ISSN 1018-5593

*
*

*
*

Commission of the European Communities

technical steel research

Properties and service performance

Interaction diagrams between axial

load and bending moment M for
columns submitted to buckling:
improvement of methods proposed in
standards and codes

s
Commission of the European Communities

technical steel research

Properties and service performance

Interaction diagrams between axial

load and bending moment M for
columns submitted to buckling:
improvement of methods proposed in
standards and codes
ARBED Recherches
66 rue de Luxembourg
L4221 EschsurAlzette

Contract No 7210 SA/510

(1.7.1988 31.12.1990)

Final report

DirectorateGeneral
Science, Research and Development

1993

PARI. EURP.
f.j Q EUR 14546 EN
1.

Published by the
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Directorate-General XIII
Telecommunications, Information Market and Exploitation of Research
L-2920 Luxembourg

LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the Commission of the European Communities nor any person acting
on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of
the following information.

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1993

ISBN 92-826-6166-0
ECSC-EEC-EAEC, Brussels Luxembourg, 1993
Printed in Belgium

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research has been performed by ARBED S A. during the years 1988 to 1990 and
sponsored by C.E.C., the Commission of the European Community (C.E.C. Agreement
N 7210-S A/510).
We want to acknowledge first of all the important financial support from the
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY, as well as the moral support given
during this research by all the members of the C.E.C. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE F6
"LIGHT WEIGHT S TRUCTURES ".

Thanks are also due to all, who by any means may have contributed in this research:
-

ARBED-Research: RPS Department

Product Department
Process Control Dept.

: MM. Becker F., Braun P., Noesen .,

Wagner G.
: M. Lorenzini E.
: M. Keiser .

BOCHUM University, Laboratory of civil engineering: MM. Hanenkamp W., Hammer W.

LIEGE University, Laboratory of civil engineering:

TNO-Delft: M. Bijlaard F.S.K., Mrs Van Hove D.

KREMER FRRES, steel fabricator (Steinfort, Luxbg)

M. BoeraeveP.

INTERACTION DIAGRAMS BETWEEN AXIAL LOAD

AND BENDING MOMENT M FOR COLUMNS SUBMITTED TO
BUCKLING : IMPROVEMENT OF METHODS PROPOSED IN
STANDARDS AND CODES

AgreementN7210SA/510 C.C. ARBED

Summary
Differences have been observed when comparing the NM interaction diagrams for
columns submitted to buckling according to the various standards and codes. These
differences are particularly significant for buckling of wideflangehotrolled columns HD
according to the weak axis, and it appears that the NM interaction formula proposed in the
Eurocode 3 penalizes the thick flange sections in comparison with a non linear method or
in comparison with the results of the numerical codes Finelg or Ceficoss.
The purpose of this research was to check by means of buckling tests the behaviour of HD
columns submitted to eccentric loading, and to compare the results with the values
calculated according to Eurocode 3 and other national standards.
Numerical simulations of different profiles with Finelg software have been compared to
design rules issued from Eurocode 3. These comparisons led to the testing programme of 13
thick flange HD columns in FeE 355 steel grade with flange thicknesses from 52 to 125
mm. The programme included 4 buckling tests according to the strong axis and 9 buckling
tests according to the weak axis, with uniform and bitriangular moment distributions. All
the initial geometrical and mechanical imperfections have been measured: initial
deformations, residual stresses, real geometry and eccentricities, yield points,...
The test results were compared with Eurocode 3 design and formulas (1984 and 1990
versions), with Swiss formulas (Sia 1611990 version) and with Finelg simulations which
are closer to the reality. The comparisons were carried out for the whole NM interaction
curves including different phenomena: buckling, resistance of crosssections, lateral
torsional buckling and bending.
It was pointed out that the proposed rules in Erucode 3 are too conservative in the scope of
these 13 HD compression tests. First proposals for improvements of the NM formulas are
introduced. It was also shown that with a simple and reliable modelization Finelg software
can easily be used as tool for realistic and safe design.

LIST

OF

SYMBOLS

LATIN UP P ER CASE LETTERS

A
Sectional area; name of sample for tensile tests

Width
C
Annexes
E
Effect of action; modulus of elasticity
F F orce; surface; action
I
Moment of inertia
L
Length
M
Moment; bending moment

Compression; axial load

Newton
R
Resistance; reaction
S
Internal forces and moments
W
Name of American hot-rolled shapes
W
Web; name of transducers
W
Section modulus
LATIN LOWER CASE LETTERS
a
Geometrical data
b
Buckling; width
c
Half width of H profile
d
Length; distance
e F lange thickness; eccentricity
f F lange
h
Height
i
Radius of gyration
k
Coefficient; kilo
1
Length
m
Meter

Plates
r
Radius
t
Thickness
u
Up
w
Web

Coordinate in X axis
y
Coordinate in Y axis

Coordinate in axis

VII

GREEK LOWER CASE LETTERS

a.

Angle; Ratio
Moment distribution factor; Correction factor
Partial safety factor
Strain; maximal strain
Reduction factor
Buckling reduction factor
Slenderness; load multiplier
Coefficient of correlation
Normal stress
Mechanical characteristics
Reduction factor for buckling
Ratio between end moments

SUBSCRIPT
b
E
k
pl(x,y)
LT
M
min
ml

R
r
red
s
t
uit
y
y

OTHER
SIA
EC
EN
ECCS
FeE
crit
red
ecc
LTB
min

Buckling
Young modulus
Characteristics
Plastic variable according to (x,y) axes
Lateral-torsional
Moment
Minimum
Partial safety factor 1
(according to) axial force
Resistance
Reduced; radius of fillet
Reduction formula
Slide
Tangent
Ultimate (limit state)
Yield
Strong axis
Weak axis
Square
EXP RESSIONS
Swiss society of engineers and architects
Eurocode
Euronorm
European Convention for Constructional Steelwork
Steel grade (yield point)
Critical
Reduced
Eccentricity
Lateral-torsional buckling
Minimum

- V III

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
SUMMARY

Ill
V

LIST OF SYMBOLS
CONTENTS

Vll-viii
Ei-XI

SOMMAIRE - KURZFASSUNG

XIII-XIV

PART I : REPORT
1.

2.

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purposes
1.2. Description

3
3

TESTING PROGRAMME
2.1. Preselection

4
4

2.2. Numerical simulations with Finelg

2.2.1. Hypothesis

5
5

2.2.2. Eurocode 3:1984 and 1988 versions

2.2.3 Results
2.3. Definitive selection

7
10
12

3.

DESIGN OF THE SPECIMENS

12

4.

BUCKLING TESTS
4.1. Generalities
4.2. Preparation

12
12
13

4.2.1. Measurements
4.2.2. Supports
4.3. Realization
4.4. Results

13
14
15
16

RESIDUAL STRESSES

17

5.1. Method of mesurements

5.2. Results

17
18

5.

- IX -

6.

7.

NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF THE BUCKLING TESTS

6.1. Measured initial imperfections
6.1.1. Geometrical imperfections
6.1.2. Mechanical imperfections
6.1.3. Supports
6.2. Comparison between the measurements and the numerical
simulations
COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE MEASUREMENTS, EUROCODE 3,
SIA 161 AND THE NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS
7.1. Collaps leads
Figures 7.1.1 to 7.1.V
7.2 N-M interaction curves
7.2.1 Buckling strength
72.1.1. Eurocode 3 (84 and 90 versions)
72.12. SIA 161(90 version)
7.2.2. Resistance of cross-sections
72.2.1. Eurocode 3 (84 version)
72.22. Eurocode 3 (90 version)

7.3

72.2.3 SIA 161 (90 version)

7.2.3 Bending resistance
7.2.4 Lateral-torsional buckling strength
72.4.1. Eurocode 3 (84 version)
72.42. Eurocode 3 (90 version)
72.43. SIA 161 (90 version)
7.2.5 Comments
Figures 7.2.0 to 7.2.
New proposal for codes formulas
Figures 7.3.0 to 7.3.

19
19
19
20
21
21

24
24
27-31
33
33
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
36
38
39
40
43-56
57
59-72

8.

STATISTICAL EVALUATION (Annex of Eurocode 3)

73

9.

CONCLUSIONS

75

10.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

77

FIGURES
1 to 3
4 to 29
30 to 59
60 to 71
72 to 90

Chapter 1 : Introduction
Chapter 2 : Testing Programme
Chapter 4 : Buckling Tests
Chapter 5 : Residual Stresses
Chapter 6 : Numerical Simulations of the Buckling Tests

83-87
89-136
117-148
149-162
163-183

PARTII : ANNEXES
ANNEX A (Al to A53):
ANNEX B (Bl to 16):
ANNEX C (Cl to C47):
ANNEX D (Dl to D32):

Design of the specimens

Geometrical measurements before the tests
Tests results (Load-deflection curves;
residual deformations after the tests)
Measurements of residual stresses

XI

187-241
243-260
261-309
311-344

DIAGRAMMES D'INTERACTION ENTRE LA FORCE

AXIALE DE COMPRESSION ET LE MOMENT DE
FLEXION M POUR DES COLONNES SOUMISES AU
FLAMBEMENT: AMLIORATION DES MTHODES
PROPOSES DANS LES NORMES
Somm

aire

Des diffrences peuvent tre observes en comparant les diagrammes d'interaction NM

pour des colonnes soumises au flambement, diagrammes tablis d'aprs plusieurs normes.
Ces diffrences deviennent particulirement significatives pour le flambement selon axe
faible des colonnes larges ailes (profils lamins chaud de type HD). apparat
mme que les formules d'interaction proposes dans lTSurocode 3 dfavorisent les secti
ons ailes paisses par rapport aux rsultats obtenus avec des mthodes non linaires
et avec des simulations numriques non linaires (logiciels Finelg ou Ceficoss).
Le but de cette recherche consiste vrifier, au moyen d'essais de flambement, le
comportement des colonnes HD soumises des compressions excentres. Ces rsultats sont
compars avec les valeurs calcules d'aprs Eurocode 3 et d'autres normes nationales.
Les simulations numriques des diffrents profils avec le logiciel Finelg ont t
compares aux rgles de calculs de rEurocode 3. Ces comparaisons nous ont permis
d'tablir le programme des essais: le programme comprend 4 essais de flambement selon
l'axe fort et 9 essais selon l'axe faible sur des colonnes HD ailes paisses en
qualit d'acier FeE 355, avec des paisseurs d'ailes variant entre 52 et 125 mm; les
essais se partagent en distributions de moment de flexion uniformes et bitriangulaires.
Toutes les imperfections initiales gomtriques et mcaniques ont t mesures: dfor
mes initiales, contraintes rsiduelles, geometries et excentricits relles, limites
lastiques, etc.
Les rsultats des essais ont t compars aux rgles de dimensionnement suivant l'Euro
code 3 (design et formules des versions de 1984 et de 1990), et suivant la norme suisse
(Sia 161 version de 1990). Les essais ont t compars galement des simulations
numriques selon Finelg qui sont proches de la ralit. Ces comparaisons ont t rali
ses pour des courbes compltes d'interaction NM incluant diffrents phnomnes:
flambement, rsistance des sections droites, dversement et flexion.
a t mis en vidence que les rgles proposes dans lTiurocode 3 sont trop scuri
taires dans le cadre de ces 13 essais de compression de profils HD.
Une amlioration des formules d'interaction NM est propose. Il a t aussi dmontr
qu'avec un modle simple et fiable on peut utiliser facilement le logiciel Finelg comme
outil de conception raliste et scuritaire.

XIII

INTERAKTIONSDIAGRAMME FR AXIALE LASTEN

UND BIEGEBEANSPRUCHUNGEN AN KNICKG E
FHRDETEN STTZEN
Kur fas 8 u ng
Einige Unterschiede knnen schon, beim Vergleich der NM Interaktionsdiagramme fr
Sttzen unter Normalbedingungen, gem verschiedener Normen und Gesetzen, festgestellt
werden. Diese Unterschiede werden noch deutlicher beim Ausknicken von breitflanschigen
Sttzen um die schwache Achse (warmgewalzte Profile der Serie HD). Es zeigt sich, da
gem Interaktionsformeln aus Eurocode 3 (der Versionen 84 und 90), die dickflanschigen
Trger, im Vergleich mit den Resultaten von nichtlinearen Methoden oder im Vergleich
mit numerischen Simulationen (Programme wie FINELG und CEFICOSS), benachteiligt
werden.
Der Zweck dieser Versuche besteht darin, mittels Knickversuchen das Verhalten von HD
Sttzen mit exzentrischer Last zu prfen, und diese Ergebnisse mit denen aus den
Berechnungswerten gem Eurocode und .anderen nationalen Normen zu vergleichen.
Numerische Simulationen verschiedener Profile die mittels FINELGProgrammen berechnet
wurden, wurden mit den Bemessungskonzepten gem Eurocode 3 verglichen. Diese Verglei
che fhrten uns zu dem Versuchsprogramm mit 13 breitflanschigen Sttzen (HD) aus Stahl
FeE 355 und Flanschdicken von 52 bis 125 mm. Das Programm beinhaltet 4 Knickversuche um
die starke Achse und 9 um die schwache Achse, mit jeweils uniformer und bitriangularer
Momentverteilung.
Alle geometrischen und mechanischen Imperfektionen wurden vor den Versuchen gemessen
(Verformung, Eigenspannungen, Geometrie, Exzentrizitten, Streckgrenzen usw.).
Die Versuchsergebnisse wurden den Vorschriften nach Eurocode 3 (Versionen 84 und 90),
den Schweizer Normen (SIA 161 Version 1990) und den realistischeren FINELG Simulationen
gegenbergestellt. Diese Vergleiche wurden fr die vollstndigen NM B erechnungskurven,
einschlielich verschiedener Phnomene: Knicken, Tragfhigkeit, B iegeDrillKnicken und
Biegung ausgefhrt.
Es stellte sich durch die 13 Druckversuche an HDProfilen heraus, da die vorgeschla
genen Vorschriften aus Eurocode 3 zu konservativ ausgelegt sind. Eine Verbesserung der
NM Interaktionsformeln wurde vorgeschlagen. Desweiteren stellte sich heraus, da
FINELG vereinfachte und zuverlssige Modelldarstellungen erlaubt, welche realistisch
und ausreichend sicher sind.

XIV

PART

REPORT

1.

INTRODUCTION

For normal service conditions, the N-M interaction curves for columns submitted to
compression may be calculated point by point with a non linear finite elements
software as FINELG or CEFICOSS, but on the other hand, they must be plotted in
accordance with the actual european or national standards and prescriptions.
In this context we observed several relatively important divergences between the
different standards and the numerical simulations, as it is shown on the N-M
diagram of figure 1, for an HD 400x400x744 profile.
These differences (up to 50 %) appear above all for the buckling according to the
weak axis and it seems that Eurocode 3 "Unified common rules for steel construction" (1984 version) penalizes the massive columns with its interaction formula
compared to a non-linear method and compared to the results of CEFICOSS numerical
simulations. This is also true to the actual codes in Great Britain, Belgium and
the United States.
1.1.

PURPOSES

In this research we want to check the behaviour of the massive columns like HD
hot-rolled sections (with thicknesses above 40 mm) by a serie of buckling tests
under eccentric loads and to compare the results issued from the actual prescription of Eurocode 3. We want to point out that the actual proposed rules in Eurocode 3 may be too much conservative and so that they don't allow the designers to
use the maximum of the real buckling strength under eccentric loads of the steel
massive columns.
We want to investigate this particular domain of the construction rules not yet
controlled by means of full-scale tests.
We know that a testing programme ( [ l ] , [2]) concerning buckling without eccentricity of these same massive columns has allowed at that time to improve their
classification in the european buckling curves; in the same way another research
[3] has led to a better classification of the profiles with high strength steel
for buckling problems.
1.2.

DESCRIPTION

The testing programme of this research can be separated in two parts:

a)

realization of 9 buckling tests according to the weak axis for thick flanged
HD columns (NM1 to NM9) with uniform moment distributions (NM1 to NM6) and
with bitriangular moment distributions (NM7 to NM9) (fig. 2 and 3).

3 -

b)

Realization of 4 buckling tests according to the strong axis for thick

flanged HD columns (NM 10 to NM 13) with uniform moment distributions (NM 10,
NM 11) and with bitriangular moment distributions (NM 12, NM 13).

The theoretical part of the proposed research consists in drawing the interaction
NM curves relating to results of the tests and according to the Eurocode 3 pres
criptions in order to deduce the practical conclusions of the comparison between
the codes and the reality.
On the other hand, we will take advantage of the test results to check also the
precision of the numerical simulations done with the Finelg software.

2.

TESTIN
G

PRO
G RAMME

Like presented in the previous report n 2 [] we selected different thick flanged

HD profiles to quantify the corresponding divergences between simulations and
Eurocode 3 rules and to show the excesses of safety. This led to a testing
programme of 13 hotrolled profiles.
In the previous report n 3 [] we measured the steel qualities, we controlled the
chosen values of the buckling parameters in the testing programme because of the
testrig limits. The definitive selection of the different parameters allowed to
design the 13 specimens (calculations, drawings) and to begin their fabrication.
2.1.

PRESE
L ECTION

We chose thick flanged HD profiles available on the ARB ED stock with different
flange thicknesses (over 40 mm), different slenderness ratios (buckling lengths,
...) and different eccentricities. For memory, the slenderness ratio means:

Xr

V*

7tV(E/oy)

where Lb

I
A
E
cy

is the buckling length of the column,

the radius of gyration (= V7A),
the moment of inertia,
the sectional area,
the Young modulus,
the yield strength.

List of the chosen available and adequate profiles:

HD 400x400x422 (flange thickness, e = 52.5 mm)
HD 310x310x454 (e = 69.0 mm)
HD 310x310x500 (e = 75.0 mm)
HD 400x400x678 (e = 82.0 mm)
W 14x16x550 = HD 400x400x818 (e = 97.0 mm)
W 14x16x730 = DH 400x400x0186 (e = 125.0 mm)
We extracted one sample from a flange of each tested beam to determine the steel
quality.
Results of the tensile tests:
Name of
the specimen

Yield point
[N/mm*]

Tensile strength

Ultimate
strain
[%]

NM1
NM2;NM7
NM3
NM4
NM5
NM6
NM8;NM11
NM9; NM13
NM10
NM12

372,0
331,0
389,0
345,0
349,5
374,0
384,0
354,5
381,0
310,5

542
530
534
540
524
543
557
527
548
505

29,7
30,4
29,4
29,5
30,4
29,4
27,6
27,7
29,1
32,8

[N/mm*J

With these datas we must choose adequate parameters as the length of the columns
and the eccentricity of the load because the testing apparatus (University of
Bochum - Germany) imposes any limits:
* the distance between the supports of the testing machine is maximum equal to
10 meters;
* the maximal compressive load which can be applied is 20.000,0 kN.
2.2.
2.2.1.

NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS WITH FINELG

Hypothesis [12

The calculations concern the buckling phenomena according to the weak and the
strong axis, with different bending moment distribution either uniform (usually
more unfavorable) or bitriangular (more realistic in frames) (figure 4).

5 -

The software Finelg is a finite element program to solve:

* geometrically and materially non linear solid or structural problems under
static dead loads;
*

linear and non linear instability problems, leading to eigenvalue computa

tion (buckling load);

Geometrical non linearity covers large displacements (i.e. large rotations);

material non linearity covers classical elastoplasticity. Only small strains
are considered at present (limit: 1 + = 1).
The numerical technique available in Finelg enables one to follow the non
linear evolution of a structure under increasing external loading up to
collapse or instability, and even beyond. The external loading may consist of
imposed loads or displacements that vary proportionally; additional constant
loads and/or displacements may be superimposed (i.e. dead load,...).
For the simulations we used the socalled GPPAA finite element, classical beam
element of engineers, for plane frames (no shear considered). Non linear geome
trical effects are dealt with through the finite element using the corotational
Lagrangian formulation taking into account the element curved current deflec
tion (Modified Marguerre's theory).
The columns have been discretized in a number of finite elements depending of
their length (range of lengths: 4,00 m to 8,71 m) (usually 12 elements for a
bitriangular moment distribution and 10 elements for an uniform moment distri
bution), with 4 Lobatto integration points along the length of elements and 3/7
or 9/7 integration points across the section (web/flange) for buckling accord
ing to respectively weak axis or strong axis. The columns are simply supported
(perfect hinges) (figure 5).
For the uniform moment distribution the bendingcompression is provided by an
eccentric load (finite elements defined with an eccentricity of the nodes to
the beam axis); for bitriangular moment distribution there is no given eccen
tricity but concentrated bending moments and axial loads at each extremity.
The residual stresses have been introduced in the profiles according to the
recommendations of Eurocode (figure 5).
First no initial geometrical imperfections have been introduced to obtain the
upper carrying capacity with the numerical simulations (because in reality you
always have the unfavorable effect of initial deformations) [].

At a second step we introduced a sinusodal initial deformation with a maximal

amplitude of L/1000 where L is the length of the column between hinged supports
(figure 6: examples of NM5 andNM13) [&].
The FeE 355 steel quality is defined by the mechanical parameters of the used
constitutive law taking into account strainhardening (figure 7): E, Young
modulus; ay, yield strength; Et, tangent modulus; at tensile strength. For
all the actual numerical simulations we took the measured values of the steel
quality.
2.2.2.

Eurocode 3:84 and 88 versions

For members submitted to pure compression, the buckling resistance is control

led by the same formulas in both versions of Eurocode 3 [9 ], [ l O l
For all members subject to combined bending and axial compression, the inter
action relationship presents any differences.
** 84 Version f]
Basic interaction formula: for strong and weak axis.

M
y,z

y,z
*y,z

pi

piy>

with:

(1
Xy,z Npl

) 2 . *
y,z
y,z
Xy,z * Np!

Npi, plastic normal force of the steel section

Mpj, plastic moment of the steel section; it is allowable to take
1,10 M p l if N/N p l > 0,10

, relative slenderness ratio

z , buckling reduction factor

y,z, strong and weak axis

moment distribution factor
uniform distribution:
triangular distribution:
bitriangular distribution:

== 1,10
== 0,66
== 0,66+ 0,44.,
M

with > 0,44 and =

H<L

88 Version IO
Basic interaction formula: for strong and weak axis.
N

y,*
M

Xmin. Npl/vnl

y.s

pl

V s

7>/1

with:
Xmin = minimum of Xy and Xz
N

\ * =

y,*

,'

^1

V <1.5

= ^ ( 2 - 4 ) + ( , - 1 ) 0 9 0
W
pl

Vvz
y z

'

- w

y,

y> z

W
w
y,z

Y m j, partial safety factor (taken equal to 1,0)

Npi, plastic normal force of the steel section
Mpj, plastic moment of the steel section

= , relative slenderness ratio

z , buckling reduction factor

Wpi

T,z

, plastic section modulus for the strong and the weak axis

Wy z , elastic section modulus for the strong and weak axis

y,z, strong and weak axis
,

moment distribution factor

uniform distribution:
triangular distribution:
bitriangular distribution:

M,

= 1.10
= 1.80
= 1.80 - 0,70.,
with
M,
and -1 < < 1
=
M,

According to the Eurocode 3 (88 version) classification of cross-sections,

the 13 tests belong to the Class 1 (the most favourable one) for which
cross-sections can form a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required
plastic analysis. This classification determines the interaction formula to
for members submitted to combined bending and axial compression [ l 0 1

all
the
for
use

The classification in Class 1 corresponds to a maximum width-to-thickness ratio

for compression elements [ l O l
* webs submitted to compression:
d/t < 33
* webs submitted to bending:
d/t<72e
* flanges submitted to compression:
d{< 10

where = V^/oy (= 0.81, for FeE 355 steel)

9 -

Profiles

Flange (c/( t ' e) )

Compression

Bending

HD 400 400 422

10,80

10,80

4,79

HD 400 400 678

7,06

7,06

3,20

HD 400 400 818

= W 14 16 550

5,89

5,89

2,77

HD 400 400 1086

= W 14 16 730

4,55

4,55

2,23

HD 310 310 454

7,50

7,50

2,99

HD 310 310 500

6,75

6,75

2,79

2.2.3.
a)

Webs ( % ) )

Compression

Results

Without initial geometrical imperfection [5 J:

* At this step of profiles selection (report n 2; []) it wasn't neces
sary to vary the strength values in function of the thickness as pres
cribed in Eurocode (or Euronorm).
We took the steel grade with a yield point of 355 MPa because we did not
know the real strength of the specimens yet.
* As explained previously no initial shallow deflection has been intro
duced to obtain the upper carrying capacity with the numerical simulati
ons (because in reality you always have the unfavorable effect of initi
al deformations).
* ECCS residual stresses have been introduced.
* The safety factor m l was equal to 1,0 for the calculation with Euro
code 3 formula.
The comparison between Finelg and Eurocode 3 is presented on the fig. 8
Afterwards (report n 3, [6]) we knew the real measured yield points of
each specimen and after new calculations with Finelg for NM1 and NM10
specimens we had to introduce a greater eccentricity than the initial
chosen value because of too big maximal failure loads. We changed the
eccentricities respectively from 5 to 8 cm and from 15 to 18 cm.

10

b)

With initial geometrical imperfection (figure 6; [6 ]):

For Finelg simulations, we took the measured yield points. ECCS residual
stresses have been introduced and initial sinusodal deformations too
(figure 6).
For the comparison with Eurocode 3 results we varied the steel quality in
function of the thickness as prescribed in Euronorm 10025 applied by Euro
code 3 for thicknesses till 100 mm and in Euronorm 25 for thicknesses upper
than 100 mm (figure 7). The safety factor v m l was equal to 1.10.
The comparison between Finelg and Eurocode 3 appears on figure 9.

Two examples of Finelg calculations and the comparisons with Eurocode 3 (84 and
89 versions) are shown on the following figures:
* Example NM5:
Section HD 400x400x1086 (or W14xl6x730), buckling according to the weak
axis, uniform moment distribution, buckling length of 8,18 m.
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure

10:
11:
12:
13:
14:

diagram load multiplier in function of the deflection.

deformation of the column at load 14250 kN.
bending moment distribution at load 14250 kN.
normal force distribution at load 14250 kN.
state of plastification at load 14250 kN (degree of plastifica
tion; general view of the beam on the side of the flanges
submitted to tension by bending).
Figure 15: state of plastification at load 14250 kN (degree of plastifica
tion; general view of the beam on the side of the flanges
submitted to compression by bending).
Figure 16: state of plastification at load 14250 kN (degree of plastifica
tion; view of the central zone on the side of the flanges
submitted to compression by bending).
Figure 17: state of plastification at load 14250 kN (degree of plastifica
tion; general view of the web).
Figure 18: comparison of FINELG simulations with Eurocode 3 (84 and 89
versions) on interaction NM diagrams.
Figure 19: calculations of Eurocode 3 (84 and 89 versions) interaction NM
diagrams.

* Example NM13:
Section HD 310x310x500, buckling according to the strong axis, bitriangular
moment distribution, buckling length of 8,00 m.
Figure 20:
Figure 21:
Figure 22:

diagram load multiplier in function of the deflection.

deformation of the column at load 12570 kN.
bending moment distribution at load 12570 kN.

11

Figure 23:
Figure 24:
Figure 25:
Figure 26:
Figure 27:
Figure 28:
Figure 29:

2.3.

normal force distribution at load 12570 kN.

state of plastification at load 12570 kN (degree of plastification; general view of the beam).
state of plastification at load 12570 kN (degree of plastification; view of the flange submitted to compression by bending).
state of plastification at load 12570 kN (degree of plastification; view of the web at an extremity).
state of plastification at load 12570 kN (degree of plastification; view of the flange submitted to tension by bending).
comparison of Finelg simulations with Eurocode 3 (84 and 89
versions) on interaction N-M diagrams.
calculations of Eurocode 3 (84 and 89 versions) interaction N-M
diagrams.

DEFINITIVE

SELECTION

The definitive selection for the testing programme appears on figure 9 with the
final parameters for the design of the specimens and the actualized differences
between Finelg numerical simulations and Eurocode 3 rules (November 89 version).
We chose 9 buckling tests according to the weak axis and 4 tests according to the
strong axis, with different moment distributions (uniform and bitriangular), different slenderness ratios, different eccentricities, for different flange thicknesses.

3.

DESIGN OF THE

SPECIMENS

On the basis of the definitive selection (figure 9) we designed for fabrication

the 13 specimens with the final chosen parameters.
We calculated the layout of the siffening at the extremities to avoid any local
problem of unstability or stresses concentration; the extremity plates, the
stiffeners and the columns are welded together.
All the drawings used for fabrication appear on annexes Al to A53 (Part II).

4.
4.1.

BUCHUNG

TESTS

GENERALITIES

In this buckling problem with N-M interaction we don't face a bifurcation of

equilibrium but a divergence problem, a non linear phenomenon of bending-compression with transverse displacements.

12

All the unavoidable geometrical and mechanical initial imperfections are practi
cally inducing the buckling of the columns.
In real beams we meet such imperfections as:
*
*
*
*
*

geometry: dimensions of profile;

imperfect loading mode (imperfect eccentricity of the applied loads);
initial deformations along the columns (curvature);
yield scatter over the profiles;
residual stresses in the profiles.

4.2.
4.2.1.

PREPARATION 7
Measurements

Before the buckling tests we took different measurements of the geometrical

characteristics of the profiles and measurements of the initial geometrical
imperfections, which strongly influence the buckling behaviour of the columns.
The dimensions of the profiles (height, width, web and flange thicknesses) were
measured as defined on Annexes B l and B 2 (Part II) at 5 positions along each
column.
The web eccentricities, the web deformations and the parallelism of the flanges
are evaluated as shown on Annex B3.
The different measurements are given on Annexes B4 to 16.
(1)

On figure 30 we compare the nominal values of the crosssections (h, b,

tw tf) with the measured ones which are the average of all the measu
rements taken along each specimen. On figure 31 we calculate the main
statical characteristics of each crosssection.

(2)

On figure 32 we compare the allowable tolerances with

ones for the geometry of each crosssection (h, b,
important geometrical values (h, b, tf) according to
have quite good acceptance; the web thicknesses (t w )
ces whith allowable tolerances but not too much and
tests are not so sensitive to such t w variations.

the measured mean

t w , tf). The most
our buckling tests
show more differen
moreover, buckling

On figure 33 we compare the allowable tolerances with the measured ones

which are the maximal values over the length of each specimen; these tole
rances concern the parallelism of the flanges, the web eccentricities and
the web deformation.

13

These tolerances are acceptable and will be neglected for the numerical
simulations.
(3)

The figure 34 shows the measured distances in comparison with a straight

reference line, to determine along the columns the initial deformation
perpendicular to the weak or to the strong axis respectively; the measurements were taken all the 15 cm along each specimen.
On the figures 35 to 47 the measured initial deformations of each specimen
are compared with the permitted sinusodal deviation according to Eurocode
3; we also draw the approximate initial deformations introduced in the
numerical simulations (described in chapter 6):
- figures 35 to 43 concern the columns NM1 to NM9 submitted to buckling
according to the weak axis.
- figures 44 to 47 concern the columns NM10 to NM13 submitted to buckling
according to the strong axis.
We always have acceptable initial deformation of the columns according to
Eurocode 3.

(4)

The eccentricities of the profiles on the extremity plates were measured

as defined on figure 48. We deduced the values of the real eccentricities
from a formula given on figure 49.

(5)

As our supports are hinges (control of this topic in the following chapter
4.2.2.) we can measure the real buckling length of each column (fig. 50).

4.2.2.

Supports

The collapse load of a buckling test is directly dependent on the buckling

length defined as the length of the fictitious column hinged at both extremities which would have the same collapse load as the given piece. So this important characteristic of the test has to be known with precision for a correct
exploitation of the results (comparison to buckling curves, numerical simulations, ...).
The supports are assumed to be hinges at both extremities like shown on fig. 51
for the uniform moment distribution and on fig. 52 for the bitriangular moment
distribution; a detailed drawing of the hinges appears on figure 53. This type
of support is fully influenced by the teflon properties and so we measured the
friction with the following procedure (figure 54):

14

* for each applied axial load we had friction between the roller and his
supports, friction which introduced a resistant moment called Ms greater
than the applied moment (= F d);
*

keeping constant the axial load we increased the eccentric load F up to a

certain level Fs which determined the slide moment Ms (= Fs d) necessary
to turn the roller.

So we obtained two curves (for two diameters of roller; 100 and 200 mm): Ms in
function of (figure 55).
We can see that for the minimal given eccentricity (for NM9 we have 5 cm) the
moment applied at the hinges against friction is always greater than the slide
moment Ms. On the other hand the curves also show that the friction coefficient
decreases when the applied load increases (figure 56).
So that's why in the scope of our tests we can expect a hinge behaviour of the
supports.
We will control this conclusion by measuring the residual plastic deformations
along each column after the tests (see chapter 4.4.).
As pointed out on figure 53, the support behaves like a hinge in the main buck
ling planes (planes perpendicular to the weak axis for NM1 to NM9 and to the
strong axis for NM10 to NM13); but with the halfcylinder of 570 mm length the
columns are fully fixed in the other planes (planes parallel to the weak axis
and to the strong axis respectively).
4.3.

REAL IZATION [7]

During the tests we took measurements:

* Strain gages were fixed in highly stressed expected zones like shown on
figures 57 and 58 respectively for the buckling according to the weak axis and
to the strong axis, both cases for uniform and bitriangular moment distribu
tions.
*

Three transducers were put along each column in each buckling plan to measure
the lateral displacements in function of the applied load (main displacements)
and to control up to collapse that we hadn't biaxial buckling (parasitical
displacements) (figure 59: position of wl to w6 transducers for buckling
according to the weak axis, for example).

15

4.4.

RESULTS [14]

* For buckling according to the weak axis (NM1 to NM9 tests) you can find on
Annexes CI to C18 the curves of load-displacements measured with transducers
wl to w3 (main displacements perpendicular to the weak axis) and with transducers w4 to w6 (parasitical displacements perpendicular to the strong axis)
to control the behaviour for each test NM1 to NM9.
* For buckling according to the strong axis (NM10 to NM 13 tests) you can find on
Annexes C19 to C26 the curves of load-displacements measured with transducers
wl to w3 (main displacements perpendicular to the strong axis) and with transducers w4 to w6 (parasitical displacements perpendicular to the weak axis) to
control the behaviour for each test NM10 to NM13.
* With a uniform moment distribution (NM1 to NM6, NM10, NM11), the tests show as
expected that since the beginning of loading up to collapse the mid-length
main displacements w2 are always superior to the others (wl and w3) which
remain equal during the whole loading.
The w2 maximal values are included between 118 mm and 235 mm. The maximal
parasitical displacement (w4, w5, w6) is equal to 12 mm with usual values not
upper than 3.6 mm and so we can conclude that there are no significant out-ofbuckling-plan displacements.
* For bitriangular moment distribution (NM7 to NM9, NM12, NM13), at the beginning of loading, the mid-length displacements w2 is equal to zero and the
others (wl and w3) remain equal; but at a certain level of loading wl and w3
become different more and more up to the maximal applied load after which the
global behaviour completely changed.
The maximal values of main displacements are included between 200 and 350 mm.
The maximal parasitical displacements (w4, w5, w6) is equal to 10.3 mm with
usual values not upper than 4.0 mm and so we can conclude that there are no
significant out-of-buckling-plan displacements.
* We measured the residual plastic deformations after the tests along each
column to control the correct behaviour of the hinged supports which influences directly the definition of the buckling length (Annexes C27 to C39). These
figures show that there is no opposite curvature at both extremities of each
column submitted to a uniform or a bitriangular moment distribution (the
measurements a, b, c have been already defined on figure 34).

- 16

As it can be seen on Annexes C33, C34, C35, C38 and C39 (residual state after
tests) for the tests with a theoretical bitriangular moment distribution (NM7
to NM9, NM12, NM13) the columns didn't keep this distribution because the
plastic residual deformations are not bi-sinusoidal like at the beginning of
loading. In practice, we have opposite but not equal eccentricities (fig. 49)
and we have different layouts of initial deformations (figures 41 to 43, 46
and 47); these both topics initiate differences between the bending moments
applied at both extremities, differences which are emphasized by - effects
and lead to these residual deformations.
On Annexes C40 to C47 we have some photos of the tests:
-

5.

NM1 specimen at collapse with both end plates and hinges, submitted to a
uniform moment distribution (Annex C40);
detail of end plate and hinged support of a specimen (Annex C41);
detail of the hinged support with the half-cylinder welded to the end
plate, the teflon sheet and the block-support (Annex C42, figure 53);
NM7 specimen with both end plates and hinges at collapse, submitted to a
bitriangular moment distribution (Annex C43);
view of the upper part of the NM7 specimen at collapse (Annex C44);
view of transducers measuring the displacements of the columns according to
both bending axis (main and parasitical displacements: Annex C45; fig. 59);
view of the strain gages measuring the strains of the most loaded part of
the specimens (Annex C46 shows a test according to the strong axis;
figure 58);
view of the residual plastic deformations after testing NM7 and NM9, both
according to weak axis and with bitriangular moment distribution (Annex
C47; Annexes C33 and C35).

RESIDUAL

STRESSES

[g]

The measurements of the residual stresses were carried out on profiles of 2 m

length extracted from the original beams before the buckling tests.
The destructive method called the "cutting out method" was used by the University
of Lige which was in charge of these measurements [13 ].
5.1.

METHOD OF

MEASUREMENTS

This "cutting out method" is based on the relaxation of the residual stresses due
to the division of sections into pieces (figures 60 and 61) for which strains are
measured and from which the internal stresses state can be deduced (figure 62).

17

With this process only the longitudinal components of the residual stresses can
be measured but it is clear that they have the main influence in problem of
columns instability.
We measured the residual stresses on 9 profiles (NM1, NM2, NM3, NM4, NM5, NM8,
NM9, NM10, NM12) because several profiles were cut out from the same hotrolled
beams: NM2 = NM7, NM8 = NM11, NM9 = NM13.
The measurements have to be corrected in such a way to obtain an equilibrium of
the stresses over the crosssection because no external loads were applied to the
beams [l3l
1)

the measurements in each cut bar are multiplied by the area of the correspon
ding bar to obtain the load existing in the bar. The sum over the cross
section give an axial load N.

2)

the positions Y and of each bar are well known and we can deduce a resul
ting bending moment on the section according to Y and Z, in other words My
and Mz.

3)

the "as measured" residual stresses are then corrected to residual stresses
with equilibrium by the following formula:
equilibr. = as measured N/A (My.Y)/Iy (Mz.Z)/Iz

5.2.

RESU
L TS

The residual stresses as measured and with equilibrium, the differences between
the residual stresses with equilibrium and as measured are all provided for each
crosssection NM1, NM2, NM3, NM4, NM5, NM8, NM9, NM10 and NM12, on Annexes
Dl to D18. These differences quantify the errors of the measurements.
Given as examples, the Annexes D19 to D30 show the graphical distribution of the
residual stresses over the thickness of each part of profile. The diagrams
concern the graphical distribution for residual stresses as measured and with
equilibrium for NM2, NM4, NM5 specimens. We can mention that the differences
between the values of the residual stresses are more important rather than the
differences of their distribution over the thickness of the flanges.
For the numerical simulations that we want to be simple we introduced the mean
values through the thickness of the residual stresses with equilibrium (fig. 63
to 71).
It , I I
Notice: Signs convention for Annexes Dl to D30: "" is used for tension and, "+
for compression.

18

On Annexes D31 and D32 we have some profiles after cutting out.

6.

NUMERICAL

SIMULATIONS

OF THE BUCKLING

TESTS

[]

The numerical simulations have been carried out with the computer program Finelg
[12] using the finite element method which has been presented in the chapter
2.2.1.
As explained for these simulations we used the socalled GPPAA finite element,
classical beam element of engineers, for plane frames (no shear considered). Non
linear geometrical effects are dealt with through the finite elements using the
corotational Lagrangian formulation taking into account the element curved current
deflection (Modified Marguerre's theory). The columns are made of non linear
material (figures 4 to 7).
As described we chose a simple modelization of this buckling problem (beam finite
elements) to obtain quickly results without too much time for preparation of the
data sets and for running of the software. With this simple approach Finelg
simulations can be easily used as a tool for realistic and safe design.
To be closer to the measurements (only for some cases like NM12 and NM13 too much
on the safe side as shown afterwards) we would have to use shell finite elements
but this would need much more time.
6.1.

MEASURED INITIAL

6.1.1.

IMPERFECnONS

Geometrical imperfections

As explained in the chapter 4.2.1 we took before the buckling tests different
measurements of the geometrical characteristics of the profiles and measure
ments of the initial geometrical imperfections, which strongly influence the
buckling behaviour of the columns.
(1) About the geometry of the sections the dimensions of the profiles (height,
width, web and flange thicknesses) were measured at 5 positions along each
column. For the simulations we took the overall average of each measured
dimension. Figure 30 shows the nominal and measured mean values of the
dimensions of the profiles for each column.
(2)

To simplify the simulations we didn't take into account the variation

the crosssection dimensions (h, b, t w , tf) and the variation of
crosssection deformations, along each specimen; the tolerances shown
figures 32 and 33 respectively are acceptable and will be neglected
the simulations.

19 -

of
the
on
for

(3)

About the initial deformation along the columns the measurements were
taken all the 15 cm along each specimen. For the simulations we introduced an approximation of the measured initial deformation which is
an envelope curve of the measurements as given on the following figures:
*

figures 35 to 43 concern the columns NM1 to NM9 submitted to buckling

according to the weak axis; the approximation of the initial deformations must be compared with the a and b measured curves.

figures 44 to 47 concern the columns NM10 to NM13 submitted to budding

according to the strong axis; the approximation of the initial deformations must be compared with the c measured curve.

It can be noticed that for buckling according to the strong axis we also
measured along the columns the initial imperfections perpendicular to the
weak axis (figures 44 to 47 for columns NM10 to NM13: the a and b measured
curves); so we controlled before testing with numerical simulations that
biaxial buckling was avoided and so that we didn't need to guide the
columns with intermediate supports [7].
(4)

About the eccentricities

provide the measurements
tricities from a formula
measured eccentricities
tions.

(5)

About the buckling length of the columns we give it as the measured length
between hinged supports on the figure 50. These values were used for the
simulations.

6.1.2.

of the profiles on
on the figure 48. We
given on the figure
at both extremities

the extremity plates we

deduced the values of eccen49. These values of the
were used for the simula-

Mechanical imperfections

1) About the mechanical characteristics of the columns we realized tensile

tests: the specimens for these tests were taken from both flanges (Al, A2)
and from the web (A3) of NM residual pieces (figure 72).
To quantify the yield scatter over the profiles we cut the whole crosssection of NM12 column into specimens for tensile tests. Figure 73 shows
that the yield scatter over the NM12 flanges is not so much important and
that the specimens extracted at the standard position (width(b)/6) are
nearly equal to the mean value calculated for each flange. We neglect the
effect of yield scatter over the web and between web and flanges because in
overall buckling problems the web doesn't interfere consequently on the
final results.

- 20

So in the simulations we considered for the whole cross-section the

more precise measured mechanical characteristics ( y,0.2 %) as the
average of both values obtained in the flanges (figure 72: (Al+A2)/2).
(2)

About the residual stresses distribution over the NM profiles we used the
residual stresses with equilibrium for the numerical simulations (chapter
5). We calculated the mean values through the thickness as shown on
figures 63 to 71. We compared the distribution of the measured mean
residual stresses with the ECCS recommendations (figure 74).
Finally to simplify the simulations we introduced a similar distribution
to the ECCS one (tri-triangular distribution over each part of a profile)
with extremal values fitted to the measures (figures 75 to 83). We
define the correction factor , as the factor which multiplies the
values of the ECCS residual stresses distribution to obtain proportionally
the residual stresses distribution for the numerical simulations. This
correction factor is provided on figures 75 to 83. F or example if =
1.0 we use the defined ECCS values for the simulations.

6.1.3.

Supports

The supports are assumed to be hinges at both extremities like shown on fig. 51
for the uniform moment distribution and on figure 52 for the bitriangular
moment distribution.
In the previous chapter 4.2.2. we have shown that according to tests results of
the supports (friction properties of the teflon sheets) and in the scope of our
N-M buckling tests we can expect a hinge behaviour of the supports.
We have also controlled this conclusion by measuring the residual plastic
deformations along each column after the tests: no opposite curvature appeared
at both extremities of any column (chapter 4.4.).
6.2.

COMP ARISONS BETWEEN THE MEASUREMENTS AND THE NUMERICAL

SIMULATIONS

In the numerical simulations:

*

the columns are simply supported (perfect hinges) (figure 84);

all the measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section,
initial deformation along the columns, eccentricity, buckling length) are
introduced;
the F eE 355 steel grade is defined by the mechanical parameters of the used
constitutive law taking into account strain-hardening (figure 85): E, Young
modulus; y, yield strength; E t, tangent modulus; t, tensile strength.

21

In order to underline the effect of the two most important parameters influencing
the buckling of columns ( y; residual stresses) we decided to introduce 3
different hypothesis for numerical simulations in varying each parameter from
case to case:
Hypothesis 1:
*

the measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section,

initial deformation along the columns, eccentricity, buckling length) are
taken into account (chapter 6.1.1.);

* the measured mechanical characteristics ( y) are considered as in the report

n4[7];
* ECCS residual stresses have been introduced (figure 74).
The results are given on figure 87.
Hypothesis 2:
*

the measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section,

initial deformation along the columns, eccentricity, buckling length) are
taken into account (chapter 6.1.1.);

* more precise measured mechanical characteristics ( y) are considered (chapter

6.1.2.: figure 72);
* ECCS residual stresses have been introduced (figure 74).
The results are given on figure 88.
Hypothesis 3:
*

the measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section,

initial deformation along the columns, eccentricity, buckling length) are
taken into account (chapter 6.1.1.);

* more precise measured mechanical characteristics ( y) are considered (chapter

6.1.2.: figure 72);
* the measured residual stresses have been introduced proportionally to the
correction factor according to the ECCS distribution (chapter 6.1.2.).
The results are given on figure 89.

22

We compare the results of all hypothesis on the figure 90:

* from hypothesis 1 to hypothesis 2, we have the influence of the measured yield
points and our massive columns submitted to buckling are quite sensitive to
these variations of yield points values;
* from hypothesis 2 to hypothesis 3, we have the influence of the measured
residual stresses and our massive columns submitted to buckling seem more
sensitive to these variations of residual stresses according to the weak axis
rather than according to the strong axis.

23

7.

7.1.

COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE MEASUREMENTS,

SIA 161 AND THE NUMERICAL
SIMULATIONS

EUROCODE

3.

COL L APSE L OADS

The complete programme of the 13 thick flanges sections buckling tests is

reminded on figure 7.1.1
The measured bearing capacity of the 13 columns submitted to buckling are equal
to the maximal loads of the loaddisplacements curves given on Annexes CI to C26
(chapter 4.4.) [ l 4 l We compare these measured bearing capacity (5) to the Euro
code 3 rules, to the SIA 161 swiss rules and to the numerical simulations.
** We applied the Eurocode 3 rules (90 version [ l l ]) with two assumptions:
(1)

once with the point of view of the designer taking into account the
theoretical yield point decreasing in function of the flange thickness
for FeE 355 (NM1, NM3, NM6, NM8 to NM11, NM13) and FeE 275 (NM2,
NM4, NM5, NM7, NM12) steels (according to Eurocode 3 and EN 10025
(figure 86) (see chapter 3.2.2.1. of EC 3) and with the partial safety
factor m l = 1.10 (as prescribed by chapter 5.1.1. (EC 3) for resis
tance to buckling problems); all the geometrical datas are nominal.

(2)

on the other hand the most realistic use of NM formulas is carried

out with all the measured values:

geometry of the sections (figure 30);

eccentricities of the loads (figure 49);
buckling lengths (figure 50);
more precise measured yield points (figure 72).

The measurements of the initial deformations and of the residual

stresses cannot be used because these parameters are already included in
the Eurocode 3 buckling curves. The partial safety factor = 1.0.
** We applied the SIA 161 swiss rules (90 version [17]) with all the measu
red values (geometry of the sections, eccentricities of the loads, buckling
lengths, yield points) (3). The safety factor R = 1,0.
** The numerical simulations used for the comparison (4) are based on all
the measured geometrical and mechanical characteristics (hypothesis 3 defined
in chapter 6.2.).

24

** The comparisons between the Eurocode 3 rules (EC3 Design (1), EC3 Formula
(2)), SIA 161 rules (SIA 161 Formula (3)), the Finelg numerical simulations
(4) and the measured collapse loads (5) appear on figure 7.1.II.
The differences (given in percentages) quantify the excesses (+x%) and the
lacks (x%) of safety issued from the standard rules and the numerical simu
lations according to the measurements of the collapse loads.
> For a Eurocode 3 design (assumption (1)) we obtain quite important safety
margins (from +30 % to +70 %: differences (5)/(l) on fig. 7.1.II)
> A realistic use of the Eurocode 3 formulas (assumption (2)) based on the
measured values of geometry and yield point provide results on the safe
side but still with too much important differences (from +7 % to +25 %:
differences (5)/(3) on figure 7.1.II).
> The differences (5)/(4) show also the good estimation of the real collapse
load with the Finelg numerical simulations using all the measured initial
imperfections: from 2,5 % to +5 % (figure 7.1.II). Differences are bigger
for buckling according to the strong axis and bitriangular moment distri
bution NM12 and NM13 (+7 % and +10 % respectively) but always on the safe
side; as explained for these two cases we would need another modelization
more precise (but more expensive) with shell finite elements.
We tried to understand the safety margin of the realistic use of Eurocode 3
formulas (assumption (2)) (from +7 % to +25 %). With this assumption (2) we
introduced all the possible measured values (geometry, yield point) and we kept
the partial safety factor y^Q = 1,0
So the remaining differences between the measurements and the EC3 formula could
be understood with the two intrinsic parameters. of EC3: the initial deformations
and the residual stresses. On figures 7.1.III and 7.1.IV we draw the initial
deformations of each specimen with the applied bending moments (5) according to
the Eurocode 3 permitted deviation of IVI 000 (4). We also write the correction
factor (3) defined in chapter 6.1.2 as the factor which multiplies of the tri
triangular ECCS residual stresses distribution (figure 74) to approximate the
measured residual stresses distribution (so if = 1,0 we have the measured resi
dual stresses equal to the ECCS values).

25

> A realistic use of the SIA 161 formulas (assumption (3)) also based on the
measured values of geometry and yield point give safe results but still
with too much important differences (from 0,3 % to +46 %: differences (5)
/ (3) on figure 7.1.II). It can be pointed out that these SIA 161 swiss
formulas (3) provide collapse loads closer to the test results in compari
son with the Eurocode 3 formulas (2), especially for uniform moment
distribution tests (from 0,3 % to +22 % for SLA 161 (3) instead of +13 %
to +25 % for Eurocode 3 (2)). The SLA 161 formulas seem to be better than
Eurocode 3 formulas but not for all the cases: greater safety margins are
obtained for buckling tests according to the weak axis with bitriangular
moment distribution (from +24 % to +46 % for SIA 161 (3) instead of +7 %
to 24 % for Eurocode 3 (2)).
On figures 7.1.Ill and 7.1.IV all the measured initial deformations have quite
lower maximal values and sometimes opposite layouts comparing to EC3 limitations;
we have also the correction factor of residual stresses often smaller (8 times)
or equal (4 times) to 1,0 (EC3 distribution). These two differences are favoura
ble to provide a higher real collapse load and they could explain that measure
ments are always on the safe side but Eurocode 3 formulas are still too conserva
tive according to the FLNELG numerical simulations which are themselves closer to
the reality including all the available measurements (initial imperfections).
On figure 7.1.V we compare Eurocode 3 formulas (assumption (3) with all the
measurements) with Finelg results (4) and we can underline the excesses of safety
of EC3 for each specimen:
* from 15 % to 22 % for 8 buckling tests according to strong and weak axis for
uniform moment distribution,
* from 3 % to 25 % for 5 buckling tests according strong and weak axis for
bitriangular moment distribution.

26

(NM) EC3 INTERACTION :

PROGRAMME OF HD SECTIONS B UCKLING TESTS
NUMBERS

PROFILE

NO V1INAL VA LUES

NAME

OF THE PRO FILE

h/b

MEASURED

BUCKLING

BUCKLING

SLENDERNESS

MOMENT

YIELD

AXIS

LENGTH

RATIO

DISTRIBUTION

POINT
h

'w

EC3

NOMINAL
LOAD
ECCEN.

(1)

[mml

Imm)

[mml

Imm)

[mml

Im]

[N/mm2]

lem)

NM1

HD 400X400X678

484

427

50.5

82.0

15.0

1.13

363.0

WEAK

4.00

0.4574

UNIFORM

8.0

NM2

HD 400X400X678

484

427

50.5

82.0

15.0

1.13

317.0

WEAK

4.00

0.4574

UNIFORM

15.0

NM3

HD 400X400X422

425

409

33.0

52.5

15.0

1.04

368.1

WEAK

4.88

0.5871

UNIFORM

15.0

NM4

HD 310X310X454

415

336

40.5

69.0

15.0

1.24

353.3

WEAK

5.34

0.7799

UNIFORM

15.0

NM5

W14X16X730

569

454

78.0

125.0

15.0

1.25

349.0

WEAK

8.18

0.8338

UNIFORM

15.0

NM6

W14X16X550

514

437

60.5

97.0

15.0

1.18

374.0

WEAK

8.71

0.9716

UNIFORM

15.0

NM7

HD 400X400X678

484

427

50.5

82.0

15.0

1.13

317.0

WEAK

7.46

0.8531

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

NM8

HD 400X400X678

484

427

50.5

82.0

15.0

1.13

374.7

WEAK

8.48

0.9698

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

NM9

HD 310X310X500

427

340

45.0

75.0

15.0

1.26

367.0

WEAK

8.00

1.1551

BITRIANGULAR

5.0

NM10

W14X16X550

514

437

60.5

97.0

15.0

1.18

362.3

STRONG

8.00

0.5246

UNIFORM

18.0

NM11

HD 400X400X678

484

427

50.5

82.0

15.0

1.13

374.7

STRONG

8.57

0.5836

UNIFORM

15.0

NM12

HD 400X400X678

484

427

50.5

82.0

15.0

1.13

305.4

STRONG

8.00

0.5448

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

NM13

HD 310X310X500

427

340

45.0

75.0

15.0

1.26

367.0

STRONG

8.00

0.6248

BITRIANGULAR

15.0
NM1:A:\NMTABL4

Remarks : (1) more precise measured yield points

51

Note : W 14X16X730 = HD 400X400X1086

W 14X16X550 = HD 400X400X818

(N-M) EC3 INTERACTION :

COMPARISON BETWEEN EC3 RULES AND SIA 161 , FINELG SIMULATIONS AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS
NAME

NOM CORR COLLAPSE COLLAPSE COLLAPSE COLLAPSE

NOMINAL MEASURED BUCK BUCKLING MOM.
INAL
LING
LOAD
LOAD
LOAD
AXIS
LENGTH DISTRIB LOAD FACT, LOAD
YIELD
FLANGE

PROFILE
NAME

ro
co

THICKNES:
t

POINT

Imm]

IN/mm2]

ECCEN.

16)
[ml

DIFFERENCE

DIFFERENCE

COLLAPSE
LOAD

MEAS/EC3

EC3

EC3

SIA

FINELG

MEASURES

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

|5)/(1)

IkNl

[kNl

IkNl

[kNl

[kNl

[%]

MEAS/SIA MEAS./FINELG

(5)/(2)

(5)/(3)

(%l

[%l

NM1

HD 400X400X678

82.0

363.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

NM2

HD 400X400X678

82.0

317.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

6890

9058

9222

11086

11005

+ 60

+ 21

+ 19

0.7

NM3

HD 400X400X422

52.5

368.1

WEAK

4.88

UNIF.

15.0

0.77

4838

5634

5201

6793

6998

+ 45

+ 24

+ 19

+3

NM4

HD 310X310X454

69.0

353.3

WEAK

5.34

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

4155

4704

5029

5496

5598

+ 35

+ 19

+2

NM5

W14X16X730

125.0

349.0

WEAK

8.18

UNIF.

15.0

1.86

7883

11282

13032

13740

13398

+ 11

+ 19

+3

c^

NM6

W14X16X550

97.0

374.0

WEAK

8.71

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

7562

8651

9209

9902

9818

+ 13

+7

0.8

NM7

HD 400X400X678

82.0

317.0

WEAK

7.46

BITRI.

15.0

1.00

8959

12640

10844

13048

13473

+ 50

O)

+ 24

+3

HD 400X400X678

82.0

374.7

WEAK

8.48

BITRI.

15.0

0.83

10595

13621

10999

14415

15138

+ 43

+ 11

+ 38

+5

NM9

HD 310X310X500

75.0

367.0

WEAK

8.00

BITRI.

5.0

0.80

8196

9536

8095

11913

11815

+ 44

+ 24

QAS)

0.8

NM10

W14X16X550

97.0

362.3

5TRONG

8.00

UNIF.

18.0

0.77

13190

15332

17374

17556

17318

+ 31

+ 13

v0

1.4

NM11

HD 400X400X678

82.0

374.7

STRONG

8.57

UNIF.

15.0

0.83

11247

13278

15084

15520

15678

+ 39

+ 18

+4

+1

NM12

HD 400X400X678

82.0

305.4

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.85

11366

14786

14945

15549

16618

+ 46

+ 12

+ 11

+7

NM13

HD 310X310X500

75.0

367.0

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.80

10358

12240

12402

12852

14130

+ 36

+ 15

+ 14

0.82

12082

13522

13869

16380

16888

+ 40

C +2 5)

+ 22

+3

&

m l = 1 . 1 , nominal geometrical datas.and the decreasing in function of the flange

(2) - Eurocode 3 ( 1 9 9 0 ) values are calculated with m l = 1 . 0 and measured values: geometry of the sections,eccentricities of the loads,

CD

buckling lengths and yield points cry (EC3 FORMULA).

(3) - SIA 161 ( 1 9 9 0 ) values are calculated with mr = 1.0,and measured values :

geometry of the sections,eccentricities of the loads,

buckling lengths and yield points (SIA 161 FORMULA)

(4) the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of geometrically and materially non linear columns .
For the hypothesis 3 of figure 8 9 :measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section,initial deformation,eccentricity) are taken
into account;more precise measured mechanical characteristics (cry) (6) are considerod;measured residual stresses have been introduced
proportionally to the correction factor according to the ECCS distribution .

fe)

NMI:A:\NMCOMP

thickness (according to EN 1 0 0 2 5 ) (EC3 DESIGN).

co'
c

[%)

[cm]
8.0

Remarks: (1) Eurocode 3 ( 1 9 9 0 ) values are calculated with

(5)/(4)

(N-M) EC3 INTERACTION :

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EUROCODE 3 FORMULA AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS.
NAME

PROFILE

NOMINAL

MEASURED

BUCK-

BUCKLING

MOM

NAME

FLANGE

YIELD

THICKNESS
t

POINT

[mm]

IN/mm2]

AXIS

NOM-

CORR.

INAL

LINO
LENGTH

DISTRIB

LOAD

FACT.

EC3 permitted deviation

L/1000

Measured initial
deformation

Lb
ECCEN.

12)
[m]

I5)

(4)
(3)

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

LOAD

LOAD

MEASURES/EC3

EC3

MEASURES

(1)

I6)

[kN]

[kNl

(6MI1)
[%]

(cml
L/2817- 1.4mm

4.0mm
NM1

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

82.0

363.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

8.0

L/2174-1.8mm
L/1880 -2.41mm

4.0mm
NM2

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

82.0

317.0

WEAK

+ 26

13522

0.82

4.00

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

9058

11006

+ 21

6634

6998

+ 24

4704

5698

+ 19

11282

13398

+ 19

8661

9818

+ 13

12640

13473

+7

13621

15138

+ 11

9536

11816

+ 24

4.88mm
NM3

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 4 2 2

62.5

368.1

WEAK

4.88

UNIF.

16.0

0.77

L/1627 -3.0mm
5.34mm

NM4

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 4 5 4

69.0

363.3

WEAK

6.34

UNIF.

16.0

1.00

NM6

W14X16X730

125.0

349.0

WEAK

8.18

UNIF.

15.0

1.86

172064-2.8mm

8.18mm

L/8lB0-1mm

L/2045_-4mm
8.71mm
W 14X16X660

97.0

NM7

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

82.0

NM8

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

NM9

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

NM6

374.0

WEAK

8.71

UNIF.

16.0

1.00

7.46

BITRI.

16.0

1.00

7.46mm
317.0

WEAK

82.0

374.7

WEAK

8.48

BITRI.

16.0

0.83

76.0

367.0

WEAK

8.00

BITRI.

6.0

0.80

L/4090-2mm

L/1889 -4.81mm

L/4892- 1.69mm

^1

L/4813-1.66mm L/7636-0.99m,)
8.48mm

L/7604-1.13mm
L/2817-3.24mm

(D
8.0mm

L/2417-3.3mm

U2624-3.1mi

NM2:A:\NMIXFFER

(NM) EC3 INTERACTION :

DIFFERENCES B ETWEEN EUROCODE 3 FORMULA AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS.

NAME

PROFILE

MEASURED

BUCK

BUCKLING

FLANGE

YIELD

AXIS

LENGTH

THICKNESS

POINT

NOMINAL

MOM

NOM

CORR.

INAL
NAME

Lb

LOAD

FACT,

ECCEN.

L/1000

Imi

[N/mm2]

[cm]

EC3

I3)
I LV8000 1 .Omm

8.0mm
NM10

W14X16X550

97.0

362.3

STRONG

8.00

UNIF.

18.0

COLLAPSE

LOAD

(51

(41

(2)
[mtnl

DISTRIB

COLLAPSE

Measured initial
deformation

EC3 permitted deviation

0.77

DIFFERENCE

MEASURES/ECS

MEASURES

ID

(6)

(6)/(1)

[kN]

IkNI

l%]

+ 13

15332

17318

13278

15678

14786

16618

+7

12240

14130

+ 10

L/BOOO 1 .Omm'

8.57mm'
NM11

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

82.0

374.7

STRONG

8.57

UNIF.

15.0

0.83
173809 2.25mm

CO
O

8.0mm
NM12

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

82.0

305.4

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.85

L/2402 3.33mm

8.0mm
NM13

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

75.0

367.0

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.80

L/10268 0.78mm

I M i l ? , 1.83mm
1 Rniffl
L/4372

NM2:<t\NMDIFFE1

(1) Eurocode 3 (1990) values are calculated w i t h ^ m l =1.0 and measured values : geometry of the sections,eccentricities of the loads,
buckling lengths and yield points (2) (EC3 FORMULA).
CO
C

(3)

(4)

The permitted deviation of the columns is in accordance with Eurocode 3 : Lb/ 1000 maximal value of a sinusoidal deformation.

(5)

The measured initial deformation is an approximation of the measurements used for Finelg numerical simulations.

CD

Measured residual stresses are compared to ECCS distribution.

(NM) EC3 INTERACTION :

COMPARISON B ETWEEN EC3 RULES, FINELG SIMULATIONS AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS
NAME

PROFILE

NOMINAL MEASURED BUCK BUCKLING MOM.

NAME

FLANGE

YIELD

THICKNES
t

POINT

Imm]

[N/mm2]

AXIS

NOM

CORR

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

LENGTH

DISTRIB LOAD FACT,

LOAD

LOAD

LOAD

MEASURES/EC3

ECCEN.

EC3

FINELG

MEASURES

(6)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(5)/(3)

(51/(4)

(41/(3)

Imi

IkNI

IkNI

IkNI

[%1

[%]

[%]

NM1

HD 400X400X678

82.0

363.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

Icml
8.0

NM2

HD 400X400X678

82.0

317.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

9058

11086

11005

+ 21

0.7

+ 22

NM3

HD 400X400X422

52.5

368.1

WEAK

4.88

UNIF.

15.0

0.77

5634

6793

6998

+ 24

+3

+ 21

NM4

HD 310X310X454

69.0

353.3

WEAK

5.34

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

4704

5496

5598

+ 19

+2

+ 17

NM5

W14X16X730

125.0

349.0

WEAK

8.18

UNIF.

15.0

1.86

11282

13740

13398

+ 19

(5)

+ 22

NM6

W14X16X550

97.0

374.0

WEAK

8.71

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

8651

9902

9818

+ 13

NM7

HD 400X400X678

82.0

317.0

WEAK

7.46

BITRI.

15.0

1.00

12640

13048

13473

15.0

0.83

13621

14415

15138

+ 11

+5

0.82

13522

16380

16888

C)

+3

+ 21

( ^

0.8
+3

+ 15

..)_____.
+6

NM8

HD 400X400X678

82.0

374.7

WEAK

8.48

BITRI.

NM9

HD 310X310X500

75.0

367.0

WEAK

8.00

BITRI.

5.0

0.80

9536

11913

11815

+ 24

0.8

NM10

W14X16X550

97.0

362.3

STRONG

8.00

UNIF.

18.0

0.77

15332

17556

17318

+ 13

1.4

+ 15

15520

15678

+ 18

+1

+ 17

"(5

NM11

HD 400X400X678

82.0

374.7

STRONG

8.57

UNIF.

15.0

0.83

13278

NM12

HD 400X400X678

82.0

305.4

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.85

14786

15549

16618

+ 12

+7

+5

NM13

HD 310X310X500

75.0

367.0

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.80

12240

12852

14130

+ 15

"

+5
NM2:A:\NMCOMP1

(3) Eurocode 3 ( 1 9 9 0 ) velues are calculated with

CD

FINELG/EC3

MEASURES/FINELG

Remarks:

(Q
C

DIFFERENCE

DIFFERENCE

COLLAPSE

INAL

LING

m l = 1 . 0 and measured values: geometry of the sections,eccentricities of the loads,

buckling lengths and yield points cry (EC3 FORMULA).

(4) the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of geometrically and materially non linear columns .
For the hypothesis 3 of figure 8 9 :measured initial geometrical imperfections

(geometry of the section,initial deformation,eccentricity) ere taken

into account;more precise measured mechanical characteristics () (6) are considered measured residual stresses have been introduced
proportionally to the correction factor according to the ECCS distribution .

7.2.

N-MINTERACTION

CURVES

In general the N-M interaction curve that we can draw for a member is composed of
parts describing different phenomena to which correspond different formulas
(figure 7.2.O.):
1)
2)
3)
4)

buckling strength;
resistance_of cross-sections;
bending resistance;
laeralorsional buckling strength.

It can be pointed out that for the tests NM1 to NM11 it is the buckling formulas
which give the minimal collapse axial load and, that for the tests NM12 and
NM13 it is the resistance of crosssections which provides the lowest values of
the collapse load already for applied eccentricities greater or equal to 5 cm
(figures 7.2.XII and 7.2.XIII).
7.2.1.

Buckng strength

7.2.1.1.

Eurocode 3 (84 and 90 versions) (93,

[ill)

The buckling behaviour is defined by the formulas already presented in

chapter 2.2.2., for which lateraltorsional buckling is not a potential
failure mode. The 88 version of EC3 [lO] is equal to the 90 version [ l l 3.
7.2.1.2.

SIA 161 (90 version) 17~\

The buckling strength is defined by the following interaction formula for one
buckling plane, if the buckling is prevented outofplane and if it is not
necessary to check lateraltorsional buckling:
Nd , 1
u).Md
+
s^SLO

NK/yR
M

i_2k MR/rR

R = MRy = Mpiy, but M Ry < 1 + 0 , 2 - M ly, f o r buckling according to the strong axis

MR = M^ = Mpl2,
Nd, M

max:

for buckling according to the weak axis

compression axial load (positive) and bending moment

(greatest absolute value), determined from first order theory,
without equivalent imperfections, for the considered risk situa
tion.
coefficient used for bending according to each axis, taking into
account the distribution of the moments for a linear diagram
along the beam.
The following conditions are applied for end moments, to be
introduced with their sign, for the considered risk situation:
' M d,min

' iMd.max

33

 = 0,6 + 0,4

M d, mi
, but > 0,40
"M d, max

Nk:

ultimate buckling strength under compression load centered in the

considered plane (Nk = XA.fy, where is the buckling
reduction factor identical to the Eurocode 3 one).

,
cr*

critical load for elastic

(N c r = 2 .|. = 2 . /

2=

1/(1 (AW/2A)), but 2 < 1,2

buckling

Mpjy, Mpi z : plastic bending moment

and weak inertias.
Ik. kk"

according

in

the

to

considered

the

axis

of

plane

strong

buckling length and slenderness related to the direction of consi

dered buckling.

We took the safety factor , equal to 1,0

7.2.2. Resistance

of cross-sections .

The resistance of crosssections is described by the following formulas if the

applied axial load is greater than N ] ^ ^ , underneath which the effect
of the axial load may be neglected (domain of bending resistance).
7.2.2.1.

Eurocode 3 (84 version) t]

Chapter 5.2.3.2.:

Plastic interaction conditions for H and I profiles.

For doubly symmetrical rolled H and I profiles with uniaxial bending and
compression, the influence of the axial force may be neglected if the axial
force is not greater than the limiting value given in the following table.
Otherwise, the plastic moment must be reduced by the appropriate formula from
the table.
Bending about the strong
axis
sections
HEA ; HEB
HEM 100 to
HEM 600 *

I sections
(IPE) *

Limiting
value "

Bending about the weak

axis

0.1 Npl

0,2 Npl
f

Reduction
formula

Mred = U l M p l ( l )

Limiting
value"
Reduction
formula

Hed = Mpl 1 I

0,18 Npl

0,36 Npl
(
NT 0,36

M Ted =l,22M pl [lj^]

Md = Mpl

1
V

* : or equivalent sections in the appropriate standard in force,

" : limit
34

Npi
^
0,8
)j

0,64

fi

7.2.2.2.

Eurocode 3 (90 version) [il ]

Chapter 5.4.8.1.:

Bending and axial force

In flanged sections, the reduction of the theoretical plastic resistance

moment by the presence of small axial forces is counter-balanced by strain
hardening and may be neglected. However when the axial force exceeds half the
plastic tension resistance of the web, or a quarter of the plastic tension
resistance of the cross-section, whichever is smaller, allowance shall be
made for its effect on the plastic resistance moment.
N
A
1
w
In other words, Ni , = minimum (
^ , ? ), where A _ i s the web area.

For crosssections without bolt holes, the following approximations may be

used for standard rolled I or sections:
N N y = M p l y (ln)/(l0.5a) but M N y < M p l y

% z = MPl,z 11 [ + H > ] but M Nz S Mpl)Z

where = N S d / N p l > R d
and a = f^
7.2.2.3.

= (A2btf)/A but a < 0,5

SIA 161 (90 version) [l7

Chapter 4.1.3.4.: Ultimate Resistance of crosssections.

Interaction NM for double T bisymetrical shapes.
The plastic bending moment M p i y >j et M p i z jq reduced by the
load N(j have respectively the following values:
B ending according to the strong axis:

ply, = Mply -\l [ * " Wfc J ' Ut

35

P^ N ~ M P^

axial

Bending according to the weak axis:

Nd
M plZiN = M p l 2 , for ^
Mpiz,N = M p l z

<

( Nd
' 1 /
_

d
N pl /y R

A.
A

, rrr. > - 7 -

with ^ = 1 / ( 1 - ^ ) and 2 = 1 / ( 1 - ^ ) , but 2 < 1,2

Aw = web area = (h - tf). t w
So, for hending according to the weak axis, limit defined on figure 7.2.0
is equal to (Aw/A) N p j = Aw fy.
7.2.3.

Bending

resistance

In general the design bending moment would not exceed the plastic bending
moment M p j = W p i fy.
So for given eccentricities (ecc.) at both end of the columns, we could not
obtain an ultimate axial load greater than (Mp]/ecc).
7.2.4.

Lateral-torsional

bucklin
g stren
g th

For columns submitted to bending according to the strong axis we must control
if the lateral-torsional buckling is a potential failure mode.
7.2.4.1.

Eurocode 3 (84 version) [93

Chapter 5.3.3.5. Alternative verification: the verification of sufficient

buckling safety shall be carried out by the following equation:
My
<1
M

*M uy
where:
%yr = ( ^ g )
1 +

= reduction coefficient for buckling

- 36

li

^uy

= plastic shape factor

Wpi. f = plastic moment capacity for class 1 sections

M =

the ideal lateral-torsional buckling stress at the compressed

edge of the cross-section under the action of My alone.
Pertinent values for different moment diagrams shall be taken
from the literature.

For single span beams with IPE or HE -sections (or profiles with similar
dimensions) and knife-edge supports at both top and bottom flanges, the
following value may be assumed:
E b t
c

Ki,M = > 66
1 h

For

Name

LB

<250

235

b t

lh
btf

250 235
fy

no check is necessary

[cm]

(My)LT
=* -Mply
ply
M
[kN-cm]
[kN-cm]
(4)

(MyHest
= Ntest eccy
[kN-cm]
(5)

(1)

(2)

NMIO 800

97,0

162

(3)
0,5599 0,9788 683.562,0

669.075,0

311.724,0

NM11 857

118,5

157

0,6128 0,9674 546.653,0

528.828,0

235.170,0

NM12 800

110,6

192

0,5921 0,9723 546.653,0

531.511,0

249.270,0

NM13 800

134,0

160

0,6545 0,9556 350.218,3

334.682,0

211.950,0

On the table the values (1) are always lower than the values (2); this fact means
that no check is necessary. For N-M interaction curves we don't take into account the
lateral-torsional buckling phenomenon.
On the other hand for our 4 tests according to the strong axis NM10 to NM13 the
ultimate bending moment reached during the test (My)test (5) is always lower than the
lateral-torsional buckling moment ( M y ) ^ (4).

37

7.2.4.2.

Eurocode 3 (90 version) [il ]

Chapter 5.5.2.: Lateraltorsional buckling of beams.

Remark (7): If the nondimensional slenderness Xjjj* is lower than 0,40
no allowance for lateraltorsional buckling is necessary.
The calculation of ^ is given in Annex F [ i l ].

^TI^LT^lJ [ M
where -^ =

E/f

w = 1 for Class 1 crosssections

The geometrical slenderness ratio ^
given for all classes of crosssection, by:

for

lateraltorsional

buckling

is

XLT=[^EWpl.y/Mcr]*
For a beam of uniform crosssection, the elastic critical moment for lateral
torsional buckling of doubly symmetrical crosssections is given for end
moment loading by:

Mcr = C!

2
(kL)

where G

It
Iw
Iz
L
C!

and

kw

i2

_k
kw.

(kL) 2 GI t
2 EI

E
2(1 + )
torsion constant
warping constant = (I z (h tf)2)/4
second moment of area about weak axis
length of beam between points which have lateral restraint
factor depending on the loading conditions and end restraint
conditions (table F l . 1. [ i l ] )
effective length factor refering to outofplane bending end
conditions (from 0,5 to 1,0)
effective length factor refering to warping end conditions (from
0,5 to 1,0)

38

With the hinged support defined on figure 53, we have

- hinges at both ends in the bending plane;
- fixation at both ends out of the bending plane (half-cylinder)
and so k = 0,50.
The NM specimens are welded to end plates (figures 51 and 52, Annex A). So
warping is prevented and k w = 0,50
Names

kw

NM10

0,5

0,5

NM11

0,5

NM12
NM13

xLT

7.338.482

23,4

0,31

857

4.663.251

26,0

0,35

3,149

800

16.058.098

14,0

0,17

3,149

800

7.869.174

16,0

0,21

C1

[cm.

[kNcm]

800

0,5

0,5

0,5

0,5

0,5

As shown on the table the relative slenderness xLT is lower than 0,40
and consequently the lateral-torsional buckling is not a potential failure
mode.
7.2.4.3.

SIA 161 (90 version) [17]

Chapter 3.254.: Lateral-torsional buckling of beams submitted to bending.

The ultimate resistance to bending M R is limited to the lateral-torsional
buckling moment D = D W p l y
The stress for lateral-torsional buckling oD is equal to:

C.fwhereC = (
y

0
z - ^ - ))0,45
,45 and = (
1 + 4'5

V
"crD

yf

P'
W

According to the paragraph number 3.254.7 the critical stress of elastic

lateral-torsional buckling CRD can be determined with scientifically
well recognized theories. We use the results with the realistic assumptions
issued from E urocode 3 (90 version) (see 7.2.4.2.) where M c r is the
critical moment of elastic lateral-torsional buckling and is equal to:

crD W y

- 39

Names

c r (E C3-90)
[kN-cm]

NMIO

7.338.482

0,3052

0,9979

NM11

4.663.251

0,3424

0,9964

NM12

16.058.098

0,1845

0,9998

NM13

7.869.174

0,2110

0,9996

In fact we obtain the ultimate resistance to bending:

M D = OD W p l y = fy W p l y = M p l y
In other words ) is proportional to the full plastic bending moment
Mpiy. We can conclude with the table that the reduction factor is
nearly equal to 1,0 and that lateral-torsional buckling is not a potential
failure mode.
7.2.5.

Comments

The best way to underline th e excess of safety of the standards formulas

consists in drawing the complete N-M interaction curves and parameters (figures
7.2.1 to 7.2.):
* the curve from E urocode 3 (90 version), with the realistic hypothesis (2)
defined in chapter 7.1.;
* the curve from E urocode 3 (84 version), with the same hypothesis (2) defined
in chapter 7.1.;
* the curve from SIA 161 (90 version), with the realistic hypothesis (3)
defined in chapter 7.1.;
* the curve from Finelg numerical simulations, with the hypothesis (3) defined
in chapter 6.2., including all the initial imperfections but nominal
eccentricities; this curve describes the real behaviour;
* the test result;
* the result from Finelg numerical simulations with the hypothesis (3) defined
in chapter 6.2. but with the measured eccentricities.
On these figures 7.2.1 to 7.2.XIII we draw two shaded areas:
-

dark shaded areas between the N-M interaction curves of E urocode 3 (90
version) and SIA 161 (90 version);

light shaded areas between the N-M interaction curve of Finelg numerical
simulations and the closest standard curve issued from E urocode 3 (90
version) or SIA 161 (90 version).
40 -

With these shaded areas we can estimate respectively:

* the differences between the formulas of Eurocode 3 (90 version) and SIA 161
(90 version) and,
* the whole range of the excess of safety issued from these standards NM
interaction formulas.
With these figures we can quantify the safety margin of standards NM inter
action formulas for each specimen in comparing the values (or M) from Finelg
curve with the values from standards curve for each eccentricity.
If we compare the NM interaction curves issued from Eurocode 3 (90 version)
and SIA 161 (90 version) (dark shaded areas), we conclude the following items:
* for the uniform moment distribution and for both bending axis (weak axis:
NM1 to NM6; strong axis: NM10 to NM11) the formulations of SLA 161 code is
better, closer to reality than the Eurocode 3 (the reality is defined by
Finelg interaction curve);
* for the bitriangular moment distribution the formulation of Eurocode 3 is
either similar to the SLA 161 code for the strong axis (NM12, NM13), or
better, closer to reality than SIA 161 for the weak axis (NM7 to NM9).
If we compare the NM interaction curves issued from both Eurocode 3 versions
(84 and 90 versions), we come to the following conclusions:
* for the uniform moment distribution and for both bending axis (weak axis:
NM1 to NM6; strong axis: NM10, NM11) the formulation of 84 version is
better, closer to reality than the 90 version;
*

for the bitriangular moment distribution and for both bending axis especi
ally more for the weak axis (weak axis: NM7 to NM9; strong axis: NM12,
NM13) the formulation of 90 version is better, closer to reality than the
84 version.

41

N-M INTE RACTION

1) Buckling strength ( Nb ){for NM1 to NM11 )

plastic
critical <>

2) Resistance
ross-sections ( R)
M12and NM13)

3) Bending
esistance
( Mpl/ecc.)

4) Lateral-torsional buckling strength (if\ , T

M plastic
> 0,4 , for E C3 ) ( N, T )

- For a given eccentricity , ecc : = mnimum [1Mb , N R , N L T , (Mpl/ecc)]

* E urocode 3 ( 1984 Version ) :
1) chapter 5.3.4
2) chapter 5.2.3.2 :
.. v
limit

Bending about
the strong axis
0,1 Npl
0,18 Npl

Bending about
the weak axis
0,2 Npl
0,36 Npl

sections
I sections

Eurocode 3 ( 1990 Version ) :

1) chapter 5.5.4
2) chapter 5.4.8.1 :
Aw . a
Nlimit =

Npl

minimum
where Aw is the web area

SiA 161 ( 1990 Version) :

chapter 4.13.4 : for bending about weak axis
limit = ( Aw /A ) . N p l , where Aw is the web area.

NM2:A:\IMTER

Figure 7.2.0
43 -

N-M INTE RACTION:

N M

COLUMN

[MN]
- 400400678
- WEAK AXIS
- YIELD POINT = 363 N/mm2
- BUCKLING LE NGTH L = 4,0 m

-7'

<*f

-<4-r
UNIFORM
MOMENT
DISTRIBUTION

e = 100 cm

0
(Q
C
-^
CD

ro

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

3 (1984)

_.*-.

3,000

Mpl = 2689,3

M Y [kNm]
EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCOD
E

2,500

SIA 161 (1990)

E
FIN LG

_._._._

\ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = 8,33 cm ; ecc down = 7,76 cm )

TESTS RE SULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM1

N-M INTE RACTION : N M 2 COLUMN

[MN]

1,000

2,000

1,500

MY [kNm]
EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCOD
E

3 (1984)

____^____.

SIA 161 (1990)

_.._....._

2,500
Mpl = 2406,3

E
FIN LG

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 14,93 cm ; ecc down = 14,73 cm )

E
T STS RE SULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM2

N-M INTERACTION : N M 3 COLUMN

[MN]

2,000

1,000
(Q
C
-^
<D

Mpl= 1626,8

MY [kNm]
EUROCODE 3 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

_.._.._0..._.._

FINELG

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = 14,86 cm ; ecc down = 14,96 cm )

TESTS RESULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM3

NM INTERACTION:

N M 4

COLUMN

[MN]

600
I
co'
c
n
CD

800

1,000

MY [kNm]

1,600

Mpl= 1426,2

EUROCODE 3 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

FINELG

_.._.......

1,400

Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = 15,26 cm ; ecc down = 14,75 cm )

TESTS RESULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM4

NM INTERACTION : N M 5 COLUMN
[MN]

2,000
CO*

ro
<

5,000

MY [klMm]

I
C
-^
CD

3,000

EUROCODE 3 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

_____^

SIA 161 (1990)

......

Mpl = 4609.1

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 15,19 cm ; ecc down = 15,21 cm )

NM2A:A:\DESNM6

N-M INTE RACTION : N M 6 COLUMN

[MN]
30
Npl = 3 8 , 3 6 /

CD

4,000

2,000

MY [kNm]

Mpl = 3 5 0 6 , 8

(Q

C
-i

CD

ro

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCOD

E

3 (1984)

-*-

SIA 161 (1990)

FIN
E LG

-.-o--

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 15,35 cm ; ecc down = 15,26 cm )

TESTS RE SULTS

NM2:A:\DESNM6

N-M INTE RACTION : N M 7 COLUMN

[MN]

Ol

1,000

1,500

,500
Mpl = 2402,1

MY [klMm]

(Q
C

3,000

-*

CD

ro

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCODE

3 (1984)

--*-

SIA 161 (1990)

FIN
E LG

-...-..e--

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = -15,01 cm ; ecc down = 12,43 cm )

TESTS RE SULTS

NM2A:\OESNM7

NM INTERACTION : N M

8 COLUMN

[MN]
Npl = 32.44

HD 400400'678
WEAK AXIS
YIELD POINT = 374,7 N/mm'
BUCKLING LENGTH L = 8,48 m

ff

BITRIANGULAR
MOMENT
DISTRIBUTION

=50cm

= 100cm

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

MY [klMm]

(O*

3,000

3,500

Mpl = 2857,1

c
CD

k)

EUROCODE 3 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

FINELG

...0

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc UD = 14,78 cm ; ecc down = 12.68 cm )

TESTS RESULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM8

N-M INTE RACTION: N M

9 COLUMN

[MN]
Npl = 2 3 , 0 9 /

Ol
IO

1,500

1,000

MY [kNm]

ca'
c
-^

CD

ro

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCODE

3 (1984)

-*-

SIA 161 (1990)

-..-e--

2,000

Mpl = 1618,0

FIN
E LG

TESTS RE SULTS

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = -3,86 cm ; ecc down = 4,33 cm )

NM2:A:\DESNM9

N M INTERACTION : | \ | M

1 0 COLUMN

[MN]

UI

2,000

8,000

4,000

MX [kl\lm]

Mpl = 6 9 9 9 , 4

CO
C
(D
S)

EUROCODE 3 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

.e

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc UD = 17.79 cm ; ecc down = 18.16 cm )

NM2A:\DESNM10A

NM INTERACTION : M 1 1 COLUMN
[MN]

1,000
(O
C
t
(0

6,000

3,000

2,000

MX [klMm]
EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCODE

3 (1984)

____^___.

Mpl = 5707,7

SIA 161 (1990)

FIN
E LG

_.._.._.._

-A

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = 15,03 cm ; ecc down = 14,98 cm )

TESTS RE SULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM11A

N-M INTE RACTION : N M

1 2 COLUMN

[MN]

Ol

1,000

6,000

2,000
Mpl = 4633,1

MX [klMm]

(
C
-

CD
vj

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCODE

3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

FIN
E LG

--e--

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 14.99 cm ; ecc down = 14.90 cm )

TESTS RE SULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM12A

NM INTERACTION : N M 1 3 COLUMN
[MN]

Ol
OJ

1,000

2,000

MX [klMm]

CO
C
CD

EUROCODE 3 (1990)

ro
X

4,000

Mpl = 3546,4

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

FINELG

...e....

2_A= Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities

ecc up = 14,90 cm ; ecc down = 15,13 cm )

TESTS RESULTS

NM2A:A:\DESNM13A

7.3.

NEW PROPOSAL S FOR CODES FORMUL AS

The NM interaction formulations of Eurocode 3 and SIA 161 are too conservative
as it is highlighted in the previous chapters as well for the collapse loads
(chapter 7.1.) as for the complete NM interaction curves (chapter 7.2.).
In view of the NM interaction curves (figures 7.2.1 to 7.2.XIII) it appears that
the excess of safety is already important in the case of centered axial load
(eccentricity = 0) and of course that this excess goes on as the eccentricities
increase.
A) Consequently the first idea to improve the NM formulas consists in improving
the bucklingdependent term which exists in the codes formulas: , the buck
ling reduction factor calculated with the same formula in both codes (Euro
code 3 and SIA 161) and depending on the selection of the buckling curves for
I shapes. So for each NM specimen we propose to take the buckling curve
upper than the one imposed by the codes as follows:

NAME

PROFILE
NAME

NOMINAL

NOMINAL

FLANGE

h/b

BUCK
LING
AXIS

THICKNESS
t
Imm]
NM1
NM2

HD 4O0X4OOX678
HD 400X400X678

Buckling
curvei
Imposed
by
the code
EC3

82.0

1.13

82.0

1.13

SIA 161

Buckling reduction lector

% IEC 3) end (SIA 161)
RPS
new
proposait
EC3

SIA 161

Imposed
by
the codes
EC3

RPS
new
proposals

SIA 161

EC3

SIA 161

WEAK

0.859

0.859

0.897

0.897

WEAK

0.859

0.859

0.897

0.897

NM3

HD 400X400X422

52.5

1.04

WEAK

0.783

0.783

0.835

0.835

NM4

HD 310X310X454

69.0

1.24

WEAK

c "

0.660

0.660

0.723

0.723

NM5

W14X16X730

125.0

1.25

WEAK

0.524

0.600

0.600

0.661

NMS

W14X16X550

97.0

1.18

WEAK

0.540

0.540

0.597

0.597

NM7

HD 400X400X678

82.0

1.13

WEAK

0.613

0.613

0.675

0.675

NM8

HD 400X400X678

82.0

1.13

WEAK

0.541

0.598

0.598

NM9

HD 310X310X500

75.0

1.28

WEAK

0.439

0.439

0.484

0.484

NM10

W14X16X550

97.0

1.18

STRONG

0.866

0.866

0.911

0.911

NM11

HD 400X400X678

82.0

1.13

STRONG

0.837

0.837

0.890

0.690

NM12

HD 400X400X678

82.0

1.13

STRONG

0.856

0.856

0.904

0.904

NM13

HD 310X310X500

75.0

1.26

STRONG

0.815

0.815

0.873

0.873

57

0.541

) On the other hand for the SIA 161 (90 version) formula we propose to change
the coefficient as follows:
= coefficient taking into account the distribution of the moments for a
linear diagram along the beam (chapter 7.2.1.2.),
= 0,6 + 0,4

Md, m i n
Md, max

must be 0,40 according to SIA 161.

We propose to eliminate this limitation.
So for bitriangular moment distribution will be equal to 0,20 and the NM
interaction curve is improved especially for specimens tested according to
the weak axis (NM7 to NM9).
With all these changements of and , the SIA 161 (90 version) formula seems
to give the best NM interaction behaviour, closer to the reality than the
Eurocode 3 formula:
figure 7.3.0.: comparison of the collapse loads between Eurocode 3, SIA
161, Finelg simulations and the measurements.
This figure can be directly related to the figure 7.1.II. which shows the
results issued from the actual rules.

figures 7.3.1 to 7.3.XIIL: comparison of the complete NM interaction

curves where the actual rules of the codes and the RPS new proposals are
drawn together.

C) In the codes formulas there are the partial safety factor of the material,
Y m l (Eurocode 3) and the resistance factor YR (SIA 161), which must be
taken equal to 1,10 in both codes. The NM formulas are already too safe and
applying this value of 1,10 will lead to "oversafe" results. So we proposed
the value of safety factors equal to 1^0 in the scope of these tests
results.
AU these proposals are introduced in the scope of these 13 compression tests
of thick flanges (52 mm < tf < 125 mm) hotrolled H shapes and more deve
lopments (tests, calculations...) would be necessary to control our conclusi
ons or to extend them to other H profiles.

58

(N-M) EC3 INTERACTION :

COMPARISON BETWEEN EC3 RULES AND SIA 161 , FINELG SIMULATIONS AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS
NAME

NOMINAL

PROFILE

MEASURED BUCK- BUCKLING MOM.

FLANGE

NAME

Ol
CD

YIELD

THICKNESS
t

POINT

(mm)

|N/mm2]

AXIS

NOM-

CORR COLLAPSE COLLAPSE COLLAPSE COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

DIFFERENCE

COLLAPSE

INAL

LINO
LENGTH

DISTRIB LOAD FACT.

B
ECCEN.

(6)
Im)

LOAD

LOAD

LOAD

FINELG

MEASURES

MEAS/EC3

MEAS/SIA MEAS./FINELG

LOAD

LOAD

EC3

EC3

SIA

ID

12)

(3)

(4)

15)

(5)/|1|

(5)/(2)

|5)/(3)

IkNI

IkN]

IkN)

IkN)

IkN)

[%1

1%1

1%)

13852

14186

16380

16888

+ 37

+ 22)

+ 19

+3

NM1

HD 400X400X678

82.0

363.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

NM2

HD 400X400X678

82.0

317.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

6977

9204

9356

11086

11005

+ 58

+ 20

+ 20

-0.7

NM3

HD 400X400X422

52.5

368.1

WEAK

4.88

UNIF.

15.0

0.77

4966

5796

6040

6793

6996

+ 41

+ 21

+ 16

+3

NM4

HD 310X310X454

69.0

353.3

WEAK

5.34

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

4312

4887

5176

5496

5598

+ 30

+ 15

+8

+2

NM5

W14X16X730

125.0

349.0

WEAK

8.18

UNIF.

15.0

1.86

8370

12151

13519

13740

13398

C+60)

+ 10

-1

+9

0.82

12356

NM6

W14X16X550

97.0

374.0

WEAK

8.71

UNIF.

15.0

1.00

7956

9025

9561

9902

9618

( + 23J

NM7

HD 400X400X678

82.0

317.0

WEAK

7.46

BITRI.

15.0

1.00

9252

13082

12820

13048

13473

+ 46

NM8

HD 400X400X678

82.0

374.7

WEAK

8.48

BITRI.

16.0

0.83

11146

14598

13162

14415

15138

+ 36

NM9

HD 310X310X500

75.0

367.0

WEAK

8.00

BITRI.

5.0

0.80

8957

10459

9262

11913

11815

NM10

W14X16X550

97.0

362.3

3TR0NG

8.00

UNIF.

18.0

0.77

13478

15692

17798

17556

NM11

HD 400X400X678

82.0

374.7

STRONG

8.57

UNIF.

15.0

0.83

11578

13720

15568

NM12

HD 400X400X678

82.0

305.4

5TR0NG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.85

11366

14786

NM13

HD 310X310X500

75.0

367.0

STRONG

8.00

BITRI.

15.0

0.80

10357

12240

-0.8

+5

+3

+4

+ 15

+5

+ 32

+ 13

Qi)

-0.8

17318

+ 28

+ 10

(,,)

-1.4

15520

15678

+ 35

+ 14

+ 0.7

+1

14945

15549

16618

+ 46

+ 12

+ 11

+7

12403

12852

14130

+ 36

+ 15

+ 14

<t!i>

09

ml = 1 . 1 , nominal geometrical datas, and the ay decreasing in function of the flange

NM1:A:\NMC0MP2

thickness (according to EN 10025) (EC3 DESIGN). RPS new proposal for N-M interaction formula.

CD

On)

+3

(2) - Eurocode 3 (1990) values are calculated with ml =1.0 and measured values: geometry of the sections,eccentricities of the loads,

1%)

(cm)
8.0

Remarks: (1) - Eurocode 3 (1990) values are calculated with

CO

(5)/(4)

buckling lengths and yield points ay (EC3 FORMULA). RPS new proposal for N-M interaction formula.
(3) - SIA 161 (1990) values are calculated with mr = 1.0,and measured values : geometry of the sections,eccentricities of the loads,
buckling lengths and yield points ay (SIA FORMULA) RPS new proposal for N-M interaction formula.
(4) - the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of geometrically and materially non linear columns .
For the hypothesis 3 of figure 89 :measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section,initial deformation,eccentricity) are taken
into account;more precise measured mechanical characteristics (ay) (6) are considered;measured residual stresses have been introduced
proportionally to the correction factor according to the ECCS distribution .

NM INTERACTION : N M

1 COLUMN

[MN]

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Mpl = 2689,3

(Q
C

(D

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS New proposal

Actual Rule

EUROCODE 3 (1984)
>|<

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal

Actual Rule

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

,,

MY [kNm]

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 8,33 cm ; ecc down = 7,76 cm )

: A:\DESNM1

fC>

N-M INTE RACTION : N M

2 COLUMN

[MN]
HD 400*400*678
WEAK AXIS
YIELD POINT = 317 N/mm'
BUCKLING LE NGTH L = 4,0 m

,500
Mpl = 2406,3
Tl

'
c
-t
CD

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCOD

E 3 (1984)
SIA 161 (1990)
RPS New proposal

<RPS New proposal

QActual Rule

Actual Rule

FIN
E LG

E
T STS RE SULTS

MY [kNm]

'
/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 14,93 cm ; ecc down = 14,73 cm )

NM9:A:\DESNM2

 INTERACTION : N M 3 COLUMN

[MN]

1,500

1,000

Mpl= 1626,8
(Q
C
CD

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS New proposal
0
Actual Rule

EUROCODE 3 (1984)
SIA 1 6 1 (1990)
>fs
RPS New proposal
0

= Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities :

CO

Actual Rule

FNELG
A;

2,000
MY [kNm]

T E S T S RESULTS
I

ecc up = 14,86 cm ; ecc down = 14,96 cm )

NMS A:\DESNM3

NM INTERACTION:

NM

COLUMN

[MN]
20
Npt = 2 0 , 5 0 /

1,600
(Q

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS New proposal

EUROCODE 3 (1984)
*"

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal

CD

Actual Rule

Actual Rule

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

Ar

Mpl = 1426.2

MY [kNm]

"P

/ A = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 15,26 cm ; ecc down = 14,75 cm )

NM9:A:\DESNM4

N-M INTE RACTION : N M 5 COLUMN

[MN]

1,000

co'
c

CD

2,000

5,000
Mpl = 4609,1

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCOD

E 3 (1984)
RPS New proposal

Actual Rule

>|<

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal

0-

Actual Rule

FINE LG

E
T STS RE SULTS

-,,

MY [kNm]

vj
CO

- * neig simulations (with measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 15,19 cm ; ecc down = 15,21 cm )

NM9:A:\DESNM6

- INTE RACTION : N M 6 COLUMN

[MN]
30
Npl = 3 8 . 3 6 /

4,000

1,000
Mpl = 3506,8

co
c
-

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCODE

RPS New proposai

Actual Rule

fc

3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal
0-

Actual Rule

FINE LG
-

E
T STS RE SULTS
M

MY [klMm]

CD

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 15,35 cm ; ecc down = 15,26 cm )
CO

NM8:A:\DSNM8

 INTERACTION : N M 7 COLUMN
[MN]

>

1,000

1,500

,500

2,000

Mp,=24o2,i
(Q*

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS New proposal

SIA 161 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)
>|<

RPS New proposal

Actual Rule

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

3,000
MY

[kNm]

(D

<

Actual Rule
\=

Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 15,01 cm ; ecc down = 12,43 cm )

NM9:A:\PEDESNM7

 INTERACTION N M

8 COLUMN

>

2,500

1,000
IQ
C
O
KJ

13,000
Mp,=2857.i

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS New proposal
0

Actual Rule

EUROCODE 3 ( 1 9 8 4 )
SIA 161 (1990)
>|<
RPS New proposal
0

Actual Rule

FINELG

MY

3,500
[kNm]

TESTS RESULTS

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 14,78 cm ; ecc down = 12,68 cm )

NM9:A:\PEDESNM8

NM INTERACTION:NM 9 COLUMN
16

[MN]

Npl = 2 3 , 0 9 /

05
00

2,000
MY [kNm]

31
ca'
c

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS New proposal

CD

Actual Rule

\=

EUROCODE 3 (1984)
SIA 161 (1990)
*
RPS New p r o p o s a l 0

Actual Rule

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS
aioncouLia

Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 3 , 8 6 cm ; ecc d o w n = 4 , 3 3 cm )

NM9:A:\PEDESNM9

NM INTERACTION : N M

1 0COLUMN

[MN]

W 1 4 1 6 * 5 5 0 = HD 400 400 818

STRONG AXIS
YIELD POINT = 362,3 N/mm1
B UCKLING LENGTH L = 8,0 m

7'

4
UNIFORM
MOMENT
DISTRIBUTION
O
CD

8,000
Mpl = 6999,4

(Q

C
(D

EUROCODE 3 (1990)

EUROCODE 3 (1984)

>|<

RPS New proposai

Actual Rule

A =

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

MX [klMm]

Actual Rule

Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 17.79 cm ; ecc down = 18.16 cm )

NM9:\DESNM10A

NM INTERACTION : N M 1 1 COLUMN
[MN]
35

HD 4 0 0 4 0 0 * 6 7 8
STRONG AXIS

Npl = 32.29

YIELD POINT = 374.7 Nimm'

BUCKLING LENGTH L = 8.57

30

Ncrt = 28.22p

UNIFORM
MOMENT
DISTRIBUTION

>l

1,000

6,000

2,000

Mpl = 5 7 0 7 , 7
(Q

EUROCODE 3 ( 1 9 9 0 )
RPS New proposal

EUROCODE 3 ( 1 9 8 4 )
SIA 161 ( 1 9 9 0 )
^
RPS New proposal
0

(D
vj

Actual Rule

Actual Rule

FINELG
A

TESTS RESULTS

MX [klMm]

CA)

\ = Finelg simulations ( w i t h measured eccentricities :

ecc up = 1 5 , 0 3 cm ; ecc d o w n = 1 4 , 9 8 c m )

NM9: A:\DESNM11 A

N-M INTE RACTION : N M

12

COLUMN

[MN]

1,000
(Q
C
CD

EUROCODE 3 (1990) E UROCODE

RPS New proposal

Actual Rule

2,000

/ \ =

5,000

4,000

3,000

Mpl = 4633,1

3 (1984)

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal

-Q-

Actual Rule

FINE LG

6,000
MX [klMm]

E
T STS RE SULTS

Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up = 14.99 cm ; ecc down = 14.90 cm )

NM9:A:\DESNM12A

NM INTERACTION : N M 1 3 COLUMN
[MN]

1,000
I
C'

4,000
MPI=3546.4

EUROCODE 3 (1990)
RPS N e w proposal

CD

Actual Rule

EUROCODE 3 (1984)
>|<

SIA 161 (1990)

RPS New proposal

Actual Rule

/ \ = Finelg simulations (with measured eccentricities : ecc up =

FINELG

TESTS RESULTS

14,90 cm ; ecc down = 15,13 cm )

MX

NM9:A:VDESNM13A

[kNm]

8.

STATISTICAL

EVALUATION

(ANNEX OF EUROCODE

3)

After discussion during a meeting of the F6 Executive Committee, TNO B uilding and
Construction Research was asked to consider the safety of the concerned EC3 design
regulations with the method described in Annex of EC3 [15]. This method is based
on a statistical analysis oftest results.
In the report [16] the results of the statistical analysis of the 13 NM tests are
given. We just copy out the conclusions of the report [l6l:
The resistance of the members can be written as followed:
* m i n A W p l , f yk
N

(for specimens 1 to 9)

R d = W , + y(k e yA A)
pi,
mn^

'm

XminAWpl,yfyk
N

2AW
N

(for specimens 10 ant 11)

R d = W. + (k e y A)
p i , y ^y y * m i n ^

Rd= 2 W

p l j

nl.vfvk
+ e (A+2bt

'm
(for specimens 12 and 13)

f)

'm

This can be rewritten as:

k

NRd'WM*
+
^min^y^M
NRd^m/YM)

zNRd^m/YM)

=1
pl,

i y ^

=1

pi,iy%)
N

= M

kyNRdWt^

xmi^y^M
%d(?*nAM)

pl,y

pl,Rd

* NRf T & ' W

/(I(0,5a))

.pi , Rd

This means that the regulations in Eurocode 3 are safe when y*m./~Wi ^ 1
unsafe when */ > 1

73

an

For the specimens 1 to 11, where failure was due to buckling, the factor 7* m
varies between about 1.05 and 1.25, dependent on the coefficient of variation
taken into account for the variables and k. When these coefficients of
variation are low enough (i.e. lower than 0.10), then the statistical analysis
shows that the concerned design regulation in Eurocode 3 can be considered as
safe. The coefficient of correlation is high (about 0.98), which means that the
formula fits well with the real buckling behaviour.
For the specimens 12 and 13, which failed due to reaching the ultimate resistance,
the factor 7* m is about 1.05. This means that the statistical analysis shows
that the concerned design regulation is safe. The coefficient of correlation p,
which is equal to 1.0, shows that the formula completely describes the actual
resistance of a member loaded by compression combined with bending.

74

9.

CONCLUSIONS

In this research we checked the behaviour of the massive HD hot-rolled columns

(with flange thicknesses above 40 mm) by 13 full-scale-tests under eccentric
compression loads. We carried out these compression tests carefully to avoid parasitical effects: control of the behaviour of the hinged supports, control of
failure mode in one bending plane. We took different measurements before and after
the tests to obtain all the precise and necessary informations for the use of
codes formulas (Eurocode 3 and SIA 161) and for the numerical simulations with
Finelg software: geometrical characteristics of each specimen, initial geometrical
imperfections (initial deformations, real eccentricities and buckling lengths),
mechanical characteristics of each specimen (yield points, residual stresses;
control of yield scatter over a profile).
With all these measurements we simulated the 13 tests with a simple modelization
using beam finite elements of Finelg non linear software and we obtain a good
accordance with the measured collapse loads. From these credible calculations we
deduced the complete N-M interaction curves for each specimen and, these simulated
curves represent the real N-M behaviour of the columns.
Then we compared the tests results (measured collapse loads and Finelg simulated
N-M interaction curves) with the prescriptions of Eurocode 3 (84 and 90
versions) and SIA 161 swiss code (90 version) used with the measured values of
geometry and yield points.
We highlighted that the proposed rules in Eurocode 3 and SLA 161 are too much
conservative in such a way that they don't allow the designers to use the maximum
of the real buckling or resistance strength under eccentric loads of the steel
massive columns.
Comparing both versions of Eurocode 3 (84 and 90 versions) we came to the following conclusions:
* for the uniform moment distribution and for both bending axis (weak axis: NM1
to NM6; strong axis: NM10, NM11) the Eurocode 3 formulation of 84 version is
better, closer to reality than the 90 version (the reality is defined by Finelg
interaction curve).
*

for the bitriangular moment distribution and for both bending axis especially
more for the weak axis (weak axis: NM7 to NM9; strong axis: NM12 to NM13) the
Eurocode 3 formulation of 90 version is quite better, closer to reality than
the 84 version.

75 -

If we compare the N-M interaction curves issued from Eurocode 3 (90 version) and
SIA 161 (90 version), we conclude the following items:
* for the uniform moment distribution and for both bending axis (weak axis: NM1
to NM6; strong axis: NM10, NM11) the formulation of SIA 161 code is better,
closer to reality than the Eurocode 3;
*

for the bitriangular moment distribution the formulation of Eurocode 3 is

either similar to the SIA 161 code for the strong axis (NM12, NM13) or better,
closer to reality than SIA161 for the weak axis (NM7 to NM9).

We tried to improve the codes formulation by introducing some changements in the

rules and it seems that the SIA 161 (90 version) improved formulas give the best
N-M interaction behaviour, closer to reality than the Eurocode 3 (90 version)
improved formulas.
On the other hand because of the conservatism of the codes N-M formulas it is
obviously too much safe to apply safety factors (Y ml or ) equal to 1,10.
We proposed the value 1,00 in the scope of these tests results.
All these proposals are introduced in the scope of these 13 compression tests of
thick flanges (52 mm < tf < 125 mm) hot-rolled shapes and more developments
(tests, calculations...) would be necessary to control our conclusions or to
extend them to other profiles.
It can be noticed that even if the applied eccentricities seem to be low, the
carrying capacity of the columns submitted to compression and bending M may be
governed by the codes formulas of cross-sections resistance instead of buckling
strength.
As shown in this report, F inelg non linear numerical simulations gave collapse
loads closed to the tests and we drew complete N-M interaction curves for each
specimen. With this simple and reliable modelization we can easily use the F inelg
software as a tool for realistic and safe design.

106-RPS/CHAN/CK

76

10.

BIBLIO
G RAPHY

[1 ]

Products n 279282 BE
Buckling of thickflanged Isection columns
Joint research program of the ARB ED S.A. and the Stahlwerke PeineSalz
gitter A6 companies / February 9th, 1982.

[2 ]

Prfbericht N 820387
Knickversuche an IProfilen mit Flanschdicken t = 97 mm aus dem Werkstoff
St 523.
Versuchsanstalt fr Stahl, Holz und Steine. Universitt (TH) Karlsruhe
(August 30th, 1985).

[3]

ECSC Agreement Number 7210SB /501. B uckling of section beams in high

strength steelDraft final report / November 24th, 1981.

[4]

ARB EDResearch Centre, Interaction diagrams between axial load and

bending moment M for columns submitted to buckling: improvement of methods
proposed in standards and codes. C.E.C. Agreement n 7210SA/510.
Technical report n 1, Luxembourg, March 89.

[5]

ARB EDResearch Centre, Interaction diagrams between axial load and

bending moment M for columns submitted to buckling: improvement of methods
proposed in standards and codes. C.E.C. Agreement n 7210SA/510.
Technical report n 2, Luxembourg, September 89.

[6]

ARB EDResearch Centre, Interaction diagrams between axial load and

bending moment M for columns submitted to buckling: improvement of mthods
proposed in standards and codes. C.E.C. Agreement n 7210SA/510.
Technical report n 3, Luxembourg, April 90.

[7]

ARB EDResearch Centre, Interaction diagrams between axial load and

bending moment M for columns submitted to buckling: improvement of methods
proposed in standards and codes. C.E.C. Agreement n 7210SA/510.
Technical report n 4, Luxembourg, October 90.

[8]

ARB EDResearch Centre, Interaction diagrams between axial load and

bending moment M for columns submitted to buckling: improvement of methods
proposed in standards and codes. C.E.C. Agreement n 7210SA/510.
Technical report n 5, Luxembourg, April 91.

[9]

Eurocode 3 (84), Industrial processes, B uilding and Civil Engineering,

C.E.C. EUR 8849,1984,
Common unified rules for steel structures.

77

[IO]

Eurocode 3 (88), Design of steel structures, Part 1 General rules for

Buildings.
Volume 1, Chapters 1 to 9: Final Draft (December 1988).

[ll]

Eurocode 3 (90). Design of steel structures, Part 1 General rules for

Building.
Volume 1, Chapters 1 to 9: Edited Draft (Issue 5, November 1990).

[12]

FINELG, Nonlinear finite element analysis program, 1986 (3rd update),

users's manual, Universit de Lige / Ecole Polytechnique Fdrale de
Lausanne.

[13]

Mesure de Contraintes Rsiduelles Rapport N 90/28, 25.02.91, MSMMcani

que des Matriaux, Stabilit des Constructions, Mcanique des Structures
Universit de Lige.

[14]

Exzentrische Druckversuche an Stahlsttzen, NM Interaktion von HD Quer

schnitten, B ericht N A08/90, 31.10.90, RuhrUniversitt B ochum, Institut
fr Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau.

[lo]

Annex of Eurocode 3 (Design of Steel Structures, Part 1 General rules

for B uildings, November 90) about the procedure for the determination of
design resistance from tests (Provisional guide).

[l6]

"Statistical Analysis of 13 NM tests on wide flanged steel columns", TNO

Report n 91811, September 1991.
ir. B.W.E.M. Van Hove, Delft.

[17]

SIA 161, Socit suisse des ingnieurs et des architectes, SN 555161,

Norme suisse pour la construction mtallique. Edition de 1990, 08/1991,
Zrich.

78

STRUCTURAL STEEL RESEARCH REPORTS

established by
RPS DEPARTEMENT / ARBED RECHERCHES
[101] Grardy J.C. .Schleich J.B.; Elasto Plastic Behaviour of Steel Frames with Semi-Rigid
Connections / NORDIC STEEL COLLOQUIUM on Research and Development within The
Field of steel Construction; Odense, Denmark , 911 September 1991, RPS Report No 101/91.
[102] Grardy J.C., Schleich J.B.;Semi-Rigid Action in Steel Frames Structures / CEC agreement
No 7210SA / 507 ; Draft of Final Report, November 1991, RPS Report No 102/91.
[103] Ppin R.,Schleich J.B.; Seismic Resistance of Composite Structures, SRCS / CEC agreement
No 7210SA / 506 ; Draft of Final Report, November 1991, RPS Report No 103/91.
[104] Chantrain Ph..Schleich J.B.; Interaction Diagrams between Axial Load and Bending
Moment M for Columns submitted to Buckling / CEC agreement No 7210SA / 510 ; Draft of
Final Report, November 1991, RPS Report No 104/91.
[105] Schaumann P., Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch Nr. 1
Einstegiger Verbundtrger / HRA, Bochum, Juli 1990, HRA Bericht A 89199, RPS Report No
105/90.
[106] Schaumann P., Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch Nr. 2
Realistischer Verbundbrckentrger / HRA, Bochum, November 1991, HRA Bericht
A 891992, RPS Report No 106/91.
[107] Bruis ., Wang J.P. ; Composite Bridges with Hot Rolled Beams in High Strength Steel
Fe E 460 , and Spans up to 50 m / Service Ponts et Charpentes, Universit de Lige; Lige,
November 1991, RPS Report No 107/91.
[108] Schleich J.B., Witry .; Acier HLE pour Ponts Mixtes Portes Moyennes de 20 50 m /
Journe Sidrurgique ATS 1991; Paris, 4 et 5 dcembre 1991, RPS Report No 108/91.
[109] Schaumann P, Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuch Nr. 5
Haupttrgerstoss mit Stahlbetonauflagerquertrger / HRA, Bochum, Januar 1992, HRA
Bericht A 90232A, RPS Report No 109/92.
[110] Schaumann P, Schleich J.B., Kulka H., Tilmanns H.; Verbundbrcken unter Verwendung
von Walztrgern / Zusammenstellung der Vortrge anlsslich des Seminars
"Verbundbrckentag" am 12.09.90 an der Ruhruniversitt Bochum, RPS Report No 110/92.
[ I l l ] Schaumann P., Steffen .; Verbundbrcken auf Basis von Walztrgern, Versuche Nr. 3 u. 4
Haupttrgerstoss mit geschraubten Steglaschen / HRA; Bochum 1992, HRA Bericht 90232B,
RPS Report No 111/92.
[112] Schleich J.B., Witry .; Neues Konzept fr einfache Verbundbrcken mit Spannweiten von
20 bis 50 m / IX. Leipziger MetallbauKolloquium; Leipzig, 27. Mrz 1992, RPS Report
No 112/92.
[113] Bergmann R., Kindmann R.; Auswertung der Versuche zum Tragverhalten von
Verbund profilen mit ausbetonierten Kammern; Verbundsttzen / Ruhruniversitt
Bochum, Bericht No 9201, Februar 1992, RPS Report No 113/92.
[114] Bergmann R., Kindmann R.; Auswertung der Versuche zum Tragverhalten von
Verbundprofilen mit ausbetonierten Kammern; Verbundtrger / Ruhruniversitt
Bochum, Bericht No 9202, Mrz 1992, RPS Report No U4/92.
[115] Schleich J.B., Wippel H., Witry .; Untersuchungen an stegparallel versteiften
Rahmenknoten, ausgefhrt aus dickflanschigen hochfesten Walzprofilen . Entwurf
hochbelasteter Vierendeeltrger im Rahmen des Neubaus des Zentrums fr Kunst und
Medientechnologie ( ZKM ), Karlsruhe / RPS Report No 115/92.
[116] Chantrain Ph., Becker ., Schleich J.B.; Behaviour of HISTAR hot-rolled profiles in the
steel constructionTests/RPS Repon No 116/91.
79

FIGURES

CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION

INTERACTION DIAGRAM
HP 400 X 400

N-M

X 744

WEAK AX,S
23,5 KN/cm 2

YIELD POINT

N[KN]
20000
non linear method
ex: DIN 18800)
CEFICOSS (no strain hardening)
EUROCODE 3 (1984 version)
(interaction

10000

L = 4,00m

formula)

20000

10000

85

M[KNm]
Figure 1

Layout for the tests

with uniform moment distribution

M=N-e

scale 1 : 20

Figure 2

86

Layout for the tests

with bitriangular moment distribution

M=N-e

M=N-e
scale 1:20
Figure 3

- 87 -

CHAPTER

2:

TESTING PROGRAMME

BUCKLING PROBLEMS WITH ECCENTRICITIES

STATIC SYSTEMS
M = Ne

=1

BM=1.10(EC3,1984)

B M , = 1.10(EC3,1989)
Equivalent uniform moment
factors

uniform
moment
distribution

M = Ne

W,t

=1

fyl,if/= 0.44 (EC3.1984)

(^,=2.50(3,1989)
Equivalent uniform moment
factors

>

M = Ne
bltriangular
moment
distribution

91

Figure 4

11

"
!

10

()

7
6
5
4

2
1

6
1

M=ANe

Discretization : uniform moment

distribution

bitriangular moment
distribution
0.3oy(lfh/b>1.2)
0.5oy(tfh/b<1.2)

Residual stresses

( where = 23,5 kN/cm 2 )

0.3 oy
0.5 oy

Figure 5

92

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS
Sinusodal initial deformations have been introduced
in numerical simulations for both types of loading

A M

L/1000

10

L/1000

r . .
^4+*

<n
m
,

AN

AN

Uniform moment

Bitriangular moment

distribution

distribution
Figure 6
93

STEEL TRILINEAR LAW

E = 21000 kN/cm2
Et = 2.10kN/cm 2
= 35.5 kN/cm2
OJ =51.0 kN/cm2

atQ

. O

Nominal values of yield strength

[N/mm2]

FeE 355

355
335

/
305

EN 10025 (EC3)

40

EN 25

100

Material thickness [mm]

Figure 7

- 94

(NM) EC3 INTERACTION :

PROGRAM OF HD SECTIONS B UCKLING TESTS
NUMBERS

PROFILE

h/b

NAME

STEEL

BUCKLING

BUCKLING

SLENDERNESS

MOMENT

LOAD

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

QUALITY

AXIS

LENGTH

RATIO

DISTRIBUTION

ECCEN.

LOAD

LOAD

FINELG / EC3

FINELG

EC3

Icml

lto|

Ito)

!%1

5.0

1896

1669

+ 13.6

1858

1637

+ 13.5

Imi

|mm|

co
on

UNIFORM

NM1

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

FeE 355

WEAK

4.00

0.471

NM2

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

FeE 355

WEAK

4.00

0.471

NM3

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 4 2 2

1.04

52.5

FeE 355

WEAK

4.88

0.604

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 4 5 4

1.24

69.0

FeE 355

WEAK

5.34

0.802

UNIFORM

NM4

15.0

W14X16X730

1.25

125.0

FeE 355

WEAK

8.18

0.900

UNIFORM

15.0

NM5
NM6

W14X16X550

1.18

97.0

FeE 355

WEAK

8.71

1.000

NM7

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

FeE 355

WEAK

7.46

0.880

NM8

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

FeE 3 5 5

WEAK

8.48

1.000

NM9

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

1.26

75.0

FeE 355

WEAK

8.00

1.189

NM10

W14X16X550

1.18

97.0

FeE 3 5 5

STRONG

8.00

0.540

NM11

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

FeE 3 5 5

STRONG

8.57

0.600

NM12

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

FeE 3 5 5

STRONG

8.00

0.561

NM13

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

1.26

75.0

FeE 355

STRONG

8.00

0.643

15.0

15.0

UNIFORM

15.0

.
NMEC3:A:\HAPPORT3\FINR3

Remarks : the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of geometrically
and materially non linear columns. ECCS residual stresses have been introduced but there were no initial deformations.
CO

The yield point is equal to 355 MPa.

The safety factor Tm 1 is equal to 1,0.

CD

Range of sections : b (width) > 340 mm ; h (height) > 425 mm

00

(NM) EC3 INTERACTION :

PROGRAM OF HD SECTIONS B UCKLING TESTS
NUMBERS

PROFILE

h/b

MEASURED
YIELD

NAME

BUCKLING
AXIS

BUCKLING
LENGTH

SLENDERNESS

MOMENT

RATIO

DISTRIBUTION

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

LOAD

LOAD

FINELG / EC3

FINELG

EC3

[cml

Ito]

Itol

[%1

LOAD
ECCEN.

POINT
[mm|

[ml

[N/mm2l

EC3

NM1

HO 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

372

WEAK

4.00

0.4574

UNIFORM

8.0

1696

1208

+ 40.3

NM2

HO 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

331

WEAK

4.00

0.4574

UNIFORM

15.0

1122

874

+ 2B .4

NM3

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 4 2 2

1.04

52.5

3B9

WEAK

4.88

0.5B71

UNIFORM

15.0

694.2

484

+ 43.5

NM4

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 4 5 4

1.24

69.0

345

WEAK

5.34

0.7799

UNIFORM

15.0

532.1

416

+ 28.1

NM5

W14X16X730

1.25

125.0

349.5

WEAK

8.18

0.8338

UNIFORM

15.0

1425

972

+ 46.6

NM6

W14X16X550

1.18

97.0

374

WEAK

8.71

0.9716

UNIFORM

15.0

994.8

756

+ 31.5

NM7

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

331

WEAK

7.46

0.B531

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

1417

1125

+ 25.9

NM8

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

384

WEAK

8.48

0.9698

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

1513

1060

+ 42.8

NM9

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

1.26

75.0

354.5

WEAK

8.00

1.1551

BITRIANGULAR

5.0

1192

820

+ 45.5

NM10

W14X16X550

1.18

97.0

381

STRONG

8.00

0.5246

UNIFORM

18.0

1802

1319

+ 36.6

NM11

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

384

STRONG

8.57

0.5836

UNIFORM

15.0

1551

1125

+ 37.9

NM12

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

1.13

82.0

310.5

STRONG

8.00

0.5448

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

1594

1694

5.9

NM13

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

1.26

75.0

354.5

STRONG

8.00

0.6248

BITRIANGULAR

15.0

1260

1214

+ 3.6

CD

Remarks : the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of geometrically
and materially non linear columns. ECCS residual stresses have been introduced and the initial
sinusodal deformations have a maximal amplitude of L/1000 ; the measured mechanical
characteristics are considered.
CQ

CD

Eurocode 3 values are calculated with $ m1= 1.1 and the a decreasing in function of the
flange thickness.
Range of sections : b (width) > 340 mm ; h (height) > 425 mm

NM:\A:\HAPP0HT3:FINR

co
^1

(Q
C
CD

NM5

BUCKLING

HD 4-00X400X1 06/1_ = 8 . 1 8 m / e = 1 5 o m / N = l 5 00 k N / F e E 3 5 5/we a k

J.

: :

'

' L' '

(O
00

I s
\

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

axis

7 7

9 9

s \

1 0 1 0 I l r - 1 1 j 2 l 2 13
s I

DEFORMEE
V U E EN
DEPL=
MULT=
REAC=

(Q

C
CD

PLAN
20 . O
9.5 0
O . 14-3E + 05

L.
NM5

BUCKLING

co
co

+
1'

HD

4 0 O X 4 O 0 X 1 086/l_ = 8 . 1 8 m / e = 1 5 c m / N = l 5 0 0 k N / F e E 3 5 5 / w e k

+ !
3 '

+
4

'

io:

+
ii!

exis

_12J
DIAGRAMME

VUE

EN

MULT =
REAC =

CO

c
CD

N3

Lx

DE

MZ

PLAN

9 . 50
0.143E+05

DMAX=
0.396E+06
ELEMENT
7 (
7)
I

NM5

BUCKLING

HD 4-00X4-00X1 0 8 6 / L = 8 . 1 8 m / e = 1 5 c m / N = 1 500k N / F e E 3 5 5/we a k exis

o
o
8

i-

a. _

I
_

.J

I
_ _ J L _ _ J U

I
a.

I
_

.1. _

I
_

IO

I
_i_

I
a.

11

I
-A.

12

I
j

I
J

DIAGRAMME
V U E EN

MULT =
REAC =

Y
(

c
CD

CO

L:

DE

PLAN

9 . 50
0.143E+05

DMAX=
0.142E+05
ELEMENT
7 (
8)

'

NM5

BUCKLING HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 1 86/|_=8 . 1 8nv'e=1 5cnri/N=1 5 k h k F e E 3 5 5 / u e a k

iP
MPIHIIfl'!

k.*ii.

Mil.

co
c
*
CD

P>>

ARBEDRPS

!6/3/9

DESFIN U5.

axis

3
85
78
71
64
57
5
42
35
8
1
14
7

PLASTIFICATION
SCHEMA~D"MOTO
9.50
MULT=
0.143E+05
REfC=

NM5

BUCKLING HD 400X400X1086/L=8.18m/e=15cm/N=15kN/FeE355/weak axis

100
92
85
78
71
64
y 57
'1
f
5
42

o
)

t*.

28
21
14
7

(Q
C
-

CD

SCHEM DE MOTO

ai

fRBE D-RPS

26/03/90

E
D SFIN U5.2 I

MULT=
REAC=

9.50
0.143E+05
NM5

BUCKLING HD 400X400X1086/|_=8.18m/e=15cm/N=15kN/FeE355/tjeak axis

CQ
C

CD

O)

I fRB EDRPS 26/03/90

DESFIN U5.2~"l

PLASTIFKATION
SCHEM"DE~Mf5
MULT=
9.50
REAC=
0.143E+05
NM5

BUCKLING HD 404136/|_=8. 1 8m/e=1 5cnv'N= 1 5kN/FeE355/ujeak

mm

1
1

a
3

'3
O

4
4

5
5

6
6

7
7

10
10

11
11

12
IE

"
, ,

axis

1
92
85
78
71
64
57
^f

> . . .

i i-..

PLASTIFICATION

(O

CD

42
35
28
21
14
7

SCHEMP~D~MT

V
'S

HRBEDRPS

fi/f13/'Rn

DESFIN Uc o

MULT=
REHC =

3.5
0.143E+05
NM5

23635.9

INTERACTION

[KN]

HD 400x400x1086
LENGTH im) = 8.2

20000.

N-M-DIAGRAM
WEAK AXIS

YIELD POINT [kN/cm2] = 3 0 . 5

LAMDABAR = 0.834 BETA 1984 = 1.10

\
15000.

h- e

s&
\

BETA 1989 = 1.10

v.J

FIN
E Lli

Diff=46.6%
L = 8.18m

o
en

\X_jJ

10000.
/

^ \

r -v

\ E C 3 1989 \ E C 3 1984
~
\
\

'

'

Moment uniform

distribution

5000.

ca'
c

CD
CXI

0.0
1000.

2000.

3000.

1

4000.
4079.6

r^>
v^
M [KNml
NM5

NM 5
* DATE

: 29-HAR-1990 08:29:48 *

HD 4 0 0 x 4 0 0 x 1 0 8 6

PROFILNAHE
HOEHE

[cm]

56.90

BREITE

[cm]

45.40

STEGDICKE

[cm]

7.80

FLANSCHDICKE

[cm]

12.50

RADIUS

[cm]

1.50

MOMENTENVERTEI LUNGSFAKTOR
MOMENTENVERTEI LUNGSFAKTOR
HOMENTENVERTEILUNGSFAKTOR
MOMENTENVERTE ILUNGSFAKTOR

X-ACHSE
Y-ACHSE
X-ACHSE
Y-ACHSE

EC3
EC3
EC3
EC3

1984 >
1984 >
1989 >
1989 >

RELATIVE SCHLANKHEIT
RELATIVE SCHLANKHEIT

X-ACHSE
Y-ACHSE

>
>

0.4786
0.8338

GEWAEHLTE KNICKKURVE X-ACHSE

GEWAEHLTE KNICKKURVE Y-ACHSE
VORGESCHLAGENE KNICKKURVE NACH EC3 X-ACHSE
VORGESCHLAGENE KNICKKURVE NACH EC3 Y-ACHSE
ABHINDERUNGSFAKTOR FUER DIE STARKE ACHSE
>
ABHINDERUNGSFAFTOR FUER DIE SCHWACHE ACHSE >

1.1000
1.1000
1.1000
1.1000

:d
:d
:d
:d
0.7944
0.5592

EINGEGEBENE STRECKGRENZE [KN/cm'2] : 35.50

VERWENDETE STRECKGRENZE [KN/cm'2] : 30.50
PLASTISCHE NORMALKRAFT Npl
[KN] > 42265.4
PLASTISCHES MOMENT X-ACHSE
[KN m] > 8299.51
PLASTISCHES MOMENT Y-ACHSE
[KN m] > 4079.57

|E [cm] |
000 HD
001 HD
002 HD
003 HD
004 HD
005 HD
006 HD
007 HD
008 HD
009 HD
010 HD
011 HD
012 HD
013 HD
014 HD
015 HD
H pur HD

PROFIL
STRECKG. L [cm]| NX [KN] NY [KN]
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 33575.3 23635.9
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0] 32070.1 22034.7
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 30711.9 20677.1
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 29477.8 19504.5
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 28350.0 18477.0
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 27314.2 17566.3
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 26358.5 16751.7
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 25473.3 16017.3
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 24650.4 15350.8
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 23883.1 14742.5
400x400x1086
30.50 8 1 8 . 0 | 23165.6 14184.5
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 22492.9 13670.4
400x400x1086
30.50 8 1 8 . 0 | 21860.5 13194.8
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 21264.9 12753.4
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 20702.8 12342.4
400x400x1086
30.50 818.0| 20171.1 11958.5
400x400x1086
0.
30.50 818.0|
0.

MX[KNnO MY[KNm]| NX89 [KN] NY89 [KN] MX89 [KNm] | MY89 [KNm]

0.0

0.0|

30523.0

21487.2

0.0|

KY |

KX

0.0

0.00

0.00|

320.7

220.3|

28796.6

19769.1

288.0|

197.7

1.48

1.79|

614.2

413.5|

27304.3

18305.5

546.1|

366.1

1.46

1.72|

884.3

585.1|

25995.5

17043.6

779.9|

511.3

1.44

1.67|

1134.0

739.1|

24834.2

15944.5

993.4|

637.8

1.42

1.63|

1365.7

878.3|

23793.7

14978.5

1189.71

748.9

1.40

1.59|

1581.5

1005.1|

22854.0

14123.0

1371.21

847.4

1.38

1.561

1783.1

1121.2)

21999.4

13359.8

1540.0|

935.2

1.37

1 -531

1972.0

1228.1|

21217.8

12675.0

1697.4|

1014.0

1.36

1 -511

2149.5

1326.8|

20499.0

12098.6

1844.9|

1088.9

1.34

1.49|

2316.6

1418.4|

19835.1

11609.7

1983.51

1161.0

1.33

1.47|

2474.2

1503.7|

19219.4

11165.4

2114-11

1228.2

1.32

1.451

2623.3

1583.4|

18646.3

10759.2

2237.6|

1291.1

1.31

1.431

2764.4

1657.9|

18111.1

10386.1

2354.41

1350.2

1.30

1.42|

2898.4

1727.9|

17609.9

10041.7

2465.41

1405.8

1.29

1 -411

3025.7

1793.8|

17139.3

9722.6

2570.9|

1458.4

1.29

1.39|

8299.5

4079.6|

0.

0.

8299.5J

4079.6

1.28

1.38|

Figure 19
106

BUCKLING

HD

3 1 O X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0 / L = 8 . O O m / e = 1 5 c m / N = 1 3 0 0 k N / F e E 3 5 5 / s tr . ax.

bl-t

10 . 0
9.67

7 . 50

I
l

I
I

1
1
1

5 . 00

g
/

/
P i

2 . 50

/
/
/
/

/
(O
C
CD

ro

/
r

1 /
/
/
/

/
'

. '

Ml
_/i

l
'

'

'
'

1
1
1

__^_*

1
I

'

1
'

'

'

'

' 0 . 2 5

0 . 5 0

' 0 . 7 5

' 1| . 0 0

I
I

I
I

I
I

'
'

'

COURBE
.

PD
5. 2

NM13

BUCKLING

HD

310X310X500/L=8.00m/e=l5om/N=1300kN/FeE355/str.

ax. b

' '
t

o
00

hi

-'
2

7~*TT|"~.

It

10

11

rr

12

TZ~

f*

13141516
31413117
DEFORMEE

L - * ~

VUE

EN

DEPL=
MULT=
REAC=

PLAN
75.0
9.67
0.126E+05

Y
CO
C
CD

Lx
NM13

BUCKLING

HD

310X310X500/L=8.00m/e=l5om/N=l300kN/FeE355/str.

Il 2 3 4!

5 ',

==r^

11

12

13141516

- - - _ _

* - - - * -

'

'

" i i

DIAGRAMME
V U E EN

MULT =
REAC =

CD

DE

PLAN

9 . 67
0 . 126E+05

DMAX=
0.19+06
ELEMENT
16 ( 17)

Y
(
C

bl-t

o
CD

ax.

NM13

BUCKLING

HD

1 2 3 4

| _| _| _| _|

310X310X500/L=8.00m/e=l5om/N=l300kN/F eE355/str.

,
1

1
1

m^

1
1

ex.

bl-t

11
12 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6
10
_ _ - _ 1 1 1 I
1

| _| _| _| _|
1

DIAGRAMME

VUE

EN

MULT =
REAC =

CQ
C

CD

L.

DE

PLAN

9 . 67
0 . 1 2 6 E + 05

DMAX=
0.126E+05
ELEMENT
16 (
17)
I

NM13

BUCKLING HD 310X310X500/|_=8. 00m/e=15cm/N=1300kN/FeE355/str . . b i t

10
92
85
78
71
64
57
58
42
35
28
21
14
7

co
c

^siFiamoN
SCHM~D~MOTO

*
'

Y
I PIRB EDRPS

27/03/90

DESFIN U5.2 I

MULT=
REHC=

9 67
0.126E+05
NM-

BUCKLING HD 310X31X5/L=8.m/e=15cm/N=1300kN/FeE355/str. . bi-t

100
92
85
78

71
64
57
50
42
35
28
21
14
7

CQ
C
i

CD

ro
en

ARBED-RPS

27/03/90

DESFIN U5.2 I

PLASTIFICATION
SCHEMA DE MOTO
MULT=
9.67
REAC=
0.126E -05
NM13

BUCKLING HD 31 0X310X500/L=8.00m/e=15cm/N=1300kN/FeE355/str. . b i-t

100
92
pis 85
78
m
'
71
64
57
50
42
35
28
21
14
7

V.''

co
c

I ARBED-RPS

27/03/90

DESFIN U5.2 I

PLASTIFICATION
SCHEMA DE MOTO
MULT=
9.67
REAC=
0.126E -05
.13

 U C LNG HD 31 ><31 5 / L=8 . 0 0 ' e = 1 5 c ' = 1300 k I I ' F e E 3 S 5 ' s t r . . b i t

14
i^i

w.

100
32

;#i;- l-:i r .- ;

oc

78
71
64
57
50
42
35
28
21
14
I~l

t'

CQ

PLASTIFICATION
SCHEMA~D~MT

C
CD

ro

^\~7

I PRBED-RPS

E7/03/90

DESFIN U5.2 I

MULT=
REfiC=

9.67
0.126E+05

NM 13

17581

,f

INTERACTION NMD AGRAM

\ [KN]

HD 310x310x500
LENGTH y

15000.
\

FINELG

" \
v

= 8.0

STRONG AXIS
YIELD POINT [kN/cm2] = 3 3 . 5

B
LAMDA AR = 0.625 B ETA 1984 = 0.44 B ETA 1983 = 2.50

/L
^>

_Diff.3.6%

10000.

EC31984\

EC 3 1989

L = 8.00 m
.

(* e *

X
5000.

\ .
\

<'
c^
CD

00

/
O.C

750.

1500.

2250.

'

Moment bitriangular
\^

3000.

distribution

3304.9

*
u"
M [KNm
NM13

DATE

HD 3 1 0 x 3 1 0 x 5 0 0

PROFILNAME
HOEHE

[cm]

2.70

BREITE

[cm]

34.00

STEGDICKE

[cm]

4.50

FLANSCHDICKE [cm]

7.50

[cm]

1.50

RADIUS

NM 13

29HAR1990 09:05:25 *

MOMENTENVERTEILUNGSFAKTOR
HOHENTENVERTEILUNGSFAKTOR
MOMENTENVERTEILUNGSFAKTOR
MOMENTENVERTEILUNGSFAKTOR

X-ACHSE
Y-ACHSE
X-ACHSE
Y-ACHSE

RELATIVE SCHLANKHEIT
RELATIVE SCHLANKHEIT

X-ACHSE
Y-ACHSE

EC3 1984 >

EC3 1984 >
EC3 1989 >
EC3 1989 >
>
>

0.4400
0.4400
2.5000
2.5000

0.6248
1.1551

GEUAEHLTE KNICKKURVE X-ACHSE

GEUAEHLTE KNICKKURVE Y-ACHSE
VORGESCHLAGENE KNICKKURVE NACH EC3 X-ACHSE
VORGESCHLAGENE KNICKKURVE NACH EC3 Y-ACHSE
ABMINDERUNGSFAKTOR F UER DIE STARKE ACHSE
>
ABMINDERUNGSFAFTOR F UER DIE SCHWACHE ACHSE >

:b
: c
:b
:c
0.8244
0.4558

EINGEGEBENE STRECKGRENZE [KN/cm'2] : 35.50

VERWENDETE STRECKGRENZE [KN/ctn'2] : 33.50
PLASTISCHE NORMALKRAF T Npl
[KN] > 21325.5
PLASTISCHES MOMENT X-ACHSE
[KN m] > 3304.88
PLASTISCHES MOMENT Y-ACHSE
[KN m] > 1500.88

|E [cm] |
000 HD
001 HD
002 HD
003 HD
004 HD
005 HD
006 HD
007 HD
008 HD
009 HD
010 HD
011 HD
012 HD
013 HD
014 HD
015 HD
M pur |HD

PRO
F IL
STRECKG. L [cm]| NX [KN] NY [KN] |MX[KNm]
310x310x500
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 17581.3
9719.1 |
0.0
310x310x500
9387.1 |
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 16831.5
168.3
310x310x500
9084.0 | 322.9
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 16145.3
310x310x500
8789.0 | 465.4
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 15514.4
310x310x500
8491.8 | 597.3
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 14931.9
310x310x500
8205.3 | 719.6
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 14392.0
310x310x500
7930.6 | 833.4
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 13890.1
310x310x500
7668.1 | 939.6
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 13422.2
310x310x500
12984.6
7417.8 | 1038.8
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 |
310x310x500
7179.5 | 1131.7
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 12574.6
310x310x500
6952.7 | 1218.9
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 | 12189.4
310x310x500
6737.1 | 1301.0
33.50 800.0] 11826.8
310x310x500
11485.0
6532.1 | 1378.2
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 |
310x310x500
11162.0
6337.2 | 1451.1
33.50 8 0 0 . 0 |
310x310x500
6151.8 | 1519.9
33.50 800.0| 10856.4
310x310x500
5975.4 | 1585.0
33.50 800.0| 10566.7
310x310x500
0
.
0.
33.50 800.0|

MY [KNm] | NX89 [KN] NY89 [KN] MX89 [KNm] | MY89

| 3304.9

0.0|

15983.0

8835.6

0.0]

93.91

15802.2

8727.2

158.0]

181.7|

15610.0

8609.5

312.2]

263.7|

15405.9

8482.0

462.2|

339.7|

15189.7

8344.3

607.6|

410.3|

14961.1

8195.9

748.1|

475.8|

14720.2

8036.9

883.2|

536.8|

14467.4

7867.5

1012.7|

593.4|

14203.2

7688.3

1136.3|

646.2|

13928.4

7500.3

1253.6|

695.3|

13644.2

7305.1

1364.4|

741.1|

13352.0

7104.2

1468.7|

783.9|

13053.4

6899.6

1566.41

823.8|

12750.2

6693.3

1657.5|

861.3|

12444.2

6487.4

1742.21

896.3|

12137.3

6283.5

1820.6|

1500.9|

0.

0.

3304.9|

[KNm]
0.0 |
87.3 |
172.2 |
254.5 |
333.8 |
409.8 |
482.2 |
550.7 |
615.1 |
675.0 |
730.5 |
781.5 |
827.9 |
870.1 |
908.2 |
942.5 |
1500.9 |

**

0.00]

0.22

0.19|

0.22

0.20|

0.23

0.211

0.25

0.23|

0.26

0.241

0.27

0.26|

0.28

0.27|

0.29

0.29|

0.31

0.311

0.32

0.32|

0.34

0.341

0.35

0.36|

0.37

0.38|

0.38

0.40|

0.40

0.42]

0.41

0.441

Figure 29
116

KY

0.00

CHAPTER

BUCKLING TESTS

4:

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (1)

GEOMETRY OF THE SECTIONS
NUMBERS

PROFILE

NAME
MEASURED

NOMINAL

MEASURED

NOMINAL

MEASURED

NOMINAL

[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

[mm]

NOMINAL

NM1

HD 400X400X678

484.00

480.65

427.00

424.43

50.50

48.86

82.00

80.07

15.00

NM2

HD 400X400X678

484.00

481.65

427.00

426.65

50.50

50.33

82.00

81.12

15.00

NM3

HD 400X400X422

425.00

425.95

409.00

408.31

33.00

33.16

52.50

51.91

15.00

NM4

HD 310X310X454

415.00

414.97

336.00

336.62

40.50

40.85

69.00

69.13

15.00

NM5

W14X16X730

569.00

564.27

454.00

452.60

78.00

76.87

125.00

124.31

15.00

NM6

W14X16X550

514.00

509.81

437.00

432.96

60.50

57.81

97.00

97.16

15.00

NM7

HD 400X400X678

484.00

481.19

427.00

426.54

50.50

50.50

82.00

81.00

15.00

NM8

HD 400X400X678

484.00

483.87

427.00

424.46

50.50

52.04

82.00

82.18

15.00

NM9

HD 310X310X500

427.00

423.71

340.00

338.76

45.00

44.91

75.00

74.33

15.00

NM10

W14X16X550

514.00

515.47

437.00

436.05

60.50

58.55

97.00

97.63

15.00

NM11

HD 400X400X678

484.00

481.69

427.00

424.58

50.50

52.00

82.00

81.79

15.00

NM12

HD 400X400X678

484.00

480.27

427.00

428.75

50.50

49.37

82.00

81.20

15.00

NM13

HD 310X310X500

427.00

423.59

340.00

338.57

45.00

45.13

75.00

74.27

15.00

*
(Q
C
CD
GO
O

MEASURED

NOMINAL

H-

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (1)

GEOMETRICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF NM CROSS-SECTIONS
NUMBERS

CO
C
-

CD
CO

PROFILE

BUCKLING

MEASURE:D VALUES

NAME

AXIS

OF THE PROFILE
h

mm

mm

mm

CALCULATED VALUES
OF THE PROFILE

' w
mm

Ix

cm2

cm

NM1

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

480.65

424.43

48.86

80.07

838.21

18.6059

NM2

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

481.65

426.65

50.33

81.12

854.89

18.5935

NM3

HD 400X400X422

WEAK

425.95

408.31

33.16

51.91

532.66

NM4

HD 310X310X454

WEAK

414.97

336.62

40.85

69.13

NM5

W14X16X730

WEAK

564.27

452.60

76.87

NM6

W14X16X550

WEAK

509.81

432.96

NM7

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

481.19

NM8

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

NM9

HD 310X310X500

WEAK

NM10

W 14X16X550

NM11

ly
c m

11.0506

Wx

Wy

cm3

cm3

Wplx

Wply

cm3

cm3

12074.26

4823.35

14898.47

7408.59

11.1013

12272.34

4938.75

15176.18

7590.93

17.2738

10.5245

7462.72

2889.94

8818.61

4419.54

580.38

16.0003

8.7185

7161.10

2621.11

8855.91

4036.69

124.31

1369.83

20.5703

11.8796

20544.12

8542.46

26697.91

13206.61

57.81

97.16

1025.64

19.2574

11.3426

14921.65

6095.42

18827.03

9376.35

426.54

50.50

81.00

854.12

18.5718

11.0940

12244.46

4929.09

15142.90

7577.45

483.87

424.46

52.04

82.18

865.85

18.6129

11.0193

12398.54

4953.83

15370.16

7625.03

423.71

338.76

44.91

74.33

629.06

16.1531

8.7699

7747.55

2856.36

9672.70

4408.67

STRONG

515.47

436.05

58.55

97.63

1040.85

19.4779

11.4083

15321.40

6213.30

19319.23

9562.39

HD 400X400X678

STRONG

481.69

424.58

52.00

81.79

B61.88

18.5309

11.0230

12288.47

4933.06

15232.68

7592.78

NM12

HD 400X400X678

STRONG

480.27

428.75

49.37

81.20

855.15

18.5648

11.1858

12273.50

4991.16

15170.58

7662.47

NM13

HD 310X310X500

STRONG

423.59

338.57

45.13

74.27

628.97

16.1428

8.7599

7738.81

2851.07

9663.32

4401.83

NM1:A:\0EOMET.DRW

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2) :tolerances

GEOMETRY OF THE SECTIONS
NUMBERS

PROFILE

NAME

l
TOLEFANCE

NOMIN.

NOMIN.

MEAS.

MEAS. ALLOW. MEAS.

|mm|

t f

tW

b
TOLERANCE
ALLOW.

MEAS.

NOMIN.

MEAS.

TOLERANCE
ALLOW.

MEAS.

|mm]

|mm|

|mm|

|mm|

|mm|

|mm|

|mm|

|mm|

|mm]

|mm|

NOMIN.

|mm|

MEAS.

|mm|

TOLERANCE
ALLOW.

MEAS.

|mm|

|mm]

NOMINAL

NM1

HD 400X400X678

484.0

|mm|
480.6

3.4

427.0

424.4

2.6

50.5

48.9

(1.6)

82.0

80.1

1.9

15.0

NM2

HD 400X400X678

484.0

481.6

2.4

427.0

426.6

0.4

50.5

50.3

+ 1

0.2

82.0

81.1

0.9

15.0

NM3

HD 400X400X422

425.0

425.9

+ 0.9

409.0

408.3

0.7

33.0

33.2

+ 1

+ 0.2

52.5

51.9

0.6

15.0

NM4

HD 310X310X454

415.0

415.0

0.00

336.0

336.6

+ 0.6

40.5

40.8

+ 0.3

69.0

69.1

+ 0.1

15.0

NM5

W14X16X730

569.0

564.3

4.7

454.0

452.6

1.4

78.0

76.9

+ 1

125.0

124.3

0.7

15.0

NM6

W14X16X550

514.0

509.8

(.)

437.0

433.0

4.0

60.5

57.8

+ 1

(2.7)

97.0

97.2

+ 0.2

15.0

NM7

HD 400X400X678

484.0

481.2

2.8

427.0

426.5

0.5

50.5

50.5

0.00

82.0

81.0

1.0

15.0

NM8

HD 400X400X678

484.0

483.9

0.1

427.0

424.5

2.5

50.5

52.0

82.0

82.2

+ 2

+ 0.2

15.0

NM9

HD 310X310X500

427.0

423.7

C" 2

340.0

338.8

1.2

45.0

44.9

+ 1

0.1

75.0

74.3

0.7

15.0

NMIO

W14X16X550

514.0

515.5

1.5 ' 4 3 7 . 0

436.0

1.0

60.5

58.5

C 2.)

97.0

97.6

+ 0.6

15.0

NM1 1

HD 400X400X678

484.0

481.7

2.3

427.0

424.6

0.6

50.5

52.0

+ 1

(+

82.0

81.8

0.2

15.0

NM12

HD 400X400X678

484.0

480.3

3.7

427.0

428.7

1.7

50.5

49.4

+ 1

(.,.}

82.0

81.2

0.8

15.0

NM13

HD 310X310X500

427.0

423.6

(T3.)

340.0

338.6

1.4

45.0

45.1

+ 1

75.0

74.3

0.7

15.0

(+

1.5)

1.5)

+ 0.1

NM1:A.\NMIOH

CD
CO

Remark: The measured values are the average

of all the measurements taken along
each specimen.

GEOMETRICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (2) :tolerances

GEOMETRY OF THE SE CTIONS
NUMBERS

PROFILE
NAME

FLANGE
PARALLELISM

WEB
ECCENTRICITY

WEB
DEFORMATION

dl,TOLERANCE

d2,T0LERANCE

d3,T0LERANCE

ALLOW.

1.5%b
Imml

N3

CQ
C

MEAS.

ALLOW.

MEAS.

ALLOW.

MEAS.

(mm|

Imm]

Imml

|mm|

(mm)

NM1

HD 400X400X678

6.4

-3.15

3.5

1.78

2.0

-0.30

NM2

HD 400X400X678

6.4

-1,45

3.5

2.78

2.0

-0.35

NM3

HD 400X400X422

6.1

-2.5

3.5

-3.30

2.0

(^2.90 )

NM4

HD 310X310X454

5.0

1.75

3.5

-0.78

2.0

0.45

NM5

W14X16X730

6.8

0.6

3.5

;.15 )

2.0

0.33

NM6

W14X16X550

6.5

3.5

-2.53 .

2.0

0.35

NM7

HD 400X400X678

6.4

-1.8

3.5

-0.73

2.0

-0.3

NM8

HD 400X400X678

6.4

0.55

3.5

1.38

2.0

-0.58

NM9

HD 310X310X500

5.1

0.35

3.5

-2.42

2.0

-0.28

NM10

W14X16X550

6.5

1.5

3.5

-4.8

2.0

0.25

NM11

HD 400X400X678

6.4

-2.45

3.5

1.43

2.0

-0.23

NM12

HD 400X400X678

6.4

-3.25

3.5

(4.68)

2.0

-0.43

NM13

HD 310X310X500

5.1

-0.75

3.5

(3.78^

2.0

-0.28

dl

2.4

d2 = ( b l - b 2 )

=(k1 +k2)/2

i
tf

Remark: The measured tolerances

are the maximal values
over the length of
each specimen

/2

CD

CO
CO
NMI A\NMIOL?

b1

b2

Initial geometrical imperfections (3)

Measures are taken all the 150 mm along each column
150
mm<>-<>-<

O)

Reference line f

r, t t t t t t t t t t

1 F

load axis

(1) layout for uniform moment distribution

(2) layout for bitriangular moment distribution

measured points for :

buckling according to
the weak axis :
a,b
buckling according to
the strong axis :
c;a,b

>

Figure 34

- 123

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM1 COLUMN
Buckling according to the weak axis
uniform moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
5

measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b finelg calculation E C3: L/1000

N-

^3

-N

7,8
cm

8,3
cm

1
- 0<fc
-1
-2
-3
-4

(Q
C
-t

CD

en

Buckling length : 4,00 m

H M V * MUITIAIINMIDOEF

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM2 COLUMN
Buckling according to the weak axis
uniform moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
5

l
i
l
i
measured measured approximation for permitted deviation
points a
points b
finelg calculation
EC3: L/1000

4
.3

...""

L...

14,7
cm

...o/ y "

.''

1
* " "

V\\,

14,9

*^
""'..
*rkA

J 0

cm

' '.
/'

's.

ja'
's

Ol

'
S

.0

'" I.

.1

y'
'

..er'

'.
*

...

0
co
c
-^
CD

en

j ._.n

I:

5
Length [m]

b B uckling length : 4,00 m

MMI A>MIT1AltNMIHDFr

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM3 COLUMN
Buckling according to the weak axis
uniform moment distribution

Deformation [mm]

measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b finelg calculation E C3: L/1000

15,0
cm

^
;

\ZJi^o-

14,9

"Sij^?

cm
l

,-""

*-+-+~\

^
,

-1

)
O)

"O...

I
0

TF^C

'r

'

>

/' S
s

'

'v.

-3

"

tzf*'

'

-2

"

y--t-

.a""'

'13.

-4

^
-Q

B"" E ) ' "

-5
-6
-1
o

0
C

co

II

Length [m]

Buckling length : 4 , 8 8 m

H** 1-AMNtlF*l\NMinO(f

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM4 COLUMN
Buckling according to the weak axis
uniform moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
0

14,7

3
2

cm

15,3

0<
)

measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b finelg calculation
EC3: L/1000

cm

*.,
' ; >

'

" \

y'

...

y"

.Jl.J^..JI.{iJI...J 'j J..II. <..Si... o

'.

'.

VI

'.

'

S,"
y
,"'
y"

"""'SX\.

if

..y
'y'

'"^.
">..

& . . ^

1 i""

6
7
o

0
(Q

-
CD

GO
OD

i:

5
Length [m]

b B uckling length : 5,34 m

NM1.A.tMUmtNM4BOCF

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM5 COLUMN
Buckling according t o the weak axis
uniform m o m e n t distribution

Deformation [mm]
4

measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b finelg calculation
EC3: L/1000

.3

EJ

ro
CD

0
CO

CD

co

x:

5
Length [m]

b B uckling length : 8,18 m

* n n Mt. BO t

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM6 COLUMN
Buckling according t o the weak axis
uniform m o m e n t distribution

Deformation [mm]
4

measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b finelg calculation

N-

15,3

cm

ro
co

CO

CD

Buckling length : 8,71 m

MM I A tmiTiAlWMSBDtF

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM7 COLUMN
Buckling according to the weak axis
bitriangular moment distribution

Deformation [mm]

measured
points a

4
.3

measured approximation for permitted deviation

points b finelg calculation
EC3: L/1000
c

12,4
cm

cm
15,0

4
c
t

CD

Length [m]

B uckling length : 7,46 m

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM8 COLUMN
Buckling according t o the weak axis
bitriangular m o m e n t distribution

Deformation [mm]
4

measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b finelg calculation E C3: L/1000

.3

cm
14,8

0
(Q
C

*
CD

5
Length [m]

>

Buckling length : 8,48 m

NM IzltllMlTlAKNMfltttCf

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM9 COLUMN
Buckling according to the weak axis
bitriangular moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
5

I
I
I
measured measured approximation for permitted deviation
points a points b finelg calculation
EC3: L/1000

4
.3

4,3
cm

1
0

"t".

" ^ ^ sJ^'V

"'t

-2

7*'

N^X

V"o...

-1

<

.+*''',''v,' * "

'o

-4

V ^

~~^'"

-3

nr'"'
S
...
'
/
r^Te?"'

V^s
''

cm
3,9

y'
s'

'> *

s'

\
y'

-5
L.

-6

. J '

ja'"

"!3 . . ^

lr

.' ''
)

(Q

c^
CD

00

**"'

II

Length [m]

b B uckling length : 8,00 m

MINIIIAUNMVnOF

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
COLUMN
Buckling according to the strong axis
uniform moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
5

co

Buckling length : 8.00 m

NMiiAiMiriAuNuioflotr

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIO NS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM11 CO LUMN
Buckling according to the strong axis
uniform moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
4

.3

15,0
cm

+ -.\

j '

15,0

--^.^.^'
i---

'

l a g .

&&'

----

measured approximation for permitted deviation

points c
finelg calculation
EC3: L/1000

i-----'

C 1 Q

-1

measured
points b

~7f.

1
0

+- + -

measured
points a

f+*1

VX /

'&---- \

" " -

-*--> -wm- > i--A ri-A. A

" + '

-2

t*

cm

y'

*v^ ^ - + - ^

'"n.

y'
y'

-3
y'

-4

y'

'ra.

-5

's.

-6

y'
tl

y'
y''

-7

'S.
.

CD

s'
.FI''

~~'iq.

-8

ca
c

s'

5
Length [m]

Buckling length : 8.57 m

1 AMNITI*HNM11BOf

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM12 COLUMN
Buckling according t o the strong axis
bitriangular m o m e n t distribution

Deformation [mm]
5

measured measured measured approximation for permitted deviation

points a
points b
points c finelg calculation E C3:_L/1000

4
~3

14,9

cm

1
0
-1

en

-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
to

c
CD

II
C

5
Length [m]

Buckling length : 8,00 m

1-A.tmiTlAl\NM17BOtf

GEOMETRICAL IMPE RFE CTIONS (3)

Initial deformation.
NM13 COLUMN
Buckling according to the strong axis
bitriangular moment distribution

Deformation [mm]
5
measured
points a

N-

measured
points b
1

measured approximation for

points c
finelq calculation

permitted deviation
EC3: L/1000

15,1

cm

-;

co
(35

cm
14,9

co
c
CD

5
Length [m]

b
c

Buckling length : 8,00 m

I'A\MITIAlvNM1->H}{r

INITIAL GEOMETRICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (4)

MEASURES ARE TAKEN AT BOTH EXTREMITY PLATES OF EACH COLUMN
COLUMN

Bp

L
P
mm

NM 1

1100

NM 2
NM 3
NM 4

1098
1100
1102

NM 5
NM 6
NM 7

1101
1102

NM 10
NM 11
NM 12

1101
1101

NM 13

1103

1100

mm

P
mm

B
P
mm

a
P
mm

b
P
mm

880
880

1102
1101

881
880

419
485

880
880

1099
1101
1099

880
880
880

1101

880

1099
1100
1100

UP

DOWN

UP

Nr

NM 8
NM 9

POSITION OF THE PROFILE S ON THE E XTRE MITY PLATE S

EXTREMITY PLATE S : DIME NSIONS

879
880

1101

881
880

879
879
879

1099
1099
1100

880
880
880

878
880
880

1100
1101
1103

882
878
881

DOWN
a
p
mm

b
P
mm

C
P
mm

p
mm

f
P
mm

202.5
198.5

417
485

602
672

419
485

195.4
195.6

199
197.7

222.5
235
159.4

229
234.2
161

497
529
477

682
676
664

603
672
681
677.5
663

532
473

491

185.5

158
186

198.2

672
648

488

186.5

488.5
464

673

373

184.9
198.9

648

462

199.4

184.5
199.2

381
487
409

187.5
345
227.8

195.7
228
115.6

200.1
226.8
113.3

465.5
423
229.2

648
568
412

650
568.5
410

199.1
227.8
112.5

198.6
228.5
108.8

411
412
416.5

227.3
217.5
268.5

156.9
156.5
189.8

161.8
164.5
191.6

230
223.9
269

414
412.5
418

414
413
418

465
428
227.5
230.6

158.5
160.6
188.1

160.3
162.2
188.1

mm

d
P
mm

673

610
673

422
485

198
196

492
535
474

680
683
664

682
682
666

499
537
476

487

674

675

187.1
184.8
343
227.9
225.1
224.8
266.5

374
379
487
409
412
415
416

609

e
p
mm

'P
mm

P
mm

495

222.7
271.8

227
231.3

226.8
231.5
157.7

NM 1: A:\NMIMPERF

NM1 -NM 9
Buckling according to the weak axis

bp-

dp

(Q
C
CD
00

,l I

f.:

NM 1 0 - N M 13
Buckling according to the strong axis

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (4)

ECCENTRICITIES OF THE COLUMNS
NUMBERS

PROFILE

BUCKLING

NAME

AXIS

LOAD

OF THE PROFILE

ECCENTRICITIES
down
up

tf

mm

mm

mm

mm

[cm]

[cm]

ECCENTRICITIES

[cm]

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

480.6

424.4

48.9

80.1

7.76

8.33

NM2

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

481.6

426.6

50.3

81.1

14.72

14.93

15

NM3

HD 400X400X422

WEAK

425.9

408.3

33.2

51.9

14.96

14.86

15

NM4

HD 310X310X454

WEAK

415.0

336.6

40.8

69.1

14.75

15.26

15

NM5

W14X16X730

WEAK

564.3

452.6

76.9

124.3

15.21

15.19

15

NM6

W14X16X550

WEAK

509.8

433.0

57.8

97.2

15.26

15.35

15

NM7

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

481.2

426.5

50.5

81.0

12.43

15.01

15

NM8

HD 400X400X678

WEAK

483.9

424.5

52.0

82.2

12.68

14.78

15

NM9

HD 310X310X500

WEAK

423.7

338.8

44.9

74.3

4.33

3.86

NM10

W14X16X550

STRONG

515.5

436.0

58.5

97.6

18.16

17.79

18

NM11

HD 400X400X678

STRONG

481.7

424.6

52.0

81.8

14.98

15.03

15

NM12

HD 400X400X678

STRONG

480.3

428.7

49.4

81.2

14.90

14.99

15

NM13

HD 310X310X500

STRONG

423.6

338.6

45.1

74.3

15.13

14.90

15

*NM1-NM9

*NM10-NM13

NM1:A:\NM,N.3.DRW

Buckling according to the weak axis

Buckling according to the strong axis

Formula for evaluation of the eccentricities

Formula for evaluation of the eccentricities :

(Q
C

Lp- -fp- h

b + t w + a P + bp+ Cp+ d p - 2 * L,
e =

CD

Nominal

NM1

Remarks

MEASURED

MEASURED VALUES

Where a p , b p I c p I d p , e p , f p are defined in figure 31

e =

GEOMETRICAL IMPERFECTIONS (5)

LENGTH OF THE COLUMNS
NUMBERS

PROFILE NAME

DISTANCE BETWEEN
THE PLATES
[m]

MEASURED LENGTH
BETWEEN HINGED
SUPPORT
[m]

NM1

HD 400X400X678

3.62

4.00

NM2

HD 400X400X678

3.62

4.00

NM3

HD 400X400X422

4.5

4.88

NM4

HD 310X310X454

4.96

5.34

NM5

W14X16X730

7.8

8.18

NM6

W14X16X550

8.33

8.71

NM7

HD 400X400X678

7.08

7.46

NM8

HD 400X400X678

8.10

8.48

NM9

HD 310X310X500

7.62

8.00

W14X16X550

7.62

8.00

NM11

HD 400X400X678

8.19

8.57

NM12

HD 400X400X678

7.62

8.00

NM13

HD 310X310X500

7.62

8.00

_ NM10

* Thickness of the extremity plates

= 2 * ( 2 * 70 ) = 280 mm

* Distance from the extremity plates

to the center of the hinged support

= 2*50

= 100 mm
= 380 mm

' BUCKLING

70
70
50

V/////////////////////////////////////

NM1:A:\NMLENGTH

Figure 50
139 -

Layout for the tests

with uniform moment distribution

k
4g
/

I
3

rl
I

* * 1

scaie .

,,e.
/

Figure 51

140

Layout for the tests

/ith bitriangular moment distribution

IVUN-e

M = N-e

scale 1: 20
Figure 52

141

buckling length

IV)

Bearing friction (1)

Friction test :

teflon sheet on both contact surfaces

For different values of the axial load :

- is applied and kept constant
- introduces a resistant moment due to friction Ms
- Ms is greater than the applied moment (F d)
- We increase F
- When F = F s,we obtain the slide moment necessary
to turn the roller.

The equilibrium is : Ms = F sd
Figure 54

- 143

Bearing friction (2)

Friction moment in function of axial load

Friction moment Ms [kNm]

10
Axial load [MN]
friction test for
r = 200 mm
....A--

friction test for

r = 100 mm
B

for NM 10; max. ecc. = 18 cm

applied Moment>Ms

for NM 9 ; min. ecc. = 5 cm

applied Moment> Ms

Figure 55

144

Bearing friction (3)

//friction coefficient

Ms

* p

Pi

Mapplied

Ms = =

Mapplied = Fd ; Mapplied < Ms while F < Fs

If Mapplied = Ms,equilibrium is : Ms = Fsd =
=>

[kN]
100
500
1000
2500
5000
7500
10000
12500
15000
17000
19000

Fs
[kN]
= 100 m m = 200 m m
2,8
5,5
4,3
8,5
5,7
12,3
7,7
21
10
27
14,3
30
18,7
31,4
23
32,1
27,2
33
31
36,4
38
/

= 100 m m = 200 m m
0,275
0,280
0,085
0,086
0,062
0,057
0,042
0,031
0,027
0,020
0,020
0,019
0,016
0,019
0,013
0,018
0,011
0,018
0,010
0,018
0,010
/

Figure 56
145

Buckling tests
Set up of strain gages for buckling according
to the weak axis
Uniform moment distribution :
L/2

2x10 = 20 strain gages

per column

IV2

JL L

\\

100 mm

.100 mm

Hprofile
+ 200 mm

100 mm

100 mm

>L
Hprofile
+ 200 mm

y-\

100 mm

>>

Bi-triangular moment distribution :

2 x 2 x 1 0 = 40 strain gages
per column
Figure 57

146

Buckling tests
Set up of strain gages for buckling according
to the strong axis
Uniform moment distribution
2 15 = 30 strain gages
per column

Bi-triangular moment distribution :

2 x 2 x 1 5 = 60 strain gages
per column
Figure 58

147

Buckling tests
Measurements of lateral displacements :
for each column,6 transducers

W4W6

il

11

"i"
"i
"i"
"i"
"i"
ll
<i

L/4

"M
Mi

"
"
Mi
'ii
'iL.
"i"
Mi
'il
I'M

'M
"i"

Mi
lil
I'M

L74

"M
Ml

'M
"

'iL
Ml
'il
'il
lil
Ml
Ml
lil
ijl
Ml
Ml
lil
"M
Ml
"i
Ml
lii
Mi
Mi
lil
M'

L/4

<W3

Ml
Ml
Ml
M'
Mi
Ml
Mi
Ml
M'
Mi
_i_

L/4

II

W2

I'

Bckling according to the weak axis

Main displacements
Parasitical displacements

148

Figure 59

CHAPTER

5:

RESIDUAL STRESSES

length of the pieces = 200 mm

L = basis of measurements for the transducer
= 100 mm

m 3}
o m
m

S
>
O
H

m
o

7J
O
2

(I)

ro

m
C/)
(Q
C
CD

following on
Figure 61

RESIDUAL STRESSES
. CUTTING OUT OF PIECES
. POINTS OF MEASUREMENTS
Vi
t

11
t

a . JS

H*S AS

Vi

i fl

2 3J-

- a

SX

>

<(<- 5J

litt

lit. -J5J

V M 5> Ili

2M

5-1
1

I'M

3 3

W14x16x730

av

H* Sif

- -iW

ft- !

lil

is*

81
i

?(

O.

i. J

stif- (&

S Sfl-

jtf *

*1

5J

,
3J.

.m

^ > * ) J4I.

B l i 5 f * f * .Mf

.&

y H

if 3}

y J*

J-ifl.

^
5

S
io

o
JO

a i^

*: 55

3 W

-SS H i

1 5

i 35

It
te

jo

1>

3oV-.

.ioT

3c-.

3<

>

^o

| * 5 ****>
ico

Mt

>

AA-.

(D

S 9J

r = 15 mm

-*

WW

in

a = 78 mm

Ato

SO

-*f

t JO IS *> JM < b
156j n u a

* J.

4* *

- * &

-fl

3>*

3U
o

3SO

00

3II

3H

xf^

; -r

! iS

3-H6

3tt-

.ffiaS

J35

i A i i \ 1

^o

ao

SrMJ 1 * B B

* *

* VC i n - Uf

iv

S s s e

1 ut

"

in
CM

-m

-Of J $-* -IS* *fl<) O-

J U . JM. Ja (i. * o J5X /iSfie.

t
-

-<*.!

J
-*S1

'

6 28 mm

*> V .

Y
-44

ff!

MS 4

JJS.

a i M.

a^O1) vM V

ida*

J KB U ! -

s- -m. > . i id a*, . U> U. Sii lil

J

iS-i

3 x 39,3 mm

6 x 28 mm

b = 454 mm
Figure 61

152

RESIDUAL STRESSES : measurements of the strains

calculations of the stresses

^(LgLj^/lOO

*
B

=(LrLV

Cutting out of the profiles into pieces

12,C = 12,F = +()/6

A
A

(
I
fc'"

6
1

<

T/3

<

T/3

>
0

<

T/3

Cutting out of the pieces into slides

For the CF slide, for example :

= 205000

(L4 C +L 4 F L3 C L 3 F )
2*100

12,Cf

en

N/mm 2

Figure 62

153

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM1 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

,y^

^\

J
vO

m
co

>
\

LH
t

>

= tension
( 0 = compression
Figure 63

154

MECHANICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM2 = NM7 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

= tension
Q = compression
- 155 -

Figure 64

MECHANICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM3 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

_
0

= tension

= compression

156

Figure 65

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM4 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

= tension
Q = compression
Figure 66
- 157

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM5 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

= tension

Q = compression

158

Figure 67

MECHANICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM8 = NM11 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

= tension
Q = compression
Figure 68
159

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM9 = NM13 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

86

^n.

= tension

Q = compression

Figure 69
160

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM10 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

= tension
Q = compression
161

Figure 70

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES MEASUREMENTS
NM12 COLUMN
MEAN VALUES OVER THE THICKNESS [N/mm2]

108

>

28

76

= tension

Q = compression

162

Figure 71

CHAPTER

6:

NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF THE BUCKLING TESTS

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (1)

CHARACTERISTICS FROM TENSILE TESTS
NUMBERS

PROFILE
NAME

MEASIJRED
tf

tw

SAMPLES

YIELD
POINTS

02

YIELD POINT

FOR SIMULATIONS STRESS

(A1+A2)/2

(1)

O)
[mm]

[mm]

[N/mm2]

NM1

HD 400X400X678

48.86

80.07

A1
A2
A3

366.0
360.0
365.5

NM2

HD 400X400X678

50.33

81.12

A1
A2
A3

317.5
316.2

TENSILE

[N/mm ! ]

MAXIMAL
STRAIN

\
[N/mm2]

ult
[%]

363.0

560
560
560

26.2
25.9
27.7

317.0

524
523
521

32.6
30.6
32.1

371.5
364.5
350.8

368.1

532
529
511

30.0
30.1
31.7

NM3

HD 400X400X422

33.16

51.91

A1
A2
A3

NM4

HD 310X310X454

40.85

69.13

A1
A2
A3

354.9
351.7
351.7

353.3

547
549
548

28.6
28.7
30.7

NM5

W14X16X730

76.87

124.31

A1
A2
A3

345.7
352.3
330.0

349.0

543
550
530

26.7
28.4
27.7

NM6

W14X16X550

57.81

97.16

A1
A2
A3

I
I
1

374.0

543
543

29.4
29.4

81.00

A1
A2
A3

317.5
316.2

317.0

524
523
521

32.6
30.6
32.1

373.9
375.5
370.2

374.7

551
558
561

29.9
28.7
28.6

NM7

HD 400X400X678

50.50

NM8

HD 400X400X678

52.04

82.18

A1
A2
A3

NM9

HD 310X310X500

44.91

74.33

A1
A2
A3

'374.0
360.0
355.4

367.0

552
545
537

27.7
28.3
29.1

NM10

W14X16X550

58.55

97.63

A1
A2
A3

364.6
360.0 .
346.2

362.3

549
546
533

26.5
25.6
27.9

NM11

HD 400X400X678

52.00

81.79

A1
A2
A3

373.9
375.5
370.2

374.7

551
558
561

29.9
28.7
28.6

NM12

HD 400X400X678

49.37

81.20

A1
A2
A3

302.3
308.5
309.3

305.4

504
513
508

31.6
31.0

NM13

HD 310X310X500

45.13

74.27

A1
A2
A3

374.0
360.0
355.4

367.0

552
545
537

27.7
28.3
29.1

NM1:A:\NMMECHAN

A2

ult
165

[%]

Figure 72

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (1)

YIELD SCATTER OVER THE PROFILE
NM12 COLUMN
ay mean = 301,4 N/mm2

ay mean = 301,4 N/mm2

ay mean = 305,3 N/mm2

Yield points = oy,0,2%

Figure 73
166

0.3 cry ( if h/b > 1.2)

0 . 5 ( j y ( i f h / b < 1.2)

Residual stresses
(where ay = 23,5 kN/cm2)
Qcompression
0 traction

Figure 74

NU1A\RESOUAL

167 -

MECHANICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM1 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor = 0,82 (for simulations)

= tension

Q = compression
Figure 75
168

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM2 = NM7 COLUMN
measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor = 1,0 (for simulations)

= tension
0

= compression
Figure 76
169

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM3 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor = 0,77 (for simulations)

= tension

= compression

Figure
170

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM4 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor 0 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor = 1,0 (for simulations)

= tension
0

= compression
Figure 78
171

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM5 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor 1,86 (for simulations)

= tension
Q = compression
Figure 79
172

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM8 = NM11 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor D = 0,83 (for simulations)

= tension

Q = compression

Figure 80
173

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM9 = NM13 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor - 0,80 (for simulations)

@ = tension
Q = compression
Figure 81
- 174

MECHANICAL IMPERFECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM10 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor 0 = 0,77 (for simulations)

= tension

= compression
Figure 82
175

MECHANICAL IMPERF ECTIONS (2)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
NM12 COLUMN
: measurements (mean values over the thickness)
ECCS residual stresses distributions :
: correction factor = 1,0 (ECCS recommendations)
: correction factor = 0,85 (for simulations)

= tension
0

= compression
Figure 83
176

 =.

11

10

()

()

10

5
4
3
2
1

=.

Discretization uniform moment

distribution

bitrianguiar moment
distribution

Figure 84

177

OtO

(>

STEEL TRILINEAR LAW

E = 210000 N/mm2
Et = 21.0 N/mm2
cry = 355 N/mm2
<rt = 510 N/mm2

Figure 85

- 178

Nominal values of yield strength

[N/mm2]1

355

FeE 355

335

295
275

FeE 275

255
225

EN 10025

EC3-

100

40

Material thickness [mm]

NM5:A:\NMNOMIN

Figure 86
179

(N-M) INTERACTION :
COMPARISON BETWEEN FINELG SIMULATIONS (HYPOTHESIS 1) AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS
NUMBERS

PROFILE
NAME

MEAS.
t

MEASURED BUCKLING
YIELD

AXIS

BUCKLING
LENGTH

MOMENT

MEASURED

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

LOAD

LOAD

LOAD

MEAS./FINELG

FINELG

MEASURES

(2)/(D

(2)
[kN]

[%]

DISTRIBUTION

ECCEN.
FLANGE

00

POINT

[mm]

[N/mm2]

[m]

down

up

[cm]

[cm]

(1)
[kN]

NM1

HD 400X400X678

80.1

372

WEAK

4.00

UNIFORM

7.757

8.332

16596

16888

+ 1.7

NM2

HD 400X400X678

81.1

331

WEAK

4.00

UNIFORM

14.725

14.925

11496

11005

-4.3

NM3

HD 400X400X422

51.9

389

WEAK

4.88

UNIFORM

14.962

14.862

7040

6998

-0.6

NM4

HD 310X310X454

69.1

345

WEAK

5.34

UNIFORM

14.750

15.262

5406

5598

+3.5

NM5

W14X16X730

124.3

349.5

WEAK

8.18

UNIFORM

15.210

15.190

14280

13398

-6.2

NM6

W14X16X550

97.2

374

WEAK

8.71

UNIFORM

15.257

15.345

9738

9818

+0.8

NM7

HD 400X400X678

81.0

331

WEAK

7.46

BITRIANGULAR

12.430

15.010

13426

13473

+0.3

NM8

HD 400X400X678

82.2

384

WEAK

8.48

BrTRIANGULAR

12.680

14.780

14725

15138

+2.8

NM9

HD 310X310X500

74.3

354.5

WEAK

8.00

BrTRIANGULAR

4.330

3.860

11925

11815

-0.9

NM10

W14X16X550

97.6

381

STRONG

8.00

UNIFORM

18.162

17.787

18373

17318

-5.7

NM11

HD 400X400X678

81.8

384

STRONG

8.57

UNIFORM

14.976

15.031

15989

15678

-1.9

NM12

HD 400X400X678

81.2

310.5

STRONG

8.00

BrTRIANGULAR

14.897

14.987

15755

16618

+5.5

NM13

HD 310X310X500

74.3

354.5

STRONG

8.00

BITRIANGULAR

15.126

14.901

12404

14130

+ 13.9

(Q
C

CD

00

Remark : (1) - the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of the geometrically and
and materially non linear columns .
For the hypothesis 1 : - measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section, initial
deformation, eccentricity) are taken into account
- the measured mechanical characteristics () are considered
- ECCS residual stresses have been introduced

(NM) INTERACTION :
COMPARISON BETWEEN FINELG SIMULATIONS (HYPOTHESIS 2) AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS
NUMBERS

PROFILE
NAME

MEAS. MEASURED BUCKLING

t
FLANGE

YIELD

AXIS

BUCKLING
LENGTH

MOMENT

>

oo
oo

LOAD

DISTRIBUTION

ECCEN.

POINT

0)

(Q
C

MEASURED

[mm]

[N/mm2]

[m]

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

LOAD

LOAD

MEAS./FINELG

FINELG

MEASURES

(2)/(1)

down

up

[cm]

[cm]

(1)
[kN]

(2)
[kN]

[%]

NM1

HD 400X400X678

80.1

363.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIFORM

7.757

8.332

16272

16888

+3.8

NM2

HD 400X400X678

81.1

317.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIFORM

14.725

14.925

11086

11005

0.7

NM3

HD 400X400X422

51.9

368.1

WEAK

4.88

UNIFORM

14.962

14.862

6728

6998

+4.0

NM4

HD 310X310X454

69.1

353.3

WEAK

5.34

UNIFORM

14.750

15.262

5496

5598

+1.9

NM5

W14X16X730

124.3

349.0

WEAK

8.18

UNIFORM

15.210

15.190

14265

13398

6.1

NM6

W14X16X550

97.2

374.0

WEAK

8.71

UNIFORM

15.257

15.345

9738

9818

+0.8

NM7

HD 400X400X678

81.0

317.0

WEAK

7.46

BTRIANGULAR

12.430

15.010

12964

13473

+3.9

NM8

HD 400X400X678

82.2

374.7

WEAK

8.48

BITRIANGULAR

12.680

14.780

14477

15138

+4.6

NM9

HD 310X310X500

74.3

367.0

WEAK

8.00

BTRIANGULAR

4.330

3.860

12238

11815

3.5

NM10

W14X16X550

97.6

362.3

STRONG

8.00

UNIFORM

18.162

17.787

17556

17318

1.4

NM11

HD 400X400X678

81.8

374.7

STRONG

8.57

UNIFORM

14.976

15.031

15504

15678

+ 1.1

NM12

HD 400X400X678

81.2

305.4

STRONG

8.00

BITRIANGULAR

14.897

14.987

15497

16618

+7.2

NM13

HD 310X310X500

74.3

367.0

STRONG

8.00

BITRIANGULAR

15.126

14.901

12824

14130

+ 10.2

Remark : (1) the numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of the geometrically and
and materially non linear columns.
For the hypothesis 2 : measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section, initial
deformation, eccentricity) are taken into account
more precise measured mechanical characteristics (cr) are considered (3)
ECCS residual stresses have been introduced

(N-M) INTE RACTION :

COMPARISON BE TWE E N FINE LG SIMULATIONS (HYPOTHE SIS 3) AND ME ASURE D COLLAPSE LOADS
NUMBERS

PROFILE
NAME

MEAS.
t
FLANGE

MEASURED
YIELD

BUCKLING
AXIS

BUCKLING
LENGTH

MOMENT

CQ

CO
CD

LOAD

DISTRIBUTION

POINT

ECCEN.

(3)

CO

MEASURED

|mml

[N/mm2]

Im]

down

up

[cm]

lem]

CORRECTION

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

FACTOR

LOAD

LOAD

MEAS./FINELG

FINELG

MEASURES

(2)/(1)

(4)

(1)

(2)

IkNI

IkNI

[%]

NM1

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

80.1

363.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIFORM

7.757

8.332

0.82

16380

16888

+3

NM2

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

81.1

317.0

WEAK

4.00

UNIFORM

14.725

14.925

1.00

11086

11005

-0.7

NM3

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 4 2 2

51.9

368.1

WEAK

4.88

UNIFORM

14.962

14.862

0.77

6793

6998

+3

NM4

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 4 5 4

69.1

353.3

WEAK

5.34

UNIFORM

14.750

15.262

1.00

5496

5598

+ 2

NM5

W14X16X730

124.3

349.0

WEAK

8.18

UNIFORM

15.210

15.190

1.86

13740

13398

-2.5

NM6

W14X16X550

97.2

374.0

WEAK

8.71

UNIFORM

15.257

15.345

1.00

9902

9818

-0.8

NM7

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

81.0

317.0

WEAK

7.46

BITRIANGULAR

12.430

15.010

1.00

13048

13473

+3

NM8

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

82.2

374.7

WEAK

8.48

BITRIANGULAR

12.680

14.780

0.83

14415

15138

+ 5

NM9

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

74.3

367.0

WEAK

8.00

BITRIANGULAR

4.330

3.860

0.80

11913

11815

-0.8

NM10

W 14X16X550

97.6

362.3

STRONG

8.00

UNIFORM

18.162

17.787

0.77

17556

17318

-1.4

NM11

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

81.8

374.7

STRONG

8.57

UNIFORM

14.976

15.031

0.83

15520

15678

+1

NM12

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

81.2

305.4

STRONG

8.00

BITRIANGULAR

14.897

14.987

0.85

15549

16618

+7

NM13

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

74.3

367.0

STRONG

8.00

BITRIANGULAR

15.126

14.901

0.80

12852

14130

+ 10

Remark : (1) - the numerical simulations with FINE LG have been carried out withassumptions of the geometrically
and materially non linear columns .
For the hypothesis 3 : - measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section, initial
deformation, eccentricity) are taken into account
- more precise measured mechanical characteristics ( )vare considered (3)
- measured residual stresses have been introduced proportionally to the
correction factor according to the E CCS distribution (4)

NM1:A:\NMTABL3

(NM) INTERACTION :
COMPARISON B ETWEEN FIN ELG SIMULATIONS AND MEASURED COLLAPSE LOADS
NUMBERS

PROFILE
NAME

MEAS.
YIELD

MEAS.
YIELD

BUCKL.
AXIS

MOM.
DISTR.

CORREC.
FACTOR

POINT

POINT

(6)

(7)

(5)

|N/mm2| |N/mm2|

00

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

COLLAPSE

LOAD

LOAD

LOAD

FINELG

FINELG

FINELG

COLLAPSE

DIFFERENCE

DIFFERENCE

DIFFERENCE

LOAD

MEAS./FINELG

MEAS./FINELG

MEAS./FINELG

(Hyp. 2)

(Hyp. 3)

(Hyp. 1)

(Hyp. 2)

(Hyp. 3)

MEASURES

(Hyp. 1)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(4)/(1)

(4)/(2)

(4)/(3)

IkNI

IkNI

IkNI

IkNI

l%l

1%I

1%I

NM1

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

372.0

363.0

WEAK

UNIF.

0.82

16596

16272

16380

16888

+ 1.7

+ 3.8

+3

NM2

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

331.0

317.0

WEAK

UNIF.

1.00

11496

11086

11086

11005

4.3

0.7

0.7

NM3

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 4 2 2

389.0

368.1

WEAK

UNIF.

0.77

7040

6728

6793

6998

0.6

+ 4.0

+3

NM4

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 4 5 4

345.0

353.3

WEAK

UNIF.

1.00

5406

5496

5496

5598

+ 3.5

+ 1.9

+ 2

NM5

W14X16X730

349.5

349.0

WEAK

UNIF.

1.86

14280

14265

13740

13398

(S>

9902

9818

+ 0.8

+ 0.8

0.8

C9

NM6

W14X16X550

374.0

374.0

WEAK

UNIF.

1.00

9738

9738

NM7

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

331.0

317.0

WEAK

BITR.

1.00

13426

12964

13048

13473

+ 0.3

+ 3.9

+3

NM8

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

384.0

374.7

WEAK

BITR.

0.83

14725

14477

14415

15138

+ 2.8

+ 4.6

+ 5

NM9

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

354.5

367.0

WEAK

BITR.

0.80

11925

12238

11913

11815

0.9

3.5

0.8

NM10

W14X16X550

381.0

362.3

STRUNG

UNIF.

0.77

18373

17556

17556

17318

5.7

1.4

1.4

NM11

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

384.0

374.7

STRONG

UNIF.

0.83

15989

15504

15520

15678

1.94

+ 1.1

+1

NM12

HD 4 0 0 X 4 0 0 X 6 7 8

310.5

305.4

STRONG

BITR.

0.85

15755

15497

15549

16618

+ 5.5

+ 7.2

+7

NM13

HD 3 1 0 X 3 1 0 X 5 0 0

354.5

367.0

STRONG

BITR.

0.80

12404

12824

12852

14130

(+13.9)

(+10.2)

<W>

Remarks : The numerical simulations with FINELG have been carried out with assumptions of the geometrically and materially
non linear columns.
For the 3 hypothesis, measured initial geometrical imperfections (geometry of the section, initial deformation, eccentricity)
(Q

are taken into account.

The initial measured mechanical characteristics (cr ) (6) are considered for the hypothesis 1. More precise measured

CD

mechanical characteristics ( ) (7) are used for hypothesis 2 and 3.

CO

ECCS residual stresses have been introduced for the hypothesis 1 and 2.

For the hypothesis 3, measured residual stresses have been used proportionally to the correction factor (5) according
to the ECCS distribution.

NM 1: A:\NMTABL6

PART

ANNEXES

II

ANNEX

A (Al TO A53):

DESIGN OF THE SPECIMENS

NM 1

3
2
1

4
2
1

cb 600x450x70
1100x880x70
HD 400x400x678

1= 3620
Dimensions

Designation

eo. Nbre.
n h

Division
Fi t L I i t K l r l t b

EUROPEAN RESEARCH N 7 2 1 0 S A 510

'e

KIMIN ! LRACTIKI DIAGRAMS FUR HICK

FLANGE COLUMNS SUB MITTED TO B UCKLING

4112kg
"594
1064
2454 kq

St "52 J
St 52
St 52

O b s e r v a l ions

Mat
Echelle1:1

16

Dessine.NOESENA. D a t e 28.12 89
Modificat ions

Service

Indice

Plpmpnt

NM 1

s d o c u m e n t r e s t e n o t r e p r o p r i t et ne peut t r e r e p r o d u i t ni c o m
u n i q u des t i e r s d'une m a n i r e q u e l c o n q u e sans n o t r e a u t o r i s a t i o n

s^

sID
Recherches

a
b
c
d
e

Nom

4/

Date

! 3.5

Numero du plan

90001
Service
RPS

A1
189

Wlll"l|i|

ny ' ui

! il

''''

.V25

li

l!

NM1

'HUM'

! I

t> 20

b. 20

'~'

LU20

t, 20

V25
,liliiiii,i;'i.

' "';

"lili K

Jkl

_80!

190

'

A2

NM1

LO
LO

W
5

880
7x110

_4

_+._

55

_.4_._

f = 70

CD

-i

LO

I
h

SCHNITT DD M 1=5
A3

191

NM1

SCHNITT AA

M M

82

//

CS)

I .

\
12_ 1 7 ~

i r
SCHNITT B B

M VI

SCHNITT CC M 1:1

A4

192

t^ 20

L 20

CD
LO

CO

V25

IMilill

lilllllllilj

ninnali
\

80

>
Ol

liliiiiYhihlN

I i!

NM 2

,150

TT
o
m

150

3848 kg

3
2
1

4
2
1

>i 500x300x70
1100x880x70
HD 400x400x678

Rep. Nbre.
Division
c
o

330
1= 3620 mm

Dsignation

Dimensions

O b j f . f EUROPEAN RESEARCH N 7210 SA 510

NMINTERACTION DIAGRAMS FOR THICK
FLANGE COLUMNS SUB MITTED TO B UCKLING

St 52
Mat.
1:1

1:5

Dessin :N0ESEN A. Date:2.190

Modifications

Observations

Echel e :

to

1064
2454 kq

Service

Elment

Indice

NM 2

Nom

Date

a
b

Ce document r e s t e n o t r e p r o p r i t et ne peut t r e reproduit ni com

muniqu des tiers d'une manire quelconque sans notre autorisation

1k.

sID
Recherches

d
e
Numro du plan

90002
Service
RPS

A6
194

NM 2

SCHNITT DD M 1 = 5
A7

195

NM 2

SCHNITT AA

82

SCHNITT

BB

50,5-

SCHNITT CC

M TI

A8
196 -

NM 2

A9
197

300
200

100

V37/450

co
00

o
o

oo
tri

LD

V 25

44 nmiim
o
r-~-

li

billin Hi'

Un umin.nliliK

_Z
"7,

V42
ll|lilliiHiitV

>

IO

NM 3
150

150

3151kg

3
2
1

2
2
1

Rep.

Nbre.

1 = 4500mm

Dsignation

Division

Dimensions

n . . , EUROPEAN RESEARCH

N 7 2 1 0 / S A 510

1064
1899 kg

St 52
St 52
Mat
Echel e

Observations
1:1

1=5

D e s s i n e NOESEN .

c
o

Date

3.1.09

Modificat ions

to

c
(
Ol

185

St 52

=t3 380x450x70
c*3 1100 580 73
HD 400x400x422

Elment

Service

NM 3

Indice

Date

Nom

Ce d o c u m e n t

r e s t e n o t r e p r o p r i t e t ne p e u t t r e r e n r o r i u i t

ni c o m

m u n i q u e a d e s t i e r s d u n e m a n i r e q u e l c o n q u e s a n s n o t r e a u t o r i s a t ion

m^

SiD
m.

Recherches

d
e
N u m e r o du p l a n

90003
Service

RP.S.

199

A11

NM 3

^^W^^

4...

^20/290

o
-4
O
LA

I
_.|

"

LO
LO

SCHNITT DD M 1 = 5
A12
200

NM 3

- 201

A13

NM 3

SCHNiT AA M V \

SCHNffT B B

MM

SCHNITT CC

202

AU

D
380

17

V25

& 17/425

LT

V26/30

V:
flihifrill 11 III n mun n i JjjjLf

l i l

olii

^Z

V25

LU

>
ai

NM 4
150

LO

150

3563 kg

3
2
1

2
2
1

50045070
qfa 1100x080x70
HD 310x310x454

Rep. N b r e .

I = 4960 mm

Desi g n a t i o n

Division

Dimensions

EUROPEAN RESEARCH ' 7 2 1 0 S A 510

m
ai
Q

1064
2252 kq

Mat

Observations

Echelle 11

15

D e s s i n e NOESEN A.

5
a
c

247

St 52
St 52
St 52

Date

..1.90

M o d i f i c a t ions

Elment

Service

NM

Indice

Nom

Date

a
b

Ce d o c u m e n t

r e s t e n o t r e p r o p r i t e t ne p e u t t r e r e p r o d u i t

m u n i q u e des t i e r s d'une m a n i r e q u e l c o n q u e sans

ni c o m

d
e
N u m e r o du p l a n

s^

=D
Recherches

90004
Service

RPS

A16
204

NM 4
890

55
37

IP
in

55

7110

!
H

I
I

!
!~

|__

_._i

_..(.

-i-

O
LA
LO

H
X
C7\

t> 20/425

O
LO

H
C3
Lrt
LO

I
+

-f

"

SCHNITT DD M15

205

A17

3)
k 20/425
o
LO

IV)

Oi

V25
=a

i
I

V26/500

i i i i i l i l H l l l l V l l l H l l l l l l l l l l l l l l U l l l ifcv

50
>
00

NM 4

SCHNITT AA M TI

207 -

19

NM 5

J50

HF

9832 kg

3
2
1

4
2
1

450x300x70
1100x880x70
W 14x16x730

Rep. Nbre.
Division

l = 760 mm

Dsignation

Dimensions

EUROPEAN RESEARCH 7210 SA 510

(A

1064
8471
Observat ions

Mal
Echelle : 1=1

B
1:

Objet'

Dessine :N0ESEN A.

c
o
ra
c

297

St 52
St 52
St 52

D a t e . ^ 1 . 90

M o d i f i c a t ions
Service

Elmonl

Indice

NM >

>
O

Dat e

Nom

a
b

Ce document reste n o t r e p r o p r i t et ne peut t r e reproduit ni com

muniqu des tiers d une manire quelconque sans notre autorisation

3^ ^

=ID
Recherches

d
e
Numero du plan

90 005
Service

RPS

208

A20

NM 5

SCHNITT DD MV5
A21
209

NM 5

70
20

30

20

SChMITTAA M 1=1

210 -

A22

300
200

o
o

IO

k 15/400

LT>

(D

o
LO

V 26

llllillll/lllhlliyililllillilK

\lilllllllllli|llllUI Thr
' 11 HI IX

(D
>
CO

Ol

150

NM 6

o
co

50

5179 Kg

3
2
1

2
2
1

600x450x70
1100x580x70
W 1416*550

Rep. Nbre.
Division
c
o
ra
c
m

1= 8330

Dsignation

297

St 52
St 52
St 52

Dimensions

1064
6818 kg
Observations

Mat

, . . . EUROPEAN RESEARCH N 7210 / SA 510

1:5

E c h e l l e ;1 '^

Dessine :N0ESEN A. D a t e : 5.1.90

Modifications
Service

Fi*.ni.

W!

Indice

>
a

Ce d o c u m e n t r e s t e n o t r e p r o p r i t e t ne p e u t t r e r e p r o d u i t ni c o m
m u n i q u des t i e r s d'une m a n i r e q u e l c o n q u e sans

AS^ ak

Nom

Date

a
b
d
e
Numro du plan

=n?
Recherches

90 006
Service

RPS

A24
212

NM 6

LO

Ht

880

55

7*110

37
_.|

C7N

O
O

O
LO

LO

f~

SCHNITT DD M 1 = 5
A25

213

NM 6

* SCHNITT AA M 1:1

214 -

A26


b. 26/425

)
Ol

V 25

s.
St"

V 26/600

>

to

>

NM 7

6161kg"

4
2 2
.1, 1.

. 3

Rep.

450x300x73
=t 1100x080 70
HD 400x400x675

Nbre.

Dsignation

M
O
Q

Dimensions

EUROPEAN RESEARCH N ' 7 2 1 0 S A 510

Division
c
o

i^TDBO

RECHERCHES

NHIKI! EXACTION DIAGRAMS FR

FLANGE

THICK
COLUMNS SUB MITTED TO B UCKLING

St 52
S>.52
5 t 52

297
104.
40O

Mat

Observations

EchelleVI

15

Desrs'in:NOESENA. D a t e

S .190

Modifications
Indice

Elment:

Service

NM y

a
b

e document reste notre p r o p r i t et ne peut t r e reDroduit ni com

uniqu des tiers d une manire quelconque sans notre autorisation

Nom

Date

A/

4ti.lt,

d
e
Numro du plan

90007

F^

= r a

Recherches

Service

RPS

A28
216

NM 7

150

300
200

.100

<

V22IUX)

V25

d _ V 2 6 _
50

150

29
217

NM 7
Q80

55
in
LT

i55_

7x110
,37

& "f f

o
10

o
LO

1/1

in

_..
i

SCHNiTDD M 1 = 5

A30
218

300
200

100

o
o

V 22 im

o
LH

I\3
CO

V25
/lllllilllllllliilllllllllll

ii

uniu

ini

V26
mumm]

EH

^4

R
150
>

V2
num

NM 7

70
20

30

SCHNITT A A

20

M 1=1

3>ET/)ILB

- 220

A32

NM 8

6853 kg
3
2
1

4
2
1

ch 450x300x70
cfc3lXX)x<580x70
HD 400x400x675 .

Rep. Nbre.
Division

l = 5100

Designation

Dimensions

EUROPEAN RESEARCH ' 7 2 1 0 S A

510

Ohjpt

c
o

Ubservat ions

Mat
1:

Echelle : "'

1:

Dessin :N0ESN A.

D a t e . 5.1.90

Modifications

ra
c

297
1064
5492

St 52
St 52
St 52

Service

Flempnt

Indice

NM 8

o
O

Ce document reste notre proprit et ne peut t r e reproduit ni com

munique a des tiers d une maniere quelconque sans notre autorisation

5^

=ID
L

a
b
c
d
e

Nom

Date

A/

? 5.S>

Numero du plan

908
Service

RPS

Recherches

221

A33

NM 8

150

300
200

vjSipo

V25

V26

~AV
5 0

(Ti

150 r
222

A34

NM 8
880

55
in
in

155

7x110

37

70^

. 3 U

7 0 -i

^26

V 26

-s

y y,
<D
CD
LO
LO

A__

...

..

CD
CD

>

t',

V25

V25

*s

2~

^ 20/290

<D

CD

in

; , > \ \ \\HD400400 678.

vvN\\\S\V\\\\Vov
120/290/ V\V

\s

>

<

s N\

\
\\
. . \\
\
.W
\
^

CD
LD

^" .

in

>
V

U8U

SCHNITT DD M 1 = 5
A35
223

NM 8

70

SCHNITT A A

M 1=1

fL4LB

- 224

A36

300
200

100 <

t
o
o

V 22 7400
IO
IO
Ol

V25

/ U l i i i

lilillilliJlinliiilllllllllX

+50
>
GO

V26

150
00

NM 9

150

50

5424 kg

3
2
1

4
2
1

500x500x70
c3 00?070
HD 310x310x500

Rep. Nbre.
Division

Dsignation
.

Dimensions

, EROPEAN RESEARCH N*7210SA 510

1064
3810 kq
Observations

Mat
Echell e :

1=1

1:5

Dessin :N0ESEN A Date:10.1.90

c
o

c
M

1=^20

550

St 52
St 52
St 52

Modifications
Service

FI

Indice

NM 9

a
b
c
d
e

munjqu des tiers d'une manire quelconque sans

A/

Date

4. i.So

Numro du plan

=ID
Ik

Nom

Recherches

90009
Service
RPS

226

A38

NM 9
880

55
LO!
LO

55

7 110
37

'

..\

LD
I

V25

V25

LO
LO

A39
227

NM 9

70

SCHNITT A A M 1=1

228

A40

_fc_24/475

o
o

LTl

fc>24/475

IO
(O

V35/500

V25

V35/500
*

25

50
>

CO

180

NM 10

180

7631 H3

3
2
1

4
2
1

1=7620

Designation

Rep. Nbre.

Dimensions
e

n h | P t

Division
c
o
ra
c
W
41

330

52
52

300x500x70
1100x580x70
W 14x16x550

. EUROPEAN RESEARCH N 7 2 1 0 S A 510

1064
6237 kg

St 52

0 bservat ions

Mat
Echelle : 1:1

1=5

Dessin :N0ESEN

Date.B..1.90

Modifications

NM 10

Service

Indice

Ce document r e s t e notre proprit et ne peut t r e r e o r o d u i l ni com

muniqu des tiers d'une manire quelconque sans notre autorisation

S^

=13

a
b
c
d
e

Date

Nom

4(.3.9

Numero du plan

90 010
Service

R.RS.

Recherches

230

A42

NM 10
55
in
LD

880

55

7x110

4-

15

4-

70

_. + ._
70

267

<<

_15

++

W2

"i

I
t

CO

"t"

LD
in

'T"

1~
I

43

231

NM 10

70

232

A44

>

<)

>

V 32/450

O
d

co

c5
c

Li

90

V 25
/

V25

IJ'

>

s4

>

V42

U4

NM 11
J 150

CD

rr\
rn
co

IJ
J 150
6 94'' kg

3
2
1

4
2
1

=> 500x300x70

11008070
HD 400x400x678

Rep. Nbre.

c
o
re
c
t

a
a

1 = 8190

Dsignation

Dimensions

h it EUROPEAN RESEARCH 7210 SA 510

Division

330

St 52
St 52
St 52

10 64
5553 kg

Mat

Observat ions

Echelle : ' :2

TSO

Dessine : OESENA. Date.11.1.90

M o d i f i c a t ions

Flftm.nt

Service

Indice

NM 11

Nom

Date

a
b

Ce document r e s t e notre proprit et ne peut t r e reproduit ni com

muniqu des tiers d'une manire quelconque sans notre autorisation

5^

=ID
*

Recherches

234

d
e
umro du plan

90011
Service
RPS

A46

NM 11

fc20/290

V25

^20/290

-4

IX.

235

A47

NM 12
150

o
VD

_i

**

150

6560 kg

3
2
1

4 500 '300 ' 7 0

2 1100* 880'70
1
HD 4 0 0 x 4 0 0 x 6 7 8

Rep. jNbre.
Division

0 h

,
) e

c
o

1 = 7620 mm

Dsignation

Dimensions

EUROPEAN RESEARCH ' 7 2 1 0 S A 510

MINItPACTiON

DIAGRAMS

FR THICK

FLANGE COLUMNS SUB MITTED TO B UCKLING

S T " 52

33

ST 52
ST 52

64
5166

Mat
Echel e '
Destin:*

Date
Modifications

IB
C

Observations

Service

Indice

Elment

NM 12

Nom

Date

3.So

A/

b
s document reste notre proprit et ne peut t r e reproduit ni com
uniqu des tiers d'une manire quelconque sans notre autorisation

E k

=o
Recherches

d
e
Numro du plan

90 012
Service
RPS

A48
236

NM 12

/-'

> / . / / / / / ] < . ' ' / J _

,'

'

/y

/>

HD 400x400x678^/
/.
/

LAGERACHS

49
237

NM 13

150

D"

il
150

5149 kg

3
2
1

4
2
1

500x250x70
=*= 1100x890x70
HD 310x310x500

Rep. Nbre.

l = 7620

Dsignation
n h i

Division

Dimensions

, . EUROPEAN RESEARCH "7210SA 510

275

St 52
St 52
St 52

1064
3810 kq

Mat

Observations

Echelle

: M

1=5

Dessine : NOESEN A. D a t e

c
o

11.190

M o d i f i c a t ions

IO

FI.Mn.nl

Service

ID
f

Indice

N M 13

Nom

A/

Date

4i. J. s.

b
Ce d o c u m e n t reste notre proprit et ne peut t r e reproduit ni com
muniqu des tiers d'une manire quelconque sans notre autor isat ion

s^

sID
Recherches

d
e
Numro du plan

90013
Service
RPS

A50
- 238

NM 13
880

55

55

7 110

J-l

+
i

r 70^

V 40/200

LO

V 40/ 2 00

in

_.+._

in

V20/45d)

V 20/450
f
V25

J,

o
m

CM

tn

o
m
in

_.|__

340

un
>n

SCHNITT DD M 15
A51

239

NM 13

70

SCHNITT AA M M

A52
240

2 50

150

400

o
o

V 20/450

(D
ro
*

o
o

LTI

V25

it

V 2E

N20/25 )

=V

50

V40/200

1150 f
>

ANNEX

GEOMETRICAL

B (Bl TO B16):

MEASUREMENTS

BEFORE THE

TESTS

Geometrical characteristics of the sections (1)

1

L,

L,

L,

L,

5 cm

5 cm
5 measured sections along each column.
o-

o-

3 mm
<S>

Height of section :
<

external
3 measures

|c2

per measured section

internal (c)

2 measures
per measured section

h2

h3

hi

-^

Width of section :
2 measures
per measured section

\.

B1

- 245 -

Geometrical characteristics of the sections (2)

1
*

w
/

L,

L,

L,

/4

5 cm1-1

5 cm
5 measured sections along each column.

Web thickness :

r + 5 mm

3 measures
per measured section
(from the results of the figure 3
(web measures) calculation with
the mean value of the flange
widths (figure 1)

- * !

-2
r + 5 mm

-i>-

-^

->-

Flange thickness :
4 measures
per measured section

B2

246

Geometrical characteristics of the sections (3)

1

L,

L,

L/

5 cm

5 cm

5 measured sections along each column.

r + 5 mm

Web eccentricity
and web deformation :

down <>

6 measures
per measured section
r + 5 mm

3 mm

I
4

>|

Parallelism of the flanges :

[c2

J L

h3

h2

2 measures (c1,c2)
per measured section

hi

B3

247

Column Nr. NM 1
Profile HD 400x400x678

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

80,3
79,9
80,4
79,3

80,4
79,8
80,5
79,5

80,6
79,8
80,4
79,6

80,6
79,7
80,7
79,6

80,4
79,8
80,6
79,4

1
2

424,6
424,3

424,5
424,7

424,4
424,3

424,6
424,0

424,1
424,8

1
2
3

189,1
189,0
189,3

189,2
189,1
189,8

189,8
189,5
190,0

187,4
187,2
187,9

189,2
189,3
190,0

1
2
3

186,8
186,0
184,9

186,1
185,9
185,4

187,2
186,7
186,3

188,3
187,5
187,6

186,5
186,4
185,7

50,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

48,5
49,4
50,2

49,3
49,6
49,4

47,3
48,1
48,0

48,6
49,6
48,8

48,7
48,7
48,7

484

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

483,0
480,2
478,2

483,2
480,2
478,3

483,6
480,4
478,2

484,3
480,5
478,0

483,2
480,2
478,2

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

322,2
320,2

322,0
319,6

322,2
319,4

321,9
319,5

322,3
320,0

82

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
188,25 and web
deformation down
[mm]
427

B4

248 -

Column Nr. NM 2
Profile HD 400x400x678

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

80,6
81,7
81,8
80,3

80,9
82,1
81,7
80,3

80,9
82,1
81,6
80,1

80,9
81,9
81,3
80,3

80,6
81,7
81,7
79,9

1
2

426,8
426,1

426,9
426,2

426,9
426,0

427,5
426,3

427,5
426,3

1
2
3

189,0
189,4
189,4

190,3
189,7
189,7

191,3
190,4
190,4

191,0
190,2
189,9

190,8
190,0
190,0

1
2
3

187,3
187,3
187,3

186,2
186,2
186,3

185,0
185,3
185,1

186,0
186,1
186,1

186,3
186,2
186,1

50,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

50,1
49,7
49,7

50,0
50,6
50,5

50,1
50,7
50,9

49,9
50,6
50,9

49,8
50,7
50,8

484

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

483,1
481,8
479,7

483,5
481,5
479,8

483,5
481,7
479,9

483., 6
481,7
479,7

433,7
481,7
479,8

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

321,2
318,4

321,2
318,4

321,0
31-8,4

321,4
318,3

321,2
318,3

82

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
188,25 and web
deformation down
[mm]
427

B5

249 -

Column Nr. NM 3
Profile HD 400x400x422

Measured sections

Nominal
value

Flange thickness
[mm]

1
2
3
4

52,4
51,7
52,7
51,3

52,4
51,8
52,3
50,8

52,3
51,8
52,1
50,8

52,3
52,0
52,5
51,1

52,0
51,8
52,8
51,2

Flange width
[mm]
Web
up
eccentricity
and web
deformation down
[mm]

1
2

408,3
408,3

408,2
407,7

408,8
407,8

408,8
407,8

408,7
408,1

1
2
3

187,3
186,8
187,0

188,9
184,4
188,5

187,9
187,0
186,9

186,8
185,6
185,4

184,9
184,2
184,1

1
2
3

188,7
188,5
188,6

186,6
186,4
186,4

187,9
187,9
188,3

188,9
189,2
189,6

191,2
191,1
191,2

33

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

32,3
33,0
32,7

32,4
37,1
33,0

32,5
33,4
33,1

32,6
33,5
33,3

32,3
33,1
33,1

425

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

429,0
425,6
424,5

428,9
425,0
423,9

428,3
424,9
423,5

423,8
425,3
423,8

428,1
425,3
424,4

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

323,6
322,4

323,9
321,9

323,9
321,6

324,0
321,3

323,6
322,1

52,5
409

188

B6

250

Column Nr. NM 4
Profile HD 310X310X454

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

69,9
69,1
68,2
69,4

69,4
69,2
68,3
69,8

69,7
69,2
68,3
69,6

68,7
69,0
68,5
69,9

69,2
69,0
68,3
69,9

1
2

336,2
337,0

336,3
337,1

336,2
337,0

336,0
337,1

336,2
337,1

1
2
3

147,1 146,8
147,2
147,5
147,5
147,5

147,6
147,8
148,1

147,3
147,7
147,9

147,6
147,7
148,1

1
2
3

148,4
148,3
148,7

148,9
148,5
148,8

148,2
147,6
148,0

147,8
147,3
148,4

148,1
147,7
148,1

40,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

41,1
40,8
40,4

41,0
41,0
40,4

40,8
41,2
40,5

41,4
41,5
40,2

40,9
41,2
40,4

415

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

412,3
413,2
415,3

411,9
413,3
415,4

412,1
413,6
415,5

412,2
413,6
415,4

432,0
413,4
415,3

277

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

274,3
276,1

274,2
276,3

274,1
276,2

274,1
276,2

274,4
276,2

69

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
147,75 and web
deformation down
[mm]
336

- 251

Column Nr. NM 5
Profile W 14x16x730

Measured sections

Nominal
value

Flange thickness
[mm]

1
2
3
4

124,0
124,6
124,3
123,9

124,0
124,4
124,7
123,9

124,0
125,0
124,5
123,5

124,4
125,1
124,5
123,4

124,2
125,0
124,6
123,8

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
and web
deformation down
[mm]

1
2

452,3
451,3

452,2
451,8

452,4
452,0

453,5
453,3

453,9
453,3

1
2
3

190,5
190,4
190,0

191,6
191,8
191,2

193,1
193,4
193,3

189,9
190,3
190,1

192,8
192,7
192,3

1
2
3

184,4
184,4
185,0

183,1
183,2
183,8

183,0
182,8
183,1

185,9
186,0
186,2

183,7
183,7
184,3

78

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

76,9
77,0
76,8

77,3
77,0
77,0

76,1
76,0
75,8

77,6
77,1
77,1

77,1
77,2
77,0

569

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

563,2
562,4
564,4

563,8
564,0
564,9

564,0
564,2
564,8

564,8
564,6
564,7

565,0
564,4
564,8

319

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

316,2
316,3

315,8
316,6

316,0
316,8

316,3
316,5

316,8
315,7

125
454

188

B8

252

Column Nr. NM 6
Profile W 14x16x550

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

96,8
97,3
96,3
98,3

96,7
97,3
96,9
98,2

96,9
97,5
96,6
97,7

97,2
97,4
96,5
97,6

96,7
97,4
96,4
97,5

1
2

432,2
433,1

433,0
433,0

433,1
432,7

433,8
432,6

434,0
432,1

1
2
3

184,2
184,8
184,4

184,8
185,4
185,8

186,5
186,9
187,7

186,3
186,6
186,9

186,7
186,3
187,2

1
2
3

189,8
189,4
189,4

189,6
189,0
189,0

189,9
189,5
189,3

189,4
188,6
188,2

189,0
188,3
188,0

60,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

58,6
58,4
58,8

58,6
58,6
58,2

56,5
56,5
55,9

57,5
58,0
58,1

57,3
58,4
57,8

514

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

507,9
509,8
512,7

507,7
509,5
512,2

507,7
509,7
512,0

508,0
509,6
511,8

507,6
509,4
511,6

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

315,2
316,9

315,3
316,8

315,2
316,6

315,2
316,4

315,5
316,6

97

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
188,25 and web
deformation down
[mm]
437

B9

253

Column Nr. NM 7
Profile HD 400x400x678

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

80,6
82,1
81,4
79,3

80,0
82,1
81,9
79,8

80,9
82,0
81,2
79,7

80,9
82,2
81,9
79,7

80,8
82,2
81,6
79,6

1
2

426,9
426,3

427,1
426,1

427,0
425,9

427,0
426,1

427,0
426,0

1
2
3

187,7
187,3
187,3

187,8
187,1
187,0

187,9
187,3
187,2

188,9
188,4
188,5

188,7
188,1
188,3

1
2
3

188,6
188,7
188,8

188,8
188,8
188,7

188,5
188,5
188,3

187,6
187,4
187,4

187,7
187,7
187,3

50,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

50,3
50,6
50,5

50,0
50,7
50,9

50,0
50,6
50,9

50,0
50,7
50,6

50,1
50,7
50,9

484

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

482,6
480,7
479,6

483,2
480,6
480,0

482,2
480,2
479,6

483,2
481,3
480,0

483,4
481,4
479,8

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

321,2
319,5

320,7
318,1

321,1
317,9

321,0
318,3

321,0
318,4

82

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
188,25 and web
deformation down
[mm]
427

B10

254

Column Nr. NM 8
Profile HD 400x400x678

Measured sections

Nominal
value

82

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
up
eccentricity
and web
188,25
deformation down
[mm]
427

1
2
3
4

82,8
82,8
81,7
80,9

81,9
82,9
83,3
81,7

81,7
81,9
82,9
82,3

81,5
81,6
83,1
82,6

81,7
80,9
83,1
82,3

1
2

425,2
423,9

425,6
424,4

424,4
423,1

425,2
424,3

424,5
424,0

1
2
3

187,4
187,3
187,2

187,8
187,6
187,7

187,3
187,4
187,8

187,3
187,2
187,9

187,3
187,1
187,4

1
2
3

185,9
184,9
184,0

186,2
185,3
184,3

185,8
184,9
183,9

185,9
185,2
184,2

183,9
185,1
184,5

51,2
52,3
53,3

51,0
52,1
53,0

50,6
51,4
52,0

51,5
52,3
52,6

53,0
52,0
52,3

'

50,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

484

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

484,3
482,3
485,4

484,6
482,5
484,7

484,4
482,2
484,8

484,1
483,0
484,8

484,6
482,1
484,3

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

320,2
317,4

320,2
316,8

320,1
316,8

319,9
316,7

320,0
316,8

B11

255

Column Nr. NM 9
Profile HD 310x310x500

Measured sections

Nominal
value

Flange thickness
[mm]

1
2
3
4

74,4
74,3
74,0
75,1

74,3
74,0
73,7
74,6

74,4
74,5
74,0
75,0

73,9
73,9
74,0
74,4

74,2
74,8
74,4
74,6

Flange width
[mm]
Web
up
eccentricity
and web
deformation down
[mm]

1
2

338,4
339,0

338,6
338,8

338,6
338,8

338,6
339,2

338,7
338,9

1
2
3

145,2
144,2
144,0

146,5
145,4
144,8

145,4
145,0
144,3

145,9
145,3
144,7

145,4
143,9
144,0

1
2
3

148,3
148,8
149,6

148,2
148,6
149,5

148,2
148,9
149,7

147,8
148,6
149,7

148,6
149,1
150,1

45

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

45,2
45,7.
45,1

44,0
44,7
44,4

45,1
44,8
44,7

45,2
45,0
44,5

44,8
45,8
44,7

427

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

424,1
423,4
424,1

423,4
422,9
423,4

423,8 423,7
422,9
423,7
423,5
424,5

424,1
423,5
424,6

277

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

276,2
275,5

275,9
275,2

275,8
275,0

275,7
274,9

275,9
274,6

75
340

147,5

B12

256

Column Nr. NM 10
Profile W 14x16x550

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

97,3
97,3
97,4
98,3

97,5
97,7
97,6
98,9

96,2
97,0
97,7
98,9

97,5
96,7
97,4
99,1

97,8
96,9
97,4
98,3

1
2

436,6
436,2

436,6
436,1

436,4
436,2

436,3
435,9

435,3
434,9

1
2
3

186,0
185,8
185,8

185,1
184,7
184,4

185,4
184,8
184,4

185,8
184,7
184,0

183,9
183,4
183,0

1
2
3

192,2
192,0
192,5

192,8
192,7
193,0

192,5
192,8
193,7

191,9
192,4
193,5

192,7
192,7
193,7

60,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

58,4
58,6
58,1

58,4
58,9
58,9

58,4
58,7
58,2

58,4
59,0
58,6

58,5
59,0
58,4

514

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

514,1
514,4
516,9

514,3
514,7
517,2

514,3
514,7
517,3

514,5
514,9
517,3

514,8
515,2
517,5

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

320,4
321,3

320,1
321,4

320,2
321,5

320,4
321,4

320,3
321,7

97

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
188,25 and web
deformation down
[mm]
437

B13

257

Column Nr. NM 11
Profile HD 400x400x678

Measured sections

Nominal
value

1
2
3
4

82,2
81,9
81,3
81,2

81,8
81,2
82,3
81,8

81,7
81,2
82,5
81,8

81,6
81,5
82,3
82,0

81,3
81,5
82,5
82,1

1
2

425,1
423,3

425,3
423,8

425,0
423,7

425,5
424,3

425,8
424,0

1
2
3

187,5
187,0
186,8

186,5
185,9
185,9

187,3
186,9
187,3

188,4
187,7
187,9

187,2
187,0
187,5

1
2
3

186,1
185,4
184,9

187,2
186,6
186,2

185,8
185,2
184,5

185,7
185,1
184,6

185,4
184,8
184,1

50,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

50,6
51,8
52,5

50,8
52,0
52,4

51,2
52,2
52,5

50,8
52,1
52,4

52,3
53,1
53,3

484

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

483,7
481,8
479,6

433,9
482,2
479,3

483,4
481,9
478,5

483,6
482,2
479,5

484,0
482,3
479,5

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

320,0
316,7

319,8
316,4

319,7
316,5

320,0
316,7

320,0
317,1

82

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
eccentricity up
188,25 and web
deformation down
[mm]
427

B14

258

Column Nr. NM 12
Profile HD 400x400x678

Measured sections

Nominal
value

82

Flange thickness
[mm]

Flange width
[mm]
Web
up
eccentricity
and web
188,25
deformation down
[mm]
427

1
2
3
4

81,4
80,4
81,3
81,9

81,4
80,2
81,3
81,8

81,6
80,6
81,3
81,6

81,5
80,1
81,2
81,0

81,3
80,3
81,9
81,9

1
2

429,2
429,1

428,8
428,6

428,8
428,3

428,6
428,4

428,9
428,8

1
2
3

192,0
192,0
193,0

191,8
192,1
193,0

192,3
192,7
193,8

192,8
193,3
194,4

193,5
194,0
195,5

1
2
3

187,8
187,6
187,0

187,6
187,2
186,6

186,7
186,3
184,9

186,6
185,8
185,0

185,8
185,0
184,1

49,3
49,5
49,1

49,3
49,4
49,1

49,5
49,5
49,8

49,1
49,4
49,1

49,5
49,8
49,2

50,5

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

484

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

482,8
480,2
478,0

482,5
480,3
477,3

482,1
480,1
478,1

482,7
480,5
477,9

483,7
480,7
477,2

320

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

320,0
315,9

319,9
315,3

319,3
315,9

319,8
316,0

320,5
316,2

'

15

- 259

Column Nr. NM 13
Profile HD 310x310x500

Measured sections

Nominal
value

Flange thickness
[mm]

1
2
3
4

74,2
73,8
74,0
74,0

74,5
73,9
74,8
74,8

74,4
73,6
73,9
74,3

74,8
73,5
74,5
74,9

74,1
73,6
74,3
74,5

Flange width
[mm]
Web
up
eccentricity
and web
deformation down
[mm]

1
2

339,0
338,6

338,6
338,3

338,6
338,4

338,9
338,4

338,6
338,3

1
2
3

151,1
150,8
150,3

150,2
150,4
149,4

150,2
150,1
149,0

149,8
149,4
148,4

151,1
150,1
149,2

1
2
3

142,9
143,6
143,0

142,7
143,3
143,4

142,7
143,6
144,0

143,6
144,4
144,4

144,0
143,6
142,5

45

Web thickness
[mm]

1
2
3

44,8
44,4
45,5

45,5
44,7
45,6

45,6
44,8
45,5

45,2
44,8
45,8

43,3
44,7
46,7

427

External height
[mm]

h 1
h 2
h 3

423,6
423,1
423,6

424,1
423,7
423,9

423,7
423,1
423,1

424,6
423,6
423,8

424,3
422,8
422,8

277

Internal height
[mm]

C 1
C 2

275,3
275,9

274,9
275,9

275,2
275,6

275,0
275,7

275,6
275,4

75
340

147,5

B16

- 260 -

ANNEX

C (Cl TO C47):

TESTS RESULTS (LOAD-DEFLECTION CURVES;

RESIDUAL DEFORMATIONSAFTER

THE TESTS)

Load [ MN ]
20
O
fi)

**$

15

Q.

1=

Q.

ro

MMI

</>

co

"
CD _ L
O b
co
3 o

10

S
&

Transducer W1

(/>

5
|
%
o

40

60

80

100

120

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

140

O
<

fi)

Transducer W3

*" ^/*

Transducer W2

3
(
^

oc
2

(0

Load [ MN ]
20
O
0)
Q.

-15

Q.

C/>

D)
O

>
t*

-10

3
iH
(/>

o
c

(/>

0,5

0,5

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

b
b
o

^^

TT
0)

<7>'

3
(Q

^+

0)

Load [ MN ]

O
Q)

o.

Q.

Q>

IO
OJ
Ol

3
(D
3
CO

o
c

"~
"^

to

c
o

O)

ro

(0

GO

40

60

80

100

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

120

Ml

3
(
CD
CO

<

CD

TT

Load [ MN ]

12

ert

O
0)
Q.

:j._:

10

*
' l"

0)

33

4
2

---it

0,5

Transducer W4

3
^^
0)
O

Transducer W5

Ml

ro

TT

Q)

<

^
o

b
>

CD
C
O

"2.

.^1

ro

t *:

0,5

Transducer W6

1.5

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

(D
0)

(
-+

0)

Load [ MN ]

O
03
Q.

TD

0>

00

IO

>

(D

(D
3

5"
o
c
<

t
O

50

100
Displacements [ mm ]

main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

200

CD
c
o

OD

co
o

s
(D

0)
PT
0)

3
(

(D
(0

Load [ MN ]

-10
O
>

o.

ro

</>

G
Q)

ro

33
OD

3
-
0)

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

00
O
J)

*"

o
c

<

(D
0)

CD

'*

Q)

c
o

3
(Q

(0

O
Q>

CL

CD

C
O

D ) <*>

ro

co

MMI

2 b

(Q

S
"
0)

(D
3

3"
o
c
<

100

150

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

250

TT
Q)

c"

Load [ MN ]
6
O
>

4
ro
o

D
c
o

CO
"*
> co
O o
co
o

4*

3
*
CO

o
c

-1

co
O
00

0
4

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

*" ^

S:

Q)
TT
Q)

co"

*"

3
(Q

CO

Load [ MN ]

-14
O
fi)

Q.

-12

Q.
t

c
o

-8

Q> 01

-6

3 5

-10
ro

"S*
(D
3

-4

O
C

-2

0
250
Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

TT

<

(D

CD

(Q
<D
t

Load [ MN ]

14
O
)

o.

CD

MB

""

ro

T5
> ro
O
o

CD O)

(O
o

o
o

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

* ^.^
^

TT

(D
0)

3
(Q

O
<

C
O
PT

Q)
t

Load [ MN ]

10

Q.

8
7

(fl

a M

6
ro

> f*
Ci

(D

(>
O

3
(D
3
^+

4
3

2
1
O

CD
C
O

-^

Transducer W3

<

50

50

100

150

200

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

250

MS

>

(D
Q)

Q)

3
(

(0

Load [ MN ]

12

-10

O
D

~t^

ir

6
*'>'

$.

'

i.

ro

Transducer W5

o
c
<

Transducer W4

,/ 1

Transducer W6
3

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

ro

MM

(0
" *
ro
D) Ui
O b
O)
o
3 lo
(D
3

0)

(!)

0)

>

c
o
TT
3
(Q
(D
(/>

*~ ^ 7 *

Q)
fi)

(7>"

Load [ MN ]

O
0>
.

"Euo

D
C
O

0)
O o
O)
co

)
-J

3 5o

D)
TT
Q)

O
C
<

O
CO

-25

25

50

75

100 125 150 175 200 225 250

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

Load [ MN ]
14
O
0)

)
vi

CD

"

*~*

fi)

o
b

3
o
3

o
c
<

(D
(0

10

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

co

vi

TT

3
(Q
(D

*- _^**

k
o

fi>

TT
fi)

Load [ MN ]

O
fi)

Q.

CD

0)

ro

ro
ro

b
lo
o

00

D
t

Ol

50

100

150

200

250

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

300

-
<

Q)

3
(

C
O
TT

Q)

Buckling test
NM 8

(weak axis)

( 22.06.90 )

Load - displacements curves

Load [ MN ] -16

-14
-12

-10
-8
-6
-4

Transducer W4
Transducer W5

-2
-*-

-3

Transducer W6
-2

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

C16
- 278

Load [ MN ]
12
O

o>

-10

Q.

(f

8
)
vi
(O

6
^

*H*

2
*

vi

100

"D " >

to
D)
O b
co

bk

00

MB

200

2
(O
^s

TransducerW1

(f

Transducer W2

O
C

>

Transducer W3
300

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

<f

400

CO'

c
o
TT
3
(Q

Buckling test
NM 9

(weak axis)

(21.06.90)

Load - displacements curves

Load [ MN ] "12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

-5

- 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 0

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

C18
280

Load [ MN ]

O
fi)

o.

ro

* ^ B

c/>

fi)

ro

IO
O

O b
(D co

(D
3

o
c

(D
0)

*>

3
(
fi)
(/)

O
CD

50

100

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

c
o

3
(Q
(D
(
-*

Buckling test
NM 10

(strong axis)

( 26.06.90 )

Load - displacements curves

Load [ MN ] - 2 0

-18
-16

-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

C20
282

Load [ MN ]

16

14

Q>
Q.

12

CD
C
O

Q.

10

TT
s

ro
oo

CD j o

CD
3

CO
O

3 2

2
O
ro

(Q

<

C/>

0
0

50

100

150

200

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

250

S"
</>

&

3
(

0>

5'

Buckling test
NM 11

(strong axis)

( 29.06.90 )

Load - displacements curves

Load [ MN ] -16

-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

C22
284

Load [ MN ]

O
D)

o.
w"
"S.
Q) ^
i O
CD o

ro

UI

c
o
ro

CD
3

co

O
C

O
3
(
0)
X

<

O
ro

CD

t"

50

100

150

200

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

250

3
(Q

Buckling test
NM 12

(strong axis)

( 27.06.90 )

Load - displacements curves

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

C24
- 286

Load [ MN ]

O
0>

o.

(
"D ro

00

0>
O

L
I

+-

ro

vi

o
(D (O
o

3
O
C
-

CD
<

Transducer W3

0)

-^

3
CO

0)
t

200

't/T

Transducer W2

-f

Transducer W1

CD

mim m

Displacements [ mm ]
main displacement perpendicular to the strong axis

250

O
Ml

(Q
(D
(0

Buckling test
NM 13

(strong axis)

( 28.06.90 )

Load - displacements curves

Load [ M N ] - 1 6

-14
-12
-10
-8
-6

-4

-2

-K
-8

-6

Transducer W6
-4

-2

Displacements [ mm ]
parasitical displacement perpendicular to the weak axis

C26
288 -

Deformation [ mm ]
200

(/>

150
Q> O
*

c O
o
7? C

-50

3 3
( 3

^VH^

-100

-150

Measured point a
Measured point b

-200

50

MVI

a? ,_,. 0)

100

ro
OD
co

Length [ m ]
Distance between the extremity plates : 3,615 m

</>

Deformation [ mm ]
200

2J

(D

150

100

<D I T

50
IO

IMN

Q.
C
Q)
0)

sVi
1

co
o

50

7="

ta

100

Measured point a

(D
t

to
150

Measured point D

(D

+
MB

200
0

Length [ m ]

CO

Distance between the extremity plates : 3,62 m

. . . . . 1

O
3

Deformation [ mm ]
200

150

ro
co

.
0) O
h C

100

50

co

50

100

mim m

3
(

150

Measured point a

Measured pomi o

200

0
o
ro
ID

4
Length [ m ]

D)

3"
^
(D
O D)
O (0
M B
TT C

i-

Distance between the extremity plates : 4,5 m

...

3 O
3

Deformation [ mm ]
200

ID

150

0)
MBB

fi)

3?

100

<D
- (D
O
c O
o C

50
IO

co

-50

3 3
( 3
a

<D

-100

^4

*H+fK

s/

-150

-+

CO

4
Length [ m ]

^*
HB

O
Q.
(D
O
t

Measured point b

t-*

fi>

(0

Measured point a

-200
0

o.
c
o

Distance between the extremity plates : 4,96 m

O
3

Deformation [ mm ]
200

ID

150
0> O

100

3"

IO

s.

-50

MHB

-100

-+++-+-M- H - H ^

+*+* * *

-150

Measured point a

| Measured point b
>

-200
0
o

c0)

mernrn

fi)
co o w
TT c O
3
3 3

CO

50
CO

Length [ m ]
Distance between the extremity plates : 7,80 m

>

Ol

Deformation [ mm ]
200

co

150
Q)

100

K^

^k. U

-50

"+-K,

fc*+

100

H=H-^-

dd

co

m*

3"
-
O
O (A
PT C O

50
CO

* * *

mimm

(O

A ^ L

Measured point a

150

Measured point b

>

3
D)
1-4
marnrn

O
3

200
0
O

ho

4
5
Length [ m ]

Distance between the extremity plates : 8,33 m

Deformation [ mm ]
200

J3

^fH

150

100

50
IO

co

F
^

(/>

S.

*A^* * * *

0)

50

w
)

^.Z

100

150

Measured point a
Measured point o

200

o
o

HM

Q.
C
CD 3 " Q)
"*

4
Length [ m ]

Distance between the extremity plates : 7,08 m

5*
( ^

3
TB

O
3

Deformation [ mm ]
200

3D

a

"*

CO
Ol

ii

0)

</>
va

cCD
>
(

00

0
o

4
Length [ m ]

Distance between the extremity plates : 8,105 m

Deformation [ mm ]
200

co

150

mim m

Q.
0) O
C
t

3"
*

O
O

100

co
7s

50
)
CO
vi

Jr

100

X^**"'

150
200
0
o

3 3
( 3
MB

50

4
Length [ m ]

Measured point a

Measured point b

Distance between the extremity plates : 7,62 m

10

co

D)

CO

3
2.
MM

O
3

Deformation [ mm ]
200

13

Measured point a

150

Measured point b

50

-4

*i+m H - H 4 - H B - R - h h = H = H - H -4=*==4

-50

CD

i*^
* *

Q)

Mt t M

Q)

co

SS o
-t
** o 3

* * * * * * $

-150

-h

c 2.
&

-100

Q)

Measured point c

fej

-200

(/>

100

INJ
CD
00

(D

MS

O
3

Length [ m ]
Distance between the extremity plates : 7,62 m

Deformation [ mm ]
200

150

Measured point b

=4^ Measured point c

50
1 t 1 1 1 1
1L1 1 1
f ' T T T ' t ff HtHTr ttT

. I

l i
f i l. i=k t=t=*=*=*=:+=fc i i i
T ' r r i r

1 1 1 1 1

rf t M

l i
*

cQ)

s
0)
t*

MMI

3 3

CD

CD S

* * * * *

100

' ,'<***iM* ) * * * * * *

* * * ^

150
200
0

Length [ m ]

) h

. *

50

0)

c 2.
l 1 1 1 1 1

(O

ID
<D

100

to
co

1
1
Measured point a

Distance between the extremity plates : 8,19 m

o
3

Deformation [ mm ]
200

150

Measured point b

100

HMS

c
Q)

*|sr Measured point c

w-m

c 2.
t 11 H t 11 f H4++H H U M ' I M H Hafc*

50

?*

100

"*

!pf

i&

o
co ^

200
0

Q)
CO
UHI

i?

fc

*m&

150

co
O
)

SS

50

o
o

Measured point a

Length [ m ]
Distance between the extremity plates : 7,62 m

Deformation [ mm ]
200

J3
Measured point a

150

50
co
o

Measured point b

100

Measured point c

c 2.

0 %H+t U H Ht t m 11 t M t HfHH

150

CDS

tf

*
%

co ^

o
3

CD

0)

3 3 Q.

200

c0)
H M

50

100

0)

Length [ m ]
Distance between the extremity plates : 7,625 m

C 40
302

C 41
- 303

C 42
304

C 43
305

C 44
- 306 -

C 45
307 -

C 46
308 -

309

C 47

ANNEX

D (Dl TO D32):

MEASUREMENTS OF RESIDUAL STRESSES

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF N M 1 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

66

45

-11

10

26

-60

-60

106

105

138

58

10

40

-109

131

19

-11

33

-35

6S

-96

-110

-86

131

60

19

-27

-44

76

-23

-3S

-114

-93

-113

78

47

76

78

-35

-14

-21

-101

10
41
64
74
98
74
75
58
15
133

28

-74

-65

-HO

-54

-123

-74

-24

66

48

40

-54

39

94

46

-28

-62

-S

-117

-48

-206

-137

-52

49

43

41

30

-25

43

SS

-to

-66

-30

-127

-16

-200

-106

1C3

95

30

-50

-4

NM1 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm2] as measured

59

39

-15

-14

25

-62

-61

-106

105

139

60

13

41

-104

96

14

-16

29

58

-70

98

-110

-85

133

63

11

23

-22

-29

71

-26

-3S

115

-94

-113

-77

-45

78

81

-31

-10

-15

-9S

13
44
68
60
133

82
84
69
27
HI

36

16

-64

-54

->2S

-42

103

55

-18

-51

-47

-104

35

52

78

29

-55

17

-113

-2

-60

.10

et

64

57

-36

-21

-192

-123

27

66

60

59

-11

-5

-185

-90

19

120

'13

49

-30

17

110

NM1 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm2] with equilibrium

D1

313 -

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF N M 1 C O L U M N : TABLE S OF V A L U E S

-7

-5

-4

-4

-3

-2

-1

-0

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

-5

-4

-3

-3

-2

-1

-0

2
3
S
6
7
i
9
10
11
7

10

11

11

12

13

14

15

15

17

18

19

10

11

12

12

13

15

16

16

17

12

19

20

10

11

IZ

13

13

14

15

14

17

17

ia

19

20

21

NM1 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

NM2:A:\MEASUR1

314

D2

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 2 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

109

89

SI

27

35

-22

-117

-76

-a?

40

16

43

91

104

93

112

111

31

47

-7S

-165

-111

-123

71

-12

15

28

92

10

92

1S1

101

46

-101

-153

-133

-US

64

-6

17

43

19

133

-v.
-3
-2
-5
-13
-11
-24
-49
119

54

-31

-26

-78

-103

-209

-21

-I

-73

-52

-39

53

S9

87

103

50

-68

-21

-37

-77

-165

-157

-14

58

-11

17

64

87

150

69

-34

42

-2

31

100

-103

-76

-17

33

70

72

124

NM2 PROFILE : residual stresses [IM/mm2] as measured

112

92

54

30

38

-115

-73

-86

-38

18

45

100

10

98

116

115

35

SI

-74

-161

-107

-119

-67

-9

19

31

96

111

97

157

106

52

12

96

-147

-127

-140

-59

-63

22

53

24

118

60
-25
8

10
9
2
6

5
-29
142

77

-8

55

80

-186

-195

-162

-51

-2

17

75

111

109

127

75

-43

13

53

141

-133

124

-35

12

41

106

110

176

95

24

-6

75

-77

50

43

56

95

97

141

NM2 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

315

D3

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 2 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

7
9
11
12
14
16
17
19
20
23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

22

22

22

22

22

22

25

25

24

24

24

24

24

24

24 .

24

24

24

24

23

23

26

26

26

26

26

26

25

25

25

25

25

25

25

25

25

NM 2 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

NM2:A:\MEASUR21

D4
316

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 3 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

42

14

60

25

18

-58

-29

-34

-30

-82

-48

-52

28

47

33

59

55

23

-48

-32

-15

2?

-108

-121

-42

-90

-47

-35

-53

11

55

-15

38

-125

-53
-54
-53
-40
-24
-25
-18
-51
-34
44
-44
22

44

38

20

-26

-63

-64

-120

-105

-123

35

-127

-32

-34

-2

-35

88

36

34

-26

-20

-69

-37

-121

-S9

-81

19

-22

13

-28

16

13

79

NM3 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] as measured

j3

34

82

44

40

-37

-8

-15

-9

-42

-28

20

-32

47

44

S3

79

73

45

-25

-10

50

-87

-100

-41

-69

-44

-14

-33

32

75

58

-103

-31
-33
-2
-14

1
1
8

-25

-9
34
-18
52

74

69

SO

-S3

-34

-90

76

-94

64

-98

-4

-7

27

-7

115

67

66

11

33

-39

-90

-59

-SI

49

42

45

41

108

NM3 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

-317-

D5

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 3 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

22

22

22

21

21

21

21

21

21

20

20

20

20

20

19

19

19

22

22

22

22

22

22

21

21

21

21

21

20

20

20

20

20

29

29

28

28

28

28

22
23
23
2
21
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
31

31

30

30

30

30

30

29

29

29

31

31

31

31

31

30

30

30

30

30

30

NM 3 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

D6
318 -

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 4 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

94

J?

-23

-26

-37

-32

13

10

27

37

-0

29

-17

25

10

59

-19

55

72

-1

-40

-91

-12

50

30

-11

-7

31

97

19
60
59
73
M

72
10
-22
52

SI

-1

-19

133

105

-71

-55

NM 4 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] as measured

69

-7

-51

-33

-35

-44

39

25

23

-14

-40

-29

-35

-66

-25

51

69

16

-74

104

-23

-5

41

14

26

52

-19

20

97

10
50
49
61
6
59
-24
-34
31

39

19

37

Si

-14

99

-71

-a

NM 4 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

319

D7

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 4 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

-13

-12

-10

-9

-a

-7

-S

-4

-2

-15

-14

-12

-11

-10

-9

-a

-7

-6

-4

-3

-10
-10
-11
-12
-12
-13
-13
-14
-21

-JO

-IS

-17

-16

-15

14

13

-12

10

-9

-22

-20

-1

-ia

-17

-16

-15

14

12

-11

-10

NM 4 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

NM2:A:\MEASUR41

D 8
320

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 5 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES
-35

-72

-30

-52

-50

-159

-94

-45

15

-20

-38

-15

-62

37

-58

-110

-6

11

54

-201

-94

17

56

20

28

179

44

59

-48

12

30

-38

-112

-201

-13

-31

-44

53

39

51

109

38

-18

-14

-70

-56

-H3

-221

-94

-21

-114

18

37

55

98

-111

-92

-53

-47

-71

-70

-74

-58

-72

-54

-53

-75

-44

-77

-112

-107

76

-12

-38

37

-143

-105

-134

-104

-137

-104

61

-80

-9

79

38

-5

23

-41

17

-94

-74

-104

-55

-79

-18

-2

-67

23

75

61

-58

14

-35

57

-38

-37

-51

-S7

-28

11

-21

20

75

143

35

-20

-39

15

17

5-i

27

73

54

37

NM 5 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] as measured

27

57

-12

44

27

107

-47

31

25

49

25

-1

97

-0

-53

49

65

-34

-151

-48

52

42

99

42

48

218

125

117

-11

47

84

15

-41

-152

W'

14

95

80

91

147

94

139

37

40

-17

-4

-94

-174

-50

22

-72

59

77

93

135

-45

-47

-8

-24

-28

-29

-32

-18

-32

-17

-14

-38

28

-41

-74

-73

120

51

29

-104

70

103

-75

108

-78

34

-55

15

101

81

34

43

20

59

-41

-73

-25

-52

23

-44

45

94

102

-1

52

92

20

-2

23

-3

35

41

94

94

107

93

72

177

48

11

-10

42

42

25

29

75

47

91

NM 5 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

- 321 -

D9

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 5 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

61

59

58

56

55

53

51

49

48

46

45

43

42

40

61

59

58

57

55

54

52

SO

48

46

45

43

42

41

39

60

58

57

55

54

52

51

49

47

45

44

42

41

39

38

ss

57

55

54

53

51

49

47

45

44

42

41

39

38

37

46

44

4S

43

43

41

42

40

40

38

39

37

37

36

36

34

42

41

39

37

35

33

31

29

28

26

25

23

22

42

41

40

38

37

35

34

32

30

28

26

25

24

22

21

11

40

38

37

35

34

32

30

28

27

25

24

22

21

19

40

38

37

34

33

31

2?

27

25

24

22

21

20

18

NM 5 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

NM2:A:\MEASUR61

322

D10

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 8 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

24

12

31

38

41

109

103

77

105

63

29

43

67

31

(0

55

61

165

113

113

119

17

59

65

153

46

11

31

40

90

13

127

96

IM

16

21

58

36
42

34
72
64
34
5
18
62

59
5
11

12

31

19

84

51

10

135

190

107

100

12

10

33

69

79

135

H2

154

23

43

50

1*

11

33

12

28

45

41

93

82

96

29

46

25

26

NM 8 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] as measured

56

35

25

16

15

19

20

87

79

52

78

34

37

62

77

77

43

10

22

36

40

142

88

86

91

12

35

93

100

165

59

22

13

20

113

101

.71

79

14

41

62

94

11
16

60
99
92
63
35
49
30

80

10

56

56

21

77

102

146

39

69

60

54

37

55

17

32

58

17

40

49

103

109

119

15

28

33

79

11

36

84

16

10

60

48

60

40

19

71

52

NM 8 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

323

D11

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 8 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

10

12

13

15

17

19

20

22

24

27

29

31

32

3*

11

12

14

16

19

21

23

25

26

28

30

31

33

35

11

13

15

17

18

20

22

25

27

29

31

32

34

36

'25
26
27
27
28
29
30
31
32

21

23

26

28

30

31

33

35

37

38

40

42

44

45

22

23

25

27

29

30

32

34

36

37

39

41

43

44

46

22

26

28

29

31

33

35

36

38

40

42

43

45

47

NM 8 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

D12
324

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF N M 9 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

-26

-1

-53

-12

-7

24

67

-97

-53

-9

-45

-6S

-79

-132

-71

-2S

-12

-12

-60
-26
15
9

37
77
21
-9
17

60

-23

IS

-34

-7

60

-20

-63

30

65

14

-19

-15

-16

-24

-SS

-57

36

-34

-12

NM 9 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm2] as measured

30

32

34

-21

-50

25

56

99

39

-64

-25

19

-17

-36

-50

-103

-42

33

18

-52

36
-3
36
27
52
90
31
-1
21

63

-19

22

-30

-3

65

-15

-58

36

70

15

-18

-15

15

-23

-86

-55

-34

-32

-9

NM 9 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm2] with equilibrium

- 325 -

D13

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 9 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

31

31

31

31

32

32

32

32

33

33

33

28

28

28

28

29

29

29

29

30

30

30

23
23
20
18
1
13
11

8
3

NM 9 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

D14
326

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 10 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

97

29

(9

41

17

-56

41

91

101

19

117

40

35

1*

-84

-60

-86

-21

44

88

25

-33

93

14

'5

i6

-115

-39

-139

-14

13

68

14

37

53

89

141

-51
-37
-33
16
-9
30
-ti
-48
-0
59

27

-3

-33

-41

-63

-109

55

-23

7*

18

38

-0

-35

-84

-59

21

57

-0

66

35

-11

44

-49

49

51

39

91

44

NM 10 PROFILE : residual Stresses [N/mm 2 ] as measured

102

33

52

'3

-15

67

56

40

89

99

16

-6

121

44

38

12

-82

-59

-86

-25

42

86

21

-37

97

18

-2

44

-114

-39

139

-16

. 10

65

-18

-41

-52
-38
-34
18
-11
-32
-51
-51
-83
60

27

-4

-35

-44

-66

113

-59

-30

47

82

134

10

74

18

37

-J

-39

-88

64

61

21

61

49

76

64

-7

32

-15

-48

55

43

32

83

NM 10 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

- 327 -

D15

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 10 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

-1

-1

-2

-3

-4

-0

-1

-2

-3

-3

-4

-0

-1

-1

-2

-3

-4

-1
1
-1
-2
-2
-2

-0

-1

-2

-3

-4

-5

-5

-6

-7

-7

-4

-4

-5

-6

-7

-1

-2

-4

-s

-5

-6

-7

-7

NM 10 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [Nimm2]

D16
328

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 12 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

,,,

61

107

12

3*

57

,27

il

55
1

27

-3

"74

"

'3'

24 -104 -91

51

58
"10

la

-87

gl

30

,33

3S

"

IM

125
11

69

-6

53

13

21

-1
-50
-24
-63
-2
-29
-26
38
52

75

93

88

22

28

54

81

58

63

83

79

109

63

21

97

87

62

41

28

75

17

32

37

58

66

69

63

73

51

83

39

22

95

20

56

68

114

72

14

17

NM 12 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] as measured

-29

25

33

57

-60 -101 -65

-7

35

24

-4 -131 -117 -112 -31

-25

22

81

111

31

32

27

77

29

-11

98

57

32

-17

-27

-1

130 102

47

11

110

98

38

29

71

61

-1

106
-75
-48
-87
26
52
-48
-60
74

"

68

64

-2

-51

32 103 -79 -84

62

59

90

45

63

38

18

-50

53

-39 -53

-58

39

44

50

**

2*

59

16

-1

73

-13

-11

36

49

96

54

J -14
-19 -18
3

NM 12 PROFILE : residual stresses [N/mm 2 ] with equilibrium

329

D17

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS OF NM 12 COLUMN : TABLES OF VALUES

30

-30

-29

29

-28

-28

27

-26

-26

-25

-25

-24

-24

23

-22

-30

-29

-29

-21

-28

-27

27

-26

-25

-25

-24

-24

-23

-23

-22

-30

-29

-29

28

-27

-27

26

-26

-25

-25

-24

-23

-23

-22

-22

-25
25
24
-24
-24
-23
-23
-22
-22

-25

-25

-24

-24

-23

-23

-22

-21

-21

-20

-20

-19

-19

18

18

25

-24

-24

-23

-23

-22

-22

-21

-20

-20

-19

-19

-18

-18

-17

-25

-2*

-24

-23

-22

-22

-21

21

-20

20

-19

-18

-18

-17

-17

NM 12 PROFILE : differences between residual stresses with equilibrium

and as measured [N/mm2]

D18
330

upper flange

150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
-200

_L_J

L_l I L

RBCDEFGH
SI

S2

lower flange

150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250

I L

J L.M 0

co
c
DD
m
s
m

R B C D E F G H

J L 0

H
CO

33

"
~F

S3

SU

SS

SG

ro
O
O

c
>
^

r
S (f)

H
<7> J ]

(_

O
10
20
30
UO
50 \
60
70

"

>
TI

O
>

J_l

I L

I L

RBCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQ
ESI

co

DD

web

NM2 PROFILE : residual stresses as measured

co

(/>
m
(/)

lower flange

upper flange

200
m
>

c
DD
m

m
*

;
R B C D E F G H

51

"

J K L M N O

S3

S2

L)

co

10
0
10
20
30
1+0
50 V
60
70

ra

ja.

_EL

"D

o
>

L
RBCDEFGH
I J K L M N 0 P Q
ES3

o
)
O

JU
>

web

2 PROFILE : residual Stresses with equilibrium

33
DD
C

3D
m
0)
D
C
>

J3

m
0)
0)

</)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS

NM2

RBCDEF&H I JKLMN

STRESSES WITH EQUILIBRIUM

IN THE UPPER FLANGE

3'JL

333

D21

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS

NM2

RBCDEFGH I JKLMNO

STRESSES WITH EQUILIB RIUM

IN THE LOWER FLANGE

R L D [ r G H ! J U
7:

334

0
x :

D22

upper flange

lower flange

100
80
60
UO
20
0
-20

-WO
-60

m
>

c
ID
m
S
m

R B C D E F G H
SI

R B C D E F G H

S3

- - S2

--- St+

"

-u
O
O

80
60
UO
20
0
-20 (-1+0

R B C D E F G H
tsi
D
ro
co

>

w
I

D
I

I J K L M M O

web

N M 4 PROFILE : residual stresses as measured

m
o
c
>

"
C/>

33

"

en

30

-i

DD
CD
C

m
O)

lower flange

upper flange

m
>
co
c
DD

m
m

3D

m
(

R B C D E F G H

SI

- S2

O
O

>

(/)

3D
80
GO
U0
Z0
0 ISL
20
I4O

DD
>
TI

M
I

R B C D E F G H

ro

EZ3

I J L 0
we

4 PROFILE : residual stresses with equilibrium

m
(

c/>

o m
>
f
g

DD
CD
C

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS

NM4
250 ^

P^.

B C 0 E F G H

STRESSES WITH EQUILIB RIUM

IN THE UPPER FLANGE

! !

D25
337

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS

NM4

B 'CD E F G H !

STRESSES WITH EQUILIB RIUM

IN THE LOWER FLANGE

[ F

==' '

S3

!.'

i
:

'

i
i !
1

338

D26

upper flange

lower flange

200

200

100

100

m
>

<

m
S
m
7

100

00

:oo

ID

B C D E F C H
SI

S2

200

I I

1 J L 0
S3

L_L

flBCDEFCH
S5

SU

co

SB

web

1 J L MM 0
S7

S8

H
CO

2J

"

c
>

"

5
2
G)
ID

>

TI

0
100
200

&J
1

MJ

CdJ

fiBCDEFCH
Fsn R 1

EH

<"
en
O

200
100

II
1

tqj

1
1

1 J L 0
EH R2

NM5 PROFILE : residual stresses as measured

>

DD
DD

(/)

33

m
co

upper flange

lower flange

200

200

m
>

100

100

.1

~r

V ,^ -

100
200

-z.
-\

100

10
J

y\ '

R B C D E F C H
SI

-- S2

200

1 J L 0
S3

R B C D E F C H

SU

S5

--- SG

1 J L 0
S7

SB

U
m
"

en
O

CZ

O
JU

200

>
TI
_L
O
I>-

100

200

rm

100

R B C D E F C H
[sa R l

-i
I

1 J L M M0

R2

00

D
c
>

"

co

web

NM5 PROF ILE : residual stresses with equilibrium

X
ro

cz

J3

0)

m
(/)

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS

STRESSES WITH EQUILIBRIUM

IN THE UPPER FLANGE

341 -

D 29

RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEASUREMENTS

STRESSES WITH EQUILIBRIUM

IN THE LOWER FLANGE

30
- 342

RESIDUAL STRESSES

PROFILE NM 1 AFTER CUTTING-OUT

PROFILE NM 2 AFTER CUTTING-OUT

343

D 31

RESIDUAL STRESSES
PROFILE AFTER CUTTING-OUT

344

D 32

For up-to-date information on

European Community research...
C

Community Research & Development Information Service

CORDIS is the Community information service set up under the VALUE programme to give
quick and easy access to information on European Community research programmes.
It consists of an on-line service at present offered free-of-charge by the European Commission Host Organisation (ECHO) and a series of off-line products such as:
CORDIS on CD-ROM;
CORDIS Interface for Windows users;
Multimedia Guide to European Science and Technology.
The on-line databases can be assessed either through a menu-based interface that makes
CORDIS simple to use even if you are not familiar with on-line information services, or for
experienced users through the standard easy to learn Common Command Language (CCL)
method of extracting data.
CORDIS comprises at present eight databases:
RTD-News: short announcements of Calls for Proposals, publications and events in the
R&D field
RTD-Programmes: details of all EC programmes in R&D and related areas
RTD-Projects: containing over 17,000 entries on individual activities within the programmes
RTD-Publications: bibliographic details and summaries of more than 57,000 scientific
and technical publications arising from EC activities
RTD-Results: provides valuable leads and hot tips on prototypes ready for industrial
exploitation and areas of research ripe for collaboration
RTD-Comdocuments: details of Commission communications to the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament on research topics
RTD-Acronyms: explains the thousands of acronyms and abbreviations current in the
Community research area
RTD-Partners: helps bring organisations and research centres together for collaboration on project proposals, exploitation of results, or marketing agreements.
For more information on CORDIS registration forms, contact:
CORDIS Customer Service
European Commission Host Organisation
BP2373
L-1023 Luxembourg
Tel.: (+352) 34 98 12 40 Fax: (+352) 34 98 12 48
If you are already an ECHO user, please Indicate your customer number.

VL

European Communities Commission

EUR 14546 Interaction diagrams between axial load and bending
moment M for columns submitted to buckling: improve
ment of methods proposed in standards and codes
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
1993 XIV, 344 pp., num. tab., fig. 21.0 29.7 cm
Technical steel research series
ISBN 9282661660
Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: ECU 40

Differences have been observed when comparing the NM interaction dia

grams for columns submitted to buckling according to the various standards
and codes. These differences are particularly significant for buckling of wide
flange hotrolled HD columns according to the weak axis; and it appears that
the NM interaction formula proposed in the Eurocode 3 penalizes the thick
flange sections in comparison with a nonlinear method or in comparison
with the results of the numerical codes Finelg or Ceficoss.
The purpose of this research was to check by means of buckling tests the
behaviour of HD columns submitted to eccentric loading, and to compare
the results with the values calculated according to Eurocode 3 and other na
tional standards.
Numerical simulations of different profiles with Finelg software have been
compared to design rules issued from Eurocode 3. These comparisons led
to the testing programme of 13 thick flange HD columns in FeE 355 steel
grade with flange thicknesses from 52 to 125 mm. The programme included
four buckling tests according to the strong axis and nine buckling tests ac
cording to the weak axis, with uniform and bitriangular moment distributions.
All the initial geometrical and mechanical imperfections have been meas
ured: initial deformations, residual stresses, real geometry and eccentrici
ties, yield points, etc.
The test results were compared with Eurocode 3 design and formulas (1984
and 1990 versions), with Swiss formulas (Sia 161 1990 version) and with
Finelg simulations which are closer to reality. The comparisons were carried
out for the whole NM interaction curves including different phenomena:
buckling, resistance of crosssections, lateraltorsional buckling and bend
ing.
It was pointed out that the proposed rules in Eurocode 3 are too conserva
tive in the scope of these 13 HD compression tests. First proposals for im
provements of the NM formulas are introduced. It was also shown that with
a simple and reliable modelization Finelg software can easily be used as a
tool for realistic and safe design.

Venta y suscripciones Salg og abonnement Verkauf und Abonnement

Sales and subscriptions Vente et abonnements Vendita e abbonamenti
Verkoop en abonnementen Venda e assinaturas
BELGIQUE/BELGI

FRANCE

NORGE

TRKIYE

Moniteur belge /
Belgisch Staatsblad
Rue d e Louvain 4 2 / Leuvenseweg 42
B1000 B ruxelles / B 1000 B russel
Tl. ( 0 2 ) 5 1 2 00 2 6
Fax (02) 511 01 8 4

Journal officiel
Service des publications
d e s C o m m u n a u t europennes
2 6 , rue Desaix
F75727 Paris Cedex 15
Tl. ( 1 ) 4 0 58 75 00
Fax (1) 40 5 8 77 00

Narvesen Info Center

Bertrand Narvessns vel 2
PO B ox 6125 Etterstad
N0602 Oslo 6
Tei. (22) 57 3 3 0 0
Telex 79668 NIC
Fax (22) 68 19 01

Pres G a z e t e Kitap Dergl

Pazariama Dagltlm Tlcaret ve sanavi
A
Narlibahe Sokak . 15
lstanbulCagaloglu
Tel. (1) 520 92 9 6 528 55 66
Fax 520 64 57
Telex 23822 DSVOTR

Autres distributeurs /
Overige verkooppunten
Librairie e u r o p e n n e /
Europese boekhandel
Rue d e la Loi 244/Wetstraat 244
B1040 B ruxelles / B 1040 B russel
Tl. (02) 231 04 35
Fax (02) 735 08 6 0
J e a n D e Lannoy
Avenue d u Roi 202 /Koningslaan 202
B1060 B r u x e l l e s / B 1060 B russel
Tl. (02) 538 51 69
Tlex 63220 U N B O O K
Fax(02) 538 08 41
D o c u m e n t delivery:
Credoc
Rue d e la M o n t a g n e 3 4 / B ergstraat 3 4
B t e 1 1 / B u s 11
B1000 B r u x e l l e s / B 1000 B russel

Tl. (02)511 69 41
Fax (02) 513 31 95

DAN M A R K
J . H. Schultz Information A / S
Herstedvang 1012
DK2620 Albertslund
Tit. 4 3 6 3 2 3 00
Fax (Sales) 4 3 63 19 69
Fax (Management) 4 3 63 19 4 9

DEUTSCHLAND
Bundesanzeiger Verlag
Breite Strae 7880
Postfach 10 05 3 4
D50445 Kln
Tel. (02 21) 2 0 290
Telex ANZEIGER B O N N 8 882 595
Fax 2 02 92 7 8

GREECE/
Q.C. Eleftheroudakls S A
International B ookstore
Nikis Street 4
GR10563 Athens
Tel. ( 0 1 ) 3 2 2 63 2 3
Telex 2 1 9 4 1 0 E L E F
Fax 323 9 8 21

IRELAND
Government Supplies Agency
45 Harcourt Road
Dublin 2
Tel. ( 1 ) 6 6 1 3 1 1 1
Fax (1) 4 7 80 645

BTJAB
Traktorvgen 13
S22100Lund
Tel. (046) 18 00 00
Fax (046) 18 01 25
3 0 79 4 7

ITALIA

SCHWEIZ / SUISSE / SVIZZERA

Licosa SpA
Via Duca d i Calabria 1/1
Casella postale 552
150125 F r e n z e
Tel.(055)64 5 4 1 5
Fax 64 12 57
Telex 570466 LICOSA I

OSEC
Stampfenbachstrae 85
CH8035 Zrich
Tel. ( 0 1 ) 3 6 5 54 4 9
Fax (01) 365 5 4 11

GRANDDUCH DE LUXEMB OURG

Messageries du livre
5, rue Raiffeisen
L2411 Luxembourg
Tl. 40 10 2 0
Fax 4 0 10 2 4 01

NEDERLAND
S D U Overheidsinformatie
Exteme Fondsen
Postbus 20014
2500 EA 'sGravenhage
Tel. (070) 37 89 911
Fax (070) 34 75 778

PORTUGAL
Imprensa Nacional
Casa d a Moeda, EP
Rua D. Francisco Manuel d e Melo, 5
P1092 Lisboa Codex
Tel. ( 0 1 ) 6 9 3 4 1 4
Distribuidora d e Livros
Bertrand, L d . '
Grupo B ertrand, SA
Rua das T e n a s d o s Vales, 4A
Apartado 37
2700 A m a d o r a Codex
Tel. (01) 49 59 050
Telex 15798 B ERDIS
Fax 4 9 60 255
UNITED KINGDOM
H M S O B ooks (Agency section)
H M S O Publications Centre
51 Nine Elms Lane
London S W 8 5DR
Tel. (071) 873 9090
Fax 873 8463
Telex 29 71 138

Uibreria d e la Generalitt
d e Catalunya
Rambla deis Estudia, 118 (Palau Moja)
E08002 B arcelona
Tel. (93) 302 6 8 35
302 6 4 62
Fax (93) 302 12 99

NIS R
Havelkova 22
130 00 Praha 3
Tel. (2) 235 84 4 6
Fax (2) 235 97 88
MAGYARORSZAG

Club Sziget
Margitszlget
1138 B udapest
Te/./Fax 1 111 60 61
1 111 62 16
POLSKA
Business Foundation

Boletn Oficial del Estado

Trafalgar, 2 9
E28071 Madrid
Tel. (91) 538 22 95
Fax (91) 538 2 3 4 9

Sucursal:
Libreria Internacional A E D O S
Consejo d e Ciento, 391
E08009 B arcelona
Tel. (93) 488 3 4 92
Fax (93) 487 7 6 59

CESKA R E P U B U K A

EuroInfoService

ESPAA

MundiPrensa L i b r o , S A
Castell, 3 7
E28001 Madrjd
Tel. (91) 431 3 3 9 9 (Ubros)
431 32 22 (Suscripciones)
435 3 6 37 (Direccin)
Tlex 4 9 3 7 0 M P U E
Fax (91) 575 3 9 9 8

SVERIGE

ul. Krucza 38/42

00512 Warszawa
Tel. (22) 21 99 9 3 , 6282882
International Fax&Phone
(039) 120077

ROY International
PO B o x 13056
41 Mishmar Hayarden Street
Tel Aviv 61130
Tel. 3 496 108
Fax 3 544 60 39
UNITED STATES OF A M E R I C A /
CANADA
UNIPUB
4611F Assembly Drive
Lanham. M D 207064391
Tel. Toll Free (800) 274 4888
Fax (301) 459 0056
CANADA
Subscriptions only
Uniquement abonnements
Renouf Publishing C o . Ltd
1294 A l g o m a Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1B 3W8
Tel. (613)741 43 3 3
Fax (613) 741 54 39
Telex 0534783
AUSTRALIA
Hunter Publications
58A Gipps Street
Collingwood
Victoria 3066
Tel. (3)417 5361
Fax (3)419 7 1 5 4

JAPAN
ROMANIA
Euromedia
65, Strada Dionisio Lupu
70184 B ucuresti
TelTFax 0 12 9 6 4 6
BLGARIJA
Europress Klasslca B K Ltd
66. b d Vitosha
1463 Sofia
TeiVFax 2 52 74 75
RUSSIA
CCEC
9,60ietiya Oktyabrya Avenue
117312 M o s c o w
TelTFax (095) 135 52 2 7
CYPRUS

OSTERREICH

ISRAEL

M a n z ' s c h e Verlags
und Universittsbuchhandlung
Kohlmarkt 16
A1014Wien
Tel. (0222) 531 61133
Telex 112 500 B O X A
Fax (0222) 531 61181

Cyprus C h a m b e r of C o m m e r c e and
Industry
Chamber B uilding
38 Grivas Dhigenis Ave
3 Dellgiorgis Street
PO B ox 1455
Nicosia
Tel. (2) 449500/462312
Fax (2) 458630

SUOMI/FINLAND

MALTA

Akateemlnen Kirjakauppa
Keskuskatu 1
PO B ox 128
SF00101 Helsinki
Tel. (0) 121 41
Fax (0) 121 44 41

Miller distributors Ltd

Scots House, M.A. Vassalli street
PO B o x 272
Valletta
Tel. 2 4 73 01
Fax 23 49 14

Kinokuniya C o m p a n y Ltd
177 Shinjuku 3 C h o m e
Shinjukuku
Tokyo 16091
Tel. (03) 34390121
Journal D e p a r t m e n t
PO B o x 55 Chitse

Tokyo 156
Tel. (03) 34390124
SOUTHEAST ASIA
Legal Library Services Ltd
STK Agency
Robinson Road
PO B ox 1817
Singapore 9036
SOUTH AFRICA
Saffo
5th Floor, Export House
Cnr Maude & West Streets
Sandten 2146
Tel. (011)8833737
Fax (011)8836569

AUTRES PAYS
OTHER COUNTRIES
ANDERE LANDER
Office des publications officielles
d e s C o m m u n a u t s europennes
2 , rue Mercier
L2985 Luxembourg
Tl. 499 281
Tlex PUB OF LU 1324 b
Fax 48 85 73/48 68 17

NOTICE TO THE READER

All scientific and technical reports published by the Commission of the European Communities
are announced in the monthly periodical 'euro abstracts'. For subscription (1 year: ECU 118)
please write to the address below.

Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: ECU 40

* \ 1 \
OFFIC
E FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS
* CH& * OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
*

***

L-2985 Luxembourg

ISBN

IB-flSb-blbb-D