 1.4435 (316L). The specimen dimensions were selected so that failure would not occur by local buckling and the measured properties are presented in Table 15. Local buckling occurred at failure in the two shorter specimens of these Class 4 members. The test results (characterised by the maximum applied load in the test) are compared with the resistances predicted from ENV 1993-1-4 in Table 16. The bold type in the table highlights the specimens for which the standard is not applicable. It can be seen that the standard is conservative in all cases, including the two specimens which buckled locally. (For the Class 4 sections, the elastic section modulus was used to calculate the moment resistance.) It can also be seen that the extent to which the standard predictions are conservative decreases as overall buckling becomes more dominant (i.e. as the specimen length increases). Fig. 6 shows the interaction curve between exural buckling and moment resistance predicted in ENV 1993-1-4. The test points plotted on the curve are calculated

Fig. 5. Reduction factor, cLT, versus generalised slenderness lLT for I-section beams test results and ENV 1993-1-4 and ENV 1993-1-1 design curves (grade 1.4462).

68

Table 15 Geometric and material properties of the CHS beamcolumn specimens 1404-EC1 1.4541 139.2 3.98 297.5 573 194 2250 202 3351 155 4451 121 194 196 201 550 122 573 572 598.5 599 195 2251 89 1.4541 140.1 3.98 297.5 1.4541 140.1 3.99 293.5 1.4435 139.9 1.97 318.5 1.4435 139.6 1.95 320 1404-EC2 1404-EC3 1402-EC0 1402-EC1 1402-EC2 1.4435 139.8 1.95 320 599 195 3351 73 1402-EC3 1.4435 139.8 1.95 316 597.5 199 4451 58

Section

1404-EC0

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Steel grade to EN 10088 1.4541 Diameter, d (mm) 139 Thickness, t (mm) 3.98 Nominal yield strength, fy 294.5 (N/mm2) Ultimate tensile strength, fu 576 (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity E 193 (kN/mm2) Column length, L (mm) 550 Test failure load, Ntest (kN) 297

Table 16 Section classication and predicted buckling resistance of the CHS beamcolumn specimens 1404-EC1 1.4541 47.93 1 21.6 0.586 0.718 0.884 444.64 161 1.4541 48.24 1 21.9 0.868 0.991 0.680 344.53 133 1.4541 46.99 1 21.6 1.139 1.329 0.496 248.46 114 1.4435 100.56 4 9.2 0.143 0.447 1.000 271.88 85 1.4435 104.98 4 9.2 0.596 0.726 0.877 236.73 71 1404-EC2 1404-EC3 1402-EC0 1402-EC1 1402-EC2 1.4435 105.13 4 9.2 0.886 1.012 0.666 180.09 60 1402-EC3 1.4435 101.73 4 9.1 1.158 1.357 0.485 129.37 52

Specimen reference name

1404-EC0

1.4541 47.62 1 21.3 0.143 0.447 1.000 497.18 195

Steel grade to EN 10088 (d/t)/e2 Section class Mc.Rda l f c Nb.Rd (kN) Buckling resistance in the presence of a moment, Nb.M.Rd (kN) Axial load ratio, Ntest/Nb.M.Rd 1.26 1.16 1.06 1.43 1.26

1.52

1.23

1.11

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

For Class 4 sections, the elastic modulus was adopted in the calculations; this is not in accordance with the standard.

69

70

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Fig. 6.

CHS beamcolumn specimens test results and ENV 1993-1-4 interaction curve.

on the basis of the measured axial resistance and predicted plastic moment resistance. In all cases the test points show that the standard is conservative. 3.6. Members subject to combined loading welded I sections A total of eight eccentric compression tests were carried out on two different Isection members of varying lengths. Bending about the major axis only was studied. The load was applied to the centreline of the ange. The specimens were fabricated by continuous submerged arc welding and were all from grade 1.4301 (304) material. The specimen dimensions were selected so that failure would not occur by local buckling and the measured properties are presented in Table 17. Table 18 shows the section classication of all the tested specimens calculated in accordance with ENV 1993-1-4, using the measured properties. The test results (characterised by the maximum applied load in the test) are compared with the resistances predicted from ENV 1993-1-4 in the table. It can be seen that the standard is conservative in all cases. As with the CHS beamcolumn tests, the extent to which the standard predictions are conservative tends to decrease as overall buckling becomes more dominant (i.e. as the specimen length increases).

4. Conclusions The results of a series of member tests forming part of an ongoing ECSC research project concerned with further development and renement of structural design guidance are presented. Comparisons of this experimental data with the design provisions in ENV 1993-1-4 are made. In general, the guidance in ENV 1993-1-4 is conserva-

Table 17 Geometric and material properties of the I-section beamcolumn specimens, grade 1.4301 I-16080EC1 2045 300 624 299 609 200 160.3 79.4 6 9.8 3 338 200 158.9 79.1 6 9.8 3 270 200 158.7 80.9 6 9.8 3 222 198 162.3 159.8 6 9.9 3 705 299 609 299 609 300 610 299 609 200 159 160.8 6 9.8 3 540 3339 300 624 5041 300 624 502 300 624 2048 300 624 3345 300 624 299 609 200 158.5 160.1 6 9.8 3 454 I-16080EC2 I-16080EC3 I-160160EC0 I-160160EC1 I-160160EC2 I-160160EC3 5043 300 624 300 610 198 159.5 160.4 6 9.9 3 356

Specimen reference name (failure about major axis)

I-16080EC0

500 300 624

299 609

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

Specimen length, L (mm) Web yield strength, fyw (N/mm2) Web ultimate tensile strength, fuw (N/mm2) Flange yield strength, fyf (N/mm2) Flange ultimate tensile strength, fuf (N/mm2) Modulus of elasticity E (kN/mm2) Section depth, H (mm) Section width, B (mm) Web thickness, tw (mm) Flange thickness, tf (mm) Weld throat thickness, a (mm) Measured failure load, Ntest (kN)

200 158.3 82.7 6 9.8 3 505

71

72

Table 18 Section classication and predicted moment resistance of the I-section beamcolumn specimens, grade 1.4301 I-16080EC1 306.1 3.8 1 43.9 0.386 0.645 0.861 618.4 268.1 1.26 1.22 1.19 1.26 1.15 302.9 3.8 1 43.3 0.635 0.867 0.686 490.0 220.8 302.4 3.9 1 44.0 0.958 1.247 0.489 354.2 186.7 311.9 8.5 2 81.5 0.089 0.462 1.000 1205.7 560.4 303.1 8.6 1 79 0.366 0.630 0.875 1044.1 469.1 I-16080EC2 I-16080EC3 I-160160EC0 I-160160EC1 I-160160EC2 302.0 8.6 1 78.4 0.600 0.832 0.710 843.9 391.2 1.16 I-160160EC3 305.4 8.6 1 80 0.904 1.177 0.518 624.1 333.2 1.07

Specimen reference number

I-16080EC0

301.5 4 1 44.6 0.095 0.465 1 734.3 329.1

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

(d/tw)(13a 1)/e c/(tfe) Section class Mc.Rd l f c Nb.Rd (kN) Buckling resistance in the presence of a moment, Nb.M.Rd (kN) Axial load ratio, Ntest/Nb.M.Rd

1.53

B.A. Burgan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 5173

73

tive. The tests on CHS beams indicate that the limiting diameter-to-thickness ratios for section classication can be considerably increased. For welded I-section beams, the ENV 1993-1-4 lateral torsional buckling curve appears very conservative and the less conservative curve adopted in ENV 1993-1-1 for carbon steel appears to give a better t to the data.

Acknowledgements The following organisations sponsored the projects described in this paper: Acciai Speciali Terni SpA, Avesta Shefeld AB Research Foundation, Avesta Shefeld Ltd, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, European Coal and Steel Community, Outokumpu Polarit Oy, Studiengesellschaft Stahlanwendung eV, The Nickel Development Institute and Ugine S.A. Their support is gratefully acknowledged.

References
[1] ANSI/ASCE-8-90. Specication for the design of cold-formed stainless steel structural members. American Society of Engineers, USA, 1991. [2] EURO INOX. Design manual for structural stainless steel, 1994. [3] ENV 1993-1-1. Eurocode 3 Design of steel structures: Part 1.1, General rules and rules for buildings. CEN, 1992. [4] ENV 1993-1-4. Eurocode 3 Design of steel structures: Part 1.4, General rules and supplementary rules for stainless steels. CEN, 1996. [5] EN 10088. Stainless steels. CEN, 1995. [6] Rasmussen KJR, Hancock GJ. Stainless steel tubular columns test and design. Tenth International Speciality Conference on Cold Formed Steel Structures, St Louis, MO, USA, 2324 October 1990. [7] van den Berg GJ, van der Merwe P, Bredenkamp PJ. The strength of Type 3CR12 corrosion resisting steel built-up I section column and beams. Report MD-51, Faculty of Engineering, Rand Afrikaans University, March 1990. [8] The Steel Construction Institute. Technical report 29: Tests on stainless steel beams and columns. SCI report no. RT/231, July 1991. [9] van Wyk ML, van den Berg GJ, van der Merwe P. The lateral torsional buckling strength of doubly symmetric stainless steel beams. Report MD-58, Faculty of Engineering, Rand Afrikaans University, May 1990. [10] Japanese Institution of Architecture. Strength and deformation of H-shaped stainless steel beams. Journal of the Kanto Branch, 1988 (in Japanese).