Paper presented by Fiona Walport - [email protected] © Walport F, Gardner L, Nethercot D, Imperial College London & Real E, Arrayago I, UPC 1 Effects of Material Nonlinearity on the Global Analysis and Stability of Stainless Steel Frames Fiona Walport a , Leroy Gardner a , Esther Real b , Itsaso Arrayago b , David Nethercot a Department of Civil Engineering, Imperial College London, UK (a) , Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcalona, Spain (b) Abstract In structural frames, second order effects refer to the internal forces and moments that arise as a result of deformations under load (i.e. geometrical nonlinearity). EN 1993-1-1 states that global second order effects may be neglected if the critical load factor of the frame cr is greater than 10 for an elastic analysis, or greater than 15 when a plastic global analysis is used. No specific guidance is provided in EN 1993-1-4 for the design of stainless steel frames, for which the nonlinear stress-strain behaviour of the material will result in greater deformations as the material loses its stiffness. A study of the effects of material nonlinearity on the stability of stainless steel frames is presented herein. A series of different frame geometries and loading conditions are considered. Based on the findings, proposals for the treatment of the influence of material nonlinearity on the global analysis and design of stainless steel frames are presented. Keywords Continuous Strength Method, Frame stability, Global analysis, Numerical Modelling, Second order effects, Stainless steel 1 Introduction Stainless steel is widely used across a range of industries with its key advantage over ordinary carbon steel being its corrosion resistance and durability. Although a number of design standards for stainless steel currently exist, their provisions have generally been based on a presumed equivalence with the carbon steel design rules. However, stainless steel and carbon steel have distinctly different material characteristics; while carbon steel is accurately characterised by a bilinear (elastic, perfectly plastic) stress-strain response, stainless steel exhibits nonlinear rounded stress-strain behaviour with no sharply defined yield point. It is important that the codes reflect these differences so as to ensure safe, efficient, and structurally sound design. The current European rules for global analysis and design are examined in this paper, assessing whether the methods provided are suitable for stainless steel. Particular attention is given to the extent to which the differences between the behaviour of stainless steel and carbon steel frames are adequately recognised. EN 1993-1-4 [1] gives supplementary guidance for the design of stainless steel structures that complement the design rules given for structural carbon steel in EN 1993-1-1 [2] . Section 5 of EN 1993-1-1 outlines the rules for structural analysis with detailed subsections on structural modelling, global analysis and imperfections, as well as methods of analysis considering material nonlinearities. The guidance on material nonlinearities largely relates to the occurrence of traditional idealised plastic hinges, as seen in carbon steel structures. However, such hinges do not form in stainless steel structures; instead zones of plasticity with gradually reducing stiffness, but with peak capacities well in excess of the traditional plastic moment are exhibited [3] . EN 1993-1-1 also states that “elastic global analysis may be used in all cases” and that “elastic global analysis should be based on the assumption that the stress-strain behaviour of the material is linear, whatever the stress level is”. The supplementary rules for stainless steel give no additional information for the global analysis of stainless steel structures, though an analytical expression for the description of the rounded stress-strain response of stainless steel based on the two stage Ramberg-Osgood model [4,5,6] is given in Annex C [1] . This paper assesses whether the assumption of an elastic global analysis is sufficient or whether, due to the significant nonlinearity of stainless steel, a plastic global analysis is necessary. Fig. 1 shows typical load-displacement paths determined from different types of structural analyses, displaying the effects of material and geometric nonlinearities and their importance in the global analysis of structures. Geometrical nonlinearities may result either from global imperfections and deformations associated with frame instability, known as ‘−∆’ effects, or member imperfections and deformations associated with member instability, known as ‘−’ effects. Whether or not global second order effects can be ignored depends on the extent to which they modify the structural behaviour or increase the forces and moments in the members. In common with other structural steel design standards, this assessment is made in EN 1993-1-1 [2] on the basis of the value of the critical load factor cr , which is the amount by which the design loading would have to be increased to cause elastic instability of the frame in a global sway mode. Second order effects are deemed to be sufficiently small to be ignored when cr > 10 for an elastic analysis and cr > 15 for a plastic analysis. These guidelines were developed on the basis of linear elastic or linear elastic, perfectly plastic material behaviour; their validity in the case of the nonlinear rounded material response of stainless steel is assessed in this paper.
Effects of Material Nonlinearity on the Global Analysis and Stability of Stainless Steel Frames
Jun 24, 2023
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Related Documents
