UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

12 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN – II

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The basic theory of beam buckling was explained in the previous chapter. Doubly
symmetric I- section has been used throughout for the development of the theory and
later discussion. It was established that practical beams fail by:

(i) Yielding, if they are short

(ii) Elastic buckling, if they are long, or
(iii) Inelastic lateral buckling, if they are of intermediate length.

A conservative method of designing beams was also explained and its limitations were
outlined.

In this chapter a few cases of lateral buckling strength evaluation of beams encountered
in practice would be explained. Cantilever beams, continuous beams, beams with
continuous and discrete lateral restraints are considered. Cases of monosymmetric beams
and non-uniform beams are covered. The buckling strength evaluation of non-symmetric
sections is also described.

2.0 CANTILEVER BEAMS

A cantilever beam is completely fixed at one end and free at the other. In the case of
cantilevers, the support conditions in the transverse plane affect the moment pattern. For
design purposes, it is convenient to use the concept of notional effective length, k, which
would include both loading and support effects. The notional effective length is defined
as the length of the notionally simply supported (in the lateral plane) beam of similar
section, which would have an elastic critical moment under uniform moment equal to the
elastic critical moment of the actual beam under the actual loading conditions.
Recommended values of ‘k’ for a number of cases are given in Table 1. It can be seen
from the values of ‘k’ that it is more effective to prevent twist at the cantilever edge rather
than the lateral deflection.

Generally, in framed structures, continuous beams are provided with overhang at their
ends. These overhangs have the characteristics of cantilever beams. In such cases, the
type of restraint provided at the outermost vertical support is most significant. Effective
prevention of twist at this location is of particular importance. Failure to achieve this
would result in large reduction of lateral stability as reflected in large values of ‘k’, in
Table 1.

© Copyright reserved

Version II 12-1
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Table 1 Recommended values of ‘k’

Restraint conditions Loading condition

At support At tip Normal Destabilizing

Built in laterally and 0.8 1.4

torsionally Free

0.7 1.4
Lateral restraint only

Torsional Restraint only 0.6 0.6

Lateral and Torsional

Restraint 0.5 0.5

Continuous with 1.0 2.5

lateral and torsional Free
restraint
0.9 2.5
Laterally restraint only

Torsional Restraint only

0.8 1.5

Laterally and Torsional

Restraint 0.7 1.2

Continuous, with 3.0 7.5

lateral restraint only Free

Lateral restraint only 2.7 7.5

Torsional Restraint only

2.4 4.5
Laterally and Torsional
Restraint
2.1 3.6
For continuous cantilevers  not less than 1 where 1 is the length of the adjacent
span

Version II 12-2
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

3.0 CONTINUOUS BEAMS

Beams, extending over a number of spans, are normally continuous in vertical, lateral or
in both planes. In the cases, where such continuity is not provided lateral deflection and
twisting may occur. Such a situation is typically experienced in roof purlins before
sheeting is provided on top of them and in beams of temporary nature. For these cases, it
is always safe to make no assumption about possible restraints and to design them for
maximum effective length.

Another case of interest with regard to lateral buckling is a beam that is continuous in the
lateral plane i.e. the beam is divided into several segments in the lateral plane by means
of fully effective braces. The buckled shape for such continuous beams include
deformation of all the segments irrespective of their loading. Effective length of the
segments will be equal to the spacing of the braces if the spacing and moment patterns
are similar. Otherwise, the effective length of each segment will have to be determined
separately.

To illustrate the behaviour of continuous beams, a single-span beam provided with

equally loaded cross beams is considered (see Fig. 1).

W W

C D
A B
1 2 1

b

Fig. 1 Single - span beam

Two equally spaced, equally loaded cross beams divide the beam into three segments
laterally. In this case, true Mcr of the beam and its buckling mode would depend upon the
spacing of the cross beams. The critical moment McrB for any ratio of 1 / b would lie in
between the critical moment values of the individual segments. The critical moments for
the two segments are obtained using the basic equation given in the earlier chapter.
π π2 E 
M cr1  1.75 ( E I y GJ) 1  2
(1)
1  1 GJ

(In the outer segment, m = 0.57. Using 1 / m and the basic moment, the critical moment is
determined)
π π2 E 
M cr2  ( EI y GJ) 1  2
2  2 GJ (2)

Version II 12-3
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

(This segment is loaded by uniform moments at its ends – basic case)

Mcr1 and Mcr2 values are plotted against 1 / band shown in Fig. 2 for the particular case
considered with equal loading and a constant cross section throughout.

Dimensionless Critical Moment Mcr / McruB 8

Mcr1
4
McrC Zero interaction point
2 Mcr2

Unbraced beams Mcr = McruB

0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.37 0.4 0.5

Dimensionless Load Position 1/b

Fig.2 Interaction between Mcr1 and Mcr2

It is seen that for 1 / b = 0.37, Mcr1 and Mcr2 are equal and the two segments are
simultaneously critical. The beam will buckle with no interaction between the two
segments. For any other value of 1 / b there will be interaction between the segments
and the critical load would be greater than the individual values, as shown in the figure.
For values of 1 / b  0.37, outer segments will restrain the central segment and vice-
versa when 1 / b  0.37.
The safe load for a laterally continuous beam may be obtained by calculating all
segmental critical loads individually and choosing the lowest value assuming each
segment as simply supported at its ends.
It is of interest to know the behaviour of beams, which are continuous in both transverse
and lateral planes. Though the behaviour is similar to the laterally unrestrained beams,
their moment patterns would be more complicated. The beam would buckle in the lateral
plane and deflect in the vertical plane. There is a distinct difference between the points of
contraflexure in the buckled shape and points of contraflexure in the deflected shape.
These points will not normally occur at the same location within a span, as shown in Fig.
3. Therefore, it is wrong to use the distance between the points of contraflexure of the
deflected shape as the effective length for checking buckling strength.

Version II 12-4
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

w2 (udl) w1 (udl) w2 (udl)

1 2 2 1
Continuous beam and loading

Deflected shape
1 ’ 2’ 2 ’ 1 ’

Buckled shape

Fig. 3 Continuous beam – deflected shape and buckled shape

4.0 EFFECTIVE LATERAL RESTRAINT

Providing proper lateral bracing may increase the lateral stability of a beam. Lateral
bracing may be either discrete (e.g. cross beams) or continuous (e.g. beam encased in
concrete floors). The lateral buckling capacity of the beams with discrete bracing may be
determined by using the methods described in a later Section. For the continuously
restrained beams, assuming lateral deflection is completely prevented, design can be
based on in-plane behaviour. It is important to note that in the hogging moment region of
a continuous beam, if the compression flange (bottom flange) is not properly restrained, a
form of lateral deflection with cross sectional distortion would occur.

4.1 Discrete bracing

In order to determine the behaviour of discrete braces, consider a simply supported beam
provided with a single lateral support of stiffness Kb at the centroid, as shown in Fig. 4.
M

Kb

Fig. 4 Beam with single lateral support

Version II 12-5
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

The relationship between Kb and Mcr is shown in Fig. 5.

Kb
3.5 4

3.0 Kb 15
Mc r without bracing
Kb
Mcr with bracing

2.5 100
Kb 2 G J / E  =240
2.0

1.5

1.0 0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Non dimensional bracing stiffness Kb 3 / 48 E Iy

Fig. 5 Relationship between Kb and Mcr

It is seen that Mcr value increases with Kb, until Kb is equal to a limiting value of Kb. The
corresponding Mcr value is equal to the value of buckling for the two segments of the
beam. Mcr value does not increase further as the buckling is now governed by the
individual Mcr values of the two segments.

Generally, even a light bracing has the ability to provide substantial increase in stability.
There are several ways of arranging lateral bracing to improve stability. The limiting
value of the lateral bracing stiffness, Kb, is influenced by the following parameters.

 Level of attachment of the brace to the beam i.e. top or bottom flange.
 The type of loading on the beam, notably the level of application of the transverse
load
 Type of connection, whether capable of resisting lateral and torsional deformation
 The proportion of the beam.

Provision of bracing to tension flanges is not so effective as compression flange bracing.

Bracing provided below the point of application of the transverse load would not be able
to resist twisting and hence full capacity of the beam is not achieved. For the design of
effective lateral bracing systems, the following two requirements are essential.

 Bracing should be of sufficient stiffness so that buckling occurs between the braces
 Lateral bracing should have sufficient strength to withstand the force transferred by
the beam.

A general rule is that lateral bracing can be considered as fully effective if the stiffness of
the bracing system is at least 25 times the lateral stiffness of the member to be braced.

Version II 12-6
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Provisions in BS 5950 stipulate that adequate lateral and torsional restraints are provided
if they are capable of resisting 1) a lateral force of not less than 1% of the maximum
factored force in the compression flange for lateral restraints, 2) and a couple with lever
arm equal to the depth between centroid of flanges and a force not less than 1% of the
maximum factored compression flange force.

4.2 Continuous restraint

In a framed building construction, the concrete floor provides an effective continuous

lateral restraint to the beam. As a result, the beam may be designed using in-plane
strength. A few examples of fully restrained beams are shown in Fig. 6.

Friction connection Concrete topping

Light weight
Steel Decking Shear studs
(a) (b)
Beam fully encased in Beam in friction connection (c)
concrete with concrete Beam with metal decking
Fig. 6 Beams with continuous lateral restraint

The lateral restraint to the beam is effective only after the construction of the floor is
completed. The beam will have to be temporarily braced after its erection till concreting
is done and it has hardened.

For the case shown in Fig.6 (a), the beam is fully encased in concrete, and hence there
will be no lateral buckling. In the arrangement shown in Fig.6 (b), the slab rests directly
upon the beam, which is left unpainted. Full restraint is generally developed if the load
transmitted and the area of contact between the slab and the beam are adequate to develop
the needed restraint by friction and bond. For the case shown in Fig.6(c), the metal
decking along with the concrete provides adequate bracing to the beam. However, the
beam is susceptible to buckling before the placement of concrete due to the low shear
stiffness of the sheeting. Shear studs are provided at the steel-concrete interface to
enhance the shear resistance. The codal provisions require that for obtaining fully
effective continuous lateral bracing, it must withstand not less than 1% of the maximum
force in the compression flange.

5.0 BUCKLING OF MONOSYMMETRIC BEAMS

For beams symmetrical about the major axis only e.g. unequal flanged I- sections, the
non-coincidence of the shear centre and the centroid complicates the torsional behaviour
of the beam. The monosymmetric I-sections are generally more efficient in resisting loads
provided the compressive flange stresses are taken by the larger flange.

Version II 12-7
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

When a monosymmetric beam is bent in its plane of symmetry and twisted, the
longitudinal bending stresses exert a torque, which is similar to torsional buckling of
short concentrically loaded compression members. The longitudinal stresses exert a
torque, TM given by

TM= Mx x d / dz (3)

where x = 1/ Ix  ( x  y  y  ) dA   y (4)
A
is the monosymmetry property of the cross section. Explicit expression for x for a
monosymmetric I-section is given in Fig. 7.

h  D - T1  T  / 

B1 T1
B T h  D  T  T D  T  t / 
y   
y S B T  B T  D  T  T  t
x C D
h t y  h  y
y0 

T2 


B2   ( B / B ) ( T / T )
y

 = B13 T1 h2 / 12

    
 
 h  y  B  T  B  T  h  y  


     


x   
Ix      
  y 
B T

 B 
T y
 
   h  y  T /   y  T /  

 t / 
    

Fig. 7 Properties of monosymmetric I-sections

The torque developed, Tm, changes the effective torsional rigidity of the section from GJ
to (GJ+Mx x). In doubly symmetric beams the torque exerted by the compressive
bending stresses is completely balanced by the restoring torque due to the tensile stresses
and therefore x is zero. In monosymmetric beams, there is an imbalance of torque due to
larger stresses in the smaller flange, which is farther from the shear centre. Hence, when
the smaller flange is in compression there is a reduction in the effective torsional rigidity;

Version II 12-8
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Mxx is negative and when the smaller flange is in tension Mx x is positive. Thus, the
principal effect of monosymmetry is that the buckling resistance is increased when the
larger flange is in compression and decreased when the smaller flange is in compression.
This effect is similar to the Wagner effect in columns. The value of critical moment for
unequal flange I beam is given by.

   2 E      2   
 
Mc = E Iy GJ  1   m
  m
 (5)
2
   GJ  2   2 

I yc
Where m = (6)
Iy
Iyc is the section minor axis second moment of area of the compression flange.

The monosymmetry property is approximated to

x = 0.9h (2 m -1) (1 – Iy2 / Ix2 ) (7)

and the warping constant  by

 = m (1- m) Iy h2 (8)

Very little is known of the effects of variations in the loading and the support conditions
on the lateral stability of monosymmtric beams. However, from the available results, it is
established that for top flange loading higher critical loads are always obtained when the
larger flange is used as the compression flange. Similarly for bottom flange loading
higher critical loads can be obtained when this is the larger flange. For Tee- sections x
can be obtained by substituting the flange thickness T1 or T2 equal to zero; also for Tee
sections the warping constant,  is zero.

6.0 BUCKLING OF NON-UNIFORM BEAMS

Non-uniform beams are often used in situations, where the strong axis bending moment
varies along the length of the beam. They are found to be more efficient than beams of
uniform sections in such situations. The non-uniformity in beams may be obtained in
several ways. Rectangular sections generally have taper in their depths. I-beams may be
tapered in their depths or flange widths; flange thickness is generally kept constant.
However, steps in flange width or thickness are also common.

Tapering of narrow rectangular beams will produce considerable reduction in minor axis
flexural rigidity, EIy, and torsional rigidity, GJ; consequently, they have low resistance to
lateral torsional buckling. Reduction of depth in I-beams does not affect EIy, and has only
marginal effect on GJ. But warping rigidity, E, is considerably reduced. Since the
contribution of warping rigidity to buckling resistance is marginal, depth reduction does

Version II 12-9
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

not influence significantly the lateral buckling resistance of I beams. However, reduction
in flange width causes large reduction in GJ, EIy and E. Similarly, reduction in flange
thickness will also produce large reduction in EIy, E, and GJ in that order. For small
degrees of taper there is little difference between width-tapered beams and thickness
tapered beams. But for highly tapered beams, the critical loads of thickness tapered ones
are higher. Thus, the buckling resistance varies considerably with change in the flange
geometry.

Based on the analysis of a number of beams of different cross sections with a variety of
loading and support conditions, the elastic critical load for a tapered beam may be
determined approximately by applying a reduction factor r to the elastic critical load for
an equivalent uniform beam possessing the properties of the cross section at the point of
maximum moment

 
r= (9)
  

   
S x  D   B   T  
       (10)
S x  D   B   T  
 
Sx = section modulus.

T = flange thickness.

D = depth of the section.

B =flange width.

Subscripts 0 and 1 relate to the points of maximum and minimum moment respectively.

For the design of non-uniform sections, BS 5950 provides a simple method, in which the
properties where the moment is maximum may be used and the value of n is suitably
adjusted. The value of n is given by

n = 1.5 – 0.5 Asm / Alm  1.0 (11)

Where Asm and Alm are flange areas at the points of the smallest and largest moment, and
m = 1.0

7.0 BEAMS OF UNSYMMETRICAL SECTIONS

The theory of lateral buckling of beams developed so far is applicable only to doubly
symmetrical cross sections having uniform properties throughout its length. Many lateral
buckling problems encountered in design practice belong to this category. However,

Version II 12-10
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

cases may arise where the symmetry property of the section may not be available. Such
cases are described briefly in this Section.
The basic theory can also be applied to sections symmetrical about minor axis only e.g.
Channels and Z-sections. In this section, the shear centre is situated in the axis of
symmetry although not at the same point as the centroid. In the case of channel and Z
sections, instability occurs only if the loading produces pure major axis bending. The
criterion is satisfied for the two sections if: (1) for the channel section, the load must act
through the shear centre Fig.8 (a) and, (2) for Z-section in a direction normal to the
horizontal principal plane [Fig.8 (b)].
y v
y
W
Centroid (c)
u W
x x x x
u

Shear center (s)

y y Centroid
v and shear center

(a) Channel section (b) Z-section

Fig. 8 Loading through shear centre

If these conditions are satisfied, Mcr of these sections can be obtained using their
properties and the theoretical equation. The warping constant  for the sections are:

T B  h   BT   h t 
 for a channel (12)
   BT  ht 


B3 h 2
12( 2 B t h) 2
2 t ( B 2  Bh  h2 )  3t B h for a Z  section (13)

where,
h = distance between flange centroids
t = thickness of web
B = total width of flange
T = flange thickness.

Version II 12-11
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

It is very difficult to obtain such loading arrangements so as to satisfy the restrictions

mentioned above. In such cases, the behaviour may not be one of lateral stability; instead
a combination of bending and twisting or bi-axial bending.
For sections, which have symmetry about minor axis only, their shear centre does not
coincide with the centroid. This results in complicated torsional behaviour and theoretical
predictions are not applicable. Fig. 9 shows the instability behaviour of sections with
flanges of varying sizes and positions (top or bottom). It can be seen from the figure that
sections with flange in the compression region are more advantageous.

12
Non dimensional critical moment

10
8
Mcr /(E Iy G J)1/2

6
4
2
0
2 10 100 1000
Non dimensional torsional parameter 4  G J / E Iy h2
2

Fig. 9 Effect of flange position and proportion on lateral stability

While considering the case of tapered beams, it has been established, based on lateral
stability studies, that variation of the flange properties can cause large changes in the
lateral buckling capacity of the beam, whereas tapering of depth has insignificant
influence on the buckling capacity.

8.0 SUMMARY
In this chapter, lateral torsional buckling of some practical cases of beams have been
explained. It is pointed out that for cantilever beams the type of restraint provided at fixed
-end plays a significant role in their buckling capacities. Torsional restraint of the
cantilever beam has been found to be more beneficial than lateral restraint. In the case of
beams with equally spaced and loaded cross beams the critical moment of the main beam
and the associated buckling mode will depend on the spacing of the cross beams.
Requirements for effective lateral restraint have been presented. Continuous restraint
provided by concrete floors to beams in composite constructions of buildings is
discussed. As discussed in an earlier chapter, the local buckling effects should be taken
into account by satisfying the minimum requirements of the member cross-section. Cases
of monosymmetric beams and non- uniform beams are also briefly explained. Finally

Version II 12-12
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

cases of beams with un-symmetric sections are discussed and concluded that beams with
flanges in the compression zone are more advantageous from the point of view of lateral
torsional buckling.

9.0 REFERENCES
1. Trahair N.S., ‘The behaviour and design of steel structures’, Chapman and Hall
London, 1977

2. Kirby P.A. and Nethercot D.A.,’Design for structural stability’, Granada Publishing,
London, 1979

Version II 12-13
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 1 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date.7/3/2000
Problem I :

A propped cantilever has a span of 9.8 m. it is loaded by cross beams

at 4.3 m and 6.6 m from its left hand end. The ends of the beam and the
loaded points are assumed to be fully braced laterally and torsionally.

90 kN 65 kN
4.3 m 2.3 m 3.2 m

B C D
A

The loads as given are factored.

Design a suitable section for the beam:

The bending moment diagram of the beam is as shown below.

260 kN m
208 kN m

-130 KN m

Version II 12-14
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 2 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Checked by. SAJ Date. 7/3/2000
Calculation sheet

Section properties of ISMB 450 are :

Depth D = 450 mm.

Width B = 150 mm.

Web thickness t = 9.4 mm.

Flange thickness T = 17.4 mm.

Depth between fillets, d = 379.2 mm.

Radius of gyration about

Minor axis, ry = 30.1 mm.
Plastic modulus about
major axis, Sx = 1512.78 cm3 .

Assume fy = 250 N / mm , E =200000 N / mm2 , m = 1.15

Py = fy / m = 250 / 1.15 = 217.4 N / mm2

(1) Type of section

(i) flange criterion:
B 
b     mm
2 
b 
  .
T .
b 
 .  , where  
T fy

Hence o.k.

Version II 12-15
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 3 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Teaching Project
Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Checked by. SAJ Date. 7/3/2000
Calculation sheet
(ii) Web criterion:

d 379.2
  40.3
t 9.4
d
 82.95 ε
t
Hence o.k.

Since
b d
 8.92 and  82.95 ε , the section is classified as " plastic"
t t

Check for moment capacity:

MC = Sx * py

. * .
=  . kN m


Maximum applied moment = 260 KN - m < 328.87 KN m

Hence o.k.

(iii) Lateral torsional buckling:

The beam length AB, BC and CD will be treated separately

using the equivalent uniform method.

Effective lengths:
AB = 4.3 m.

BC = 2.3 m.

CD = 3.2 m.

Version II 12-16
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 4 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 7/3/2000
Length LAB:

The equivalent uniform moment should be less than the

lateral torsional buckling resistance moment

M  Mb

where,
M is equivalent uniform moment

Mb is lateral torsional buckling resistance moment

M = m MA

where,
MA is the maximum moment in the member

m is the equivalent uniform moment factor

To determine ‘m’ :
Mmin
m = 0.57 + 0.33  + 0.1  2  0.43 , where =
M max


 =   . , then m  0.43


M = 0.43 * 260 = 112 kN m

Version II 12-17
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 5 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 7/3/2000
Length LBC:

=  . ; Then m  0.9


M  . *    kN m

length LCD:
=0; m = 0.57. M  . *    kN m

For the purpose of determining the governing values, all the three
segments are checked separately.

 AB 4.3 * 1000
=   142.86
ry 30.1

D
x =  .
T

 .
  .
x .

v  .

LT = n u v  ; u = 0.9 , n = 1.0

= 1.0 * 0.9 * 0.79 * 142.86

= 101.57

Bending strength, Pb = 117 Mpa (for LT = 101.57)

Buckling resistance moment

. * 
Mb=     kN m


Version II 12-18
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 6 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 7/3/2000
Length AB is safe against lateral torsional buckling

Length BC :

 BC 2300
=   76.41
ry 30.1

D
x =  .
T

 .
  .
x .

v = 0.91

LT = 1.0 * 0.9 * 0.91 * 76.41 = 62.58

Bending strength , pb = 190 Mpa

Buckling resistance moment Mb

. * 
=  .   kN m


Length BC is safe against lateral torsional buckling

Length CD :

 CD 3.2 * 1000
 =   106.31
ry 30.1

D
x  .
T

Version II 12-19
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-II

Job No. Sheet 7 of 7 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example:1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 7/3/2000

λ 106.31
  4.11
x 25.86

v = 0.70

LT = 1 * 0.9 * 0.7 * 106.31 = 66.97

bending strength, pb = 174 Mpa

 *  .

bending resistance moment = 

= 263.22 > 119 kN m

Length LCD is safe against lateral torsional buckling.

There fore the section chosen ‘ISMB 450’ is o.k.

The shortest segment BC, which has the most severe pattern of
moments controls the design.

Version II 12-20
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN – I

11

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Generally, a beam resists transverse loads by bending action. In a typical building frame,
main beams are employed to span between adjacent columns; secondary beams when
used – transmit the floor loading on to the main beams. In general, it is necessary to
consider only the bending effects in such cases, any torsional loading effects being
relatively insignificant. The main forms of response to uni-axial bending of beams are
listed in Table 1.
Under increasing transverse loads, beams of category 1 [Table1] would attain their full
plastic moment capacity. This type of behaviour has been covered in an earlier chapter.
Two important assumptions have been made therein to achieve this ideal beam behaviour.
They are:

 The compression flange of the beam is restrained from moving laterally, and
 Any form of local buckling is prevented.
If the laterally unrestrained length of the compression flange of the beam is relatively
long as in category 2 of Table 1, then a phenomenon, known as lateral buckling or lateral
torsional buckling of the beam may take place. The beam would fail well before it could
attain its full moment capacity. This phenomenon has a close similarity to the Euler
buckling of columns, triggering collapse before attaining its squash load (full
compressive yield load).
Lateral buckling of beams has to be accounted for at all stages of construction, to
eliminate the possibility of premature collapse of the structure or component. For
example, in the construction of steel-concrete composite buildings, steel beams are
designed to attain their full moment capacity based on the assumption that the flooring
would provide the necessary lateral restraint to the beams. However, during the erection
stage of the structure, beams may not receive as much lateral support from the floors as
they get after the concrete hardens. Hence, at this stage, they are prone to lateral buckling,
which has to be consciously prevented.
Beams of category 3 and 4 given in Table 1 fail by local buckling, which should be
prevented by adequate design measures, in order to achieve their capacities. The method
of accounting for the effects of local buckling on bending strength was discussed in an
earlier chapter.
In this chapter, the conceptual behaviour of laterally unrestrained beams is described in
detail. Various factors that influence the lateral buckling behaviour of a beam are
explained. The design procedure for laterally unrestrained beams is also included.

© Copyright reserved

Version II 11-1
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Table 1 Main failure modes of hot-rolled beams

Category Mode Comments

1 Excessive bending W This is the basic failure mode

triggering collapse provided (1) the beam is prevented
from buckling laterally,(2) the
component elements are at least
compact, so that they do not buckle
locally. Such “stocky” beams will
collapse by plastic hinge formation.
2 Lateral torsional Failure occurs by a combination of
W
buckling of long lateral deflection and twist. The
beams which are proportions of the beam, support
not suitably braced conditions and the way the load is
in the lateral applied are all factors, which affect
direction.(i.e. “un failure by lateral torsional buckling.
restrained” beams)
3 Failure by local Unlikely for hot rolled sections,
buckling of a which are generally stocky.
Box section
flange in Fabricated box sections may
compression or require flange stiffening to prevent
web due to shear premature collapse.
or web under Web stiffening may be required for
compression due Plate girder in shear plate girders to prevent shear
to concentrated W buckling.
loads Load bearing stiffeners are
sometimes needed under point
loads to resist web buckling.

4 Local failure by W Shear yield can only occur in very

(1) shear yield of short spans and suitable web
web (2) local stiffeners will have to be designed.
crushing of web
(3) buckling of Shear yield Local crushing is possible when
thin flanges. concentrated loads act on
unstiffened thin webs. Suitable
stiffeners can be designed.
Crushing of web
This is a problem only when very
wide flanges are employed.
Welding of additional flange plates
Buckling of thin flanges will reduce the plate b / t ratio and
thus flange buckling failure can be
avoided.

Version II 11-2
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

2.0 SIMILARITY OF COLUMN BUCKLING AND LATERAL BUCKLING

OF BEAMS
It is well known that slender members under compression are prone to instability. When
slender structural elements are loaded in their strong planes, they have a tendency to fail
by buckling in their weaker planes. Both axially loaded columns and transversely loaded
beams exhibit closely similar failure characteristics due to buckling.
Column buckling has been dealt with in detail in an earlier chapter. In this section, lateral
buckling of beams is described and its close similarity to column buckling is brought out.
Consider a simply supported and laterally unsupported (except at ends) beam of “short-
span” subjected to incremental transverse load at its mid section as shown in Fig.1 (a).
The beam will deflect downwards i.e. in the direction of the load [Fig. 1(b)].
W W
Undeflected position

Deflected position

(a) (b)
Fig. 1(a) Short span beam, (b) Vertical deflection of the beam.

The direction of the load and the direction of movement of the beam are the same. This is
similar to a short column under axial compression. On the other hand, a “long-span”
beam [Fig.2 (a)], when incrementally loaded will first deflect downwards, and when the
load exceeds a particular value, it will tilt sideways due to instability of the compression
flange and rotate about the longitudinal axis [Fig. 2(b)].

Horizontal W 
Twisting
W W movement

Vertical
movement

Before After
(a) buckling buckling
(b)

Fig. 2(a) Long span beam, (b) Laterally deflected shape of the beam

Version II 11-3
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

The three positions of the beam cross-section shown in Fig. 2(b) illustrate the
displacement and rotation that take place as the midsection of the beam undergoes lateral
torsional buckling. The characteristic feature of lateral buckling is that the entire cross
section rotates as a rigid disc without any cross sectional distortion. This behaviour is
very similar to an axially compressed long column, which after initial shortening in the
axial direction, deflects laterally when it buckles. The similarity between column
buckling and beam buckling is shown in Fig. 3.

P
Y
M
B
X
B
Z
B

M B

P
Column buckling
u
EA EI y Beam buckling u

 
3 Section B-B EIx >EIy
EIx >GJ Section B-B
Fig. 3 Similarity of column buckling and beam buckling

In the case of axially loaded columns, the deflection takes place sideways and the column
buckles in a pure flexural mode. A beam, under transverse loads, has a part of its cross
section in compression and the other in tension. The part under compression becomes
unstable while the tensile stresses elsewhere tend to stabilize the beam and keep it
straight. Thus, beams when loaded exactly in the plane of the web, at a particular load,
will fail suddenly by deflecting sideways and then twisting about its longitudinal axis
[Fig.3]. This form of instability is more complex (compared to column instability) since
the lateral buckling problem is 3-dimensional in nature. It involves coupled lateral
deflection and twist i.e., when the beam deflects laterally, the applied moment exerts a
torque about the deflected longitudinal axis, which causes the beam to twist. The bending
moment at which a beam fails by lateral buckling when subjected to a uniform end
moment is called its elastic critical moment (M cr). In the case of lateral buckling of
beams, the elastic buckling load provides a close upper limit to the load carrying capacity
of the beam. It is clear that lateral instability is possible only if the following two
conditions are satisfied.

 The section possesses different stiffness in the two principal planes, and
 The applied loading induces bending in the stiffer plane (about the major axis).
Similar to the columns, the lateral buckling of unrestrained beams, is also a function of its
slenderness.

Version II 11-4
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

3.0 INFLUENCE OF CROSS SECTIONAL SHAPE ON LATERAL

TORSIONAL BUCKLING

Structural sections are generally made up of either open or closed sections. Examples of
open and closed sections are shown in Fig. 4.

Wide Flange Beam Standard beam Channel Angle Tee

Open sections

Tubular Box
Closed sections

Fig. 4 Open and closed sections

Cross sections, employed for columns and beams (I and channel), are usually open
sections in which material is distributed in the flanges, i.e. away from their centroids, to
improve their resistance to in-plane bending stresses. Open sections are also convenient
to connect beams to adjacent members. In the ideal case, where the beams are restrained
laterally, their bending strength about the major axis forms the principal design
consideration. Though they possess high major axis bending strength, they are relatively
weak in their minor axis bending and twisting.

The use of open sections implies the acceptance of low torsional resistance inherent in
them. No doubt, the high bending stiffness (EIx) available in the vertical plane would
result in low deflection under vertical loads. However, if the beam is loaded laterally, the
deflections (which are governed by the lower EIy rather than the higher EIx) will be very
much higher. From a conceptual point of view, the beam has to be regarded as an element
having an enhanced tendency to fall over on its weak axis.

In contrast, closed sections such as tubes, boxes and solid shafts have high torsional
stiffness, often as high as 100 times that of an open section. The hollow circular tube is
the most efficient shape for torsional resistance, but is rarely employed as a beam element
on account of the difficulties encountered in connecting it to the other members and

Version II 11-5
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

lesser efficiency as a flexural member. The influence of sectional shapes on the lateral
strength of a beam is further illustrated in a later Section.

4.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING OF SYMMETRIC SECTIONS

As explained earlier, when a beam fails by lateral torsional buckling, it buckles about its
weak axis, even though it is loaded in the strong plane. The beam bends about its strong
axis up to the critical load at which it buckles laterally [Fig. 5(a) and 5(b)].

A y
M M
Lateral Deflection

z
A

 x
Elevation

Section


Plan
Twisting

(a) (b) Section A-

A
Fig. 5(a) Original beam (b) laterally buckled beam

For the purpose of this discussion, the lateral torsional buckling of an I-section is
considered with the following assumptions.

1. The beam is initially undistorted

2. Its behaviour is elastic (no yielding)
3. It is loaded by equal and opposite end moments in the plane of the web.
4. The loads act in the plane of the web only (there are no externally applied lateral or
torsional loads)
5. The beam does not have residual stresses
6. Its ends are simply supported vertically and laterally.
Obviously, in practice, the above ideal conditions are seldom met. For example, rolled
sections invariably contain residual stresses. The effects of the deviations from the ideal
case are discussed in a later Section.

Version II 11-6
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

The critical bending moment capacity attained by a symmetric I beam subjected to equal
end moments undergoing lateral torsional buckling between points of lateral or torsional
support is a function of two torsional characteristics of the specific cross-section: the pure
torsional resistance under uniform torsion and the warping torsional resistance

Mcr = [ (torsional resistance)2 + ( warping resistance )2]1/2

1
2
 π2 E I  
π  y 
M  E I G J   1(a)
cr  y 2
  

This may be rewritten as

1 1
 2   E 
E I y G J 
2 2
M cr  1  2  1(b)
   GJ 

where, EIy is the minor axis flexural rigidity

GJ is the torsional rigidity
E is the warping rigidity

The torsion that accompanies lateral buckling is always non-uniform. The critical
bending moment, Mcr is given by Eqn.1 (a).

It is evident from Eqn.1 (a) that the flexural and torsional stiffness of the member relate
to the lateral and torsional components of the buckling deformations. The magnitude of
the second square root term in Eqn.1 (b) is a measure of the contribution of warping to
the resistance of the beam. In practice, this value is large for short deep girders. For long
shallow girders with low warping stiffness,   0 and Eqn. 1(b) reduces to
1
2
π
M   E I y G J  (2)
cr  
An I-section composed of very thin plates will posses very low torsional rigidity (since J
depends on third power of thickness) and both terms under the root will be of comparable
magnitude. The second term is negligible compared to the first for the majority of hot
rolled sections. But light gauge sections derive most of the resistance to torsional
deformation from the warping action. The beam length also has considerable influence
upon the relative magnitudes of the two terms as shown in the term 2E / 2GJ. Shorter
and deep beams (2E / 2GJ term will be large) demonstrate more warping resistance,
whereas, the term will be small for long and shallow beams. Eqn. (1) may be rewritten in
a simpler form as given below.

Version II 11-7
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

1  1
  2 2 

M cr   E I y G J  2 π 1  π  
  
(3)
B2  
  
 

where B2 = 2 G J / E  3(a)

Mcr = (E Iy G J)1/2  (4)

where  =  / (1+2 / B2 )1/2 4(a)

Eqn. (4) is a product of three terms: the first term, , varies with the loading and support
conditions; the second term varies with the material properties and the shape of the beam;
and the third term, , varies with the length of the beam. Eqn. (4) is regarded as the basic
equation for lateral torsional buckling of beams. The influence of the three terms
mentioned above is discussed in the following Section.

5.0 FACTORS AFFECTING LATERAL STABILITY

The elastic critical moment, Mcr, as obtained in the previous Section, is applicable only to
a beam of I section which is simply supported and subjected to end moments. This case is
considered as the basic case for future discussion. In practical situations, support
conditions, beam cross section, loading etc. vary from the basic case. The following
sections elaborate on these variations and make the necessary modifications to the basic
case for design purposes.

5.1 Support conditions

The lateral restraint provided by the simply supported conditions assumed in the basic
case is the lowest and therefore Mcr is also the lowest. It is possible, by other restraint
conditions, to obtain higher values of Mcr, for the same structural section, which would
result in better utilization of the section and thus saving in weight of material. As lateral
buckling involves three kinds of deformations, namely lateral bending, twisting and
warping, it is feasible to think of various types of end conditions. But, the supports
should either completely prevent or offer no resistance to each type of deformation.
Solutions for partial restraint conditions are complicated. The effect of various support
conditions is taken into account by way of a parameter called effective length, which is
explained, in the next Section.

5.2 Effective length

The concept of effective length incorporates the various types of support conditions. For
the beam with simply supported end conditions and no intermediate lateral restraint, the
effective length is equal to the actual length between the supports. When a greater amount
of lateral and torsional restraints is provided at supports, the effective length is less than

Version II 11-8
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

the actual length and alternatively, the length becomes more when there is less restraint.
The effective length factor would indirectly account for the increased lateral and torsional
rigidities provided by the restraints. As an illustration, the effective lengths appropriate
for different end restraints according to BS 5950 are given in Table 2. The destabilizing
factor indicated in Table 2 is explained in the next Section.

Table 2 Effective length

Effective Length, e, for beams , between supports

Conditions at supports Loading conditions

Normal Destabilising
Beam torsionally unrestrained
Compression flange laterally unrestrained 1.2( + 2D) 1.4( + 2D)
Both flanges free to rotate on plan
Beam torsionally unrestrained
Compression flange laterally unrestrained
Compression flange only free to rotate on 1.0( + 2D) 1.2( + 2D)
plan
Beam torsionally restrained
Compression flange laterally restrained
Compression flange only free to rotate on 1.0 1.2
plan
Beam torsionally restrained
Compression flange laterally restrained
Both flanges partially free to rotate on 0.85 1.0
plan
(i.e. positive connections to both flanges)
Beam torsionally restrained
Compression flange laterally restrained 0.7 0.85
Both flanges NOT free to rotate on plan
 is the length of the beam between restraints
D is the depth of the beam

5.3 Level of application of transverse loads

The lateral stability of a transversely loaded beam is dependent on the arrangement of the
loads as well as the level of application of the loads with respect to the centroid of the
cross section. Fig. 6 shows a centrally loaded beam experiencing either destabilising or
restoring effect when the cross section is twisted.

A load applied above the centroid of the cross section causes an additional overturning
moment and becomes more critical than the case when the load is applied at the centroid.
On the other hand, if the load is applied below the centroid, it produces a stabilising
effect. Thus, a load applied below or above the centroid can change the buckling load by

Version II 11-9
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

 40%. The location of the load application has no effect if a restraint is provided at the
load point. For example, BS 5950 takes into account the destabilising effect of top flange
loading by using a notional effective length of 1.2 times the actual span to be used in the
calculation of effective length (see Table 2).

14
12 Bottom flange
loading w w
w
10

8
Critical Value Of

Shear center
6 loading
Top flange loading
4

2
4 10 100 1000

Value of 2 G J / E 

Fig.6 Effect of level of loading on beam stability

Provision of intermediate lateral supports can conveniently increase the lateral stability of
a beam. With a central support, which is capable of preventing lateral deflection and
twisting, the beam span is halved and each span behaves independently. As a result, the
rigidity of the beam is considerably increased. This aspect is dealt in more detail in a later
chapter.

5.4 Influence of type of loading

So far, only the basic case of beams loaded with equal and opposite end moments has
been considered. But, in reality, loading patterns would vary widely from the basic case.
The two reasons for studying the basic case in detail are: (1) it is analytically amenable,
and (2) the loading condition is regarded as the most severe. Cases of moment gradient,
where the end moments are unequal, are less prone to instability and this beneficial effect
is taken into account by the use of “equivalent uniform moments”. In this case, the basic
design procedure is modified by comparing the elastic critical moment for the actual case
with the elastic critical moment for the basic case. This process is similar to the effective
length concept in strut problems for taking into account end fixity.
5.4.1 Loading applied at points of lateral restraint
While considering other loading cases, the variation of the bending moment within a
segment (i.e. the length between two restraints) is assumed to be linear from Mmax at one
end to Mmin at the other end as shown in Fig. 7.

Version II 11-10
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Mmax Mmin Mmax Mmin

Mmax
Mmax Mmin Mmin
Positive Negative

Fig. 7 Non uniform distribution of bending moment

The value of  is defined as

 = Mmin / Mmax 1.0    1.0  (5)

The value of  is positive for opposing moments at the ends (single curvature bending)
and negative for moments of the same kind (double curvature bending). For a particular
case of , the value of M at which elastic instability occurs can be expressed as a ratio
‘m’ involving the value of Mcr for the segment i.e. the elastic critical moment for  = 1.0.
The ratio may be expressed as a single curve in the form:
m = 0.57 + 0.33 +0.1 2  0.43 (6)

The quantity ‘m’ is usually referred to as the equivalent uniform moment factor.

Ratio of moments Mcr / M

1.0
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0


Fig. 8 ‘m’ factor for equivalent uniform moment

The relationship is also expressed in Fig. 8. As seen from the figure, m =1.0 for uniform
moment and m < 1.0 for non uniform moment; therefore, beam with variation of moment
over the unsupported length is less vulnerable to lateral stability as compared to that
subjected to uniform moment. Its value is a measure of the intensity of the actual pattern
of moments as compared with the basic case. In many cases, its value is dependent only
on the shape of the moment diagram and a few examples are presented in Fig.9.

Version II 11-11
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

A good estimate of the critical moment due to the actual loading may be found using the
proper value of m in the equation
M = (1 / m) Mcr (7)
This approximation helps in predicting the buckling of the segments of a beam, which is
loaded through transverse members preventing local lateral deflection and twist. Each
segment is treated as a beam with unequal end moments and its elastic critical moments
may be determined from the relationship given in Eqn.7. The critical moment of each
segment can be determined and the lowest of them would give a conservative
approximation to the actual critical moment.
Beam and loads Actual bending Mmax m Equivalent
moment uniform
moment
M M M 1.0

M M 0.57

M M M 0.43

W W/4 0.74

W W2/8 0.88

W W W/4 0.96

c/4 /4

Fig. 9 Equivalent uniform moment

It may be noted here that the values of ‘m’ apply only when the point of maximum
moment occurs at one end of the segments of the beams with uniform cross section and
equal flanges. In all other cases m=1.0. For intermediate values of , m can be
determined by Eqn. 6 or can be interpolated from Fig 8. The local strength at the more
heavily stressed end also may be checked against plastic moment capacity, Mp as in Eqn.
8.

Version II 11-12
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Mmax  Mp. (8)

5.4.2 Use of m factors in design

As discussed earlier, the shape of the moment diagram influences the lateral stability of a
beam. A beam design using uniform moment loading will be unnecessarily conservative.
In order to account for the non-uniformity of moments, a modification of the moment
may be made based on a comparison of the elastic critical moment for the basic case.
This can be done in two ways. They are:

(i) Use equivalent uniform moment value M = m Mmax (Mmax is the larger of the two
end moments) for checking against the buckling resistance moment Mb.
(ii) Mb value is determined using an effective slenderness ratio ’LT = LT m .
(where LT is the lateral torsional slenderness ratio and ’LT is the effective lateral
torsional slenderness ratio).

Mb(i)=Mb / m
1.0
Moment capacity factor M / Mp

Mb(ii) Method i
Mb
Method(ii)

’LT = LT m LT

0.0 36.0 72.0 108.0 144.0

Lateral – torsional slenderness LT

Fig. 10 Moment capacity of beams

The idea of lateral torsional slenderness LT is introduced here to write the design
capacity Mb as

Mb  1 
 f  2  (9)
Mp  LT 

where Mp is the fully plastic moment

The quantity LT is defined by

Version II 11-13
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

 2E M p
LT  (10)
py M cr

For a particular material (i.e particular E and py) the above equation can be considered as

a product of c constant and

Mp
 
M cr
 LT . The quantity  LT is called as the new defined

slenderness ratio.

Buckling resistance moment, Mb is always less than the elastic critical moment, Mcr.
Therefore, the second method is more conservative especially for low values of LT . The
two methods are compared in Fig. 10, where for the first case Mmax is to be checked
against Mb / m and for the second case against Mb only. Method (i) is more suitable for
cases where loads are applied only at points of effective lateral restraint. Here, the
yielding is restricted to the supports; consequently, results in a small reduction in the
lateral buckling strength. In order to avoid overstressing at one end, an additional check,
Mmax < Mp should also be satisfied. In certain situations, maximum moment occurs
within the span of the beam. The reduction in stiffness due to yielding would result in a
smaller lateral buckling strength. In this case, the prediction according to method (i)
based on the pattern of moments would not be conservative; here the method (ii) is more
appropriate. In the second method, a correction factor n is applied to the slenderness ratio
LT and design strength is obtained for nLT. It is clear from the above that n = m . The
slenderness correction factor is explained in the next section.

5.4.3 Slenderness correction factor

For situations, where the maximum moment occurs away from a braced point, e.g. when
the beam is uniformly loaded in the span, a modification to the slenderness, LT, may be
used. The allowable critical stress is determined for an effective slenderness, nLT., where
n is the slenderness correction factor, as illustrated in Fig. 11 for a few cases of loading.

For design purposes, one of the above methods – either the moment correction factor
method (m method) or slenderness correction factor method (n method) may be used. If
suitable values are chosen for m and n, both methods yield identical results. The
difference arises only in the way in which the correction is made; in the n factor method
the slenderness is reduced to take advantage of the effect of the non- uniform moment,
whereas, in the m factor method, the moment to be checked against lateral moment
capacity, Mb, is reduced from Mmax to M by the factor m. It is always safe to use m = n
=1 basing the design on uniform moment case. In any situation, either m = 1 or n= 1, i.e.
any one method should be used.

Version II 11-14
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Slenderness correction factor, n

Load pattern Actual bending moment n Equivalent uniform
moment

M M
1.0

0.77

M M
0.65

0.86

w/m 0.94

W W

0.94
/4 /4
W

0.94
/4

5.5 Effect of cross-sectional shape

The shape of the cross-section of a beam is a very important parameter while evaluating
its lateral buckling capacity. In other words, lateral instability can be reduced or even
avoided by choosing appropriate sections. The effect of cross-sectional shape on lateral
instability is illustrated in Fig. 12 for different type of section with same cross sectional
area.

The figure shows that the I-section with the larger in-plane bending stiffness does not
have matching stability. Box sections with high torsional stiffness are most suitable for
beams. However, I-sections are commonly used due to their easy availability and ease of

Version II 11-15
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

connections. Box sections are used as crane girders where the beam must be used in a
laterally unsupported state.

Ratio of M Cr of the section considered to MCr of 10.0

M Cr\MCr 

0.1
box section

0.01

0.001 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Ratio of length to depth /d

Fig. 12 Effect of type of cross section

6.0 BUCKLING OF REAL BEAMS

The theoretical assumptions made in section 4.0 are generally not realised in practice. In
this section, the behaviour of real beams (which do not meet all the assumptions of the
buckling theory) is explained. Effects of plasticity, residual stresses and imperfections are
described in the following sections.
6.1 Plasticity effects
Initially, the case, where buckling is not elastic is considered. All other assumptions hold
good. As the beam undergoes bending under applied loads, the axial strain distribution at
a point in the beam varies along the depth as shown in Fig.13.

With the increase in loading, yielding of the section is initiated at the outer surfaces of the
top and bottom flanges. If the Mcr of the section as calculated by Eqn.1 is less than My,
then the beam buckles elastically. In the case where Mcr is greater than My, some amount
of plasticity is experienced at the outer edges before buckling is initiated. If the beam is
sufficiently stocky, the beam section attains its full plastic moment capacity, Mp. The
interaction between instability and plasticity is shown in Fig. 14.

Version II 11-16
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Strain distribution

Stress distribution

Spread of yield

(Elastic –perfectly plastic material behaviour is assumed)

Fig 13 Strain / Stress Distribution and yielding of section

There are three distinct regions in the curve as given below.

Mp
1. Beams with high slenderness ( 1.2 ). The failure of the beam is by elastic
M cr
lateral buckling at Mcr
Mp
2. Beams of intermediate slenderness 0.4 <  1.2 ), where failure occurs by
M cr
inelastic lateral buckling at loads below Mp and above Mcr
Mp
3. Stocky beams (  0.4 )), which attain Mp without buckling.
M cr
Plastic failure M = Mp

Inelastic buckling (no residual stress)

1.0
M<MCr
My / MP
Moment ratio M / Mp

Myr / MP Inelastic buckling (with

residual stress) M<My
M <Mcr

0.0 0.4 1.0 1.2 2.0

Mp
Modified Slenderness
M cr

Fig. 14 Interaction between instability and plasticity

Version II 11-17
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

6.2 Residual stresses

It is normally assumed that a structural section in the unloaded condition is free from
stress and strain. In reality, this is not true. During the process of manufacture of steel
sections, they are subjected to large thermal expansions resulting in yield level strains in
the sections. As the subsequent cooling is not uniform throughout the section, self-
equilibrating patterns of stresses are formed. These stresses are known as residual
stresses. Similar effects can also occur at the fabrication stage during welding and flame
cutting of sections. A typical residual stress distribution in a hot rolled steel beam section
is shown in Fig.15.
frc

frt

frc
frc

frc

frt

frc

Fig. 15 Residual stresses in I beams

Due to the presence of residual stresses, yielding of the section starts at lower moments.
Then, with the increase in moment, yielding spreads through the cross-section. The in-
elastic range, which starts at Myr increases instead of the elastic range. The plastic
moment value Mp is not influenced by the presence of residual stresses.

6.3 Imperfections

The initial distortion or lack of straightness in beams may be in the form of a lateral bow
or twist. In addition, the applied loading may be eccentric inducing more twist to the
beam. It is clear that these initial imperfections correspond to the two types of
deformations that the beam undergoes during lateral buckling. Assuming Mcr  My, the
lateral deflection and twist increase continuously from the initial stage of loading
assuming large proportion as Mcr is reached. The additional stresses, thus produced,
would cause failure of the beam as the maximum stress in the flange tips reaches the
yield stress. This form of failure by limiting the stress to yield magnitude is shown in
Fig. 16. In the case of beams of intermediate slenderness, a small amount of stress
redistribution takes place after yielding and the prediction by the limiting stress approach
will be conservative. If residual stresses were also included, the failure load prediction
would be conservative even for slender beams.

Version II 11-18
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

1.0
Non dimensional applied moment My / M p Elastic buckling
M<Mcr

Initial
deformations
increasing

First yield of initially deformed beams at

M<Mcr (no residual stress)
0.0 1.0 2.0
Modified Slenderness M p /M cr

Fig. 16 Beam failure curve

While studying the behaviour of beams, it is necessary to account for the combined
effects of the various factors such as instability, plasticity, residual stresses and
geometrical imperfections.

7.0 DESIGN APPROACH

Lateral instability is a prime design consideration for all laterally unsupported beams
except for the very stocky ones. The value Mcr is important in assessing their load
carrying capacity. The non-dimensional modified slenderness λ LT = M p / M cr
indicates the importance of instability and as a result the governing mode of failure.

For design purposes, the application of the theoretical formula is too complex. Further,
there is much difference between the assumptions made in the theory and the real
characteristics of the beams. However, as the theoretical prediction is elastic, it provides
an upper bound to the true strength of the member. A non-dimensional plot with abscissa
as M p / M cr and the ordinate as M/Mp, where Mp is the plastic moment capacity of
section and M is the failure moment shows clearly the lateral torsional behaviour of the
beam. Such a non-dimensional plot of lateral torsional buckling moment and the elastic
critical moment is shown in Fig 17. Experiments on beams validate the use of such a
curve as being representative of the actual test data.

Three distinct regions of behaviour may be noticed in the figure. They are:
 Stocky, where beams attain Mp, with values of λ LT < 0.4
 Intermediate, the region where beams fail to reach either MP or Mcr ; 0.4< λ LT <1.2
 Slender, where beams fail at moment Mcr; λ LT >1.2

Version II 11-19
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

As pointed out earlier, lateral stability is not a criterion for stocky beams. For beams of
the second category, which comprise of the majority of available sections, design is based
on inelastic buckling accounting for geometrical imperfections and residual stresses.

  
1.0
  represent experimental
 
  Mcr / Mp point
0.8 



0.6  
M / Mp

 

0.4  
  

0.2 Stocky Intermediate Slender

0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

 LT  M p / M cr

Fig 17. Theoretical elastic critical moment

7.1 Conservative design procedure

The lateral buckling moment capacity of a section can be expressed as

Mb = pb Sx
(11 )
where, pb is the bending strength accounting for lateral instability
Sx is the appropriate plastic section modulus

The slenderness of the beam LT is defined as:

π2 E
LT = λ LT (12)
py

This has close similarity to the slenderness associated with compressive buckling of a
column. The relation between pb and LT is shown in Fig.18.

In the case of slender beams, pb is related to LT . LT can be determined for a given section
by the following relationship

LT =n u v e / ry (13)

where, n is the slenderness correction factor

Version II 11-20
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

u is buckling parameter from steel tables (= 0.9 for rolled beams and channels and
1.0 for other sections)

v is slenderness factor and f(/ry, x), given in Table 14 of BS 5950 part 1; but
approximated to 1.0 for preliminary calculations
x is the torsional index which is provided in BS 5950 part 1


x = 0.566 h  A J for bi-symmetric sections and sections symmetric about
minor axis, and


x = 1.132  A H I y J  for sections symmetric about major axis.
 

where

A is the cross sectional area of the member.

Iy is the second moment of the area about the minor axis
H is the warping constant
J is the torsion constant
h is the distance between the shear center of the flanges.

300

200
pb
N / mm2
100

0 LT

50 100
150 200 250
Fig. 18 Bending strength for rolled sections of design strength 240 N / mm 2

For compact sections, full plasticity is developed at the most heavily stressed section.
Unlike plastic design, moment redistribution is not considered here. For example, for a
particular grade of steel and for λ LT  0.4, when pb attains the value of py, LT = 37.
Hence, this is the value of maximum slenderness for which instability does not influence
strength.

A good design can be achieved by determining the value of LT and thereby pb more
accurately. Mb can be determined using Eqn.11. Effective lengths of the beam may be
adopted as per the guidelines given in Table 2. For beams, and segments of beams
between lateral supports, equivalent uniform moments may be calculated to determine

Version II 11-21
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

their relative severity of instability. The lateral stability is checked for an equivalent
moment M given by

M = m Mmax (14)

where m is the equivalent uniform moment factor.

If Mb > M , the section chosen is satisfactory. At the heavily stressed locations, local
strength should be checked against development of Mp.

Mmax  Mp (15)

8.0 SUMMARY
Unrestrained beams that are loaded in their stiffer planes may undergo lateral torsional
buckling. The prime factors that influence the buckling strength of beams are: the un
braced span, cross sectional shape, type of end restraint and the distribution of moment.
For the purpose of design, the simplified approach as given in BS: 5950 Part-1 has been
presented. The effects of various parameters that affect buckling strength have been
accounted for in the design by appropriate correction factors. The behaviour of real
beams (which do not comply with the theoretical assumptions) has also been described.
In order to increase the lateral strength of a beam, bracing of suitable stiffness and
strength has to be provided.

9.0 REFERENCES
1. Timoshenko S., ‘Theory of elastic stability’ McGraw Hill Book Co., 1st Edition 1936.

2. Clarke A.B. and Coverman, ‘Structural steel work-Limit state design’, Chapman and
Hall, London, 1987

3. Martin L.H. and Purkiss J.A., ‘Structural design of steel work to BS 5950, Edward
Arnold, 1992.

4. Trahair N.S., ‘The behaviour and design of steel structures’, Chapman and Hall
London, 1977

5. Kirby P.A and Nethercot D.A.,’Design for structural stability’, Granada Publishing,
London, 1979

Version II 11-22
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 1 of 4 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project Worked example: 1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet Checked by. SAJ Date.5/3/ 2000
Problem - 1

Check the adequacy of ISMB 450 to carry a uniformly distributed load

of 24 kN / m over a span of 6 m. Both ends of the beam are attached to
the flanges of columns by double web cleat.

24 kN/m
(factored)

ISMB 450
6m

Design check:

For the end conditions given, it is assumed that the beam is simply
supported in a vertical plane, and at the ends the beam is fully
restrained against lateral deflection and twist with, no rotational
restraint in plan at its ends.

Section classification of ISMB 450

The properties of the section are:

B
Depth, D = 450 mm

Width, B = 150 mm
D t
T Web thickness, t = 9.4 mm

Flange thickness, T = 17.4 mm

Version II 11-23
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 2 of 4 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet Checked by. SAJ Date. 5/3/ 2000
Depth between fillets, d = 379.2 mm

Radius of gyration about minor axis, ry = 30.1 mm

Plastic modulus about major axis, Sx = 1512.8 * 10-3 mm3

Assume fy = 250 N/mm2, E=200000 N/mm2, m = 1.15,

py = fy / m= 250 / 1.15 = 217.4 N / mm2

(I) Type of section

Flange criterion:

B 150
b=   75 mm
2 2

b 75.0
  4.31
T 17.4

b 250
 8.92ε where ε 
T fy
Hence O.K.

Web criterion:

d 379.2
  40.3
t 9.4
d
 82.95 ε
t
Hence O.K.

Version II 11-24
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 3 of 4 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 5/3/ 2000
b d
Since  8.92 ε and  82.95 ε , the section is classified as
T t
‘plastic’

(II)Check for lateral torsional buckling:

Equivalent slenderness of the beam, λLT  n u v λ

where, n = slenderness correction factor (assumed value of 1.0)

u = buckling parameter (assumed as 0.9)

 = slenderness of the beam along minor axis

6000
=  199.33
30.1

v = slenderness factor (which is dependent on the

proportion of the flanges and the torsional index [D / T])

= 0.71 (for equal flanges and  = 199.33) Table 14 of

BS5950 Part I
Now, LT = 1.0 * 0.9 * 0.71 * 199.33

= 127.37

Bending strength, pb = 84 Mpa (for LT = 127.37) (from Table 11 of

BS 5950 Part I)

Buckling resistance moment Mb = Sx * pb

= (1512.78 * 84 )/1000

Version II 11-25
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 4 of 4 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 1
Made by. SSR Date.1/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 5/3/ 2000
= 127.07 kN m

For the simply supported beam of 6.0 m span with a factored load of
24.0 KN/m

w 2 24* 6 2
M m ax  
8 8

= 108.0 KN m < 127.07 kN m

Hence Mb > Mmax

ISMB 450 is adequate against lateral torsional buckling.

Version II 11-26
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 1 of 5 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 2
Made by. SSR Date.23/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date.26/3/2000

Problem-2

(i) A simply supported beam of span 4 m is subjected to end moments

of 155 kN m (clockwise) and 86 k N m (anticlockwise) under factored -
applied loading. Check whether ISMB 450 is safe with regard to lateral
buckling.
155 kN m 86 kN m

4m

155 kN m 86 kN m

B.M Diagram

Design check:

For the end conditions given, it is assumed that the beam is simply
supported in a vertical plane, and at the ends the beam is fully
restrained against lateral deflection and twist with, no rotational
restraint in plan at its ends.

Section classification of ISMB 450

The properties of the section are:

B Depth, D = 450 mm.

Width, B = 150 mm.

D t
T Web thickness, t = 9.4 mm
Flange thickness, T = 17.4 mm

Version II 11-27
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 2 of 5 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 2
Made by. SSR Date23/34/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date.26/3/2000

Depth between fillets, d = 379.2 mm

Radius of gyration about minor axis, ry = 30.1 mm

Plastic modulus about major axis, Sx = 1512.8 * 10-3 mm3

Assume fy = 250 N/mm2, E=200000 N/mm2, m = 1.15,

py = fy / m= 250 / 1.15 = 217.4 N / mm2

(II) Type of section

Flange criterion:

B 150
b=   75 mm
2 2

b 75.0
  4.31
T 17.4

b 250
 8.92ε where ε 
T fy
Hence O.K.
Web criterion:

d 379.2
  40.3
t 9.4
d
 82.95 ε
t
Hence O.K

Version II 11-28
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 3 of 5 Rev.

Structural Steel Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN

Design Project Worked example: 2

Made by. SSR Date.23/3/2000

Calculation sheet Checked by. SAJ Date.26/3/2000

b d
Since  8.92 ε and  82.95 ε , the section is classified as
T t
‘plastic.’ Section should be plastic or compact to attain plastic
moments. Most of the hot - rolled sections are classified as plastic or
compact.

(II)Check for lateral torsional buckling:

Equivalent slenderness of the beam, λLT  n u v λ

Where, n = slenderness correction factor (assumed value of 1.0)

u = buckling parameter (assumed as 0.9)

 = slenderness of the beam along minor axis, e/ry

6000
=  199.33
30.1

v = slenderness factor (which is dependent on the

proportion of the flanges and the torsional index [D / T])

= 0.71 (for equal flanges and  = 199.33) Table 14 of

BS5950 Part I
Now, LT = 1.0 * 0.9 * 0.71 * 199.33

= 127.37

Bending strength, pb = 84 Mpa (for LT = 127.37) Table 11 of

BS5950 Part I
Buckling resistance moment Mb = Sx * pb
= (1512.78 * 84 )/1000

Version II 11-29
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 4 of 5 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 2
Made by. SSR Date.23/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date.26/3/2000
= 127.07 kN m

For the given beam of 4 m span,

 = 86 / 155 = 0.555

Using the equation to find the value of m

m = 0.57 +0.33* 0.555 + 0.1* 0.555 2

= 0.784
Equivalent uniform moment M = 0.784 * 155

=122 kN m

127.07 > 122.

Therefore the capacity of the beam exceeds the design moment.

“ISMB 450 is adequate against lateral torsional buckling”

(ii) If the beam of problem (i) is subjected to a central load producing a

maximum factored moment of 155 kN m check whether the beam is still
safe. 155 kN

4m
155 kN m

B.M Diagram

Version II 11-30
 UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN-I

Job No. Sheet 5 of 5 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: UNRESTRAINED BEAM DESIGN
Design Project
Worked example: 2
Made by. SSR Date.23/3/2000
Calculation sheet
Checked by. SAJ Date. 26/3/2000
For this problem,

m =0.74 (see Fig. 9 of the text)

Therefore n =  m =  0.74 = 0.86 (see section 5.4.2 of the text)

Therefore ’LT = nLT = 0.86 * 127.37 = 109.54

pb = 105 N/mm 2

Therefore Mb = 105 *1512.78 / 1000 = 158.84 kN m.

Therefore the Mb > Mmax (158.84 > 155)

Therefore the section ISMB 450 is adequate against lateral torsional

buckling.

Version II 11-31
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

35 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The elastic design method, also termed as allowable stress method (or Working stress
method), is a conventional method of design based on the elastic properties of steel. This
method of design limits the structural usefulness of the material upto a certain allowable
stress, which is well below the elastic limit. The stresses due to working loads do not
exceed the specified allowable stresses, which are obtained by applying an adequate
factor of safety to the yield stress of steel. The elastic design does not take into account
the strength of the material beyond the elastic stress. Therefore the structure designed
according to this method will be heavier than that designed by plastic methods, but in
many cases, elastic design will also require less stability bracing.

In the method of plastic design of a structure, the ultimate load rather than the yield stress
is regarded as the design criterion. The term plastic has occurred due to the fact that the
ultimate load is found from the strength of steel in the plastic range. This method is also
known as method of load factor design or ultimate load design. The strength of steel
beyond the yield stress is fully utilised in this method. This method is rapid and provides
a rational approach for the analysis of the structure. This method also provides striking
economy as regards the weight of steel since the sections designed by this method are
smaller in size than those designed by the method of elastic design. Plastic design method
has its main application in the analysis and design of statically indeterminate framed
structures.

2.0 BASIS OF PLASTIC THEORY

2.1 Ductility of Steel

Structural steel is characterised by its capacity to withstand considerable deformation

beyond first yield, without fracture. During the process of 'yielding' the steel deforms
under a constant and uniform stress known as 'yield stress'. This property of steel, known
as ductility, is utilised in plastic design methods.

Fig. 1 shows the idealised stress-strain relationship for structural mild steel when it is
subjected to direct tension. Elastic straining of the material is represented by line OA.
AB represents yielding of the material when the stress remains constant, and is equal to
the yield stress, fy. The strain occurring in the material during yielding remains after the
load has been removed and is called the plastic strain and this strain is at least ten times
as large as the elastic strain, y at yield point.

© Copyright reserved

Version II 35 - 1
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

When subjected to compression, the stress-strain characteristics of various grades of

structural steel are largely similar to Fig. 1 and display the same property of yield. The
major difference is in the strain hardening range where there is no drop in stress after a
peak value. This characteristic is known as ductility of steel.

Strain hardening

A B
fy
Strain hardening
Stress f

commences

O Strain 
Fig. 1 Idealised stress – strain curve for steel in tension

2.2 Theoretical Basis

As an incremental load is applied to a beam, the cross-section with greatest bending

moment will eventually reach the yield moment. Elsewhere the structure is elastic and
the 'peak' moment values are less than yield. As load is incremented, a zone of yielding
develops at the first critical section, but due to ductility of steel, the moment at that
section remains about constant. The structure, therefore, calls upon its less heavily
stressed portions to carry the increase in load. Eventually the zones of yielding are
formed at other sections until the moment capacity has been exhausted at all necessary
critical sections. After reaching the maximum load value, the structure would simply
deform at constant load. Thus it is a design based upon the ultimate load-carrying
capacity (maximum strength) of the structure. This ultimate load is computed from a
knowledge of the strength of steel in the plastic range and hence the name 'plastic'.

2.3 Perfectly Plastic Materials

The stress-strain curve for a perfectly plastic material upto strain hardening is shown in
Fig. 2. Perfectly plastic materials follow Hook's law upto the limit of proportionality.
The slopes of stress-strain diagrams in compression and tension i.e. the values of Young's
modulus of elasticity of the material, are equal. Also the values of yield stresses in
tension and compression are equal. The strains upto the strain hardening in tension and
compression are also equal. The stress strain curves show horizontal plateau both in
tension and compression. Such materials are known as perfectly plastic materials.

Version II 35 - 2
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

STRESS

fy TENSION

STRAIN

f
COMPRESSION y

Fig. 2 Stress - Strain Curve for perfectly plastic materials

2.4 Fully Plastic Moment of a Section

The fully plastic moment Mp, of a section is defined as the maximum moment of
resistance of a fully plasticized or yielded cross-section. The assumptions used for
finding the plastic moment of a section are:

(i) The material obeys Hooke's law until the stress reaches the upper yield value; on
further straining, the stress drops to the lower yield value and thereafter remains
constant.

(ii) The yield stresses and the modulus of elasticity have the same value in
compression as in tension.

(iii) The material is homogeneous and isotropic in both the elastic and plastic states.

(iv) The plane transverse sections (the sections perpendicular to the longitudinal axis
of the beam) remain plane and normal to the longitudinal axis after bending, the
effect of shear being neglected.

(v) There is no resultant axial force on the beam.

(vi) The cross section of the beam is symmetrical about an axis through its centroid
parallel to plane of bending.

(vii) Every layer of the material is free to expand and contract longitudinally and
laterally under the stress as if separated from the other layers.

Version II 35 - 3
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

In order to find out the fully plastic moment of a yielded section of a beam as shown in
Fig. 3, we employ the force equilibrium equation, namely the total force in compression
and the total force in tension over that section are equal.

fy

A1
G1 C = fy .A1
A1
y1

y2
G2 T = fy . A2
A2

fy

Fig. 3

Total compression , C = Total tension , T

f y . A1 = fy. A2
 A1 = A2
A = A1 + A2
A1 = A2 = A/2

Plastic Moment of resistance, Mp  f y  A1  y1  f y  A2  y 2

 fy 
A
2

 y1  y 2 
 fy  Zp (1)

where Zp , the plastic modulus of the section =

A
2

 y1  y2 
The plastic modulus of a completely yielded section is defined as the combined statical
moment of the cross-sectional areas above and below the neutral axis or equal area axis.
It is the resisting modulus of a completely plasticised section.

3.0 BENDING OF BEAMS SYMMETRICAL ABOUT BOTH AXES

The bending of a symmetrical beam subjected to a gradually increasing moment is

considered first. The fibres of the beam across the cross section are stressed in tension or
compression according to their position relative to the neutral axis and are strained in
accordance with Fig. 1.

Version II 35 - 4
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

f  fy
Neutral Axis

Fig. 4 Elastic stresses in beams

While the beam remains entirely elastic the stress in every fibre is proportional to its
strain and to its distance from the neutral axis. The stress (f) in the extreme fibres cannot
exceed fy. (see Fig. 4)

When the beam is subjected to a moment slightly greater than that, which first produces
yield in the extreme fibres, it does not fail. Instead the outer fibres yield at constant stress
(fy) while the fibres nearer to the neutral axis sustain increased elastic stresses. Fig. 5
shows the stress distribution for beams subjected to such moments.

Such beams are said to be 'partially plastic' and those portions of their cross-sections,
which have reached the yield stress, are described as 'plastic zones'.

Plastic Zone (Compression) fy

Neutral Axis

fy
Plastic Zone (Tension)
(a) Rectangular (b) I - section (c) Stress distribution
section for (a) or (b)

Fig. 5 Stresses in partially plastic beams

Version II 35 - 5
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

The depths of the plastic zones depend upon the magnitude of the applied moment. As
the moment is increased, the plastic zones increase in depth, and, it is assumed that
plastic yielding can occur at yield stress (fy) resulting in two stress blocks, one zone
yielding in tension and one in compression. Fig. 6 represents the stress distribution in
beams stressed to this stage. The plastic zones occupy the whole of the cross section, and
are described as being 'fully plastic'. When the cross section of a member is fully plastic
under a bending moment, any attempt to increase this moment will cause the member to
act as if hinged at the neutral axis. This is referred to as a plastic hinge.

The bending moment producing a plastic hinge is called the full plastic moment and is
denoted by 'Mp'. Note that a plastic hinge carries a constant moment, MP.

b fy

Neutral Axis
d

fy
(a) Rectangular (b) I - section (c) Stress distribution
section for (a) or (b)

Fig. 6 Stresses in fully plastic beams

4.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR UTILISING PLASTIC DESIGN

CONCEPTS

Generally codes (such as IS 800, BS 5950) allow the use of plastic design only where
loading is predominantly static and fatigue is not a design criterion.

For example, in order to allow this high level of strain, BS 5950 prescribes the following
restrictions on the properties of the stress-strain curve for steels used in plastically
designed structures (clause 5.3.3).

1. The yield plateau (horizontal portion of the curve) is greater than 6 times the yield
strain.
2. The ultimate tensile strength must be more than 1.2 times the yield strength.
3. The elongation on a standard gauge length is not less than 15%.

These limitations are intended to ensure that there is a sufficiently long plastic plateau to
enable a hinge to form and that the steel will not experience a premature strain hardening.

Version II 35 - 6
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

4.1 Shape Factor

As described previously there will be two stress blocks, one in tension, the other in
compression, both of which will be at yield stress. For equilibrium of the cross section,
the areas in compression and tension must be equal. For a rectangular cross section,
the elastic moment is given by,
bd 2
M  fy (2.a)
6
The plastic moment is obtained from,
d d bd 2
Mp  2.b .   f y  fy (2.b)
2 4 4

Here the plastic moment Mp is about 1.5 times greater than the elastic moment capacity.
In developing this moment, there is a large straining in the extreme fibres together with
large rotations and deflection. This behaviour may be plotted as a moment-rotation
curve. Curves for various cross sections are shown in Fig. 7.

1
S
a (S 1.00) b
1.00
0.87
(S  1.15)

0.67 (S  1.50)
(S  1.80)
bd 2
M  fy
6

o
Rotation

Fig.7 Moment – rotation curves

The ratio of the plastic modulus (Zp) to the elastic modulus (Z) is known as the shape
factor (S) and will govern the point in the moment-rotation curve when non-linearity
starts. For the theoretically ideal section in bending i.e. two flange plates connected by a
web of insignificant thickness, this will have a value of 1. When the material at the
centre of the section is increased, the value of S increases. For a universal beam the value
is about 1.15 increasing to 1.5 for a rectangle.

Version II 35 - 7
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

5.0 PLASTIC HINGES

In deciding the manner in which a beam may fail it is desirable to understand the concept
of how plastic hinges form where the beam is fully plastic.

At the plastic hinge an infinitely large rotation can occur under a constant moment equal
to the plastic moment of the section. Plastic hinge is defined as a yielded zone due to
bending in a structural member at which an infinite rotation can take place at a constant
plastic moment Mp of the section. The number of hinges necessary for failure does not
vary for a particular structure subject to a given loading condition, although a part of a
structure may fail independently by the formation of a smaller number of hinges. The
member or structure behaves in the manner of a hinged mechanism and in doing so
adjacent hinges rotate in opposite directions.

Theoretically, the plastic hinges are assumed to form at points at which plastic rotations
occur. Thus the length of a plastic hinge is considered as zero.

The values of moment, at the adjacent section of the yield zone are more than the yield
moment upto a certain length L, of the structural member. This length L, is known as
the hinged length. The hinged length depends upon the type of loading and the geometry
of the cross-section of the structural member. The region of hinged length is known as
region of yield or plasticity.

5.1 Hinged Length of a Simply Supported Beam with Central Concentrated

Load
W

b
L/2 L/2
x

MY MY
Mp

Fig. 8

In a simply supported beam with central concentrated load, the maximum bending
moment occurs at the centre of the beam. As the load is increased gradually, this moment
reaches the fully plastic moment of the section Mp and a plastic hinge is formed at the
centre.

Version II 35 - 8
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Wl
Mp 
4
bh 2  bh 2 
 fy   Z p  
 
4  4 
bh 2  bh 2  2
My  fy  
  fy  
 3
6  4 

2
 My  Mp
3

Let x (= L) be the length of plasticity zone.

From the bending moment diagram shown in Fig. 8

My Mp

L x L

2 2 2
L x
My 
 2 2
Mp L
2
My x
 1 
Mp L
L  x M p  L  My

L  x M p  L
2
M p
3
1
x  L (3)
3

Therefore the hinged length of the plasticity zone is equal to one-third of the span in this
case.

6.0 FUNDAMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR PLASTIC ANALYSIS

(i) Mechanism condition: The ultimate or collapse load is reached when a

mechanism is formed. The number of plastic hinges developed should be just
sufficient to form a mechanism.

(ii) Equilibrium condition : Fx = 0, Fy = 0, Mxy = 0

Version II 35 - 9
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

(iii) Plastic moment condition: The bending moment at any section of the structure
should not be more than the fully plastic moment of the section.

6.1 Mechanism

When a system of loads is applied to an elastic body, it will deform and will show a
resistance against deformation. Such a body is known as a structure. On the other hand if
no resistance is set up against deformation in the body, then it is known as a mechanism.

Various types of independent mechanisms are

6.1.1 Beam Mechanism

Fig. 9 sketches three simple structures and the corresponding mechanisms.

(a) A simply supported beam has to form

one plastic hinge at the point of
maximum bending moment.
Redundancy, r = 0

(b) A propped cantilever requires two hinges

to form a mechanism.
Redundancy, r = 1
No. of plastic hinges formed,
= r + 1 = 2

(c) A fixed beam requires three hinges to

form a mechanism.
Redundancy, r = 2
No. of plastic hinges = 2 + 1 = 3

Fig. 9

From the above examples, it is seen that the number of hinges needed to form a
mechanism equals the statical redundancy of the structure plus one.

Version II 35 - 10
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

6.1.2 Panel or Sway Mechanism

Fig. 10 (A) shows a panel or sway mechanism for a portal frame fixed at both ends.

(A) Panel Mechanism (B) Gable Mechanism (C) Joint Mechanism

Fig. 10
6.1.3 Gable Mechanism

Fig. 10 (B) shows the gable mechanism for a gable structure fixed at both the supports.

6.1.4 Joint Mechanism

Fig. 10 (C) shows a joint mechanism. It occurs at a joint where more than two structural
members meet.

6.1.5 Combined Mechanism

Various combinations of independent mechanisms can be made depending upon whether

the frame is made of strong beam and weak column combination or strong column and
weak beam combination. The one shown in Fig.11 is a combination of a beam and sway
mechanism. Failure is triggered by formation of hinges at the bases of the columns and
the weak beam developing two hinges. This is illustrated by the right hinge being shown
on the beam, in a position slightly away from the joint.

Two hinges developed on

the beam

Fig. 11 Combined Mechanism

6.2 LOAD FACTOR AND THEOREMS OF PLASTIC COLLAPSE

Plastic analysis of structures is governed by three theorems, which are detailed in this
section.

Version II 35 - 11
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

The load factor at rigid plastic collapse (p) is defined as the lowest multiple of the design
loads which will cause the whole structure, or any part of it to become a mechanism.

In a limit state approach, the designer is seeking to ensure that at the appropriate factored
loads the structure will not fail. Thus the rigid plastic load factor p must not be less than
unity.

The number of independent mechanisms (n) is related to the number of possible plastic
hinge locations (h) and the number of degree of redundancy (r) of the frame by the
equation.

n=h–r (4)

The three theorems of plastic collapse are given below for reference.

6.2.1 Lower Bound or Static Theorem

A load factor (s ) computed on the basis of an arbitrarily assumed bending moment
diagram which is in equilibrium with the applied loads and where the fully plastic
moment of resistance is nowhere exceeded will always be less than or at best equal to the
load factor at rigid plastic collapse, (p).

p is the highest value of s which can be found.

6.2.2 Upper Bound or Kinematic Theorem

A load factor (k) computed on the basis of an arbitrarily assumed mechanism will
always be greater than, or at best equal to the load factor at rigid plastic collapse (p )

p is the lowest value of k which can be found.

6.2.3 Uniqueness Theorem

If both the above criteria are satisfied, then the resulting load factor corresponds to its
value at rigid plastic collapse (p).

7.0 RIGID PLASTIC ANALYSIS

As the plastic deformations at collapse are considerably larger than elastic ones, it is
assumed that the frame remains rigid between supports and hinge positions i.e. all plastic
rotation occurs at the plastic hinges.

Considering a simply supported beam subjected to a point load at midspan, the maximum
strain will take place at the centre of the span where a plastic hinge will be formed at
yield of full section. The remainder of the beam will remain straight, thus the entire
energy will be absorbed by the rotation of the plastic hinge. (See Fig. 12)

Version II 35 - 12
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Plastic zone Yield zone Stiff length

 
2
L
M

B. M. D. 
Moment – rotation curve

Fig. 12 Simply supported beam at plastic hinge stage

Considering a centrally loaded simply supported beam at the instant of plastic collapse
(see Fig. 12)
Workdone at the plastic hinge = Mp 2 (5a)

Workdone by the displacement of the load = W  L .  (5b)

2 

At collapse, these two must be equal

2Mp. = W  L . 
2 
WL
Mp  (6)
4

The moment at collapse of an encastre beam with a uniform load is similarly worked out
from Fig. 13. It should be noted that three hinges are required to be formed at A, B and C
just before collapse.

W / unit length
P=0 P=0 Loading

M A C B
MB
A L

MP   MP
Collapse

MP MP 2

Fig. 13 Encastre Beam

Version II 35 - 13
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Workdone at the three plastic hinges =Mp ( + 2 +  ) = 4Mp (7.a)

Workdone by the displacement of the load =W/L . L/2 . L/2 .  (7.b)

WL
  4M p
4
WL  16 M p
(8)
WL
Mp  (9)
16
In other words the load causing plastic collapse of a section of known value of Mp is
given by eqn. (8). All the three hinges at A, B and C will have a plastic moment of Mp as
given in eqn. (9).

7.1 Continuous Beams

Consider next the three span continuous beam of uniform section throughout (constant
Mp) as shown in Fig. 14(a). Here a conventional approach is more laborious but the
collapse load may be readily determined by consideration of the collapse patterns. Each
pattern represents the conversion of each of the three spans into mechanism.

10W 10W 6W
W

2L 2L 3L 2L 2L 3L

Fig. 14 (a)
Collapse pattern 1:

10W 10W 6W

 
2
Fig. 14(b)

Work done in hinges = M p ( 2 +  ) = 3 Mp

Version II 35 - 14
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Work done by loads = 10 W( 2L ) = 20WL

Collapse load, Wc = 3 Mp / 20L = 0.15 Mp / L

Collapse pattern 2:

10W 10W 6W
WW
WW
2 3

5
Fig. 14 (c)

Work done in plastic hinges = M p ( 2  + 5 + 3  ) = 10 Mp 

Work done by loads = 10W( 6L ) = 60 WL

Collapse load, Wc = 10 Mp / 60 L = 0.17 Mp / L

Collapse pattern 3:

10W 10W 6W

3 2
5
Fig. 14(d)

Work done in hinges = M p ( 3 + 5  ) = 8 Mp 

Work done by loads = 6W (6L  ) = 36 WL

Collapse load, Wc = 8 Mp / 36L = 0.22 Mp / L

Thus collapse will occur in the mode of Fig. 14 (b) when Wc = 0.15 Mp / L .

7.2 Mechanism Method

In the mechanism or kinematic method of plastic analysis, various plastic failure

mechanisms are evaluated. The plastic collapse loads corresponding to various failure
mechanisms are obtained by equating the internal work at the plastic hinges to the

Version II 35 - 15
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

external work by loads during the virtual displacement. This requires evaluation of
displacements and plastic hinge rotations.

For gabled frames and other such frames, the kinematics of collapse is somewhat
complex. It is convenient to use the instantaneous centres of rotation of the rigid elements
of the frame to evaluate displacements corresponding to different mechanisms. In this,
properties of rotations of a rigid body during an infinitesimally small angle  are assumed
as follows (see Fig.15):

(i) Any point P will move by distance r to point P' normal to the radius vector OP
for length r, due to the rotation of the rigid body by an angle  about O.

(ii) The work done by a force F due to the rotation of the rigid body about O by an
angle  is given by F*x*, where x is the shortest (perpendicular distance)
between vector F and the centre of rotation O.

y
F P
P’

r


x
o x

Fig.15 Rigid body rotation

Consider, for example the structure shown in Fig 16. Let us consider the plastic
mechanism by formation of plastic hinges A, C, F and G. Let the virtual rotation of the
member FG be  about plastic hinge G. Point F moves, normal to line FG to F' due to
rotation about G. This would cause a part of the structure ABC to rotate about point A and
point C would move to C'. Since point F moves to F' the instantaneous centre of rotation
of segment CDF would be along the line FG. Similarly since point C would move normal
to line AC, the instantaneous centre of rotation of element CDF should also be along the
line AC. Thus we can locate the instantaneous centre which will be the point of
intersection of line AC and GF, obtained by extending them to meet at I.

Version II 35 - 16
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

 /4  /4

4L

P3 D P5
H3 C E H5 L/2
H2 B
C’ F F’

L
A 
A
A L C"L L L G

Fig. 16
Let us find the rotation of element CDF about instantaneous centre of rotation I,

Let  FGF' =

From FGF' we get FF' = L*

To find the location of I, consider similar triangles ACC" and IAG,

IG CC"

AG AC"
L
L
x  L  L/2 4

4L L
3L
x  4L  L
2
7L
x
2
Similarly from IFF'

(x + L/2)I =FF' =L*

Version II 35 - 17
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

(7L/2+L/2) I= L
θ
 
I 4

Similarly from ICC' and ACC'


* 3L   A L
4
3
A 
4
The displacements of loads in the direction of application of loads are as follows:

Displacement of horizontal loads

3
For H2; 2 = L
4

For H3; 3 = 3  L  L   15 L

4  4  16
 L  15
For H5; 5=  4L    L
4 4  16

Displacement of vertical loads

3
For P3; '2 = L
4

For P5; '5 = L
4
The rotations at the plastic hinges are as follows:
3
A =
4

3 
C=     
 4 4

 5
F=     
4  4
G = 

With these information the virtual work equation can be written.

Version II 35 - 18
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

7.3 Rectangular Portal Framework and Interaction Diagrams

The same principle is applicable to frames as indicated in Fig. 17(a) where a portal frame
with constant plastic moment of resistance Mp throughout is subjected to two independent
loads H and V.

This frame may distort in more than one mode. There are basic independent modes for
the portal frame, the pure sway of Fig. 17 (b) and a beam collapse as indicated in Fig. 17
(c). There is now however the possibility of the modes combining as shown in Fig.
17(d).
V V
V V
  H 
H H H
2 2
  
a

   
a a

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Fig.17 Possible Failure Mechanisms

From Fig. 17(b)

Va / Mp
Work done in hinges = 4 Mp
Work done by loads = Ha
At incipient collapse Ha /Mp= 4 (10) 6

A B
From Fig. 17 (c) 4

Work done in hinges = 4 Mp

Work done by loads = Va C
At incipient collapse = Va / Mp = 4 (11) 2

From Fig. 17(d)

D
Work done in hinges = 6 Mp 0 2 4 6 Ha
Ha/ M
/Mp p

Work done by loads = Ha + Va Fig. 18

At incipient collapse Ha / Mp + Va / Mp = 6 (12)

The resulting equations, which represent the collapse criteria, are plotted on the
interaction diagram of Fig. 18. Since any line radiating from the origin represents
proportional loading, the first mechanism line intersected represents failure. The failure
condition is therefore the line ABCD and any load condition within the area OABCD is
therefore safe.

Version II 35 - 19
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

7.4 Frames not of Constant Section Throughout

Let us suppose however that the beam had an enhanced value of fully plastic moment of
2Mp. The possible modes of collapse are unaltered but wherever a hinge forms at the
beam/stanchion joint, it will occur in the weaker member - in this case it will be at the
stanchion. For clarity it is customary to draw the hinge location just away from the joint
as indicated in Fig. 19, but in the ensuing geometric computations it is assumed that its
location is at the joint. The previous calculation is then modified as follows:

V
 V  V
V
H H H
H
2
  2 2
a

  

a a

(a) (b) (d)

(c)
Fig.19
From Fig. 19 (b) Va / Mp
8
Work done in hinges = 4 Mp
Work done by loads = Ha A B
At incipient collapse Ha / Mp = 4 (13) 6

From Fig. 19 (c)

4 C
Work done in hinges = 6 Mp
Work done by loads = Va
At incipient collapse Va / Mp = 6 (14)
2
From Fig.19 (d)

Work done in hinges = 8 Mp D

Work done by loads = Ha + Va 0 2 4 6 HaH
8/ aM/pMp
At incipient collapse Ha / Mp + Va / Mp = 8 (15)
Fig. 20
The interaction diagram then becomes as shown in Fig. 20.

Version II 35 - 20
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

8.0 STABILITY

For plastically designed frames three stability criteria have to be considered for ensuring
the safety of the frame. These are

1. General Frame Stability.

2. Local Buckling Criterion.
3. Restraints.

8.1General Frame Stability

Under loading, all structures move. In some cases this movement is small compared to
the frame dimensions and the designer does not need to consider these any further. In
other cases, the movement of the structure will be sufficient to cause the factor of safety
to drop by a significant amount (for more details readers may wish to refer to BS:5950
Part 1, clauses 5.1.3, 5.5.3.2 and 5.5.3.3). In these cases the designer will need to take
this drop in the load carrying capacity into account in checking the structure.

8.2 Local Buckling Criterion

At the location of a plastic hinge, there is a considerable strain, and at ultimate load this
can reach several times the yield strain. Under these conditions it is essential that the
section does not buckle locally, or the moment capacity will drop considerably. In order
to ensure that the sections remain stable, limiting values are provided for flange outstands
and web depth ratios. In no circumstances should sections not complying with the plastic
section classification limits given in the code be used in locations where there are plastic
hinges; otherwise there is a real risk of a premature reduction in the moment capacity of
the member at the hinge location.

The limits for the sizing of flanges and webs are discussed in another chapter on “ Local
Buckling and Section Classification”.

8.3 Restraints

In order to ensure that the plastic hinge position does not become a source of premature
failure during the rotation, torsional restraint should be provided at the plastic hinge
locations. These are discussed in the next chapter, which covers the design requirements
in detail.

9.0 EFFECT OF AXIAL LOAD AND SHEAR

If a member is subjected to the combined action of bending moment and axial force, the
plastic moment capacity will be reduced.

The presence of an axial load implies that the sum of the tension and compression forces
in the section is not zero (Fig. 21). This means that the neutral axis moves away from the

Version II 35 - 21
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

equal area axis providing an additional area in tension or compression depending on the
type of axial load.

Consider a rectangular member of width b and depth d subjected to an axial compressive

force P together with a moment M in the vertical plane (Fig. 21).
The values of M and P are increased at a constant value of M/P until the fully plastic
stage is attained, then the values of M and P become:

Mpa = 0.25 fy b (d2 – 4y2) (16)

P = 2y  b fy (17)
where fy = yield stress
y = distance from the neutral axis to the stress change for
Mp without axial force, Mp = fybd2/4 (18)

If axial force acts alone -Py = fybd (19)

at the fully plastic state.

From equations (16) to (19) the interaction equation can be obtained:

Mx/Mp = 1 – P2/ Py (20)

The presence of shear forces will also reduce the moment capacity.

b fy fy

d/2 C
C
d C
y
1 fy
T T
fy fy

Total stresses = Bending + Axial

compression

Fig. 21 Effect of axial force on plastic moment capacity

10.0 PLASTIC ANALYSIS FOR MORE THAN ONE CONDITION OF

LOADING

When more than one condition of loading can be applied to a beam or structure, it may
not always be obvious which is critical. It is necessary then to perform separate

Version II 35 - 22
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

calculations, one for each loading condition, the section being determined by the solution
requiring the largest plastic moment.

Unlike the elastic method of design in which moments produced by different loading
systems can be added together, plastic moments obtained by different loading systems
cannot be combined, i.e. the plastic moment calculated for a given set of loads is only
valid for that loading condition. This is because the 'Principle of Superposition' becomes
invalid when parts of the structure have yielded.

11.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS

Basic concepts on Plastic Analysis have been discussed in this chapter and the methods
of computation of ultimate load causing plastic collapse have been outlined. Theorems of
plastic collapse and alternative patterns of hinge formation triggering plastic collapse
have been discussed. Worked examples illustrating plastic methods of analysis have been
provided.

12.0 REFERENCES

1. Clarke, A. B. and Coverman, S. H. Structural Steelwork, Limit state design,

Chapman and Hall Ltd, London, 1987.
2. Horne, M. R. Plastic Theory of Structures, Pergamon Press Ltd, Oxford, 1979.
3. Introduction to Steelwork Design to BS 5950: Part 1, The Steel Construction
Institute, 1988
4. Owens G.W., Knowles P.R : "Steel Designers Manual", The Steel Construction
Institute, Ascot, England, 1994

Version II 35 - 23
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 1 of 2 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 1
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

5 kN/m (factored)

C
I
x /3 3m

B
D
x
6m
 

A E

18.00 m

Fig. 22 Portal with fixed base and symmetrical vertical loading

Determine the Mp required for a symmetric single bay pitched portal frame with a
factored UDL of 5 kN /m by instantaneous centre method.

In the case of gable frames, computation of the geometrical relationship of the

displacement in the direction of the load as the structure moves through the
mechanism may become somewhat tedious. In such cases the method of
instantaneous centres may be used. This method is discussed below along with its use
for solving practical problems.

In the following problem, when the structure moves under loading, the point B will
move in a direction perpendicular to line AB . Then its centre of rotation should be
along line AB extended. The point C will move vertically downwards and its centre of
rotation should lie in a horizontal line. The point I satisfies both the conditions. Thus
I is the centre of rotation of the member BC . The rotation at both the column bases
is taken as . Assume that the hinges will form in the rafter at a distance of x from B
and very close to roof apex.

Version II 35 - 24
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 2 of 2 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 1
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

Data (as shown in Fig. 20).

Frame centres 5.0 m
Span of portal 18.0 m
Eves height 6.0 m
Eves to ridge height 3.0 m
Purlin spacing 1.5 m

Solution:

(x / 3)  = 6

 = 18  / x

Mp ( + 18  / x +  + 18  / x ) = 18  / x [ 5 x2 / 2 + ( 9 - x ) 5x]

Mp 

9  2.5 x 2  45 x 
 18  x 
dMp
For maximum value of Mp ,  0
dx

( 18 + x ) ( - 5x + 45 ) - ( - 2.5 x2 + 45 x ) = 0

- 2.5 x2 - 90 x - 810 = 0

x = 7.5 m

Substituting in eqn. for Mp , Mp = 69.5 kNm

Version II 35 - 25
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 1 of 6 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 2
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

Find Mp for the portal frame with electrically operated travelling crane as shown
in Fig. 21 by ‘Reactant moment diagram’ method. The roof pitch is 30. Neglect the
effect of wind acting vertically on the roof.

Horizontal wind pressure is = 1 kN/m2

f = 1.2 for the combined effects of wind, crane, dead load and live load.

LL
DL
13
Purlin locations 0
4@1375
5D

2887
14 4
0 3
Wind C 2 E
1
B F
eccentricity e
6500
5000

35 Crane loads
( 3T. E. O. T) 35
0 0
A G
pin pin
10000 Frames at 6 m c/c

Fig. 23 Summary of typical loads and dimensions for Example 2

PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS

(1) Forces due to dead load and live load on roof

Superimposed load = 0.6 kN/m2

Dead load = 0.5 kN/m2
Total load = (0.6 + 0.5)  1.2  6 = 7.92 kN/m

Version II 35 - 26
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 2 of 6 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 2
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

(2) Crane loading

3 ton capacity crane, 9.3 m span.

Horizontal crane loading

This may be shared between each side of the portal, based on the assumption that the
crane wheels are flanged, and in effect share the load between the two rails. Check
that the crane wheels are flanged when the vendor is selected, or place entire
horizontal crane load at point B for a more onerous case.

Vertical crane loading

Maximum wheel load = 26.5 kN (2 wheels)
Minimum wheel load = 7.25 kN (2 wheels)
Maximum reaction at column due to loaded crane = 2  26.5 = 53 kN
Minimum reaction at column due to loaded crane = 2  7.25 = 14.5 kN

Moment due to vertical crane loading (unfactored)

Moment at B = 53  0.35  1.2 = 22.3 kNm
Moment at F = 14.5  0.35  1.2 = 6.1 kNm
Load on the crane bracket is 350 mm eccentric from column centre line.

Transverse crane loading

Transverse load due to crab and load = 0.1 (6.0 + 3.0) = 3.6 kN
Shared between points B and F, i.e. 1.8 kN each.

Moment due to transverse crane loading

Moment at B = 1.8  5  1.2 = 10.8 kNm

Split the frame at the apex, then it can be treated as two cantilevers.

Total roof load = 7.92 kN/m

 1191  7.92
Load at purlin point 5 =  113   = 5.61 kN
 2  1000

Version II 35 - 27
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 3 of 6 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 2
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

 1191 1191  7.92

Load at purlin point 4 =    = 9.43 kN
 2 2  1000
=  9.43  1191  5.61   1191 2  
1
Moment at purlin point 3
1000
= 24.59 kNm

Moment at A

Moment due to roof load = 7.92  5  2.5 = 99 kNm

6 .5
Moment due to wind load on ABC = ( 1  6  6.5 )  1.2 = 152.1 kNm
2
Moment due to vertical crane loading = 53  0.35  1.2 = 22.3 kNm

Moment due to transverse crane load = 1.8  1.2  5 = 10.8 kNm

Total = 284.2 kNm

Moment at G

Moment due to roof load = 99 kNm

Moment due to vertical crane loading = 6.1 kNm

Moment due to transverse crane load = 10.8 kNm

Total = 115.9 kNm

Summary of the reactant moment diagram method for the portal frame is shown in
Fig. 22(a) and 22(b). For solution by calculation, let purlins be numbered 1 to ‘n’
from roof to apex. Put moment for each purlin point into the reactant moment
diagram equations and solve for successive purlin points. The largest value of Mp
found by this method is the design case.

Version II 35 - 28
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 4 of 6 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 2
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

For this design the equations for Mp are:

At A : 284.2 – m – 9.387 R – 5 S = 0

At point 3 : 24.59 – m - 1.42 R – 2.495 S = - Mp

At E : 99 - m - 2.887 R + 5 S = + Mp

At G : 115.9 – m – 9.387 R + 5 S = 0

Using the method and equations illustrated in Fig. 22(b) these equations can be
solved simultaneously (or by matrix) to give R = 16.2 kN, S = 16.83 kN, m = 48 kN,
and
Mp = 88.4 kNm.

Version II 35 - 29
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 5 of 6 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 2
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000
w1 w2

D h
C E
W1 P1 P W2 2
B F
2
w3 a h3 b h
1
A G
1 2
L
Loading and geometry

w3 h12/2

w222/2
w112/2

A C D E G

Free moment diagram for UDLs

P1.h3

P3.h3
W1.a W2.b

A B F G
Free moment diagram due to crane loads

Fig. 24(a) Loadings and free moment diagrams for the portal frame

Version II 35 - 30
 PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Job No. Sheet 6 of 6 Rev.

Structural Steel
Job title: PLASTIC ANALYSIS
Design Project
Worked Example. 2
Made by RSP Date April 2000
CALCULATION SHEET Checked by RN Date April 2000

For the purpose of analysis, frame Equations for fixed bases

is notionally split at apex, and at C ; Free M – M – h2R - 1S = +Mp
treated as two cantilevers at n ; Free M – M – yR – xS = -Mp
SS at E ; Free M – M – h2R + 2S = +Mp
Purlin points
at G ; Free M – M – (h1+h2)R + 2S = -Mp
R R
D y Equations for pinned bases are as for fixed
C 3 n bases but with moment at the bases set to
1 2 x x
E
zero. Put the factored values of free moment
B x F
into the equations and solve simultaneously
or by matrix. Solve for successive purlin
A G points, thus finding the largest value of Mp
R R

S S
M + (hI+ h2)R + 1S M + (h1+h2)R - 2S
Redundant reactants

x
M + (h1 + h2)R + 1S

M + (h1+h2)R - 2S
M + h2R + 1S

M + h2R - 2S
M + yR + xS

A B C D E F G
Redundant reactant moment diagram

Fig. 24(b) Summary of the reactant moment diagram method for a portal frame

Version II 35 - 31
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet: 1 of 1 Rev:

Structural Steel Job title: Weld Design (Static)
Design Project Worked example: 1
Made by SSR Date.

Calculation Sheet Checked by SAJ Date.

PROBLEM 1:

Two plates 14 mm thick are joined by (I) a double-V butt weld, (II) a
single-V butt weld. Determine the strength of the welded joint in tension in
each case. Effective length of the weld is 20 cm. Yield strength of steel =
250 N/mm2, Partial safety factor for strength = 1.15.

Solution:

Single V butt weld Double V butt weld

I. In the case of double V butt weld, complete penetration of the weld

would take place.
Therefore effective throat thickness = 14 mm (thickness of the
parent metal
Effective length of weld = 200 mm
Factored yield stress of the member = 250/1.15 = 217.4 N/mm2
Design ultimate Strength of the
Single V butt weld = (217.4 *14 * 200)/1000
= 608.72 kN
II For single V butt weld the penetration would be incomplete
Therefore effective throat thickness = 5/8 * 14 = 8.75 mm
(IS: 816-1969)
Effective length of weld = 200 mm
Design ultimate Strength of the
double V butt weld = (217.4 * 8.75 * 200)/1000
= 380.45 kN

Note: The design ultimate strength of the welds are presented along with
the factored strength and in no case these should be used with working
loads.

Version II 31-28
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet: 1 of 2 Rev:

Structural Steel Job title: Weld Design (Static)
Design Project Worked example: 2
Made by SSR Date.

Calculation Sheet Checked by SAJ Date.

PROBLEM 2:

Design a suitable side fillet weld to connect two plates 100 mm  10 mm

and 120 mm  12 mm, and to transmit tension equal to the full strength of
the thin plate. Factored shear stress in the weld is 125.5 N/mm2 and
factored yield stress of the plate is 217.4 N/mm2.

210 mm
100 mm 120 mm

Small weld length (end

returns) for good welding
Fillet weld practice. (not considered
in design

Solution:

Minimum size of the weld specified in IS:816(1969) for 12 mm thick plate is

5 mm.

Maximum size of fillet weld based on the thickness of the plate, i.e.,
= (10.0 – 1.5 ) = 8.5 mm

A fillet weld of 6 mm may be suitable.

Tension transmitted by 1 mm of weld length = 125.5* 1* 0.7*6

= 527.1 N

Tensile strength based on the thinner plate = 217.4* 100* 10

= 217.4 kN

Version II 31-29
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet: 2 of 2 Rev:

Structural Steel Job title: Weld Design (Static)
Design Project Worked example: 2
Made by SSR Date.

Calculation sheet Checked by SAJ Date.

Length of weld required = 217400 / 527.1

= 413 mm

Therefore, a weld length of 210 mm each on either longitudinal side can be

provided.

To ensure good fabrication practice the following checks are to be made

 The welds are to be checked for, a) whether sufficient weld lengths

are provided on either side, b) This is greater than the width of the
thinner plate. In this particular case 210 mm > 100 mm.

 The spacing of the longitudinal welds should be checked so as to be

less than 16 times the thickness of the plate. In the present case 100
mm < 16 * 10 mm.

 It is also a good fabrication practice to take the weld round the

corner for a small distance, normally twice the weld thickness (end
return).

Version II 31-30
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet: 1 of 2 Rev:

Structural Steel Job title: Weld Design (Static)
Design Project Worked example: 3
Made by SSR Date

Calculation Sheet Checked by SAJ Date

PROBLEM 3:

In a roof truss, a tie member ISA 110 mm X 110mm X 8 mm carries a

factored tension of value 210 kN. The tie is connected to a gusset plate 8
mm thick. Design the welded joint. Factored yield strength of steel is
217.4 N/mm2 and shear strength of weld is 125 N/mm2.

l1= 235.9 mm

30 mm

80 mm

l2= 54.1 mm

Fillet weld for tie member of a roof truss

Solution:

For this problem we would provide a weld group consisting of transverse

and longitudinal welds and ensure that the CG of the weld group
coincides with the line of action of the externally applied load.

First we would decide about the weld size. This is decided by the
thickness of the rolled section and the plating. Weld which are applied to
rounded toe of rolled section should not be more than ¾ of its thickness
or plating and hence we get a weld size of 6mm (3/4* 8). The maximum
size of the end weld is also limited by the thickness of the plating, which
is 8-1.5=6.5 mm. Hence 6 mm fillet welds are O.K.

Transverse weld is provided equal to the size of the leg = 110 mm.

Version II 31-31
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet : 2 of 2 Rev:

Structural Steel Job. Title: Weld Design (Static)
Design Project Worked Example: 3

Made by SSR Date

Calculation Sheet
Checked by SAJ Date
Force transmitted by transverse weld = (125* 0.7* 6* 110) /1000
=57.75 kN

Remaining force to be transmitted by the longitudinal welds = 210 – 57.75

=152.25 kN

We must ensure that the CG of the welds coincides with line of action of
the external force. This could be ensured by providing longitudinal welds
along the near and far side of the angle and also by ensuring that the
moment of the all the forces about any of the line of the weld vanishes.

Let us assume that the lengths of the welds in the heel and toe sides are l1
and l2 respectively.

Total weld length required for 152.25 kN

=152.25 * 1000 / ((125* 0.7*6))=290 mm

Taking moment of all forces about the heel side longitudinal weld, we get

57.75* 1000* 55 + l1 * 0+ l2* (125. * 0.7* 6) * 110

=210* 1000 * 30.
Therefore l2 = 54.09 mm

Hence we get the weld length l2 as say 54.09 mm. The bracketed term in
the above expression represents the strength of the weld for 1 mm.

Now we get the length l1 as 290 – 54.09 =235.91 mm

Alternatively the longitudinal weld length l1 is obtained by taking moment

of all the forces about the toe side weld line. Hence we have demonstrated
as to how a weld group could be designed to have a CG coinciding with
the externally applied load.

It is also to be noted that in case it is desired to reduce the length of the

joint then the heel side weld size can be increased.

Version II 31-32
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet: 1 of 2 Rev:

Structural Steel Job. Title: Weld Design (Static)
Design Project Worked Example: 4
Made by SSR Date

Calculation Sheet Checked by SAJ Date

PROBLEM 4:

An ISA 100 mm X 75 mm X 10 mm is welded with the flange of a column

ISHB 300, @63 kg/mm. The bracket carries factored load of 80 kN at a
distance of 40 mm from the face of the column. Design the bracket
connection. Factored yield stress of steel is 217.4 N/mm2.

80 kN
40 mm

ISA 100 mm X 75 mm X 10 mm
100 mm

ISHB 300 mm @ 63 kg /m

Welded bracket connection

Solution:
For the rolled section ISHB 300 @63 kg/ m

Flange width = 250 mm

We see that the external load not only causes shear but also a bending
moment in the plane of the web. Hence it is necessary to provide two weld
lines such that they produce a resisting couple to oppose the applied
bending moment. In this particular case, as shown in the figure, we can
provide weld at the top and bottom of the seating angle or bracket. Hence
the top weld would be under tension and bottom weld would be under
compression producing a couple whose lever arm would be 100 mm
(length of the connected leg).

We also see that both welds share the shear force. Hence the welds are
subjected to simultaneous action of shear and tension or compression.

Version II 31-33
 WELDS - STATIC AND FATIGUE STRENGTH - II

Job No: Sheet : 2 of 2 Rev:

Structural Steel
Design Project Job. Title: Weld Design (Static)
Worked Example: 4
Made by SSR Date

Calculation Sheet Checked by SAJ Date

Having decided about the weld lengths (250 mm at top and bottom of the
bracket) we can calculate the size of the weld ‘t’.

Shear force in 1mm length size of the weld. = 80000/(2* 250)=160 N

100 mm

1 mm
Bending moment about the face of the column=40 * 80000
=32* 105 N-mm

Force in the weld per 1 mm length

due to bending moment = 32* 105 / (250* 100 )=128 N

Resultant force due shear and bending = 1602  1282 =205 N

This resultant force should not exceed the design strength of the weld.

Therefore, t* 0.7* 125  205

Solving for t,
t  2.34 mm

Hence provide a weld size of 3 mm.

Version II 31-34
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 1 of 1 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Eccentrically Loaded Bolt Group
Design Project Worked Example – 1
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by VK Date
Calculation Sheet
Design Example 1: Design a bolted connection between a bracket 8 mm Remarks
thick and the flange of an ISHB 400 column using HSFG bolts, so as to carry Ref:
a vertical load of 100 kN at a distance of 200 mm from the face of the Section 2.1
column as shown in Fig. E1.

Solution:
1) Bolt force:
100 kN
Px = 0; Py = 100 kN; 250 200

Total eccentricity x’=200+250/2=325 mm 60

M = Pyx’ = 100x325 = 32500 kN-mm 60

60 Fig. E1
140
Try the arrangement shown in Fig. E1
Note: minimum pitch = 60 mm and
minimum edge dist. = 60 mm

n=6

 ri2 =  xi2 +  yi2 = 6(70)2+4(60)2 = 43800 mm2 Equation (8)

Shear force on the farthest bolts (corner bolts)


 32500  60  100 32500  70  
2 2

Ri   
  6     81 .79 kN

  43800   43800  


2) Bolt capacity
Try M20 HSFG bolts

Bolt capacity in single shear = 1.1 K  Po = 1.1  0.45  177 = 87.6 kN

ISHB 400 flange is thicker than the bracket plate and so bearing on the
bracket plate will govern.
Bolt capacity in bearing = d t pbg = 20  8  650  10-3 = 104 kN
Use 6 M20
 Bolt value = 87.6 kN > 81.79 safe. HSFG bolts as
shown.

Version II 34 - 10
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 1 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Beam Splice
Design Project Worked Example – 2
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by VK Date
Calculation Sheet
Design Example 2: Design a bolted splice for an ISMB 450 section to
transfer a factored bending moment of 150 kN-m and a factored shear of 100
kN. Assume that the flange splices carry all of the moment and that the web
splice carries only the shear.
35 45 150x16 flange
60 60
splice plates

35 160x8 web
splice plates
100 2 Nos

450 100

35

Fig. E2
Solution:
1) Flange Splices :
Flange force =BM/(D-tf) = 150  103/(450-17.4) = 346.7 kN

For M20 Gr.8.8 HSFG bolts in single shear

Slip resistance per bolt = 1.1  0.45  144 = 71.3 kN 1.1KsPo
Bearing resistance on flange per bolt = 20  17.4  650  10-3 = 226.2 kN dtpbg
Bolt value = 71.3 kN

Use 3 rows of 2 bolts at a pitch of 60 mm

Net area of flange = (150-2  22) 17.4 = 1844.4 mm2

Flange capacity = (250/1.15)  1844  10-3 = 400.9 kN > flange force OK m=1.15

Try 150 mm wide splice plate

Thickness of splice plate required
= 346.7  103/1.0  250(150-2  22)/1.15 = 15.1 mm Use 16 mm
Flange splice
Use flange splice plate of size 400150  16 plate of size
400 150  16

Version II 34 - 11
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 2 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Beam Splice
Design Project Worked Example – 2
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
2) Web Splice

For M20 HSFG bolts of Gr.8.8 in double shear

Slip resistance per bolt = 2  1.1 0.45  144 = 142.6 kN

Try 8 mm thick web splice plates on both sides of the web.

Therefore bearing on web will govern

Bearing Resistance per bolt = 20  9.4  650  10-3 == 122.2 kN
Bolt value = 122.2 kN

Try 3 bolts at 100 mm vertical pitch and 45 mm from the center of joint.

Horizontal shear force on bolt due to moment due to eccentricity

= 100  45  100/(2  1002) = 22.5 kN

Vertical Shear force per bolt = 100/3 = 33.3 kN

Web splice
Resultant shear force = (22.5 +33.3 ) = 40.2 kN < 122.2(bolt cap) OK
2 2 plate of size
2701608
Use web splice plate of size 2701608 - 2 nos. with 3 M20
bolts on each
side of the
splice.

Version II 34 - 12
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Sheet 1 of 2 Rev
Structural Steel Job Title: Column Splice
Design Project Worked Example – 3
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
Design Example 3:Design a bolted cover plate splice for an ISHB 200 @ Remarks
50.94 kg/m column supported by an ISHB 200 @ 47.54 kg/m column so as to
tramsfer a factored axial load of 440 kN. The splice is near a point of lateral
restraint. The ends are not prepared for full contact in bearing.

ISHB 200
50.9 kg/m

Flangs Splice Plate

50
325 x 200 x 10
75
Web Splice Plates
75 175 x 160 x 6 – 2
nos.
75 M22 HSFG
60
bolts at 140 c/c
50

ISHB 200
Fig. E3 47.5 kg/m

Solution:
1) Area of ISHB 200 @ 47.54 kg/m section = 4754 mm2
Area of web = (200-2  9)  6.1 = 1110.2 mm2

2) Web Splice
Portion of load carried by web = 440  1110.2/4754 = 102.8 kN
For M22 HSFG bolts, 2 Nos in double shear
Shear force /bolt = 102.8/2 = 51.4 kN

Slip resistance/bolt = 2  1.1  0.45  177 = 175.2 kN

Bearing resistance/bolt = 22  6.1 650  10-3 = 87.62 kN
Bolt value = 87.62 kN > bolt force of 51.4 kN  OK
End distance > 51.4  103 /(1/3 6.1  650) = 39 mm
Also end distance > 1.4(22+1.5) = 35 mm Use 50 mm
Web splice
Use 175  160  6 mm web splice plates – 2 Nos. 175  160  6

Version II 34 - 13
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 2 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Column Splice
Design Project Worked Example - 4
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
3) Flange Splice
Portion of load carried by each flange = 0.5(440-102.8) = 168.6 kN
For M22 HSFG bolts, 4 Nos in single shear
Shear force /bolt = 168.6/4 = 42.15 kN

Slip resistance/bolt = 1.1  0.45  177 = 87.62 kN

Bearing resistance/bolt = 22  9  650  10-3 = 128.7 kN
Bolt value = 87.62 kN > bolt force of 42.15 kN  OK

End distance > 42.15  103 /( 1/3  9  650) = 21.62 mm

Also end distance > 1.4(22+1.5) = 35 mm Use 50 mm

Use 32520010 mm flange splice with bolts at 140 mm gauge,

75 mm pitch flange splice
32520010

Version II 34 - 14
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 1 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Bolted Seating Angle Connection
Design Project Worked Example – 4
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
Design Example 4: Design a Seating angle connection for an ISMB 400 Remarks
beam to an ISHB 200 column so as to transfer a shear of 150 kN.

ISHB
200 c+d?
ISMB 400 b 3h2
Root line
V = 150 kN
A B
200 2t

Fig. E4 100

1) Seating Angle
The support reaction acts as a UDL over length (b+ 3h2) on the web
Length of bearing required at root line of beam (b+3 h2)
= V/(twpyw)= 150  103/(8.9  250/1.15) = 77.53 mm
Length of bearing on cleat = b = 77.53-3h2 = 77.53-(3)32.8 = 20.7 mm
end clearance of beam from the face of the column c= 5 mm
allow tolerance d = 5 mm
minimum length of angle leg required for seating = b+c+d = 30.7 mm

Try ISA 20010012 angle of length w = bf = 140 mm

Distance from end of bearing on cleat to root of angle (A to B)

= b + c + d –- (t+r) of angle; assuming r = t for angle
= b + 5 + 5 – (2t) = 20.7 + 5 + 5 – 24 = 6.7 mm

assuming the load to be uniformly distributed over the bearing length b

moment at the root of angle =(150/20.7) 6.72/2 = 162.6 N-m
Moment capacity = 1.2pyZ = 1.2(250/1.15)(140122/6) 10-3
= 876.5 N-m OK
Note :[The maximum moment occurs to the left of point A. To account for
it the section modulus is taken as 1.2wT2/6 instead of wT2/4].

Shear Capacity of outstanding leg of cleat

= 0.6py0.9wt=0.6(250/1.15)0.91401210-3
Use ISA
= 197.2 kN >150 kN OK
20010012

Version II 34 - 15
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 2 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Bolted Seating Angle Connection
Design Project Worked Example – 4
Made by Date 15-04-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
2) Connection of seating angle to column flange
Bolts required to resist only shear
Try 4 bolts of 20mm dia and grade 4.6 at angle back marks

Total shear capacity = 416024510-3=156.8 kN > 150 kN OK

Column flange critical for bearing of bolts

Total bearing capacity = 4418209.010-3= 301 kN > 150 kN OK Npbsdtf

3) Provide nominal clip angle of ISA 50  50  8 at the top

Version II 34 - 16
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 1 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Bolted Web Cleats Connection
Design Project Worked Example – 5
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
Design Example 5: Design a bolted web cleat beam-to-column connection
between an ISMB 400 beam and an ISHB 200 @ 40 kg/m column. The
connection has to transfer a factored shear of 150 kN. Use bolts of diameter
20 mm and grade 4.6.
ISA 90 x 90 x 8
ISHB 108.9
2 nos.
200
ISMB 400
40 A
75
75
75 V = 150 kN
75
75
35

e V/2
Fig. E5

1) The recommended gauge distance for column flange is 100 mm.

Therefore required angle back mark is 50 mm.
Use web cleats of ISA 90x90x8 giving gauge g = 50+50+8.9=108.9 mm g for ISHB200
is 100 mm OK
2) Connection to web of beam- Bolt capacity
shear capacity of bolt in double shear = 216024510-3=78.4 kN
bearing capacity of bolt on the beam web = 418209.010-3= 75.24 kN
bolt value = 75.24 kN

Try 4 bolts as shown in the Figure with vertical pitch of 75 mm

Assuming the shear to be acting on the face of the column, its eccentricity
with the centre of the bolt group will produce horizontal shear forces in
the bolts in addition to the vertical shear.

horizontal shear force on top bolt due to moment due to eccentricity e

= 15050112.5/2(37.52+112.52) = 30.0 kN Px e ri/ ri2

vertical shear force per bolt = 150/4 = 37.5 kN

resultant shear = (30.02+37.52) = 48.0 kN < bolt value Safe !

Version II 34 - 17
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 2 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Bolted Web Cleats Connection
Design Project Worked Example – 5
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
3) Connection to column flange: Bolt capacity

shear capacity of bolt in single shear = 16024510-3 = 39.2 kN

bearing capacity of bolt on column flange = 418209.010-3= 75.24 kN
bolt value = 39.2 kN

Try 6 bolts as shown in the Fig.E5 with vertical pitch of 75 mm

4) Check bolt force

Similar to the previous case, the shear transfer between the beam web and
the angle cleats can be assumed to take place on the face of the beam web.
However, unlike the previous case, no relative rotation is possible between
the angle and the beam web.

Assuming centre of pressure 25 mm below top of cleat (point A),

horizontal shear force on bolt due to moment due to eccentricity e
= (15050/2) 200/(502+1252+2002) =12.9 kN (V/2)exri/ri2

vertical shear force per bolt = 150/6 = 25.0 kN

resultant shear = (12.92+25.02) = 28.13 kN < bolt value OK

Use 2 Nos ISA 90x90x8 of length 375 mm as angle cleats ISA 90x90x8
Length 375mm

Version II 34 - 18
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 1 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Bolted End Plate Connection
Design Project Worked Example - 6
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
Design Example 6: Design a bolted end plate connection between an
ISMB 400 beam and an ISHB 200 @ 40 kg/m column so as to transfer a
hogging factored bending moment of 150 kN-m and a vartical factored
shear of 150 kN. Use HSFG bolts of diameter 22 mm.

ISHB
200
ISMB 400
M=150 kN-m
V=150 kN

1) bolt forces
taking moment about the centre of the bottom flange and neglecting the
contribution of bottom bolts and denoting the force in the top bolts by F
4F 384 = 150 103
F = 97.6 kN

tension capacity of M22 bolt = 0.9Po = 159.3 kN

allowable prying force Q = 159.3-97.6 = 61.7 kN

2) design for prying action

try 30 mm thick end plate of width be = 180 mm
distance from the centre line of bolt to prying force n is the minimum of
edge distance or 1.1TPo/Py = 1.1 30 (2 512/250) = 55.66 mm
n = 40 mm
assuming 10 mm fillet weld,
distance from center line of bolt to toe of fillet weld b = 60-10 = 50 mm;

moment at the toe of the weld = Fb-Qn = 97.650-61.740 = 2412 N-m

effective width of end plate per bolt w = be/2 = 180/2 = 90 mm

moment capacity = (250/1.15)(90302/4)=4402 N-m > 2412 N-m Safe ! (py/1.15)(wT2/4)

Version II 34 - 19
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 2 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Bolted End Plate Connection
Design Project Worked Example - 6
Made by Date 01-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
50  2 1.5  0.587  90  30 
4
Q
b 
F 
Po wT 4 

min Q  97.6   2n  27 nb2 
2  40  27  40  50 2
 =2 (non-
Q = 31.8 kN < 61.7 kN OK preloaded)
 =1.5 (for factored
load)
3) Check for combined shear and tension

Shear capacity of M20 HSFG Ps l= 87.6 kN

Shear per bolt Fs = 150/6 = 25 kN

= (25.0/87.6) + (97.6+31.8)/159.3 = 0.936 < 1.0 Safe ! Fs/Psl + 0.8ft /Pt

Version II 34 - 20
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 1 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Beam to Beam Connection
Design Project Worked Example - 7
Made by Date 1-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK
Design Example 7: Design a double web cleat connection for an ISMB 400
coped beam to an ISMB 600 main beam so as to transfer a factored load of
300 kN using HSFG bolts of 20mm diameter and grade 8.8.

ISMB 600 ISMB 400

A 40
50
80
80
80
80
80
C B 40

2 ISA 909010

Fig. E7
Solution:
1) Connection to web of ISMB 400

For M20 Gr.8.8 HSFG bolts in double shear

Slip resistance per bolt = 21.1  0.45  144 = 142.6 kN
Bearing capacity of web per bolt = 20  8.9  650  10-3 = 115.7 kN
Bolt value = 115.7 kN

Try 4 bolts as shown in the Figure with vertical pitch of 80 mm

Assuming the shear to be acting on the face of the ISMB 600 web, its
eccentricity with the centre of the bolt group will produce horizontal
shear forces in the bolts in addition to the vertical shear.

horizontal shear force on top bolt due to moment due to eccentricity e

= (300/2)50112.5/(37.52+112.52) = 60.0 kN

vertical shear force per bolt = 300/4 = 75.0 kN

resultant shear = (602+752) = 96.0 kN < bolt value Safe !

Version II 34 - 21
 BOLTED CONNECTIONS – II

Job No: Sheet 2 of 2 Rev

Structural Steel Job Title: Beam to Beam Connection
Design Project Worked Example - 7
Made by Date 1-10-00
SRSK
Checked by Date
Calculation Sheet VK

2) Connection to web of ISMB 600

Try 6 bolts as shown in the Figure with vertical pitch of 80 mm

For M20 Gr.8.8 HSFG bolts in single shear

Slip resistance per bolt = 1.1  0.45  144 = 71.28 kN
Bearing capacity of web per bolt = 20  12  650  10-3 = 156 kN
Bolt value = 71.28 kN

Assuming center of pressure 27.5 mm below the top of the angle

horizontal shear force on bottom bolt due to moment due to eccentricity e

= (300/2)50200/(502+1252+2002)= 25.82 kN

vertical shear force per bolt = 300/6 = 50.0 kN

resultant shear = (25.822+502) = 56.27 kN < bolt value Safe !

3) Check web of ISMB 400 for block shear

Block shear capacity = shear capacity of AB + 0.5tensile capacity of BC

= 0.62500.91.1(380+50-3.522)8.910-3
+ 0.52501.1(45-0.522)8.910-3 = 323.12 > 300 kN Safe!

Version II 34 - 22