Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

Shear buckling strengths of web-posts in a castellated steel beam with

hexagonal web openings
Peijun Wang , Kangrui Guo, Mei Liu, Lulu Zhang
School of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province 250061, China

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 20 September 2015
Received in revised form 13 January 2016
Accepted 12 February 2016
Available online xxxx
Keywords:
Castellated steel beam
Web-post
Shear buckling
Shear buckling coefcient
Design method

a b s t r a c t
Shear buckling behaviors of web-post in a Castellated Steel Beam (CSB) with hexagonal web openings under vertical shear were investigated using nite element method. Through treating the upper part of the web-post as a
free body under horizontal shear force, whose shear buckling strength can be calculated by the thin-plate shear
buckling theory, design equations for the vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post were proposed. Parameters that affected the vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post were studied, which were the opening
height to web thickness ratio h0/tw, the web-post width to web thickness ratio e/tw, the web height of Teesection above the opening to the web thickness hf/tw, the web thickness tw and the incline angle of the opening
edge . After obtaining the vertical shear buckling strength of a CSB through nite element model, the shear
buckling coefcient k can be obtained through inverse analysis. Research results showed that k decreased nonlinearly with the increase in e/tw and hf/tw and it increased linearly with the increase in and h0/tw. Practical calculating method for k was proposed based on parameter analysis results. The vertical shear buckling strength of
the web-post calculated using the proposed shear buckling coefcient k agreed well with that obtained from the
nite element simulation. For the proposed method was based on the elastic buckling of the web-post, it
overestimated the shear buckling strength when the web-post buckled in the elasticplastic state.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The Castellated Steel Beam (CSB) can be made through cutting an Hsection steel beam in a zig-zag pattern along the web and then rewelding the two parts together at the convex area. The strength to
weight ratio of the beam is increased without additional usage of
steel. At the same time, the story height of the building can be reduced
by installing the service pipelines in web openings.
Existences of web openings break the continuity of beam web. Compared with the solid web steel beam, the CSB may fail in new modes,
such as the formation of plastic hinges at ends of the Tee-sections
above and below the web opening [14], and the buckling of the webpost under vertical shear force [57].
The plastic failure at the perforated section of a CSB was usually
named as the Vierendeel Mechanism failure. Based on analytical and
numerical studies, Chung, et al. [1] and Liu and Chung [2] proposed empirical M-V interaction curves at the perforated sections for practical design of steel beams with circular web openings against the Vierendeel
mechanism failure. Wang, et al. [3] investigated effects of opening dimensions and opening shapes on the Vierendeel failure of CSBs with
let corner web openings. The M-V interaction equation for predicting
the load bearing capacity of the CSB with let corner web openings
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Pjwang@sdu.edu.cn (P. Wang).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.02.012
0143-974X/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

was proposed. Panedpojaman, et al. [4] proposed an interaction curve

to check the Vierendeel failure of non-composite symmetric cellular
beams, or steel beams with circular or elongated circular openings,
which was based on a quadratic nonlinear failure criterion.
The buckling of web-post was also very common, especially for the
CSB with great web height to thickness ratio. Ellobody [5] investigated
the behavior of CSBs under combined lateral torsional and distortional
buckling modes. Finite element simulation results showed that the
presence of web distortional buckling caused a considerable decrease
in the failure load of the slender CSB.
Except for the traditional circular and hexagonal openings, many
new opening shapes were developed recently. Abidin and Izzuddin [7]
employed Element Free Galerkin method to study local buckling of the
CSB with different opening shapes and sizes. Durif and Bouchar [8,9]
carried out experimental studies on the CSB with sinusoidal openings.
Tsavdaridis and D'Mello [10,11] investigated web-post buckling behavior of the CSB with novel elliptically-based web openings.
Inclined compression strut would be formed in the web-post under
vertical shear force, as shown in Fig. 1(a). The stability of the compression strut can be checked by the buckling curve c of a steel column
[12]. Wang, et al. [13] proposed a modication to the strut model for
predicating the shear buckling capacity of the web-post in the CSB
with let corner openings. Tsavdaridis and D'Mello [10] carried out experimental and analytical study on two beams with circular web openings and ve perforated beams with novel web opening shapes to

174

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

Fig. 3. Conguration of studied CSB.

Fig. 1. Strut in the web-post. (a) Inclined compression strut. (b) Compression and tension
eld.

investigate the failure mode and shear buckling strength of the webpost. An empirical formula which predicted the ultimate vertical shear
buckling strength of web-posts was formulated for the particular web
opening shapes. Lawson, et al. [14] presented simplied equations for
web-post buckling based on strut model, which was calibrated against
results of nite element analyses. Under vertical shear force, the webpost buckled in an S shape. Hence, it was discordant to check its stability using the column buckling curves. And the benecial effect of the inclined tension zone was not included in the design.
As shown in Fig. 1(b), it was much reasonable to check the stability
of the web-post based on the plate shear buckling theory. Redwood and
Demirdjian [15] investigated buckling behavior of the web-post in the
CSB with hexagonal openings through studying the upper part of the
web-post under horizontal shear force, as shown in Fig. 2. The horizontal shear buckling strength, Vh,cr, of the free body was calculated by
Vh;cr k

Eetw
2

h0 =tw

where k was the shear buckling coefcient of the upper part of the webpost under horizontal shear force. E was the Young's modulus of steel. e
was the width of web-post. tw was the web-post thickness. h0 was the
height of web opening. From the force equilibrium of the free body
shown in Fig. 2, the vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post
was calculated by
Vcr

h2yi
Vh;cr
s

where h was the section height of CSB. yi was the distance from the
ange to the centroid of Tee-section. s was the distance between two
adjacent web openings. The buckling strength of the web-post could
be easily determined if k was provided. However, Redwood and
Demirdjian [15] only presented curves to calculate the shear buckling
coefcient k of the web-post with limited geometric parameters.
Substitute Eq. (1) into Eq. (2), the vertical shear buckling strength of
the web-post can be obtained by
Vcr k 

h2yi
Eetw

2
s
h0 =tw

Fig. 4. FEM of the CSB with hexagonal web openings. (a) Mesh of the CSB with
hexagonal web openings. (b) Load and boundary conditions of the CSB with hexagonal
web openings.

In this paper, after obtaining the vertical shear buckling strength of

the web-post through FEM simulation, the shear buckling coefcient k
was calculated through reverse analysis. And then an equation was

Fig. 2. Free body in the CSB with polygonal web openings.

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

175

Fig. 5. Comparison of load-middle span deection curves and buckling deformations. (a) Dimension of test beams [10]. (b) Load-middle span deection curves. (c) Buckling
deformations.

proposed to calculate k based on the parameter study results. Studies in

this paper followed four steps:
(1) A Finite Element Model (FEM) was proposed and veried by
available test results [10,15,19,20] on CSBs failed in web-post
buckling;
(2) Shear buckling strengths calculated by hand calculated method
proposed by Redwood and Demirdjian [15] were compared
with the FEM simulation results to show its precision;
(3) Parameters affected the shear buckling coefcient k of the webpost were studied; and then an equation to calculate k was
proposed;

(4) The vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post obtained

using the proposed buckling coefcient k was veried by FEM
and test results [15,19].

2. Finite element model and verication

2.1. Model description and constitutive model of FEM
The CSB was made of Q345 steel with yield strength of 345 MPa and
Poisson's ratio of 0.3. The material behavior provided by ABAQUS [16]
using the PLASTIC option allows a nonlinear stressstrain curve to be

Table 1
Tested CSBs with hexagonal openings [15,19].
Specimens

h
(mm)

bf
(mm)

tw
(mm)

tf
(mm)

e
(mm)

h0
(mm)

b
(mm)

L
(mm)

fyw
(MPa)

fyf
(MPa)

10-5a [15]
10-5b [15]
10-6 [15]
10-7 [15]
10-1 [19]
10-3 [19]
12-1 [19]
12-3 [19]

380.5
380.5
380.5
380.5
370.59
376.43
476.25
449.58

66.9
66.9
66.9
66.9
69.09
70.61
78.49
78.23

3.56
3.56
3.56
3.56
3.58
3.61
4.69
4.62

4.59
4.59
4.59
4.59
4.39
4.45
5.33
5.35

77.8
77.8
77.8
77.8
58.17
57.91
73.41
71.37

266.2
266.2
266.2
266.2
245.87
260.53
352.81
302.51

76.2
76.2
76.2
76.2
69.85
127
101.6
149.35

4
4
6
8
12
8
8
6

1220
1220
1828
2438
3048
3048
3048
3048

352.9
352.9
352.9
352.9
357.1
357.1
311.6
311.6

345.6
345.6
345.6
345.6
342
342
307
307

176

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

Table 4
Shear buckling strengths of CSBs with circular openings obtained from FEM and tests.

Fig. 6. CSB with hexagonal openings [15,19].

Table 2
Shear buckling strengths of CSBs with hexagonal openings obtained from FEM and tests.
Specimens

Vcr,TEST
(kN)

Vcr,FEM
(kN)

Vcr,TEST/Vcr,FEM

10-5a [15]
10-5b [15]
10-6 [15]
10-7 [15]
10-1 [19]
10-3 [19]
12-1 [19]
12-3 [19]

46.35
50.45
47.4
42.2
39.55
36.92
57.33
58.22

45.75
45.75
45.75
41.75
38.75
40.64
58.43
61.21

1.05
1.10
1.03
1.01
1.02
0.91
0.98
0.95

Specimens

Vcr,TEST [20]
(kN)

Mean value
(kN)

Vcr,FEM
(kN)

Vcr,TEST/Vcr,FEM

NPI_240 Test3
NPI_240 Test4
NPI_280 Test1
NPI_280 Test2
NPI_280 Test3
NPI_280 Test4

142.05
143.1
188.8
192.1
186.2
184.45

142.58

152.62

0.93

187.89

176.81

1.06

Table 5
Comparison of deection obtained from FEM and tests [20].
Specimens

wTEST
(mm)

Mean value
(kN)

wFEM
(mm)

wTEST/wFEM

NPI_240 Test3
NPI_240 Test4
NPI_280 Test1
NPI_280 Test2
NPI_280 Test3
NPI_280 Test4

13.892
14.146
20.181
20.694
19.805
19.891

14.019

15.91

0.88

20.143

20.036

1.01

Fig. 7. Comparison of web-post buckling deformations. (a) Test results [19]. (b) FEM
results.

Fig. 9. Shear buckling coefcient for web-post proposed by Redwood and Demirdjian [15].

Fig. 8. CSB with cellular openings [20].

used. The rst part of the nonlinear curve represents the elastic part up
to the proportional limit stress with Young's modulus of 205 GPa. Since
the non-linear buckling analysis involved large inelastic strains, the
nominal stressstrain curves were converted to true stress and

logarithmic plastic true strain curves. The steel constitutive model in

the proposed FEM used Von Mises yield surfaces with associated plastic
ow, which allowed for isotropic yield. The Von Mises yield surface was
dened by giving the value of the uniaxial yield stress as a function of
uniaxial equivalent plastic strain [17,18].
The studied CSB had four openings along the beam, as shown in
Fig. 3. The vertical concentrated force was applied at the middle span
of the beam. The width and thickness of the two anges were
180 mm and 20 mm, respectively. was the incline angle of web

Table 3
Test specimen NPI_240 and NPI_280 [20].
Specimens

h
(mm)

bf
(mm)

tw
(mm)

tf
(mm)

e
(mm)

h0
(mm)

L
(mm)

fyw
(MPa)

fyf
(MPa)

NPI_240
NPI_280

355.6
406.9

106
119

8.7
10.1

13.1
15.2

94
163

251
271

2846
2820

390
290

390
290

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

177

Fig. 10. Values of k obtained from FEM and proposed by Redwood and Demirdjian [15]. (a) Effects of tw on k, (b) effects of h0/h on k, and (c) effects of e/tw on k.

Table 6
Dimensions of web-post to study effects of tw on k.
Group No.
1
2
3

e/tw
20

h0/e
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

h0/h

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0(mm)

h (mm)

0.74

6.0
8.0
10.0

120
160
200

360, 480, 600, 720, 840, 960,

480, 640, 800, 960, 1120, 1280
600, 800, 1000, 1200, 1400, 1600

480, 640, 800, 960, 1120, 1280

640, 853, 1066, 1280, 1493, 1706
800, 1066, 1333, 1600, 1866, 2133

Table 7
Dimensions of web-post to study effects of h0/h on k.
Group no.
1
4

e/tw
20

h0/e

h0/h

3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

0.74
0.51

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

h (mm)

6.0

120
120

360, 480, 600, 720, 840, 960

360, 480, 600, 720, 840, 960

480, 640, 800, 960, 1120, 1280

720, 960, 1200, 1440, 1680, 1920

Table 8
Dimensions of web-post to study effects of e/tw on k.
Group no.

e/tw

1
5

20
15

h0/e
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

h0/h
0.74

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

h (mm)

6.0

120
90

360, 480, 600, 720, 840, 960,

270, 360, 450, 540, 630, 720

480, 640, 800, 960, 1120, 1280

480, 600, 720, 840, 960

178

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

Table 9
Parameters of CSBs for studying effects of e/tw.
Group no.

Incline angle

e/tw

h0/tw

hf/tw

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

hf (mm)

Group I
Group II
Group III

60

10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60

80

15

8.0
10.0
12.0

80, 120, 160, 200, 240, 280, 320, 360, 400, 440, 480
100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600
120, 180, 240, 300, 360, 420, 480, 540, 600, 660, 720

640
800
960

120
150
180

Table 10
Parameters of CSBs for studying effects of h0/tw.
Group no.

Incline angel

e/tw

h0/tw

hf/tw

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

hf (mm)

Group IV
Group V
Group VI

60

15

40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120,

130, 140

15

3.0
6.0
10.0

45
90
150

120, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300, 330, 360, 390, 420
240, 300, 360, 420, 480, 540, 600, 660, 720, 780, 840
400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400

45
90
150

opening edge. hf was the web height of the Tee-section above the web
opening. l was the half span of the CSB. tf was the thickness of the ange.
h and bf were the section height and ange width of the CSB.
2.2. Boundary conditions
For the symmetry of the model, only half of the beam was modeled,
as shown in Fig. 4(a). Displacements in y (Uy) and z (Uz) direction of the
bottom ange at the left end of the beam were restrained to simulate
the pin support. The Uz at the top ange was restrained to simulate
the lateral brace. At the right end of the beam, the displacement in x
(Ux) direction and the rotation around y-axis (URy) of the web were restrained. The Uz was also restrained to prevent the beam from failing at
the lateral torsional buckling. For the top and bottom anges, the Ux and
rotation around z-axis (URz) were restrained. The vertical shear force
was applied at the bottom ange, as shown in Fig. 4(b).
The beam was meshed using the shell element S4R in ABAQUS, a 4node quadrilateral shell element with reduced integration and a largestrain formulation, with mesh size of 10 10 mm. The eigenvalue buckling analysis was employed to obtain the elastic buckling strength and
the buckling modes of the web-post.
2.3. Model verication
Test results on CSBs with cellular openings by Tsavdaridis and
D'Mello [10], on CSBs with hexagonal openings by Redwood and
Demirdjian [15] and by Zaarour and Redwood [19], and on CSBs with

cellular openings by Erdal and Saka [20] were used to validate the proposed FEM. The beams selected all failed in web-post buckling.
CSBs with cellular web openings tested by Tsavdaridis and D'Mello
[10] were made of UB457 152 52 and had steel grade of S355, as
shown in Fig. 5(a). The yield strength equaled to 375.3 MPa and
359.7 MPa for the web and the anges, respectively; and the ultimate
stresses of the web and the anges were 492.7 MPa and 480.9 MPa, respectively. The simply supported beam was loaded at mid-span through
a hydraulic jack. The load-middle span deection curves and failure
modes obtained from FEM agreed well with those from tests, as
shown in Fig. 5(b). The shear buckling strengths of tested specimen
A1 and B1 obtained from test were 133.3 kN and 101.5 kN, respectively,
which were half of the applied concentrated load. The Vcr,TEST/Vcr,FEM
were only 0.99 and 1.05 for the two tested beams, respectively. Vcr,TEST
and Vcr,FEM were the shear buckling strengths obtained from test and
FEM, respectively. Failure modes and buckling deformations obtained
from FEM and test all buckled in S shape, as shown in Fig. 5(c),
which proved the validity of the FEM.
Test results on CSBs with hexagonal openings carried out by Redwood and Demirdjian [15] and Zaarour and Redwood [19] were compared with the FEM results. The tested CSBs were simply supported
and were loaded by a concentrated force at middle span. Vertical stiffeners were applied at the two supports and the loading point at the
middle span. Dimensions of tested beams and yield strengths of the
web (fyw) and the anges (fyf) were listed in Table 1. h was the section
height of the CSB. h0 was the height of web opening. bf and tf were the
width and thickness of the ange, respectively. tw was the thickness of
the web. e was the width of web-post. b was the horizontal length of

Table 11
Parameters of CSBs for studying effects of hf/tw.
Group no.

Incline angle

e/tw

h0/tw

hf/tw

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

hf (mm)

Group VII
Group VIII
Group IX

60

15

80

3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23

8.0
10.0
12.0

120
150
180

640
800
960

24, 40, 56, 72, 88, 104, 120, 136, 152, 168, 184
30, 50, 70, 90, 110, 130, 150, 170, 190, 210, 230
36, 60, 84, 108, 132, 156, 180, 204, 228, 252, 276

Table 12
Parameters of CSBs for studying effects of tw.
Group
no.

Degrees

e/tw

h0/tw

hf/tw

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

hf (mm)

Group X
Group XI
Group XII

60

15
20
30

80

15

3.0, 4.0, 5.0 ,6.0,

7.0,8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0

45, 60, 75, 90, 105, 120, 135, 150, 165

60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160, 180, 200, 220
90, 120, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300, 330

240, 320, 400, 480, 560,

640, 720, 800, 880

45, 60, 75, 90, 105, 120,

135, 150, 165

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

179

Table 13
Parameters of CSBs for studying effects of .
Group no.

Incline angel

Tangent value

e/tw

h0/tw

hf/tw

tw (mm)

e (mm)

h0 (mm)

hf (mm)

Group XIII
Group XIV
Group XV

85, 80, 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50

11.43, 5.67, 3.73, 2.14, 1.73, 1.43, 1.20

15

80

15

6.0
8.0
10.0

90
120
150

480
640
800

90
120
150

Fig. 11. Effects of web-post dimensions on vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post. (a) Effects of e/tw on shear buckling strength, (b) effects of h0/tw on shear buckling strength,
(c) effects of hf/tw on shear buckling strength, (d) effects of tw on shear buckling strength, and (e) effects of on shear buckling strength.

180

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

the opening edge. L was the length of the beam, as shown in Fig. 6. n was
the number of openings of the CSB.
Shear buckling strengths obtained from FEM and tests [15,19] were
listed in Table 2. It could be seen that the shear buckling strengths predicted by FEM agreed well with those measured from tests [15,19]. The
Vcr,TEST/Vcr,FEM varied from 0.91 and 1.05 of the eight beams with a mean
value of 0.99 and a standard deviation of 0.0572.
For beam 10-5a and 10-5b [15], shear buckling deformations of the
web-post obtained from FEM and test were shown in Fig. 7. The FEM
and test results both demonstrated that the web-post buckled in S
shape.
Erdal and Saka [20] carried out experiment on cellular steel beams.
Test results of specimen NPI_240 and NPI_280 which failed in web-post
buckling were used to verify the FEM. The cellular steel beams were supported by round rollers and loaded by a concentrate force at middle span.
Lateral supports were installed at beam ends to prevent the lateral torsional buckling, as shown in Fig. 8. Dimensions of NPI_240 and NPI_280
were listed in Table 3. Shear buckling strengths and vertical deections
obtained from FEM and tests were listed in Tables 4 and 5, respectively.
Results obtained from the FEM with mesh size of 10 mm agreed well
with those measured from tests. The Vcr,TEST/Vcr,FEM varied from 0.93
and 1.06 of the six beams with a mean value of 0.99 and a standard deviation of 0.0667. The wTEST/wFEM varied from 0.88 and 1.01 of the six
beams. wTEST was the deection of the cellular steel beam obtained
from the tests, and wFEM was the deection obtained from FEM.

3. Precision of k proposed by Redwood and Demirdjian [15]

If Vcr had been obtained through FEM simulation, the buckling coefcient k could be obtained through reverse analysis by
2

k Vcr 

h0 =tw
s

Eetw
h2yi

where Vcr was the vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post,
which could be obtained through FEM eigenvalue analysis.
The horizontal shear buckling strength of the web-post could not exceed its shear yield strength
Vh;p 0:58etw f y

Fig. 12. Effects of e/tw on k.

Fig. 13. Effects of h0/tw on k.

Substitute Eqs. (2) and (5) into Eq. (4). The corresponding shear
yielding coefcient kp

kp 0:58

 2
f y h0
E tw

Redwood and Demirdjian [15] proposed the shear buckling coefcient k as a function of the ratio of web opening height to web-post
width h0/e, the ratio of web opening height to section height h0/h, and
the ratio of web-post width to web thickness e/tw. For h0/h equaled to
0.51 or 0.74, k could be obtained through Fig. 9 [15]. dg in Fig. 9 [15] represented section height of the CSB, which was denoted as h in this paper.
Comparison of shear buckling coefcients of web-posts obtained
using the nite element method and method proposed by Redwood
and Demirdjian [15] was shown in Fig. 10(a), (b) and (c). The yield
strength of steel, fy, was 345 MPa. The incline angle of opening edge
was 60.
Effects of web thickness on the shear buckling coefcients of the
web-post were shown in Fig. 10(a). Dimensions of the web-post were
listed in Table 6. Three tw were studied, which were 6.0 mm, 8.0 mm
and 10.0 mm. For the web-post with the same e/tw, h0/e and h0/h, k proposed by Redwood and Demirdjian [15] were the same. However, FEM
results showed that k changed with the changes of tw. So it was not
enough to formulate the buckling coefcient by only using the three dimensionless parameters e/tw, h0/e and h0/h. And the k calculated by

Fig. 14. Effects of hf/tw on k.

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

181

Fig. 15. Effects of tw on k.

Fig. 17. Distribution of k obtained from proposed method and FEM.

method proposed by Redwood and Demirdjian [15] was much lower

than that obtained through FEM.
Effects of h0/h on the shear buckling coefcients of the web-post
were shown in Fig. 10(b). Dimensions of the web-post studied were
listed in Table 7. Two h0/h were studied, which were 0.74 and 0.51. According to the curves obtained by Redwood and Demirdjian [15], with
the increase of h0/e, the slope of the k line with different h0/h was almost
the same, as shown in Fig. 10(b). However, FEM results showed that the
slope of the k line decreased with the increase in h0/h. k obtained by
Redwood and Demirdjian [15] was still smaller than FEM results.
Effects of e/tw on k were shown in Fig. 10(c). Dimensions of the webpost studied were listed in Table 8. Three e/tw were studied, while tw
was kept constant. k decreased with increase in e/tw, if it was calculated
by method presented by Redwood and Demirdjian [15]. FEM results
showed that k nearly kept constant with the increase in e/tw, if the
web-post had the same tw. k obtained by Redwood and Demirdjian
[15] was smaller than FEM results.

4. Shear buckling strength of web-post

Parameters that affected the buckling behaviors of the web-post
were studied rst to nd out how and to what degrees each parameter
inuenced the Vcr. If the vertical shear buckling strength Vcr had been
obtained through FEM simulation, then the shear buckling coefcient
k can be calculated by Eq. (4). Then a practical method to calculate k

was proposed based on curve tting of FEM simulation results. And

the vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post was calculated by
Eq. (3) at last.

4.1. Parameters affected vertical shear buckling strength of web-post

CSBs listed in Tables 913 were studied to show effects of web-post
dimensions on vertical shear buckling strength of a CSB with hexagonal
web openings. Analysis results were shown in Fig. 11. Dimensions of the
web-post were represented by dimensionless factors, which were the
ratio of web-post width to web thickness e/tw, the ratio of web opening
height to web thickness h0/tw, the ratio of web height of Tee-section
above web opening to web thickness hf/tw, the web thickness tw (in
mm), and the incline angle of web opening edge .
As shown in Fig. 11(a), (b) and (c), with the increase in e/tw, h0/tw
and hf/tw, the shear buckling strength decreased. h0/tw had great effect
on the shear buckling capacity. And with the increase in tw and , the
shear buckling strength increased, as shown in Fig. 11(d) and (e).

4.2. Effects of geometry parameters on the shear buckling coefcient k

After Vcr was obtained through FEM simulation, the buckling coefcient k can be obtained by Eq. (4). Parameters that affected k were
investigated through FEM.

4.2.1. Effects of e/tw on k

Three groups of CSBs were studied to show effects of e/tw on k. Parameters of the studied CSBs were listed in Table 9. As shown in
Fig. 12, k decreased non-linearly with the increase in e/tw and it could
be expressed by an exponent function with negative index.
Table 14
Statistics of (kCAL kFEM)/kFEM.

Fig. 16. Effects of on k.

Statistics project

Value

Mean
Standard error
Median
Standard deviation
Sample variance
Minimum
Maximum
Sum
Count

0.004653
0.002179
0.000391
0.027217
0.000741
0.043890
0.1183996
0.6978705
150

182

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

4.2.2. Effects of h0/tw on k

Totally 33 CSBs listed in Table 10 were studied to show effects of h 0 /t w on k. As shown in Fig. 13, k increased linearly
with the increase in h0/tw and it could be formulated by a linear
function.

4.2.3. Effects of hf/tw on k

33 CSBs were studied to illustrate effects of hf/tw on k. Dimensions of CSBs studied were listed in Table 11. As shown in Fig. 14,
k decreased non-linearly with the increase in hf /t w and it could
be formulated by an exponential function.

Fig. 18. Comparisons of Vcr obtained by proposed method and FEM. (a) Vertical shear buckling strength of web-post with different e/tw, (b) vertical shear buckling strength of web-post
with different h0/tw, (c) vertical shear buckling strength of web-post with different hf/tw, (d) vertical shear buckling strength of web-post with different tw, and (e) vertical shear buckling
strength of web-post with different.

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

of (kCAL kFEM)/kFEM were listed in Table 14. The mean value was
only 0.004653 and the standard error was only 0.002179.

Table 15
Calculated parameters of CSBs with hexagonal web openings.
Specimens

e/tw

h0/tw

hf

hf/tw

tw

tan

yi

s (mm)

10-5a [15]
10-5b [15]
10-6 [15]
10-7 [15]
10-1 [19]
10-3 [19]
12-1 [19]
12-3 [19]

21.85
21.85
21.85
21.85
16.25
16.04
15.65
15.45

74.78
74.78
74.78
74.78
68.68
72.17
75.23
65.48

52.56
52.56
52.56
52.56
57.97
53.50
56.39
68.19

14.76
14.76
14.76
14.76
16.19
14.82
12.02
14.76

3.56
3.56
3.56
3.56
3.58
3.61
4.69
4.62

60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
45.00
60.00
45.00

1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.00
1.73
1.00

13.11
13.11
13.11
13.11
14.86
13.26
14.62
18.46

308.00
308.00
308.00
308.00
256.04
369.82
350.02
441.44

4.4. Verication
The vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post in a CSB was
predicted by Eq. (3), where k was calculated by Eq. (7). Comparisons
of Vcr obtained by Eq. (3) and FEM analysis were shown in Fig. 18. It
could be seen that, for CSBs listed in Tables 913, Vcr obtained by
Eq. (3) agreed well with FEM analyses.
Test results on CSBs with hexagonal openings [15,19] were used to
validate the proposed method. Calculated parameters of CSBs were
listed in Table 15. Buckling coefcients k1 ~ k5 and shear buckling
strengths of CSBs obtained from the proposed method and test were
listed in Table 16. The average of (Vcr,CAL Vcr,TEST)/Vcr,TEST was 19.7%.
Web-posts in specimen 10-5a, 10-5b, 10-6 and 10-7 buckled in the elastic state; and those in specimen 10-1, 10-3, 12-1 and 12-3 failed in shear
yielding. For the proposed method was based on the elastic buckling of
the web-post, it overestimated the shear buckling strength when the
web-post buckled in the elasticplastic state, such as those with thick
web thickness. Through introducing a safety factor of 1.2, the precision
of the proposed method was increased. The average of (Vcr,CAL/1.2
Vcr,TEST)/Vcr,TEST was reduced to 0.22%, as listed in Table 16.

4.2.4. Effects of tw on k
As listed in Table 12, 27 CSBs were studied to show effects of tw on k.
As shown in Fig. 15, k decreased linearly with the increase in tw. It could
also be expressed by a linear function.
4.2.5. Effects of on k
As listed in Table 13, 24 CSBs were studied to show effects of on k.
was represented by its tangent value tan(). As shown in Fig. 16, k increased linearly with the increase in tan . It could also be expressed by
a linear function.
4.3. Practical equations for calculating shear buckling coefcient

5. Conclusions

Parameter studies showed that k decreased non-linearly with the increase in e/tw and hf/tw, as shown in Figs. 12 and 14. It increased linearly
with the increase in and h0/tw, as shown in Figs. 16 and 13. It decreased linearly with tw (in mm), as shown in Fig. 15. As results of numerical regression analysis, k could be calculated by
k k1  k2  k3  k4  k5 kp

Elastic buckling behaviors of the web-post in the CSB under vertical

shear were investigated using nite element method. Through treating
the upper part of the web-post as a free body under horizontal shear
force, whose shear buckling strength can be calculated by the thinplate shear buckling theory, the vertical shear buckling strength of the
web-post was obtained after providing the shear buckling coefcient k.
The shear buckling coefcient k was not only affected by the dimensionless parameters of the web-post, such as e/tw, h0/tw, and hf/tw, but
also the thickness of the web-post tw and incline angle of the opening
edge . k was calculated through reverse analysis after the vertical
shear buckling strength of the CSB was obtained through FEM simulation. e/tw, h0/tw, and hf/tw, tw and all had great inuences on the
shear buckling coefcient. A simplied method was proposed to calculate k. The vertical shear buckling strength of the web-post employing
the proposed k agreed well with FEM results.
For the proposed method was based on the elastic buckling of the
web-post, it overestimated the shear buckling strength when the
web-post buckled in the elasticplastic state, such as those with thick
web thickness. The average of (Vcr,CAL Vcr,TEST)/Vcr,TEST was 19.7%.
Through introducing a safety factor of 1.2, the precision of the proposed
method was increased. The average of (Vcr,CAL/1.2 Vcr,TEST)/Vcr,TEST
was reduced to 0.22%. The simplied method for calculating shear
buckling coefcient k in elasticplastic state needed to be investigated
later.
The proposed equation for calculating the shear buckling strength of
web-posts was derived from the CSBs with hexagonal web openings.

where
 1:011
e
k1 0:782 19:712
tw
k2 0:0325 0:00292

183

h0
tw

k3 0:275 0:239 exp0:093h f =tw

10

k4 16:9980:312tw

11

k5 2:037 0:0360 tan

12

Comparisons of k obtained from FEM and Eq. (7) were shown in

Figs. 1216. k obtained by Eq. (7) agreed well with FEM results. Fig. 17
showed differences between k obtained by Eq. (7) and FEM. The differences were mainly within 5%, which showed that Eq. (7) could give
accurate predictions on shear buckling coefcient. Here, kCAL was obtained by Eq. (7) and kFEM was obtained from FEM analyses. Statistics
Table 16
Shear buckling strength of CSBs obtained by proposed method and tests [15,19].
Specimens

k1

k2

k3

k4

k5

kp

Vcr

PTEST (kN)

(Vcr,CAL Vcr,TEST)/Vcr,TEST

(Vcr,CAL/1.2 Vcr,TEST)/Vcr,TEST

10-5a [15]
10-5b [15]
10-6 [15]
10-7 [15]
10-1 [19]
10-3 [19]
12-1 [19]
12-3 [19]
Average

1.65
1.65
1.65
1.65
1.96
1.97
2.00
2.02

0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.23
0.24
0.25
0.22

0.34
0.34
0.34
0.34
0.33
0.34
0.35
0.34

15.89
15.89
15.89
15.89
15.88
15.87
15.53
15.56

2.10
2.10
2.10
2.10
2.10
2.07
2.10
2.07

5.58
5.58
5.58
5.58
4.77
5.26
4.99
3.78

4.64
4.64
4.64
4.64
4.99
5.30
5.82
4.89

54.23
54.23
54.23
54.23
57.42
40.97
79.47
55.71

46.35
50.45
47.4
42.2
39.55
36.92
57.33
58.22

17.0%
7.5%
14.4%
28.5%
45.2%
11.0%
38.6%
4.3%
21.0%

2.5%
10.4%
4.7%
7.1%
21.0%
7.5%
15.5%
20.3%
0.8%

184

P. Wang et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 121 (2016) 173184

Whether the CSBs with other web opening shapes could use the proposed equation needed to be investigated later.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the support from the Fundamental
Research Funds of Shandong University (No. 2015JC 046), the Natural
Science Foundation of Shandong Province (ZR2015EM041) and the Natural Science Foundation of China (51578322) for the work reported in
this paper.
References
[1] K.F. Chung, T.C.H. Liu, A.C.H. Ko, Investigation on Vierendeel mechanism in steel
beams with circular web openings, J. Constr. Steel Res. 57 (5) (2001) 467490.
[2] T.C.H. Liu, K.F. Chung, Steel beams with large web openings of various shapes and
sizes: nite element investigation, J. Constr. Steel Res. 59 (9) (2003) 11591176.
[3] P.J. Wang, Q.J. Ma, X.D. Wang, Investigation on Vierendeel mechanism failure of castellated steel beams with llet corner web openings, Eng. Struct. 74 (1) (2014)
4451.
[4] P. Panedpojaman, T. Thepchatri, S. Limkatanyu, Novel simplied equations for
Vierendeel design of beams with (elongated) circular openings, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 112 (1) (2015) 1021.
[5] E. Ehab, Interaction of buckling modes in castellated steel beams, J. Constr. Steel Res.
67 (5) (2011) 814825.
[6] P. Panedpojaman, T. Thepchatri, S. Limkatanyu, Novel design equations for shear
strength of local web-post buckling in cellular beams, Thin-Walled Struct. 76 (1)
(2014) 92104.
[7] A.R. Zainal Abidin, B.A. Izzuddin, Meshless local buckling analysis of steel beams
with irregular web openings, Eng. Struct. 50 (special issue IASS-IACM 2012: Modelling and Computations) (2013) 197206.

[8] S. Durif, A. Bouchar, O. Vassart, Experimental tests and numerical modeling of cellular beams with sinusoidal openings, J. Constr. Steel Res. 82 (1) (2013) 7287.
[9] S. Durif, A. Bouchar, O. Vassart, Experimental and numerical investigation on webpost member from cellular beams with sinusoidal openings, Eng. Struct. 59 (2014)
587598.
[10] K.D. Tsavdaridis, C. D'Mello, Web buckling study of the behaviour and strength of
perforated steel beams with different novel web opening shapes, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 67 (10) (2011) 16051620.
[11] K.D. Tsavdaridis, C. D'Mello, Optimisation of novel elliptically-based web opening
shapes of perforated steel beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 76 (1) (2012) 3953.
[12] British Standard Institution, BS5950-1:2000, Structural Use of Steelworks in Building, BSI, 2000.
[13] P.J. Wang, X.D. Wang, N. Ma, Vertical shear buckling capacity of web-posts in castellated steel beams with llet corner hexagonal web openings, Eng. Struct. 75 (1)
(2014) 315326.
[14] R.M. Lawson, J. Lim, S.J. Hicks, W.I. Simms, Design of composite asymmetric cellular
beams and beams with large web openings, J. Constr. Steel Res. 62 (6) (2006)
614629.
[15] R.G. Redwood, S. Demirdjian, Castellated beam web buckling in shear, J. Struct. Eng.
ASCE 124 (8) (1998) 12021207.
[16] ABAQUS Standard User's Manual, Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen, Inc., USA, 2008
vols. 1, 2 and 3. Version 6.8-1.
[17] R.D. Krieg, D.B. Krieg, Accuracies of numerical solution methods for the elastic-perfectly plastic model, ASME J. Press. Vessel. Technol. 99 (4) (1977) 510515.
[18] H.L. Schreyer, R.F. Kulak, J.M. Kramer, Accurate numerical solutions for elasticplastic models, ASME J. Press. Vessel. Technol. 101 (3) (1979) 226234.
[19] W. Zaarour, R.G. Redwood, Web buckling in thin webbed castellated beams, J. Struct.
Div. Proc. ASCE 122 (8) (1996) 860866.
[20] F. Erdal, M.P. Saka, Ultimate load carrying capacity of optimally designed steel cellular beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 80 (1) (2013) 355368.