You are on page 1of 56

CIDECT Report : 5BP-4/05

November 2005

DEVELOPMENT OF A FULL CONSISTENT DESIGN APPROACH FOR


BOLTED AND WELDED JOINTS IN BUILDING FRAMES AND TRUSSES
BETWEEN STEEL MEMBERS MADE OF HOLLOW AND/OR OPEN
SECTIONS
APPLICATION OF THE COMPONENT METHOD
VOLUME 2 - PROGRESS OF THE SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES ON JOINT
COMPONENTS AND ASSEMBLY
Final report submitted to:
Comit International pour le Dveloppement et lEtude de la Construction Tubulaire
Authors:
J.P. Jaspart, C. Pietrapertosa
University of Lige, Lige, Belgium
K. Weynand, E. Busse, R. Klinkhammer
PSP Technologien GmbH, Aachen, Germany

coordinated by:
J.P. Grimault
ARCELOR Tubes

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 2 of 56

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword........................................................................................................................................... 3
Part I
Recent developments for the derivation of an analytical formulation for CHS wall
components........................................................................................................................ 4
I.1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................4
I.1.1
Summary of the interim report (5BP-4/04 August 2004) .......................................... 4
I.1.1.1 Types of the plastic mechanisms............................................................................. 4
I.1.1.2 Two contributions to the yield mechanisms ............................................................. 5
I.1.1.3 Ring model mechanism ......................................................................................... 6
I.1.1.4 External mechanisms .............................................................................................. 6
I.1.2
Objectives expressed in the second interim report ..................................................... 8
I.1.3
Research strategy ....................................................................................................... 8
I.1.4
Research steps ........................................................................................................... 8
I.2 Direct analytical approach.................................................................................................10
I.3

Numerical study ................................................................................................................12

I.3.1
Validation of the FEM tool ......................................................................................... 12
I.3.2
Definition of the numerical model for the study of the CHS component .................... 12
I.3.2.1 FEM mesh ............................................................................................................. 13
I.3.2.2 Loading .................................................................................................................. 13
I.3.2.3 Plastic model ......................................................................................................... 13
I.3.2.4 Influence of the thickness of the plate ................................................................... 14
I.3.2.5 Influence of the length of the tube ......................................................................... 15
I.3.3
Parametrical study..................................................................................................... 16
I.3.3.1 Objectives .............................................................................................................. 16
I.3.3.2 Description of the parametrical study .................................................................... 16
I.3.3.3 Results of the parametric study ............................................................................. 17
I.3.3.4 Comparison with Eurocode 3 formula.................................................................... 21
I.3.4
Correlation with Gomes model .................................................................................. 22
I.3.4.1 Application of the Gomes model to CHS components........................................... 22
I.3.4.2 Comparison numerical results and Gomes model ................................................. 23
I.3.4.3 Determination of the limit value ............................................................................. 25
I.3.5
First conclusions of the parametrical study ............................................................... 26
I.4 Conclusions further developments .................................................................................26
Part II
II.1

Recent developments for the verification of component and assembly models............... 27


Introduction .......................................................................................................................27

II.2

Database on test results ...................................................................................................28

II.3

FE model generator for hollow section joints ....................................................................33

II.4

Calibration of the FE models .............................................................................................36

References...................................................................................................................................... 51

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 3 of 56

Foreword
The application of the component method for the characterisation of the mechanical properties of
structural joints in tubular construction has been initiated into CIDECT few years ago, within the
project 5BM. As an outcome of this first project, the possibility to extend to hollow joints this
method initially developed for joints between open sections has been demonstrated and the
advantage of this use has been pointed out.
Present project 5BP aims at developing further the concept, at indicating how the component
method may be implemented in daily practice but also at identifying any lack of information which
could limit the application. Finally developments were expected to be achieved so as to increase
the scientific knowledge and progress in the preparation of appropriate answers to some of the still
pending technical questions.
In the present report, the reader will find the outcome of the works performed within the 5BP
project in the last two-and-a-half years in the form of two separate volumes, respectively entitled:
Volume 1 : Practical guidelines
Volume 2 : Progress of the scientific activities on joint components and assembly
Volume 1 gathers all the information available to the designer and helpful for the design of a wide
range of structural steel joints connecting hollow and/or open sections. The use of this material
requires anyway an experience which is not necessary widely shared at the moment and therefore
simple design aids (called design sheets) more appropriate to daily practice have been prepared
for some selected joint configurations. These ones are complemented by worked examples.
Should these design sheets be appreciated, additional design sheets covering other joint
configurations would have to be drafted by referring to the material made available in the first part
of Volume 1.
Volume 2, on the other hand, reflects the progress of the scientific works achieved during the
project. These ones contribute to a better understanding of the behaviour of CHS components and
of their assembly. Further research activities which could not have been achieved in the 5BP
project are required in this field so as to come to fully validated models. These works are planned
to be achieved at PSP and at Lige University in the next months; they could be reported on at the
occasion of the next ISTS Symposium to be held in Quebec in 2006.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Part I

August 2005
Page 4 of 56

Recent developments for the derivation of an


analytical formulation for CHS wall components

I.1 Introduction
In parallel with the work presented in the volume 1, some scientific developments have been
performed in Lige in order to derive a new analytical formulation, based on physical aspects and
plastic theory, for the resistance of CHS wall component. In the interim report BP-4/04, the first
elements of this study have been presented. Since August 2004, this study has well progressed,
some tools have been developed, a good understanding of the physical behaviour of the
components has been obtained and some key steps have been crossed in view of the derivation of
analytical formulation for component characterisation.
Hereunder the main elements of the interim reports are briefly reported and the more recent
developments performed this year are presented. Further research steps have still to be
performed. They are planned to be achieved in the next months at Lige University and at PSP; as
this work has been initiated in the 5BP project, the two mentioned institutions will report in the next
CIDECT meetings about the progress of these research works.

I.1.1 Summary of the interim report (5BP-4/04 August 2004)


The first studies carried out on the CHS wall components have been presented in the second 5BP
interim report [3]. The main conclusions of this report are summarised in this chapter. The new
developments carried out this year are described in Chapter I.2.
I.1.1.1

Types of the plastic mechanisms

When CHS profiles are subjected to transverse compression and tension forces, plastic yield line
mechanisms, membrane effects and possible instability effects develop. If second order effects are
disregarded (membrane effects, instability effects, ), the resistance of the CHS section is a fully
plastic one and the failure loads in compression and in tension are equal. The plastic mechanisms
which form in the CHS section have been analysed through experimental tests and numerical
simulations and, as a result, two types of plastic mechanisms may be identified (Figure 1):
global plastic mechanisms involving the whole section;
local plastic mechanisms involving a part of the whole section.

: yield line
(a) One global mechanism

(b) One local mechanism


Figure 1: Types of mechanisms

(c) Two local mechanisms

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

I.1.1.2

August 2005
Page 5 of 56

Two contributions to the yield mechanisms

In the interim report, the form of the mechanisms has been studied. And it has been shown that the
mechanisms may be divided into two different contributions (see Figures 2 and 3): a ring
model mechanism (Npl(rm)) and two external mechanisms (Npl(em)).
Npl

lp

dm
A
Bp

tm

Npl

Plane view

Cut

A- A :

Figure 2: Connection with a CHS chord and a rectangular brace

Beff
Bem

Brm

Bem

Bp
Rectangular brace

CHS chord

Ring Model

External mechanisms

Figure 3: Two contributions for the plastic mechanism of the chord

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 6 of 56

It has also been demonstrated that a good estimation of the plastic resistance Npl (tot) of the chord
may be derived by summing the resistance of the separate contributions:
Npl (tot) = Npl(rm) + 2*Npl(em).
I.1.1.3

(1)

Ring model mechanism

An analytical formula for this part of the mechanism has been presented in the previous report.
This formula has been validated by numerical tests. The plastic resistance of the Ring model
contribution for a CHS loaded in transverse tension or compression may be determined by the
following expression (Figure 4):
2
2
f y0
B
t0
(2)
N pl(rm) =
(d t0 ) b
b
with:
d = diameter of the CHS
b = width of the loading area
B = length of the loading area

B
d

Figure 4: Application of the ring model theory to the component


CHS wall in tension or compression

I.1.1.4

External mechanisms

The form of the external mechanisms observed in CHS in tension and compression is seen in
Figure 4 in the case of a global mechanism. But an identical shape is observed in local
mechanisms. Furthermore the yield line pattern shown in Figure 4 is quite similar to the one
predicted by the so-called Gomes model for I or H column webs in transverse compression or
tension (Figure 5); the main difference is obviously the nature of the surface where the yield lines
develop:
- a shell in CHS profiles.
- a plate in I or H column;
Gomes proposes an analytical expression to evaluate the plastic resistance of I or H column webs
in transverse compression or tension (Formula 3 and Figure 6):

F pl =

4 m pl
b
1
L

1 b + 2c

L L

(3)

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 7 of 56

Rectangular area with


longitudinal deformations
Curved yield line continuing
the Ring Model plastic
yield line
Yield lines in fan

Yiled line along the


loading area

Figure 5: Scheme of an external mechanism

L
d

Figure 6: Schema of the Gomes mechanism for column webs


As said just before, in the CHS component considered in the present works, the mechanism forms
on a curved surface (shell); as a consequence, the development of a traditional plastic approach is
quite complex and therefore an indirect way to solve the problem had been suggested in the
second interim report. It was consisting in:
- proceed to the projection of the actual yield pattern on a plane surface perpendicular to the
brace axis (see Figure 7);
- use the Gomes model to evaluate the plastic resistance Frd(plane) of the projected yield
pattern;
- derive a projection coefficient by which the Gomes plastic resistance should be
multiplied to obtain an estimation of the actual plastic resistance Frd(shell) of the CHS
component:

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 8 of 56

Frd(shell) = . Frd(plane) with > 1

(4)

Frd (shell)
Frd(plane)

(a) Actual yield line

(b) Projected yield line

Figure 7: Projection of a yield line

I.1.2 Objectives expressed in the second interim report


The main objective is to develop an analytical expression of the factor (Formula 4). In a first
stage, different pure analytical approaches are followed. However, none of these approaches really
enables to reach the objective. Therefore, a numerical parametric study is performed by means of
the non-linear FEM software FINELG so as to progress in the derivation of an analytical expression
for the factor .

I.1.3 Research strategy


The whole procedure followed is illustrated in Figure 8. This plan shows the part of the work that
has been made since the last interim report.

I.1.4 Research steps


The research works carried out in the last year are presented in Sections I.2 and I.3:
-

Direct analytical approaches: the aim is to derive a formulation of the factor through pure
analytical investigations. This work is presented in Section I.2.

Numerical simulations: the FEM approach is used to understand how the actual plastic
mechanism forms on a curved surface and to find a correlation with the in-plane mechanisms.
The numerical approach requires several steps:
validation of the FEM tool;
calibration of the model;
parametrical study;
interpretation and analysis of the results;
This activity is reported in Section I.3.
-

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 9 of 56

CHS
Tension compression
Plastic resistance

Analysis of the
plastic mechanisms

Numerical
investigations

Experimental
results

Two different
mechanisms

Global
mechanism

Local mechanism

similar
two contributions

External
mechanism

Report 2005

Numerical
investigation
Parametrical study

Correlation with
Gomes model

Similar to Gomes
plastic model

Analytical projection
on curve surface

Analytical formulation
for plastic resistance
of CHS wall

Figure 8: Research strategy

Ring model

Analytical model
validated by
numerical
simulations

OK

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 10 of 56

I.2 Direct analytical approach


In order to derive the analytical formulation, assumptions are made:
- the plastic resistance on a curved surface can be calculated as on a plane surface, but with
projected lengths for the yield lines L=L with:
L = Lshell = length of the yield lines on the curve surface;
L = Lplate = length of the yield lines projected;
- the plastic resistance is proportional to the length of the yield lines of the plastic mechanism
(Johanssen theory); therefore the factor is equal to :
L'
=
(5)
L
The equation to calculate the length of the projected yield line may be expressed in a very general
case, as a function of the curvature of the curved surface. The only parameter to consider is R, the
radius of curvature.
L and L are function of the 3 spatial coordinates:
L = f(x,y,z)
L = f(x,y,z)
The general equation for the line projected from a curved surface on a plane surface is (see Figure
9):

L' =

x
R

E arcsin 0 , sin 2
cos
R

(6)

E [] = elliptical function

x0

Figure 9: projection of yield line of curvature R

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 11 of 56

This general equation is rather complicated. The derivation of a single factor from this equation is
not so easy.
But before trying to go further, it would be important to validate the simplifying assumptions made
and therefore to check whether a direct analytical projection may provide an adequate response.
So the approach has been applied to a very simple model for which the plastic mechanism is
known. The model tested is an cantilever shell element and the corresponding projected plate
subjected to a concentrated load applied at its extremity (Figure 10).
For this case, the problems of projection becomes much more simple. The yield line in the plate
case is equal to the width of the plate: L = b
The projection of this yield line is L = 2R, with R = radius of curvature and = angle of the arc
length.
In this particular situation, the factor is equal to:

Pcurve L' 2R
= =
Pplane
L
b

(7)

If half-a-CHS profile is considered for numerical application: = 90


b
= 100mm
If b = diameter of the CHS is taken as equal to 200 mm R =
2 sin 90
= 0,5

R
b

(a) Actual yield line

(b) Projected yield line

Figure 10: Illustration of the example


By calculating the plastic resistance of the plane yield line Figure 10.b) and multiplying it by =0,5,
an analytical expression of the actual resistance of the shell cantilever element (Figure 10.a) is
obtained; it has been compared to the exact solution determined by numerical simulations (interim
report [3]) and a poor agreement is obtained, so clearly demonstrating the weakness of the
assumptions made.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 12 of 56

I.3 Numerical study


The objective of the numerical study is to define the parameters that influence the plastic
resistance of the CHS components and to find a correlation with the plate mechanisms. The value
of the plastic resistances and the shape of the yield line patterns are analysed for different joint
configurations.
The results of the simulations are compared to the analytical results of the Gomes approach for an
equivalent plate and an expression of their ratio is expected to be derived.

I.3.1 Validation of the FEM tool


In Lige, the numerical study is performed with the full non-linear FEM software FINELG. In order
to validate this FEM tool in the frame of the present research, a comparison has been made with
experimental results. These results are presented in the part II of the present volume 2 (chapter II
4 - Figure 55). The results of the FEM simulation performed with FINELG for a specific test result
(Y. Makino et al) are reported in Figure 11. These results show that the FINELG results are very
close to the ABAQUS ones derived at PSP. On the basis of several such comparisons, FINELG
can be considered as giving reliable results and can therefore be used for the numerical study.

800
700
600

P [kN]

500
400

Test results

300

FEM ABAQUS results


FEM Finelg results

200
100
0
0

10

15

20

25

s [mm]

Figure 11: Load displacement curves of X-joint XP1-T-1 under tension (Y. Makino et al.)

I.3.2 Definition of the numerical model for the study of the CHS component
A T-joint configuration has been chosen as numerical model to study the CHS component in
tension or compression. This T-joint is composed of a tubular element and of a plate fixed
perpendicularly to the tube.
The plate is submitted to an axial force (Figure 12). The nodes are blocked in the three directions
at the extremities of the tube.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 13 of 56

Figure 12: FEM model of a plate to CHS joint


I.3.2.1

FEM mesh

The model uses shell elements. Simulations have been computed with different meshes and the
results have been compared. In Figure 14, it is seen that the adopted mesh gives same results
then a more refined one.
I.3.2.2

Loading

The joint is subjected to a point load at the extremity of the plate. In order to avoid a local plasticity
effects at the load introduction point, the edge of the plate has been reinforced by very stiff beam
element. The material law used for the elements of the plate is a linear law. Therefore, only the
face of the CHS is influenced by the loading.
I.3.2.3

Plastic model

In order to study the plastic resistance of the component, all the second order effects (membrane
effects, instability, ) have to be disregarded. For this purpose, the steel material properties used
in the model have been selected in such a way that no second order effect develops. The Young
modulus has been taken equal to 2,1 1010 MPa. That doesnt affect the maximum resistance. It
only changes the initial stiffness and it prevents appearance of large displacements and therefore
of second order effects.
As far as the plastic resistance is concerned, the numerical response should be the same in
tension and compression. This is confirmed in Figure 13, where appearance of a horizontal plateau
in all the four curves proves that the plastic resistance is reached.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 14 of 56

200000
183418

180000
160000
140000

P (N)

120000

122131

100000
80000

Tube: = 114,3mm ; t = 6,3mm


Plate: Width = 76,1mm ; t = 5mm

60000
40000
20000
0

0,00E+00 1,00E-04 2,00E-04 3,00E-04 4,00E-04 5,00E-04 6,00E-04 7,00E-04 8,00E-04 9,00E-04 1,00E-03

depx (mm)
tension S235

compression S235

tension S355

compression S355

Figure 13: Plastic resistance of the CHS components


I.3.2.4

Influence of the thickness of the plate

The thickness of the plate can not be taken into account in the numerical model as shell finite
elements are used. Figure 14 shows that the thickness of the plate has no influence on the
numerical plastic resistance. To take this parameter into account a model with solid elements
should be built, what would lead to much heavier simulations.
In the Gomes analytical model (Formula 3), the thickness of the plate is explicitly taken into
account. But in reality it will be shown in paragraph I.3.4 that this parameter has not a great
influence on the value of the plastic resistance as long as realistic thickness values are considered.
The numerical study can therefore be achieved without taking into account this parameter and a
good estimation of the plastic resistance may be anyway expected.
For the numerical study, all the simulations are run with a plate thickness equal to 1mm.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 15 of 56

250000

200000

~190000

P (N)

150000

100000

50000

0
0,00E+00

1,00E-03

2,00E-03

3,00E-03

4,00E-03

5,00E-03

6,00E-03

7,00E-03

8,00E-03

9,00E-03

depx (mm)

t=1mm

t=1mm (refined meshing)

t = 10mm

t = 5mm

t = 0,1mm

Figure 14: Influence of the thickness of the plate on the plastic resistance
in the shell FEM model
I.3.2.5

Influence of the length of the tube

A particular attention has to be paid to the length of the tube in the numerical model. Indeed, if the
tube is too long, the failure occurs by a plastic mechanism involving three plastic hinges in the CHS
profile (Figure 16) and the numerical resistance does not correspond to the studied phenomena. If
the tube is too short, the yielding extends all olong the length of the CHS profile and the studied
mechanism can not be isolated.
In fact, For each simulation, the failure mechanism has to correspond to a local mechanism close
to the plate (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Local mechanism

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 16 of 56

As shown in Figure 16, for high values of the length, the beam mechanism appears; if the length
decreases, the whole face of the tube is yielded. An intermediate value of the CHS length has
therefore to be selected.
250000

200000

P (N)

150000

100000

50000

0
0

0,005

0,01

0,015

0,02

0,025

dep x (mm)
300mm

600mm

1200mm

1800mm

3000mm

Figure 16: Influence of the length of the tube

I.3.3 Parametrical study


I.3.3.1

Objectives

The first objective of the parametrical study is to analyse the evolution of the plastic resistance
according to the geometrical parameters of the joint configuration.
The main parameters influencing the plastic resistance are the following ones:
t0 = thickness of the tube
d0 = diameter of the tube
b = width of the plate
The thickness of the plate, as it has been demonstrated on Figure 14, can not be taken in
consideration through the numerical simulations. This parameter will therefore not be integrated in
the study.
In Eurocode 3, use is often made to the two following values:
2 = t0/d0
= b/d
In fact, these two values involve the three main geometrical parameters listed here-above and will
therefore be used as references in the parametrical study.
The second objective is to compare the numerical results to the Gomes formula and to derive an
expression of the factor defined by Formula (3).
I.3.3.2

Description of the parametrical study

A set of 36 simulations has been performed. They are grouped into 4 series according to the
thickness of the CHS profile:

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4

August 2005
Page 17 of 56

t0 = 8mm
t0 = 6,3mm
t0 = 10mm
t0 = 12mm

These thickness values are common ones.


For each set of simulations, the diameter of the tube varies from 76,1 to 1700mm:
T3 d = 76,1mm
T4 d = 114,3mm
T5 d = 193,7mm
T6 d = 244,5mm
T7 d = 323,9mm
T8 d = 508,0mm
T9 d = 800,0mm
T10 d = 1000mm
T11 d = 1700mm
The diameters T4 to T8 are the usual diameters for CHS sections. Some simulations with
diameters higher than the usual ones (T9, T10 and T11) have been performed in order to approach
a limit study case (plate of infinite width). Figure 17 illustrates such a limit case where the yield
mechanism is nearly located on a plane surface.

Figure 17: Model with high CHS diameter


The width of the plate is kept constant for all the simulations (b = 76,1mm).
The material law implemented in the model is a bilinear elastic-plastic one for the CHS elements,
with fy0 = 355N/mm, and a linear elastic one for the plate elements.

I.3.3.3

Results of the parametric study

Figures 18 to 2& present the results of the FEM simulations (P and d are respectively the load
applied to the transverse plate et the corresponding displacement at the CHS surface)

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Figure 18: P-d curves for models with t0 = 8mm

Figure 19: P-d curves for models with t0 = 6,3mm

August 2005
Page 18 of 56

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 19 of 56

Figure 20: P-d curves for models with t0 = 10mm

Figure 21: P-d curves for models with t0 = 12mm


Curves T3 and T4 correspond to beam mechanisms. The resulting plastic loads are therefore not
relevant.
All these curves show that the plastic resistance increases when the diameter of the tube
decreases. For limit cases with very high values of diameters, the plastic resistance does not
decrease very much when the diameter increases further (from T10 to T11, D is multiplied by 1,7
but the plastic resistance does not decrease significantly). The plastic resistance seems to tend a
limit constant value.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 20 of 56

Figure 22 presents the evolution of the plastic load obtained numerically versus the parameter.
When 0, Npl ; this is logical as =0 corresponds to a CHS with an infinite thickness. For
high values of , the plastic resistance again tend to a limit value.

400000
350000
t=8mm
300000

t=6,3 mm
t=10 mm

Npl (N)

250000

t=12 mm
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

20

Figure 22: Plastic resistance versus parameter


Figure 23 shows how the plastic load obtained by numerical simulations varies the parameter.
The evolution may be supposed to be linear.
450000
400000

y = 484159x + 197114
t=8mm

350000

t=6,3 mm

Npl (N)

300000

t=10 mm

y = 379377x + 140751

t=12 mm

250000
y = 289710x + 93524

200000

y = 200850x + 62822

150000
100000
50000
0
0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

Figure 23: Plastic resistance versus parameter

0,6

0,7

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 21 of 56

The numerical results also allow to visualise the yield mechanisms (Figure 24). For high diameters
models, these numerically obtained mechanisms may be compared to results of plastic plate yield
theories. Finally they should allow to better understand the correlations between shell and plate
yield line patterns.

Figure 24: Numerical yield patterns


I.3.3.4

Comparison with Eurocode 3 formula

The numerical results have been compared to the current design formulae for CHS connections
implemented in Part 1.8 of Eurocode 3 or in the design Guide book published by CIDECT [41].
The relevant formula is the following :
N* = f() . f() . f(n) . fc,y . tc
with f() =

5.0
1 0.81

f() = 1
f(n) = 1
Figure 25 shows how the plastic resistance varies with the parameter.

(8)

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 22 of 56

400000
350000
300000

Npl (N)

250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

0,4

0,45

FEM t=8mm

FEM t=6,3mm

FEM t=10mm

FEM t=12mm

Annex K t=8mm

Annex K t=6,3mm

Annex K t=10mm

Annex K t=12mm

Figure 25: Comparison Eurocode 3 numerical simulations


The numerical plastic resistances are quite close to the Eurocode and CIDECT
recommendations. The design values are on the safe side except for low values of (which is out
of the field of the design recommendations).

I.3.4 Correlation with Gomes model


I.3.4.1

Application of the Gomes model to CHS components

The Gomes model has been developed to study the behaviour of minor axis joints between I or H
profiles. Present research focuses on another component. Therefore, the parameters used by
Gomes in his formulation have to be interpreted differently to be in agreement with the CHS
problem.
The Gomes model for minor axis joint is:

Npl =

4 m pl
b
1
L

b 2c
1 +

L L

(9)

mpl = 0,25 fy tw2


L = the width of the column web
b = the width of the beam flange (or plate)
c is the thickness of the flange (or plate)
The aim is to apply the same formula for CHS connections but with a correction factor (Formula
3) taking into account the curvature of the CHS wall.
Therefore, if the Gomes model is applied to a CHS joint, the different parameters are defined as
follow:
- mpl = 0,25 fy0 t02 with t0 = thickness of the CHS
fy0 = yield limit of the CHS
-

b is logically defined as the width of the plate

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 23 of 56

L is the most complicated parameter to define. In the Gomes model, the parameter L is fixed
by the geometrical layout of the joint (L = width of the column web). In the case of the CHS
chord, an equivalent parameter is not so obvious to define. Indeed, the plastic mechanism is
not limited by flanges, as for an I profile, and the length of the mechanism is, at first sight,
unknown. Therefore, for the developments of the next paragraph, the Gomes model will be
used with L equal to the length of the yield area defined by FEM simulations projected on a
plane surface. This will allow to compare and understand the behaviour of the yield mechanism
in comparison with the Gomes model. But to derive the final analytical formula, a fixed
reference has to be chosen and L will be taken equal to the diameter of the CHS. Obviously, a
corrective factor will have to be used.

c is the thickness of the plate but as it is showed in Figure 14, this parameter can not be taken
into account by the numerical simulations. Therefore, as a first approach, this parameter is
neglected in the developments of the analytical formulation. The following example proves that
the error made by neglecting this term is not important.
A case with a b/L and a very thick plate very high would be the most severe. For this example, L
is taken as the diameter of the tube.
Diameter of the CHS: L = 100mm
Width of the plate: b = 80mm
Thickness of the plate: c = 12mm
b
= 0,447
1
L
2c
= 0,076
L
The second term

I.3.4.2

2c
can therefore be reasonably neglected in comparison with
L

b
.
L

Comparison numerical results and Gomes model

In Figures 27 and 28, the results of the numerical simulations have been compared to the Gomes
2c
model. As explained in the previous paragraph, the term
has been neglected.
L

L = L projected on a
plane surface

Figure 26: Illustration of L parameter

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 24 of 56

For this comparison, the parameter L has been taken equal to the length of the yield mechanism
obtained numerically, projected on a plane surface (Figure 26). The Gomes curves on Figures 27
and 28 are not pure analytical curves as they depend on a numerically determined parameter (L).
The value of L obtained numerically has a physical meaning and this allows to draw interesting
conclusions and see whether the application of the Gomes model for CHS walls has a sense.
The analysis of the graphs shows that the shapes of the numerical curves and the shapes of the
Gomes curves are the same. That proves that the Gomes model is a reliable background from
which the analytical formulation for the CHS wall component can be derived.
400000
350000
300000

Npl (N)l

250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

0,4

0,45

Gomes t=8mm

Gomes t=6,3mm

Gomes t=10mm

Gomes t=12mm

FEM t=8mm

FEM t=6,3mm

FEM t=10mm

FEM t=12mm

Figure 27: Comparison Gomes model numerical simulations versus


The curves Npl() are almost linear, also for the Gomes model. The numerical plastic resistance is
always higher than the one obtained by Gomes, but the difference between the two values
decreases for low values of .
400000
350000
300000

Npl (N)

250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

20
Gomes t=8mm
FEM t=8mm

Gomes t=6,3mm
FEM t=6,3mm

Gomes t=10mm
FEM t=10mm

Gomes t=12mm
FEM t=12mm

Figure 28: Comparison Gomes model numerical simulations versus

300

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 25 of 56

The graph Npl() also shows that the plastic resistance tends to a limit value when increases. It
can therefore be supposed that, for an infinite diameter, a single value of the plastic resistance, not
depending of any parameter, is reached.
In conclusion, the Gomes model can be considered as an adequate basis for the new analytical
formulation. The correcting factor, which will allow to modify the Gomes model so as to get results
close of the numerical resistances has now to be found.
Remark: Obviously for the final analytical formulation, the parameter L can not be equal to a value
taken from numerical simulations. The formula relies on a known value of L. L could be taken as
equal to the diameter of the CHS in a first stage.
I.3.4.3

Determination of the limit value

It would be interesting to define the limit of the plastic resistance in the extreme case where the
diameter of the CHS section is equal to infinite.
If the diameter is equal to infinite, the CHS becomes an infinite plate.
The analytical solution may be found by referring to the Johanssen plastic theory (Figure 28):
Ppl = mpl [2b 1/X + 2L 1/X + 2 + 2 + 4(L/2-b/2) 1/X]

(10)

with X = (L/2 b/2) tg (/2)


To find the plastic resistance, the parameter et L have to be optimised.

P
L = 0

=0

(11)

The solution of this system of equations gives = /2 X = Ppl = 4mpl

L
Figure 29: Plastic mechanism on an infinite plate
The limit of the plastic resistance when the D = equals 4mpl.
In order to illustrate this limit value, the evolution of the plastic resistance with the diameter of the
tube have been reported in Figure 30. In this case, the Gomes model has been used with L=
diameter of the tube. The values of the resistance have been divided by the plastic moment (mpl).
In such a way, all the curves calculated with the Gomes model do not depend on the thickness

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 26 of 56

anymore. Therefore one single reference curve represents the Gomes model. The value

4 m pl
mpl

= 4 has also been reported on the graph and it can be observed that all the values of

Npl/mpl (numerical and analytical) tends to the value 4.


45
40
35

Npl/mpl

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
100

300

500

700

900

1100

1300

1500

1700

1900

Diameter of the CHS (mm)


Gomes reference

FEM t=8mm

FEM t=6,3mm

FEM t=10mm

FEM t=12 mm

4pi

Figure 30: Limit value of plastic resistance

I.3.5 First conclusions of the parametrical study


This parametrical study allows to understand the general behaviour of the component and to
establish the link with the analytical model of Gomes for plane surfaces. This study proves that the
Gomes model can be used as a reliable basis for the development of the analytical formulation.
The numerical results show also that the limit in the field of high diameters for CHS is the same
than the limit of the Gomes model.

I.4 Conclusions further developments


The developments for the derivation of an analytical formulation are still in progress. A set of
interesting elements has been presented in this report. The objective of the present research works
(which were not part of the 5BP project) is not yet reached and several steps are still required:
- To finalise the analytical formulation for the CHS wall, the right parameter taking the curvature
aspects into account should be derived. This key parameter applied in the Gomes model would
lead to an analytical formulation for the CHS wall.
- This formula would give the plastic resistance value for the local mechanism. For complete
RHS to CHS joints, this plastic resistance should be combined to the Ring Model contribution.
- This model will have to be further worked out for braces in compression. In this case, a
reduction factor has to be applied to take into account a loss of resistance due to local
instability phenomena.
- At this level, the formula will be then directly applicable to I-profile to CHS joints and RHS to
CHS joints. As a last step, the formula will have to be modified so as to allow to cover CHS to
CHS joints; in this case, the brace cross-section is not composed of plane walls and this
parameter is likely to affect the plastic resistance of the CHS chord.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Part II

II.1

August 2005
Page 27 of 56

Recent developments for the verification of


component and assembly models
Introduction

Volume 1 presents a full consistent approach for the design of joints between open and/or hollow
sections. This approach is based on the component method, i.e. for each individual component the
main properties (stiffness, resistance) should be determined and in a second step these properties
will be assembled to obtain the joint resistance and stiffness respectively. For quite a number of
components detailed rules for the determination of the component properties are given. As these
rules are taken from existing standards or other technical publications the validity of the rules has
already been proved. However, if rules for new components will be developed, it is necessary to
validate such new models at the level of the component and at the level of the joint.
Part I of the present Volume 2 presents the progress of the scientific works achieved during the
project with respect to the behaviour of CHS components. Other components have been studied in
other CIDECT research projects as for example 5BH [54], 5BS [55], 8D/E [56], 8G [57].
In order to be able to validate such mechanical models at the joint level, i.e. the use of a new
component in any joint configuration, a more general tool would be required to validate the
mechanical model with test results.
This Part II of Volume 2 presents the progress achieved during this project with respect to the
development of such a tool.
In order to validate the mechanical models both test results from literature and numerical
simulations can be used. To compare the joint characteristics with test results, a database on test
results has been created. This work is briefly presented in section II.2. Several test results were
added since the second interims report [3].
Finally a study with FE simulations can be performed in order to validate those configurations
where no experimental tests are available. With the aim to cover a large number of different joint
configurations, a specific software tool has been developed. With this tool FE models of hollow
section joints with different dimensions of the members and different material laws can be
generated in a very flexible way. Section II.3 contains more information concerning this FE model
generator.
In a next step various FE models have to be calibrated against experimental tests, to ensure the
accuracy of the numerical models (see section II.4). In this step the test results of the database can
be used.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

II.2

August 2005
Page 28 of 56

Database on test results

In the literature quite a number of test results can be found. However, in most cases the
description of the individual data of such experiments is not complete. In order to validate design
models with experimental tests, it is required that the following data are available:

layout of the test arrangement


loading and support conditions
measured geometrical and material data
measured load-displacement curves
description of the failure mode

For the present research project, literature containing documentations on test results have be
reviewed. Tests which are sufficiently complete documented have been collected and a database
on test results was created. In order to prepare an more automatic handling of these data, some
software tools have been developed to create a visual representation of the joint configuration of
the tests on one side and to generate a preliminary FE model from the basic data on the other
side. An overview of the tests collected is given in the following tables. In total 320 tests have been
introduced in the database. Of course, not all test are fully in line with the scope of the project, but
it is hoped that the consideration of those tests may also be helpful for the validation of the models
in development.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 29 of 56

Table 1: Joint configurations of experimental test from reference [33]:


Joint

Column

EHS

Beam(s)

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

Compression

Tension

EHS

=6
Table 2: Joint configurations of experimental test from reference [35]:
Joint

Column

CHS

Beam(s)

CHS

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

Compression

Tension

10

Bending

Compression +
bending

12

Tension + bending

= 41
Table 3: Joint configurations of experimental test from reference [36]:
Joint

Column

Beam(s)

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

CHS

CHS

Compression

CHS

CHS

Compression

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Joint

August 2005
Page 30 of 56

Column

Beam(s)

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

CHS

CHS

Compression

= 12

Table 4: Joint configurations of experimental test from reference [37]:


Joint

Column

CHS

CHS

CHS

CHS

Beam(s)

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

1x

Compression

1x

Tension

14

Compression

Tension

12

Compression

21

Tension

2x

Bending

Compression

Tension

Bending

flat steel
(horizontal)

flat steel
(horizontal)

flat steel
(vertical)

flat steel
(vertical)

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Joint

August 2005
Page 31 of 56

Column

CHS

CHS

CHS

Beam(s)

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

Compression

Tension

Compression

Compression

Tension

2x

Bending

cross

cross

I-profile

CHS

I-profile

Compression

CHS

RHS

Compression

CHS

RHS

Compression

= 124

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 32 of 56

Table 5: Joint configurations of experimental test from reference [38], [39]:


Joint

F--diagram

Loading

Combinations of
compression
and tension

Compression

Tension

8
(4 with
floor)

Bending

Different
combinations of
compression
and tension

Compression

Tension

8
(4 with
floor)

4x

Bending

Column

Beam(s)

Tests

CHS

flat steel

CHS

CHS

RHS

RHS

RHS

double
flat steel

I-profile

flat steel

double
flat steel

I-profile

= 38

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 33 of 56

Table 6: Joint configurations of experimental test from reference [40]:


Joint

Column

RHS

Beam(s)

Tests

F--diagram

Loading

86

15 x

Bending

13

Bending +
compression

RHS

= 99

II.3

FE model generator for hollow section joints

In order to prepare a parametrical study a flexible tool to generate various FE models of hollow
section joints had to be developed. For the FE-simulation the program system ABAQUS was
chosen. This FEM simulation software is suitable because of the interface of the interactive
version, which allows to generate FE models with an integrated program language called Python.
8 different types of T-joint configurations with hollow section members were considered, because
of their typical, often used basic components. Examples of the chosen configurations are given in
Figure 31.

Figure 31: T-joint configurations, which were modelled with the FE model generator

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 34 of 56

For the 8 given joint configurations all geometrical properties, as length of the column, height and
width of the beam, thickness of profiles, thickness of the welds, etc., can be modified. If an
examination of the influence of 1 parameter is required, all the other parameters can be fixed, while
the parameter of interest is varied in a given increment. The tool generates all the joints with the
different geometrical properties and the simulation to get stress-displacement curves can be
started.
The material behaviour of the column and the beam in the simulation can be described by a bilinear or a tri-linear stress-strain curve (see Figure 32). The properties of the material have to be
provided.

Figure 32: Bi- and tri-linear stress-strain curves


Due to the fact that buckling problems were expected in some joint configurations under load, the
simulations were controlled by displacement. For these purposes the displacements/rotations of
the end of the beam can be set in three individual directions or a combination of them (see Figure
33).

Figure 33: Directions, in which displacements can be applied


The dimensions of the shell elements can be adapted very easily.
The tool can generate for example a RHS-RHS T-joint configuration, where the width of the column
RHS-profile is varied from 160 to 200 mm in the increment of 20 mm as demonstrated in Figure 34,
while all the other geometrical parameters are fixed. The shell dimensions are kept constant, and
the mesh is adjusted automatically. In Figure 35 the height of the beam is varied from 120 to 180
mm in 30 mm steps.
So it is easy to perform systematical parameter studies taking into account the typical parameter
characterising hollow section joints (, , , etc.).

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 35 of 56

Figure 34: Varying the width of the column/chord

Figure 35: Varying the height of the beam/brace


The simulations run with physical and geometrical non-linear algorithms. The chosen element
types and dimensions are specified in II.4.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

II.4

August 2005
Page 36 of 56

Calibration of the FE models

To be sure to get reliable results in the FE simulations and to ensure realistic results of the
simulations, which are used to replace real test results, the numerical models have to be
calibrated. For this purpose the influence of the shell type, element size, solver algorithm etc. on
the simulation results have to be examined, and the results of the numerical simulations have to be
compared with test results. It is the aim, to create robust FE models, that reproduce the loaddisplacement curves of real test results as exact as possible.
The first test results that were used to calibrate the FE model are based on the work of the
university of Karlsruhe (see [40]; Table 6). In this study T-joints with RHS columns and RHS beams
were tested. The specimen were fixed at the ends of the column and the loads were applied at the
end of the beams. The displacements were measured at the point, where loads were applied, in
direction of the loads. A principal sketch of the experimental setup is given in Figure 36.

Figure 36: Setup for T-joint with RHS members test to calibrate the FE models

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 37 of 56

1300

The test M21, that was reproduced by FE modelling, has the following geometrical properties:

460
[mm]

Figure 37: Geometrical properties of specimen M21


The dimensions of the RHS-profiles, according to the notations given in Figure 36, are:
Table 7: Geometrical properties of specimen M21
Joint member

h [mm]

b [mm]

t [mm]

Column

140

140

8,8

Beam

100

100

4,0

The material properties are:


Table 8: Material properties of specimen M21

where:

Joint member

fy [N/mm]

fu [N/mm]

f [-]

Column

335,7

528,9

0,2885

Beam

424,6

527,1

0,33375

fy is the yield strength


fu is the ultimate strength
f is the plastic strain at tensile failure

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 38 of 56

As the strain when the material reaches the ultimate tensile strength fu is not given, as an
approximation different material laws for the beam and for the column are used, see Figure 38 and
Figure 39. An initial stiffness of E=210000 N/mm is assumed.
600

500

stress [N/mm]

400

Curve 1
300

Curve 2
Curve 3
200

Curve 4

100

0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

strain [-]

Figure 38: Different approximations of the material law for the column of model M21

600

500

400

stress [N/mm]

Curve 5
Curve 6

300

Curve 7
Curve 8

200

100

0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

strain [-]

Figure 39: Different approximations of the material law for the beam of model M21

0,35

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 39 of 56

8 node shell elements (S8R-elements in the ABAQUS-library) and 4 node shell elements (S4Relements in the ABAQUS-library) with reduced integration were tested. The side length was varied
between 8 and 4 mm.
By taking thicker shell elements with the width of 0 ,8 a 2 , the welds are considered.
All displacements and loads are plane-symmetric. That means, that modelling only one half of the
joint should lead to correct results, if the required boundary conditions are set.
As an example one model with an approximate shell element length of 8 mm is given in Figure 40.

Figure 40: FE model of test specimen M21

In Table 9 the main parameters for the different FE models of test M21 are summarized and the
changes are marked. The - curves are in accordance with those given in see Figure 38 and
Figure 39.
Table 9: Main parameters of the FE model M21
Model name
FEM 21-5
FEM 21-6
FEM 21-7
FEM 21-8
FEM 21-9
FEM 21-10
FEM 21-11

Element type
S8R
S4R
S4R
S8R
S8R
S4R
S4R

Approximate size
length [mm]
8
8
5
8
8
5
5

All simulations were computed geometrical non linear.

- curve
column
Curve 1
Curve 1
Curve 1
Curve 2
Curve 3
Curve 3
Curve 4

- curve
beam
Curve 5
Curve 5
Curve 5
Curve 6
Curve 7
Curve 7
Curve 8

Further
modifications
-

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 40 of 56

The comparison of the test results and the results of the numerical simulations of M21 is given in
Figure 41, where P is the applied load, see Figure 37, and s is the deformation at the point of load
introduction.

45

40

35

30
Test results
P [kN]

25

FEM M21-5
FEM M21-6

20

FEM M21-7
FEM M21-8

15

FEM M21-9
FEM M21-10

10

FEM M21-11
5

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

s [mm]

Figure 41: Comparison test results FE simulations for specimen M21


The S8R element is an 8 node element, considering thick shell theory. The element S4R is used
for thin shells. To avoid shear locking effects, S4R uses reduced integration when determining the
stiffness matrix. The S4R results seem to fit better, and the refinement of the mesh has no
significant influence on the load displacement curve. The system seems to be convergent.
With - curve 1 and 5 in the first models stiffness after yielding seems to be underestimated. To
raise the gradient of the stress strain curve after yielding, and to describe the material behaviour
more realistic, at the level of the ultimate stress was reduced, and a zero stiffness after reaching
fu was assumed (see Figure 38, Figure 39). With this modifications the joint model produces
sufficient results (see FEM 21-10). The initial stiffness and the behaviour of the joint in the non
elastic range is close to the test result.
For FEM 21-11 the - curves were modified in a way, that the stiffness of the material after
yielding is 1/50 of the initial E-modulus. This assumption overestimates the stiffness of the whole
joint.
To check the results and to increase the knowledge about robust joint modelling, different other
joints tested by the university of Karlsruhe [40] were modelled.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 41 of 56

The measured properties of test specimen M10 are given in Table 10 and Table 11.
Table 10: Geometrical properties of specimen M10
Joint member

h [mm]

b [mm]

t [mm]

Column

100

100

6,3

Beam

80

80

3,6

Table 11: Material properties of specimen M10


Joint member

fy [N/mm]

fu [N/mm]

f [-]

Column

242,5

353,1

0,3725

Beam

298,5

392,9

0,3706

where: fy is the yield strength


fu is the ultimate strength
f is the plastic strain at tensile failure
As there is again no exact information about the stress-strain curve, different material laws for the
beam and for the column are tested, see Figure 42 and Figure 43.
400

350

300

stress [N/mm]

250
Curve 1
Curve 2

200

150

100

50

0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

strain [-]

Figure 42: Different approximations of the material law for the column of model M10

0,4

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 42 of 56

450
400
350

stress [N/mm]

300
250
Curve 3
200

Curve 4

150
100
50
0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

0,4

strain [-]

Figure 43: Different approximations of the material law for the beam of model M10
The main parameters of model M10and their variation are summarized in Table 12.
The load displacement curves and the comparison to the test result are given in Figure 44.

Table 12: Main parameters of the FE model M10


Model name
FEM 10-1
FEM 10-2
FEM 10-3

Element type
S8R
S4R
S4R

Approximate size
length [mm]
6
6
5

- curve
column
Curve 1
Curve 1
Curve 2

- curve
beam
Curve 3
Curve 3
Curve 4

Further
modifications
-

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 43 of 56

20
18
16
14

P [kN]

12
10
8

Test results
FEM M10-1

FEM M10-2
4

FEM M10-3

2
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

s [mm]

Figure 44: Comparison test results FE simulations for specimen M10


The results of this comparison confirm the previous conclusion, that element type S8R is not
adequate for such simulations. The simulation of FEM 10-1, where S8R is used, is aborted after 30
mm displacement. The simulation FEM 10-3 with the reduced 'at the level of ultimate strength
(1/4 of the value in FEM 10-1 and FEM 10-2) fits very well. The initial stiffness and the load
displacement curve after yielding is very close to the test result.
The calibration is repeated with test M78, taken from [40].
The measured properties of test specimen M78 are given in Table 13 and Table 14.
Table 13: Geometrical properties of specimen M78
Joint member

h [mm]

b [mm]

t [mm]

Column

180

180

14,2

Beam

100

100

6,3

Table 14: Material properties of specimen M78


Joint member

fy [N/mm]

fu [N/mm]

f [-]

Column

227,7

380,1

0,324

Beam

242,5

353,1

0,3725

where: fy is the yield strength


fu is the ultimate strength
f is the plastic strain at tensile failure

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 44 of 56

In this model a stress-strain curve with a reduced at the ultimate strength level (1/4 of f) is used
directly, because of the results of the former tests.
The used curves for the column and for the beam are given in Figure 45 and Figure 46.
400

350

300
Curve 1

stress [N/mm]

250

200

150

100

50

0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

strain [-]

Figure 45: Material law for the column of model M78


400

350

300

stress [N/mm]

250

200
Curve 2
150

100

50

0
0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

strain [-]

Figure 46: Material law for the beam of model M78


The main parameters of model M78and their variation are summarized in Table 15.
The load displacement curves and the comparison to the test result are given in Figure 47.

0,4

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 45 of 56

Table 15: Main parameters of the FE model M78

FEM 78-1
FEM 78-2
FEM 78-3

S4R
S4R
S8R

Approximate size
length [mm]
10
5
10

FEM 78-4

S4R

Model name

Element type

- curve
column
Curve 1
Curve 1
Curve 1

- curve
beam
Curve 2
Curve 2
Curve 2

Curve 1

Curve 2

Further
modifications
The whole
joint was
modelled
(not only one
half with axis
symmetric
boundary
conditions)

60

50

P [kN]

40

30
Test results
FEM M78-1
20

FEM M78-2
FEM M78-3
FEM M78-4

10

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

s [mm]

Figure 47: Comparison test results FE simulations for specimen M78


The results of this simulation confirm again, that S4R elements work well, even if the walls of the
RHS profiles are thick (14,2 mm). The mesh refinement has no significant influence and the
boundary conditions are set correctly, so that the results of the model, where only one plane
symmetric part is modelled to increase the efficiency of the simulation, lead to correct results (see
Figure 48 and Figure 49).
Considering all the simulations of the test one arrives at the conclusion that using the ABAOQUS
4-node elements S4R with a material behaviour close to the stress strain curve of the real material
leads to sufficient results.
With this knowledge further test results are rechecked by using S4R elements when generating the
models with the tool described in section II.3.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

Figure 48: Test specimen FEM 78-2 under load

Figure 49: Test specimen FEM 78-4 under load

August 2005
Page 46 of 56

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 47 of 56

The next test, that are reproduced by FE simulation are part of the work presented by Y.
Makino, Y. Kurobane, J.C. Paul, Y. Orita and K. Hiraishi in 1991 (see [37] and Table 4).
In this tests X- and T-joints were examined under normal- and bending loads of the beam. The
column was always a CHS-profile with different geometrical properties, while the profile types of
the beams were diversified.
The joint that was reproduced by FE modelling was a X-joint with horizontal gusset plates under
tension and compression. The geometrical properties of the joints are given in Figure 50 and
Figure 51.

Figure 50: Dimensions of test specimen XP-1-C-1

Figure 51: Dimensions of test specimen XP-1-T-1


For this test specimen there is no information about the measured material properties available.
Because of this lack of information a bi-linear stress strain curve with a theoretical value of 488
N/mm for fy is used for the simulation of test XP-1-C-1 and XP-1-T-1. This value is obtained from
an expression given in [37].
Loads and displacements of the specimen are double symmetric, so that only a quarter of the
structure had to be generated. The mesh for the simulation of test XP-1-C-1 is given in Figure 52.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 48 of 56

Figure 52: Mesh of test specimen FEM XP1-Compression


The load displacement curve of the specimen under compression is given in Figure 53.
450

400

350

300

P [kN]

250

Test results

200
FEM XP1Compression

150

100

50

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

s [mm]

Figure 53: Load displacement curves of X-joint XP1-C-1 under compression (FEM and test
results)
With regard to the ultimate resistance the FE model doesn't fit exact with the test results. But as
said above, there is poor information about the material behaviour. The buckling of the CHS profile,
can be identified in the FE simulation. The deformed specimen is given in Figure 54.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 49 of 56

Figure 54: FEM XP1-C-1 under compression loads


The results of the same joint configuration under tension loads are given in Figure 55.
800

700

600

P [kN]

500

400

Test results

300

FEM XP1Tension

200

100

0
0

10

15

20

s [mm]

Figure 55: Load displacement curves of X-joint XP1-T-1 under tension (FEM and test
results)

25

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 50 of 56

After analysing all FE simulations carefully, the results lead to the conclusion, that real test results
can be reproduced by FE modelling in a sufficient way. If there is enough information about the
material behaviour and the test setup, the load displacement curves derived from numerical
simulations are nearly identical with those ones measured at real tests.
Effects like buckling and yielding can be simulated, and the computation runs reliable, if the
ABAQUS shell elements S4R are used. In its final version the FE model generator uses for all
required joint configurations shell elements S4R. The size length has to be specified adequate.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 51 of 56

References
[1]

K. WEYNAND, J.P. JASPART


Application of the component method to joints between hollow and open sections
CIDECT research project 5BM; Aachen, Lige, 2002.

[2]

J.P. JASPART, K. WEYNAND, R. KLINKHAMMER


Development of a full consistent design approach for bolted and welded joints in building
frames and trusses between steel members made of hollow and/or open sections Application of the component method
CIDECT research project, First interim report 5BP-6/03, Aachen, Lige, 2003.

[3]

J.P. JASPART, K. WEYNAND, R. KLINKHAMMER


Development of a full consistent design approach for bolted and welded joints in building
frames and trusses between steel members made of hollow and/or open sections Application of the component method
CIDECT research project, Second interim report 5BP-4/04, Aachen, Lige, 2004.

[4]

P. ANSOURIAN
Rigid-frame connections to concrete-filled tubular steel columns
CRIF report, MT 86, Belgium, January 1974.

[5]

COST C1 European Research Action on Control of the semi-rigid behaviour of civil


engineering structural connections, 1991, 1999.
Belgian contribution, Fourth semestrial report, Period 16.03.94 to 15.09.94, University of
Lige, Department MSM.

[6]

D. VANDEGANS
Liaison entre poutres mtalliques et colonnes en profils creux remplis de bton, base sur la
technique du goujonnage (goujons filets)
CRIF report, MT 193, Belgium, October 1995.

[7]

X. NAVEAU, R. MAQUOI, J. RONDAL


Assemblages de charpente mtallique bass sur la technique du goujonnage
CRIF report, MT 152, Belgium, May 1983.

[8]

F.C.T. GOMES
Etat-limite ultime de la rsistance de lme dune colonne dans un assemblage semi-rigide
daxe faible
Universit de Lige, MSM Department, Internal report N 203, Belgium, August 1990.

[9]

Y.W. KIM
The behaviour of beam-to-column web connections with flush end plates
Ph. D. Thesis, University of Warwick, Department of Engineering, U.K., July 1988.

[10] J.E. FRANCE


Bolted connections between open section beams and box columns
Ph. D. Thesis, University of Sheffield, Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, U.K.,
January 1997.
[11] JASPART, J.P.
"Recent advances in the field of steel joints Column bases and further configurations for
beam-to-column joints and beam splices"
Professorship Thesis, Department MSM, University of Lige, Belgium, 1997.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 52 of 56

[12] R. MAQUOI, B. CHABROLIN


Frame design including joint behaviour
ECSC Report 18563, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,
Luxembourg, 1998.
[13] BSCA and SCI
Joints in Steel Construction Moment Connections
Publication 207/95,The Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, U.K, 1995.
[14] L.F.C. NEVES, F.C.T. GOMES
Semi-rigid behaviour of beam-to-column minor axis joints
Proceedings of the IABSE Colloquium on Semi-Rigid Structural Connections, Istanbul,
Turkey, September 25-27, 1996, pp. 207-216.
[15] L.F.C. NEVES
Nos semi-rigidos em estruturas metalicas. Avaliaao da rigidez em configuraoes de eixo
fiaco
Master Thesis, University of Coimbra, 1996.
[16] FINELG Non-linear Finite Element Programme
Department MSM, University of Lige, Belgium
[17] J.P. JASPART
Etude de la semi-rigidit des assemblages poutre-colonne et de son influence sur la
rsistance et la stabilit des ossatures en acier
PH.D. Thesis, Department MSM, University of Lige, Belgium, 1991.
[18] D. VANDEGANS
Use of threaded studs in joints between I-beams and RHS columns
Proceedings of the IABSE Colloquium on Semi-Rigid Structural Connections, Istanbul,
Turkey, September 25-27, 1996, pp. 53-62.
[19] N. FERTE
tude du comportement dassemblages daxe faible en construction mtallique Comparaison dapproches thorique et exprimentale
Diploma work form C/U/S/T Clermont-Frerrand Work carried out at the Department MSM,
University of Lige, Belgium, 2001.
[20] K. WEYNAND, J.-P. JASPART et al
CoP - The Connection Program
PC software for the calculation of joints in steel building frames, Aachen, Lige, 1997-2001.
[21] CEN
prEN 1993 Eurocode 3 Design of Steel Structures, Brussels, 2003.
[22] CEN
prEN 1993-1-8: 2003
Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures Part 1.8: Design of joints
Brussels, 05 May 2003.
[23] CEN
EN 1994-1-1
EN 1994 Design of composite steel and concrete structures Part 1.1: General rules and
rules for buildings
Brussels, 17 November 2004.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 53 of 56

[24] R. PUTHLI
Hohlprofilkonstruktionen aus Stahl
Werner Verlag, 1998 ISBN 38-04129-75-7.
[25] F. GRIMM
Konstruieren mit Walzprofilen
Verlag Ernst und Sohn, 2003 ISBN 3-433-02840-0.
[26] F. GRIMM
Konstruieren mit Hohlprofilen
Verlag Ernst und Sohn, 2003 ISBN 3-433-02833-8.
[27] L.F.C. NEVES, F.C.T. GOMES
Semi-rigid behaviour of beam-to-column minor axis joints
September 1996 Proceedings of the LABSE Colloquium, Istanbul, Turkey, p. 207 216.
[28] C. BRASSIER
Caractrisation du comportement en rotation dassemblages souds de construction
mtallique en poutre en I et poteau tubulaire de forme circulaire Dveloppement dune
mthode analytique
June 2003 Diploma work, Department M&S, University of Lige CUST Clermont-Ferrand.
[29] J. MARRA
Assemblage dans les poutres en treillis tubulaire de section elliptique
June 2003 Diploma work, Department M&S, University of Lige.
[30] C. PIETRAPERTOSA
Etude du comportement des assemblages souds de poutres en treillis constitus de
profils mtalliques tubulaires de forme elliptique
June 2002 Diploma work, Department M&S, University of Lige.
[31] J. WARDENIER
Hollow section joints
1982 Delft University Press, Delft (The Netherlands).
[32] J. WARDENIER
Hollow section in structural applications
CIDECT Bouwen met Staal, 2002 ISBN 90-72830-39-3.
[33] Experimental test EHS joints, Internal report, Univ. Lige 2003.
[34] S. WILLIBALD, J.A. PACKER, R. S. PUTHLI
Bolted connections for RHS tension members
University of Toronto
Draft Final Report, CIDECT Project: 8D / 8E, Report 8D / 8E 8/02.
[35] Y. KUROBANE, Y. MAKINO, K. OGAWA, T. MARUYAMA
Capacity of EHS-joints under combined OPB and axial loads and its interactions with frame
behaviour
Kumamoto University, Japan
Tubular Structures, 4th International Symposium, Delft 1991.
[36] J.C. PAUL, T. UENO, Y. MAKINO, Y. KUROBANE
The ultimate behaviour of circular multiplanar TT-joints
Kumamoto University, Faculty of Engineering, Japan
Tubular Structures, 4th International Symposium, Delft 1991.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 54 of 56

[37] Y. MAKINO, Y. KUROBANE, J.C. PAUL, Y. ORITA, K. HIRAISHI


Ultimate capacity of gusset plate-to-tube joints under axial and in-plane bending loads
Kumamoto University, Faculty of Engineering, Japan
Tubular Structures, 4th International Symposium, Delft 1991.
[38] G.D. DE WINKEL
The Static Strength of I-beam to Circular Hollow Section Column Connections
Delft, Netherlands.
[39] ECSC
Semi-rigid connections between I-beam and tubular columns
Stevin Report 6.93.27-A1/11.07, TNO Bouw Report 93-CON-RO832
ECSC Convention 7210-SA/611 (F 6.6/90).
[40] F. MANG, BUCAK, WOLFMLLER
"Bemessungsverfahren fr T-Knoten aus Rechteck-Hohlprofilen"
Forschungsbericht der Versuchsanstalt fr Stahl, Holz und Steine, Universitt Karlsruhe (TH)
Mai 1981.
[41] J. WARDENIER, Y. KUROBANE, J. A. PACKER, D. DUTTA, N. YEOMANS
For circular hollow section (CHS) joints under predominantly static loading
Design Guide No. 1 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1991 -ISBN 3-88585-975-0-.
[42] J: RONDAL, K.-G. WRKER; D. DUTTA, J. WARDENIER; N. YEOMANS
Structural stability of hollow sections
Design Guide No. 2 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1992 -ISBN 3-8249-0075-0-.
[43] J. A. PACKER, J. WARDENIER, Y. KUROBANE, , D. DUTTA, N. YEOMANS
For rectangular hollow section (RHS) joints under predominantly static loading
Design Guide No. 3 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1992 ISBN 3-8249-0089-0-.
[44] L. TWILT, R. HAAS, W. KLINGSCH, M. EDWARDS, D. DUTTA
For structural hollow section columns exposed to fire
Design Guide No. 4 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1992 -ISBN 3-8249-0171-4-.
[45] R.BERGMANN; C: MATSUI; C: MEINSMA, D. DUTTA
For concrete filled hollow section columns under static and seismic loading
Design Guide No. 5 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1995 -ISBN 3-8249-0298-2-.
[46] J. WARDENIER, D. DUTTA, N. YEOMANS, J. A. PACKER, . BUCAK
For structural hollow sections in mechanical applications
Design Guide No. 6 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1995 -ISBN 3-8249-0302-4-.
[47] D. DUTTA, J. WARDENIER, N. YEOMANS, K. SAKAE, . BUCAK, J. A. PACKER
For fabrication, assembly and erection of hollow section structures
Design Guide No. 7 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 1998 -ISBN 3-8249-0443-8-.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 55 of 56

[48] X.-L. ZHAO, S. HERION, J. A. PACKER, R. S. PUTHLI, G. SEDLACEK, J. WARDENIER, K.


WEYNAND, A. M. VAN WINGERDE, N. F. YEOMANS
For circular and rectangular hollow section welded joints under fatigue loading
Design Guide No. 8 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 2001 -ISBN 3-82490565-5-.
[49] Y. KUROBANE, J. A. PACKER, J. WARDENIER, N. YEOMANS
For structural hollow section column connections
Design Guide No. 9 edited by CIDECT
Verlag TV Rheinland, Kln 2004 -ISBN 3-8249-0802-6-.
[50] L. S. DA SILVA, L. NEVES, P. VELLASCO
DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR I-BEAM TO CONCRETE FILLED COLUMN AND MINOR AXIS
JOINTS- Characterization of the component column web loaded in out-of-plane bending
ECCS Technical committee 10 Connections
Brgge November 11-12, 2004.
[51] G: SEDLACEK, K. WEYNAND, S. OERDER
Typisierte Anschlsse im Stahlhochbau
Deutscher Stahbauverband DSTV
Stahlbau-Verlagsgesellschaft, Dsseldorf 2000 ISBN 3-923726-74-0.
[52] J. P. JASPART, S. RENKIN, M. L. GUILLIAUME
European recommendations for the design of simple joints in steel structures
Design manual
Universit de Lige; M&S under supervision of ECCS TC 10
September 2003.
[53] B. CHABROLIN
Assamblages flexionnels en acier selon lEurocode 3
CTICM 1996 ISBN 2-902720-21-1-.
[54] J.A. PACKER, N. KOSTESKI, J.J. CAO
Plate connections to RHS columns at brace points
CIDECT research project 5BH; final report , June 2002.
[55] S. WILLIBALD, J.A. PACKER, X. ZHAO, A.P. VOTH
Branch plate connections to round hollow sections
CIDECT research project 5BS; first interim report , Toronto, August 2005.
[56] Bolted connections for RHS tension menbers
CIDECT research project 8D/8E; final draft report , Karlsruhe, August 2002.
[57] S. WILLIBALD, J.A. PACKER, G. MARTINEZ SAUCEDO
Slotted end connections to hollow sections
CIDECT research project 8G; second interim report , August 2004.
[58] VEGTE, G.J. VAN DER
The static strength of uniplanar and multiplanar tubular T- and X-joints
PhD thesis, Delft University Press Delft, The Netherlands, 1995.
[59] MAKINO, Y., KUROBANE, Y., OCHI, K., VEGTE, G.J. VAN DER, WILMHURST, S.R.
Database of tests and numerical analysys results for unstiffened tubular joints
IIW Doc. XV-E-96-220, Dept. of Achitecture, Kumamoto University Japan, 1996.

CIDECT Research Project 5BP


Draft final report - Volume 2

August 2005
Page 56 of 56

[60] Kurobane, Y. and Makino, Y.


Analysys of existing and forthcoming data for multiplanar KK-joints with circular hollow
sections
CIDECT final report 5BF-10/98.

You might also like