Full Text 02

Finite Element Modelling and Parametric
Studies of Semi-Closed Thin-Walled Steel

Polygonal Columns
Application on Steel Lattice Towers for Wind Turbines
Bona Ryan
Civil Engineering, masters level (120 credits)

2017
Luleå University of Technology

Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering
Finite Element Modelling and Parametric Studies of Semi-Closed Thin-Walled Steel Polygonal Columns
FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING AND PARAMETRIC STUDIES OF

SEMI-CLOSED THIN-WALLED STEEL POLYGONAL COLUMNS
-Application on Steel Lattice Towers for Wind Turbines-
Bona Ryan
Supervisors: Efthymios Koltsakis

Panagiotis Manoleas
Luleå University of Technology

Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering
Division of Structural and Construction Engineering - Steel Structures
SE - 971 87 LULEÅ
www.ltu.se/sbn
Luleå, January 2017
Preface
PREFACE
This thesis is a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master degree in Erasmus Mundus
Master Programme Sustainable Construction under Natural Hazard and Catastrophic Events
(SUSCOS). The work presented here was performed at the Department of Civil, Environmental and
Natural Resources Engineering of Luleå University of Technology at the Division of Structural and
Construction Engineering, with research focus on renewable energy structures.
There are many people who had essential part in the creation of this thesis. The author would like to
express his gratitude to the supervisor Prof. Efthymios Koltsakis, for his continuous supervision,
guidance and support during this thesis work. Likewise, to Phd candidate Panagiotis Manoleas, a
special word of appreciation, for his measureless help and invaluable feedback in the numerical
modeling and development of this thesis, despite of the tight schedule of his own work. All their
supports were deeply acknowledged.
I also would like to thank my SUSCOS colleagues here in Sweden for the time we spent together in
the middle of extreme cold weather, for those related to the thesis and other stuff as well.
Special acknowledgements are addressed to programme coordinators Prof. Ing. František Wald from
Czech Technical University in Prague, Prof. Luis Simoes da Silva from University of Coimbra, Prof.
Dan Dubina, Ph.D. from Polytechnica University Timisoara, Prof. Dr. Jean-Pierre Jaspart from
University of Liege, and Prof. Dr. R. Landolfo from University Federico II Naples, and all the people
who involved in the Consortium of Erasmus Mundus SUSCOS Master Programme. This program,
that connects six European technical universities together, has created a huge opportunity for me to
meet and learn a lot from European most recognized steel experts. It is a big privilege to be a part of
research focused on steel structure engineering.
Finally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my parents, my brothers Joy and Aldo, my
girlfriend Rina, and friends whose support have been always available and who helped me during this
period of my life, even from distance, with kind words, encouragement, and infinite love. To my
family I dedicate this thesis.
i
Abstract
ABSTRACT
The trend of structural engineering in the recent years is toward the use of lighter and more
economical structural elements. In steel construction, peculiarly, thin-walled structural elements are
becoming more popular and have a growing importance. Improved techniques in a manufacturing of
thin-walled elements have led to increased competitiveness of such products in the building
applications. Some examples of such structural element can be found in everyday life in form of
columns, studs, roofing trusses, and light-weight frames. However, the use of slender profiles and a
complex cross sections shape lead to requirements to study instability phenomenon in a form of local,
distortional, flexural, torsional and coupled instability. Such complex structural behavior is inevitably
accompanied by demand to improve calculation methods and design provisions. In this thesis, an
innovative solution of structural element composed of thin-walled plates is proposed for the
application on lattice support structure of wind turbine.
Thin-walled cold-formed profiles are steel products usually made from cold rolled coils and folded in
the second step. In this way, only open profiles can be produced. The predominant problem of the
open cross-section is the excessive torsional effect caused by the non-coincidence between the shear
center and mass center, and a poor torsional resistance. A better response is possible with closed cross
sections, but such profiles could not be produced by the folding. The solution is to make semi-closed
section by assembling them into polygonal profiles with mechanical fasteners, as presented in this
thesis.
Objective of this work is to study the proposed structural sections in design situation and to
investigate possible design models. The expected structural behavior of the column is a mixture
between the open and closed cross-section. These cases will be investigated through numerical study.
In this thesis presented a comprehensive parametric study on the ultimate strength of proposed cold-
formed steel columns using the Finite Element package ABAQUS. FE models were first developed
for columns by using automation that was made through MATLAB and Python script. The buckling
and non-linear FE study was done for the investigation of local (L), distortional (D) and global (G)
possible buckling failures and ultimate resistance, respectively. Modelling issues such as boundary
conditions, meshing, initial imperfections, material models, and non-linear solution controls in FEA
were also addressed.
The parametric study involved series of profiles of built-up polygonal cross-section types with varied
thickness (t), number of corners (n), diameter (d), slenderness (slend), yield strength (fy), number of
points along corner radii (np), extension lip length (lext), gusset plate thickness (tg), member length (l),
and density of fasteners (s/d ratio), loaded in compression and bending moment. The bending moment
occurs as the effect of forces acting on the connection. The purpose of this analysis is to study the
critical load, cross-sectional behavior, influence of the amplitude of initial imperfections on the
ultimate load, and influence of each parameter used in the analysis through Full Factorial Design.
Key Words
Lattice tower, Thin-walled element, Semi-closed polygonal section, Finite element analysis,
Parametric study, Buckling, Python script, Matlab script, Eurocode 3, Factorial design
iii
Notations
NOTATIONS
Latin capital letters
Latin small letters
v
Notations
Greek small letters
vi
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ................................................................................................................................................ i
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................................... iii
NOTATIONS .......................................................................................................................................... v
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Objectives and Expected Research Achievement ................................................................... 2
1.3 Limitation................................................................................................................................ 3
1.4 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Organization of the Thesis ...................................................................................................... 4
1.6 Type of Towers for Wind Energy Converter .......................................................................... 5
1.6.1 Welded steel shell tower ................................................................................................. 5
1.6.2 Pretensioned Concrete Tower ......................................................................................... 6
1.6.3 Concrete/Steel Hybrid Tower ......................................................................................... 7
1.6.4 Lattice Tower .................................................................................................................. 8
1.6.5 Hybrid Lattice-Tubular Towers ...................................................................................... 9
1.6.6 Summary of Type of Support Structure ........................................................................ 10
1.7 Semi-closed polygonal section trusses .................................................................................. 11
2 THIN-WALLED STEEL PROFILES AND THEIR RESISTANCE ACCORDING TO
EUROCODES....................................................................................................................................... 13
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Manufacturing of Cold-Formed Steel Section ...................................................................... 14
2.2.1 Peculiar Characteristic of Cold-Formed Sections ......................................................... 16
2.3 Buckling Behaviour .............................................................................................................. 17
2.3.1 Elastic buckling of column ........................................................................................... 17
2.3.2 Buckling behaviour of cold-formed structural members .............................................. 20
2.3.3 Coupled Instabilities ..................................................................................................... 22
2.3.4 Open section, free and prevented warping .................................................................... 25
2.3.5 Closed section, free warping ......................................................................................... 28
2.3.6 Buckling of Thin Plates according to Eurocodes .......................................................... 28
2.3.7 Buckling of cold-formed sections according to Eurocodes .......................................... 31
2.3.7.1 Ultimate Limit States. EC3-1-3 -6 ................................................................................ 33
2.3.7.2 Buckling Resistance. EC3-1-3 -6.2 ............................................................................... 34
vii
Table of Contents
2.3.8 Buckling of shell sections according to Eurocodes....................................................... 36

b. Ultimate resistance of thin shell ............................................................................................ 37
2.4 Connection in Lattice(Truss) Structures ............................................................................... 39
2.4.1 Moment-Rotation Behaviour ........................................................................................ 41
2.4.2 Rotational stiffness based on Eurocode 3-1-8 ............................................................... 42
2.5 Stiffness of Lip Connection .................................................................................................. 43
2.6 Imperfections ........................................................................................................................ 45
2.7 Post-Buckling and Non-Linear FE Analysis ......................................................................... 46
3 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURAL MEMBERS .......... 49
3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 49
3.2 Automation of Parametric Studies ........................................................................................ 50
3.2.1 Pre-processing and generation of FE input files ........................................................... 50
3.2.2 Job running.................................................................................................................... 53
3.2.3 Post-processing and generation of data ......................................................................... 53
3.3 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................ 54
3.4 Development of FE models................................................................................................... 56
3.4.1 Units .............................................................................................................................. 56
3.4.2 Geometry and Material Properties ................................................................................ 56
3.4.2.1 Geometry....................................................................................................................... 56
3.4.2.2 Material properties ........................................................................................................ 68
3.4.3 Python automation ........................................................................................................ 69
3.4.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 69
3.4.3.2 Part Module ................................................................................................................... 70
3.4.3.3 Partition ......................................................................................................................... 76
3.4.3.4 Property Module ........................................................................................................... 78
3.4.3.4.1 Material Properties .................................................................................................... 78
3.4.3.5 Section Module ............................................................................................................. 78
3.4.3.6 Assembly Module ......................................................................................................... 79
3.4.3.7 Interaction Module ........................................................................................................ 82
3.4.3.7.1 Coupling Constraint .................................................................................................. 82
3.4.3.7.2 Tie Constraint............................................................................................................ 83
3.4.3.7.3 Rigid Body Constraint .............................................................................................. 84
3.4.3.8 Load Module ................................................................................................................. 86
3.4.3.9 Mesh Module ................................................................................................................ 89
3.4.3.10 Step Module .............................................................................................................. 90
viii
Table of Contents
3.4.3.10.1 Imperfection .......................................................................................................... 90

3.4.3.10.2 Field and History Output....................................................................................... 91
3.4.3.11 Job Module................................................................................................................ 91
4 PARAMETRIC STUDIES OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURAL MEMBERS........................ 93
4.1 Post-Processing ..................................................................................................................... 93
4.2 Factorial Design .................................................................................................................... 94
4.3 FE Elastic Buckling and Non-linear Analysis ...................................................................... 98
4.3.1 Verification of Elastic Buckling Analysis..................................................................... 98
4.3.2 Verification of Non-linear Analysis ............................................................................ 103
4.3.2.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 103
4.3.2.2 Load-Displacement of FE Analysis ............................................................................ 112
4.3.2.2.1 Diameter (d-parameter) ........................................................................................... 112
4.3.2.2.2 Thickness (t-parameter) .......................................................................................... 114
4.3.2.2.3 Length ( -parameter) .............................................................................................. 116
4.3.2.2.4 Bolt spacing (b-parameter)...................................................................................... 117
4.3.3 Analytical analysis for the proposed columns according to the standard rules EN1993-
1-3 and EN1993-1-6 ................................................................................................................... 119
4.3.3.1 Analytical analysis according to EN1993-1-3 ............................................................ 119
4.3.3.2 Analytical analysis according to EN1993-1-6 ............................................................ 124
4.3.4 Axial Compression and Bending Moment .................................................................. 130
4.3.5 Resistance-to-weight ratio........................................................................................... 135
5 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING OF THE STIFFNESS ON LIPS’ BOLTED
CONNECTIONS ................................................................................................................................ 137
5.1 Modelling and Analysis Method ......................................................................................... 137
5.2 Results ................................................................................................................................. 141
5.2.1 Influence of diameter and plate thickness on the stiffness of lips’ connection ........... 141
5.2.2 Influence of bolt spacing on the stiffness of lips’ connection ..................................... 145
5.2.3 Influence of number of corners on the stiffness of lips’ connection ........................... 146
6 CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORKS ............................................................................ 149
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 151
ANNEXES .......................................................................................................................................... 154
ANNEX A.1 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR [X, Y] DATABASE OF POLYGONALS’ PROFILES.. 154
ANNEX A.2 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR PROFILES DATABASE AND META DATABASE OF
POLYGONALS’ PROFILES IN RANGES OF INPUT VARIABLES ............................................. 154
ANNEX A.3 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR FACTORIAL DESIGN IN FEA PARAMETRIC
STUDIES ................................................................................................................................. 154
ix
Table of Contents
ANNEX A.4 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

USED FOR PARAMETRIC STUDIES ............................................................................................. 154
ANNEX A.5 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF POST-PROCESSING................... 154
ANNEX B.1 LOAD-DISPLACEMENT CURVES ..................................................................... 154
ANNEX B.2 LOAD-ROTATION CURVES ............................................................................... 154
ANNEX B.3 AXIAL COMPRESSION-BENDING MOMENT N-M INTERACTION ............. 154
ANNEX C.1 ELASTIC BUCKLING EIGENMODES ................................................................ 154
ANNEX C.2 FAILURE MODES FROM RIKS ANALYSIS ...................................................... 200
ANNEX D: TABULATION OF RESULTS READING FROM .ODB FILES ............................. 207
ANNEX E: AVAILABLE PROFILES PROPERTIES .................................................................. 209
x
Finite Element Modelling and Parametric Studies of Semi-Closed Thin-Walled
Steel Polygonal Columns
1 INTRODUCTION
At current stage of wind converter development, reducing the amount of input cost is still a big
challenge. Wind energy is positive in the way that the wind resource is renewable and it does not
produce harmful impact like greenhouse gas from conventional power source. However, one of the
shortcomings with wind power generation is that the amount of investment cost makes it not as much
commercially competitive as other conventional power generation sources for the time being. Efforts
are being carried out to optimize it. As for optimization of structural form, lattice system is proposed
as support structure for wind turbine. Lattice structure possesses advantages in that it generally
requires less material and the wind load impact is also reduced due to the reduced impacted area
compared with monopole structure. In this part, lattice structure composed of steel semi-closed
polygonal cross-section made by cold-formed thin-walled plates is proposed for more efficient
structural solution, and compared to other common type of wind turbine towers. This novel built-up
structural section is expected to deliver robust structure with economical feature.
1.1 Background
Wind power is considered one of the most promising alternative energy resources for production
of electricity. One major advantage that wind power offers compared to conventional ways of
producing energy such as fossil energy and nuclear energy is the low emission of carbon dioxide CO2
during production of electrical energy. It is a clean renewable energy. In the last decades extensive
research and huge resources have been focused on production of wind power around the world,
especially in the European Union (EU) where annual wind power installations have increased steadily
over the past 15 years from 3.2 GW in 2000 to 12.8 GW in 2015, an annual growth rate of over 9%
[1].
A wind power station consists of a supporting tower structure with a turbine nacelle at the top.
The cost of the tower is one of the most important aspects to address at the moment of design stage
and installation. Based on experience, it covers approximately 20%of the total manufacturing cost for
a wind turbine [2]. For turbines with higher rated power capacity, the percentage could be even
increasing. Moreover, the height of the tower is an important factor in the efficiency of using wind
power. Higher tower solutions have a significant role in reducing the unit costs of generated
electricity [3], likewise latest development in wind power industry includes the effort to achieve larger
blades radius and consequently higher tower. Building higher tower increases the output of wind
power as the wind becomes more constant, less turbulence and the wind speed increases with the
increase of the tower height. Hence, the optimization of supporting tower for more economical
solution while keeping the structural performance is necessary.
Reduction of investment cost could be made through various ways. The structural system
optimization can be done either in the material or form of structure. The manufacturing cost can also
be optimized by means of mass production. The latter is one factor that has driven large scale wind
farm development. One possibility to reduce costs of tower manufacturing could be to produce them
in smaller parts that are easier and less expensive to transport. For such a solution to be
Introduction 1
feasible it is important that the resulting structure and connections has the required stability and load
resistance. The problem of transportation of tower to inland sites and erection method significantly
decreases if the tower is built by sections instead of large cross-section and in long segments.
Moreover, the price of the tower can also be decreased by the use of thin elements with high strength
values.
In the current design of steel towers for onshore wind turbines the most common type of tower is
cylindrical tubular tower. Some challenging limitations regarding tower height and erection process
attributed to this type of structures including transportation restriction for maximum shell diameter of
4 – 4.5m, fatigue endurance due to transversal and longitudinal welding, connection problems with
thick flanges, expensive rolling process, and lifting technology that limit the height of current
installed tower to be 80 – 100m.Lattice or truss support structure then proposed to deal with such
problems, however the steel CHS section as common cross section for this type of structure for high
onshore wind turbine has complication in welding connection and member thickness. All these issues
will eventually affect the cost effectiveness of tower component in the overall building cost. Many
researches have been looking for different solutions to these problems. Three projects which have
been dealing with these questions are the HISTWIN [4], HISTWIN2 [5], and the on-going
AEOLUS4FUTURE [6]. New challenging load conditions and new type of support structures for
wind energy converter which foster new structural concepts and high performance material became
the focus of those researches. As part of these projects, Heistermann [7] proved a new solution with
friction connections to replace the traditional in flange connection, and then Garson [8] conducted
comprehensive study of polygonal tubular towers made of folded plates. In 2008 the steel supplier
“Rautaruukki Oy” [3] developed a method to build a lattice tower of 160 m using a new section type
made from cold-formed steel as illustrated in Figure 11. The latter type of structural member is
adopted in this thesis.
Besides the structural performance of member, one important issue for the stability of the
presented tower is to analyze the connections required to maintain the structural performance. As the
joint behavior affects distribution of both internal forces and moments as well as deformations of the
structure, its investigation is very important. Therefore, the work presented here also addressed
questions related to the structural characteristic of bolted connection on the lattice column made of
polygonal thin-walled folded plates. Globally, this work is intended to promote competitiveness of
semi-closed polygonal cross section for truss structure application.
1.2 Objectives and Expected Research Achievement
The main objective of this thesis is to study the structural behaviour of semi-closed polygonal column
subject to various geometrical configuration and loading schemes. Another aspect with regard to the
connections on this type of member is also considered. As of structural joints are characterized by
means of their resistance, stiffness and rotation capacity, one parameter investigated here is estimation
of stiffness of the connection under prescribed set of parameters.. The overall objectives are achieved
by performing an extensive numerical parametric study to analyze and investigate the influence of
different parameters on the response of the member.
2 Introduction
The following key research questions are addressed:
1. Are the existing Eurocode EN1993 part 1-3 [9]analytical models for cold-formed steel
sections suitable for predicting the critical axial force and bending moment on the proposed
semi-closed polygonal section with bolted connection?
2. Is it possible to accurately predict the behavior of the proposed cross-sections as a built-up

member by means of Finite Element Methods (FEM)? What are differences of such an
approach compared to the analytical ones?
3. As for parametric studies, how far is the influence of each parameter on the structural
response of the model?
4. Is it possible to investigate the influence of imperfection on the resistance of the proposed

cross-sections?
1.3 Limitation
This thesis is endeavoring to solve the challenges for application of a new type of truss member as
support structure of wind turbine and the purpose is to achieve a balance point between the safety,
cost and the overall performance. Limitations exist because there is little existing experience and
research to learn from for this thesis topic and many resources in the steel thin-walled are not
accessible. This thesis work was carried out based on conceptual studies and numerical analysis and
there was limited verification from physical modeling. The thesis is therefore trying to produce a
work within its scope that could be useful or applied as a reference when future relevant projects are
to be performed.
The study performed in this thesis deals with the structural behavior of steel semi-closed polygonal
sections with bolted connection in lattice structure, with focus on buckling behaviour, ultimate
resistance and connection stiffness. In the numerical analyses, different types of structural
configurations have been considered. Several parameters are applied on the parametric study to
identify the influence on the response of the member. Thus, the analysis is limited to these specific
prescribed parameters. The studied members in this thesis are series of segment of corner chord on
lattice tower.
1.4 Methodology
To address the objectives and answers of the research questions in this thesis the following research
methodology was adopted:
1. In the first step, a literature review has been carried out to identify the status of existing
research work related to cold-formed polygonal section. The existing rules according to
Eurocode EN1993 are briefly presented. Results from other researches are also presented. A
particular focus was on built-up section made of thin-walled folded plates with bolted
connection.
Introduction 3
2. Thereafter, automation was carried out to build 3D finite element models of the sub-
assemblies for parametric studies. MATLAB code was used to generate profiles of model and
continued with automation in Python. Focus is given to numerically study and investigate the
influence of different parameters on the response of the section.
3. After evaluating the results, focus is shifted to the stiffness prediction of connection on the
studied columns. In addition, influence of imperfection is also investigated.
4. An evaluation of the results of the models performed by FEM and recommendation for the
applicability of numerical calculation for this type of cross-section with regard to the
standards of Eurocodes for steel design: EN 1993 part 1-3 [9] and EN1993 part 1-5 [10] was
done.
1.5 Organization of the Thesis
The thesis consists of seven chapters excluding annexes. A brief summary of the content of each
chapter is explained as follows.
Chapter 1 gives a background and a brief introduction of the research subject. Therein, also
present the objectives and expected research achievements, limitations, and research
methodology.
Chapter 2 gives a state of the art review. It starts with an overview of the rules for the considered
type of thin-plates as presented in Eurocode EN1993. In addition research results from other
references are also presented.
Chapter 3 presents the procedure of parametric studies and numerical analysis. Detail description
of FE models developed for the proposed semi-closed polygonal cross-section is described here.
Chapter 4 describes the evaluation of result from FE-calculations and parametric studies for the
proposed polygonal cross-section.
Chapter 5 gives procedure for the numerical modeling and calculation of stiffness of the bolt
connection along the member
Chapter 6 gives the investigation of moment-rotation behaviour of the gusset connection on the
member
Chapter 7 sums up the main conclusions achieved and provide some suggestions for future work
related to the research presented in this thesis.
4 Introduction
Thin
1.6 Type of Towers for Wind Energy Converter
1.6.1 Welded steel shell tower
The welded steel shell tower today dominates the wind turbine market. It consists of cylinders made
of steel plate bent to a circular shape and welded longitudinally (Figure 1).
). Transversal welds connect
several such cylinders to form a tower section. Each section ends with a steel flange in each end. The
sections are bolted to each other. The bottom flange is connected to the foundation and the top one to
the nacelle.
A tower is primarily dimensioned against

against tension and buckling in the extreme load cases. Ideally the
margin should be the same for both criteria, since increasing the diameter, with a corresponding
reduction of plate thickness, increases the tension strength but reduces the buckling margin. Finally
the tower has to be checked against fatigue. According to Eurocode connecting welds (transversal and
longitudinal) and dimension changes (flanges) affects the strength in a negative way. Thus it is the
welds and the geometry that primarily determine
determine the fatigue strength rather than the quality of the
steel. Therefore wind turbine towers mostly use ordinary qualities of steel. In this report use of
S355J2G3 (earlier known as SS2134, tensile yield limit 355 MPa) is assumed for both the welded and
friction joint towers.
In the dimensioning load case, the tower is affected by the thrust from the rotor. This thrust will create
a bending moment, which increases with the distance from the turbine shaft, i.e. inversely
proportional to the height above the ground. To cope with this increasing bending moment it is
favourable to make the tower conical in shape, to the limit of buckling. However, land transportation
even with a special permit is not possible for diameters exceeding 4.55 m in Sweden. Other countries
countr
and certain roads may create even more severe restrictions, e.g. 3.5 3 5 m. To a certain degree these
restrictions may be counteracted by an increase of plate thickness, however, the tower will wi then
become less economical [11].
a) Shell tower in two sections b) Ring flange connection c) Friction connection
Figure 1.a) Modularized

odularized tubular sections with two different connection types:
types
b) ring flange and c) friction
f connection proposed in HISTWIN project
Introduction 5
Thin
The specific investment cost for the different alternatives is summarized in Figure 2. The intended
higher hub height alternative was not possible to attain with the 4.5 m base diameter limitation. For
the 5 MW turbine the limit was 100 m. For all towers the maximum plate thickness is 75 mm.
According to one source, some manufacturers experience difficulties
difficulties above 50 mm.
mm
Figure 2.. Summary of specific investment cost for 3 and 5 MW wind turbines furnished with welded steel shell
towers, maximum diameter 4.5 m [11]
Besides making the tower expensive, a small tower diameter also means difficulties with transferring
the loads into the foundation
ndation and also with the distribution of the loads in the foundation [12].
1.6.2 Pretensioned Concrete Tower
In a concrete tower the concrete proper only withstands pressure. The ability to absorb tension is
provided primarily by pretensioned tendons, located in ducts in the concrete or internal/external of the
concrete walls. Putting them internal or external enables easy inspection. There are also traditional
untensioned reinforcement bars cast into the concrete
concrete shell, necessary to provide the compressive
strength.
A concrete tower is clearly dimensioned by the extreme load case, since it has large margins towards
fatigue. It is assumed that the concrete is pretensioned by the tendons to 20 MPa. In the extreme
extre load
case the pressure side is offloaded to close to zero whereas the tension on the other side is doubled.
By increasing the thickness of the concrete cover it may be possible to increase the lifetime to e.g. 50
years. One concrete tower may then serve for two generations of machineries, with obvious
economical savings (Figure 3).
Compared to steel towers, concrete towers are much heavier and takes longer time to erect. On the
other hand, the concrete or the concrete elements, if made small enough, are not subject to
transportation restrictions, as for the case with welded steel towers with large base diameters.
6 Introduction
Thin
Figure 3.. Summary of specific investment cost for 3 and 5 MW wind turbines furnished
with slip formed concrete towers [11]
Regardless if the tower is slip formed or assembled from precast elements, it is advantageous to install
the post-stressing
stressing tendons from below, thus not needing to lift the heavy rolls of tendons to the tower
top. Then it is however necessary to furnish the foundation with a cellar [12].
1.6.3 Concrete/Steel Hybrid Tower
The idea behind building a hybrid concrete/steel tower is to use concrete in the wide lower part and
steel in the upper part, where a conventional welded steel shell tower section may be designed without
any risk of conflict with the transportation limitations. In reality it also makes it easier to design
desig the
concrete part and to get the eigen-frequencies
eigen right [11].
Figure 4. Concrete-steel hybrid tower
Introduction 7
Thin
Figure 5.. Summary of specific investment cost for 3 and 5 MW wind turbines furnished
with hybrid concrete/steel towers[11]
1.6.4 Lattice Tower
The simplest construction method of building higher and stiffer towers

tower is a three-dimensional truss, so
called lattice or truss towers [13
13]. Lattice towers have been used in large numbers for smaller wind
turbines. For larger turbines they have mainly been a choice when a stiff (under-critical)
(under tower was
needed. They are typically manufactured by means of welded or bolted tubular steel profiles or L- L
section steel profiles. The lattice towers are typically three-
three or four- legged and consist of corner
chords interconnected withth bracings
braci in a triangulated structure.
It is clear that they often are considerably lighter than towers based on other technologies. The
physical background to this phenomenon is the large widths of the lower sections. The need for
material to take strain
ain or pressure is inversely proportional to the width. With a tubular section a thin-
thin
walled construction will finally meet with buckling, which restrains the maximum diameter. A lattice
design does not buckle like a shell. The risk of buckling of the individual
individual members is controlled by
inserting numerous struts that give the lattice tower its characteristic look.
The basic advantage of lattice towers is cost, since a lattice tower requires only half as much material
as a freely standing tubular tower with a similar stiffness as already described above (Figure 7). In
terms of structural optimization, this type of tower
wer could reduce the cost of the tower about 20% or
even higher when it is applied
pplied as support structure for wind turbine. One another stated advantage of
lattice towers is that they should have less aerodynamic drag and hence create less tower shadow and
noise. Moreover, transportation of lattice elements is also much more convenient when there is
limitation of 4-6m width for road transportation capacity, while a larger dimension
mension of monopole is
required for a larger scale wind turbine.
turbine
8 Introduction
Thin
Figure 6. Steel lattice tower
The visual qualities are controversial, especially due to the resemblance to towers for high-voltage
high
power lines, generally claimed to be ugly. An open design, like a lattice tower, is more prone to icing
than
an a tubular tower. The possible impact on the dynamic properties may be the most severe
consequence, which may endanger the wind turbine in an extreme case. It may also be a problem for
maintenance personnel, even if their elevator runs on heated rails. Another
Another danger for such tower is
the increased risk of falling ice. The last resort for evacuating a wind turbine nacelle is normally by a
rope to the ground.
Figure 7.. Specific investment cost for 3 MW wind turbine furnished with
lattice towers
1.6.5 Hybrid Lattice-Tubular

Tubular Towers
The most recent type of wind tower is hybrid lattice-tubular

lattice tubular tower. This type of towers is intended to
achieve greater hub heights. It consists of the three components, the lower lattice part, a transition
piece, and tubular part. The lattice tower is set on the foundation and is assembled directly at site. The
transition piece connects the lattice tower to the tubular tower, ensures the connection and
transmission of forces between the two main parts. The tubular tower consists of sections joint by
means off bolted flanges as happen in most tubular towers.
Introduction 9
The tower can be climbed from the inside and is equipped with working platforms, ladder with fall
protection system and a service lift. The bottom cabinet sections are arranged in the transition piece.
The cabinet sections are connected to the generator and the top cabinet in the nacelle via power and
control cables. At the tower top the cables are routed through a cable loop. It allows the nacelle to turn
several times in each direction without damaging the cables. The power cables between WTG and
grid are routed through conduits. The tower is protected against corrosion with special coating.
A tower of this type was installed at the wind farm in Gujarat, India (Figure 8). It is expected that this
new type of towers produces about 10 to 12% more energy, because gains against the normal towers
more than 40 meters in total height, with a combined height of 120 meters compared to the 80 meters
of most tubular towers, therefore it is ideal for low wind areas, due to its superior performance, with a
potential to be installed in all parts of the world, without having to look for places where the wind
speed is high [12].
Figure 8. Steel hybrid lattice-tubular tower
1.6.6 Summary of Type of Support Structure
In the early stage of wind energy development and especially when the size of wind turbine was not
such big, the emphasis was given on cost reduction of the mechanical parts, not of the tower. That is
why the tubular tower was very widely used. However, as commercialization of wind energy is driven
and the size of wind turbine grows, the cost optimization associated with the turbine support structure
is of major interests after cost reduction measurements on mechanical components, e.g. the gearbox
and generator are done. This is why these years the lattice structure is receiving more and more
attentions, especially on large scale wind turbines.
A comparison in terms of the investment cost of a commissioned wind turbine divided by the yearly
production, called the specific cost for the presented types of tower is shown in Figure 9 below.
10 Introduction
Thin
Figure 9.. Tower cost for the alternative designs. Power 3 MW, hub height 125 m[11].
m
1.7 Semi-closed
closed polygonal section trusses
The idea of using built-up polygonal profile member made of folded plates for the truss
trus element is an
innovative and recent solution,, therefore the research and previous studies
studies about this matter are not
much available. The objective is to maximize the efficiency
efficie of the cross-sectio
section by its geometry,
while minimizing the quantity of steel
ste used. This can lead to great economical al and environmental
benefits. There is no extended research and literature behind this type
t of built-up
up hollow sections so
far and therefore there are many uncertainties
unce on how these elements would behave under loads.
The main advantage of semi-closedclosed polygonal profiles

profile made from cold-formed
formed steel is that they
facilitate simpler connections with minimum
mi welding. Figure 10 shows possible polygonal profiles for
compression chords and diagonals
iagonals in a lattice. The gusset plates required for the connections are
inserted into thee polygonal profile and secured with pretension bolts.
Figure 10.. Illustration of connection

c of semi-closed polygonal cross sections chords to diagonals
A detailed research study about this type of section was performed in [8],, which investigated the
resistance of the polygonal cross-sections
cross for tubular tower application.. The focus of that research is
the use of thin walls on bolted elements in wind tower applications and the assessment of the design
methods according to Eurocodes in i comparison with FEM analysis. The results of the study show that
Introduction 11
Thin
the Eurocode EN1993 part 1-33 and part 1-61 are in a good agreement when compared to the laboratory
tests
sts and FEM analysis performed, whenever the axial resistance tance was done on the folded
fold plates. A
smaller difference between numerical and analytical results was obtained when
when calculating the critical
load with EN1993 part 1-5,, rather than with part 1-6.
1 Therefore, in this thesis EN1993 part 1-5 is also
used in order
der to determine the critical load of plates. It is also shown that the strength of the folded
plate, even with less material used in the cross-section
cross section has a higher efficiency than the plates with
circular cross-sections [8].
Furthermore, as part of HISTWIN project,

project, lattice tower using a new section made from cold-formed
cold
steel as illustrated in Figure 11 was developed by Ruukki.. A preliminary study by experimental test
and FE analysis of the behavior of this new polygonal cross-section
section consist of folded plates was
conducted at Luleå University of Technology [8].
(a)
(b) (c)
Figure 11.. Lattice (truss) tower using semi-closed

semi closed polygonal cross section, a) Steel plate, b) tower section
and c) Lattice tower designed by “Rautaruukki Oy”
This thesis is an extended research for built-up

built polygonal cross-section
on for application in lattice /
truss structures with bolted connection.
connection Several numerical models are developed for parametric
study to understand the structural behavior and evaluate the efficiency of the proposed solution in
comparison with the existing Eurocode for cold-formed steel.
12 Introduction
2 THIN-WALLED STEEL PROFILES AND THEIR RESISTANCE

ACCORDING TO EUROCODES
Cold-formed steel sections demonstrates extensive applicability, even it is a relatively new system, due
to some great advantages, such as high strength-to-weight ratio, reduced labor costs and fast erection
due to the light weight of cold-formed members. In the form of individual plates, they have an inherent
weakness in their small torsional stiffness, which is unfavorable for compressive members. The
solution is to make closed section by assembling them with fasteners. Cold-formed steel design is
dominated by two specific problems, i.e. (1) stability behaviour, which is dominant for design criteria
of thin sections, and (2) connecting technology, which is specific and influences significantly the
structural performance and design detailing. The work presented in this chapter deals with resistance
of the proposed section in relation with stability and connection, based on analytical approach in the
Eurocodes.
2.1 Introduction
In steel construction cold-formed structural members are becoming more popular and have a growing
importance. One of the reasons is the versatile nature which allows for the forming of almost any
section geometry which can be produced at low-cost by cold forming and rolling from thin steel
sheets. Cold–formed steel sections are usually thinner than hot–rolled sections and can be subject to
different modes of failure and deformation and therefore extensive testing is required to provide a
guideline for the design of cold-formed thin-walled structural members [14].
The main mechanical properties (yield point, tensile strength and ductility) of cold-formed steel
sections, particularly at the corners, are considerably different from those of the flat steel sheet, plate,
strip or bar before forming. This is because the cold–forming operation increases the yield point and
tensile strength, and at the same time decreases the ductility. Design codes have been generated for
cold-formed steel structures subjected to various loading scenarios which can cause buckling, bending
and web crippling or a combination.
Cold formed sections can be optimized for different purposes and they are fairly inexpensive to
produce in small series by brake forming. The first objective of the optimization is to avoid the
detrimental effects of local buckling of compressed parts. This is done by folds and by forming
intermediate stiffeners in wide flat parts. Most of the cold-formed members have open cross-sections
with a very small torsional stiffness. This means that the resistance to global buckling frequently is
governed by torsional or torsional-flexural buckling with a relatively low resistance compared to
flexural buckling. One way of improving the resistance is to make the cross-section closed by using
mechanical fasteners for the connection, which will be investigated in this thesis. It is here called a
semi-closed cross-section because it is not continuously and rigidly connected.
Thin-Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according to Eurocodes 13

Using the newest developments in material technology and in cold forming technique the processing
of steel sheets with yield strength ranging from 250 MPa to 700 MPa and larger sheet thicknesses
becomes possible. Due to that, trusses with cold formed sections show a marked reduction in weight
in comparison to hot rolled sections. However, this advantage can only be used for structures, where
serviceability is not decisive, which is the case for trusses with their large flexural rigidity. For
conventional truss structures made from hot rolled sections, design details were optimised during
decades of application, while for an economical design of trusses made of cold formed sections, new
cross-section types as well as truss connections details need to be developed. In a research [15] a
certain type of built-up cross-section was proposed and investigated by using an analytical
calculation based on the Generalized Beam Theory (GBT), which was then compared to experimental
data and numerical calculations. The steps and principles that should be followed when using the
implementation of GBT formulation were aimed to perform first-order elastic–plastic analyses of
thin-walled members. In that research, the GBT results were compared to numerical calculation by
ABAQUS shell finite element, and the results showed a very good agreement. However, it was shown
that FE analysis provides better and more accurate results than the GBT procedure and therefore, in
this work an FEM approach is adopted.
The objective of this chapter is to assess the established design procedure of an axially compressed
cold-formed steel member and stiffness of the connection. The investigated steel member is a segment
of a semi-closed corner chord as illustrated in Figure 11. The element was intended to be used as part
of a lattice tower for wind turbines. The resistance to axial compression of the folded plate was
analysed according to the rules of EN-1993 rules part 1-3 [9] for the folded cold-formed members and
then evaluated with the help of FEA.
2.2 Manufacturing of Cold-Formed Steel Section
Cold-formed members are steel products made from coated or uncoated hot-rolled or cold-rolled flat
strips or coils. Within the permitted range of tolerances, they have constant or variable cross section.
Individual structural members (bar members) obtained from so called “long products” including
single open sections, open built-up sections, and closed built-up sections.
Cold-formed members are normally manufactured by one of two processes, namely:
- Roll forming;
- Folding and press braking.
Roll forming consists of feeding a continuous steel strip through a series of opposing rolls to
progressively deform the steel plastically to form the desired shape. Each pair of rolls produces a
fixed amount of deformation in a sequence of type shown in Figure 12a. Each pair of opposing rolls is
called a stage as shown in Figure 12. In general, the more complex the cross sectional shape, the
greater the number of stages required.
14 Thin-Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according to Eurocodes

Thin
Figure 12..Stages in roll forming a simple section(Rhodes, 1991)
Folding is the simplest process, in which specimens of short lengths, and of simple geometry are
produced from a sheet of material by folding a series of bends, as shown in Figure 13. This process
has very limited application.
Figure 13. Folding process
Press braking is more widely used, and a greater variety of cross sectional forms can be produced by
this process. Here a section is formed from a length of strip by pressing the strip between shaped dies
to form the profile shape, as shown in Figure 14. Usually each bend is formed separately. This process
also has limitations on the profiled geometry which can be formed and, often more importantly, on the
lengths of sections which can be produced. Press braking is normally
normally restricted to sections of length
less than 5 m although press brakes capable of producing 8 m long members are in use in industry.
nd Their Resistance according to Eurocodes

Thin-Walled Steel Profiles and 15
Thin
Figure 14. Press braking process
2.2.1 Peculiar Characteristic of Cold-Formed Sections
Compared to hot-rolled
rolled steel sections, the manufacturing technology of cold-formed
cold formed steel sections
causes some peculiar characteristics. First of all, cold-forming
cold forming leads to a modification of the stress-
stress
strain curve of the steel. With respect to the virgin material, cold-rolling
rolling provides an increase of the
yield strength and, sometimes, of the ultimate strength that is important in the corners and still
appreciable in the flanges, while press braking leave these characteristics nearly unchanged in the
flanges.
Table 1.. Influence of manufacturing process on the strengths of hot and cold-formed
cold formed sections
The increase of the yield strength is due to strain hardening and depends on the type of steel used for
cold rolling. On the other hand, the increase
increase of the ultimate strength is related to strain aging, which is
accompanied by a decrease of the ductility and depends on the metallurgical properties of the
material. Eurocodes provide formulas to evaluate the increase of yield strength of cold-formed
cold steel
sections, compared to that of the basic material.
Hot-rolled
rolled profiles are affected by residual stresses, which result from air cooling after hot-rolling.
hot
These stresses are mostly of membrane type, they depend on the shape of sections and have a
significant influence on the buckling strength. In the case of cold-formed
cold formed sections the residual stresses
are mainly of flexural type (Figure 15),
15) influenced by cold rolling procedure, and their influence on
the buckling strength is less important than membrane
membrane residual stresses as shown in Table 2.
16 Thin--Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according

ccording to Eurocodes
Thin
Figure 15.flexural
.flexural residual stresses in a lipped channel cold-formed
cold formed steel section
Table 2. Residual stress in steel sections
The fact that the mechanical properties

pro of cold-formed sections,, i.e. yield strength and residual
stresses – are different to those of hot rolled ones, different buckling curves need to be justified.
However, for the simplicity of the design process,
proce the same buckling curves as for hot formed
fo sections
are still used in Eurocodes.
2.3 Buckling Behaviour
2.3.1 Elastic buckling of column
Buckling is a geometric non-linear

linear problem. Buckling of a member occurs when the axial force in the
member is so high, that the member cannot resist this axial force in combination with lateral
deflection and thus no stable equilibrium can be found. The value
value for which this happens is called a
bifurcation point because an intersection between two equilibrium paths is present. For the ideal
column (a perfectly straight column is subjected to a centrically applied load) when the load is less
than the critical load, the column will remain straight in state of stable equilibrium. When the load is
continuously increased equilibrium is not only possible for a straight column in deformed shape,
however this is state of unstable equilibrium meaning that small disturbances
disturbances leads to large
displacements. In Figure 16 is shown in a force-deflection
force deflection diagram. The vertical axis represents the
axial compressive force in the column (hinged at both ends) and the horizontal axis shows the lateral
deflection in the middle of the column.

Thin
Figure 16. Euler buckling load
In a Linear Buckling Analysis, it is assumed that the column is centrically loaded, the material is
homogeneous, isotropic and perfectly elastic and that the deflections are small. A maximum maxi
compressive stress is not taken into account. This way, a buckling load can be found by finding an
equilibrium between the compressive force multiplied with an eccentricity (which is only present if
buckling occurs) and the flexural stiffness of the column
column where the axial compressive force is called
the disturbing force and the force caused by the flexural stiffness of the column is called the internal
resisting moment. The disturbing force and the internal resisting moment must be in equilibrium for
thee column to be stable. Using a differential equation to describe its behavior, the first order or linear
buckling load can bee found by equation below,
below which is found by solving
ving the differential equation.
. .
.
where:
Ncr is the critical load or buckling load of the column
EI is the flexural stiffness of the column
L is the system length
K is effective length factor
And critical stress is defined by:
where:
σcr is the critical stress, the stress whereby
w the column buckles
λ is the slenderness of the column
A is the area of the section
where:
i is the radius of gyration, determined by

Thin
With the above equations a graph can be plotted with the critical stress on the vertical axis and the
slenderness on the horizontal axis (Figure 17).
Figure 17. Euler buckling curve
It can be seen that the critical stress increases when the slenderness decreases. The stress even exceeds
the yielding stress of steel. Of course, this is impossible, but as outlined before, it is assumed the
material is perfectly elastic and a maximum stress
st is not taken into account.
The failure of a column under compressive

compressive stresses could be either local or global buckling. In the
case of global buckling the deformation can be in bending, torsion or in combination depending on the
type of cross-section.
section. Local buckling occurs in the form of one or several small buckles. An important
i
characteristic of local buckling is the post-buckling
post buckling range, as the load can be increased beyond the
load at which an initially flat cross-section
cross section buckles. The process of local buckling and global buckling
is different depending on the type of structural
str element (Figure 18).
Figure 18.
18 Stability of a member under axial compression
It can be seen in Figure 18 that compared to other kinds

kinds of structures, thin plates are characterised by
a stable post-critical behaviour.. Standards such as EN 1993 part 1-55 consider the susceptibility of
structural element to buckling by the classification of the cross-sections.
cross sections. Where Classes 1 and 2 is
used for elements where buckling less possible to occur. Class 3 and 4 is used when the slenderness
slen is
higher and buckling occurs before the yield stress is reached. Cross-sections
Cross sections formed from thin plates
usually fall in class 4 and are very sensitive to imperfections under axial compressive loads.

Thin
2.3.2 Buckling behaviour of cold-formed

cold structural members
The use of thinner sections and high strength steels leads to design problems for structural engineers
which may not normally be encountered in routine structural steel design. Structural instability
instabi of
sections is most likely to occur as a result of the thickness of the
he sections, leading to reduced buckling
loads (and stresses), and the use of higher strength steel typically makes the buckling stress and yield
stress of the thin-walled
walled sections approximately equal.
Unlike heavy hot-rolled

rolled steel sections,
sec cold-formed thin-walled
walled sections tend to buckle locally at
stress levels lower than the yield
yiel strength of the material,, characterised by the relatively short
wavelength buckling of individual plate element.
element. However, these members do not fail at these stress
levels and continue to carry further loads. This phenomenon is called post-bucklingbuckling behaviour, as
shown in Figure 18. In thin-walled
walled cold-formed
cold steel structures, elastic bucking and load deformation
response are closely related. There are different
differ nt buckling modes as illustrated in Figure 19: Local
[16], Distortional [16], Euler (Flexural),
(Flexural) Torsional–Flexural of column or Lateral–Torsional
Lateral of beam
[17].
(a) Locally buckled plain channel
(b) Distortional buckling mode (c) Flexural-torsional

torsional buckling mode
Figure 19. Different buckling modes
It is well known that cold-formed

formed thin-walled
thin members under compression load exhibit local and
global post buckling behavior [1818]. Overall column strength is greatly dependent on the interaction
effect of local and overall column buckling.
buckl The curves shown in Figure 20 have been obtained
obta using
elastic Finite Strip (FS) software, analysing and describing
describing the change of buckling strength versus
buckle half-wavelength.
It is recognised that cold formed steel compression

compres members
mbers may locally buckle before the applied
load reaches the overall collapse load of the column. The influence of local buckling on column
strength depends on the following factors: the slenderness
slenderness ratio of the column, the shape of the cross
section,
n, influence of cold work, the type of steel used and its mechanical properties,
properties the type of
governing overall column buckling, effect of imperfection, effect of welding,
welding, interaction between
plane components, effect of perforations if any, effect of residual stress etc. For short columns, local
buckling occurs first leading to large deflections.
deflections. Local buckling involves deformation
de of the
component plate elements of the section,
se with the plate junctions remaining straight and occurs as

Thin
plate buckling of individual

vidual slender elements in a cross-section
section as shown in Figure 19(a),identified
19 by
first minimum buckling stress at Point A (Fig. 20).
Distortional buckling is characterised by rotation of the flange at the flange/web junction in members
with edge stiffened elements and occurs only for open cross-sections
cross sections where the compressed flanges
buckle inward
ard or outward along the length of a member as shown in Figure 19(b).(b). This is the form of
a ”semi–local” buckling mode which can generally arise at somewhat longerr wavelengths,
wavelengths generally
intermediate between that of local buckling and global buckling.
buckling. The distortional buckling mode has
been found to govern the strength of sections with intermediately stiffened elements [16], [17]. The
elastically determined post–buckling
buckling behaviour is generally stable, but in–plane
plane deformations can
encourage substantial membrane stresses and rapidly produce yield and failure in the stiffeners [19],
[20].
Figure 20.Buckling
Buckling strength versus half-wavelength
half th for a lipped channel in
compression (Hancock, 2001)
For long columns under compression load, Euler buckling

buckling is more likely to occur before any other
instability failure and occurs by bending about the web[21].
web . When a slender member is subjected to
an axial force, failure in the member takes place due to torsion or bending rather than direct
compression of the material. Further, if the compression member is not supported in the lateral
direction the member ber will fail due to lateral buckling of the compression flange [22].This
phenomenon occurs when the flexural load increases to a critical limit. In wide–flang
wide flange sections, if the
compression flange buckles laterally, the cross section
section will also twist in torsion, resulting in a failure
mode which represents lateral–torsional
torsional buckling. The lateral torsional buckling strength of a section
could be increased by using a bracing system. In general, bracing systemss could be divided into two
categories namely, lateral bracing and torsional bracing. Cold formed steel structures
structures are made of thin
steel sheets and have often mono symmetric or un–symmetric
un symmetric cross sections. HenceHen their lateral–
torsional buckling behaviour is more complicated than that of doubly symmetric hot–rolled
hot beams.
Past research on lateral–torsional
torsional buckling of steel beams has mainly concentrated on hot–rolled
hot steel
beams [23].
The dashed line in Figure 20, qualitatively shows the pattern

pattern of all modes or coupled mode. The effect
of interaction between sectional
ional and global buckling modes results in increasing sensitivity to
imperfections, leading to the erosion of the theoretical buckling strength.

Thin
In general, the
he buckling mode is influenced by cross–section
cross geometry, end conditions, loading
load and
material. Also, introducing openings and imperfections to structures
ctures has a significant effect on the
critical buckling load and the buckling mode [24], [25].
Figure 21.. Behaviour of (a) slender thick-walled

thick and (b) thin-walled
walled compression column
Figure 21 shows the difference in behaviour of a thick-walled slender column in compression and a
thin-walled column. It shows the behaviour of a thick-walled bar that it begins to depart from the
elastic curve at point B when the first fibre reaches the yield stress, Nel, and it reaches
reach its maximum
(ultimate) load capacity, Nu, at point C; after which the load drops gradually
gradually and the curve approaches
the theoretical rigid-plastic
plastic curve asymptotically.
asymptotically The elastic theory is able to define the deflections
and stresses up to the point of first yield and the load at which first yield occurs. The position of the
rigid-plastic curve determines the absolute limit of the load carrying capacity,
capacity, above which the
structure cannot support the load and remain in a state of equilibrium.
In case of a thin-walled bar, sectional

ctional buckling, e.g. local or distortional buckling, may occur prior to
the initiation of plastification. Sectional buckling is characterised by the stable post-critical
post path and
the bar does not fail as a result of this, but significantly
signific lose stiffness. Yielding starts at the corners of
cross section prior to failure
lure of the bar, when sectional buckling mode changes into a local plastic
mechanism quasi-simultaneously
simultaneously with the occurrence of global buckling.
2.3.3 Coupled Instabilities
In many practical cases, as it is for thin walled members, the loss of stability is often complicated by
the occurrence of two or more eigenmodes at coincident or nearly coincident critical loads. This leads
to an increase in sensitivity to geometric imperfection
imperfection with reduction (erosion) of the expected
buckling strength.
The natural effect of geometrical imperfections is the erosion of the cusp formed by the interaction of
the pre-critical and post-critical
critical paths. In the case of coupled instabilities (termed herein used to
express the simultaneous occurrence of different buckling modes) further reduction is produced.

Thin
• Nature of the Phenomenon
The occurrence of simultaneous buckling arises in practical situations when the attempt is done to
optimize the structurere by choosing a specific geometry that allows the buckling modes to have the
same critical load: this is the so-called
called “simultaneous buckling design principle”.
The matter is to analyse which are the effects of one buckling mode on the other; the interaction
interact
between the two modes generates a change in the buckling shape causing severe imperfection
sensitivity and modifying the apparent optimization assumed with this approach.
The phenomenon can be illustrated by a simple model as shown in Figure 22.
Figure 22.. Model used by Croll and Walker (1972) to illustrate interaction of critical loads
By introducing the potential energy of the illustrated model and deriving the equilibrium equations
four solutions are obtained, the next figures
figu depict their expression:
(a) (b)
Figure 23.. a) Stability paths for coupling between relatively close critical loads;
b) Stability paths for coupling between coincident critical
criti loads
It may be observed that the coupling of two stable symmetric post-critical

post critical curves (S2 and S3 in Figure
23)) generates a fourth path (S4) which inverted shape suggests a marked increase in sensitivity of this
model to initial imperfections.
ring only the lowest post-critical

Considering post critical path (S2) would have carried to have not detected the
presence of these unstable paths, thus leading to an incorrect interpretation of the member behavior.

Thin
• Interaction Types in Bar Members
The characteristic of main interest

interest of coupled instabilities is the evaluation of the associated
maximum load reduction; this fact is generated by a column increase of sensitivity to geometric
imperfection. As for simple buckling, there are coupled instabilities for which the effects of
imperfections are not very important, but structures exist with very important reduction in the
buckling loads.
If the two modes that couple have wavelengths of about the same order the post-
post-critical path shows a
weak or moderate interaction: this is the case of coupling between flexural and flexural-torsional
flexural
buckling of mono-symmetrical
symmetrical compressed members.
If high difference exists between the two buckling modes wavelengths, as for an overall buckling that
t
couples with a local one, a big erosion might occur.
oc
For thin-walled
walled members, a typical situation is a preliminary coupling between multiple local
buckling modes with m-1, 1, m, m+1 half-wavelength
half wavelength which give rise to an unstable post-critical
post path
characterized by the localisation of the buckling patterns (experimental tests showed that the
periodical local buckling mode develops at failure a local mechanism). The second interaction occurs
between a stable post-critical
critical overall buckling mode (i.e. flexural or torsional-flexural)
torsional with the
unstable localized mode, this leads to a very unstable post-critical
post behavior.
Figure 24.. Flexural and Flexural-torsional

Flexural coupled instabilities
Figure 25. Overall and localized coupled instabilities

Thin
Figure 26. Multiple buckling mode interaction
Figure 24 – 26 summarize the main results achieved in the field.
Dubina [26] suggested a reduction from the theoretical buckling load less than 30% in the coupling
between flexural and flexural-torsional
torsional buckling, more than 50% in the coupling
coupling between an overall
mode with localized one.
Thus it might be concluded that coupling instabilities

instabilities may generate high sensitivity to local and global
geometric imperfections, this phenomenon will occur with a more and more significant relevance
when approaching the simultaneous buckling mode.
For the studied cross section, doubly symmetric cross

cross section, for which centroid and shear center
coincide, these buckling modes are independent. In this case the column buckles at the lowest of the
critical loads associated with these modes.
In the case of asymmetric cross sections, the modes are coupled and the lowest bucking load is lower
than each one associated to the independent modes described above: in this case the column buckles
in a flexural-torsional mode.
In the case cross section is mono-symmetric,

mono symmetric, in this case the flexural buckling mode about
abou one axis is
independent from the others modes because the shift between shear center and centroid with respect to
this axis is zero. The shift of another axis on the other hand different from zero, this causes a flexural-
flexural
torsional mode (deflection due to translation about non-zero zero shift axis and rotation about the shear
center).
2.3.4 Open section, free and prevented warping
The theory of bending and torsion of thin-walled

thin walled elastic column is applied in this part to solve the
behaviour of a biaxially loaded column.
col The governing equation for column buckling, referring to
Murray are achieved considering the equilibrium of a generic section which undergoes generic three
dof small displacement (u, v,, and φ).

The basic assumptions taken for this analysis are:
a. The material elasticity assurances the invariability of the sectional property

b. Thin-walled open cross section
c. Shear deformation is ignored
d. Initially straight member. The effects of initial lateral deflections and twist on the behavior of
the beam-column can be neglected if they compared with the eccentricities applied
e. Small deformation. The lateral deflection u, v, and twisting θ are considered small. In this
mode, it is possible to use linear differential equations
f. No lateral load, which is applied only in the beam-column ends.
The rectangular coordinate system (x, y, z) are defined in accordance with the principal axes of the
cross-section having the origin at the mass center G, but the displacements (u, v, θ) are taken to shear
center S of coordinates (xo, yo).
The equilibrium equations are as follows:
+ − − ! 0
#$ + $ + # −% ! 0
&! + −' ( ! + ) # −% ! − − * 0
where:
+
+ + % + , + -# −- + -& .&
#
#
and βx, βy, βω are the Wagner’s coefficients, that represent the symmetry degree of the section respect
the relative axis. They are equal to:
1
-# 0 % + 1 −2
# 3
1
- 0 % + %1 − 2% 0
3
1
-& 0 % + 41
& 3
This is a system of three linear non-homogenous differential equation with the unknown su, v and θ.
An exact solution is possible and has been written by Culver, who found the unknown variables
resolving separately the homogenous particular problem. The twelve integration constants can be
determined giving the followed twelve boundary conditions for both the extremes:
0 ;$ 0 ; 7 0 geometric boundary conditions
#/ ;$ / # beam simple supported
7 0 ;7 0 for warping free or prevented

In the exact approach, the evaluation of the integration constant it is not always simple and fast. There
is an approximate way for find the same solution, and that studied by Pekoz and Celebi using the
Galerkin method. They supposed the rotation and deflection functions with the following form:
− : −:
#
9 9
2
$ ;9 $9 − : −:
2 #
7 <9 79
Where u0, v0, θ0 are function of z, and they respect the boundary conditions imposed, therefore simple
supported beam-column.
Applying the Galerkin method to the previous differential equations, and using those displacements
functions, a system of three linear equations with the unknowns A0, B0, C0 is possible to be solved.
The solution of that system is the following matrix system:
G − # L
0 − 9 E E
9 E E
= 0 #− − # − %9 > A B;9 C −
− − <9 F K
# − %9 ?9 @−
#
E − − %9 E
9 >
E H
9 #
−
#
IE
D # J
where:
MN % ?ON P QRN ST NUO1 O?U S1 % − O% V

#
#
MN % ?ON P QRN ST NUO1 O?U S1 − O% V
1
W + ' ( X YU?V USON P QRN ST NUO1
&
@
?9
And the constants K1 and K2 are the integration coefficients functions of the boundary conditions
used, which for this case take the following value 0.8834 and 4.1223 respectively in accordance with
the Pekoz and Celebi solution.
In the case of mono-symmetry cross-section, which is subject to an axial force P in the plan of
symmetry (ey = 0) it is possible to write an independent equation of in-plane bending about x-axis and
two homogenous simultaneous equations of flexural torsional buckling.
− 9 − #
− − − %9 ; 0
+ , Z 9[ \ ]
# # >
− # − %9 > ?9 @− <9 0

From which three critical loads are obtained:
# − @ ±` # − @ +4 # @ # − %9 /?9 >
2[1 − − %9 /?9 ]
>,
# >
2.3.5 Closed section, free warping
The theory explained in the previous paragraph can be used in case of closed section only in free
warping, where the displacement along the profile are free.
The studied cross section is doubly-symmetrical, in this case the flexural buckling mode about x and
y-axis is independent from other modes because the shift xo and yo between shear center and centroid
is zero. Further, this cross-section is not susceptible to torsion due to coincidence of shear center and
centroid.
2.3.6 Buckling of Thin Plates according to Eurocodes
The resistance of a thin plate under compressive forces is calculated in two steps; first calculating the
critical load (elastic or buckling analysis) and second the determination of the ultimate load level
(post-buckling analysis), when the behaviour is not linear any more due to plasticity or loss of
stability.
EN-1993 part 1-5[10]defined the critical compressive stress for buckling of a plate element as:
. Y
Re . .
12. (1 − f ) P
where; kσ is the plate buckling coefficient that depends on the support conditions of the plate.
When an element is formed from a folded plate the width of the element b can be defined in different
ways. EN 1993 part 1-5 does not take the bent parts of the cross-section into consideration and the use
of EN 1993 part 1-6 is recommended by the standard. This should be done by calculating a notional
flat width bp of the plane elements, which is measured from the midpoints of the adjacent corner
elements (Figure 27). Hence the critical stress becomes:
. Y
= Re . .
12. (1 − f ) Pg
Where; kσ is the buckling coefficient (4 for internal compression elements and 0.43 for outstand
compression elements).

Thin
Figure 27. Notional flat width bp
The minimum critical load is obtained from the outer plate both in using the elastic plate theory and in
calculations with the notional flat width bp.
• The
he ultimate load for plates in compression
In a linear elastic analysis of compression, the stress distribution is assumed to remain uniform until
the plate buckles. In post-buckling
buckling however, stresses are re-distributed
re distributed in the plate. Equilibrium paths,
the influence of imperfections and load eccentricities may be analysed by means of equations of
equilibrium or energy methods. In order to avoid complex analysis in design, the criteria of effective
width is used, where a simply supported plate is considered and axially loaded in two sides, the stress
distribution in a buckled cross-section
section of the plate is simplified into two stress blocks with constant
stress over the total width. EN 1993 part 1-51 5 determined the effective width by using reduction factor
ρ, this
is factor is obtained as follows:
Prss h. P
If the flat width b is replaced by the notional flat width bp from EN 1993 part 1-3,
1 equation above
becomes:
Prss h. Pg
iii
i
where;
h 1 M g j 0.673
673;
1 0.055. 3 o
h M iii
g t 0.673 P Y h j 1.0
iii
g
for doubly supported elements compression, where:
o
ep
eq
is the ratio of the extreme fibre stresses;
1 0.188
h P Y h j 1.0
iii
g
for outstand compression element.

The reduction factor ρ depends on the plate slenderness iii

g which is determinate in EN 1993 part 1-3
xy
M
as:
iii w
28.4 z {Re
g
vw
If we compare the notional flat width bp and the effective width beff we get two expressions for the
cross section area as:
~
| = } Pg . Y
v•>
rss = } Prss . Y
v•>
In the ultimate limit state EN 1993-1-3 differs from part 1-5 since it allows a consideration of an
average yield strength fya (due to different levels of cold working) if there is no reduction due to local
and/or distortional buckling, this average yield strength fya is illustrated in equation 15 and it is found
in EN1993 part 1-3 chapter 6.1.3(1) [9]. Thus the characteristic resistance for uniform compressed
plate should be determined as follows:
,€• = rss . M x if rss < |
†
,€• = | ƒM x + M„−M x . 4. …1 − † ‰Š ≤ |. M „ if rss = |
‡ˆ
Due to local buckling the centroid of the effective cross-section does not coincide with the centroid of
the gross cross-section described in EN1993 part 1-5 chapter 4.3(3) [10]. Therefore, an additional
bending moment, considering the shift of the centroidal axis, should be considered. The characteristic
slenderness iii
buckling resistance for flexural buckling of a column made of thin plate is based on the relative
g:
̅ = `3.sŒ
•
for class cross-section 1, 2, 3
Ž•
’
` ‡““
̅ = `3.sŒ ≡ ‘Ž• ’
• v †q
for class cross-sections 4
Ž•
̅ = `”
s Œ
Using the relative slenderness ̅ and an imperfection factor α of 0.49 (in accordance with buckling
curve c in EN 1993 part 1-1) the reduction factor • for the buckling resistance can be calculated as:
1
•=
– + )– − ̅ *
9.—
– = 0.5. (1 + ˜ ̅ − 0.2 + ̅ )

This leads to a characteristic buckling column resistance of:
x,€™ •. . M for class cross-section 1, 2, 3
x,€™ = •. rss . M for class cross-section 4
2.3.7 Buckling of cold-formed sections according to Eurocodes
o Geometrical Proportions. EC3-1-3 -5.2
The part considers the slenderness of the single plate, which composes the cross-section. The
maximum ratio b/t have to be lower of a particular value, which depend on the relative position in the
cross-section of the elements tested and the presence of stiffeners as shown in table 5.1 of Eurocode 3
part 1-3.
The maximum width-to-thickness ratios for the section studied are satisfied in all cases, with all the
thickness.
o Local and Distortional Buckling. EC3-1-3 -5.5
In this part is considered the local and distortional buckling, that influence is accounted through the
definition of effective cross section properties. This means that the non-uniform stress distribution
that arise in the post local (or distortional) buckling range, is replaced by an uniform distribution of
the maximum stress acting on a reduced portion of the element, having same thickness but reduced
width.
The researches of the effective reaction section applied at an entire global section is complicated, and
for that reason the assumption of the Eurocode and other codes, to consider the member as an
assembly of individual plates simply supporting each other at boundaries. In the studied cross-section,
every side is considered simply supported, included the flange and its stiffener, which dimension is
not so important to influence the effective area of the flange.
The effective width of a compression element should be based on the comprehensive stress σcom,Ed in
the element when the cross-section resistance is reached. Since this value is not initially known, an
iterative procedure needs to be performed until the initial stress used to calculate the effective area
coincides with the stress corresponding to the cross section resistance.
Local buckling can occur either simultaneously with distortional buckling, or at higher or lower loads.
The two modes can interact too but the post–critical coupled mode is stable and, consequently, the
local and distortional buckling strengths can be assessed independently of whether they occur
simultaneously. In design codes, these two problems are treated separately.
Plane Element with Edge or Intermediate Stiffener. EC3-1-3 -5.5.3
For the studied case the element are classified as doubly supported compression element and outstand
compression element.
The effective width beff of a compression element is defined as:
Prss = hP

Thin
The reduction factor ρ is based on the largest compressive stress σcom,Ed acting on the element when
the cross section resistance is reached. The calculation for taking into account
ount local buckling is done
in accordance to EC3-1-5,5, as described in section 3.3.6.
Distortional buckling of compression members is governed by the rotational stiffness at the
web/flange junction; deeper webs are more flexible and thus provide less rotational stiffness to the
web/flange juncture. EN1993-11-3 does not provide explicit cit provisions for distortional buckling.
However, a calculation procedure
cedure can be obtained from the interpretation of the rules given in the
code for plane elements with edge or intermediate stiffeners in compression.
The procedure of calculation in EN1993-1-3
EN1993 is performed by assuming that the stiffener will behave
as a member with continuous partial restraint subject to compression.
compression The partial restraint is
represented by spring stiffness which values depend on the boundary conditions of the plate and the
flexural stiffness of the adjacent elements of the cross section. The value of spring stiffness can be
determined byy applying a unit load per unit length at the location of the stiffener.
stiffener The value of
rotational spring stiffness Cθ represents the bending stiffness of the web part of the cross-section.
Therefore, the spring stiffness K per unit length can be determined from:
/š
where δ is the deflection of the stiffener due to the unit load u.
Figure 28.. Procedure for calculating the spring stiffness according to EN1993-1-3
EN1993
The calculation of elastic critical buckling stress is performed based on Timoshenko & Gere (1961)
using assumption of a strut on an elastic foundation, as follows:
. .
.
›
›. ›.
where:
As and Is are the effective cross sectional
sect area and second moment of area of the stiffener according to
t
EN1993-1-3, as illustrated in Figure
Fig 29 for an edge stiffener;
λ = L / m is the half-wavelength;
wavelength; m is the number of half-wavelengths.
Figure 29. Effective cross sectional area of stiffener

The slenderness or half-wavelength of buckling can be derived from equation above by applying:
œ . ›
For an infinitely long strut, the critical buckling stress can be derived, after substitution, as:
2. { . . ›
=
›
The above equation of critical buckling stress is given in EN1993-1-3.
2.3.7.1 Ultimate Limit States. EC3-1-3 -6

The design value of the internal force and moment at each cross section shall not exceed the design
value of the corresponding resistance, which will be determined for combined bending moment and
axial compression.
• Resistance of cross section. EC3-1-3 -6.1

a. Axial Compression. EC3-1-3 -6.1.3
The design resistance for uniform compression fyb / γM0 is determined as the resistance of the effective
area Aeff:
,€• = rss M x /žŸ9
b. Bending Moment. EC3-1-3 -6.1.4

The design moment resistance for bending around one principal axis Mc,Rd is determined as follows:
. ,€• = rss M x /žŸ9
where Weff is the effective resistance of the cross section and a linear distribution of stress across the
cross-section is taken.
c. Combined Compression and Bending. EC3-1-3 -6.1.9

Cross-section subject to a combined axial force and bending moment should satisfy the following
criteria:
”• . ,”• + Δ. ,”•
+ ≤1
,€• . ,€•, ¢
where:
Δ. ,”• = ”• • is the additional moment for the eccentricity between the gross area and the
effective one
. ,€•, ¢ is the pure moment resistance

2.3.7.2 Buckling Resistance. EC3-1-3 -6.2

a. Axial Compression. EC3-1-3 -6.2.2
The buckling resistance of a member subject to compression can be taken as:
• ,€• žŸ9
x,€•
žŸ>
where:
•
>
¦ p §.¨
£¤ £p ¥†
is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode,
– = 0.5[1 + ˜ ̅ − 0.2 + ̅ ]
̅ is the relative slenderness for the relevant buckling mode

α is an imperfection factor, depending on the relevant buckling mode
The appropriate imperfection factor for the relevant buckling mode should be obtained from Table 6.2
in EC3.
In part EC3-6.2.2.2 (3) is prescribed that for closed built-up section (as could be intended the studied
one) curve b should be used which corresponding α is equal to 0.34.
a.1. Flexural Buckling. EC3-1-3 -6.2.2.2

The relative slenderness ̅ for flexural buckling about a given axis is determined as:
{ rss /
̅=
>
with:
= = 93,9z
>
M
Lcr is buckling length in the plane considered

i is radius of gyration based on the properties of the gross section
a.2. Torsional and Torsional-Flexural Buckling. EC3-1-3 -6.2.2.3

In this part is stated that all section should be verified for torsional or flexural torsional buckling if
these modes result to be the critical ones.
The relative slenderness ̅ for the torsional-flexural buckling is determined as:
rss /
̅=
Where Ncr is the axial critical load for the pertinent instability, therefore the minimum critical load
between:
Ncr,T elastic critical force for torsional buckling
Ncr,TF elastic critical force for flexural-torsional buckling

For simply supported beam

1
' w+
&
,(
9 N
where
G shear modulus
Jt torsion constant of gross-section
+ + +:
Jω warping constant of gross-section
@
iz radius of gyration of the gross-section about z-z axis

iy radius of gyration of the gross-section about y-y axis
y o, z o coordinate of shear center respect to gross-section center
l buckling length
For mono-symmetric cross section
[1 + − W1 − X +4« ¬ ]
, ,( ,( ,(
,(ª
2- , , ,
with
- 1−« ¬
b. Bending Moment. EC3-1-3 -6.2.3
b.1. Lateral torsional buckling
The design buckling resistance of a member susceptible to lateral torsional buckling should be taken
•‘( . ,€• žŸ9

as:
.x,€•
žŸ>
1
where:
•‘( ≤1
–‘( + [–‘( − 0.75iiii
‘( ]
– = 0.5[1 + ˜‘( …iiii iiii

‘( − 0.4‰ + 0.75 ‘( ]
iiii {. ,€•
‘( =
.
αLT = 0.34 is an imperfection factor

Mcr is the elastic critical moment of the gross-section for lateral-torsional buckling, which is taken
in literature
The Mcr for mono-symmetric cross-section can be written as
@- - -
. ' + +[ ] +
& @ @
N &
N 2 N 2 N
where
βy is the Wagner coefficient around the y-y axis, which represents the symmetry degree of the
section.
c. Bending and Compression. EC3-1-3 -6.2.4

For member with mono-symmetrical cross section the resistance criteria used is:
9.® 9.®
.”•
W X
”•
+W X ≤1
x,€• .x,€•
2.3.8 Buckling of shell sections according to Eurocodes
Thin cylindrical shells structures under compressive stresses are known to be sensitive to
imperfections which reduce their resistance considerably. Therefore, local buckling is one of the most
important criteria in the calculations of the maximum strength of such shells. The bending stress
which varies trough the shell thickness, does not affect the stability of the shell, except in as much as
they may cause yield of the material of the shell and in this case local reduction in the stiffness of the
shell. In general there are two ways in which an elastic structure may become unstable. These are
commonly termed as snap-through and bifurcation point illustrated in Figure 18.
a. Elastic buckling
For thin circular shells the elastic theory of the shell is given by Timoshenko where the elastic critical
stress in the case for symmetrical buckling of the thin shell is defined as:
1 .Y .Y
= . ≅ 0.605 .
vw
{3. (1 − f ? ?
where, r is the radius of the shell and t is the wall thickness.
When analysing buckling in a shell, it is important to consider in addition to axial compression, the
strain of the middle surface in the circumferential direction. Thus the strain energy of the shell is
increased. This increase in energy must be equal to the work done by the compressive load as the
cylinder shortens owing to buckling. The buckling mode can be given as:
±. . %
° = ° .V S… ‰ . sin (S. µ)
N

The critical load of a structure in the elastic range can be obtained from eigenvalue analysis if the
geometry of the structure up to buckling remains essentially unchanged as in a compressed column.
However, in many practically important buckling problems for shells e.g. for axis symmetrically
loaded shells of revolution the critical load and the buckling mode is significantly affected by pre-
buckling geometric nonlinearity. Linear eigen value analysis is required to find the elastic bifurcation
point on the pre-buckling path and thus predict the critical load and mode.
b. Ultimate resistance of thin shell

Shell buckling is the principal design consideration for cylindrical shells with constant wall thickness
under any stress loading conditions because the wall thickness of the shell may vary. Therefore,
buckling stress becomes an important concept for the assessments of cylindrical shells. Buckling
stress design approach follows the principle established in Eurocode. The calculation process of the
ultimate strength for cylindrical shells begins with the determination of two important variables:
1. The plastic limit load
The ratio of these two loads is used to determine the shell relative slenderness ̅ of the shell:
2. The linear elastic critical load
M
̅
vw
Where fy is the yield strength of the shell and vw is the critical stress value of the shell. The
combination of the relative slenderness with different reduction factors governs the assessment of the
relative plastic and elastic behaviour of the shell.
The buckling stress calculation is done based on the evaluation of the ultimate load according to the
EN 1993 part 1-6 and EN 1993 part 3-2 which are defined by the variation of the reduction factors of:
1. Geometry
2. Load case
3. Fabrication quality
The critical stress in EN 1993 part 1-6 is determined by the variation of Donnell’s theory with the
introduction of the coefficient factor Cx. The factor Cx refers to the length of the shell defined from
long to short cylinders where:
<# 1 for medium-length cylinders if 1.7 ≤ 4 ≤ 0.5 . w

>.®d .9¶
<# = 1.36 − + p 4 ≤ 1.7
& &
for short cylinders if
<# = <#,• for long cylinders if 4 > 0.5 . w
0.2 Y
<#,• = 1.36 − +1 − 2. 4. ,
<#,x ?
Cx,N represents the reduction in the elastic critical stress. And Cx,b is a parameter depending on the
boundary conditions. The idea to classify shells into strength groups according to the quality of
construction was introduced into the Eurocode. The characteristic determinate factor used to calculate
the sensitivity of the elastic buckling strength of the shell to both imperfections and geometry non-
linearity is calculated as follow:

1 ?
Δ° .` .Y
· Y
Where Q is the meridional compression fabrication quality parameter with three fabrication tolerance
quality class. The meridional buckling parameter factor αx is determined as a function of the non-
dimensional imperfection amplitude Δw/t since this measure raised in all imperfection sensitivity
analyses for the geometric and quality fabrication of the shells.
0.62
˜# =
¸¹ >.ºº
1 + 1.91 . … ‰
w
The buckling reduction factor χ is determined as a function of the relative slenderness of the shell ̅#
from:
•=1 if ̅# ≤ ̅9
¦ ¼
† ¥¦
if ̅9 < ̅# < ̅9
†
• = 1 − -. «¦†» ¥ ¦†§ ¬
y §
- = 0.6 and ½ = 1.0
if ̅g ≤ ̅#
¾
• = «¦ »p ¬
†»
where:
β is the plastic range factor
η is the interaction exponent
̅9 is the meridional squash limit for short and medium cylinder is defined as:
̅9 = 0.2 + 0.1 « #,Ÿ

¬
#
And ̅g is the plastic relative slenderness, defined as:
̅ g = ` ¾»
>¥¿
The plastic relative slenderness
Hence, the characteristic buckling strength is:
À = • .M •
This procedure of shell assessment will be used in Chapter 4 when calculating the ultimate resistance
of members. Diagram below shows the workflow of the of the shell assessment with the above
mentioned methods.

Thin
.
Figure 30.. Workflow of resistance analysis of cylindrical shell based on EN 1993 part 1-6
2.4 Connection in Lattice(Truss) Structures
So far the focus of all the research carried out on bolted connections in steel structures has been on the
strength of such joints. However it has long been realized that, as well as strength, connection
stiffness is important to a sound design and successful use of steel in any building. Traditionally,
connections have been designed as either pinned (implying no moment transfer) or rigid (implying
complete rotational continuity) in steel frames - alternatively referred to as simple and continuous
construction. Lattice structure is no exception to this tradition. At present, the truss design is
constantly being carried out with ideally hinged joints in the finite element models.
models
The notions of pinned and rigid joints

joints are simply extreme cases of true joint behavior. Most pinned
connections possess some rotational stiffness, while rigid connections often display some flexibility.
In real systems, itt would therefore seem more appropriate to regard all steel frames under
un the more
general heading of semi-rigid
rigid construction, treating the simple and continuous construction as the
extremes (Figure 30). The so-called
so semi-rigid
rigid joint covers the whole range of intermediate
characteristics between the two idealized ones mentioned
menti above. In beam analysis, the performance of
such connections can be represented by set of springs with respective degree of freedoms and stiffness
values. The structural design code [27] provides guidelines for engineers, however they do not widely

Thin
apply probably due to difficulties of assessment and/or insufficient guidelines of such connections.
Finite element analysis is then needed to know the actual stiffness of the connection.
This thesis is made to describe a finite element investigation on rotational stiffness of semi-closed
semi
polygonal steel section members in lattice structures.. In practice, the stiffness of the connection
obtained from moment-rotation
rotation relation would represent the real rigidity of that connection,
connection which
affects the behavior of structure. The stiffness of connection will affects distribution of both internal
forces and moments as well as deformations of the structure. Moreover, it affects the buckling length
factor which
hich in turn determines the first order elastic buckling load of a member. The first order
buckling load, material properties and a buckling curve are then used to determine an elastic-plastic
elastic
buckling load. In many cases, the significance of connection stiffness
stiffness to the response of entire
structure is not negligible [28].. This shows the importance of determination of the real stiffness of
connections rather than assuming it as fully hinge (pinned) or fixed (rigid) ones.
Figure 31.Typical
Typical moment-rotation
moment rotation characteristics of a bolted connection
Figure 32 shows the bending moment distributions for a pinned, rigid and semi-
semi rigid beam. It can be
seen that with pinned connections the mid-span
mid span moment is critical, whereas with rigid joints the end-
end
moments are critical. If semi-rigid
rigid joints are used, these two moments
moments may be more nearly balanced,
and the optimum solution is when the mid-span
mid moment and the end-moments
moments are equal. Hence,
consideration of the moment/rotation characteristics of bolted connections can be of vital importance
to economic design.
Figure 32.. Effect of end restraint on end moments

moment and deflectionss for elastic response

Thin
The thesis consists of two parts; a literature study and a report about the analytical and numerical
investigation. The first part is made to gain insight into the moment-rotation
moment rotation characteristics of
members in the lattice girder, with emphasis on hollow structural
structural members in lattice structures, and to
make clear what has already been done and what is known. The second part describes the performed
numerical study, where the methodology, used parameters and conclusions are discussed with
emphasis on connections ns with semi-closed
semi closed polygonal sections. This novel type of section is a new
alternative in steel lattice girder structures so that not many researches have been performed,
especially related to its connection in which this thesis tries to explore.
2.4.1 Rotation Behaviour

Moment-Rotation
The non-linear moment-rotation

rotation (M-φ)
(M behavior of a semi-rigid
rigid joint can be idealized as a series of
stepwise linear relationships of gradient R1, R2, ..., Rn, as shown in Figure 33.. If at a general loading
increment j, the angle of rotation
tation of the semi-rigid
semi joint changes from φj-1, to φj caused by change in
rotational moment from Mj-1 to Mj; then the incremental moment-rotationrotation of the joint may be defined
š. ÁÂ . 1µ
as:
where,
ÁÂ .Â − .Â¥> / µÂ µÂ¥>
Figure 33.
33 Moment-rotation behaviour of a semi-rigid joint
The hinge can be replaced with a rotational spring to model the semi-rigid
semi rigid nature of the joint. To
consider the appropriate stiffness of the spring a quantity called fixity factor is introduced. The fixity
factor is defined as ratio of angles seen Figure 34.
Figure 34. Definition of fixity factor
It can be written as equation

uation (Monforton and Wu, 1963)

Thin
Ÿ
µ ™¤
ÃÄ
1
˜ Å
µ> Ÿ
1
d”
™ ™‘
or if fixity factor
ctor is known, the respective rotational
rotationa stiffness can be solved, thus
3 ˜
R
1 ˜
Fixity factor can get values α ∈ [0,1] where 0 means ideally hinged and 1 means ideally rigid
connection. Eurocode 1993-1-8[[27],, on the other hand, gives values for the limits of ideally rigid or
hinged joints. A joint can treated ideally rigid if the stiffness satisfies
25
RÇ
or by using fixity factor
25
˜Ç 0.893
28
Also, if stiffness satisfies
1
Rj U? ˜j 0.143
2 7
the joint can be treated ideally hinged.
2.4.2 Rotational stiffness based on Eurocode 3-1-8

3
EN 1993-1-8 [27] distinguishes between three simplified joint models: A simple model in which the
joint is assumed to be nominally pinned, thus not transmitting bending moments; a continuous joint
model in which the joint behaviour is considered not to have any effect on the analysis; and a semi- semi
continuous model in which the behaviour of the joint has to be taken into account in the global
analysis. Three different kinds of global analyses are considered. In an elastic global analysis a joint is
classified according to its rotational stiffness, whereas in a rigid-plastic
rigid plastic analysis it is categorised based
on its strength. An elastic-plastic
plastic global analysis requires both strength and stiffness for classification.
A short summary is depicted in Table 3.
Table 3.. Different joint models according to EN 1993-1-8 [27]

Thin
Joints which are classified according to their design moment resistance are divided into three classes –
nominally pinned, partial-strength
strength and full-strength.
full strength. Nominally pinned joints are defined as joints
with a design moment resistance Mj,Rd smaller than 0.25 times the design moment resistance of a full-
full
strength joint. In order to classify a full-strength
full joint a comparison of its design moment resistance
Mj,Rd is made with respect to the design plastic bending moment resistance Mpl,Rd of the adjacent
members (beam or column). All joints which do not meet the criteria for nominally pinned or full- full
strength joints are considered
ed to be partial-strength.
partial
If a joint is classified by its stiffness, it should be categorized into nominally pinned, rigid and semi-
semi
rigid joints. Nominally pinned joints shall transmit internal forces without developing significant
moments, whereas rigid joints are assumed to have sufficient rotational stiffness as to fully transfer
the moment acting on the connection. All joints which do not meet the criteria for nominally pinned
or rigid joints are considered to be semi-rigid.
semi
When the connection is classified

sified as semi-rigid,
semi rigid, the flexibility must be determined. The flexibility is
classified as an initial stiffness (SSj,ini) and a stiffness (Sj). If the moment in the joint is smaller than 2/3
of the maximum moment capacity of the joint (M ( j,Ed < 2/3 Mj,Rd), the initial stiffness Sj,ini of the joint
can be used. If larger moments can occur (not greater than the maximum moment capacity of the
joint), the stiffness Sj must be used. As a simplification, Sj,ini / η may be used for any value of the
moment in the joint (not greater than the maximum) where η is the stiffness modification factor,
which is 2 for girder-column
column connections and 3 for all other connections if the connection is bolted
end-plates (Figure 35).
Figure 35.
35 Rigidity in elastic calculation (Eurocode 3:1-8) [27]
The determination of the stiffness is not discussed for bolted connections of lattice systems. For these
connections, only the capacity (strength) of the connections is considered, with assumption of pinned
joints.
2.5 Stiffness of Lip Connection
The structure
ure with bolted joints to be analyzed is discretized with a number of elements and then
assembled at nodes. The elements of different type and shape with complex loads and boundary
surface S with the traction vector È̅ prescribed on a part of the surface SF. The finite element
conditions can be used simultaneously using FEM. Consider an element of volume volume V bounded by a
formulation is to begin with a variational principle related to total potential energy as follows:

Thin
0 ÉÌ z1Í − 0 ÊÌ È̅ 1Ð 0,
ÎÏ
where σ, ɛ and u are stress, strain and displacement vector, respectively. The first order
or variation of
the functional equation above can be written as
š 0 ÉÌ šz1Í 0 šÊÌ È̅ 1Ð 0
ÎÏ
Using constitutive equation É ÑÒand strain–displacement relation Ó ÔÊ,, the above equation is
derived is derived as
šÊË H0 ÔË ÑÔ1Í I Ê šÊÌ 0 ÕÈ̅ 1Ð 0

ÎÏ
where N is matrix of shape functions. Equation above is the basic equation for the finite element
discretization and can be converted to algebraic equations as follows:
follow
ÖÊ ×
where K is the element stiffness matrix, f is the vector of surface loads. This equation
uation system can be
solved for unknown displacement vector u using commercial FEM software.
In this section definition of stiffness matrix of a structure is given.. This concept will be used and
developed in the next chapter for calculating stiffness of bolted connection along the lip of polygonal
plates. Consider a simple example structure, as follows.
In general, the global stiffness matrix for this structure can

ca be written:
R>> R> R>d

Ö ØR > R R dÙ
Rd> Rd Rdd
The finite element force-displacement

displacement relations:
R>> R> R>d 1> Ü>

ØR > R R d Ù Ú1 Û ÚÜ Û
Rd> Rd Rdd 1d Üd
The first equation of the force equilibrium at node 1 is
R>> 1> R> 1 R>d 1d Ü>

Thin
By applying displacement at node 1 while nodes 2 and 3 are held fixed, the force k21 and k31 can be
obtained. Similarly, it allows knowing the other entries of the global stiffness matrix.
In general:
ÝÞß Force at node ′ié due to ÊëìÈ ñìòóôõö÷ø÷ëÈ at node ′j′ keeping õôô Èý÷ þÈý÷ ëþñ÷ò ×ì ÷ñ
This is an alternate route to generating the global stiffness matrix.
Taking into account the rotational degree of freedom, the above equation can be extended into:
R>> R> R>d R>º R>— R>ð Ü>

ï
>
G L G L
îR > R R R R R E E EÜ E
E E
d º — ð
î E E EÜ E
îRd> Rd Rdd Rdº Rd— Rdð d d
î
îRº> Rº Rºd Rºº Rº— Rºð F ?> K F.> K
îR—> E ?E E E
R— R—d R—º R—— R—ð E. E
î E E E E
íRð> Rð Rðd Rðº Rð— Rðð D ?d J D.d J
In the FEM modeling, each bolt connection on the lips provide translational (spring) stiffness in 2
DOF, i.e. x- and y-direction
direction and rotational stiffness in 1 DOF, i.e. z-direction.
direction. Detail method and
calculation of connection stiffness is given in Chapter 5.
2.6 Imperfections
In practice, a geometrically and materially perfect structure is non-existent.

existent. It is therefore essential to
consider and include a proper imperfection into the numerical model. Due to the fact that the non-
linear response of thin-walled
walled structures are generally sensitive to imperfection, and consequently
affects the overall strength of this kind of member, investigation was carried out with refer to the
European standard in EN 1993 part 1-11 and EN 1993 part 1-5.
Imperfections of cold-formed
formed steel members may include bowing, warping and twisting, also local
deviations and bar deflections.. As for the analysis in this study, global geometrical imperfection
becomes the main issue. The magnitude of imperfection should consider the shape of the buckling
mode, which can be obtained from elastic buckling analysis of the compressed member. Another
imperfection, i.e. material imperfection which occurs in the member corners by cold-forming
cold is
residual stress, as already mentioned in previous section. It will be complicated to model residual
stresses in an accurate way in FE analysis.
analysis The appropriate magnitude should be taken from
experimental data. Therefore, material
material imperfection in the form of residual stress is often excluded
from the analysis. As an alternative, the stress-strain behaviour of the material can be modified to
approximate the effect of the residual stresses. In this thesis this effect was taken
take into account by
using real properties of the material from coupon test experimental data.

Thin
2.7 Post-Buckling and Non-Linear

Linear FE Analysis
Thin-walled
walled structures, in general, are slender structural elements rather sensitive for an influence of
geometrical imperfections and eccentricity of applied load. In order to study the influence of these
parameters on the behavior of the compressed member it is necessary to perform non-linear non FE
analysis.
Moreover, non-linear
linear analysis is considered when non-linearity of the material, such as plasticity,
plasticity and
of the geometry of the profile, is present, or post-buckling
post g behavior is of interest.
interest This is the main
objective of this section. This was possible by a step-by-step
step step loading process, which simulates a more
realistic behavior of the structure, which is programmed in ABAQUS/Standard. Incremental
procedure based on RIKSIKS algorithm is used to solve system of non-linear
non linear equations.
In linear elastic stress analysis, equilibrium is based on the original undeformed configuration; while
for linear elastic instability problem, deformed shape is considered, although the deformation
deform before
instability is usually very small compared to structure’s original geometry. For this type of problems,
theory of linear elastic buckling analysis serves well in predicting the onsite
onsite of the buckling or critical
loads. In other situations, whenn a structure undergoes finite deformation due to complex load or
material plasticity before instability actually occurs, system parameters change along with the
deformation, thus, makes the eigenvalue analysis inaccurate to perform. If the he system accumulated
accumula
deformation is not negligible prior to instability due to the loads that ultimately causes its instability,
the critical load becomes system configuration or deformation dependent.
dependent In this case, a nonlinear
analysis becomes necessary in order to simulate
simulate this type of highly unstable behavior due to lack of
the inclusion of large deviation
ion from the original geometry.
In nonlinear static analysis for buckling, post-buckling,

post buckling, or collapse behavior, the tangent stiffness
from the load-displacement
displacement response curve could change signs when system changes its stability
status as shown in Figure 36.. The classical Newton’s method will not work in this situation because
the corrections for approaching equilibrium solutions during iterations may become difficult to
determine
etermine when the tangent stiffness is close to null.
null
Figure 36. A typical unstable response curve

ccording to Eurocode
During the unstable phase of the response, static equilibrium states can be found by using the
“modified Riks method” [29]. This method can be used for cases where the loading is proportional,
where the load magnitudes are governed by a single scalar parameter. The basic Riks algorithm is
essentially Newton’s method with load magnitude as an additional unknown to solve simultaneously
for loads and displacements, thus, it can provide solutions even in cases of complex and unstable
response as that one shown in the graph of Figure 36.
As for material plasticity, realistic description of the steel behavior is obtained from the coupon tests.
Therefore, true stress-strain curve modified from the test results was used as an assumption for the
material behaviour.
w Àr 1+z
zw Àr NS 1 + z
zg zw −
w Àr
w Àr Àr

3 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURAL

MEMBERS
The application of cold-formed steel members for truss structure is relatively new in building
construction. The knowledge of structural behaviour of this steel member especially for the proposed
type of section is not widely acquired. Limitations due to little existing experience and research for
this type of structure has prompted tests and experiments to be performed in order either to get better
understanding of real behaviour of the structure or establish design approach. In this part an
extensive parametric study by numerical FEM analysis was proposed. By doing so, it is expected that
the structural characteristic and behaviour of semi-closed polygonal cross-section can be well-
understood and bring in useful recommendation for design purpose. Parametric studies were carried
out through automation using MATLAB and Python script. Scripting is a powerful tool for calculating
a large number of cross-sections in parametric studies that evade laborious task in conventional
method while keeping the functionality of FEM ABAQUS. A set of parameters, e.g., cross-section
geometries, material, slenderness, bolt spacing were determined in this study.
3.1 Introduction
In order to gain a deeper understanding and formulate hypotheses for the structural behavior of semi-
closed thin-walled steel columns with polygonal section, a comprehensive parametric study was
carried out by means of finite element modelling in ABAQUS.
It is vital to first develop a reliable FE model capable of producing realistic and accurate results,
particularly for elastic buckling and non-linear ultimate modes and loads. As the material and
geometric non-linear modelling of thin-walled structures is sensitive to modelling inputs and
assumptions[17], caution should be exercised when defining issues such as the type and size of the
element, the material, boundary conditions, imperfections, and solution controls, etc. The model
should also be validated before trusting it to generate further data for design purposes. This part
follows these principles and describes the essential stages in the development of FE models for
columns susceptible to local, distortional, or global buckling, and any possible interactions between
these basic buckling modes.
Subsequently, by way of a rigorous and systematic procedure, parametric studies were carried out to
produce more than one hundred numerical models. Simulations of the proposed columns subjected to
axial compressive load with elastic buckling and non-linear analysis, were performed. Data obtained
from the parametric studies mainly included the elastic buckling loads and ultimate strengths of the
FE models, as well as load-displacement relations.
The finite element modeling was an integrated process, performed in parallel with parametric study.
Both processes were created through automation using MATLAB and Python script. First, the profiles
geometrical database of the sections was generated by using MATLAB code. This database was then
exported to Python via pickle file. Then the automation was performed in Python environment that
will be fed to ABAQUS. The automation process in Python was carried out through back and forth
modeling process between ABAQUS/CAE and Python to build the final working models and
eventually used as an input file for ABAQUS. This input file of all models was then run
Finite Element Modelling of the Proposed Structural Members 49

simultaneously in batch mode of ABAQUS platform. Therefore, it can be said that the FE modeling
were carried out in fully automation method.
ABAQUS/standard v6.14was used as solvers for the FE simulations, while codes using MATLAB
R2015a and Python 2.7.3 were developed to perform the pre-processing (including generating input
files) and post-processing tasks. Most simulations were performed on the Cluster with parallel servers
provided by LTU’s computer lab. The large number of simulations included in the parametric studies
would have been impossible without these high performance computing facilities, although the
systematic procedure developed to conduct the parametric studies also enabled the successful
execution of the large number of analyses.
The proposed procedure will be explained in the following section.
3.2 Automation of Parametric Studies
An FE analysis generally requires three steps: (i) pre-processing to build up the FE model and
generate the input file, (ii) job-running by submitting the input file, and (iii) post-processing to extract
the results. This study attempted to maximise the level of automation involved in these steps in order
to increase the efficiency and capacity of the parametric studies. This automation was mainly
achieved using scripts written in the Python language integrated into ABAQUS.
As mentioned above, the job-running step was computationally intensive and was performed in
parallel-computing cluster and servers. However, the pre-processing and post-processing steps could
be particularly input/output (I/O) intensive yet computationally less intensive, so most operations in
these two steps were performed in the local computer.
The following flowchart in Figure 37 describes the general procedure used in this research to carry
out FE parametric studies for thin-walled steel columns. Efforts were made to increase the level of
automation while retaining the accuracy and reliability of the analysis at three key stages, i.e. pre-
processing, job running, and postprocessing.
3.2.1 Pre-processing and generation of FE input files
The pre-processing stage in a commercial FE program is normally carried out in a Graphical User
Interface (GUI) which requires a significant amount of computing time, which means that this
conventional approach is not feasible for a large number of simulations. For this reason an input file
generator coded in Python was used where the profiles of section coded in and imported from
MATLAB.
In order to generate an input file for a number of particular types of cross-section, the pre-processing
process included the following key steps:
(i) Cross-section profiling. A number of cross-sections needed to be modeled for each type
of polygonal shape and cross-sectional criteria. The profiles were selected to cover the
practical range of applicability and cross-section slenderness values. In the present
parametric studies, profiles of all types of cross-section were generated in MATLAB
code, bringing out profiles database. This profile database was then converted into a file
format i.e. pickle that is compatible for exporting to Python
50 Finite Element Modelling of the Proposed Structural Members

1. User – Input, Function

MATLAB script for section profile (pcoords.m)
X, Y coordinates of profile
Cross-sectional parameters, such as number of corner,
diameter, slenderness, bending radius to thickness ratio,
number of points along corner, lip length to diameter ratio,
gusset to sector thickness ratio, length
Elastic material property (fy)
2. User – Input, Function

MATLAB script for ranges of section profile (polygoner.m)
X, Y coordinates of profiles in predefined range
Cross-sectional parameters
Elastic material property (fy) 4. User – Function
Cross-section properties calculation (A, I) Mat2pkl.py
Method in Python to
and geometrical variables (λ, l), saved in metadata
create pickle file
Profiles and metadata file database creation
3. Out 5. Out
Profiles database Pickle database
Profiles database (profiles.mat) Profiles database (profiles.pkl)
Profiles metadata (meta.mat) Profiles metadata (meta.pkl)
6. User – Function
Automation of modelling with Python script
Loop for each model: buckling model
Parts creation, bolt spacing and perforation, material properties 7. User – Function
Generate model in
Abaqus CAE
Assembly of instances Identify Python
method in Abaqus
Step, type of analysis
Interaction: rigid body constraint for bolt connection, coupling Journal .jnl file
constraint for BC
Boundary conditions and loading conditions
Meshing
continuing…

Loop for each model: riks model
Plastic material properties
Step, type of analysis
Boundary conditions and loading conditions
Job creation, keywords definition 9. User – Function

Automation Python
script for post-
Script for history and field output processing
8. Out 10. Job running and

Input .inp file post-processing
Batch in cluster and local
generation
computer
Figure 37.General workflow for FE modeling and parametric studies
(ii) Prepare all parameters for the parametric studies. Set up all requested parameters and
initial data. The requested parameters included the cross-sectional characteristics, i.e.,
polygonal type, diameter, slenderness, bending radius to thickness ratio, number of points
along the bend, extension lip length to diameter ratio, thickness of the gusset plate to
thickness of sector ratio; material; member length, etc., while the initial data included the
cross-section geometrical information, non-dimensional slenderness and all other settings
for the input data. Initial data were created in MATLAB together with profile database.
This meta database was then converted into a file format i.e. pickle that is compatible for
exporting to Python
(iii) Importing profiles database and profiles meta database from MATLAB into Python via
pickle file Create automation in Python as input file for ABAQUS. As mentioned
previously, a parametric study input file is an inventory that includes the definitions of all
the models and jobs for both the elastic buckling and collapse analyses. The calculation of
bolt spacing was also performed for each column such that the spacing effect on
distortional buckling of the model will be investigated. After that, input file for all models
was ready for job running in the cluster. It is worth mentioning that on the script the
workflow and explanation, in the form of comments, was included for all relevant coding
paragraphs for human readable purpose.

3.2.2 Job running
The optimal way to run simulations depends largely on the resources available. The general
availability of CPU, memory, disk storage capacity, will influence the way the simulations were run.
Therefore, the job running task used high performance computing facilities provided by LTU. The
following points will introduce the general steps involved in the simulation process:
(i) Sub-divide the input file into groups: elastic buckling analyses and collapse analyses
(ii) Sub-divide the input files into different groups according to CPU number required for
each job. In this study, the size of the file closely related to the number of partition of
parts, the number of elements and hence the DOFs in the model. Number of partitioning
became the most significant factor for the file size. Each group served as the basic
submission batches that contained several hundred input files, depending on their sizes
(iii) Create batch files. Batch files for all computing facilities were generated simultaneously
(iv) Submit batch files. The number of batches that could be submitted concurrently depended
on the capacity of the specific facility with the CPUs, memory, hard disk and running
time allowed for each batch may also affecting. Commands were used for submission to a
facility operating on Linux.
3.2.3 Post-processing and generation of data
When simulations in each batch of submissions were completed the output result files were
downloaded back to the peripheral storage devices of a local PC. Once all the result files for all
analysis type of a particular cross-section were collected, the post-processing stage commenced. Its
main purpose in this study was to obtain the data set for parametric studies, such as first elastic
buckling load and mode, as well as the failure mode and ultimate strength for each simulation. The
following paragraph will describe the general post-processing steps of analyses:
(i) Generate a Windows batch file to copy all the result files into one directory
(ii) Extract results. The results for each buckling and collapse analysis were fetched from the
ABAQUS.odb files and saved in a text file by using Python script
(iii) Reading each result data to check whether the analysis successfully performed; the job
name of any analysis that did not complete was recorded in a text file
(iv) For those jobs not successfully done, find out the reason behind it. Modify the original
input file and generate new input file accordingly. Then, loop back the process to step
(iii).
Once the result data of all elastic buckling and collapse analyses, it becomes raw data for further
analysis. Therefore, these data was turned into final result sheet for columns made from a particular
cross-section, generated and classified for each intended parameter. The relevant results were then
used for parametric studies presented in Chapter 4.
The ABAQUS scripting is a Python-based application programming interface (API) to ABAQUS.

ABAQUS version 6 makes extensive use of Python, a powerful, widely used scripting language to
automate repetitive tasks. The diagram below shows the workflow of scripting for ABAQUS.

Figure 38. Abaqus Scripting workflow
3.3 Problem Statement
The studied members is chord segment of lattice tower with hexagonal base shape as the common
shape for lattice wind turbine tower, hence it forms 120˚ of angle between the horizontal beams. The
chord column has three shapes according to number of side or bend, namely 6-sided (hexagon), 9-
sided (nonagon), and 12-sided (dodecagon), as shown in Figure 41.
chord
diagonals
Figure 39.Base of the studied tower

The chord is a built-up member composed of folded plates and gusset plates. The close-up picture of
the member is shown in Figure 40. Assembly of the member is performed by bolting them along the
lips of the folded plate at a specified spacing. As for the connection between chord and diagonals,
gusset plates coming out from the core of the chord provide the joint.
bolt connection
packing plate
folded plate
(‘sector’)
gusset plate
Figure 40. Closed-up of the member
(a) 6-sided hexagon (b) 9-sided nonagon (c) 12-sided dodecagon

Figure 41. Type of polygonal cross-section for the studied chord
As can be seen in Figure 42, forces acting on diagonals may create bending moment at the connection
with the chord, and consequently utilizes rotational capacity of the joint. This aspect will be further
investigated in Chapter 4.
Figure 42.Illustration of chord-to-diagonals bolted connection

Thin
3.4 Development of FE models
3.4.1 Units
Table 4. Units used for FE analysis

Young’s
Length Force Stress Energy Density Gravity
Modulus
mm N MPa N-mm 7,83e-09 2,07e+05 9,806e+03
3.4.2 Geometry and Material Properties
3.4.2.1 Geometry
The proposed members are built-up

built polygonal cross-sections. Each polygonal section is composed of
three folded plates which forming 120˚
120˚ angle of gusset plate. This configuration is intended as a chord
member of lattice tower with hexagonal form of base, as shown in Figure 39.. The connection between
chord and diagonals are possibly made through the gusset plate extending on the two sides of the
cross-section.. The folded plates in assembly are separated by gusset plates at the connection segment;
by packing plates at the bolt connection
nection points along the length; and by gaps at the remaining regions.
region
The geometry of section profiles was generated through automation using MATLAB code. The
workflow of the software builtt by MATLAB will be described in the following sections.
section
o File name: pcoords.m

This code is basically the engine for generating x, y data of the profile. First of all, function script for
profile of one folded plate (henceforth called sector) was made, with input variables:variables number of
corner (n), diameter of cross-section
section (d), profile slenderness (slend),
), yield strength (fy), bending radius
to thickness ratio (rcoef),), number of points along the bend (nbend),
( lip length to diameter ratio
(l_ratio), gusset to sector thickness ratio (t_ratio).
The output variables are:

x_out, y_out is x, y coordinate of a profile according to the given input variables
t is thickness of profile according to cross-sectional ( 2.d/t)
sectional slenderness (ɛ
tg is thickness of gusset plate according to t_ratio (tg/t)) variable
l_lip is length of lip extension according to l_ratio (l_lip/d) variable
The above output variables are used to generate profile of sector plate, as can be seen in Figure 43-45
below.

Figure 43.Figure of profile generated by MATLAB

(n=6, d=500, slend=90, fy=355, rcoef=6, nbend=5)
Figure 44.(n=9, d=300, slend=90, fy=355, rcoef=6, nbend=5)
Figure 45. (n=12, d=700, slend=90, fy=355, rcoef=6, nbend=5)
The function script contains codes of geometrical calculation to generate [x,y] coordinates of the
profile based on the predefined geometrical parameters. The step-by-step explanation of the codes is
presented here.
>> Line 1-2
Function script, contains output variables and input variables of the function.
>> Line 3-36
The script contains recommended input argument. Descriptions of each input argument are also given.

Thin
>>Line 40-45
Characteristics of profile were defined here. Thickness of profile is calculated according to cross-
cross
sectional slenderness (slend) as a function of diameter and epsilon. The slenderness range was chosen
so as the cross section class to be in the limit between Class 3 and 4,
4, based on EC 3-1-1.
‚ 150
1
z Y
70 ‚
The thin-walled
walled profile usually made of plates which fall in Class 4 cross-section.
cross section. However, in order
to limit the complication of effective cross section in calculation, profile in between these cross-
cross
section classes is chosen. In the parametric study, only two values of profile slenderness were
analysed, i.e. 90 as the lower bound and 110 as the upper bound. Thickness calculation is rounded to
get integer value.
>>Line 46-142
The script contains calculations for the x,y coordinate to produce profile of a sector. The step can be
summarized, as follows:
① Calculate center of polygon (0,
( 0) ② calculate polygon’s corner (xi, yi) ③ calculate center of
bending arc (xc, yc) ④ calculate x, y coordinate of the arch’s points (xarc, yarc) ⑤ loop
⑥ calculate lip’s center of bending arc (x
( cs, ycs) ⑦ calculate x, y coordinate of the lip’s arch’s
points (xsarc, ysarc) ⑧ loop ⑨ calculate point of the lip (xstart, ystart) and (xfinish, yfinish)
Theta (θ) is the relative angle between lines, while phi (φ)
( ) is the absolute angle of points with respect
to x-axis; n is number of corners.
corners. From the phi angle the coordinate of polygon’s corners can be
calculated. Detail of geometry calculation can be seen in Figure 46-48.
4

Finite
ite Element Modelling and Parametric Studies of Semi-Closed Thin-Walled
Thin
Figure 46. Geometry calculation
Figure 47. Inset of geometry calculation
The center of bending arcs (xc, yc) then calculated with refer to the obtained x, y values, by using
Pythagorean theorem. This center point
poin become a reference for calculation of x, y coordinates along
the bent (xarc, yarc).
Loop function was used to generate these arc’s points as many as nbend input argument. Angle of the
midline (φm) was used as reference angle for calculating each arch’s point.

Thin
The calculation continued to the lip extension part,

part, with the same workflow to the main part.part Corner
of polygon (x1, y1) with refer to corner point at gusset plate location (x, ( y)) was first calculated
according to angle of midline (φφm). From this, the center of bend (xcs, ycs) can be calculated using the
angle of adjacent sector (v).
). After that, the points along bend (x( sarc, ysarc) were calculated based on
center of bending and angle of the vector with respect to x-axis.
Figure 48. Geometry calculation for extension lip

Finite
Thin
The bend center coordinate for end bend can be calculated in the similar way. Loop function was used
to generate these arc’s points as many as nbend input argument.
The next part of calculation is to define the x, y coordinate for the lip ends. These two points will be
the start and end point of profile coordinates, respectively. Pythagorean theorem as per Figure 48
4 was
used to calculate this point.
The last point of lip can be calculated accordingly. Finally, the last step is to collect all points that
were calculated into a sorted array. Coordinates
C along the flat plate (xstart,
xstart, xend; ystart, yend)
yend and
corners (xsarc, xarc; ysarc, yarc)) of the profile were generated, as follows.
The complete pcoords.m script for generation of x,y coordinate can be found in Annex A.1 line 1 –
132.

Thin
Figure 49.. Figure of assembled profiles generated by MATLAB

(n=9, d=300, slend=90,
slen fy=355, rcoef=6, nbend=5)
Figure 48 and 49 shows that thehe calculation takes into account the actual gap between profiles which
comes from half the thickness of sector profiles and gusset plate thickness. This arrangement has been
made to make sure that at there is neither overlap nor gap when all the parts are assembled. The
calculation also related to the thickness extrusion method used in ABAQUS, which in this case usesuse
middle plane extrusion.
Thickness of gusset
sset plate was locked to gusset-to-sector
gusset thickness ratio (t_ratio
t_ratio), while thickness of
sector was locked to cross-sectional
sectional slenderness (slend).
The above pcoords.m script was then further developed and used to create another script, script named
polygoner.m, in order to generate
nerate profile coordinates for ranges of parameter values. The script was
also intended to create metadata file, for the purpose of storing geometry variable database needed for
modelling automation in Python.
o File name: polygoner.m

This code is the core software for generating several profile data and variable database in range of
input parameters.
>> Line 1-2
Function
nction script was created with input variables: range of n, d, slend, and lambda;
lambda single value of fy,
rcoef, nbend, l_ratio,and t_ratio..
The output variables are:

profiles is a cell containing arrays of x, y coordinates of profiles
meta is a cell containing arrays of variable values, e.g., diameter (d),
( thickness (t),
gusset thickness (tg),
( yield strength (fy)) cross section properties (A,
( Iyy, Izz),
and length (len)
(

Finite
Thin
>> Line 3-26

The script contains recommended input argument of range. Descriptions of each input argument are
also given.
>> Line 28-33
Briefly,, the script will generate two databases: profiles and meta, which contain arrays with the same
dimension.
The range and single value of input arguments were determined as per Table 6. There is one new
variable in the function script, i.e. lambda. This variable is non-dimensional
dimensional slenderness, which
determines the critical buckling length of a member.
.M
̅ ;
N
9.—
.M .N
̅ W X
Variable lambda will be used to calculate length of the profiles. It will take the information stored in
meta database, e.g. cross-section
section properties.
>> Line 35-44
he process was done by running loop through the values within the given ranges. The for…end
The
command was used to make loop of profiles, with i, j, and k as range of numbers for n, d, and slend
parameter, respectively. Firstly, it
i calls pcoords function to get data for profile and then collect x, y
coordinates of profiles into profiles database.
>> Line 46-110

Secondly, calculation for profiles meta database was performed. Calculation of cross section
properties were made by using cutwp_prop2 function module which available in CUFSM software
package. In order to use this function, codes to create nodes and element arrays for the profiles as an
input to cutwp_prop2 function should be made. Process of constructing nodes and elements can be
seen in the complete script line 52 – 84.

Thin
The cross sectional properties (A,

A, Iyy, Izz, and Iyz)) are for the entire assembled cross-section.
cross As can
be seen in the script, the cross sectional properties are needed for slenderness (λ (λ) calculation, which
will be used for determining the length of member and lock it based on certain slenderness value
defined in Python automation. These variables (drange(j);
(drange(j); t; tg; fy; A; Iyy; Izz; Iyz)
Iyz were stored in
profiles meta database.
At the end of the script, a command was written to create .mat files for each database function. Later,
these files will be converted into pickle file using mat2pkl Python method, and used in Python
automation.
In this script, calculations for cross-section

cross class and the corresponding effective
ctive area were also
performed. This data are required for the analytical calculation based on Eurocodes. It can be found in
line 81 – 133.
The complete script for generation of several profiles and meta database in predefined range can be
found in Annex A.2 line 1 – 155..
Ranges of values for each parameter used in this parametric study are tabulated in the following table.
In order to complete the FE modelling and analyses optimally in the predefined time, the number of
input variables used in this parametric study were reduced, so that only some input variables of the
parameter were taken from the database.

Table 5. Ranges of parameter values
Number of Total
Parameter Description Function Value(s) model for number of
each profile models acc.
n number of corners [6, 9, 12] 6 3
d diameter of chord [300:200:900] 500, 700, 900 3
d/(ɛ2.t)
slend profile slenderness 90, 110 2
linspace(70,150,10)
fy yield strength 355 355 1
bending radius to
rcoef 6 6 1
thickness ratio 18
number of points
nbend 5 5 1
along the bend
lip length to
l_ratio 0.1 0.1 1
diameter ratio
gusset to sector
t_ratio 1.2 1.2 1
thickness ratio
. .
.
len length of chord i W X 0.65, 1.0, 1.25 3
b_ratio bolt density s/d 3.0, 4.0, 5.0 3 54

N Axial force - N 1 54
Axial force-bending 0.05M, 0.1M,
NM - 3 216
moment 0.15M
From Table 5 above it can be seen that there are one other parameter besides the ones defined in
MATLAB function script above. This parameter is bolt density (b_ratio). This parameter, together
with length parameter, are important in the buckling behavior of the member since they affect the
buckling half-wave length of the member which in turn becomes decisive parameters for the buckling
The length of chord is calculated by keeping the non-dimensional slenderness i to certain values,
and interaction buckling failure mode, as described in Chapter 2.
which are 0.65, 1.0, and 1.25. These values were chosen to make sure the member will not either be
too slender or too stocky. The calculation require cross-section properties: area of closed cross-
section, A, and moment of inertia, I and this was carried out in MATLAB script and stored in meta
file which then used in the Python script.
The bolt density as function of spacing-to-diameter ratio was fully calculated in Python, together with
the creation of bolt holes. The s/d ratio was determined to observe the influence of bolt density to
distortional and local buckling occurrences, which in this study was taken 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0. This part
will be further explained in the section of perforation modeling.
Five parameters which have varied values: n, d, slend, len, and b determine the naming of numerical
model. In order to make easy identification, it was decided to name the models with numbers, as
follows.

i - j - k - l - b i …number of corners (n)

j …diameter (d)
k …slenderness (slend)
l …length (len)
b …bolt spacing (b_ratio)
The variable number for naming and the corresponding value is shown in the table below.
i j k l b
var. ID 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 3 5 1 2 3 1 2 3
values 6 9 12 300 500 700 900 90 110 0.65 1.0 1.25 3 4 5
o Conversion from MATLAB to pickle file

Profiles database calculated in MATLAB were then exported to Python script, as the scripting
language used in ABAQUS. The automation then carried out in Python directly. The database file
exporting from MATLAB to Python was performed via pickle file.
The creation of pickle file was done through Mat2pkl.pymodule. It is essentially a small module for
python. The steps can be summarized below:
1. Save the database file as .mat files
2. Run a python 2.7.3 command prompt
3. Make sure that the .mat database is in the python working directory
4. Import the method mat2pkl from the mat2pkl file
5. Run the method for a given filename. The filename should be given without the extension
6. Example code:
from mat2pkl import mat2pkl
mat2pkl(“filename”)
Script of Mat2pkl.py can be written as follows:
# Python method converting a 3D cell array from a matlab file (.mat) to

anequivalent pickled object containing 3D nested lists.
# This script has to be executed by an generic Python of the same
versionas the one in Abaqus (i.e 2.7.3). Requires pickle and scipy
# The filename is given without the extension
# Module imports
import scipy.io as sio
import pickle
def mat2pkl(filename):
# Load the matlab file
database = sio.loadmat(filename+'.mat')

Finite
Thin
# Scipy imports the data of the .mat in a dictionary.

# Get the lists from inside the dictionary
ppp = database[filename]
# Export with pickle to a .pkl file

pickle.dump(ppp, open( filename+".pkl", "wb" ))
Each model represents a corner chord member of lattice tower and was created as a segment,
segment consist
of three connection parts, located at the ends of segment and at the middle, and chord in between the
connection parts. The configuration is shown in Figure 50.
Parts that compose one segment model
sector
gusset
Assembled segment model
Figure 50. Segment model

3.4.2.2 Material properties
The material property given by EC3 for cold-formed profile and used in the normal production is
S355, which properties are summarized in the following table:
• Elastic
Table 6. Steel property used
Type of steel Grade Fyb [N/mm2] Fu [N/mm2]
Non-alloy structural steel S 355 355 510
The nominal value for the elastic characteristic of steel was taken from modulus of elasticity E = 210
000 N/mm2, and poison’s ratio is 0.3.The following recommendations have to be respected:
o Fu/fyb = 1,10
o Elongation at failure = 15%
o ɛu = 15 ɛy
• Plastic
The plastic characteristic of steel was taken from relationship between yield stress and plastic strain
defined based on uniaxial coupon test data from Complab LTU. The testing machine measured total
strain and reaction value of each specimen from elastic range until failure. It is worth noting that the
true stress-strain data was used as input into ABAQUS as a series of data points.
The plasticity table is taking values without the elastic part. In essence, the plastic strain is obtained
by subtracting the elastic part from the total strain:
zw w = zr + zg
zg = zw w − zr = zw w −
coupon test 'optim355'

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45
Figure 51. Coupon test stress-strain curve of S355 steel specimen

Finite
Thin
Step of constructing plasticity table for the use in FEM can be summarized as follows.
1. Take specific stress at plastic zone from true stress-strain
stress curve
2. Take the corresponding total strain with excluding elasticity (use tangent of elastic portion, E,
to calculate elastic strain)
3. Add
dd a few points on the plastic part (e.g. in range 0% - 14%) while keeping the last two
points has a moderate inclination. This is due to the reason that ABAQUS will continue the
curve by extrapolating these two values. A steep increase of this part may cause over-strength
over
in the FEM analysis.
Table 7. Plastic material properties
# Yield stress Plastic strain # Yield stress Plastic strain # Yield stress Plastic strain
1 381.1 0 4 418.0 0.0228 7 539.1 0.0765
2 391.2 0.0053 5 444.2 0.0310 8 562.1 0.1009
3 404.8 0.0197 6 499.8 0.0503 9 584.6 0.1221
10 596.4 0.1394
3.4.3 Python automation

3.4.3.1 Introduction
The ABAQUS Scripting extends Python with several types of objects.. The hierarchy and the
relationship between these objects is called the ABAQUS Object model.
Figure 52. ABAQUS object model
The data encapsulated by an object are called the members of the object. The functions that
manipulate the data are called methods.
methods. A method that creates an object is called a constructor.
Ownership defines the access path to the objects. Any Python statement that accesses the Session,
Mdb, or Odb is called a command.
command
Commands are used to access objects by stepping through the hierarchy of objects in the object
model. All commands mirror the structure
structur of the object model. For example:

Thin
It can be interpreted that the cell with an index of 4 in the part named crankcase in the model named
block in the model database mdb is assigned to the variable cell4.
The first script need to be defined is importing Abaqus modules. Each module has functionality
attributed to it. Modules are imported using the import statement, the same as any other Python
module:
from caeModules import *
Table 8. Modules and their functionality
The script for this part can be seen in Annex A.4

A. line 1 – 15.
3.4.3.2 Part Module

As mentioned before, the modelling
model ing of section members were carried out through fully automation
process by using Python script. All parts were modeled using shell element, 3D deformable type with
extrusion feature. Instead of creating sketch of profile in CAE environment, the profiles
profile were
imported from database file in pickle format (.pkl) stored in working directory.
Workflow of the modeling process in Python for part module can be described as follows.
1. Import database pickle files required for profile definition (profiles

(profiles database and profiles
metadata)) which stored in working directory
2. Create the models in a loop. Create models instead of renaming to make more tidy and
straight code
3. Create different
ferent models for buckling and Riks
Riks analysis. First create the buckling models and
then copy it into the Riks
iks models. They will be identical in shape but they will differ in the
boundary conditions, the loads, the keywords etc. This way done so that they can have
individual Jobs for
or the buckling and the Riks
R analyses and have individual input files

Finite
Thin
4. Extrude the sector part based on geometry calculation in profiles metadata

data file
5. Create gusset part directly in Python based on geometry calculation in profiles metadata file
Each model consists of two parts, ‘sector’ and ‘gusset’ part. Sector part represents the folded plate and
was profiled in MATLAB script, which then imported in Python. Gusset part represents the gusset
plate at connection regions, protruding
pr from the center of assembly cross-section
section to the chord-
chord
diagonals connection.
o Sector
The script for modeling parts in loop, in accordance with the workflow mentioned above is written
below. Thicknesses of sector part are locked based on width-to-thickness ratio (slend
slend) parameter. The
calculation was performed in MATLAB script.
=
Ó .
non dimensional slenderness ( ̅ ) parameter. The

This ratio refers to the cross-section
section classification regulated in Table 5.2 of EC3-1
EC3 1-1[9].
Length of sector parts are locked based on non-dimensional
calculation was performed in Matlab script.
.
.
. W X
.
In Python, profiles will be extruded based on this calculation with total length equal to the length of
one segment, composed of two chords and three gusset plates.
plate
. ! " +#. $%
One peculiarity in Python is that the indexing starts from 0 and not from 1 as it is usually,
usual so a list of
10 items numerates [0, 1, 2, 3, ...,
... 8, 9].

Thin
with,
i refers to input variable number of corners
j refers to input variable diameter
k refers to input variable cross-section
section slenderness
l refers to input variable length
Figure 53. Created sector part (n=6, 9, 12)
The detail script for creating sector part can be seen in Annex A.4
A. line 51 – 90.
o Gusset
The gusset plate has to be adjusted according
accord to the profile’s diameter. Unlike the sector part, profile
of gusset part was created directly in Python
Pyt due to fixed shape of the gusset for all sections. The
variable need to be calculated is radial length of gusset from the center point [0.0,
[0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
0.0 to the tip
of lips. This calculation is a bit tricky since the radius of assembly section,, apart from the lips, uses
the bended corner as the end point. This makes the calculated radius become slightly less than the
actual radius. A modified code was made to consider this thing.
Figure 54. Created gusset part

Finite
Thin
Thicknesses
cknesses of gusset plate is locked based on gusset plate-to-sector
plate sector thickness ratio (t_ratio),
( set at
value of 1.2.
The script sequence for gusset part inside the looping function is written below.
Length of gusset plate is set equal to the diameter of assembly section, lg = d.. The profile of gusset
was then extruded based on the above parameter.
parameter
The detail script for creating gusset part can be seen in Annex A.4 line 200 – 253..
o Perforation
In part module, calculation of bolts
bolt position was also performed. Bolts, located both at connection
part and along chord region, were modelled
model by holes with diameter equal to washer diameter. This
was made to take into account the effect of contact interaction between the member plate and a bolt
washer. Creating holes were chosen instead of creating circle partition since the area inside the circle
is of no interest in this study and also this method will obviate complicated mesh of circle region.
Nonetheless, partitions still need to be made
made near the hole to apply structured mesh.
The connections provided by bolts will be modeled by tie constraining the perimeter of the holes. This
will be further explained in the section of interaction module.
Workflow of the modeling process in Python for

for perforation of lips section can be described as
follows.
1. Import length calculation from database pickle file

&
=
2. Calculate the gusset extrusion length,
+ '+
=(. . , &. , &.
& &
; (∈
3. Calculate the total extrusion length,
4. Calculate the bolt spacing (s) as α ratio of the diameter,
5. Calculate the number of bolts (n) and the remainder distance to the edge (so)
In Python use: “(n,so) = divmod (l,s)”
(l,s)
=
6. Create a list of z coordinates for the bolts;
¤
& & +
=
o First space:
o All the following space Þ Þ¥& +
7. Create the holes
o Holes are created using hole extrusion tool, require edges
o The .getClosest method could be used to find the edges of the lips
8. Make longitudinal partitioning based on the calculated z-distance
z distance (± distance
dist from the hole
center).
The longitudinal partitioning is needed to make structured mesh apart of the circle region.
This partitioning can be done by:
o Creating datum planes as offsets from principal plane XY
o Partitioning face (select all faces) based on the datum planes

Thin
M16 bolts, with washer diameter dw= 30mm, were used in all models. The choice of bolt size was
made considering that the bolts will only act as a tie of the plates, without significant forces work on
it.
Calculation of z-distances
distances along z-axis
axis is needed to get the exact position of bolts. This was done by
calculating the bolt space along the clear span between joints and the remaining distance distribute
evenly at both ends. Bolt space on connection region was made denser than the clear span s to provide
sufficient stiffness of the connection between chord and another member.
Figure 55. Scheme for bolt spacing
Script for calculation of bolt position is written below.
The coding for perforation adopts the tool for making holes extrusion available in ABAQUS. This
tool uses edges to define position of holes. Two edges were needed, both are on the lip region. In
order to select the edge, the .getClosest
.getClose method can be used. Format of method:
.getClosest(coordinates=((x,y,z,))
sest(coordinates=((x,y,z,))
This method will find the edge close to the selected point which taken from profile database. After
that, by using the calculated distance from each edge, hole extrusion will be created. Distance1 was

Finite
Thin
measured from edge1, equal to z-distance

distance while distance2 was measure from edge2, equal to
lipwidth/2.
distance2
Edge2
Edge1
distance1
Figure 56.
56 Method for perforation using edges in ABAQUS
The width of the lip as a function of lip-to-diameter

lip diameter ratio was made to take into account sufficient
clearance for the bolt, which in this study uses M16 bolt. The part of script for hole extrusion is shown
below.
The detail script for creating perforation,

perforation, including bolt distance calculation and hole extrusion, can
be seen in Annex A.4 line 92 – 157.
157

Thin
(a) Perforated
forated ‘sector’ part (b) Perforated ‘gusset’ part
Figure 57.
57 Modelling of perforation on part (Model 1-1-1-1)
3.4.3.3 Partition
Because of the perforation with circular shape there is issue with meshing. Therefore, the part will be
partitioned into several parts. It is also advantageous for applying different mesh density at connection
regions. Partition will be done in part level since dependent part instance type was chosen. The
partition process can be presented in following script and figures.
- Sector
Partitions were made at the vicinity of the holes as a strip with the help of series of datum planes. This
method
hod will allow the application of structured mesh in the region outside the holes, while keeping
free mesh near the hole circle.
The position of datum planes was calculated by utilizing the bolts position points, taking distance half
lip width toward both sides from center of hole.
Figure 58. Datum planes for partitioning on sector part

Finite
Thin
The partitioning process adopting .PartitionFaceByDatumPlane method available in ABAQUS. It

will partition the selected face, which is all face in this case.
Figure 59. Partitioned sector part
- Gusset
Partitioning of gusset was performed in the similar way with the partitioning of sector. However, for
gusset .PartitionFaceByShortestPath method was adopted instead of ByDatumPlanes
ByDatumP since the
partition needed for gusset are along the longitudinal direction.
direction Format of the method:
.PartitionFaceByShortestPath(faces=
PartitionFaceByShortestPath(faces=, point1=, point2=)
This method uses shortest path between two points as the cut line. First, datum points were set at the
end sides of each fin of gusset plate at a distance of lip-width from the gusset tip.. Coordinate of datum
point was taken from profiles meta database. Selection of faces used .getClosest method to find the
face from the coordinate of datum point.
After creating datum points at each fin of gusset plate, partition can be defined at the path connected
those datum points. The .getClosest
getClosest method was used to find nd the created datum points in partitioning
process.

Thin
Figure 60.. Datum points definition and partition of gusset part
The detail script for creating partition on sector part can be seen in Annex A.4 line 173 – 195, while
for gusset part on line 299 – 342..
3.4.3.4 Property Module

3.4.3.4.1 Material Properties
The created part then will be assigned in the property module with material properties.
properties For batch of
model intended for buckling analysis, the elastic material properties are
are used. Modulus of elasticity, E
= 210x103 MPa and poisson ratio, v=0.3 was set in the script.
For batch of model intended for static Riks analysis, the plastic material properties are added to the
material assignment. This was done to understand the behaviour of the model in non-linear
non range
when undergoing plastic stress. Ultimate resistance, load–displacement relationship,
relationship and post-yielding
characteristic of the model will be observed.
observed The value of this property was taken from stress-strain
stress
relationship in Table 7.
3.4.3.5 Section Module

As mentioned before, shell element will be assigned for all parts of the model. Thickness of the shell,
shell
current_t, is set based on the calculation of profile thickness stored in profiles meta database, as
function of diameter-to-thickness
thickness ratio (slend).
(
For gusset plate, similar section definition code was assigned. Only thickness
hickness of the shell is different,
current_tg, which was set as function of gusset thickness-to-sector
sector thickness ratio (t_ratio).
(

Finite
Thin
Section assignment was applied with middle surface as the offset type. For selection of part to be
assigned, set of all faces was used.
Figure 61. Section assigned to sector and gusset
3.4.3.6 Assembly Module

The modelled part was brought into the assembly module
mo as a dependent part instance. It is the default
type of part instance in ABAQUS/CAE. A dependent instance is only a pointer to the original part. In
effect, a dependent instance shares the geometry and the mesh of the original
original part. As a result, it is
possible to mesh the original part, but not on instances assembly.. When the original part is modified,
ABAQUS/CAE /CAE applies the same modification to all dependent instances of the part. Most
modifications are not allowed
ed on a dependent part instance.. However, operations that do not modify
the mesh and geometry of a dependent part instance are still allowed. Therefore, modification for
mesh and geometry has to bee done within the part and mesh module, respectively.
The advantages of dependent part instances are that they consume fewer memory resources and the
parts need to be meshed only once and all the other dependent instances in the assembly module will
be meshed accordingly. In addition, ABAQUS/CAE /CAE instances a dependent part instance in the input
file by writing a single set of nodal coordinates and element connectivity to define the part along with
a transform to define each part instance. Since the core of this parametric study is the script that will
be run simultaneously on cluster systems and the most heavy duty part is the meshing so s that to mesh
one part on each model rather than three
t individual identical parts is preferred.

Thin
In order to have the assembly of one segment model,, three instances of sector part and three instances
of gusset part should be created. Sector instances were positioned through adopting radial pattern
method available in ABAQUS. It allows the created instances going on according to the global
coordinate system and positioned dependently to each other. The created instances were set refer to
axis of rotation by 120˚.. A datum axis was created at z-axis for this purpose.
Figure 62. Sector instances
After gusset instances were created, they were going to be placed at connection region, at the far end
and at the middle of segment model. Gusset instances were positioned through translation method
with defined vector coordinate (0.0, 0.0, z). Z-point
point coordinate was taken from profiles
profi metadata file.
Figure 63.Gusset instances translation

Finite
Thin
The final geometry of assembled model is shown in Figure 64 and 65 below.
Figure 64. Extruded view of cross-section
Figure 65. Final geometry of the assembly

Thin
3.4.3.7 Interaction Module

In the interaction module, there are several options for constraints and connections. Constraints
defined in the interaction
nteraction module will model constraints on the analysis degrees of freedom;
freedom partially
or fully eliminate degrees of freedom of a group of nodes and couple their motion to the motion of a
master node (or nodes).
In this modelling two constraint types were used, coupling constraint and
an rigid body constraint.
3.4.3.7.1 Coupling Constraint

Coupling interactions provide a constraint between a reference node and the nodes on a surface (the
coupling nodes). It will limit the motion of a group of nodes to the rigid body motion defined by a
single node (reference node).
In the model, this type of constraint was applied for applying loads and boundary conditions to a
model and model the end conditions,
conditions as well. Kinematic coupling constraint which constraining all six
degree of freedoms (u1, u2, u3, ur1, ur2, ur3) was used in the modeling.
Coupled elements:
- Reference point for BC and load application
- End chord including gusset
The reference point (RP) end node as master node was coupled with the front edge of the end chord as
slave nodes, as shown in Figure 66.
6
Figure 66. Kinematic coupling constraints
First the reference points (RPs) were created. These reference points will also be used for boundary
conditions (BCs) and loading conditions. RPs were made at the two two ends and at the middle of the
column.

Finite
Thin
In this stage, it is important to create sets of geometry since the interaction will involve numbers of
nodes and edges. Identification of set will ease the workflow of coding.
Sets then made for each master and slave node, the ‘RP-end1 set’ and ‘RP-end22 set’ for the reference
point, and ‘end1-face’
face’ and ‘end2-face’
‘end2 for the end edges. The creation of coupling constraint used
.findAt method to select the reference point (RP) as master node, and .getByBoundingBox method to
select the faces of slave nodes. The arguments to findAt are an arbitrary point on an edge, face, or cell
or the X-, Y-, and Z-coordinates
coordinates of a vertex. findAt returns an object that contains the id of the vertex
or the id of the edge, face, or cell that includes the arbitrary point The .getByBoundingBoxmethod
.getByBoundingBox is
capable of selecting objects that lie entirely within the selection volume.
volume Six points need to be defined
for the box. Format of the method:
.findAt(x, y, z)
.getByBoundingBox(xmin, ymin, zmin, xmax, ymax, zmax)
The second end coupling at another end (End 2) and the third coupling at the middle connection
(Middle) were made in the same way as above. A distinction for middle connection is that the mid-RP
mid
master nodes coupled with the three fins’ intersection edge as the slave nodes (Figure 66).
6
3.4.3.7.2 Tie Constraint

Tie constraint ties two separate surfaces together so that there is no relative motion between them.
Hence, the two tied surfaces expected to behave as rigid body. This type of constraint allows fuse
together two regions even though the meshes created on the surfaces of the regions may be dissimilar.
dissimilar
This type of constraint was tried to tie the bolt holes along the sector plates and gusset plates.
Modelling of bolt connection using
using tie constraint was performed in consideration that the rigidity of
bolts are much higher compared to the connected plates, so that by constraining the perimeter of holes
as rigid body will represent the bolt connections on the model.
Tied element:
- Holes perimeter on sector and gusset plates
The master nodes are nodes along the holes perimeter and the slave nodes are the nodes along the
holes perimeter at the opposite side.

Thin
Gusset plate
Nodes in generated node set

CONSTRAINT_NODES
Figure 67. Tie constraint of holes perimeter
The codes for tie constraint were made by first creating the sets of node region for each constraint
pair. Sets of node were stored to later facilitate nodes selection using .findAt method.
Figure 68. Result of static analysis at tie constraint region
As it can be noticed in Figure 688, the tie constraint physically displaces the nodes of the slave region
to meet the master nodes, which
hich is unrealistic.
The type of constraint intended in this study is the one that only couples the node DOFs, without
changing the geometry. The attempt to constraint the connection holes then will be done with rigid
body type of constraint instead of tie.
tie For this type of constraint, reference points, RPs, must be
created for each bolt and then all corresponding surfaces by coupled as a rigid body to the RP.
3.4.3.7.3 Rigid Body Constraint

A rigid body constraint allows constrain the motion of regions of the assembly
assembly to the motion of a
reference point. The relative positions of the regions that are part of the rigid body remain constant
throughout the analysis.
Codes for rigid body constraint principally made in the same way with the tie constraint previously
described,, only sets of reference points need to be created to act as master nodes. Sets of node were
stored as variables, to facilitate nodes selection using .findAt method.
First, position of each bolt was defined for sector (‘sh’) and gusset (‘gh’) using profiles database and
function of bolt position in gusset plate, respectively.

Finite
Thin
These sets of point then multiplied in order to obtain the points on the other instances. Rotation matrix
(Rmat) method was used to calculate the points for sector plate.
Figure 69. Rigid body constraint assignment at ‘bolt-1’
After that, reference points and set of reference point were created by using .findAt method. In the
following section will be described the codes for rigid body constraint as End1 connection. The
remaining region, i.e., Middle connection, Span1, Span2, and End2 connection were made with the
same flow.
The RPs and tie region were made in loop of number of bolts along z-direction
direction based on bolt function
previously defined. findAt method used to select ‘sh’ and ‘gh’ points and stored them in set. This
function will create constraint between the set of reference points and the corresponding set
s of tie
regions, with number of constraints as many as the hole pairs.

Thin
The detail script of interaction can be seen in Annex A.4

A. line 504 – 717. Result for the application of
rigid body constraint is shown in Figure 70.
Figure 70.. Result of static analysis at rigid body constraint region
It can be seen in the figure,, the rigid body constraint works well,
well as expected in rigid connection. The
geometry at hole circle does not change and tied accordingly. Therefore,
Therefore, this type of constraint was
used for modeling the bolt connection.
3.4.3.8 Load Module

Boundary conditions have a profound impact on the structural response
response and therefore they must be
modelled as closely as possible to the physical situation in practical
practica thin-walled
ed steel systems. Despite
this, their numerical models should not be overly complicated so as to impair modelling efficiency
and computational stability.
The boundary conditions adopted in the model correspond to those applies for truss structure.
structur Pinned
support at the two ends of the column was used. As mentioned above, the boundary condition will be

Finite
Thin
put on the end reference point (RP) and connected to the member by kinematic coupling constraint.
This way, the coupling nodes, i.e., the chord ends
end are constrained to the rigid body motion of a single
node (RP). Therefore, all the constrained
constrained degrees of freedom transmitted at this node.
node It will allow the
end chord to rotate globally instead of each edge move locally if BC along edges is applied.
BCend-1 at one end reference node has u1, u2, u3 restrained translational DOFs and ur3 restrained
rotational DOFs, while BC end-22 at the other end has u3 free to accommodate the application of load.
A BC was added for the middle joint. This joint is stabilised
stabilised by the converging diagonals so the global
buckling length
ngth is the length of one span. In this middle joint BC, All DOFs of the nodes on the edges
are coupledd to the RP and the RP is restrained
restrained on U1 and U2. It can move on the z axis and it can
rotate freely
reely because the converging diagonals do not provide any rotational stiffness (it is very small
and neglected).
The RP was selected from the predefined set of reference points by using .findAt method. Script for
end2-BC and middle-BC BC were made in the similar way as above. All boundary conditions were
created in the initial step.
Figure 71. Boundary condition of the model

Thin
As for loading condition, two loading conditions

con were set.
1. Buckling analysis: concentrated
oncentrated force of 1N was applied at end2-BC
end2
2. Riks analysis:
a. Riks_N (axial only): Concentrated force of 510 x area of cross section at end2-BC.
510MPa is the nominal ultimate stress for S355. ItI is used to estimate a load as the highest
load thatt could be applied on the cross-section.
cross So the resistance is definitely going to be
lower than that in all cases
b. Riks_NM (axial and bending): Concentrated force of 510 x area of cross section at end2-
BC and 5, 10, 15% % bending moment resistance of the cross-section
cross at mid-BC. This value
is chosen since the presence of bending moment in truss structure actually not significant.
The bending moment is induced by forces from diagonals.
(a) axial only
CM1
(b) axial-bending
Figure 72. Boundary conditions and loading conditions

Finite
Thin
3.4.3.9 Mesh Module

In meshing module, the proper element type should be assigned in order to provide the solver with
information about the interpolation it should apply to those elements. For thin-walled
walled structures
structure it is
widely acknowledged that shell elements are the most suitable type for FE modelling because it is
able to capture local, distortional, as well as localised
ed buckling of the structure so that a realistic
response can be predicted. ABAQUS offers a dozen commonly commonly used shell elements for 3-D 3
stress/displacement analysis, such as S3, S3R, S4, S4R, S4R5, S8R, S8R5,
S8R5, S9R5, etc., of which S4R,
as shown in Figure73,, was chosen for this study.
Figure 73.Illustration of ABAQUS shell element S4R
Element S4R is a standard large-strain

large shell element with “4-node general--purpose shell, finite
membrane strains” (ABAQUS 6.14 6.1 Documentation). It has six degrees of freedom per node: three
translations and three rotations. It also has a uniformly reduced integration to avoid shear and
membrane locking. It also converges to a shear flexible theory for thick shells and to a classical
classic theory
for thin shells. Hence, it can be concluded that the element chosen is a suitable element for the
buckling analysis of thin-walled
walled structures.
As already mentioned in the assembly module, all part instances in the model are dependent type. It
means that meshing of those elements should be performed for each part instead of in assembly level.
The mesh module will associate the mesh from part to all dependent instances. In order to keep the
meshed element as close to square as possible and limit the free mesh only to region right at the
peripheral of the hole circle, partitions were created as described in the part module.
All of the shell elements were seeded by size of seeds. An adequate mesh of the structures is very
important when dealing
ealing with finite element method analysis. If a mesh is too coarse, the results
obtained from the analysis may not be sufficiently accurate. On the other hand, if a mesh is too
refined, the analysis can develop accurate results but it will increase the processing
pr time with
computational costs. In order to have the accurate results without spending too much processing time,
it was decided to model all the structures with a reasonable mesh. After running several convergence
studies, the mesh with approximate size of 30 was chosen.
Mesh control with quadratic shape of element was used since it can be applied to any planar or curved
surface. The reason behind this is that the
the high order approximation for the finite element (keeping the
same size) leads to thee small error for the solution if all parameters (boundary conditions, geometry,
materials) are sufficiently smooth. Moreover, it can avoid error due to shear locking in bending
problem commonly found in triangular shape. Thus the quadratic approximation is i used.

Thin
Sector part Gusset part

Figure 74. Meshed part
3.4.3.10Step Module
In the FE analysis, the load history of the simulation will be divided into a number of steps. Each step
is called a period of “time,” and based on this step ABAQUS calculates the response of the model to a
certain set of loads and boundary conditions. The analysis procedure may be specified by user to
determine the type of response, and may change analysis procedures from step to step.
step
In ABAQUS FE analysis there are two main groups of analysis procedure:
procedure: linear perturbation and
general. In this parametric study linear eigenvalue analysis and static Riks analysis were employed.
Linear eigenvalue analysis is generally used
used to estimate the critical (bifurcation) load and buckling
shape of the structure. On the other hand, load-deflection (Riks) analysis had been used to incorporate
concern about material nonlinearity, geometric nonlinearity prior to buckling, and postbuckling
response.
The Riks method uses the load magnitude as an additionaladditional unknown; it will solve loads and
displacements simultaneously. In order to measure the progress of the solution,
solution ABAQUS uses the
“arc length,” l, along the static equilibrium path in load-displacement space. By using this, solutions
can be provided regardless of whether the response is stable or unstable.
unstable
Two kinds of Riks analysis were employed in this study, axial only (N) and axial bending (N+M)
analysis.
3.4.3.10.1 Imperfection
The geometrically and materially nonlinear analysis with imperfection using Riks solver solve obtain the
shape of imperfection according to thethe first buckling mode shape from linear perturbation analysis,
and its magnitude according to recommendation in EC3-1-5.The EC3 The procedure to include this
imperfection is performed by editing
edit keywords. The displacement data for different buckling
bucklin shapes
is written to the node file, which then is used for Riks analysis as the shape of imperfection.
imperfection In Python
the process of writing, deleting, and modifying keyword is possibly done with the built-in

Finite
Thin
keywordBlock method.. This method automates the process to synchronize, insert, and replace text
block.
The amplitude of imperfection taken for the analysis is equal to s/2000,, with s is bolt spacing.
Distance of bolt spacing was chosen instead of overall length since it was revealed that the dominant
buckling mode occurred is sectional buckling, not the flexural one. The use of elastic buckling mode
as the shape of geometric imperfections itself and the chosen magnitude was a conservative approach
(Moen 2008) [30].
3.4.3.10.2 Field and History Output

In order to obtain intended output, in this module all required output data are specified. In field output
request the following data was requested:
- All stress components ‘S’, mises equivalent stress ‘Mises’, all ll strain components ‘E’,
effective plastic strain ‘PEEQ’, and all
ll physical displacement components ‘U’
while in history output request:
- Reaction
eaction force RF3 at RP-1
RP
- Displacement
isplacement U3 at load application point RP-2
RP
- Rotation
otation UR1 at middle connection RP-Mid
RP
3.4.3.11Job Module
Once all of the tasks involved in defining
de a model is finished, the Job module can be assigned to
analyze the model. The jobob will be created for each model and then submitted to cluster which
comprise multiple processor. It will divide the model analysis
ana into multiple tasks according to number
of processor.
At the end of script, a command to create input file was made. Therefore, the input file will be created
for each model.
The script for Job assignment can be seen in Annex A.4

A. line 860 – 884.

Finite Element Modelling
Modelli and Parametric Studies of Semi-Closed Thin-Walled
Thin
4 PARAMETRIC STUDIES OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURAL

MEMBERS
Chapter 3 detailed the development of the FE models, and showed that the input file coded in Python
was able to generate reliable FE models of proposed polygonal thin-walled walled columns. These FE
models can therefore be readily used for extensive parametric studies towards design purposes. A
total of more than 150 FE elastic buckling and collapse analyses have been conducted in the
parametric studies, involving
ng variables such as number of corner (n), diameter of cross-section
cross (d),
slenderness (slend), yield strength (fy), bending radius to thickness ratio (rcoef), number of points
along the bend (nbend), lip length to diameter ratio (l_ratio), gusset to sector thickness ratio (t_ratio),
(t_ratio)
bolt spacing (b),, and member length (l). Evaluation of the results will be carried out with Factorial
Design.
4.1 Post-Processing
In this chapter,, results from the analysis will be presented. After downloading all result files from the
cluster, a method was used to call the required output variables and arrange them in a convenient
format for the further study. This was done through automation using Python script dedicated to
collect data from .odb files and present them in a certain tabulated database.
Automated post-
processing
Figure 75. Abaqus result in .odb file
To access the output database, odbAccess module was used. This post-processing
processing work will produce
an external data outside ABAQUS,
ABAQUS with the following approach:
• Open and read
ead data from all .odb files
• Write the required data in predefined format to an output database (.dat)
• Capture the visualization from viewport module and save them in certain format (.png)
By doing so, data analysis, e.g. statistics and probability of the results can be carried out more
handily. In this parametric study, the output database was analysed by statistical analysis, i.e. factorial
design which will be described in the next section.
Complete script of the output

utput reading automation, including .odb data extraction and visualization
data import from the viewport module can be seen in Annex A.5.Example
Example of result table extracted
from .odb file using this automation is presented in Annex D.
Parametric Studies of the Proposed Structural Members 93

Thin
4.2 Factorial Design
In this parametric study, results from FEA will be assessed with Factorial Experimental Design.
Actually, the factorial design is a statistical approach where the design has at least two factors, each
with discrete possible values known as "levels", and where the calculated experimental units will
consider all possible combinations of these levels across all factors. In this case, a full factorial design
was used. It is also known as a fully crossed design. In this analysis method, the analyst can study the
effect of each factor on the response variable and their significance,, as well as the significance of
interactions between factors on the response variable. Moreover, multiple
ultiple response variables can be
studied at once.
For the common factorial design,

design each factor has two levels. For example, where it has two factors
and each factor takes two levels, a factorial design will have four (2k) number of running or treatment
combinations in total, with k is number of factors.
By applying Factorial Design in FEA analysis,

analysis, the following objectives are to be achieved:
1. Screen for important factors
2. Determine factor interactions
3. Systematically study how different modelling choices affect the FE model response.
The example of two level full factorial design with three factors: 23 design, is shown below.
Factors are A, B, and C, with interaction AB, AC, BC, and ABC. Number of runs to be performed
grows exponentially with number of factors (2k). Response variable for each run as a function of
interaction is indicated as y1…y8.Main and interaction effect then can be calculated, as follows.
Or can be expressed:
94 Parametric Studies of the Proposed Structural Members

Thin
Factors are cancelled out (for Factor A):
Computing main and interactions effects

eff in matrix notation:
where nruns= 8 is the total number of simulations/runs.

simulations/runs
Hence,
The parametric study that performed in this thesis is a multi-level level full factorial with four factors
(diameter, cross section slenderness, member
mem slenderness, and bolt spacing). To evaluate the result of
a factorial design, a graph that is called
called factor interaction plot is a powerful tool. This can be done in
MATLAB, as carried out in this section. Complete MATLAB script for factorial design and
generating interaction plot can be seen in Annex A.3.
The plots show mean values. As it can be seen in Figure 76, the mean values of ultimate loads for
different diameters and bolt spacing were given on the vertical axis, while input variables of the factor
was given on the horizontal axis. For example, plot line with blue color represent the factor
interaction
eraction of model with bolt spacing b=3, for diameter d=500, 700, 900. Whereas, the green color
and red color plots represent models with bolt spacing b=4 and b=5,
=5, respectively. Taking one point on
the plot, e.g. bolt spacing b=3
=3 and diameter d=900, it willl give a mean value of ultimate load of
3, which is 12.6x106N.
models 1-4-3-1-3, 1-4-3-2-3, 1-44-3-3-3, 1-4-5-1-3, 1-4-5-2-3, and 1-4-5-3-3,

Thin
Figure 76. Main effects and interaction plot
This way the important factors and interaction between factors can be identified. Main effects may be
identified directly from the response variable attributed to the factor, while the interaction exists if the
plot lines are not parallel. A 2k design (full factorial) will always give more information than one-
factor-at-a-time
time (OFAT) method, where interaction can never be identified. If the OFAT method is
used, the measured response will always confound main interaction effects (if interaction exist),
which may lead to wrong conclusion. The T results from OFAT method are only valid for those fixed
values of the other factors.
Figure 77.. Interaction plot of factorial design for Riks-N Models
Figure 77 shows the interaction plot of full-factorial

full design with four factors for RIKS-N models.
From m the plot it can be concluded that diameter (d-parameter)
( have the most significant influence on
the ultimate strength, and followed by member slenderness (λ-parameter). Profile slenderness (slend-
(
parameter) and bolt spacing (b-parameter)have
( parameter)have relatively moderate influence. No significant
interaction exists, however interaction diameter-member
diameter member slenderness and interaction member
slenderness-bolt
bolt spacing are the highest among all interaction. Interaction between profile slenderness
with other factors seemed very small which means profile slenderness dependency is negligible.
Visible effect of interaction are especially shown when the factors interact with member slenderness
̅ =1.25. It might suggest that the range used in the factors
factor were not large enough.

Figure 78.Interaction plot of factorial design for Riks-NM10 Models
Figure 78 shows the interaction plot for models subject to combined axial compression force and
bending moment. It can be seen that the plot shows the same trend as for models under pure axial
compression. The results may conclude that with application of relatively small bending moment, e.g.
0.1Mu, no significant change on the ultimate strength expected to occur. The magnitude of applied
bending moment might be too small for a significant influence, however ideally no bending moment
should exist in the truss member. Small bending moment was applied in order to take into account
moment at the joint due to unbalance force from diagonals, which may be found in practical
condition.
Figure 79. Interaction plot of factorial design for Riks-NM15 Models

Figure 79 and 80 shows the interaction plot for models RIKS-NM15 and RIKS-NM-05, respectively.
No significant difference between them and the models with pure axial compression, i.e. RIKS-N.
Figure 80. Interaction plot of factorial design for Riks-NM05 Models
4.3 FE Elastic Buckling and Non-linear Analysis
4.3.1 Verification of Elastic Buckling Analysis
In order to analyse the behaviour of the built-up columns the methodology as for the whole chord
column (elastic buckling and non-linear post-buckling analysis, see chapter 2.3 and 2.7) were used.
The analysis of elastic buckling was intended as the initial step of analysis for predicting the ultimate
resistance of the proposed members. Since geometrical non-linearity, non-linear material, and
imperfection exist and play an important influence on the ultimate resistance of this type of members,
elastic buckling analysis cannot give accurate prediction of the resistance of the member even though
it is related to the resistance. Therefore, a geometrical and material non-linear analysis with
imperfection (GMNIA) was used for this purpose. However, determination of an accurate elastic
buckling load and mode shape is important to the existing design method. The correlation between the
elastic buckling and ultimate resistance of cold-formed members provides the basis for the design
strength, e.g. when using Direct Strength Method. In this study, elastic buckling analysis was used,
among others, to give imperfection mode shape for the non-linear analysis and calculation of member
slenderness.
In the non-linear analysis, imperfections based on the mode shape from the buckling analysis have
been introduced in accordance to EC 1993-1-5 [10]. For these calculations a value of s/2000 (s is the
spacing of lip’s bolt connection) was taken for the first four mode shapes from elastic buckling
analysis, and then was used as initial imperfection. Distance s was chosen since sectorial buckling was
the expected critical buckling mode in these models. Details of modelling the imperfection are
described in Chapter 3.4.

Thin
Annex C.1 shows the first buckling mode shapes of all 54 models for the considered parameters.
Example of buckling mode shape is shown in Figure 81. Buckling mode shape of the models with the
lowest non-dimensional global slenderness ( ̅ ), i.e. 0.65 are characterized by distortional buckling of
the sector plate in between the lip’s bolt connection,
connection whereas higher non-dimensional
dimensional slenderness, i.e.
1.0 and 1.25 were dominated by flexural buckling and interaction flexural-distortional
distortional buckling. This
̅
phenomenon occurs since correlated with length of the member or half-wave
half wave length of the buckling.
Moreover, no torsional or torsional-flexural
torsional flexural mode govern as the lowest critical buckling load which
wh
indicate that in these column models the torsional stiffness is almost fully developed.
developed This semi-
closed configuration of section member provides
provide effective way to drastically increase the torsional
rigidity, compared to the one as individual plate.
Figure 81. First buckling shape of Model 1-2-3-1-3
Results of elastic buckling analysis for all models are presented in Table 9.. It can be seen from the
table that the theoretical
heoretical or Euler elastic buckling calculations based on EC1993-1-1
EC1993 have a
disagreement on the FEM analysis critical load for models with distortional-controlled
controlled buckling.
buckling In
this case, the Euler critical loads are much higher than results from FEM analysis since the Euler
buckling formulae consider thee member as a whole perfect column and for flexural case only, without
taking into account local or distortional buckling and interaction between them. In other hand, FEM
analysed the member as a built--up plates connected together as semi-closed
closed section,
section considering the
real geometrical conditions.. Therefore, the effect of non-fully
non fully rigid connected plates to the buckling
behaviour was taken into account in FEM. With increasing bolt spacing, the critical loads decrease,
and consequently the ratio of FEM-to-Euler
FEM critical load increases.
In case of models with flexural-controlled

flexural controlled buckling, results from FEM are slightly higher that the
theoretical one. This happens since effect of gusset plates in FEM model on the two end of the
member will a bit increase the inertia
nertia of the member. Meanwhile, for two models, i.e. 1-4-3-2-4
1 and
1-4-5-2-44 the critical loads are slightly lower than the theoretical one. This happens due to interaction
with distortional buckling (see picture in Annex E). E). Therefore, it is also noted that
t effect of the
presence of another buckling type, e.g. distortional or local buckling, on the interaction of dependent
buckling causes the critical load to be lower than the independent (individual) buckling.
In FEM, buckling
uckling analyses were performed forr four eigenvalues and mode shapes for all models. It
was shown that from the other buckling mode shapes,
shape , the deformation of the models were changing
and unsymmetrical.. It proves that in some cases, choosing a suitable buckling mode shape is
complicated. Itt will influence on the cost of performing the analysis and accuracy of the results.

Thin
Therefore, in this
his study the imperfection took the first until the fourth mode shapes in order to make it
more realistic.
Figure 82.
82 First four buckling mode shape of Model 1-2-3-2-3
Table 9.1st critical

ritical load according to elastic buckling analysis
(a) d-parameter=500
Elastic theory Numerical
bolt
Dia. Thick. Slend. Length (Euler Analysis
spacing Buckling
Model ID buckling) (FEM)
mode
d t λ l s/d Ncrit Ncrit
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [kN]
1 2 3 1 3 3 11095 8899 dist.
1 2 3 1 4 0.65 18098 4 11095 6645 dist.
1 2 3 1 5 5 11095 5357 dist.
1 2 3 2 3 3 4972 5099 flex.
1 2 3 2 4 9 1 27035 4 4972 5021 flex.
1 2 3 2 5 5 4972 4889 dist.
1 2 3 3 3 3 3254 3382 flex.
1 2 3 3 4 1.25 33419 4 3254 3350 flex.
1 2 3 3 5 5 3254 3308 flex.
500
1 2 5 1 3 3 8692 5995 dist.
1 2 5 1 4 0.65 18106 4 8692 4413 dist.
1 2 5 1 5 5 8692 3540 dist.
1 2 5 2 3 3 3895 4001 flex.
1 2 5 2 4 7 1 27048 4 3895 3936 flex.
1 2 5 2 5 5 3895 3182 dist.
1 2 5 3 3 3 2549 2654 flex.
1 2 5 3 4 1.25 33435 4 2549 2628 flex.
1 2 5 3 5 5 2549 2594 flex.

(b) d-parameter=700
bolt
spacing Buckling
mode
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [kN]
1 3 3 1 3 3 20741 15768 dist.
1 3 3 1 4 0.65 25339 4 20741 11605 dist.
1 3 3 1 5 5 20741 9277 dist.
1 3 3 2 3 3 9295 9487 flex.
1 3 3 2 4 12 1 37852 4 9295 9333 flex.
1 3 3 2 5 5 9295 8383 dist.
1 3 3 3 3 3 6083 6300 flex.
1 3 3 3 4 1.25 46790 4 6083 6239 flex.
1 3 3 3 5 5 6083 6157 flex.
700
1 3 5 1 3 3 17374 11900 dist.
1 3 5 1 4 0.65 25347 4 17374 8683 dist.
1 3 5 1 5 5 17374 6907 dist.
1 3 5 2 3 3 7785 7933 flex.
1 3 5 2 4 10 1 37865 4 7785 7797 flex.
1 3 5 2 5 5 7785 6169 dist.
1 3 5 3 3 3 5095 5271 flex.
1 3 5 3 4 1.25 46806 4 5095 5218 flex.
1 3 5 3 5 5 5095 5147 flex.
(c) d-parameter=900
bolt
spacing Buckling
mode
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [kN]
1 4 3 1 3 3 33361 24696 dist.
1 4 3 1 4 0.65 32580 4 33361 17943 dist.
1 4 3 1 5 5 33361 14242 dist.
1 4 3 2 3 3 14950 15182 flex.
1 4 3 2 4 15 1 48669 4 14950 14924 flex-dist
1 4 3 2 5 5 14950 12777 dist.
1 4 3 3 3 3 9784 10095 flex.
1 4 3 3 4 1.25 60161 4 9784 9992 flex.
1 4 3 3 5 5 9784 9857 flex.
900
1 4 5 1 3 3 29029 19850 dist.
1 4 5 1 4 0.65 32588 4 29029 14355 dist.
1 4 5 1 5 5 29029 13347 dist.
1 4 5 2 3 3 13008 13193 flex.
1 4 5 2 4 13 1 48682 4 13008 12956 flex-dist
1 4 5 2 5 5 13008 10076 dist.
1 4 5 3 3 3 8513 8777 flex.
1 4 5 3 4 1.25 60177 4 8513 8685 flex.
1 4 5 3 5 5 8513 8563 flex.

The comparison of elastic critical load between the models with predefined parameters can be seen in
Table 9. Critical load of the models are significantly higher for larger diameter as the inertia increases.
With the same cross sectional slenderness, the average increases of critical load are 90.8% and 62.8%
for changing diameter 500mm to 700mm and diameter 700mm to 900mm, respectively. The
thicknesses of plates also affect the critical load. An average increase of 17.6% for models d=900mm
with thickness from 13mm to 15mm. Higher slenderness, consequently longer member, has lower
critical load. An average decrease of 36.9% on critical load was experienced for models by
changing ̅ =0.65 into ̅ =1.0, and 33.6% decrease of critical load was experienced for models by
changing ̅ =1.0 into ̅ =1.25. Effect of bolt spacing on the critical load depends on the length of
member. The effect is significant for short member, in this case ̅ =0.65, with average decrease of
26.7% and 17.9% by changing the bolt spacing from 3d to 4d and 4d to 5d, respectively. For member
with ̅ =1.0 an average decrease of 1.7% for changing bolt spacing from 3d to 4d, meanwhile for
member with ̅ =1.25 an average decrease of 0.9% for changing bolt spacing from 3d to 4d.
1.2
0.8
Pcrit/Pcrit,e
0.6
0.4
dist-controlled
0.2 flex-dist-controlled
flex-controlled
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Pcrit
Figure 83. Pcrit-to-Pe ratio
This analysis shows that the bolt spacing of 3d – 5d on this type of polygonal sections gives elastic
buckling modes of distortional, flexural, and flexural-distortional. With this bolt density, influence of
the stiffness of the lip connection on triggering different elastic buckling type, i.e. local buckling is
not sufficient since result shows that all buckling modes lies in range of distortional and flexural type.
Elastic buckling prediction by current design specification (i.e. EC1993) for local and flexural mode
is only appropriate when the members are wholly thin plate and column, respectively. Moreover, for
distortional buckling prediction there is no explicit expression available. In this case, where the
members are semi-closed built-up column composed of folded plates, there is no expressions in
Eurocode for predicting the elastic critical buckling, either for sectorial or global buckling modes. An
element model and semi-empirical model for elastic buckling prediction of open cross-sections was
developed by AISI (1996), Lau and Hancock (1987), and Schafer (2008). Application of the latter
calculation method can be found in finite-strip method, e.g. CUFSM. Therefore, models and
expressions of elastic buckling for semi-closed cross-sections need to be developed and evaluated to
determine whether a similar correlation to that for open cross-section also exists for semi-closed
cross-section.

Using elastic buckling loads obtained from FE models as the basis for semi-closed polygonal columns
would be ineffective, because it would have to exert enormous effort to create an FE model and then
inspect and choose the appropriate buckling mode. Limited number of models run in this parametric
study made it not feasible to provide equations for the elastic buckling loads.
4.3.2 Verification of Non-linear Analysis

4.3.2.1 General
The non-linear finite element analysis using Riks solver was carried out for analyses of unstable,
materially and geometrically nonlinear with imperfections considered. The ultimate load was
evaluated and compared between the models. ABAQUS models uses four-node general-purpose shell
element with finite membrane strains, elastic-plastic material with strain hardening, and imperfections
as suggested in the modeling guidelines for cold-formed steel [17] were created.
A total of 216 non-linear collapse analyses were carried out for all column models with predefined
parameters and under pure axial compression (N) and combined axial-bending moment (NM0.05,
NM0.1, and NM0.15), of which all analyses successfully reached the ultimate loads. Table 10shows
the ultimate load and corresponding displacement for all models which includes the defining variables
and types of failure. The results were obtained by Python automation from ABAQUS as described in
Chapter 4.1.
Table 10. Ultimate loads and corresponding displacement from FE non-linear analysis for models RIKS-N
(a) d-parameter=500
bolt Normalized
Dia. Thick. Slend. Length Max. load Shortening
spacing resistance Failure
Model ID
mode
Pu disp Pu/Pyg
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [mm] [-]
1 2 3 1 3 3 5625.7 29.13 1.00 dist.
1 2 3 1 4 0.65 18098 4 4982.5 26.03 0.89 dist.
1 2 3 1 5 5 4531.8 24.75 0.81 dist.
1 2 3 2 3 3 4865.7 37.93 0.87 dist.
1 2 3 2 4 9 1 27035 4 4555.0 35.44 0.82 dist.
1 2 3 2 5 5 4126.2 32.17 0.74 dist.
1 2 3 3 3 3 3335.7 34.09 0.60 dist-flex
1 2 3 3 4 1.25 33419 4 3269.5 33.10 0.59 dist-flex
1 2 3 3 5 5 3176.2 31.49 0.57 dist-flex
500
1 2 5 1 3 3 4132.5 27.34 0.95 dist.
1 2 5 1 4 0.65 18106 4 3576.7 24.21 0.82 dist.
1 2 5 1 5 5 3161.9 23.20 0.72 dist.
1 2 5 2 3 3 3665.2 36.35 0.84 dist.
1 2 5 2 4 7 1 27048 4 3241.9 32.20 0.74 dist.
1 2 5 2 5 5 2840.9 28.59 0.65 dist.
1 2 5 3 3 3 2606.7 33.78 0.60 dist-flex
1 2 5 3 4 1.25 33435 4 2496.8 31.14 0.57 dist-flex
1 2 5 3 5 5 2405.3 30.03 0.55 dist-flex

(b) d-parameter=700
bolt Normalized
Model ID
mode
Pu disp Pu/Pyg
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [mm] [-]
1 3 3 1 3 3 10583.1 41.10 1.00 dist.
1 3 3 1 4 0.65 25339 4 9053.7 35.59 0.87 dist.
1 3 3 1 5 5 8140.8 33.86 0.78 dist.
1 3 3 2 3 3 8974.8 52.52 0.86 dist.
1 3 3 2 4 12 1 37852 4 8128.1 47.34 0.78 dist.
1 3 3 2 5 5 7400.3 43.45 0.71 dist.
1 3 3 3 3 3 6192.9 47.06 0.59 dist-flex
1 3 3 3 4 1.25 46790 4 6020.5 45.09 0.58 dist-flex
1 3 3 3 5 5 5901.9 43.72 0.57 dist-flex
700
1 3 5 1 3 3 8309.6 38.52 0.95 dist.
1 3 5 1 4 0.65 25347 4 7358.9 34.13 0.84 dist.
1 3 5 1 5 5 6417.5 32.86 0.74 dist.
1 3 5 2 3 3 7105.3 49.55 0.81 dist.
1 3 5 2 4 10 1 37865 4 6373.9 44.55 0.73 dist.
1 3 5 2 5 5 5661.1 40.01 0.65 dist.
1 3 5 3 3 3 5177.7 47.83 0.59 dist-flex
1 3 5 3 4 1.25 46806 4 4985.4 44.02 0.57 dist-flex
1 3 5 3 5 5 4683.0 40.90 0.54 dist-flex
(c) d-parameter=900
bolt Normalized
Model ID
mode
Pu disp Pu/Pyg
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [mm] [-]
1 4 3 1 3 3 16670.0 51.85 0.99 dist.
1 4 3 1 4 0.65 32580 4 14571.6 45.18 0.87 dist.
1 4 3 1 5 5 12630.0 41.79 0.75 dist.
1 4 3 2 3 3 14330.1 66.74 0.86 dist.
1 4 3 2 4 15 1 48669 4 13158.7 61.34 0.79 dist.
1 4 3 2 5 5 11412.8 53.88 0.68 dist.
1 4 3 3 3 3 9958.4 60.53 0.59 dist-flex
1 4 3 3 4 1.25 60161 4 9777.5 58.85 0.58 dist-flex
1 4 3 3 5 5 9320.6 54.80 0.56 dist-flex
900
1 4 5 1 3 3 13828.6 49.28 0.95 dist.
1 4 5 1 4 0.65 32588 4 11788.0 43.61 0.81 dist.
1 4 5 1 5 5 10664.4 42.53 0.73 dist.
1 4 5 2 3 3 12124.6 65.03 0.83 dist.
1 4 5 2 4 13 1 48682 4 10701.6 57.72 0.73 dist.
1 4 5 2 5 5 9216.9 50.32 0.63 dist.
1 4 5 3 3 3 8656.9 61.02 0.59 dist-flex
1 4 5 3 4 1.25 60177 4 8400.3 57.10 0.58 dist-flex
1 4 5 3 5 5 7913.5 53.21 0.54 dist-flex

From the above tables, it can be seen that the failure mode of the models are dominated by distortional
failure with the remaining models show interaction distortional-flexural failure. Annex C.2 provides
the screenshots of the models at failure state taken from ABAQUS non-linear analysis. The difference
of this result to the elastic buckling analysis can be clearly noticed, where there is no independent
global flexural failure mode in non-linear analysis. This affirms the significant influence of material
and geometrical non-linearity and imperfections on the ultimate resistance of the studied models. The
results for combined axial compression- bending moment (RIKS-NM) models are presented in the
next section.
The results of the parametric studies of all column models are presented in Figure 84 in the form of
normalized resistance (Pu-FEM/Pyg) based on fully effective cross-section resistance (Pyg) versus local
slenderness λcr-FEM=(Pyg/Pcr-FEM)0.5 based on Pyg and the critical buckling load by the FEM analysis. It
is important to note that the failure mode of all models in this non-linear study is distortional type,
while some of the first critical buckling loads by FEM discussed in previous section (4.3.1) were the
flexural type. Therefore, it is needed to obtain distortional buckling loads for those models in order to
have proper local slenderness, according to the actual failure mode. This is performed by looking at
other buckling modes which give distortional type of buckling in ABAQUS. Then, these critical
buckling loads (Table 11) were taken for constructing the graph. Figure 84 also shows the EC1993-1-
3 [9] resistance curve for distortional buckling mode, and other codes for different buckling modes.
From the graph it is worth noted that there are two obvious scatters of data points when slenderness
0.9<λcr-FEM<1.2. The higher scatter group corresponds to those columns which failed in a pure
distortional mode, while the lower scatter corresponds to those columns failed in distortional-flexural
interaction. This means although the vast majority of the failure modes from the FEM are distortional
modes, an interaction distortional-flexural failure did occur for models with high global slenderness, ̅
= 1.25, in which give lower strength than the distortional modes. Figure 84 shows that in case of
distortional failure, a full proportion of the numerical ultimate resistance were slightly underestimated
by the Code, which means that EC1993-1-3 corresponds to the FEM analysis results and gives safe
but less conservative prediction. It can be said that the EC1993-1-3 curve almost forms the lower
bound of the numerical ultimate resistance for the studied models. The detail discussion and
verification of analysis based on design code specification (EC1993) is given in the next section.
A small scatters of data points which appeared below the EC1993-1-3 strength curve in the graph are
all models with global slenderness ̅ = 1.25, and a safe estimates of strength cannot be provided by
EC1993-1-3 since it is an interaction modes. Very unsafe predictions were provided by the EC1993-1-
3 curve for those models. These data points fell on local slenderness, i.e. λcr-FEM≥ 0.9 for models with
bolt spacing ratio, b = 4 and larger slenderness λcr-FEM≥ 1.0 for models with b = 5. The flexural
slenderness which was significantly high and larger than the distortional slenderness may induce the
flexural deformation interacted with the distortional mode. It is suggested by this parametric study
that the EC1993-1-3 curve provides safe (or almost safe) predictions if the columns fail in a pure
distortional mode, whereas give unsafe prediction if the columns fail in interaction mode, D-F
interaction in this case.
By travelling from the highest to the lowest Pu-FEM/Pyg values, the scatter of data points correspond to
the increase of bolt spacing ratio b-parameter. This shows that with the increase of bolt spacing, being
from b=3 to b=4 and b=5, the ultimate resistance tends to decrease.
This shows that the non-dimensional slenderness and bolt spacing are the most influencing parameter
which characteristics resulted in significantly deviated ultimate resistance. Likewise, the diameter d-

parameter and thickness t-parameter give unfavourable effect on the ultimate resistance when it
increases, however this influence is not significant and considerably lower than those caused by
slenderness and bolt spacing.
If Figure 84 is redrawn as Figure 85, which plots (Pu-FEM/Pyg) versus λcr-FEM= (Pyg/Pcr-FEM)0.5 for loading
condition of combined axial compression-bending moment (RIKS-NM), the scatter of data points for
the numerical ultimate resistance move slightly downward, which results in unsafe predictions for
some models even though a large portion are still on the safe side. This happens as expected since the
presence of bending moment will reduce the ultimate strength of the column due to load interaction.
The axial-moment (NM) interaction of the studied columns will be discussed in detail in the next
section.
From this analysis it can be noted that for the studied columns, distortional failures have lower post-
buckling capacity than the other mode, i.e. local buckling. Furthermore, distortional buckling may
control the failure mechanism even when the elastic distortional buckling stress (fcrd) is higher than
the elastic flexural buckling stress (fcrf).
1.4
b=3
b=4
b=5
1.2 EC3-1-5 Eq (4.2)
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.3)
EC-3-1-1 Eq (6.49)
1 EC3-1-3 Eq (5.12)
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
λcr-FEM=(Pyg/Pcr-FEM)0.5
Figure 84. Parametric study results of the studied columns (normalized resistance based on Pyg
vs. slenderness based on Pyg and FEM critical buckling loads): Models RIKS-N
As shown in the subchapter 4.3 Factorial design, the most significant factor interaction are member
slenderness-bolt spacing and member slenderness-diameter, hence plot was also made for diameter
group scatter, as shown below. As for diameter, the phenomenon of interaction distortional-flexural
failure did occur for models with all diameters, i.e. 500, 700, and 900, when high global slenderness,
̅ = 1.25 possessed.

1.4
d=500
d=700
1.2 d=900
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.2)
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.3)
1
EC-3-1-1 Eq (6.49)
EC3-1-3 Eq (5.12)
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
λcr-FEM=(Pyg/Pcr-FEM )0.5
vs. slenderness based on Pyg and FEM critical buckling loads): Models RIKS-N
As a sample for visualization of failure mode, Figure 86 shows a typical distortional buckling mode at
the ultimate load of model RIKS-N-1-2-5-1-3. The colour contours represent the magnitudes of von
Misses stress. Complete screenshots of failure mode for all models are given in Annex C.2.
The failure is characterized by buckling of the lips outward, while no significant rotation along its
weak axis experienced by the entire column. This type of buckling is also known as “stiffener flexural
buckling” or “local-torsional buckling”. Lips as connection between plates in this type of sections can
be considered as the stiffener. Distortional mode well recognized by rotation of the flange at the
flange-web junction or displacement of the intermediate stiffener normal to the plane of the element.
The junction point between flange and web moves inward or outward, as exhibited in the result of
numerical analysis of this parametric study. Distortional buckling exists at intermediate longitudinal
half sine waves (half-wavelength), between short local buckling half-wavelength and long flexural or
flexural-torsional buckling half-wavelength. In this case, the half-wavelength is the bolt spacing
distance (s).
Meanwhile, Figure 87 shows the failure mode by interaction between distortional and flexural
buckling for models with ̅ = 1.25. The failure mode is characterized by buckling of the lips outward
and at the same time, large rotation of the entire member.

Thin
1.4 b=3
b=4
b=5
1.2 EC3-1-5
5 Eq (4.2)
EC3-1-5
5 Eq (4.3)
EC-3-1-1
1 Eq (6.49)
1 EC3-1-3
3 Eq (5.12)
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Figure 86.. Parametric study results of the studied columns (normalized resistance based on Pyg
vs. slenderness based on Pyg and FEM critical buckling loads): Models RIKS-NM01
RIKS
(a) ISO view
(b) Top view
(c) Front view
Figure 87. Failure mode of a RIKS-N

RIKS N model failing by distortional mode

Thin
(d) ISO view
(e) Top view
(f) Front view

Figure 88.. Failure mode of a RIKS-N
RIKS model failing by distortional-flexural
flexural interaction mode
Moreover, this parametric study is expected to rule out the limit of normalized resistance for the
expected failure mode, in this case distortional buckling, based on slenderness of the member. From
graph in Figure 81, it can be suggested that the expression used in EC1993-1-33 for reduction factor
due to distortional buckling (Eq. 5.12) may be adopted for the semi-closed
semi closed polygonal
polygon type of cross-
section undergoes pure distortional buckling mode used in this parametric study,
study with provision of
global slenderness, ̅ < 1.25.. The EC1993-1-3
EC1993 3 became the lower bound for the results of numerical
ultimate strength.
•• = 1.0
0 if ̅• <0.65; ̅ < 1.25
•• = 1.47
47 − 0.723 ̅• if 0.65< ̅• <1.38; ̅ < 1.25
•• =
9.ðð
ðð
̅• Ç1.38; ̅ < 1.25
¦)
†
¦ if

1.4
EC3-1-3 Eq (5.12)
1.2
1
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
vs. slenderness based on Pyg and FEM critical buckling loads): Pure distortional mode
Meanwhile, a distortional-flexural interaction would be found in models with global slenderness ̅ =

1.25. Therefore, by excluding the cluster data points of pure distortional mode, a linear regression was
developed to get the expression of ultimate resistance:
••¥s = 0.7576 − 0.1751 ̅• if 0.9< ̅• <1.25; ̅ ≥ 1.25
1.4
EC3-1-3 Eq (5.12)
1.2
1
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
y = -0.1751x + 0.7576
R2 = 0.914
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
vs. slenderness based on Pyg and FEM critical buckling loads): Distortional-flexural interaction
The critical buckling mode for various eigenmodes are shown in the following table.

Table 11. Critical buckling loads for various eigenmodes

(a) d-parameter=500
Numerical Analysis
bolt (FEM)
Dia. Thick. Slend. Length
spacing
Model ID Elastic buckling (Ncrit.)
d t λ l s/d Dist. Flex-Dist Flex.
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [kN] [kN]
1 2 3 1 3 3 8899 - -
1 2 3 1 4 0.65 18098 4 6645 - -
1 2 3 1 5 5 5357 - -
1 2 3 2 3 3 - - 5099
1 2 3 2 4 9 1 27035 4 - - 5021
1 2 3 2 5 5 4889 - -
1 2 3 3 3 3 - - 3382
1 2 3 3 4 1.25 33419 4 - - 3350
1 2 3 3 5 5 4769 - 3308
500
1 2 5 1 3 3 5995 - -
1 2 5 1 4 0.65 18106 4 4413 - -
1 2 5 1 5 5 3540 - -
1 2 5 2 3 3 - - 4001
1 2 5 2 4 7 1 27048 4 - - 3936
1 2 5 2 5 5 3182 - -
1 2 5 3 3 3 - - 2654
1 2 5 3 4 1.25 33435 4 - - 2628
1 2 5 3 5 5 - - 2594
(b) d-parameter=700
Numerical Analysis
bolt (FEM)
spacing
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [kN] [kN]
1 3 3 1 3 3 15768 - -
1 3 3 1 4 0.65 25339 4 11605 - -
1 3 3 1 5 5 9277 - -
1 3 3 2 3 3 - - 9487
1 3 3 2 4 12 1 37852 4 - - 9333
1 3 3 2 5 5 8383 - -
1 3 3 3 3 3 - - 6300
1 3 3 3 4 1.25 46790 4 - - 6239
1 3 3 3 5 5 - - 6157
700
1 3 5 1 3 3 11900 - -
1 3 5 1 4 0.65 25347 4 8683 - -
1 3 5 1 5 5 6907 - -
1 3 5 2 3 3 - - 7933
1 3 5 2 4 10 1 37865 4 - - 7797
1 3 5 2 5 5 6169 - -
1 3 5 3 3 3 - - 5271
1 3 5 3 4 1.25 46806 4 - - 5218
1 3 5 3 5 5 - - 5147

(c) d-parameter=900
Numerical Analysis
bolt (FEM)
spacing
[mm] [mm] [-] [mm] [-] [kN] [kN] [kN]
1 4 3 1 3 3 24696 - -
1 4 3 1 4 0.65 32580 4 17943 - -
1 4 3 1 5 5 14242 - -
1 4 3 2 3 3 - - 15182
1 4 3 2 4 15 1 48669 4 - 14924 -
1 4 3 2 5 5 12777 - -
1 4 3 3 3 3 - - 10095
1 4 3 3 4 1.25 60161 4 - - 9992
1 4 3 3 5 5 - - 9857
900
1 4 5 1 3 3 19850 - -
1 4 5 1 4 0.65 32588 4 14355 - -
1 4 5 1 5 5 13347 - -
1 4 5 2 3 3 - - 13193
1 4 5 2 4 13 1 48682 4 - 12956 -
1 4 5 2 5 5 10076 - -
1 4 5 3 3 3 - - 8777
1 4 5 3 4 1.25 60177 4 - - 8685
1 4 5 3 5 5 - - 8563
4.3.2.2 Load-Displacement of FE Analysis

Load-displacement curves based on unstable analysis of Riks method are presented in this section.
The ultimate loads and resistance of the cold-formed sections according to EC-1993-1-3 are also
determined. Note that due to space limitations, the results of the samples are provided here, while the
complete data can be seen in Annex. Four predefined parameters, i.e. diameter (d), thickness (t),
length ( ̅ ), and bolt spacing (b) are compared to see the significance of them on the ultimate resistance
of the members. Results from FEA and EC1993-1-3 ultimate loads are close as already observed in
previous section (Figure 84).
4.3.2.2.1 Diameter (d-parameter)

Figure 90 shows the influence of diameter d-parameter on the ultimate resistance of the members.
With increasing diameter, the ultimate strength of the members is increased significantly. This
happens as expected since the area of cross section increases. An average increase of 88.1% and
57.2% on the ultimate load is experienced by member if diameter changing from 500 to 700mm and
700 to 900mm, respectively. Likewise, the displacement experiences an increase with increasing
diameter which shows higher ductility.

Load vs. Displacement

18000
16000
14000
12000
EC-3-1-3 d=500
Pu [kN]
10000
EC-3-1-3 d=700
8000 EC-3-1-3 d=900
6000 1-2-3-1-3
4000 1-3-3-1-3
2000 1-4-3-1-3
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement [mm]
Figure 91. Load-displacement curve of numerical analysis for different diameters
Effect of d-parameter on the normalized resistance (Pu/Pyg) is shown in Figure 91. Six models were
taken in comparison. The curve shows that diameter change has little influence on the normalized
resistance. It means that by changing the diameter, reduction factor on ultimate cross-section
resistance due to distortional buckling deviate negligibly. An average increase of 0.64% on
normalized resistance occurs when diameter changing from 500 to 700mm, while average decrease of
2.1% occurs when diameter changing from 700 to 900mm.

1.2
1
1-2-3-1-3
0.8 1-3-3-1-3
1-4-3-1-3
Pu/Pyg
0.6 1-2-3-2-3
1-3-3-2-3
0.4
1-4-3-2-3
1-2-3-3-3
0.2
1-3-3-3-3
0 1-4-3-3-3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement [mm]
Figure 92. Load-displacement curve with normalized resistance (diff. diameters)
In order to make a uniform comparison of the normalized resistance between the parameters, a graph
of normalized strength (Pu/Pyg) versus length represented by global slenderness( ̅ ) was made. Figure
92 shows that different diameters have no significance on normalized resistance. The effect is less in
the members in models with larger length or higher global slenderness.

1.2
Normalized resistance
0.8
0.6
0.4
d=500
0.2 d=700
slend=90 d=900
0 b=3
0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25
λ_bar
Figure 93.Normalized resistance vs. length for models with different diameters
4.3.2.2.2 Thickness (t-parameter)

Thickness parameter was calculated from cross-section slenderness input variable (slend) in the
automation Python script. Therefore, this parameter depend on diameter (d/t ratio), and since two
values of cross-section slenderness were taken, i.e. slend = 90 and 110, then there are two different
thicknesses for each diameter or six different thickness in total. Models diameter 700mm with
thickness 12 and 10mm were taken for comparison.
Figure 93 shows the influence of thickness t-parameter on the ultimate resistance of the members.
With decreasing thickness, the ultimate strength of the members is also decreased. Alike d-parameter,
this happens since thickness directly related to the area property of cross section. An average decrease
of 21.5% on the ultimate load is experienced by member if thickness changing from 12 to 10mm.
Likewise, the displacement experiences a decrease with decreasing thickness.

12000
10000
8000
EC-3-1-3 t=12
Pu [kN]
EC-3-1-3 t=10
6000
1-3-3-1-3
4000 1-3-5-1-3
1-3-3-2-3
2000
1-3-5-2-3
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement [mm]
Figure 94. Load-displacement curve of numerical analysis for different thicknesses
Effect of t-parameter on the normalized resistance (Pu/Pyg) is shown in Figure 94. Six models were
taken in comparison. The curve shows similar trend as the d-parameter, changing thicknesses have

little influence on the normalized resistance. By changing the thickness, reduction factor on ultimate
cross-section resistance due to distortional buckling deviate negligibly. An average decrease of 6.3%
on normalized resistance occurs when thickness changing from 12 to 10mm, while average decrease
of 5.5% occurs with thickness from 12 to 10mm for models with larger length ( ̅ =1).

1.2
0.8
1-3-3-1-3
Pu/Pyg
1-3-5-1-3
0.6
1-3-3-2-3
0.4 1-3-5-2-3
1-3-3-3-3
0.2
1-3-5-3-3
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Displacement [mm]
Figure 95.Load-displacement curve with normalized resistance (diff. thickness)
Figure 95 shows normalized strength (Pu/Pyg) versus length represented by global slenderness ( ̅ ) for
models with different thicknesses. As it can be seen the thickness change has little significance on
normalized resistance. The effect is less in the members in models with larger length or higher global
slenderness.
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
t=12
0.20
d=700 t=10
0.00 b=3
0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25
λ_bar
Figure 96. Normalized resistance vs. length for models with different thicknesses

4.3.2.2.3 Length ( i -parameter)

Length parameter was calculated from input variable lambda, which is the global slenderness of the
member. Three values were taken for slenderness, i.e. 0.65, 1.0, and 1.25, which in this comparison
corresponds to length of 18106mm, 27048mm, and 33435mm, respectively. Models with diameter
500mm, bolt spacing ratio of 4, and cross-section slenderness of 110 were used. As it can be seen in
graph of Figure 96, more slender member will give less ultimate resistance. It is also noted that model
with high global slenderness, i.e. 1-2-5-3-4 has ultimate strength much lower than the resistance
calculated by EC1993-1-3 due to interaction of distortional mode with flexural mode. An average
decrease of 9.4% and 22.9% on the ultimate load is experienced by member when ̅ changing from
0.65 to 1.0 and from 1.0 to 1.25, respectively. In contrary, the displacement experiences an increase
with increasing slenderness.

4000
3500
3000
2500 EC-3-1-3 lambda=0.65

Pu [kN]
EC-3-1-3 lambda=1.0
2000
EC-3-1-3 lambda=1.25
1500 1-2-5-1-4
1-2-5-2-4
1000
1-2-5-3-4
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement [mm]
Figure 97. Load-displacement curve of numerical analysis for different lambda
Figure 97 shows effect of ̅ -parameter on the normalized resistance (Pu/Pyg) due to change of global
slenderness. Six models were taken in comparison. The curve shows similar trend as the other
parameters, however the difference is visible. Changing length or slenderness has significant
influence on the normalized resistance. By changing the slenderness, reduction factor on ultimate
cross-section resistance due to distortional buckling deviate considerably. An average decrease of
9.4% on normalized resistance occurs when slenderness changing from 0.65 to 1.0, while average
decrease of 22.9% occurs with changing slenderness from 1.0 into 1.25. A significant drop exists
when the slenderness is above 1.0.


0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
1-2-5-1-4
0.5
Pu/Pyg
1-2-5-2-4
0.4 1-2-5-3-4
0.3 1-2-5-1-5
0.2 1-2-5-2-5
0.1 1-2-5-3-5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Displacement [mm]
Figure 98. Load-displacement curve with normalized resistance (diff. global slenderness)
Figure 98 shows normalized strength (Pu/Pyg) versus global slenderness ( ̅ ) for models with different
lengths. As it can be seen the slenderness change has quite significant influence on normalized
resistance, especially when the slenderness is above 1.0. The effect is more when the global
slenderness is higher.
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
l=18106mm
0.20
l=27048
0.10 d=500 l=33435
0.00 b=4
0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25
λ_bar
Figure 99. . Normalized resistance vs. length for models with different lengths
4.3.2.2.4 Bolt spacing (b-parameter)

Bolt spacing parameter as the s/d ratio was taken with three different values, i.e. 3, 4, and 5. This
parameter is expected to give significant influence on the global behaviour and strength of the
member since the stiffness of lip connection provided by these bolts determines the buckling mode of
the section. Models with diameter 900mm, cross-section slenderness of 90, and global slenderness of
0.65 were used for comparison. Figure 99 shows that with denser bolts or closer bolt spacing, higher

ultimate resistance will be achieved. An average increase of 12.6% and 13.3% on the ultimate load
is experienced by member for changing bolt ratio from 3 to 4 and from 4 to 5, respectively. Similarly,
the displacement experiences an increase with closer bolt spacing.

18000
16000
14000
12000
EC-3-1-3 b=3
Pu [kN]
10000
EC-3-1-3 b=4
8000 EC-3-1-3 b=5
6000 1-4-3-1-3
4000
1-4-3-1-4
1-4-3-1-5
2000
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement [mm]
Figure 100. Load-displacement curve of numerical analysis for different bolt spacing
Effect of b-parameter on the normalized resistance (Pu/Pyg) is shown in Figure 100. Nine models were
taken in comparison. Similarly to ̅ -parameters, the curve shows significant change of normalized
resistance by shifting the bolt spacing. By changing the bolt spacing, reduction factor on ultimate
cross-section resistance due to distortional buckling deviates considerably. An average decrease of
12.6% on normalized resistance occurs when bolt spacing ratio changing from 3 to 4, while average
decrease of 13.3% occurs with changing bolt spacing ratio from 4 to 5. The changes are in proportion
with the ultimate load changes.

1.2
1
1-4-3-1-3
0.8 1-4-3-1-4
1-4-3-1-5
Pu/Pyg
0.6 1-4-3-2-3
1-4-3-2-4
0.4
1-4-3-2-5
1-4-3-3-3
0.2
1-4-3-3-4
0 1-4-3-3-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement [mm]
Figure 101. Load-displacement curve with normalized resistance (diff. bolt spacing)

Thin
Figure 101 shows normalized strength (P( u/Pyg) versus global slenderness ( ̅ ) for models with different
differ
bolt spacing ratio. As it can be seen in the graph, the change of bolt spacing gives quite significant
influence on normalized resistance. The effect is less in the members in models with larger length or
higher global slenderness.
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
b=3
b=4
0.20
d=900 b=5
slend=90
0.00
0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25
λ_bar
Figure 102.. Normalized resistance vs. length for models with different bolt spacings
4.3.3 Analytical analysis for the proposed columns according to the standard rules EN1993-1-
EN1993
3 and EN1993-1-6
In this section, the results from numerical
numerical analysis of the models used in parametric studies were
compared and verified to the analytical calculations according to EN1993-1-3
EN1993 General rules for cold-
cold
formed members and sheeting and EN1993-1-6 Strength and stability of shell structures. structures The
numerical results were compared to these two design codes with consideration that the expected
behaviour of the proposed columns is in between of plates and shell structural element. Due to large
amount of models, calculations were performed with Python script
script automation; detail of the script can
be found in the Annex A.5.
4.3.3.1 Analytical analysis according to EN1993-1-3

EN1993
EN1993-1-33 considers the studied semi-closed
semi polygonal sections as built-up
up member composed of
plates. Each adjacent edge of the polygonal was considered as simply supported connected plate.
Figure 103.. Simply supported plates compose the polygonal cross-section

cross section

The procedure of calculation is described in chapter 2.3.7 and the complete results are presented in the
Annex. The determination of ultimate resistance of the member includes cross-section resistance and
buckling resistance. Calculation of cross-section resistance covers the local and distortional buckling
mode through reduction factor, namely ρ and χd. Reduction factor due to local buckling is applied to
the plane plate according to the class of cross-section, refer to EC1993-1-5 [10]. Meanwhile,
reduction factor due to distortional buckling is applied to the stiffener element either edge or
intermediate stiffener, and taken into account for flexural buckling of the stiffener. The reduction
factor due to local and or distortional buckling is used as the reduction of the cross-section area.
Calculation of buckling resistance of cold-formed member includes flexural (F), torsional (T), and
flexural torsional (FT) buckling. The lowest reduction factor between these three buckling modes will
govern and used as reduction in buckling resistance calculation.
Part 3.2 and 5.1 of the code rule out the requirement for geometrical and material properties
verification including material increased average yield strength (fya) and influence of rounded corners,
respectively. These two requirements were taken into account and calculated in this analysis
accordingly. Average increased average yield strength was not applicable since the effective areas of
cross section were used in the calculation, while influence of rounded corners can be neglected due to
the using of plane elements along corners during the calculation. Detail of results for this calculation
can be seen in the Annex D.
Cross section classification was carried out according to EN1993-1-1 by considering the polygonal
profiles are composed of simply supported plates. All cross-section models fall in class 3 cross-
section. Double check was done in MATLAB by calculating class of each plate and took the lowest
class as the cross-section class, and by calculating the effective area of each plate then sum up them as
the cross-section effective area. Both methods have agreement in the results. Complete script for
calculating the classification of cross section and effective area can be seen in the MATLAB script for
profiles polygoner.m line 81 – 133 in Annex A.2.
In the analytical calculation, lips along the profiles are considered as stiffeners and refer to EC1993-1-
3 part 5.5.3 plane elements with edge or intermediate stiffeners. It takes into account the assumption
that stiffener behaves as a compression element with continuous partial restraint, with a spring
stiffness and the flexural stiffness of the adjacent plane elements. This stiffener subjects to distortional
buckling mode. Reduction factor due to distortional buckling was calculated based on stiffness and
local slenderness of the stiffener. The procedure included iterative process to obtain refined and less
conservative result by calculating the effective width with a reduced compressive stress σcom,Ed =
χdfyb/γM0with χd taken from previous iteration. In this study, iteration was done until the third step
where enough convergence was achieved, χd,n≈ χd,(n-1) but χd,n≤ χd,(n-1).
Since all cross section are in class 3 then there is no local buckling mode of failure, which
corresponds to the numerical results. Therefore, reduction of cross-section area only comes from
distortional buckling, which applies to the thickness of stiffener area plus the effective portions of the
adjacent plane element.
Table 12 shows the result of analytical calculation according to EC1993-1-3 for cross-section
resistance and comparison between numerical and analytical results.

Table 12. Analytical calculation result of the cross-section resistance for studied columns according to EN1993-1-3
and comparison of the resistance to the FE results
(a) b-parameter=3
d t λ s/d Class Area Cross section resistance

FE FE/
Eff. area Dist. Eff. area
Model ID Local Dist. analysis EC3-1-3
local slend dist. Nc,Rd
Ag ρb Aeff,loc λd χdist Aeff,dis
2 2 2
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [-] [cm ] [-] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [-]
1 2 3 1 3 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 0.79 0.898 141.0 5003.9 5625.7 1.12
1 3 3 1 3 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 0.81 0.882 258.9 9192.4 10583.1 1.15
1 4 3 1 3 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 0.82 0.874 412.8 14653.3 16670.0 1.14
0.65
1 2 5 1 3 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 0.85 0.853 104.9 3724.3 4132.5 1.11
1 3 5 1 3 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 0.86 0.851 209.2 7425.1 8309.6 1.12
1 4 5 1 3 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 0.86 0.850 349.3 12398.7 13828.6 1.12
1 2 3 2 3 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 0.81 0.884 138.8 4927.1 4865.7 0.99
1 3 3 2 3 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 0.83 0.868 254.6 9038.6 8974.8 0.99
1 4 3 2 3 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 0.85 0.859 405.4 14391.9 14330.1 1.00
1 3
1 2 5 2 3 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 0.88 0.836 102.8 3650.2 3665.2 1.00
1 3 5 2 3 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 0.88 0.827 203.2 7213.2 7105.3 0.99
1 4 5 2 3 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 0.88 0.833 342.2 12148.3 12124.6 1.00
1 2 3 3 3 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 1.28 0.542 85.1 3020.0 3335.7 1.10
1 3 3 3 3 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 1.29 0.540 158.6 5628.8 6192.9 1.10
1 4 3 3 3 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 1.29 0.539 254.2 9024.0 9958.4 1.10
1.25
1 2 5 3 3 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 1.28 0.543 66.7 2369.0 2606.7 1.10
1 3 5 3 3 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.29 0.540 132.7 4710.1 5177.7 1.10
1 4 5 3 3 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.29 0.538 221.0 7846.1 8656.9 1.10
(b) b-parameter=4

FE FE/
2 2 2
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [-] [cm ] [-] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [-]
1 2 3 1 4 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 0.92 0.808 126.8 4502.4 4982.5 1.11
1 3 3 1 4 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 0.95 0.785 230.4 8178.2 9053.7 1.11
1 4 3 1 4 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 0.97 0.771 364.1 12924.9 14571.6 1.13
0.65
1 2 5 1 4 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 0.99 0.751 92.3 3278.4 3576.7 1.09
1 3 5 1 4 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.00 0.745 183.2 6502.9 7358.9 1.13
1 4 5 1 4 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.01 0.741 304.5 10809.4 11788.0 1.09
1 2 3 2 4 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 0.95 0.784 123.0 4368.0 4555.0 1.04
1 3 3 2 4 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 0.99 0.758 222.3 7893.1 8128.1 1.03
1 4 3 2 4 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 1.01 0.742 350.1 12426.9 13158.7 1.06
1 4
1 2 5 2 4 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 1.04 0.720 88.5 3143.1 3241.9 1.03
1 3 5 2 4 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.05 0.713 175.2 6221.0 6373.9 1.02
1 4 5 2 4 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.05 0.708 290.8 10322.0 10701.6 1.04
1 2 3 3 4 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 0.96 0.777 122.0 4332.5 3269.5 0.75
1 3 3 3 4 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 1.00 0.750 220.2 7817.0 6020.5 0.77
1 4 3 3 4 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 1.02 0.734 346.3 12293.2 9777.5 0.80
1.25
1 2 5 3 4 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 1.05 0.712 87.5 3107.0 2496.8 0.80
1 3 5 3 4 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.06 0.704 173.1 6146.6 4985.4 0.81
1 4 5 3 4 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.07 0.699 287.0 10189.7 8400.3 0.82

(c) b-parameter=5

FE FE/
2 2 2
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [-] [cm ] [-] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [-]
1 2 3 1 5 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 1.02 0.733 115.0 4082.8 4531.8 1.11
1 3 3 1 5 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 1.06 0.704 206.6 7332.6 8140.8 1.11
1 4 3 1 5 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 1.08 0.686 323.7 11491.3 12630.0 1.10
0.65
1 2 5 1 5 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 1.11 0.667 82.0 2912.5 3161.9 1.09
1 3 5 1 5 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.12 0.657 161.6 5736.4 6417.5 1.12
1 4 5 1 5 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.05 0.714 293.4 10415.4 10664.4 1.02
1 2 3 2 5 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 1.07 0.698 109.6 3890.3 4126.2 1.06
1 3 3 2 5 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 1.11 0.664 194.9 6917.5 7400.3 1.07
1 4 3 2 5 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 1.15 0.642 303.0 10758.1 11412.8 1.06
1 5
1 2 5 2 5 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 1.17 0.623 76.6 2720.3 2840.9 1.04
1 3 5 2 5 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.19 0.610 150.0 5323.7 5661.1 1.06
1 4 5 2 5 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.20 0.600 246.6 8752.7 9216.9 1.05
1 2 3 3 5 500 9 3 157.0 1.0 157.0 1.08 0.688 108.1 3836.6 3176.2 0.83
1 3 3 3 5 700 12 3 293.5 1.0 293.5 1.13 0.653 191.5 6798.7 5901.9 0.87
1 4 3 3 5 900 15 3 472.0 1.0 472.0 1.16 0.629 297.1 10545.4 9320.6 0.88
1.25
1 2 5 3 5 500 7 3 123.0 1.0 123.0 1.19 0.610 75.1 2664.5 2405.3 0.90
1 3 5 3 5 700 10 3 245.8 1.0 245.8 1.21 0.597 146.7 5206.3 4683.0 0.90
1 4 5 3 5 900 13 3 410.7 1.0 410.7 1.22 0.586 240.5 8538.3 7913.5 0.93
The ultimate resistance of cross-section from the finite element analysis showed a good agreement
with EN-1993 part 1-3. However, some numerical models have a disagreement and show unsafe
predictions compared to the design standard. Cluster of models with global slenderness ̅ =1,25 and
bolt spacing b=3 and 4 exhibit considerably lower resistance than the design standard. Examination
showed that these models are all models failed in interaction mode, i.e. distortional-flexural
interaction, as shown in Figure 84. Therefore, it can be concluded that the analytical calculation based
on EC1993-1-3 performed in this section corresponds to the numerical analysis described in chapter
4.3.2; whereas the deviations due to the interaction mode cannot be captured by EN 1993-1-3.
Besides cross-sections resistance, design standard EC1993-1-3 requires calculation of buckling
resistance. In this case, flexural buckling was expected to govern between the three buckling modes,
i.e. flexural, torsional, and flex-torsional buckling since the semi-closed connection provide high
torsional stiffness on the cross-section, as shown in table of cross-section properties and chapter 3.2.1
verification of elastic buckling analysis. Calculation of flexural buckling resistance was done
according to EC1993-1-1. Effective area taken from cross-section resistance calculation was used
when calculating the global slenderness. Buckling class b=0.34 was used, as recommended by
EC1993-1-3. The reduction factor is mainly determined by those two above-mentioned properties. As
for torsional buckling, the expression in EC1993-1-3 was used. Principally, the reduction factor for
torsional and flexural torsional buckling is calculated by substituting elastic critical stress in in the
equations of flexural buckling with torsional and flexural-torsional critical stress. The lowest
reduction factor will be the governing buckling mode and then used in the buckling resistance
Mx
formulae.
x,€• = •. rss .
žŸ>

Table 13. Analytical calculation result of the buckling resistance for studied columns according to EN1993-1-3 and
comparison of the resistance to the FE results
(a) b-parameter=3
d t λ s/d Class Area Buckling resistance

FE FE/
Model ID Eff. Area Flex. Tor. Flex-Tor analysis EC3-1-3
Nb,Rd
Ag Aeff χF χT χFT
2 2
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [cm ] [-] [-] [-] [kN] [kN] [-]
1 2 3 1 3 500 9 3 157.0 141.0 0.819 1.0 0.819 4097.5 5625.7 1.37
1 3 3 1 3 700 12 3 293.5 258.9 0.820 1.0 0.820 7536.4 10583.1 1.40
1 4 3 1 3 900 15 3 472.0 412.8 0.820 1.0 0.820 12022.1 16670.0 1.39
0.65
1 2 5 1 3 500 7 3 123.0 104.9 0.824 1.0 0.824 3069.7 4132.5 1.35
1 3 5 1 3 700 10 3 245.8 209.2 0.824 1.0 0.824 6116.7 8309.6 1.36
1 4 5 1 3 900 13 3 410.7 349.3 0.824 1.0 0.824 10210.9 13828.6 1.35
1 2 3 2 3 500 9 3 157.0 138.8 0.611 1.0 0.611 3011.8 4865.7 1.62
1 3 3 2 3 700 12 3 293.5 254.6 0.613 1.0 0.613 5541.8 8974.8 1.62
1 4 3 2 3 900 15 3 472.0 405.4 0.614 1.0 0.614 8839.9 14330.1 1.62
1 3
1 2 5 2 3 500 7 3 123.0 102.8 0.621 1.0 0.621 2268.5 3665.2 1.62
1 3 5 2 3 700 10 3 245.8 203.2 0.621 1.0 0.621 4476.4 7105.3 1.59
1 4 5 2 3 900 13 3 410.7 342.2 0.620 1.0 0.620 7533.4 12124.6 1.61
1 2 3 3 3 500 9 3 157.0 85.1 0.466 1.0 0.466 1408.2 3335.7 2.37
1 3 3 3 3 700 12 3 293.5 158.6 0.468 1.0 0.468 2635.6 6192.9 2.35
1 4 3 3 3 900 15 3 472.0 254.2 0.469 1.0 0.469 4235.6 9958.4 2.35
1.25
1 2 5 3 3 500 7 3 123.0 66.7 0.477 1.0 0.477 1129.9 2606.7 2.31
1 3 5 3 3 700 10 3 245.8 132.7 0.476 1.0 0.476 2242.1 5177.7 2.31
1 4 5 3 3 900 13 3 410.7 221.0 0.476 1.0 0.476 3731.1 8656.9 2.32
(b) b-parameter=4

FE FE/
Nb,Rd
2 2
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [cm ] [-] [-] [-] [kN] [kN] [-]
1 2 3 1 4 500 9 3 157.0 126.8 0.819 1.0 0.819 3686.9 4982.5 1.35
1 3 3 1 4 700 12 3 293.5 230.4 0.820 1.0 0.820 6704.9 9053.7 1.35
1 4 3 1 4 900 15 3 472.0 364.1 0.820 1.0 0.820 10604.0 14571.6 1.37
0.65
1 2 5 1 4 500 7 3 123.0 92.3 0.824 1.0 0.824 2702.2 3576.7 1.32
1 3 5 1 4 700 10 3 245.8 183.2 0.824 1.0 0.824 5357.0 7358.9 1.37
1 4 5 1 4 900 13 3 410.7 304.5 0.824 1.0 0.824 8902.0 11788.0 1.32
1 2 3 2 4 500 9 3 157.0 123.0 0.611 1.0 0.611 2670.0 4555.0 1.71
1 3 3 2 4 700 12 3 293.5 222.3 0.613 1.0 0.613 4839.5 8128.1 1.68
1 4 3 2 4 900 15 3 472.0 350.1 0.614 1.0 0.614 7632.9 13158.7 1.72
1 4
1 2 5 2 4 500 7 3 123.0 88.5 0.621 1.0 0.621 1953.3 3241.9 1.66
1 3 5 2 4 700 10 3 245.8 175.2 0.621 1.0 0.621 3860.7 6373.9 1.65
1 4 5 2 4 900 13 3 410.7 290.8 0.620 1.0 0.620 6400.9 10701.6 1.67
1 2 3 3 4 500 9 3 157.0 122.0 0.466 1.0 0.466 2020.3 3269.5 1.62
1 3 3 3 4 700 12 3 293.5 220.2 0.468 1.0 0.468 3660.2 6020.5 1.64
1 4 3 3 4 900 15 3 472.0 346.3 0.469 1.0 0.469 5770.1 9777.5 1.69
1.25
1 2 5 3 4 500 7 3 123.0 87.5 0.477 1.0 0.477 1481.9 2496.8 1.68
1 3 5 3 4 700 10 3 245.8 173.1 0.476 1.0 0.476 2926.0 4985.4 1.70
1 4 5 3 4 900 13 3 410.7 287.0 0.476 1.0 0.476 4845.6 8400.3 1.73

(c) b-parameter=5

FE FE/
Nb,Rd
2 2
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [cm ] [-] [-] [-] [kN] [kN] [-]
1 2 3 1 5 500 9 3 157.0 115.0 0.819 1.0 0.819 3343.3 4531.8 1.36
1 3 3 1 5 700 12 3 293.5 206.6 0.820 1.0 0.820 6011.6 8140.8 1.35
1 4 3 1 5 900 15 3 472.0 323.7 0.820 1.0 0.820 9427.9 12630.0 1.34
0.65
1 2 5 1 5 500 7 3 123.0 82.0 0.824 1.0 0.824 2400.6 3161.9 1.32
1 3 5 1 5 700 10 3 245.8 161.6 0.824 1.0 0.824 4725.6 6417.5 1.36
1 4 5 1 5 900 13 3 410.7 293.4 0.824 1.0 0.824 8577.5 10664.4 1.24
1 2 3 2 5 500 9 3 157.0 109.6 0.611 1.0 0.611 2378.1 4126.2 1.74
1 3 3 2 5 700 12 3 293.5 194.9 0.613 1.0 0.613 4241.3 7400.3 1.74
1 4 3 2 5 900 15 3 472.0 303.0 0.614 1.0 0.614 6607.9 11412.8 1.73
1 5
1 2 5 2 5 500 7 3 123.0 76.6 0.621 1.0 0.621 1690.5 2840.9 1.68
1 3 5 2 5 700 10 3 245.8 150.0 0.621 1.0 0.621 3303.8 5661.1 1.71
1 4 5 2 5 900 13 3 410.7 246.6 0.620 1.0 0.620 5427.7 9216.9 1.70
1 2 3 3 5 500 9 3 157.0 108.1 0.466 1.0 0.466 1789.0 3176.2 1.78
1 3 3 3 5 700 12 3 293.5 191.5 0.468 1.0 0.468 3183.3 5901.9 1.85
1 4 3 3 5 900 15 3 472.0 297.1 0.469 1.0 0.469 4949.7 9320.6 1.88
1.25
1 2 5 3 5 500 7 3 123.0 75.1 0.477 1.0 0.477 1270.9 2405.3 1.89
1 3 5 3 5 700 10 3 245.8 146.7 0.476 1.0 0.476 2478.4 4683.0 1.89
1 4 5 3 5 900 13 3 410.7 240.5 0.476 1.0 0.476 4060.3 7913.5 1.95
Table 13 shows the results of buckling resistance calculation according to EC1993-1-3 and
comparison with numerical results. As expected, the governing global buckling mode was flexural
type. No reduction on torsional buckling mode proves that the torsional stiffness of the cross section
was fully (or almost fully) developed, and moreover shows the effectiveness of lip connection that
form semi-closed cross-section. As for comparison, it can be seen that the ultimate resistance from FE
analysis were much higher than the EC-1993-1-3 buckling resistance. The design standard
underpredicted the strengths of all models since the failure modes that occurred were not global
flexural type. From these analyses it is known that this type of cross-section, with the specified local
and global slenderness, seemed much more prominent for distortional failure mode.
It is worth noting that for this type of cross-section, adopting the design standard without knowing the
exact failure mode can result in too conservative predictions. Local slenderness comes from the bolt
spacing which significantly determine the failure mode and hence the ultimate strength of the
member, is not included in the current design standard.
4.3.3.2 Analytical analysis according to EN1993-1-6

EN1993-1-6 was used to see the closeness of this type of cross-section to the behaviour of shell
structures and also the applicability of this design standard for this type of sections. By using
EN1993-1-6, the studied columns were considered as tubular cross section which means fully closed
and fully rigid connected. The studied semi-closed polygonal sections were then classified with refer
to Table 5.2 sheet 3 of EC1993-1-1. Based on this table, the limit for class 3 cross-sections is d/t ≤
90ɛ2, with d/ ɛ2t known as cross-section slenderness. Since two values of cross-section slenderness,
i.e. 90 and 110 were used in this study then some cross-sections will be class 4.

The procedure of calculation based on EC1993-1-6 is described in chapter 2.3.8 and the workflow can
be seen in Figure 30.Ultimate resistance calculation was intended to investigate loss of stability under
compressive membrane or shear membrane stresses in the shell wall, as expected will govern in this
studied columns. The buckling limit state (LS3) was calculated for this purpose.
Design resistances for stress components are obtained using buckling reduction factors χ taking into
account:
- Imperfections depending on the Fabrication Tolerance Quality Class
- Boundary Conditions of the cylindrical shell
The partial safety factor may be defined in the National Annex. The recommended value is žŸ> =
1.1. The buckling reduction factors are determined as a function of the relative slenderness of the
shell, defined for different stress components, i.e. meridional, circumferential and shear. The elastic
critical buckling stresses were obtained using appropriate expression in Annex D of EC1993-1-6. In
this study, the parameter Cxb was taken equal to 1.0 as a conservative value for long equivalent
cylinders, while the characteristic imperfection amplitude Δwk was calculated based on fabrication
taken as ̅#9=0.2, β=0.6, and η=1.0. Detail calculation of analytical based on EC1993-1-6 can be seen
quality parameter Q, which is taken as Class C (normal), equal to 16. Other parameters should be
in Python script in Annex A.5. Results of the analytical calculation are presented in Table 18. For
cross-sections with class 3, the design resistance was calculated as the full effective cross-section
resistance, as per EC1993-1-1.
Table 14. Analytical calculation result of the design resistance for studied columns according to EN1993-1-6 and
comparison of the resistance to the FE results
(a) b-parameter=3
Real Design
d t l d/t λ s/d Class Area FE FE/
cs-slend resistance
Model ID analysis EC3-1-6
EC3-1-3
Ag NRd_shell
2
[mm] [mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [-]
12313 500 9 18098 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.43 5625.7 1.01
13313 700 12 25339 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 10583.1 1.02
14313 900 15 32580 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 16670.0 1.22
0.65
12513 500 7 18106 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 4132.5 1.18
13513 700 10 25347 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 8309.6 1.19
14513 900 13 32588 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 13828.6 1.18
12323 500 9 27035 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 4865.7 0.87
13323 700 12 37852 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 8974.8 0.86
14323 900 15 48669 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 14330.1 1.04
1 3
12523 500 7 27048 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 3665.2 1.05
13523 700 10 37865 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 7105.3 1.01
14523 900 13 48682 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 12124.6 1.03
12333 500 9 33419 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 3335.7 0.60
13333 700 12 46790 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 6192.9 0.59
14333 900 15 60161 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 9958.4 0.73
1.25
12533 500 7 33435 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 2606.7 0.75
13533 700 10 46806 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 5177.7 0.74
14533 900 13 60177 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 8656.9 0.74

(b) b-parameter=4
Real Design
cs-slend resistance
EC3-1-3
Ag NRd_shell
2
[mm] [mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [-]
12314 500 9 18098 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 4982.5 0.89
13314 700 12 25339 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 9053.7 0.87
14314 900 15 32580 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 14571.6 1.06
0.65
12514 500 7 18106 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 3576.7 1.02
13514 700 10 25347 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 7358.9 1.05
14514 900 13 32588 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 11788.0 1.01
12324 500 9 27035 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 4555.0 0.82
13324 700 12 37852 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 8128.1 0.78
14324 900 15 48669 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 13158.7 0.96
1 4
12524 500 7 27048 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 3241.9 0.93
13524 700 10 37865 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 6373.9 0.91
14524 900 13 48682 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 10701.6 0.91
12334 500 9 33419 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 3269.5 0.59
13334 700 12 46790 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 6020.5 0.58
14334 900 15 60161 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 9777.5 0.71
1.25
12534 500 7 33435 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 2496.8 0.71
13534 700 10 46806 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 4985.4 0.71
14534 900 13 60177 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 8400.3 0.72
(c) b-parameter=5
Real Design
cs-slend resistance
EC3-1-3
Ag NRd_shell
2
[mm] [mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [-]
12315 500 9 18098 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 4531.8 0.81
13315 700 12 25339 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 8140.8 0.78
14315 900 15 32580 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 12630.0 0.92
0.65
12515 500 7 18106 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 3161.9 0.90
13515 700 10 25347 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 6417.5 0.92
14515 900 13 32588 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 10664.4 0.91
12325 500 9 27035 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 4126.2 0.74
13325 700 12 37852 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 7400.3 0.71
14325 900 15 48669 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 11412.8 0.83
1 5
12525 500 7 27048 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 2840.9 0.81
13525 700 10 37865 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 5661.1 0.81
14525 900 13 48682 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 9216.9 0.79
12335 500 9 33419 55.6 83.9 3 157.0 5573.4 3176.2 0.57
13335 700 12 46790 58.3 88.1 3 293.5 10418.6 5901.9 0.57
14335 900 15 60161 60.0 90.6 4 472.0 13714.0 9320.6 0.68
1.25
12535 500 7 33435 71.4 107.9 4 123.0 3495.4 2405.3 0.69
13535 700 10 46806 70.0 105.7 4 245.8 7005.2 4683.0 0.67
14535 900 13 60177 69.2 104.6 4 410.7 11721.7 7913.5 0.68

Table 14 shows the ultimate resistance based on the design standard and comparison with FE analysis.
It shows the same trend as resistance calculated by EC1993-1-3, characterized by declining resistance
with increasing member slenderness and bolt spacing. However, more models are in unsafe region
when comparing the FE results with the analytical ones. This result gives an insight that EN1993-1-6
overpredicted the ultimate strength for majority of the models.
The disagreement significantly increases when the member slenderness and bolt spacing increases. It
provides very unsafe predictions for members with high slenderness and bolt spacing. Those result
suggested that analytical resistance calculation according to EN1993-1-6 is not applicable for this type
of cross section with the predefined parameters, since the expression was derived for flexural buckling
due to bending and does not take into account distortional buckling, which exists and was dominant
mode in this case.
Taking the general overview of verification on ultimate resistance between the FE results and
analytical calculation according to Eurocode, it can be seen that the studied columns show an in-
between post-buckling behaviour of perfect column and shell structures. It should be treated as built-
up member composed of plates and hence to be designed accordingly.
As for comparison, Table 15 shows the ratio of FEM-to-analytical calculation results.
Table 15. Comparison of ultimate resistance of the studied column according to FE analysis and design standards
EC1993-1-3 and EC1993-1-6
(a) b-parameter=3
FE FE/ FE/
d t λ s/d Area EC3-1-3 EC3-1-6
analysis EC3-1-3 EC3-1-6
Nc,Rd Nb,Rd Nd_shell NFEM,Rd
Model ID cross
cross buckling
Ag buckling section
section
2
[mm] [mm] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [-] [-] [-]
12313 500 9 157.0 5003.9 4097.5 5573.4 5625.7 1.12 1.37 1.01
13313 700 12 293.5 9192.4 7536.4 10418.6 10583.1 1.15 1.40 1.02
14313 900 15 472.0 14653.3 12022.1 13714.0 16670.0 1.14 1.39 1.22
0.65
12513 500 7 123.0 3724.3 3069.7 3495.4 4132.5 1.11 1.35 1.18
13513 700 10 245.8 7425.1 6116.7 7005.2 8309.6 1.12 1.36 1.19
14513 900 13 410.7 12398.7 10210.9 11721.7 13828.6 1.12 1.35 1.18
12323 500 9 157.0 4927.1 3011.8 5573.4 4865.7 0.99 1.62 0.87
13323 700 12 293.5 9038.6 5541.8 10418.6 8974.8 0.99 1.62 0.86
14323 900 15 472.0 14391.9 8839.9 13714.0 14330.1 1.00 1.62 1.04
1 3
12523 500 7 123.0 3650.2 2268.5 3495.4 3665.2 1.00 1.62 1.05
13523 700 10 245.8 7213.2 4476.4 7005.2 7105.3 0.99 1.59 1.01
14523 900 13 410.7 12148.3 7533.4 11721.7 12124.6 1.00 1.61 1.03
12333 500 9 157.0 3020.0 1408.2 5573.4 3335.7 1.10 2.37 0.60
13333 700 12 293.5 5628.8 2635.6 10418.6 6192.9 1.10 2.35 0.59
14333 900 15 472.0 9024.0 4235.6 13714.0 9958.4 1.10 2.35 0.73
1.25
12533 500 7 123.0 2369.0 1129.9 3495.4 2606.7 1.10 2.31 0.75
13533 700 10 245.8 4710.1 2242.1 7005.2 5177.7 1.10 2.31 0.74
14533 900 13 410.7 7846.1 3731.1 11721.7 8656.9 1.10 2.32 0.74

(b) b-parameter=4
FE FE/ FE/
Model ID cross
cross buckling
Ag buckling section
section
2
[mm] [mm] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [-] [-] [-]
12314 500 9 157.0 4502.4 3686.9 5573.4 4982.5 1.11 1.35 0.89
13314 700 12 293.5 8178.2 6704.9 10418.6 9053.7 1.11 1.35 0.87
14314 900 15 472.0 12924.9 10604.0 13714.0 14571.6 1.13 1.37 1.06
0.65
12514 500 7 123.0 3278.4 2702.2 3495.4 3576.7 1.09 1.32 1.02
13514 700 10 245.8 6502.9 5357.0 7005.2 7358.9 1.13 1.37 1.05
14514 900 13 410.7 10809.4 8902.0 11721.7 11788.0 1.09 1.32 1.01
12324 500 9 157.0 4368.0 2670.0 5573.4 4555.0 1.04 1.71 0.82
13324 700 12 293.5 7893.1 4839.5 10418.6 8128.1 1.03 1.68 0.78
14324 900 15 472.0 12426.9 7632.9 13714.0 13158.7 1.06 1.72 0.96
1 4
12524 500 7 123.0 3143.1 1953.3 3495.4 3241.9 1.03 1.66 0.93
13524 700 10 245.8 6221.0 3860.7 7005.2 6373.9 1.02 1.65 0.91
14524 900 13 410.7 10322.0 6400.9 11721.7 10701.6 1.04 1.67 0.91
12334 500 9 157.0 4332.5 2020.3 5573.4 3269.5 0.75 1.62 0.59
13334 700 12 293.5 7817.0 3660.2 10418.6 6020.5 0.77 1.64 0.58
14334 900 15 472.0 12293.2 5770.1 13714.0 9777.5 0.80 1.69 0.71
1.25
12534 500 7 123.0 3107.0 1481.9 3495.4 2496.8 0.80 1.68 0.71
13534 700 10 245.8 6146.6 2926.0 7005.2 4985.4 0.81 1.70 0.71
14534 900 13 410.7 10189.7 4845.6 11721.7 8400.3 0.82 1.73 0.72
(c) b-parameter=5
FE FE/ FE/
Model ID cross
cross buckling
Ag buckling section
section
2
[mm] [mm] [-] [cm ] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [-] [-] [-]
12315 500 9 157.0 4082.8 3343.3 5573.4 4531.8 1.11 1.36 0.81
13315 700 12 293.5 7332.6 6011.6 10418.6 8140.8 1.11 1.35 0.78
14315 900 15 472.0 11491.3 9427.9 13714.0 12630.0 1.10 1.34 0.92
0.65
12515 500 7 123.0 2912.5 2400.6 3495.4 3161.9 1.09 1.32 0.90
13515 700 10 245.8 5736.4 4725.6 7005.2 6417.5 1.12 1.36 0.92
14515 900 13 410.7 10415.4 8577.5 11721.7 10664.4 1.02 1.24 0.91
12325 500 9 157.0 3890.3 2378.1 5573.4 4126.2 1.06 1.74 0.74
13325 700 12 293.5 6917.5 4241.3 10418.6 7400.3 1.07 1.74 0.71
14325 900 15 472.0 10758.1 6607.9 13714.0 11412.8 1.06 1.73 0.83
1 5
12525 500 7 123.0 2720.3 1690.5 3495.4 2840.9 1.04 1.68 0.81
13525 700 10 245.8 5323.7 3303.8 7005.2 5661.1 1.06 1.71 0.81
14525 900 13 410.7 8752.7 5427.7 11721.7 9216.9 1.05 1.70 0.79
12335 500 9 157.0 3836.6 1789.0 5573.4 3176.2 0.83 1.78 0.57
13335 700 12 293.5 6798.7 3183.3 10418.6 5901.9 0.87 1.85 0.57
14335 900 15 472.0 10545.4 4949.7 13714.0 9320.6 0.88 1.88 0.68
1.25
12535 500 7 123.0 2664.5 1270.9 3495.4 2405.3 0.90 1.89 0.69
13535 700 10 245.8 5206.3 2478.4 7005.2 4683.0 0.90 1.89 0.67
14535 900 13 410.7 8538.3 4060.3 11721.7 7913.5 0.93 1.95 0.68

Based on Table 15, a relation between ultimate resistance of semi-closed polygonal profiles and the
‘equivalent’ cylindrical shell can be made. Figure 103 and 104 shows the ultimate resistance
polygonal-cylinder ratio (Pu-poly/Pu-cshell) versus member global slenderness ( ̅ ) of all columns. As
shown in the subchapter 4.3 Factorial design, the most significant factor interaction are member
slenderness-bolt spacing and member slenderness-diameter, hence scatter plot was made for this two
factor interactions. It can be seen that resistance of semi-closed polygonal profiles are higher than the
same diameter circular shell when bolt spacing ratio are 3 and for global slenderness of 0.65. The
higher the bolt spacing and member slenderness, the polygonal profiles tend to have declining
resistance and hence pose lower capacity than the circular ones.
1.40
b=3
y = -0.715x + 1.625 b=4
1.20 R² = 0.785 b=5
y = -0.508x + 1.337
R² = 0.720
1.00
Pu-poly / Pu-cshell
y = -0.380x + 1.133
0.80 R² = 0.747
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50
λ
Figure 104. Comparison of resistance between polygonal vs. cylindrical shell (scatters’ icon in varied b)
As for diameter point of view, resistance of semi-closed polygonal profiles are higher than the same
diameter circular shell for diameter 900, 700 and 500, with global slenderness of 0.65 and bolt
spacing ratio of 3. Similarly as above, the higher the member slenderness, the polygonal profiles tend
to have declining resistance and hence pose lower capacity than the circular ones.
1.40
d=500
d=700
1.20 y = -0.553x + 1.430 d=900
R² = 0.668
1.00
Pu-poly / Pu-cshell
y = -0.518x + 1.331
R² = 0.595
0.80 y = -0.532x + 1.334

R² = 0.599
0.60
0.40
0.20
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5
λ
Figure 105. Comparison of resistance between polygonal vs. cylindrical shell (scatters’ icon in varied d)

Thin
4.3.4 Axial Compression and Bending Moment

M
Structural members subjected to axial compression and bending moment are known as beam-column.
beam
When a doubly symmetric cross--section
section is subjected to axial compression and bending moment about
its minor axis, the member may fail flexurally by either yielding
yielding or local buckling at the location of
the maximum moment. Since in this type of profiles the shear center coincides with the center of
gravity, therefore torsional-flexural
flexural mode can be neglected. For torsionally
sionally non-susceptible
non shapes
with closed circular
rcular tubes like the ones in this study, when the end bending moment is applied, the
member may fail flexurally about the x-axis
x or y-axis.
The resistance of a cross-section

section subject to compression and bending moment can be shown by the
interaction curve between the normal force NRd and the internal bending moment MRd. The interaction
curve has some significant
ficant points, shown in Figure 105.. These points represent the stress distributions
on the cross section.. The internal moments and axial loads belonging to these stress distributions can
be easily calculated elastically or plastically using equilibrium for the classification of cross-section.
cross
(a) Elastic and plastic limit envelopes for (b) Plastic limit envelope
elope with stress distributions
a rectangular cross section
Figure 106.Interaction
Interaction curve for combined bending (M) and axial force (N)
EC1993-1-33 suggests the interaction between axial force and bending moment to be obtained from
second-order
order analysis of the member, based on the properties of the effective cross-section.
cross An
interaction formula is defined, as follows.
+W j 1.0
9.® 9.®
”• ”•
W X X
x,€• x,€•
where Nb,Rd is the design the design buckling resistance of a compression member (flexural, torsional
or torsional-flexural
flexural buckling) and Mb,Rd is the design bending moment resistance and MEd includes
the effects of shift of neutral axis, if relevant.
In this study, 4-points N-M

M interaction curves were created. The ultimate axial resistance (P
( u) was
taken for the applied bending moment with a proportion to the plastic moment resistance, namely
0.05Mu, 0.1Mu, and 0.15Mu. These values of applied bending moment were taken with consideration
that the column members in this study are in the form of lattice structure where ideally no bending
moment exists. However, in practical condition a relatively small bending moment may occur,

induced by unbalanced axial forces from diagonals. Therefore a small proportion of plastic moment
capacity was taken. Total of 162 models with combined axial compression and bending moment were
created and analysed.
Axial compression load, CF3, was applied at one end of the column while bending moment about x-
axis, CM1, applied at middle connection of the member.
Table 16.Ultimate resistance and corresponding displacement for models subject to axial compression and bending
moment
(a) d-parameter=500
bolt
Dia. Thick. Slend. Max. load Shortening Max. load Shortening Max. load Shortening Max. load Shortening
spacing
Model ID N N-M (05) N-M (10) N-M (15)
d t λ s/d
Pu disp Pu disp Pu disp Pu disp
[mm] [mm] [-] [-] [kN] [mm] [kN] [mm] [kN] [mm] [kN] [mm]
1 2 3 1 3 3 5625.7 29.13 5605.36 29.03 5545.8 28.72 5466.43 28.29
1 2 3 1 4 0.65 4 4982.5 26.03 5014.15 26.34 5036.6 26.45 5043.99 26.32
1 2 3 1 5 5 4531.8 24.75 4508.34 24.49 4483.6 24.23 4465.95 24.16
1 2 3 2 3 3 4865.7 37.93 4666.12 36.39 4520.4 35.23 4401.06 34.38
1 2 3 2 4 9 1 4 4555.0 35.44 4690.57 36.39 4744.3 36.95 4601.61 35.84
1 2 3 2 5 5 4126.2 32.17 4135.20 32.28 4065.0 31.80 3979.55 31.08
1 2 3 3 3 3 3335.7 34.09 3363.15 33.56 3321.8 33.91 3275.82 33.48
1 2 3 3 4 1.25 4 3269.5 33.10 3306.80 32.62 3269.4 32.29 3219.05 32.11
1 2 3 3 5 5 3176.2 31.49 3231.36 31.82 3199.2 31.26 3155.90 31.12
500
1 2 5 1 3 3 4132.5 27.34 4123.04 27.26 4092.6 27.06 4058.97 26.86
1 2 5 1 4 0.65 4 3576.7 24.21 3590.68 24.29 3596.1 24.31 3595.79 24.39
1 2 5 1 5 5 3161.9 23.20 3151.29 23.02 3130.2 22.68 3082.00 21.02
1 2 5 2 3 3 3665.2 36.35 3868.25 38.25 3797.8 37.65 3677.00 36.57
1 2 5 2 4 7 1 4 3241.9 32.20 3268.79 32.45 3227.8 32.15 3178.39 31.61
1 2 5 2 5 5 2840.9 28.59 2803.88 28.36 2768.9 28.05 2734.77 27.83
1 2 5 3 3 3 2606.7 33.78 2682.04 32.95 2616.0 33.37 2565.73 32.58
1 2 5 3 4 1.25 4 2496.8 31.14 2565.54 31.90 2572.0 31.91 2512.11 31.39
1 2 5 3 5 5 2405.3 30.03 2473.61 30.67 2694.5 33.12 2420.80 29.99
(b) b-parameter=700
bolt
spacing
Model ID N N-M (05) N-M (10) N-M (15)
d t λ s/d
1 3 3 1 3 3 10583.1 41.10 10451.10 40.54 10282.8 39.92 10116.05 39.30
1 3 3 1 4 0.65 4 9053.7 35.59 9129.54 35.51 9188.0 35.69 9231.05 35.87
1 3 3 1 5 5 8140.8 33.86 8166.73 34.09 8124.0 33.62 7977.14 31.25
1 3 3 2 3 3 8974.8 52.52 8689.70 50.90 8469.3 49.77 8272.49 48.72
1 3 3 2 4 12 1 4 8128.1 47.34 8263.92 48.24 8202.6 47.90 8033.41 47.04
1 3 3 2 5 5 7400.3 43.45 7346.71 43.11 7212.7 42.33 7094.29 41.70
1 3 3 3 3 3 6192.9 47.06 6401.78 46.04 6215.2 47.12 6088.92 45.39
1 3 3 3 4 1.25 4 6020.5 45.09 6150.01 45.43 6284.8 46.69 6052.44 45.10
1 3 3 3 5 5 5901.9 43.72 6029.10 44.63 6401.1 46.10 5909.22 43.29
700
1 3 5 1 3 3 8309.6 38.52 8190.04 37.96 8055.9 37.39 7938.30 36.86
1 3 5 1 4 0.65 4 7358.9 34.13 7341.72 34.05 7270.4 33.72 7169.81 33.33
1 3 5 1 5 5 6417.5 32.86 6408.45 32.98 6351.3 32.44 6090.13 28.48
1 3 5 2 3 3 7105.3 49.55 7334.15 51.22 6955.5 48.71 6813.75 47.73
1 3 5 2 4 10 1 4 6373.9 44.55 6515.84 45.36 6567.2 45.79 6461.13 45.10
1 3 5 2 5 5 5661.1 40.01 5593.41 39.46 5520.2 39.03 5455.60 38.78
1 3 5 3 3 3 5177.7 47.83 5147.44 47.26 5090.7 48.07 5037.88 46.74
1 3 5 3 4 1.25 4 4985.4 44.02 5019.61 44.96 4947.7 43.99 4872.77 43.39
1 3 5 3 5 5 4683.0 40.90 4729.89 41.38 4746.5 41.93 4691.82 41.49

(c) d-parameter=900
bolt
spacing
Model ID N N-M (05) N-M (10) N-M (15)
d t λ s/d
1 4 3 1 3 3 16670.0 51.85 16582.64 51.52 16390.7 50.90 16126.15 50.01
1 4 3 1 4 0.65 4 14571.6 45.18 14640.38 45.50 14498.1 44.96 14491.32 45.02
1 4 3 1 5 5 12630.0 41.79 12678.90 42.07 12662.3 41.89 12435.65 40.08
1 4 3 2 3 3 14330.1 66.74 14622.25 68.38 14090.3 65.81 13637.78 63.91
1 4 3 2 4 15 1 4 13158.7 61.34 13515.38 62.97 13774.2 64.35 13247.31 61.89
1 4 3 2 5 5 11412.8 53.88 11446.37 54.06 11255.5 52.95 11059.90 51.96
1 4 3 3 3 3 9958.4 60.53 9967.40 60.51 9732.7 60.03 9732.66 60.03
1 4 3 3 4 1.25 4 9777.5 58.85 9806.37 59.72 9638.8 57.23 9424.57 55.67
1 4 3 3 5 5 9320.6 54.80 9345.13 54.63 9249.1 54.34 9135.92 53.75
900
1 4 5 1 3 3 13828.6 49.28 13775.28 49.20 13673.4 48.85 13559.91 48.47
1 4 5 1 4 0.65 4 11788.0 43.61 11839.70 43.74 11871.3 43.93 11869.11 43.73
1 4 5 1 5 5 10664.4 42.53 10588.47 41.91 10487.2 41.25 10408.13 40.40
1 4 5 2 3 3 12124.6 65.03 12608.89 67.59 12315.8 66.26 11998.24 64.66
1 4 5 2 4 13 1 4 10701.6 57.72 10806.27 57.96 10639.7 57.05 10480.09 56.24
1 4 5 2 5 5 9216.9 50.32 9074.74 49.42 8937.6 48.51 8813.19 48.05
1 4 5 3 3 3 8656.9 61.02 8678.68 60.56 8581.1 60.92 8464.29 60.53
1 4 5 3 4 1.25 4 8400.3 57.10 8399.80 56.50 8293.8 56.23 8188.90 55.65
1 4 5 3 5 5 7913.5 53.21 7874.48 52.71 7773.0 52.03 7669.76 51.49
Table 16 shows the results of ultimate resistance and corresponding displacement for models subject
to axial compression and bending moment. As expected, the presence of bending moment slightly
lowers the ultimate strength of the columns due to the interaction between them. In average, the
ultimate load decreased 0.52% by applying bending moment. However, some models show an
anomaly where the ultimate strength went higher as bending moment was applied. A close
examination on the failure state of the members suggested that the increase happened due to the
favourable effect of moment direction on the flexural mode of the column under axial loading. It gives
stabilizing effect to the secondary moment resulting from the applied axial load P and the deflection
of the member. Then at a point of certain increased applied moment, the flexural mode changes
direction and the resistance decent. The application of bending moment will change the contribution
from other modes, i.e. flexural mode on the interaction and hence change the failure mode.
1.4
b=3
b=4
1.2 b=5
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.2)
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.3)
1
EC-3-1-1 Eq (6.49)
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Figure 107.Parametric study results of the studied columns (normalized resistance based on Pyg

1.4
b=3
b=4
b=5
1.2 EC3-1-5 Eq (4.2)
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.3)
EC-3-1-1 Eq (6.49)
1 EC3-1-3 Eq (5.12)
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
1.4
b=3
b=4
b=5
1.2 EC3-1-5 Eq (4.2)
EC3-1-5 Eq (4.3)
EC-3-1-1 Eq (6.49)
1 EC3-1-3 Eq (5.12)
Pu-FEM/Pyg
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Figure 106 – 108 shows the normalized resistance versus slenderness of the models subject to
combined axial compression and bending moment. It can be seen that in general more scatter of data
points are in unsafe region found in the models. Models with low slenderness tend to be more affected
by the moment application, while some models with high slenderness were more likely to experience
an increase of ultimate strength.

Axial – bending moment interaction curves were constructed to give a clearer picture of the influence
of N-M interaction on the ultimate strength of the models. The curve compared group of models with
the same diameter and cross-section slenderness, different lambda and bolt spacing.
N/Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 2 3 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 2 3 1 4
RIKS- 1 2 3 1 5
0.9
RIKS- 1 2 3 2 3
0.8
RIKS- 1 2 3 2 4
0.7 RIKS- 1 2 3 2 5
RIKS- 1 2 3 3 3
0.6
RIKS- 1 2 3 3 4
0.5 RIKS- 1 2 3 3 5
0.4
0.3
M/Mu
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure 110. N-M interaction curve for models with kept dia. 500 and slend. 90;
varied lambda and bolt spacing
N/Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 4 5 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 4 5 1 4
RIKS- 1 4 5 1 5
0.9
RIKS- 1 4 5 2 3
0.8
RIKS- 1 4 5 2 4
0.7 RIKS- 1 4 5 2 5
RIKS- 1 4 5 3 3
0.6
RIKS- 1 4 5 3 4
0.5 RIKS- 1 4 5 3 5
0.4
0.3
M/Mu
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure 111. N-M interaction curve for models with kept dia. 900 and slend. 110;
varied lambda and bolt spacing
The axial-bending moment interaction curve shows that the parameters did influence significantly on
the effect of bending moment to the ultimate strength of the members. Slenderness λ-parameter
seemed to give more considerably effect on the N-M interaction, compared to other parameters. The
effect of interaction was higher with higher slenderness. More slender columns were also more likely
to have higher contribution from flexural mode in the interaction of failure. Complete N-M interaction
curve can be seen in Annex B.3.
Figure 111 shows failure mode of model 1-2-5-3-5 under pure axial compression force and combined
bending with 0.05M, 0.1M, and 0,15M. By applying bending moment with various magnitudes, the
failure mode shape of the member was changed and the resistance changed accordingly.

Thin
RIKS-N RIKS-NM05
RIKS
RIKS-NM10 RIKS-NM15
Figure 112. Failure mode of model RIKS-1-2-5-3-5
Figure 112 shows the history of rotation u1 for model 1-2-5-3-5.

1 5. This affirms the change of flexural
mode shape on the model due to applied bending moment. The complete data of rotation u1 of the
members can be seen in Annex B.2.
B
Load vs. rotation

3000
2500
2000
Load
1500
[kN]
1000
RIKS
RIKS-NM 1-2-…
500
0
-1.60E-02 -1.40E-02 -1.20E-02 -1.00E-02 -8.00E-03 -6.00E-03 -4.00E-03 -2.00E-03 0.00E+00 2.00E-03
2.00E
Rotation [rad]
Figure 113. Rotation u1 of model RIKS-NM-1-2-5-3-5
4.3.5 Resistance-to-weight
weight ratio
In order to assess the efficiency of a structure - normally associated with the amount of material used,
a strength-to-weight
weight ratio was calculated. It compares the weight of the structure itself to the amount
of weight it can carry/support without collapsing. A very high strength-to-weight
strength weight ratio can be

achieved either by optimizing the material or the structural system itself. As material, steel has a good
strength-to-weight ratio; steel construction requires less material than the traditional construction
technologies and contributes to reducing a building's environmental impact. Since one of the purposes
of developing this type of structural member is as structural optimization, this parameter becomes
important to be considered.
Due to large number of models, only samples were taken for the comparison here. Complete
calculation data of s/w ratio can be seen in the Annex D. Strength-to-weight ratio was calculated for
different diameter, thickness, bolt spacing and length.
2.5
lambda=0.65
lambda=1.0
2 lambda=1.25
N/mass [kN/kg]
1.5
0.5
slend=9
0
500 600 700 800 900
Diameter [mm]
Figure 114.strength-to-weight ratio versus diameters
Profiles with diameter 500mm give the highest strength-to-weight ratio and with increasing diameter,
the ratio decreases. The Effect is less in the members with high slenderness.
1.8
1.6
1.4
N/mass [kN/kg]
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 lambda=0.65
d=700
lambda=1.0
0 lambda=1.25
10 11 12
Thickness [mm]
Figure 115.strength-to-weight ratio versus thicknesses
Influence of thickness is not significant on the strength-to-weight ratio. Higher thickness gives higher
s/w ratio. Meanwhile, bolt spacing ratio equal to 3d gives the highest s/w ratio. By increasing bolt
spacing, the ratio will decrease, however the influence is less for high slenderness.

2.5
N/mass [kN/kg]
1.5
0.5
lambda=0.65
d=500 lambda=1.0
0 lambda=1.25
3 4 5
bolt spacing = s/d
Figure 116.strength-to-weight ratio versus bolt spacing
Figure 116 shows that the influence of member slenderness on s/w ratio was significant. The ratio
dropped considerably with increasing slenderness; the s/w ratio less than 1.0 was shown by members
with slenderness ̅ >1.
1.6
t=15
1.4
t=13
1.2
N/mass [kN/kg]
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
d=900
0
0.65 0.80 0.95 1.10 1.25
λ_bar
Figure 117.strength-to-weight ratio versus member slenderness
From the comparison, it can be seen that the significant parameters on the strength-to-weight ratio
were member slenderness and diameter. The choice of geometrical properties in the design of semi-
closed polygonal cross-section is of important aspect and will determine the resistance and
effectiveness of the structure.
As a more accurate and reliable method of analysis, interaction plot from factorial design was created
to see the significant factor and interaction between factors for response variable: strength-to-weight
ratio. From Figure 117, it can be seen that the most significant factor for s/w ratio is member
slenderness and then diameter. Meanwhile, the most significant interaction is member slenderness-
diameter and member slenderness-bolt spacing.

Figure 118. Interaction plot for strength-to-weight ratio
This far, from the analysis it is known that two factors in this parametric study were the most
significant factor for the resistance of the members: diameter and member slenderness. As for
interaction between factors, the significant interaction is from member slenderness-diameter and
member slenderness bolt spacing.
137
Thin
5 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING OF THE STIFFNESS ON LIPS’

BOLTED CONNECTIONS
The value of connection stiffness on the lips of folded plates becomes one important parameter in the
study. These stiffnesses will determine the buckling behaviour of the member as a semi-closed
semi section
and are useful for application in finite strip numerical modeling, e.g. CUFSM. For such thin walled
open section, stability i.e.. distortional buckling, is one of the most dangerous failure cases, it leads to
brittle failure. At the end, the acquired stiffness of connection can also be used to establish effective
bolting density for this type of semi-closed
semi cross section.
5.1 Modelling and Analysis Method
As described in the introduction chapter that as individual plate, the section has very small torsional
stiffness, which in turn inherit very low stability, so that it is unfavorable for compression
compress members. It
will crush at a low level of compressive loading. One way of improving the resistance is to assemble
them and make the cross-section
section closed by using mechanical fasteners. It is called semi-closed cross-
section because it is not continuously and rigidly connected.
connected Therefore, the level of connection, in this
case is its stiffness, play a vital role in the stability and resistance of the member.
Bolts
olts were devices used to connect the folded plates to form the assembled closed section. The bolts
were placed in correspondence to the middle line of each lip of folded plates longitudinally along the
span. Spacing of the bolt was one parameter
p in the parametric study with the calculation and result
already described in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4, respectively. In the modeling process, rigid-body
rigid
constraint which working between paired holes perimeter represent the bolt connection.
In this chapter, analyses were carried out in FEM ABAQUS for certain models in order to obtain
translational and rotational spring stiffness of the connection.. The relationship between developed
reaction force and relative displacement was adopted to estimate the stiffness value.
Figure 119.. Concept of stiffness of the connection of folded plates assembly
In order to simulate the stiffness calculation of bolt, unit displacement is given for each bolt set in
radial direction. This scheme was modeled by applying the displacement on this RP. Reaction force at
the RP of the bolt set was then measured to get the spring stiffness in this direction (Figure 119).
he Stiffness on Lips’ Bolted Connections

Finite Element Modelling of the 137
Thin
Figure 120. Schematic procedure for stiffness calculation
Steps of stiffness calculation can be summarized as follows:

1. Consider one of the three sectors. It is going to see the stiffness that the other two sectors provide
2. Looking at set of bolts independently. By “set of bolts” it means the 2 bolts of a cross-section.
cross So,
for one sector there are 2 bolts holding on every bolted cross-section
cross
3. Construct a local stiffness matrix for one set of bolts (the 2 bolts connecting one sector to the
other two)
a. When calculating a stiffness
tiffness matrix, one locks/fixes all the DOFs and activates/applies
displacement on one DOF each time, measuring the reactions on all the DOFs
b. There are a number of bolt sets on each span. Each bolt set is one DOF, namely DOF i.
Supposing that it looks for a 3x3 stiffness matrix [K]. So, if focus given on one bolt set (one
DOF), the 2 neighboring sets are the two extra DOFs of the matrix [K]. Consider as
neighboring sets only from the one side, not two symmetrical sets.
c. Lock U1, U2 for all the bolts connecting
connecting the two lips of one sector, except the two that is
investigated (pick the bolt set closest to the middle of the span. This is DOF1). Apply the BCs
on the RPs that are coupled to the shell. Leave the rest of the bolts (the ones connecting the
other two sectors) free
138 Finite Element Modelling of the Stiffness onn Lips’ Bolted Connections
Thin
d. Apply displacement on the DOF1. Both bolts take displacement on the x and y as cosine and
sine function accordingly
e. Request output for the reaction forces on the RPs corresponding to the 3 DOFs (in order to
request outputs for reaction forces it needs to designate sets in ABAQUS so as to create 6 sets
for the 6 bolts of the 3 DOFs)
f. So, for three sequential bolt sets, DOF1 is the first, DOF2 and DOF3 are the two following
bolt sets accordingly. Do the same for the next bolt set, one space next to the first set. Lock
the first set and apply the displacement on the second. The same goes for the third
g. Those reaction forces will give the diagonally symmetric 3x3 [K] matrix
4. To take into account rotational stiffness:
a. Restrain the rotations on the RPs as well. Then it will add the rotational DOF in the matrix
which will become 6x6
b. First lock rotations and apply the displacements and then lock the displacements and apply a
rotation around z. In both cases read the output for the forces U1, U2 and moment UR3
Therefore, the
he main stiffness of each bolt is the reaction of this bolt when displacement is applied.
There is some additional stiffness coming from the rest of the bolts but it will be small. These are the
off-diagonal numbers on 6x6 stiffness matrix.
mat
It can be noted that actually it only needs
need to apply the displacement on one bolt set (a pair of bolts)
and measure the reactions on this one and the two neighboring sets. This means no repetition to be
performed for the other two sets. The reactions would be the same.
R>> R> R>d

Ö = ØR > R R dÙ
Rd> Rd Rdd
R = Rdd = R>>
R > =R d = Rd = R>
Rd> = R>d
This also applies for moment rotation. The 6x6 [K] matrix then can be simplified as follows.
The shaded quadrants which come from rotational reaction due to translational displacement and
translational reaction due to rotational displacement,
displacement respectively, can be neglected due to small

Thin
values of them. The main diagonal as the most significant entities is of interest in this study,
stu i.e. k11
and k44. These two values are going to be used in CUFSM as translational stiffness and rotational
stiffness, respectively, of the interaction between folded plates.
In finite element strip software package CUFSM, there is no tool for applying point-based
point connection
to assemble thin-walled profiles since the software is mostly used for open cross-section.
cross
Alternatively, stiffness per unit length can be applied between profiles so that the profiles will be
considered as a semi-closed
closed cross-section.
cross Therefore, FEM modelling was carried out in order to get
proper stiffness values to be used in CUFSM.
CUFSM Compared to ABAQUS, CUFSM has peculiar ability in
providing buckling stress of each buckling mode,
mode interaction of them and contribution from each
mode so that a clear picture of buckling behaviour of the thin-walled member can be given.
Some models in the parametric studies were used for calculation of lips’ connection stiffness.
stiffness
Modelling was done by modifying the Python
Py script for intended parameters
ameters used in the calculation.
Parameters such as number of corners, diameter, and cross-section
cross section slenderness were modified on the
loop lines. Example of script for model with n=12, d=700, slend=140 140 (thickness=8mm)
(thickness=8 is shown
below.
for i in range(2,3,1):
for j in range(2,3,1):
for k in range(7,8,1):
for l in range(1):
As for bolt spacing, the s/d ratio can be changed to define the space value.
# Loop through the different bolt spacings (temporary b to change)

b = [3, 4, 5]
Static general analysis was used in this analysis, therefore the script should be modified as follows.
load_step = c_model.StaticStep(
name='Load',
previous='Initial'
previous='Initial')
Sets of points were created at the reference points of rigid body constraint to accommodate history
output request. Reaction forces at corresponding RPs were then measured in sequential manner as
described above.
Figure 121.. Application unit of boundary condition and unit displacement
Thin
Figure 122.. Set of boundary conditions at active DOF and locked DOF
5.2 Results
The main purpose of this analysis is to get spring values to be fed to finite strip package CUFSM
which is used in another thesis (Jimmy and Hamse, 2017). 2017) The supplementary functionalities in
CUFSM can be used to compare and complement the results obtained in this thesis.
thesis Another purpose
is to see the influence of some parameters to the stiffness value.
5.2.1 Influence of diameter and plate thickness on the stiffness of lips’ connection
Results for translational spring value due to translational (u1, u2, u3) and rotational (ur1, ur2, ur3)
load are shown in Table 17. It can be seen that translational stiffness of the consecutive bolts has the
most significant value on the first bolt (k11) where the load is applied, and reduces significantly on the
third bolt (k13) with negligible value. It is the reason that in the analysis three bolts were taken and
measured in sequential manner.. This way, the connection stiffness that the other two sectors provide
can be obtained while taking into account the neighboring bolts.
Translational stiffnesses due to rotational load, indicated as k14, k15, and k16 in the matrix, have small
values and can be neglegted.
Results for rotational spring due to translational (u1, u2, u3) and rotational (ur1, ur2,
ur2 ur3) load are
shown as well in Table 117.. The same principle as described above applies to the rotational stiffness,
the first bolt (k44) due to rotational load has the most significant value while the remaining reduces as
distance increases.
Likewise, rotational stiffnesses due to translational load, indicated as k41, k42, and k43 in the matrix,
have small values and can be neglegted.

Table 17. Stiffness of lip connection for models with different diameters (d) and thicknesses (t)
u1 u2 u3 ur1 ur2 ur3

Model
transl. spring (kN)
n b d t k11 k12 k13 k14 k15 k16
1 2 300 4 58.860 28.139 2.237 1.369 0.854 0.119
1 2 300 5 84.258 38.564 3.292 1.681 1.080 0.164
1 2 300 6 114.344 49.901 4.490 1.913 1.276 0.204
1 2 500 5 43.513 18.722 2.029 1.506 0.831 0.119
1 2 500 6 61.585 26.500 2.931 1.913 1.276 0.204
1 2 500 8 105.791 44.482 5.117 2.803 1.737 0.152
1 2 500 11 193.493 76.391 9.015 3.583 2.503 0.332
1 2 700 8 68.489 27.898 3.775 2.723 1.504 0.077
1 2 700 11 129.080 51.878 6.505 4.243 2.581 0.140
1 2 700 15 239.306 91.565 11.558 5.361 3.778 0.438
1 2 900 11 94.022 36.679 5.700 4.292 2.365 0.145
1 2 900 15 173.782 66.888 9.192 6.194 3.847 0.185
rot. spring (kNm)
k41 k42 k43 k44 k45 k46
1 2 300 4 0.110 0.030 0.010 18.652 6.801 1.013
1 2 300 5 0.169 0.040 0.013 28.367 8.439 1.387
1 2 300 6 0.243 0.047 0.015 41.108 9.781 1.705
1 2 500 5 0.079 0.007 0.017 30.301 10.042 0.045
1 2 500 6 0.243 0.047 0.015 44.792 13.664 0.625
1 2 500 8 0.256 0.028 0.031 82.921 19.905 2.032
1 2 500 11 0.554 0.021 0.042 173.524 27.658 4.118
1 2 700 8 0.153 0.002 0.031 88.187 23.459 0.107
1 2 700 11 0.365 0.007 0.051 184.302 38.953 2.782
1 2 700 15 0.857 0.011 0.064 388.342 54.697 7.292
1 2 900 11 0.252 0.039 0.052 195.265 45.031 0.566
1 2 900 15 0.528 0.073 0.080 402.167 70.244 4.816
Figure 122 shows that stiffnesses decrease with increasing diameter. This corresponds to the Hooke’s
law that length of member is inversely proportional to its stiffness. In average, with increasing
diameter by 45%, the translational stiffness will experience decrease by 36%. However, effect of
diameter is not significant for rotational stiffness and shows the opposite trend to the translational
stiffness. In average, with increasing diameter by 45%, the rotational stiffness will experience
increase by 6%.
142 Finite Element Modelling of the Stiffness on Lips’ Bolted Connections

transl. stiffnes with different thicknesses

300
250 d700
d500
k (kN) 200 t4
150 d700 d900 t5

d300
d500 t6
100 d300
d300 d900 t8
50 d500 d700
d500
t11
0 t15
0 3 6 9 12 15
thickness (mm)
rot. stiffnes with different thicknesses

450
d900
400
350 d700
300 t4
k (kNm)
250 t5
d900
200 d700 t6
150 d500
d700 t8
100
50 d500d500 d500 t11
d300
0 d300 d300 t15
0 3 6 9 12 15
thickness (mm)
Figure 123. Stiffness with different thicknesses
diff
d t
k11 k44
300 5
500 +66.7% 5 -48.36% +6.82%
300 6
500 +66.7% 6 -46.14% +8.96%
500 8
700 +40.0% 8 -35.26% +6.35%
500 11
700 +40.0% 11 -33.29% +6.21%
900 +28.6% 11 -27.16% +5.95%
700 15
900 +28.6% 15 -27.38% +3.56%
avg +45.08% -36.26% +6.31%
In contrary, Figure 123 shows that stiffnesses increase with increasing thickness. This also
corresponds to the Hooke’s law that area of cross section is proportional to its stiffness. In average,
with increasing thickness by 67%, the translational stiffness will experience increase by 67%.
Likewise, with increasing thickness by 67%, the rotational stiffness will experience increase by 83%.
Finite Element Modelling of the Stiffness on Lips’ Bolted Connections 143

transl. stiffnes with different diameters

300
t15
250
t11
k (kN) 200 t15
150 d300
t6 t11
t8 d500
100
t11 d700
t5 t6
50 t8
d900
t5
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
diameter (mm)
rot. stiffnes with different diameters

450 t15
t15
400
350
300
k (kNm)
250 d300
200 t11 t11
t11 d500
150
d700
100 t8
t6 t6 t8 d900
50
0 t5 t5
0 200 400 600 800 1000

diameter (mm)
Figure 124. Stiffness with different diameter
diff
d t
k11 k44
300 4
300 5 +25.0% +43.15% +52.08%
300 6 +20.0% +35.71% +44.91%
500 5
500 6 +20.0% +41.53% +47.82%
500 8 +33.3% +71.78% +85.12%
500 11 +37.5% +82.90% +109.26%
diff
d t
k11 k44
700 8
700 11 +37.5% +88.47% +108.99%
700 15 +36.4% +85.39% +110.71%
900 11
900 15 +36.4% +84.83% +105.96%
avg +66.7% +66.72% +83.11%

5.2.2 Influence of bolt spacing on the stiffness of lips’ connection

Results of spring stiffness for different bolt spacing is presented in Table 18-19 and Figure 124. As
expected, a more densely bolt connection gives higher stiffness both translation and rotation. Three
variables were used, i.e. space-to-diameter ratio (b) equal to 1, 2, and 3, with two different diameters,
i.e. 300 and 500mm and thicknesses, i.e. 5 and 6mm.
As can be seen in Figure 124, bolt spacing has significant effect on the spring value when it changed
from 1d to 2d. By changing the spacing doubly, from 1d into 2d, the translational stiffness value
reduces about 60%, and reduces about 40% with changing spacing from 2d into 3d. Effect of
changing diameter and thickness is the same as described in the previous section. As for rotational
stiffness, no significant effects from different diameters.
Table 18. Stiffness of lip connection for models d=300mm with different bolt spacing (b) and thicknesses (t)
Model
transl. spring (kN)
n b d t k11 k12 k13 k14 k15 k16
1 1 300 5 215.403 97.923 9.334 4.812 2.561 0.134
1 2 300 5 84.258 38.564 3.292 1.681 1.080 0.164
1 3 300 5 48.250 19.213 1.518 0.657 0.454 0.080
1 1 300 6 283.797 128.262 11.052 5.867 3.231 0.118
1 2 300 6 114.344 49.901 4.490 1.913 1.276 0.204
1 3 300 6 68.495 25.379 1.819 0.726 0.524 0.092
rot. spring (kNm)
k41 k42 k43 k44 k45 k46
1 1 300 5 0.169 0.002 0.038 53.239 20.607 0.824
1 2 300 5 0.169 0.040 0.013 28.367 8.439 1.387
1 3 300 5 0.126 0.032 0.006 20.444 3.453 0.698
1 1 300 6 0.239 0.004 0.044 72.039 25.769 0.334
1 2 300 6 0.243 0.047 0.015 41.108 9.781 1.705
1 3 300 6 0.189 0.028 0.013 33.213 7.447 1.133
Table 19. Stiffness of lip connection for models d=500mm with different bolt spacing (b) and thicknesses (t)
Model
transl. spring (kN)
n b d t k11 k12 k13 k14 k15 k16
1 1 500 5 101.174 43.251 4.652 2.643 1.057 0.340
1 2 500 5 43.513 18.722 2.029 1.506 0.831 0.119
1 3 500 5 26.889 11.240 1.266 0.815 0.495 0.055
1 1 500 6 139.461 59.101 7.292 3.769 1.608 0.432
1 2 500 6 61.585 26.500 2.931 1.913 1.276 0.204
1 3 500 6 38.054 15.516 1.743 1.010 0.636 0.085
rot. spring (kNm)
k41 k42 k43 k44 k45 k46
1 1 500 5 0.054 0.018 0.009 44.350 13.275 4.002
1 2 500 5 0.079 0.007 0.017 30.301 10.042 0.045
1 3 500 5 0.075 0.019 0.010 22.022 5.907 0.747
1 1 500 6 0.090 0.025 0.016 66.461 20.009 4.967
1 2 500 6 0.243 0.047 0.015 44.792 13.664 0.625
1 3 500 6 0.114 0.028 0.013 33.213 7.447 1.133

diff diff
d t s/d d t s/d
k11 k44 k11 k44
300 5 1 500 5 1
300 5 2 -60.88% -46.72% 500 5 2 -56.99% -31.68%
300 5 3 -42.74% -27.93% 500 5 3 -38.21% -27.32%
300 6 1 500 6 1
300 6 2 -59.71% -42.94% 500 6 2 -55.84% -32.60%
300 6 3 -40.10% -19.20% 500 6 3 -38.21% -25.85%
avg -50.86% -34.20% avg -47.31% -29.36%
transl. stiffnes with different bolt spacing

300
250
200
k (kN)
150 d300; t5
d300; t6
100
d500; t5
50
d500; t6
0
0 1 2 3 4
s/d ratio
rot. stiffnes with different bolt spacing
80
70
60
50
k (kNm)
40 d300; t5
30 d300; t6
20 d500; t5
10 d500; t6
0
0 1 2 3 4
s/d ratio
Figure 125. Stiffness with different bolt spacing
5.2.3 Influence of number of corners on the stiffness of lips’ connection

Table 20 and Figure 125 show that different number of corners does not have significant effect on the
spring values. Smaller number of corners gives higher stiffness since smaller angleof bend
provideshigher stiffness to the member.Effect on rotational stiffnes is not significant compared to the
translational one.

Table 20. Stiffness of lip connection for models with different number of corners (n) and diameter (d)
Model
transl. spring (kN)
n b d t k11 k12 k13 k14 k15 k16
6 2 500 8 105.791 44.482 5.117 2.803 1.737 0.152
9 2 500 8 78.296 30.749 4.439 2.561 1.605 0.145
12 2 500 8 72.540 28.038 4.308 2.451 1.551 0.147
6 2 700 8 68.489 27.898 3.775 2.723 1.504 0.077
9 2 700 8 50.357 19.603 2.833 2.527 1.418 0.047
12 2 700 8 46.172 17.758 2.612 2.438 1.384 0.036
rot. spring (kNm)
k41 k42 k43 k44 k45 k46
6 2 500 8 0.256 0.028 0.031 82.921 19.905 2.032
9 2 500 8 0.216 0.008 0.022 83.259 18.795 2.016
12 2 500 8 0.201 0.001 0.019 82.278 17.628 1.934
6 2 700 8 0.153 0.002 0.031 88.187 23.459 0.107
9 2 700 8 0.132 0.007 0.021 87.795 22.324 0.216
12 2 700 8 0.121 0.011 0.018 86.456 21.075 0.309
diff
b d t n
k11 k44
2 500 8 6
2 500 8 9 -25.99% 0.41%
2 500 8 12 -7.35% -1.18%
2 700 8 6
2 700 8 9 -26.47% -0.44%
2 700 8 12 -8.31% -1.53%
avg -17.03% -0.68%
transl. stiffnes with different number of corners
120
100
80
k (kN)
60 d500
40 d700
20
0
0 3 6 9 12 15
n

Thin
rot. stiffnes with different number of corners
89
88
87
86
k (kNm)
85
d500
84
d700
83
82
81
0 3 6 9 12 15
n
Figure 126. Stiffness with different number of corners
Von misses stresses and deformed shape at the region of load application can be seen in Figure 126
12
below. It is shown that as expected, the response
respo is still in elastic range.
Figure 127.
127 Von misses stress at location of load application
From the analysis above it can be conluded that parameter of diameter,

diameter, thickness, and bolt spacing
give significant influence on the spring stiffness of the lip connection. This method of determining
connection stiffness is convenient and applicable for the need of spring values in finite strip method
CUFSM, as an alternative
tive besides experimental test.
6 CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORKS
Behavior and design of thin-walled steel columns requires consideration of failure modes from local,
distortional and Euler (i.e. flexural or flexural-torsional) buckling. A parametric study on the ultimate
strengths of semi-closed thin-walled polygonal columns was presented in order to have those
understandings on this specific type of cross-section. Finite element models were first developed in
ABAQUS by using Python automation for the predefined parameters, i.e. diameter, profile
slenderness, member slenderness, and bolt spacing. Issues such as application of initial geometric
imperfections, material modelling, and loading conditions were addressed. Total 216 FE models were
created and analysed in this parametric study. The results from FE analysis were then compared
against analytical solutions carried out according to the design standard EC1993-1-3 and EC1993-1-6.
Elastic buckling analysis of FE models shows that the studied models have predominant distortional
buckling as the first buckling mode. Meanwhile, some models buckled in flexural and flexural-
distortional buckling mode. For this type semi-closed built-up column composed of folded plates,
there is no expression in the Eurocode for predicting the elastic critical buckling, either for sectorial or
global buckling modes. FE analyses need to be performed to obtain accurate elastic buckling critical
load and mode shape.
From non-linear post-buckling analysis considering material, geometrical non-linearity and initial
imperfections, it can be concluded that FE models in the range of the predefined parameters failed in
predominant distortional mode. Models with high global slenderness, ̅ =1.25, experienced
distortional-flexural interaction with significantly lower resistance than the one failed in pure
distortional mode. From this analysis it is suggested that for the models in this parametric study,
distortional failures have lower post-buckling capacity than other failure modes, and distortional
buckling may control the failure mechanism even when the elastic distortional buckling stress (fcrd) is
higher than the elastic flexural buckling stress (fcrf). Moreover, it was noticed that members with high
distortional and global slenderness have higher parameter sensitivity on the ultimate strength and
failure mode interaction.
It is concluded that for this type of semi-closed hexagonal cross-section, bolt spacing-to-diameter
ratio (s/d) of 3, 4, and 5 gives a dominated distortional post-buckling failure mode. This phenomenon
occurs for member slenderness ( ̅ ) range of 0.65 to 1.25.
Evaluation of ultimate resistance according to EN1993-1-3 shows that for members with ̅ =0.65 and
̅ =1.0 a good agreement was obtained, while for very slender columns ̅ =1.25 a large scatter
numerical results were in found in unsafe region. This corresponds to the FE results which exhibit a
distortional-flexural interaction mode in those models. Interaction failure mode causes the resistance
to drop. Therefore, it can be suggested that the expression used in EC1993-1-3 for reduction factor
due to distortional buckling (Eq. 5.12) may be adopted for the semi-closed polygonal type of cross-
section undergoes pure distortional buckling mode used in this parametric study, with provision of
global slenderness, ̅ < 1.25. The EC1993-1-3 became the lower bound for the results of numerical
ultimate strength. It is important to note that for this type of cross-section, a careful application of
design standard shall be done since current design methods ignore buckling interaction and do not
Conclusions and Further Works 149

explicitly consider sectional buckling. Knowing the exact failure mode is necessary, in order to avoid
too conservative predictions.
Design according to EN1993-1-6 has disagreement with the FE results with the analytical ones,
especially for models with high slenderness. This result gives an insight that EN1993-1-6
overpredicted the ultimate strength for majority of the models. It is suggested that analytical resistance
calculation according to EN1993-1-6 is not applicable for this type of cross section under the
predefined parameters. By using this calculation for comparing the studied semi-closed polygonal
profiles versus ‘equivalent’ cylindrical profiles, it was revealed that polygonal profiles with bolt
spacing ratio, b=3 and global slenderness ̅ =0.65 have higher ultimate resistances than the cylindrical
ones. The higher the bolt spacing and member slenderness, the polygonal profiles tend to have
declining resistance and hence pose lower capacity than the circular profiles.
Analyses of members subject to combined axial compression force and bending moment were carried
out to see the effect of bending moment on ultimate resistance and influence of parameters on the N-
M interaction. Three magnitude of moment, i.e. 0.05Mu, 0.1Mu, and 0.15Mu was applied. Axial-
bending moment interaction curve shows that the existence of bending moment tends to decrease the
ultimate strength of the member and may change the failure mode shape, however the effect was not
significant.
Full factorial design with four parameters was carried out in this study in order to determine the main
and interaction effects in the models. From the interaction plot it can be concluded that diameter (d-
parameter) have the most significant influence on the ultimate strength, and followed by member
slenderness (λ-parameter). Profile slenderness (slend-parameter) and bolt spacing (b-parameter) have
relatively moderate influence. Interaction diameter-member slenderness and interaction member
slenderness-bolt spacing are the most significant among all interactions. Profile slenderness
dependency is negligible since interaction between profile slenderness with other factors were very
small. Visible effect of interaction are especially shown when the factors interact with member
slenderness ̅ =1.25.
In terms of strength-to-weight ratio, member slenderness and diameter are most the significant
parameters on it. The choice of proper geometrical properties in the design of semi-closed polygonal
cross-section is of important aspect and will determine the resistance and effectiveness of the
structure.
Calculations of the stiffness of lips’ bolted connection were done. The results show that this spring
stiffness value was mostly influenced by diameter and thickness of the profiles. The method of
calculation can be applied for the purpose of required spring values for finite strip package, e.g.
CUFSM. The spring values are to be fed into the software with not a straightforward way though.
To extend the work in this thesis, the following recommendations can be considered regarding further
research of the semi-closed thin-walled polygonal profiles for truss columns:
1. A more extensive parametric study with larger range of parameters should be done, especially
for the significant parameters. Boundary conditions, parameter of bolt spacing and member
length shall be arranged to set the member for a specific failure mode, and therefore cover all
possible failure modes and interaction between them.
2. Study of the effect of lips’ connection stiffness at the joint area on the behaviour and design
of the member.
3. Validation of the numerical analysis with experimental tests.
150 Conclusions and Further Works

REFERENCES
[1] The European Wind Energy Association, "Wind in power: 2015 European Statistics," EWEA,
2016.
[2] E. Hau, Wind Turbines: Fundamentals, Technologies, Application, Economics. Berlin

Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2006.
[3] RUUKKI. (2013) RUUKKI. [Online].http://www.ruukki.com/Corporateresponsibility/Corporate-

responsibility-reporting/Corporate-responsibility-report-2010/Environment/Energy-
efficiency/Energy-effiency-products/Profitable-wind-power-from-on-high
[4] C. Heistermann, W. Husson, M. Limam, M. Feldmann, J. Naumes, T. Pak, T. Faber, M. Klose,

K.-U. Fruhner, L. Krutschina, C. Baniotopoulos, L. Lavisas, A. Pontes, E. Ribeiro, M. Hadden,
R. Sousa, L. da Silva, C. Rebelo, R. Simoes, J. Henriques M. Veljkovic, "High-strength tower in
steel for wind Turbines (HISTWIN)," European Commission, Directorate-General for Research
and Innovation, Brussel, 2012.
[5] M. Limam, O. Garzon, A. Olasson, F. Möller, C. Richter, D. Pak, S. Gerasimidis, E. Efthymiou,

C. C. Baniotopoulos, O.-P. Holamo, R. S. Lima, C. Rebelo, P. Paulo, R. Matos, M. Silva and L.
S. da Silva M. Veljkovic, "HISTWIN2 "High steel tubular towers for wind turbines" Mid-term
Report," 2012.
[6] European Commission. (2016) AEOLUS4FUTURE. [Online].http://www.aeolus4future.eu/about
[7] C. Hesitermann, Behaviour of pretensioned bolts in friction connections. Towards the use of
higher strength steel in wind towers. Luleå: Luleå University of Technology, 2011.
[8] O. Gerson, Resistance of Polygonal Cross-Sections: Application on Steel Towers for Wind
Turbines. Luleå: Luleå University of Technology, 2013.
[9] CEN, "Eurocode 3: design of steel structures, part 1-3: general rules," European comitte for
standardization, Brussels, 2002.
[10] CEN, "Eurocode 3- Design of steel structures - Part 1-5: Plated structural members," European
committee for standardization, Brussels, 2009.
[11] Tomas Lyrner, Manouchehr Hassanzadeh, Thomas Stalin, John Johansson Staffan Engström,
"Tall towers for large wind turbines: Report Vindforsk project V-342 Höga torn för
vindkraftverk," 2010.
[12] T. Stalin and J. Johansson M. Hassanzadeh, "High towers for wind power onshore – information
dissemination," Vattenfall Reasearch and Development AB, 2008.
[13] K. Hüsemann, Ruukki Wind Towers: High truss towers for wind turbine generators. Helsinki:
RUUKKI, 2010.
References 151
[14] W. W. Yu, Cold–Formed Steel Design, 3rd ed. Canada: John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
[15] D. Camotim, and N. Silvestre M. Abambres, "Physically non-linear GBT analysis of thin-walled
members," Comput. Struct., vol. 129, pp. 148-165, 2013.
[16] J. G. and Michael, R. Teng, Buckling of thin metal shells. London: Spon Press, 2004.
[17] Pekoz T. Schafer B. W. (2011) Local and distortional Buckling of Cold–Formed Steel Members
with Edge Stiffened Flanges. [Online].
http://ceeserver.cee.cornell.edu/tp26/TWResearchGroup/tpadd/edgepap-corr.doc
[18] Y. B. and Seo, G. H. Kwon,.: Thin-Walled Structures, 2012, pp. 126-139.
[19] G. J. Hancock, "Design for distortional buckling of flexural members," Thin-Walled Structures,
20:3–12, Elsevier, 1997.
[20] D. and Hancock, G. J. Yang, "Developments in design for distortional buckling of thin walled
members," ICTWS, University of Loughborough, 2004.
[21] E. S., Batista, E. M. and Camotim, D. Dos Santos, "Experimental investigation concerning lipped
channel columns undergoing local–distortional–global buckling mode interaction," Thin-Walled
Structures, 54, pp. 19-34, 2012.
[22] E. and Tomblin, J. Barbero, "Euler Buckling of Thin-Walled Composite Columns," Thin
[23] N. D. and Mahendran, M. Kankanamge, "Behaviour and design of cold–formed steel beams
subject to lateral–torsional buckling," Thin-Walled Structures, 51, Elsevier Science, pp. 25-38,
2012.
[24] Eurocode resources. (2011) [Online]. http://www.eurocode-resources.com/buckling-a16.html
[25] AISI, "Distortional buckling of cold–formed steel column," Research Report rp. 00-1 2006.
[26] Viorel Ungureanu Dan Dubina, "Erosion of Interactive Buckling Load of Thin-Walled Steel Bar
Members: Contribution of "Timisoara School" ," Ro. J. Techn. Sci. − Appl. Mechanics, vol. 59,
pp. 9–137, 2014.
[27] CEN, "Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, part 1-8: Design of joints," European comitee fro
standardization, Brussels, 2005.
[28] M. Muvafık M.E. Kartal, "Effects of Semi-Rigid Connection on Structural Responses,"

Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering, no. 10, 2010.
[29] Dassault Simulia, Abaqus CAE Documentation: User Guide., 2007.
[30] C.D. Moen, Direct Strength Design for Cold-Formed Steel Members with Perforations. Ph.D.
Thesis. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 2008.
152 References
ANNEXES
List of Annexes:
ANNEX A: PROGRAMMING SCRIPT

A.1 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR [X, Y] DATABASE OF POLYGONALS’ PROFILES
pcoords.m
A.2 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR PROFILES DATABASE AND META DATABASE OF
POLYGONALS’ PROFILES IN RANGES OF INPUT VARIABLES
polygoner.m
A.3 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR FACTORIAL DESIGN IN FEA PARAMETRIC STUDIES
pfactorial.m
A.4 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING
USED FOR PARAMETRIC STUDIES
polygoner_ABQS.py
A.5 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF POST-PROCESSING
ReadODB.py; viewport.py
ANNEX B: GRAPHS OF FE ANALYSIS RESULTS

B.1 LOAD-DISPLACEMENT CURVES
B.2 LOAD-ROTATION CURVES
B.3 AXIAL COMPRESSION-BENDING MOMENT N-M INTERACTION
ANNEX C: VISUALIZATION OF FE ANALYSIS RESULTS

C.1 ELASTIC BUCKLING EIGENMODES
C.2 FAILURE MODES FROM RIKS ANALYSIS
ANNEX D: TABULATION OF RESULTS READING FROM .ODB FILES
ANNEX E: AVAILABLE PROFILES PROPERTIES
153 Annexes
ANNEXES
List of Annexes:
ANNEX A: PROGRAMMING SCRIPT
ANNEX A.1 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR [X, Y] DATABASE OF POLYGONALS’ PROFILES

pcoords.m
ANNEX A.2 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR PROFILES DATABASE AND META DATABASE
OF POLYGONALS’ PROFILES IN RANGES OF INPUT VARIABLES
polygoner.m
ANNEX A.3 MATLAB SCRIPT FOR FACTORIAL DESIGN IN FEA PARAMETRIC

STUDIES
pfactorial.m; plotting_results.m
ANNEX A.4 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

USED FOR PARAMETRIC STUDIES
polygoner_ABQS.py
ANNEX A.5 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF POST-PROCESSING

ReadODB.py; viewport.py
ANNEX B: GRAPHS OF FE ANALYSIS RESULTS
ANNEX B.1 LOAD-DISPLACEMENT CURVES
ANNEX B.2 LOAD-ROTATION CURVES
ANNEX B.3 AXIAL COMPRESSION-BENDING MOMENT N-M INTERACTION
ANNEX C: VISUALIZATION OF FE ANALYSIS RESULTS
ANNEX C.1 ELASTIC BUCKLING EIGENMODES
ANNEX C.2 FAILURE MODES FROM RIKS ANALYSIS
ANNEX D: TABULATION OF RESULTS READING FROM .ODB FILES
ANNEX E: AVAILABLE PROFILES PROPERTIES

Finite Element Modelling and Parametric Studies of Semi-Closed
Closed Thin-Walled
Thin
ANNEX A.1
MATLAB SCRIPT FOR [X, Y] DATABASE OF POLYGONALS’ PROFILES
>>>pcoords.m
155
Walled Steel Polygonal
Columns under Compression and Bending Moment
156
Closed Thin-Walled
Thin
157
ANNEX A.2
MATLAB SCRIPT FOR PROFILES DATABASE AND META DATABASE
>>>polygoner.m
158
Closed Thin-Walled
Thin
159
160
ANNEX A.3
MATLAB SCRIPT FOR FACTORIAL DESIGN IN FE PARAMETRIC
STUDIES
>>>factorial.m
162
Semi Closed Thin-Walled
Thin
ANNEX A.4
PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF FINITE ELEMENT
MODELLING USED FOR PARAMETRIC STUDIES
>>>polygoner_ABQS.py
163
164
Thin
165
166
Thin
167
168
Thin
169
170
Thin
171
172
Thin
173
174
Thin
175
176
Thin
177
178
Thin
179
Thin
ANNEX A.5
PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF POST-PROCESSING
POST PROCESSING
>>>ReadODB.py
181
182
Thin
183
184
Thin
185
186
ANNEX B.1. LOAD-DISPLACEMENT CURVES – RIKS N

6000
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-1-3
5000
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-1-4
4000 RIKS-N- 1-2-3-1-5
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-2-3
Load
3000
[kN] RIKS-N- 1-2-3-2-4
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-2-5
2000
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-3-3
1000 RIKS-N- 1-2-3-3-4
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-3-5
0
0 10 20 30 40
Displacement [mm]
Figure B.1 Load-displacement curve for models with kept d=500, slend=90;
varied lambda λ=0.65, 1.0 & 1.25, bolt ratio b=3, 4, & 5

4500
4000 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-1-3
3500 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-1-4
3000 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-1-5
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-2-3
Load 2500
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-2-4
[kN] 2000
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-2-5
1500
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-3-3
1000
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-3-4
500
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-3-5
0
0 10 20 30 40
Displacement [mm]

12000
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-1-3
10000
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-1-4
8000 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-1-5
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-2-3
Load
6000 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-2-4
[kN]
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-2-5
4000
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-3-3
2000 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-3-4
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-3-5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Displacement [mm]
ANNEX B.1. 187

9000
8000 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-1-3
7000 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-1-4
6000 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-1-5
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-2-3
Load 5000
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-2-4
[kN] 4000
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-2-5
3000
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-3-3
2000
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-3-4
1000
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-3-5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Displacement [mm]

18000
16000 RIKS-N- 1-4-3-1-3
14000 RIKS-N- 1-4-3-1-4
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-1-5
12000
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-2-3
Load 10000
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-2-4
[kN] 8000
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-2-5
6000
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-3-3
4000
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-3-4
2000
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-3-5
0
0 20 40 60 80
Displacement [mm]

16000
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-1-3
14000
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-1-4
12000
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-1-5
10000 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-2-3
Load
8000 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-2-4
[kN]
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-2-5
6000
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-3-3
4000
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-3-4
2000 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-3-5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Displacement [mm]
ANNEX B.1. 188

ANNEX B.2. LOAD-ROTATION CURVES – RIKS NM

Load vs. rotation
6000
5000 ‘Slender column’

‘Short column’
4000
Load 3000
[kN]
2000
1000
0
0.00E+00 5.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.50E-02 2.00E-02 2.50E-02 3.00E-02 3.50E-02
rotation [rad]
RIKS-NM 1-2-3-1-3 RIKS-NM 1-2-3-1-4 RIKS-NM 1-2-3-1-5
Figure B.1 Load-rotation curve for models with kept d=500, slend=90;
Load vs. rotation

4500
4000
3500
3000
Load 2500
[kN] 2000
1500
1000
500
0
-2.00E-02 -1.50E-02 -1.00E-02 -5.00E-03 0.00E+00 5.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.50E-02 2.00E-02
Rotation [rad]
Load vs. rotation

12000
10000
8000
Load
6000
[kN]
4000
2000
0
-2.50E-02 -2.00E-02 -1.50E-02 -1.00E-02 -5.00E-03 0.00E+00 5.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.50E-02 2.00E-02 2.50E-02
Rotation [rad]
ANNEX B.2. 189

Load vs. Rotation
9000
8000
7000
6000
Load 5000
[kN] 4000
3000
2000
1000
0
-1.00E-02 -5.00E-03 0.00E+00 5.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.50E-02 2.00E-02 2.50E-02
Rotation [rad]
Load vs. rotation

18000
16000
14000
12000
Load 10000
[kN] 8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.00E+00 5.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.50E-02 2.00E-02 2.50E-02 3.00E-02
Rotation [rad]
Load vs. rotation

16000
14000
12000
10000
Load
8000
[kN]
6000
4000
2000
0
-5.00E-03 0.00E+00 5.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.50E-02 2.00E-02
Rotation [rad]
ANNEX B.2. 190

ANNEX B.3. AXIAL -BENDING MOMENT N-M INTERACTION

N/Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 2 3 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 2 3 1 4
RIKS- 1 2 3 1 5
0.9
RIKS- 1 2 3 2 3
0.8 RIKS- 1 2 3 2 4
0.7 RIKS- 1 2 3 2 5
RIKS- 1 2 3 3 3
0.6
RIKS- 1 2 3 3 4
0.5 RIKS- 1 2 3 3 5
0.4
0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
M/Mu
Figure B.1 N-M interaction curve for models with kept d=500, slend=90;
N/Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 2 5 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 2 5 1 4
RIKS- 1 2 5 1 5
0.9
RIKS- 1 2 5 2 3
0.8 RIKS- 1 2 5 2 4
0.7 RIKS- 1 2 5 2 5
RIKS- 1 2 5 3 3
0.6
RIKS- 1 2 5 3 4
0.5 RIKS- 1 2 5 3 5
0.4
0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
M/Mu
N /Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 3 3 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 3 3 1 4
0.9 RIKS- 1 3 3 1 5
0.8 RIKS- 1 3 3 2 3
RIKS- 1 3 3 2 4
0.7
RIKS- 1 3 3 2 5
0.6 RIKS- 1 3 3 3 3
0.5 RIKS- 1 3 3 3 4
0.4 RIKS- 1 3 3 3 5
0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
M/Mu]
ANNEX B.3. 191

N/Nu
1
0.9 RIKS- 1 3 5 1 3
RIKS- 1 3 5 1 4
0.8 RIKS- 1 3 5 1 5
RIKS- 1 3 5 2 3
0.7
RIKS- 1 3 5 2 4
0.6 RIKS- 1 3 5 2 5
RIKS- 1 3 5 3 3
0.5 RIKS- 1 3 5 3 4
RIKS- 1 3 5 3 5
0.4
0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
M/Mu
N/Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 4 3 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 4 3 1 4
RIKS- 1 4 3 1 5
0.9
RIKS- 1 4 3 2 3
0.8 RIKS- 1 4 3 2 4
0.7 RIKS- 1 4 3 2 5
RIKS- 1 4 3 3 3
0.6
RIKS- 1 4 3 3 4
0.5 RIKS- 1 4 3 3 5
0.4
0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
M/Mu
N/Nu
1.2
1.1
RIKS- 1 4 5 1 3
1 RIKS- 1 4 5 1 4
RIKS- 1 4 5 1 5
0.9
RIKS- 1 4 5 2 3
0.8 RIKS- 1 4 5 2 4
0.7 RIKS- 1 4 5 2 5
RIKS- 1 4 5 3 3
0.6
RIKS- 1 4 5 3 4
0.5 RIKS- 1 4 5 3 5
0.4
0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
M/Mu
ANNEX B.3. 192

ANNEX C.1. ELASTIC BUCKLING EIGENMODES
BCKL- 1-2-3-1-3 BCKL- 1-2-3-1-4
BCKL- 1-2-3-1-5 BCKL- 1-2-3-2-3
BCKL- 1-2-3-2-4 BCKL- 1-2-3-2-5
BCKL- 1-2-3-3-3 BCKL- 1-2-3-3-4
ANNEX C.1 193

BCKL- 1-2-3-3-5 BCKL- 1-2-5-1-3
BCKL- 1-2-5-1-4 BCKL- 1-2-5-1-5
BCKL- 1-2-5-2-3 BCKL- 1-2-5-2-4
BCKL- 1-2-5-2-5 BCKL- 1-2-5-3-3
ANNEX C.1 194

BCKL- 1-2-5-3-4 BCKL- 1-2-5-3-5
BCKL- 1-3-3-1-3 BCKL- 1-3-3-1-4
BCKL- 1-3-3-1-5 BCKL- 1-3-3-2-3
BCKL- 1-3-3-2-4 BCKL- 1-3-3-2-5
ANNEX C.1 195

BCKL- 1-3-3-3-3 BCKL- 1-3-3-3-4
BCKL- 1-3-3-3-5 BCKL- 1-3-5-1-3
BCKL- 1-3-5-1-4 BCKL- 1-3-5-1-5
BCKL- 1-3-5-2-3 BCKL- 1-3-5-2-4
ANNEX C.1 196

BCKL- 1-3-5-2-5 BCKL- 1-3-5-3-3
BCKL- 1-3-5-3-4 BCKL- 1-3-5-3-5
BCKL- 1-4-3-1-3 BCKL- 1-4-3-1-4
BCKL- 1-4-3-1-5 BCKL- 1-4-3-2-3
ANNEX C.1 197

BCKL- 1-4-3-2-4 BCKL- 1-4-3-2-5
BCKL- 1-4-3-3-3 BCKL- 1-4-3-3-4
BCKL- 1-4-3-3-5 BCKL- 1-4-5-1-3
BCKL- 1-4-5-1-4 BCKL- 1-4-5-1-5
ANNEX C.1 198

BCKL- 1-4-5-2-3 BCKL- 1-4-5-2-4
BCKL- 1-4-5-2-5 BCKL- 1-4-5-3-3
BCKL- 1-4-5-3-4 BCKL- 1-4-5-3-5
ANNEX C.1 199

ANNEX C.2. FAILURE MODES FROM RIKS ANALYSIS – RIKS N
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-1-3 RIKS-N- 1-2-3-1-4
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-1-5 RIKS-N- 1-2-3-2-3
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-2-4 RIKS-N- 1-2-3-2-5
RIKS-N- 1-2-3-3-3 RIKS-N- 1-2-3-3-4
ANNEX C.2 200

RIKS-N- 1-2-3-3-5 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-1-3
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-1-4 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-1-5
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-2-3 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-2-4
RIKS-N- 1-2-5-2-5 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-3-3
ANNEX C.2 201

RIKS-N- 1-2-5-3-4 RIKS-N- 1-2-5-3-5
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-1-3 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-1-4
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-1-5 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-2-3
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-2-4 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-2-5
ANNEX C.2 202

RIKS-N- 1-3-3-3-3 RIKS-N- 1-3-3-3-4
RIKS-N- 1-3-3-3-5 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-1-3
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-1-4 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-1-5
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-2-3 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-2-4
ANNEX C.2 203

RIKS-N- 1-3-5-2-5 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-3-3
RIKS-N- 1-3-5-3-4 RIKS-N- 1-3-5-3-5
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-1-3 RIKS-N- 1-4-3-1-4
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-1-5 RIKS-N- 1-4-3-2-3
ANNEX C.2 204

RIKS-N- 1-4-3-2-4 RIKS-N- 1-4-3-2-5
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-3-3 RIKS-N- 1-4-3-3-4
RIKS-N- 1-4-3-3-5 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-1-3
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-1-4 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-1-5
ANNEX C.2 205

RIKS-N- 1-4-5-2-3 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-2-4
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-2-5 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-3-3
RIKS-N- 1-4-5-3-4 RIKS-N- 1-4-5-3-5
ANNEX C.2 206

ANNEX D. Results from ODBRead.py for RIKS-N Model
Model Ultimate Real Class Eff. area Eff. area Class

d t l d/t lambda s/d Displ. Area χdist NcRd_local NcRd_dist χF χT χFT NbRd NcRd_shell fya Mass NRd/mass
ID load cs-slend EC1-5 local distort EC1-6
2 2 2
n d t l b [mm] [mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [N] [mm] [-] [mm ] [-] [mm ] [-] [mm ] [-] [N] [N] [-] [-] [-] [N] [N] [MPa] [kg] [kN/kg]
1 2 3 1 3 500 9 18098 55.6 0.65 3 5625706 29.13 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.90 14096 3 5573434 5003923 0.82 1.0 0.82 4070662 5573434 390.8 2230 2.52
1 3 3 1 3 700 12 25339 58.3 0.65 3 10583087 41.10 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.88 25894 3 10418590 9192417 0.82 1.0 0.82 7575642 10418590 389.0 5838 1.81
1 4 3 1 3 900 15 32580 60.0 0.65 3 16670033 51.85 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.87 41277 4 16757418 14653327 0.82 1.0 0.82 12152574 16757418 388.0 12072 1.38
1 2 5 1 3 500 7 18106 71.4 0.65 3 4132538 27.34 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.85 10491 4 4365948 3724270 0.82 1.0 0.82 3111015 4365948 382.6 1748 2.36
1 3 5 1 3 700 10 25347 70.0 0.65 3 8309604 38.52 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.85 20916 4 8726522 7425069 0.82 1.0 0.82 6231490 8726522 383.2 4891 1.70
1 4 5 1 3 900 13 32588 69.2 0.65 3 13828574 49.28 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.85 34926 4 14580769 12398696 0.82 1.0 0.82 10423917 14580769 383.5 10507 1.32
1 2 3 2 3 500 9 27035 55.6 1 3 4865735 37.93 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.88 13879 3 5573434 4927056 0.61 1.0 0.61 2945890 5573434 390.8 3332 1.46
1 3 3 2 3 700 12 37852 58.3 1 3 8974794 52.52 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.87 25461 3 10418590 9038614 0.61 1.0 0.61 5491181 10418590 389.0 8720 1.03
1 4 3 2 3 900 15 48669 60.0 1 3 14330121 66.74 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.86 40540 4 16757418 14391859 0.61 1.0 0.61 8817113 16757418 388.0 18034 0.79
1 2 5 2 3 500 7 27048 71.4 1 3 3665155 36.35 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.84 10282 4 4365948 3650204 0.62 1.0 0.62 2271261 4365948 382.6 2611 1.40
1 3 5 2 3 700 10 37865 70.0 1 3 7105255 49.55 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.83 20319 4 8726522 7213206 0.62 1.0 0.62 4546017 8726522 383.2 7307 0.97
1 4 5 2 3 900 13 48682 69.2 1 3 12124579 65.03 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.83 34221 4 14580769 12148284 0.62 1.0 0.62 7601410 14580769 383.5 15696 0.77
1 2 3 3 3 500 9 33419 55.6 1.25 3 3335747 34.09 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.54 8507 3 5573434 3019951 0.47 1.0 0.47 2255339 5573434 390.8 4119 0.81
1 3 3 3 3 700 12 46790 58.3 1.25 3 6192939 47.06 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.54 15856 3 10418590 5628825 0.47 1.0 0.47 4207730 10418590 389.0 10780 0.57
1 4 3 3 3 900 15 60161 60.0 1.25 3 9958434 60.53 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.54 25420 4 16757418 9023969 0.47 1.0 0.47 6759878 16757418 388.0 22293 0.45
1 2 5 3 3 500 7 33435 71.4 1.25 3 2606744 33.78 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.54 6673 4 4365948 2368985 0.48 1.0 0.48 1747482 4365948 382.6 3228 0.81
1 3 5 3 3 700 10 46806 70.0 1.25 3 5177700 47.83 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.54 13268 4 8726522 4710080 0.48 1.0 0.48 3496152 8726522 383.2 9032 0.57
1 4 5 3 3 900 13 60177 69.2 1.25 3 8656932 61.02 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.54 22102 4 14580769 7846074 0.48 1.0 0.48 5844575 14580769 383.5 19402 0.45
1 2 3 1 4 500 9 18098 55.6 0.65 4 4982469 26.03 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.81 12683 3 5573434 4502428 0.82 1.0 0.82 4070662 5573434 390.8 2230 2.23
1 3 3 1 4 700 12 25339 58.3 0.65 4 9053748 35.59 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.78 23037 3 10418590 8178229 0.82 1.0 0.82 7575642 10418590 389.0 5838 1.55
1 4 3 1 4 900 15 32580 60.0 0.65 4 14571561 45.18 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.77 36408 4 16757418 12924900 0.82 1.0 0.82 12152574 16757418 388.0 12072 1.21
1 2 5 1 4 500 7 18106 71.4 0.65 4 3576703 24.21 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.75 9235 4 4365948 3278378 0.82 1.0 0.82 3111015 4365948 382.6 1748 2.05
1 3 5 1 4 700 10 25347 70.0 0.65 4 7358898 34.13 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.75 18318 4 8726522 6502901 0.82 1.0 0.82 6231490 8726522 383.2 4891 1.50
1 4 5 1 4 900 13 32588 69.2 0.65 4 11788016 43.61 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.74 30449 4 14580769 10809407 0.82 1.0 0.82 10423917 14580769 383.5 10507 1.12
1 2 3 2 4 500 9 27035 55.6 1 4 4554955 35.44 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.78 12304 3 5573434 4367961 0.61 1.0 0.61 2945890 5573434 390.8 3332 1.37
1 3 3 2 4 700 12 37852 58.3 1 4 8128143 47.34 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.76 22234 3 10418590 7893145 0.61 1.0 0.61 5491181 10418590 389.0 8720 0.93
1 4 3 2 4 900 15 48669 60.0 1 4 13158688 61.34 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.74 35005 4 16757418 12426866 0.61 1.0 0.61 8817113 16757418 388.0 18034 0.73
ANNEX D. 207
Model Ultimate Real Class Eff. area Eff. area Class

d t l d/t lambda s/d Displ. Area χdist NcRd_local NcRd_dist χF χT χFT NbRd NcRd_shell fya Mass NRd/mass
ID load cs-slend EC1-5 local distort EC1-6
2 2 2
n d t l b [mm] [mm] [mm] [-] [-] [-] [N] [mm] [-] [mm ] [-] [mm ] [-] [mm ] [-] [N] [N] [-] [-] [-] [N] [N] [MPa] [kg] [kN/kg]
1 2 5 2 4 500 7 27048 71.4 1 4 3241900 32.20 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.72 8854 4 4365948 3143084 0.62 1.0 0.62 2271261 4365948 382.6 2611 1.24
1 3 5 2 4 700 10 37865 70.0 1 4 6373937 44.55 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.71 17524 4 8726522 6220994 0.62 1.0 0.62 4546017 8726522 383.2 7307 0.87
1 4 5 2 4 900 13 48682 69.2 1 4 10701573 57.72 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.71 29076 4 14580769 10322023 0.62 1.0 0.62 7601410 14580769 383.5 15696 0.68
1 2 3 3 4 500 9 33419 55.6 1.25 4 3269501 33.10 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.78 12204 3 5573434 4332464 0.47 1.0 0.47 2255339 5573434 390.8 4119 0.79
1 3 3 3 4 700 12 46790 58.3 1.25 4 6020515 45.09 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.75 22020 3 10418590 7817013 0.47 1.0 0.47 4207730 10418590 389.0 10780 0.56
1 4 3 3 4 900 15 60161 60.0 1.25 4 9777493 58.85 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.73 34629 4 16757418 12293238 0.47 1.0 0.47 6759878 16757418 388.0 22293 0.44
1 2 5 3 4 500 7 33435 71.4 1.25 4 2496823 31.14 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.71 8752 4 4365948 3107017 0.48 1.0 0.48 1747482 4365948 382.6 3228 0.77
1 3 5 3 4 700 10 46806 70.0 1.25 4 4985356 44.02 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.70 17314 4 8726522 6146646 0.48 1.0 0.48 3496152 8726522 383.2 9032 0.55
1 4 5 3 4 900 13 60177 69.2 1.25 4 8400347 57.10 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.70 28703 4 14580769 10189730 0.48 1.0 0.48 5844575 14580769 383.5 19402 0.43
1 2 3 1 5 500 9 18098 55.6 0.65 5 4531789 24.75 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.73 11501 3 5573434 4082844 0.82 1.0 0.82 4070662 5573434 390.8 2230 2.03
1 3 3 1 5 700 12 25339 58.3 0.65 5 8140806 33.86 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.70 20655 3 10418590 7332567 0.82 1.0 0.82 7575642 10418590 389.0 5838 1.39
1 4 3 1 5 900 15 32580 60.0 0.65 5 12630036 41.79 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.69 32370 4 16757418 11491298 0.82 1.0 0.82 12152574 16757418 388.0 12072 1.05
1 2 5 1 5 500 7 18106 71.4 0.65 5 3161856 23.20 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.67 8204 4 4365948 2912516 0.82 1.0 0.82 3111015 4365948 382.6 1748 1.81
1 3 5 1 5 700 10 25347 70.0 0.65 5 6417546 32.86 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.66 16159 4 8726522 5736437 0.82 1.0 0.82 6231490 8726522 383.2 4891 1.31
1 4 5 1 5 900 13 32588 69.2 0.65 5 10664361 42.53 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.71 29339 4 14580769 10415366 0.82 1.0 0.82 10423917 14580769 383.5 10507 1.01
1 2 3 2 5 500 9 27035 55.6 1 5 4126212 32.17 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.70 10959 3 5573434 3890319 0.61 1.0 0.61 2945890 5573434 390.8 3332 1.24
1 3 3 2 5 700 12 37852 58.3 1 5 7400332 43.45 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.66 19486 3 10418590 6917544 0.61 1.0 0.61 5491181 10418590 389.0 8720 0.85
1 4 3 2 5 900 15 48669 60.0 1 5 11412761 53.88 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.64 30305 4 16757418 10758139 0.61 1.0 0.61 8817113 16757418 388.0 18034 0.63
1 2 5 2 5 500 7 27048 71.4 1 5 2840900 28.59 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.62 7663 4 4365948 2720258 0.62 1.0 0.62 2271261 4365948 382.6 2611 1.09
1 3 5 2 5 700 10 37865 70.0 1 5 5661079 40.01 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.61 14996 4 8726522 5323710 0.62 1.0 0.62 4546017 8726522 383.2 7307 0.77
1 4 5 2 5 900 13 48682 69.2 1 5 9216875 50.32 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.60 24655 4 14580769 8752650 0.62 1.0 0.62 7601410 14580769 383.5 15696 0.59
1 2 3 3 5 500 9 33419 55.6 1.25 5 3176238 31.49 83.9 15700 3 15700 0.69 10807 3 5573434 3836554 0.47 1.0 0.47 2255339 5573434 390.8 4119 0.77
1 3 3 3 5 700 12 46790 58.3 1.25 5 5901916 43.72 88.1 29348 3 29348 0.65 19151 3 10418590 6798664 0.47 1.0 0.47 4207730 10418590 389.0 10780 0.55
1 4 3 3 5 900 15 60161 60.0 1.25 5 9320637 54.80 90.6 47204 3 47204 0.63 29705 4 16757418 10545433 0.47 1.0 0.47 6759878 16757418 388.0 22293 0.42
1 2 5 3 5 500 7 33435 71.4 1.25 5 2405325 30.03 107.9 12298 3 12298 0.61 7506 4 4365948 2664540 0.48 1.0 0.48 1747482 4365948 382.6 3228 0.75
1 3 5 3 5 700 10 46806 70.0 1.25 5 4682954 40.90 105.7 24582 3 24582 0.60 14666 4 8726522 5206291 0.48 1.0 0.48 3496152 8726522 383.2 9032 0.52
1 4 5 3 5 900 13 60177 69.2 1.25 5 7913537 53.21 104.6 41073 3 41073 0.59 24052 4 14580769 8538333 0.48 1.0 0.48 5844575 14580769 383.5 19402 0.41
ANNEX D. 208
ANNEX E. List of Available Profiles
Area of Mass per Moment of inertia Radius of Torsional Warping

Model Diameter Thickness Length
section meter about y- and z-axis gyration constant constant
i j k l b D T L A M Ixx Iyy iy It Iw
[-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm2] [kg/m] [mm4] [mm4] [mm] [mm4] [mm6]
x102 x106 x106 x106 x1012
1 2 3 1 3 500 9 18098 157.00 123.24 438.34 438.34 170.92 138.36 71.72
1 3 3 1 3 700 12 25339 293.48 230.38 1606.29 1606.29 240.01 419.90 515.53
1 4 3 1 3 900 15 32580 472.04 370.55 4271.20 4271.20 309.15 951.58 2267.05
1 2 5 1 3 500 7 18106 122.98 96.54 343.73 343.73 173.83 151.87 56.42
1 3 5 1 3 700 10 25347 245.82 192.97 1346.41 1346.41 243.00 459.43 433.13
1 4 5 1 3 900 13 32588 410.73 322.42 3718.53 3718.53 312.18 1033.09 1977.27
1 2 3 2 3 500 9 27035 157.00 123.24 438.34 438.34 170.92 138.36 71.72
1 3 3 2 3 700 12 37852 293.48 230.38 1606.29 1606.29 240.01 419.90 515.53
1 4 3 2 3 900 15 48669 472.04 370.55 4271.20 4271.20 309.15 951.58 2267.05
1 2 5 2 3 500 7 27048 122.98 96.54 343.73 343.73 173.83 151.87 56.42
1 3 5 2 3 700 10 37865 245.82 192.97 1346.41 1346.41 243.00 459.43 433.13
1 4 5 2 3 900 13 48682 410.73 322.42 3718.53 3718.53 312.18 1033.09 1977.27
1 2 3 3 3 500 9 33419 157.00 123.24 438.34 438.34 170.92 138.36 71.72
1 3 3 3 3 700 12 46790 293.48 230.38 1606.29 1606.29 240.01 419.90 515.53
1 4 3 3 3 900 15 60161 472.04 370.55 4271.20 4271.20 309.15 951.58 2267.05
1 2 5 3 3 500 7 33435 122.98 96.54 343.73 343.73 173.83 151.87 56.42
1 3 5 3 3 700 10 46806 245.82 192.97 1346.41 1346.41 243.00 459.43 433.13
1 4 5 3 3 900 13 60177 410.73 322.42 3718.53 3718.53 312.18 1033.09 1977.27
ANNEX E. 209

Full Text 02

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text 02

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text 02

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Finite Element Modelling and Parametric

Studies of Semi-Closed Thin-Walled Steel

Civil Engineering, masters level (120 credits)

Luleå University of Technology

FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING AND PARAMETRIC STUDIES OF

-Application on Steel Lattice Towers for Wind Turbines-

Supervisors: Efthymios Koltsakis

Luleå University of Technology

Latin capital letters

Latin small letters

Greek small letters

2.3.8 Buckling of shell sections according to Eurocodes....................................................... 36

3.4.3.10.1 Imperfection .......................................................................................................... 90

ANNEX A.4 PYTHON SCRIPT FOR AUTOMATION OF FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

1.2 Objectives and Expected Research Achievement

The following key research questions are addressed:

2. Is it possible to accurately predict the behavior of the proposed cross-sections as a built-up

4. Is it possible to investigate the influence of imperfection on the resistance of the proposed

1.5 Organization of the Thesis

1.6 Type of Towers for Wind Energy Converter

1.6.1 Welded steel shell tower

A tower is primarily dimensioned against

a) Shell tower in two sections b) Ring flange connection c) Friction connection

Figure 1.a) Modularized

1.6.2 Pretensioned Concrete Tower

1.6.3 Concrete/Steel Hybrid Tower

Figure 4. Concrete-steel hybrid tower

1.6.4 Lattice Tower

The simplest construction method of building higher and stiffer towers

Figure 6. Steel lattice tower

1.6.5 Hybrid Lattice-Tubular

The most recent type of wind tower is hybrid lattice-tubular

Figure 8. Steel hybrid lattice-tubular tower

1.6.6 Summary of Type of Support Structure

The main advantage of semi-closedclosed polygonal profiles

Figure 10.. Illustration of connection

Furthermore, as part of HISTWIN project,

Figure 11.. Lattice (truss) tower using semi-closed

This thesis is an extended research for built-up

2 THIN-WALLED STEEL PROFILES AND THEIR RESISTANCE

Thin-Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according to Eurocodes 13

2.2 Manufacturing of Cold-Formed Steel Section

14 Thin-Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according to Eurocodes

Figure 12..Stages in roll forming a simple section(Rhodes, 1991)

Figure 13. Folding process

nd Their Resistance according to Eurocodes

Figure 14. Press braking process

2.2.1 Peculiar Characteristic of Cold-Formed Sections

16 Thin--Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according

Table 2. Residual stress in steel sections

The fact that the mechanical properties

2.3 Buckling Behaviour

2.3.1 Elastic buckling of column

Buckling is a geometric non-linear

nd Their Resistance according to Eurocodes

Figure 16. Euler buckling load

18 Thin--Walled Steel Profiles and Their Resistance according

Figure 17. Euler buckling curve

The failure of a column under compressive

It can be seen in Figure 18 that compared to other kinds