Au: Please check

the numbring of

6 Buckling
figures cited or
Display maths
also.

6.1 Simple Models

In Section 1.7 Chapter 1, we developed an expression to determine the buckling
load for a wooden column (Equation 1.7.1). In Chapter 6, we shall derive a similar
but more general expression based on what we learned in Chapter 2. In this section,
we shall approach the general expression by using simple models of the buckling
phenomenon.
Before we do that, we shall conduct a simple test to obtain a feel for the physical
phenomenon of buckling.

1. Take a wooden stick approximately 2-ft long with a 1/8-in. (~3.2 mm) square
section.
2. Insert the stick into a small block of Styrofoam as shown in Figure 6.1.1a.
3. Attach a binder clip to the top of the stick (Figure 6.1.1b).
4. Place several small magnets onto the binder clip carefully until the stick
starts to bend as shown in Figure 6.1.1c. Bending may occur suddenly
without warning, or slowly, depending on the straightness of the stick and
the arrangement of the weights.

What you have observed is another example of a buckling column albeit on a small
scale. Leonhard Euler (1707–1783), a Swiss mathematician and physicist, derived
the following relationship between the buckling load for a concentrically loaded
(axis of load aligned with the axis of the column) column and its geometrical and
material properties. An example of the “Euler equation” applicable to a cantilever
column subjected to an axial load is reproduced in Equation 6.1.1. It should apply to
our experiment.
π 2 EI EI (6.1.1)
Pcr = 2
≈ 2.47 × 2
4L L

where E is Young’s modulus, I is the moment of inertia, and L is the free length of
the stick. Buckling can be very dangerous in a structure. Structural designers need
to understand well the buckling mechanism so they can prevent it in structures they
design.
Figure 6.1.2a shows a cantilever column subjected to a horizontal load F at its
free end. We ignore the self-weight of the column. An expression for the lateral
deflection at the free end of such a column was developed in Section 2.8, Chapter 2.
FL3
v= (2.8.14)
3EI

293

6861X_C006.indd 293 2/7/08 4:31:36 PM

 294 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

Binder
clip Magnets

Wood
L
Push vertically

Styrofoam

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 6.1.1  Experiment.

In order to help us understand the buckling phenomenon, we set up an analog column

(Figure 6.1.2a). The analog column is rigid throughout its height. It is supported on
a pin at the base and its free end is maintained in position by a horizontal, linearly
elastic spring attached to the end of the column and a fixed point. In effect, the flex-
ibility of the entire column is concentrated in the spring.
Inspection of Figure 6.1.2 will reveal that the spring is analogous to the flexural
stiffness of the cantilever column. The column resists the load F because of its flex-
ural stiffness. The analogous column resists the load F with the help of the spring.

F v F v k

F=k.v

(a) Cantilever column (b) Rigid column

with a spring

Figure 6.1.2  System with horizontal spring.

6861X_C006.indd 294 2/7/08 4:31:38 PM

 Buckling 295

Without the spring, it would topple over. To improve the analogy, we make the stiff-
ness of the spring, k:
3EI (6.1.2)
k=
L3

Note that F = kv is the same as Equation 2.8.14. Even though the lateral stiffness of
the analog column is provided by a different mechanism, it mimics the cantilever
column successfully.
What would happen if you push the column in Figure 6.1.2b at the top? If you
could push the column at its exact cross-sectional center with a load that is exactly
vertical, and if the column is perfectly straight and isotropic throughout its length,
the column would remain as it is except for a small amount of shortening. However,
such a setup is virtually impossible under practical conditions. The vertical is almost
always “eccentric” with respect to the resistance axis of the column.
At this time, we stop and introduce the definition of eccentricity. It is the per-
pendicular distance between the axes of column resistance and applied load. We can
illustrate it in two dimensions as depicted in Figure 6.1.3a. The axis of column resis-
tance may be represented by the centerline of the column in Figure 6.1.3a (assuming
that the column is straight and the column section and material are uniform through-
out). You will note that the axial vertical load P acts at a small distance, e, to the
right of the centerline of the column at the point of application. The distance, e,
is the eccentricity of the applied vertical load with respect to the center of column
resistance.
We return to the analogous column (Figure 6.1.3a), which is loaded with an axial
load P at eccentricity e. Because of the eccentricity, the axial load generates a clock-
wise moment at the top equal to Pe. In response to the applied moment, the analogous

v e P e/L = 0.001
e
P P k.L
k.v
A
k k
e/L = 0.01

L k.L
2

k.v
B

P v
P 0
0.1L 0.2L
(a) Light load (b) Heavy load (c) Load-deflection relationship

Figure 6.1.3  System with horizontal spring.

6861X_C006.indd 295 2/7/08 4:31:40 PM

 296 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

column tends to rotate clockwise. This tendency is resisted by the spring. Taking
moments about the free end of the analogous column,

P × ( v + e ) = kv × L (6.1.3)

Rearranging Equation 6.1.3 to define the deflection, v, at the top of the analogous
column,
Pe (6.1.4)
v=
kL − P
The solid line and the broken line in Figure 6.1.3c show the relationship between
P and v for cases of large eccentricity (e/L = 0.01) and small eccentricity
(e/L = 0.001), respectively. For the case of large eccentricity, the displacement v
increases gradually as the load P increases. For the case of small eccentricity, the dis-
placement v increases dramatically when the load P approaches the value of kL because
the denominator in Equation 6.1.4 approaches zero. This phenomenon is similar to
what we observed when we loaded the wooden stick in the experiment (Figure 6.1.1).
We call Pcr = kL the buckling load. If we substitute Equation 6.1.2, we obtain
3EI (6.1.5)
Pcr = kL =2
L
This equation is similar to Equation 6.1.1 (the exact solution) except that the coeffi-
cient 3 is 20% larger than 2.47. Note that this equation is independent of the strength
of the spring. The way we have set it up with our assumptions, the spring does not
fail. The buckling strength of the analogous column is determined by the stiffness of
the spring. If we remove the load, the moment P (v + e) will disappear and the spring
will push back. The deflection at the top of the analogous column will return to zero.
Therefore, we call this failure mechanism “elastic buckling” as it is referred to in
engineering jargon even though it should be called “buckling in the range of linearly
elastic response.”

Exercise 6.1.1
In GOYA-U1, you can find a system with k = 0.5 N/mm and L = 200 mm. Fill in
Table 6.1.1 for the three cases: e = 0.1 mm, e = 1 mm, and e = −1 mm. Check your
results using GOYA-U1.
Figure 6.1.4a shows another simple model with a rotational spring at the bottom of a
rigid column. The stiffness of the spring is assumed as

3EI (6.1.6)
K=
L2

If q is small enough so that v = L sin θ ≈ Lθ , F = Kq/L is equivalent to Equation 2.8.14.

Figure 6.1.4b defines the eccentricity. Figure 6.1.4c shows the deformation caused by
the axial force. Moment equilibrium around the spring leads to

P × ( Lθ + e) = Kθ (6.1.7)

6861X_C006.indd 296 2/7/08 4:31:44 PM

 Buckling 297

Table 6.1.1
Load versus Deflection
Deflection v (mm)
Load P (N)
e = 0.1 mm e = 0.1 mm e = 0.1 mm

0
20
40
60
80
95

or
P e (6.1.8)
θ= ×

K
L −P L
from which
K 3EI (6.1.9)
Pcr = = 2
L L

Exercise 6.1.2
In GOYA-U2, you can find a system with K = 20 × 103 N-mm and L = 200 mm. Fill
in Table 6.1.2 for the case of e = 1 mm in terms of radians and degrees. Check your
results using GOYA-U2.

e
e L.q
v=L.θ P
P
F

θ θ

L L

K K K

M=K.θ P .
P M=K θ
(a) Horizontal force (b) Light load (c) Heavy load

Figure 6.1.4  System with rotational spring.

6861X_C006.indd 297 2/7/08 4:31:47 PM

 298 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

Table 6.1.2
Load versus Rotation
Rotation q (e = 0.1 mm)
Load P (N)
Unit: Rad. Unit: Deg.

0
20
40
60
80
95

Now we use a two-spring model that we had considered in Section 2.7, Chapter 2, to
evaluate the deflection of a cantilever beam. Figure 6.1.5a shows the model. Recall
that each spring represents the flexural deformation of a length of beam equal to L/2.
The relationship between the bending moments (MA and MB) and the rotations of the
springs (aA and a B) are

2 EI
M A = Kα A and M B = Kα B where K= (6.1.10)
L

The free-body diagrams shown in Figure 6.1.5b,c lead to

P × (vA + e) = M A = K α A (6.1.11)

P × ( v A + vB + e ) = M B = K α B (6.1.12)

vA e vA e vA
e vB vB e
P P P P
P.e
L/4 aB aA
A A A A MA

MA = KaA
L/2 P
aB
B B B MB
L/4 MB = KaB
P

(a) Model (b) Deformed shape (c) Free-body (d) Free-body (e) Bending moment

Figure 6.1.5  Two-spring model.

6861X_C006.indd 298 2/7/08 4:31:50 PM

 Buckling 299

Figure 6.1.5d shows the moment distribution along the height. We assume that aA and
a B are small enough (sin α A ≈ α A and sin α B ≈ α B). From Figure 6.1.5b, we obtain

L (6.1.13)
vA = (α A + α B ) ×
4
L (6.1.14)
vB = α B ×
2
Substituting Equations 6.1.13 and 6.1.14 into Equations 6.1.11 ad 6.1.12,

 L 
P × (α A + α B ) × + e  = K α A (6.1.15)
 4 
 L L  (6.1.16)
P × (α A + α B ) × + α B × + e  = K α B
 4 2 
If we solve these equations in terms of aA and a B, we obtain

(8K − 4 PL ) Pe (6.1.17)
αA =
( PL )2 − 8KPL + 8K 2
8KPe
αB = (6.1.18)
( PL )2 − 8KPL + 8K 2
Equations 6.1.17 and 6.1.18 have the same denominators. They will be zero if

2 2 K EI (6.1.19)
P= × ≈ 2.34 × 2
2 +1 L L
or

2 2 K EI
P= × ≈ 13.7 × 2 (6.1.20)
2 −1 L L

Figure 6.1.6 shows the relationship between the load P and the rotations of the springs
(aA and a B) assuming EI = 4 × 106 N/mm2, L = 200 mm (or K = 40,000 N-mm), and

250
αA
200
αB
150
Load (N)

100

50

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rotation (deg)

Figure 6.1.6  Load-rotational relationship.

6861X_C006.indd 299 2/7/08 4:31:58 PM

 300 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

Table 6.1.3
Load–Moment–Deflection
Bending Moment
Deflection v
Load P (N)
MA (N-m) MB (N-m) (mm)

0
50
100
150
200
220

e = 1 mm. We can see that the rotations increase dramatically as the load approaches
K = 234 N (the value given by Equation 6.1.19). Note that Equation 6.1.19 is similar to
Equation 6.1.1. The error for the approximate solution is only 5%.

Exercise 6.1.3
In GOYA-U3, you can find a two-spring model with L = 200 mm. Fill in Table 6.1.3 for
the case of EI = 4 × 106 N/mm2 and e = 1 mm. Check your results using GOYA-U3.

Example 6.1.1
Figure 6.1.7a shows the plan of a 110-story skyscraper. Each floor is supported by
76 columns with cross sections shown in Figure 6.1.7b. The columns are steel with
a Young’s modulus of 30,000 ksi. The weight of floor per unit area is 200 lbf/ft2. The
story height is 15 ft (Figure 6.1.7c). Assume that the beams are much stiffer than the
columns. Estimate the safety factor of the structure against buckling for the following
two cases: (In this application, the safety factor is defined as the buckling strength
divided by the axial load.)

Case 1: Structure as it is (the solid line in Figure 6.1.7c).

Case 2: All the beams supporting the second and third floors are destroyed because of
fire (the solid line in Figure 6.1.7d). Furthermore, Young’s modulus of steel is reduced
to 7,500 ksi because of the high temperature.

Hint: Calculate the horizontal stiffness against the force F shown in Figure 6.1.7c,d.
Use the method shown in Figure 6.1.3.

Solution
The total weight of the building is

W = 110 × 60 2 × 1000 = 8.80 × 108 lbf

 We ignore the possibility of rotation of the building about its vertical axis.

6861X_C006.indd 300 2/7/08 4:32:00 PM

 Buckling 301

16 in

200 ft 24 in

24 in

200 ft
(a) Floor plan (b) Section

13 ft 13 ft

13 ft 13 ft

13 ft 13 ft
F
13 ft 13 ft

13 ft 13 ft
F
13 ft 13 ft

(c) Before fire (d) After fire

Figure 6.1.7  A skyscraper.

The moment of inertia of the column section is

24 4 164
I= − = 22, 200 in 4
12 12

Recalling Equation 5.5.4, the horizontal stiffness for Case 1 is

∑ 12 EI 76 × 12 × (30, 000 × 10 3 ) × 22, 200

k= = = 1.60 × 108 lbf/in
H3 (13 × 12 )3

The critical load for Case 1 is

Pcr = kH = 1.60 × 108 × (13 × 12 ) = 2.50 × 1010 lbf

The safety factor is

Pcr 2.50 × 1010

= ≈ 28.4
W 8.80 × 108

6861X_C006.indd 301 2/7/08 4:32:04 PM

 302 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

The structure is quite safe against buckling. On the other hand, the horizontal stiffness
for Case 2 is

∑ 12 EI 76 × 12 × ( 7, 500 × 10 3 ) × 22, 200

k= = = 1.48 × 10 6 lbf/in
H3 (3 × 13 × 12 )3

The critical load for Case 1 is

Pcr = kH = 1.48 × 10 6 × (3 × 13 × 12 ) = 6.93 × 108 lbf

The safety factor is

Pcr 6.93 × 108

= = 0.79
W 8.80 × 108

The structure should collapse as shown by the broken line in Figure 6.1.7d. Collapse
is caused by the gravity force, not by a horizontal force. Note that Pcr is proportional
to EI/H2. Now that E is 1/4 and H is three times their values before the fire, the safety
factor is (1/4) × (1/3)2 = 1/36 of that in Case 1.

Example 6.1.2
A column is loaded in compression as shown in Figure 6.1.8a. Estimate the buck-
ling load assuming that the eccentricity e is small enough. (Hint: the column buckles
as shown by the broken lines in Figure 6.1.8a. Use the two-spring model shown in
Figure 6.1.8.)

e e e e
v v
P P P P
P.e
L/4 a
A A A M

M = Ka
L L/2 P

B B M
a
L/4

P P P
e e
(a) Column (b) Model (c) Deformed shape (d) Free-body (e) Bending moment

Figure 6.1.8  Simply compressed column.

6861X_C006.indd 302 2/7/08 4:32:07 PM

 Buckling 303

Solution
Figure 6.1.8c shows the deformed shape of the column axis, where a denotes the rota-
tion angle of springs A and B. Figure 6.1.8d shows free-body diagram, which leads to

P × (v + e) = K α

Noting v = α L/4, we get

 αL 
P× + e = K α
 4 

If we solve this equation in terms of a, we obtain

e
α=
K − PL
4

Assuming the denominator is zero, we conclude that

4 K 8EI
Pcr = = 2 (6.1.21)
L L

If we assume more than two springs, the coefficient 8 in Equation 6.1.21 will be larger
and close to Euler’s solution, which will appear in Section 6.2.

π 2 EI 10 EI (6.1.22)
Pcr = ≈ 2
L2 L
Note that the value is four times that in Equation 6.1.1 for a cantilever column.

Example 6.1.3
One end of a column is fixed and the other is supported by a vertical roller as shown
in Figure 6.1.9a. Estimate the buckling load using the two-spring model shown
in Figure 6.1.9b. (Hint: the column will buckle as depicted by the broken line in
Figure 6.1.9a.)

e e v = aL e v = aL e e
2 2
P P P P P
R R P .e
R R
L/4 2a
A A R A A 3Ka
3a
M = 3Ka
L L/2 P
a

B B R Ka
L/4 M = Ka
P

(a) Column (b) Model (c) Deformed shape (d) Free-body (e) Free-body (f) Bending moment

Figure 6.1.9  Fixed-end and roller-supported column.

6861X_C006.indd 303 2/7/08 4:32:12 PM

 304 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

Solution
Figure 6.1.9c shows the deformed shape of the column axis, where a denotes the rota-
tion angle of spring B. The rotation angle of spring A is 3a. The free-body diagrams
shown in Figure 6.1.9d,e lead to

 αL  L
P× + e − R × = 3 K α
 2  4

 L L
R ×  +  − P × e = Kα
 4 2

Eliminating the horizontal reaction R and solving in terms of a, we obtain
4 Pe
α=
20 K − 3PL
Assuming the denominator is zero, we conclude that
20 K 40 EI
Pcr = = (6.1.23)
3L 3L2
If we assume more than two springs, the coefficient 8 in Equation 6.1.21 will be larger
and close to Euler’s solution.
2π 2 EI 20 EI (6.1.24)
Pcr = ≈ 2
L2 L

Note that the value is eight times that in Equation 6.1.1 for a cantilever column.

6.2 Continuously Deformable Model

Having dealt with the problem of buckling using simple and rigid-discrete models,
we are ready to derive Euler’s equation in reference to a continuously deformable
model. To simplify the notation, we shall refer to a horizontal member (Figure 6.2.1a)
or a cantilever column rotated through 90°. In Figure 6.2.1b, v0 denotes the deflection
at the free end. Figure 6.2.1c shows the deflected shape of the member axis, where
v denotes the deflection of the member at a distance x from the fixed end. The free-
body diagram shown in Figure 6.2.1d determines the bending moment at any section
with a known deflection v.
M = P × ( e + v0 − v) (6.2.1)

Figure 6.2.1e shows the bending-moment diagram corresponding to Equation 6.2.1.
Recall the following equation derived in Section 2.8, Chapter 2, to describe the
relationship between curvature and bending moment.
d2v M
= (2.8.9)
dx 2 EI

 Leonhard Euler (1707–1783) was completely blind for the last seventeen years of his life, during which
time he produced almost half of his total work output. He had extraordinary powers of memory and
mental calculation.

6861X_C006.indd 304 2/7/08 4:32:17 PM

 Buckling 305

L
P
e
e = 0.1 mm
(a) Very small load 1.6
P
e 1.4
v0
1.2
e = 1 mm
(b) Large load 1.0

qL (rad)
P 0.8
e
e + v0 – v v0
0.6
v
x 0.4

(c) Deflected shape 0.2

P 0
e + v0 – v e
v0 0 2 4 6 8 10
v P
v0 (mm)
M
(f) Load-deflection relationship
(d) Free-body diagram

P . (e + v0)
P . (e + v0 – v)
P.e

(e) Bending moment

Figure 6.2.1  Buckling of cantilever beam.

Replacing M as defined by Equation 6.2.1, we obtain

d 2 v P × ( e + v0 − v) (6.2.2)
=
dx 2 EI
If we let q = P/EI ,

d2v (6.2.3)
+ q 2 v = q 2 ( e + v0 )
dx 2

The solution of the differential equation is of the form

v = C1 sin qx + C2 cos qx + e + v0 (6.2.4)

where C1 and C2 are constants of integration.

 The second derivative of Equation 6.2.4 is

d2v (6.2.4′)
= −C1 q 2 sin qx − C2 q 2 cos qx
dx 2
If we substitute Equations 6.2.4 and 6.2.4′ into Equation 6.2.3, we find that Equation 6.2.3 is satisfied.
Therefore, we conclude that Equation 6.2.4 is the solution.

6861X_C006.indd 305 2/7/08 4:32:22 PM

 306 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

To evaluate the constants C1 and C2, we use the boundary conditions v = 0 and
dv/dx = 0 at x = 0 (at the fixed end), from which we get C1 = 0 and C2 = −( e + v0 ).
Substituting these values into Equation 6.2.4, we obtain

v = ( e + v0 )(1 − cos qx ) (6.2.5)

To determine the deflection at the free end, v0, we use the other boundary condition:
v = v0 at x = L (at the free end). This leads to
 1  (6.2.6)
v0 = e  − 1
 cos qL 

Figure 6.2.1f shows the relationship between qL and v0 for the case of L = 100 mm.
The value qL is indicated in terms of radians (no physical unit) because the unit
of q = P/EI is a reciprocal of length. Note that v0 increases to infinity as qL
approaches π /2 ≈ 1.57 even if the eccentricity e is very small. The reason for this
result is that cosqL in Equation 6.2.6 approaches zero. Substituting q = P / EI into
qL = π /2 and solving for P, we get Euler’s equation for the buckling load of a can-
tilever column.
π 2 EI (6.2.7)
Pcr =
4 L2

Exercise
In GOYA-U4, you can find the case illustrated in Figure 6.2.2a: a 200-mm long col-
umn with a cross section of 10 mm × 15 mm and a Young’s modulus of 1000 N/mm2.

P
10 mm P

15 mm

y
200 mm

(a) (b)

Figure 6.2.2  Column.

6861X_C006.indd 306 2/7/08 4:32:29 PM

 Buckling 307

AU: Table title? Table 6.2.1

qL v0 (mm)
Load P (N) q (/mm) cosqL
Unit: Rad. Unit: Deg. e = 1 mm e = 0.1 mm

0
25
50
75

Because the moment of inertia is smaller around the y-axis, the column deflects in
direction x as shown in Figure 6.2.2b. Calculate the moment of inertia around the
y-axis and calculate the buckling load. Fill in Table 6.2.1 for the two cases: e = 0.1 mm
and e = 1 mm. Check your results using GOYA-U4.

Example 6.2.1
Take a spaghetti strand 200 mm (~8 in.) long with a diameter of 1.6 mm (~0.06 in.).
Assume that Young’s modulus is 2000 N/mm2, the compressive strength is 200 N/mm2,
and the tensile strength is 20 N/mm2. Compute the buckling loads for the spaghetti
strand for the three types of loading shown in Figure 6.2.3. Check your results in the
kitchen using a scale.

F
F

100

F
200

100

F F

(a) Compressive (b) Tensile (c) Bending

force force force

Figure 6.2.3  Loading of spaghetti.

6861X_C006.indd 307 2/7/08 4:32:31 PM

 308 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

P P

v0

L L

v0
2L
P v0

P P
(b) Bending (c) Cantilever
(a) Deflected shape moment column (d) Test apparatus

Figure 6.2.4  Pin-Supported column.

Solution
Moment of inertia of the spaghetti strand is

π r 4 3.14 × 0.82
I= = = 0.32 mm 4
4 4

Figure 6.2.4a shows the deformed shape of the strand, with length 2L, after buckling.
Figure 6.2.4b shows the bending-moment diagram, where eccentricity is assumed to
be negligible. The condition is equivalent to that of a cantilever column of length L
shown in Figure 6.2.4c. Therefore, the buckling load is

π 2 EI 3.14 2 × 2000 × 0.322 (or 0.6 oz)

Pcr = = = 0.16 N
4 L2 4 × 100 2
The cross-sectional area of the spaghetti strand is

A = π r 2 = 3.14 × 0.82 = 2.0 mm 2

6861X_C006.indd 308 2/7/08 4:32:37 PM

 Buckling 309

The force required to break the strand by pulling is the product of the cross-sectional
area and the tensile strength.
F = Aσ = 2.0 × 20 = 40 N (or 8.9 lb)

Section modulus of the spaghetti is

I π r 3 3.14 × 0.83
Z= = = = 0.4 mm 3
r 4 4

Flexural strength is determined using the bending strength ( M = Zσ ) and the span
length L.
2 M 2 Zσ 2 × 0.4 × 20
F= = = = 0.16 N (or 0.6 oz)
L L 100
AU: Twice If you test a 100-mm-long spaghetti, the flexural strength will be twice, whereas the
what?
buckling strength will be four times. In GOYA-U5, you can have a test apparatus
shown in Figure 6.2.4d. We use such an apparatus when we conduct a test of buckling
of an I-shaped steel column.
Isaac Newton (1643–1727) showed that the laws of physics observed on Earth are
also observed in space. You should understand that the laws of mechanics observed
in the kitchen using a spaghetti strand are also observed in skyscrapers that use steel
columns.

Example 6.2.2
If you keep loading the spaghetti strand in Example 6.2.1 after buckling, it will break.
Estimate the deflection v0 at fracture. (Hint: The spaghetti strand will break if the
maximum tensile stress reaches its tensile strength. Look in GOYA-U5 and see the
stress distribution in the section at midspan.)

Solution
Figure 6.2.5a shows the stress distribution of a column subjected to pure compres-
sion, where P is assumed positive though in compression. If we apply a small bending
moment, the stress distribution will be trapezoidal as shown in Figure 6.2.5b (Section
5.1, Chapter 5). If we increase the bending moment, the stress distribution will be as
shown in Figure 6.2.5c. If the maximum tensile stress reaches the strength, the column
will fail.

P M
σ =− + (6.2.8)
A Z

Substituting M = Pv0 and σ = 20 N/mm 2 into Equation 6.2.8, and solving for v0 , we
get

 P Z  0.159  0.402
v0 =  σ +  × =  20 + × = 50.8 mm (or 2.0 in.)
 A P  2.01  0.1159

The maximum compressive stress is

P M P Pv 0.159 0.159 × 50.8

σ =− − =− − 0 =− − = −0.08 − 20.1 = −20.2 N/mm 2
A Z A Z 2.01 0.402

6861X_C006.indd 309 2/7/08 4:32:44 PM

 310 Understanding Structures: An Introduction to Structural Analysis

Uniform compression
–P/A –P/A

(a) M = 0

Uneven compression
–P/A + M/Z
–P/A – M/Z

(b) M is applied

Tension
–P/A + M/Z

–P/A – M/Z

Compression
(c) M is increased

Figure 6.2.5  Stress distribution.

Note that the magnitude is almost equal to the maximum tensile stress, σ = 20 N/mm 2.
The stress distribution in a buckled column is quite similar to that in a beam without
axial force.

Exercise 6.2.1
Compute the deflection v0 at fracture for a 100-mm-long spaghetti strand. The answer
will be about 1/4 of that obtained in Example 6.2.2.

Exercise 6.2.2
Compute the deflection of the spaghetti strand v0 at fracture under the loading shown
in Figure 6.2.6 for cases of L = 100 mm and 50 mm. The answers will be smaller than
those for buckling, but not very different, because the bending-moment distributions
are similar.

L
F

v0

Figure 6.2.6  Simply supported beam.

6861X_C006.indd 310 2/7/08 4:32:47 PM

 Buckling 311

B 40 ft
20 ft
20 ft D
A Snow F

C
20 ft E
40 ft 40 ft

G
20 ft H
20 ft J

(a) Perspective view (b) Elevation

Figure 6.3.1  Canopy in snowy region.

6.3 Problems
6.1 Figure 6.1.8a shows a canopy that extends out from a building. We may
assume that the building is stiff and strong enough not to fail under
the conditions specified. The canopy is supported by three beams:
AB, CD, and EF. You may assume the beams to be simply supported
(Figure 6.1.8b). Each beam is supported by a steel pipe-column having
an outside diameter of 8.0 in. and an inside diameter of 6.0 in. The con-
nections at both ends of each column may be assumed to be pins. Assume
that Young’s modulus for steel is 30,000 ksi. The building is in a snowy
region, and the maximum possible snow load per unit area of the can-
opy is estimated to be 1,000 lbf/ft2. Assume that the self weights of the
canopy and the beams are negligible, and the tributary area of column
CH is 20 × 20 = 400 ft2 as indicated by the broken lines in Figure 6.3.1a.
Check if column CH is safe against buckling.
6.2 Assume that we make the connections between the foundation beams
and the columns continuous so that the columns may be assumed to be
fixed at their bases. Check if the columns are safe against buckling under
the specified snow load.
6.3 Assume that the columns are fixed top and bottom. Check if the columns
are safe against buckling under the specified snow load.

 The “tributary area” for a particular column is defined as the area that contributes load to that column.
In this case, we assume that the moment restraints on the slab across lines AB, CD, and EF are similar.
Accordingly, half the load on the slab goes to beam CD. Because beam CD is supported simply, half
of the load it carries goes to support C. The tributary area is one-fourth of the area ABEF or 20 ×
20 = 400 ft2.

6861X_C006.indd 311 2/7/08 4:32:48 PM

6861X_C006.indd 312 2/7/08 4:32:48 PM