2. Methodology

5. Evalutaion of the results and

assessment of Eurocode 3

7. References

1. Hibbitt, Karlsson, Sorensen Inc. ABAQUS, (2010) ABAQUS/Standard user’s manual volumes I–III and ABAQUS CAE manual. Version 6.10. USA: Pawtucket 2. Theofanous M, Gardner L. Report on tests (material, stub columns and beams). HILONG Background document D2.1, 2014: Pawtucket: 2010

6. Conclusions

4. Parametric studies

3. Development of FE model and validation against

11 & 11 bending tests

1. Introduction

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00

M /

Mp

l

θ / θpl

experimental

no imperfections

measured imperfections

t/100

t/50

t/10

Dawson & Walker

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00

M /

Mp

l

k / kpl

experimental

no imperfections

measured imperfections

t/100

t/50

t/10

Dawson & Walker

Figure 3.1 Typical experimental and numerical failure modes of RHS

and SHS 3pt and 4pt bending beams respectively

Figure 1.1 Application of HSS at the Friends Arena Stadium in

Sweden and at the Airbus Hangar in Frankfurt, Germany

Figure 3.2 Typical experimental and numerical curves - moment-rotation for 3point bending

and moment-curvature for 4point bending

Varying thickness to provide cross-sectional

slenderness ct/ε = 10÷90

t = 1.52÷10.03mm for steel grade S460

t = 1.89÷11.71mm for steel grade S690

Three testing configurations

3pt bending test with beam span of L=10xH

3pt bending test with beam span of L=20xH

4pt bending test with beam span of L=20xH

Three sections with aspect ratios 1.0, 2.0 and 2.44:

SHS 100x100 (H/B=1)

RHS 200x100 (H/B=2)

RHS 200x100 (H/B=2.44)

The aim of the current study is to investigate the

structural response of HSS beams. To achieve this, the

following methodology is adopted:

Development of finite element (FE) model

Validation of the FE model against the

experimental results of HILONG project

Execution of parametric studies

Evaluation of the results

Assessment of Eurocode 3

The general purpose FE software ABAQUS [1] is

utilized for the fulfilment of the aforementioned steps.

Both linear (Eigenbuckling) and non-linear (Riks)

analysis are performed during the research, whereas

the 4-noded elements (S4R) with material properties

from HILONG project [2] are incorporated in the

models.

11 (3 point, L/H=10) & 11 (4point, L/H=20) bending tests were validated

5 imperfection magnitudes were assessed

0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

15.0

18.0

0 10 20 30 40

Ro

tati

on

cap

acit

y

Flange slenderness (c / tε)

Class 1 limit S460 - SHS - 3pt (L/H=20)

S460 - RHS_2 - 3pt (L/H=20)

S460 - RHS_2.44 - 3pt (L/H=20)

S690 - SHS - 3pt (L/H=20)

S690 - RHS_2 - 3pt (L/H=20)

S690 - RHS_2.44 - 3pt (L/H=20)

EN 1993-1-1 Class 1 limit

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85

Mu

/ M

pl

Flange slenderness (c / tε)

Class 2 limit S460 - SHS - 4pt (L/H=20)

S460 - RHS_2 - 4pt (L/H=20)

S460 - RHS_2.44 - 4pt (L/H=20)

S690 - SHS - 4pt (L/H=20)

S690 - RHS_2 - 4pt (L/H=20)

S690 - RHS_2.44 - 4pt (L/H=20)

EN 1993-1-1 class 2 limit

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85

Mu

/ M

el

Flange slenderness (c / tε)

Class 3 limit S460 - SHS - 4pt (L/H=20)

S460 - RHS_2 - 4pt (L/H=20)

S460 - RHS_2.44 - 4pt (L/H=20)

S690 - SHS - 4pt (L/H=20)

S690 - RHS_2 - 4pt (L/H=20)

S690 - RHS_2.44 - 4pt (L/H=20)

EN 1993-1-1 class 3 limit

Figures 5.1, 5.2, 5.3: Assessment of Eurocode 3 slenderness limits

Slenderness limits=codified

treatment of local buckling

Depend on the support

conditions of the constituent

plate elements, the imposed

stress distribution and the

material yield strength

Overall very good agreement between experimental and

numerical results was achieved

Conclusions regarding the applicability of slenderness

limits for HSS Class 1 limit not suitable for plastic design

Class 2 limit slightly unconservative

Class 3 limit non-economic

Figure 4.1: Typical linear and non-linear

buckling for SHS 3pt and 4pt bending tests

Numerical study of the structural response of S460 & S690 beams

Gkantou Michaela1, Baniotopoulos Charalampos1, Theofanous Marios1, Hemida Hassan1 1 School of Civil Engineering, University of Birmingham, UK

Increasing demands for sustainable and light structures

together with the technological advances in material

science brought high strength steel (HSS) into the

construction market over the past decades. The principal

benefit that HSS offers is the weight reduction which is

achieved thanks to its high yield capacity. Apart from

that, benefits by the use of HSS in building applications

include more elegant and iconic solutions as well as

more sustainable design due to reduced raw material,

energy use and carbon emissions. Applications of HSS

in building engineering are depicted in Figure 1.1.