0 Голоса «за»0 Голоса «против»

Просмотров: 613 стр.plate

Mar 13, 2015

secm-2013-0227.aop[1]

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

plate

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 6

secm-2013-0227.aop[1]

plate

© All Rights Reserved

- Design for Torsion for Steel Structure
- White Etal 2001
- m Tech Elective
- Observations on Eigenvalue Buckling
- Azhari-28B.pdf
- Superholor (Composite Floor)
- Lecture 7-Unrestrained Beam
- ansys
- Extracts From EuroCode3
- Buckling of Thin Laminated Plates
- A Finite Element Module for Undergraduates GUT
- 125760133 Buckling of Thin Metal Shells 35
- SFD-CSA-S16-01
- 40783-45459-1-SM(1)
- 02. Παραδειγμα Λυγισμού.pdf
- Lateral Capacity of Helix Piers
- Steel Sans
- Simlasoft
- Smith, J. C.-structural Steel Design - LRFD Approach-John Wiley & Sons (1996)
- Moment-curvature-thrust Program for Wide-flange Shapes, August 1963

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 13

composite with various sections

Abstract: The flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled

pultruded fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) members composed of unstiffened, stiffened cruciform- and I-shaped

sections under uniform compressive loads was investigated using finite element methods (FEM). As the basic

method, an eigenvalue solution using the minimum

potential energy method was utilized to obtain the critical

buckling stress and buckling mode shapes. FEM results

were compared with the closed-form solutions and literature results. Furthermore, a parametric study was carried

out to investigate the different cross-section geometries

and span lengths on the critical buckling stresses and

buckling mode shapes, that is, flexural, torsional, or

mixed buckling.

Keywords: fiber-reinforced plastic members; flexuraltorsional mode; linear stability analysis; pultruded thinwalled members.

MechanicalEngineering, Ege University, Izmir 35100, Turkey,

e-mail: pekbey.yeliz@gmail.com

Esmaeil Ghanbari: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ege

University, Izmir 35100, Turkey

1 Introduction

In recent years, fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) composite

members found an increasing range of applications due

to high strength-to-weight and stiffness-to-weight ratios

and high resistance to difficult environmental conditions.

FRP shapes are generally manufactured by the pultrusion.

The performance of FRP profiles depends on deformability and buckling. Buckling affects the load carrying

capacity of thin-walled members. Global and local buckling plays an important role in the load carrying capacity of composite thin-walled members. A flexural mode,

a torsional mode, or flexural-torsional modes are considered as instability effects. These types of failures decrease

the load capacity. Flexural-torsional buckling occurs

suddenly in members, which deflects or twists out of the

loading plane. It occurs when in-plane bending stiffness

flexural-torsional buckling.

FRP pultruded profiles can be produced in different

cross-sectional shapes such as channel, square and rectangular tubes, angles, and I- and W-shaped beams. Open

thin-walled profiles have higher utilization compared to

others due to low torsion rigidity. Torsional instability

occurs for open thin-walled profiles under compressive

loads and section of member twists on the rigid torsion.

Flexural-torsional buckling loads and buckling

modes are obtained by calculating eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the system. An accurate prediction the stability

limit state in design of thin-walled members has a critical

importance in actual design. To get accurate prediction,

span lengths, cross-section of the members, and the position of the loads should be accurately known. The factors

affected by the critical flexural-torsional buckling loads

are determined by the stability analysis. If the model indicates that the risk of flexural-torsional buckling existed,

the design member sizes can be changed accordingly.

Evaluation of flexural-torsional, lateral, and distorsional buckling of FRP structural members has been

investigated by several authors [129]. The closed-form

solutions were given for simple cases by well-known

sources such as Timoshenko and Gere [30] and Trahair

[31]. Experimental behaviors of the flexural-torsional and

lateral-torsional buckling of members are also studied by

several authors [1, 21, 22, 27]. The critical buckling load

can be calculated by solving the governing integral equations or by energy principle. Torkamani etal. [11] solved

elastic flexural-torsional buckling analysis of plane structures using energy equations. New solutions to flexuraltorsional buckling problems have been presented using

computer-aided methods such as the finite strip method

(FSM) [9, 24] and the finite element method (FEM) [1, 4, 6,

18, 23, 29]. Due to easier definition of boundary conditions,

FEM is the one of the most popular numerical methods.

This paper aims to present and discuss the result of

numerical investigation of the dominant global mode in

buckling of composite thin-walled pultruded FRP columns.

The stability analysis of the pultruded FRP section as an

orthotropic material is carried out using FEM. The critical

stress and buckling mode shapes of unstiffened, stiffened

cruciform- and I-shaped section sections under uniform

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

the system are expressed as the critical buckling stress

and buckling mode shapes, respectively. For verification

purpose, FEM results compared with the closed-form solutions and literature results [24]. Furthermore, the crosssection geometry and span length on the critical buckling

stresses and buckling mode shapes are investigated. Flexural, torsional, or mixed mode buckling for FRP columns

with different cross-section is determined how the column

lengths are occurred.

The buckling behavior of unstiffened, stiffened cruciformand I-shaped section FRP columns is investigated. Profiles

with both x and y axis symmetry are considered for the basic

analysis. Critical flexural and torsional stresses are obtained

by determining the dominant global mode in buckling of

composite FRP columns. In addition, the closed-form solution is obtained for the flexural, torsional buckling of FRP

thin-walled members for comparison purposes.

The same case studies were analyzed by Naderian

[24]. They analyzed numerically FSM of the composite

FRP cruciform-shaped section in two cases: unstiffened

and stiffened cruciform-shaped sections. In this study,

the numerical results obtained by Naderian [24] are also

used for a comparison with finite element results. The

critical buckling stresses are obtained from FEM and the

closed-form solutions. Then, the critical buckling stresses

obtained from FEM are compared with both the closedform solution and FSM [24] for unstiffened and stiffened

cruciform-shaped sections. It is also investigated the

flexural-torsional buckling behavior of FRP pultruded

I-shaped section columns with different thickness and

width of the flanges.

Let us consider an unstiffened, stiffened cruciformand I-shaped section columns with simply supported

b wh

b fv

C

bf

B

bw

t wv

bw

bf

t wh

t fh

boundary conditions and subjected to the uniformly distributed compressive force. For I-shaped section, the distributed compressive force is applied through at the shear

centre.

Figure 1 shows the geometric properties of beam crosssections. Geometric properties of stiffened cruciformshaped section columns are represented as connected

subscript. First subscripts w and f display web and flange,

respectively, whereas second subscripts h and v indicate

horizontal and vertical, respectively. For example, bwh and

bfh are width of horizontal web and flange, respectively,

while twh and twv express thickness of horizontal and vertical flange, respectively, for stiffened cruciform-shaped

section columns. Similarly, B, h, bw, and bf are flange

width, web width, web thickness, and flange thickness,

respectively, for unstiffened cruciform- and I-shaped

section columns.

The critical buckling stresses and buckling mode

shapes are performed seven geometries of FRP columns

with cruciform-shaped (unstiffened and stiffened) and

I-shaped section under compression stresses. The material properties adopted for each FRP column are the same

as in the literature [24] for comparing critical buckling

stresses between FSM and FEM results. The material properties are Ex = 21,000 MPa, Ey = 8000 MPa, G = 2500 MPa,

and vxy = 0.3 [24]. Geometrical dimensions of unstiffened

cruciform-shaped, stiffened cruciform-shaped section,

and I-shaped section columns are given in Tables 1 and 2

In Table 2, suffixes v and h represent the vertical and

horizontal parts of section, respectively, for stiffened cruciform-shaped sections.

The span length of the column is L. The span lengths

of the column are modeled using the closed-form solution

and FEM to obtain possible combinations of flexural, torsional, or flexural-torsional buckling behavior. The critical flexural and torsional stresses are calculated for three

column lengths such as L = 3000, 5000, and 10,000 mm.

In the analyses, it is assumed that the deformations

are small and the column behaves in a linearly elastic

b fh b wv

t fv

Stiffened cruciform section

B

Unstiffened cruciform section

I section

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

B (mm)

356 356 9.5 (Case 2)

305 305 9.5 (Case 3)

305 305 12.7 (Case 4)

203 203 9.5 (Case 5)

152 102 6.4 (Case 6)

152 152 9.5 (Case 7)

356

356

305

305

203

102

152

Section

h (mm)

bf = bw (mm)

L (mm)

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

356

356

305

305

203

152

152

6.40

9.50

9.50

12.70

9.50

6.40

9.50

356 152 9.5 9.5 (Case 2)

356 203 9.5 9.5 (Case 3)

305 152 9.5 9.5 (Case 4)

305 203 12.7 12.7 (Case 5)

203 102 9.5 9.5 (Case 6)

152 102 6.4 6.4 (Case 7)

356

356

356

305

305

203

152

Section

L (mm)

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

3000, 5000, and 10,000

203

152

203

152

203

102

102

manner. It is also considered that the members are perfectly straight and local buckling does not occurred.

6.40

9.50

9.50

9.50

12.70

9.50

6.40

buckling and it is defined as following equation:

rt2 =

3 Closed-form solution

The corresponding buckling stresses are given in closed

form for general boundary conditions [24]:

Flexural buckling stress: Pcr =

Ex

( KL / rmin ) 2

2

GJ E xCw

+

I p ( KL ) 2 I p

(2)

( KL / rt ) 2

(3)

(4)

(1)

length factor calculated with regard to the end conditions

of column, the unbraced length of the column, the radius

of gyration of the section about the weak axis, the polar

moment of inertia, the warping factor of the cross-section,

and the equivalent torsion rigidity of the section, respectively. For simply supported boundary conditions, the

effective length factor K is equal to 1.

Equation (2) can be written as follows in the form of

Euler critical stress:

2 Ex

Cw + 0.1( G / E x ) JL2

.

Ip

C = I y ( Ivertical )

6.40

9.50

9.50

9.50

12.70

9.50

6.40

2

b2

bwv

+ I y ( Ihorizontal ) wh ,

4

4

(5)

parts of section, respectively. The properties of the column

cross-section for unstiffened, stiffened cruciform- and

I-shaped section are given in Tables 3 and 4.

The torsional buckling stresses in Equations (2)

and (3) are very close to each other. However, the torsional stresses obtained from in Equation (3) are given

relatively bigger values compared to Equation (2). The

closed-form torsional buckling stresses are obtained

from Equation (2).

The critical buckling stresses are normalized with Ex

and it is used following equations for simply supported

boundary conditions:

Normalized flexural buckling stress:

Pcr

2

.1000 =

.1000

Ex

( L / rmin ) 2

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

(6)

5.65

6.43

6.15

7.91

7.88

6.67

9.42

P cr

2

.1000 =

.1000

Ex

( L / rt ) 2

(7)

and illustration

4.31

4.33

3.15

4.51

2.14

2.27

2.97

3.94

5.84

6.81

9.10

10.21

10.40

13.62

5.15

5.39

4.46

5.86

4.50

3.98

5.41

1.98

2.95

3.43

4.58

5.12

5.21

6.82

4.31

4.33

3.15

4.51

2.14

2.27

2.97

7.30

7.32

6.28

6.29

4.19

1.89

3.16

buckling behavior of FRP columns with the unstiffened,

stiffened cruciform- and I-shaped section. The ANSYS is

employed for modeling of the FRP columns using Solid 46

layered solid elements (SOLID46).

The finite element mesh of the unstiffened cruciformshaped section is shown in Figure 2. A uniform load is

applied using surface pressure. In this solution, simply

supported boundary conditions are used. The following

material properties are used: the Youngs modulus for FRP

plate in different directions Ex = 21GPa and Ey = 8 GPa, the

shear modulus Gxy = 2.5 GPa, and the Poisson ratio vxy = 0.3

[24].

Linear eigenvalue analysis is employed to analyze the

buckling of the thin-walled columns with the principle

of minimum potential energy. The solution to the critical

load is converted into the solution to eigenvalue problem,

such as

([K]-[G]){} = {0}

5.04

5.14

4.01

5.33

3.37

3.12

4.07

1.22

1.81

2.09

2.79

3.09

3.14

4.11

4.31

4.33

3.15

4.51

2.14

2.27

2.97

7.30

7.32

6.28

6.29

4.19

1.89

3.16

356 356 6.4 (Case 1)

356 356 9.5 (Case 2)

305 305 9.5 (Case 3)

305 305 12.7 (Case 4)

203 203 9.5 (Case 5)

152 102 6.4 (Case 6)

152 152 9.5 (Case 7)

I-shaped

I-shaped

Unstiffened

rmin

Unstiffened

rt

3000

Section

7.30

7.32

6.28

6.29

4.19

1.89

3.16

I-shaped

I-shaped

I-shaped

I-shaped

Unstiffened

rmin

Unstiffened

rt

5000

Unstiffened

rmin

Unstiffened

vrt

10,000

Span (mm)

(8)

element geometric stiffness matrix, and the eigenvector

of displacements corresponding to an eigenvalue respectively. K and G are expressed as

K 11 K 12 K 13

K 22 K 23

[ K ] =

K 33

sym

K 14

K 24

K 34

K 44

(9)

G22 G23

[G] =

G33

sym

G14

G24

.

G34

G44

(10)

To obtain critical load using the minimum eigenvalue, Equation (1) is solved. The solution is consisted two

steps: the static analysis is to calculate the stress stiffness

matrix. Prestress option must be used. Then, eigenvalue

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

Section

356 152 9.5 9.5 (Case 2)

356 203 9.5 9.5 (Case 3)

305 152 9.5 9.5 (Case 4)

305 203 12.7 12.7 (Case 5)

203 102 9.5 9.5 (Case 6)

152 102 6.4 6.4 (Case 7)

Span

3000 mm

rmin

rt

10.71

9.19

10.63

8.82

9.31

5.79

4.65

4.96

3.77

5.00

3.90

5.12

3.25

3.03

analysis is achieved to obtain the eigenvalue and eigenvector, namely, buckled mode. Subspace iteration method

and block Lanczos method are methods that are used in

ANSYS.

To obtain the minimum eigenvalue and correspondingly consider the critical load, Equation (1) can be solved.

The solution is consisted two steps: The static analysis to

calculate the stress stiffness matrix with prestress option

is carried out as the first step. Then, eigenvalue analysis

is achieved to obtain the eigenvalue and eigenvector. Subspace iteration method and block Lanczos method are the

basic solution methods utilized by ANSYS.

Consequently, the critical buckling stresses are

numerically calculated using ANSYS code for seven geometries and varying span lengths with unstiffened, stiffened

cruciform- and I-shaped section. As a general observation, the present FEM results are in a good agreement and

convergence with closed-form solutions.

section.

5000 mm

rmin

rt

10.71

9.19

10.63

8.82

9.31

5.79

4.65

5.07

4.05

5.25

4.34

5.65

4.37

3.89

10,000 mm

rmin

rt

10.71

9.19

10.63

8.82

9.31

5.79

4.65

5.57

5.17

6.28

6.01

7.66

7.68

6.58

In this study, the torsional, flexural, and flexural-torsional

buckling behavior under pure axial compression of thinwalled FRP members is analyzed by means of numerical

simulations. The standard finite element procedure is

used to derive stability of FRP thin-walled members.

The comparisons of critical buckling stresses among

closed-form solution, FSM, and the finite element results

are given in Tables 57 for span lengths of L = 3000, 5000,

and 10,000 mm. The results obtained from closed-form

solution in tables are normalized critical stresses acquired

using Equations (4) and (5).

The comparison between the values of normalized

buckling loads and FEM and reported by Naderian [24]

is given in Figures 35. In these figures, the vertical axis

shows normalized buckling loads obtained by FEM, the

closed-form solution, and FSM [24].

As shown in tables and figures, FSM more accurately

predicts the buckling stresses than the finite element

solution. In FSM, obtained values are in excellent agreement with the closed-form solution, whereas FEM results

are a bit different from the results obtained from the

closed-form solution for some span lengths. Such difference between FEM and FSM is a consequence of the

displacement approach. FEM is used for polynomial

displacement function in all directions, whereas FSM is

utilized for both simple polynomials in some directions.

Also, continuously differentiable smooth series is used in

other directions in FSM. Furthermore, the series should

implement the probable boundary conditions at the end

of the strips. In addition, an increase in the number of

elements used in FEM provides acceptable results with

little variation in buckling stresses obtained from closedform solution. It is no doubt that a mesh density is influenced by the convergence of the solution. The results

obtained from FEM with the finer mesh are provided that

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

Table 5Normalized critical buckling stresses of FRP unstiffened cruciform-shaped section beams.

Section

Formulation

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

solution.

The results can be expressed as follows:

Buckling occurs in flexural modes for longer columns

(L = 10,000 mm) for Cases 37 with unstiffened cruciformshaped section. For the short to moderate length (L = 5000

mm), buckling takes place flexural modes in Cases 57.

Finally, the short lengths (L = 3000 mm) exhibit torsional

modes. As a consequence, the dominant global buckling

mode in the majority of cases is torsional for unstiffened

cruciform-shaped section. Similarly, for longer columns

(L = 10,000 mm) for Cases 6 and 7, flexural buckling modes

are occurred for stiffened cruciform-shaped section.

The torsional buckling modes are dominant for short

lengths (L = 3000 mm) and the short to moderate length

Span (mm)

3000

5.85

0.16

0.16

0.19

Torsional

5.87

0.36

0.35

0.33

Torsional

4.32

0.49

0.47

0.51

Torsional

4.35

0.87

0.84

0.87

Torsional

1.93

1.05

1.05

0.85

Torsional

0.39

1.07

0.38

0.49

Flexural

1.09

1.88

1.04

0.92

Flexural

5000

2.11

0.16

0.16

0.16

Torsional

2.12

0.35

0.34

0.30

Torsional

1.56

0.47

0.47

0.44

Torsional

1.57

0.82

0.83

0.83

Torsional

0.69

1.04

0.67

0.55

Flexural

0.14

1.08

0.14

0.17

Flexural

0.39

1.86

0.38

0.34

Flexural

10,000

0.53

0.15

0.15

0.15

Torsional

0.53

0.34

0.34

0.28

Torsional

0.39

0.45

0.38

0.32

Flexural

0.39

0.82

0.38

0.32

Flexural

0.17

1.04

0.17

0.13

Flexural

0.04

1.08

0.03

0.048

Flexural

0.09

1.85

0.10

0.078

Flexural

Therefore, it is generally shown that the possibility of

flexural deformed configuration for stiffened cruciformshaped section is less than unstiffened cruciform-shaped

sections. For I-shaped section columns, buckling only

occurs in flexural modes for all lengths. In other words,

there is no possible torsional buckling mode for I-shaped

section for examined cases. Therefore, there is major difference concerning the I-shaped section and cruciformshaped columns: buckling types of I-shaped section

columns for all lengths are always associated with flexural instability.

For the long length case, it is shown that critical

buckling stress values obtained from FEM are slightly

different than those calculated with the closed-form

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

Table 6Normalized critical buckling stresses of FRP stiffened cruciform-shaped section beams.

Section

Formulation

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Ref. [24]

Present

Buckling type

solution and FSM. However, for the short case and short

to moderate length, FEM results are in good agreement with the closed-form solution. If the span length

increases, the normalized critical buckling stresses

decrease. The present FEM predictions show good agreement with results with closed-form solutions and FSM

for short lengths. Furthermore, it is clear that the probability of flexural buckling increases for longer columns,

whereas the torsional buckling becomes more noticeable

for the short lengths and the short to moderate lengths.

In general, torsional buckling is more dominant than

flexural buckling mode for examined cases. However, it

is worthy of mention that flexural buckling dominates for

I-shaped section in all cases. The buckling mode shapes

are given in Figures 68 for stiffened cruciform-shaped

Span (mm)

3000

12.56

2.69

2.64

2.65

Torsional

9.28

1.55

1.55

1.49

Torsional

12.37

2.75

2.74

2.70

Torsional

8.52

1.66

1.68

1.53

Torsional

9.52

2.87

2.94

2.82

Torsional

3.68

1.16

1.16

1.12

Torsional

2.37

1.01

1.10

1.14

Torsional

5000

4.52

1.01

1.02

1.09

Torsional

3.34

0.65

0.65

0.70

Torsional

4.45

1.09

1.11

1.20

Torsional

3.06

0.74

0.75

0.91

Torsional

3.42

1.26

1.30

1.60

Torsional

1.32

0.75

0.73

0.91

Torsional

0.85

0.60

0.47

0.60

Torsional

10,000

1.13

0.30

0.31

0.32

Torsional

0.83

0.26

0.26

0.37

Torsional

1.11

0.39

0.39

0.45

Torsional

0.76

0.35

0.35

0.42

Torsional

0.86

0.57

0.59

0.66

Torsional

0.33

0.58

0.36

0.29

Flexural

0.21

0.42

0.12

0.17

Flexural

section (203 102 9.5 9.5, Case 6) for L = 3000, 5000, and

10,000 mm, respectively. As shown in figures, the torsional buckling mode occurred for span length of L = 3000

and 5000 mm, whereas deformed configuration is flexural buckling mode for L = 10,000 mm.

If the radius of gyration of the section about the weak

axis (rmin) is bigger than the equivalent radius of gyration

(rt), the torsional buckling consists for unstiffened stiffened

cruciform- and I-shaped section for examined span lengths.

There are also noticeable differences between the

buckling stresses the stiffened and unstiffened cruciformshaped sections. When compared with the unstiffened

and stiffened cruciform-shaped sections, it is seen that the

critical buckling stress is increased in the stiffened cruciform-shaped sections. The stiffeners provide increasing

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

Table 7Normalized critical buckling stresses of FRP I-shaped section beams.

Section

Formulation

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Closed-form flexural

Closed-form torsional

Present

Buckling type

Numerical studies show that critical local buckling

stresses in I-shaped section sections are higher than those

in unstiffened cruciform-shaped sections with similar

properties (Table 8).

The critical buckling stress always decreases, whereas

the length increases for unstiffened, stiffened cruciformand I-shaped section columns. The maximum critical

stress occurred in stiffened cruciform-shaped section

columns. The critical stress for I-shaped section columns

is bigger than unstiffened cruciform-shaped section

columns for all case numbers.

The flexural-torsional buckling stresses are increased

when the thickness of the web (or flange thickness) is

increased for unstiffened cruciform- and I-shaped section

(Table 9). Similarly, it is seen that the flexural buckling

stress increases when the length of web (or length of the

flange) is increased (Table 10). Tables 11 and 12 show the

effect of the vertical (or horizontal) stiffener width and

Span (mm)

3000

5000

10,000

2.04

2.79

2.15

Flexural

2.06

2.89

2.24

Flexural

1.09

1.76

1.24

Flexural

2.23

3.12

2.48

Flexural

0.50

1.24

0.58

Flexural

0.56

1.07

0.66

Flexural

0.97

1.82

1.12

Flexural

0.73

1.05

0.64

Flexural

0.74

1.14

0.64

Flexural

0.39

0.78

0.34

Flexural

0.80

1.36

0.71

Flexural

0.18

0.80

0.16

Flexural

0.20

0.62

0.18

Flexural

0.34

1.15

0.31

Flexural

0.18

0.31

0.14

Flexural

0.18

0.40

0.14

Flexural

0.098

0.37

0.078

Flexural

0.20

0.62

0.16

Flexural

0.045

0.61

0.036

Flexural

0.051

0.44

0.04

Flexural

0.087

0.88

0.070

Flexural

for stiffened cruciform-shaped sections. Similarly, the

flexural buckling stress increases if the vertical (or horizontal) stiffener width or the vertical (or horizontal) stiffener thicknesses is increased. Varying the vertical web

depth is also influenced on the flexural-torsional buckling stresses. Tables 13 and 14 show the effect of the vertical (or horizontal) stiffener width and thickness on the

critical buckling stresses for stiffened cruciform-shaped

section.

6 Concluding remarks

A finite element formulation has been used to study the

flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled pultruded FRP

members composed of unstiffened, stiffened cruciformand I-shaped section under uniform compressive loads.

The results show global buckling of FRP thin-walled

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

L=3000 mm

L=3000 mm

3

1.1

1

2.5

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

1.5

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.5

0.2

0.1

0

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 1

Case 7

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

L=5000 mm

1.6

L=5000 mm

0.9

1.4

0.8

1.2

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.8

0.4

0.6

0.3

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.1

Case 1

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

Case 7

L=10,000 mm

L=10,000 mm

0.7

FEM

0.40

FEM

0.35

0.6

0.30

Closedform

0.5

0.25

FSM

0.4

0.20

Closedform

FSM

0.3

0.15

0.2

0.10

0.1

0.05

0

0

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

members with open sections. Furthermore, the crosssection geometry on the critical buckling stresses is

investigated.

The critical stresses can be evaluated by solving

eigenvalue problem. The results show that the critical

stresses obtained from FEM are in good agreement with

those obtained from the closed-form solutions. Naderian [24] proposed the use of FSM to design unstiffened,

cruciform-shaped section.

obtained by FSM are computationally more efficient than

FEM.

Numerical examples showed the performance,

accuracy, and efficiency of FEM for the stability of thinwalled members. FEM provided the means to distinguish

between flexural and torsional buckling modes for different span lengths. Concerning the design of I-shaped

section members that only exhibit flexural buckling

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

L=3000 mm

2.5

1.5

0.5

0

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

section for L = 3000mm (torsional buckling).

L=5000 mm

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

L=10,000 mm

0.2

Closed-form

FEM

section for L = 5000mm (torsional buckling).

0.18

0.16

0.14

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

section.

Figure 8Buckling mode shapes of stiffened cruciform-shaped

section for L = 10,000mm (flexural buckling).

the flexural instability. However, this has not been the

path for unstiffened, stiffened cruciform-shaped section.

Numerical studies show that critical buckling stresses

in I-shaped sections are higher than those with similar

properties unstiffened cruciform-shaped sections. In

particular, global buckling is related to the section

properties and span length. The torsional and flexural

buckling modes generally occurred for short and intermediate-to-long lengths, respectively. The possibility of

flexural instability occurrence in long thin cross-section

is higher.

There is major difference concerning the unstiffened and stiffened cruciform-shaped section columns:

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

Table 8Comparisons normalized buckling stresses of FRP unstiffened cruciform- and I-shaped section beams.

Section

Span (mm)

3000

5000

10,000

3000

5000

10,000

3000

5000

10,000

3000

5000

10,000

3000

5000

10,000

3000

5000

10,000

3000

5000

10,000

Unstiffened cruciform-shaped

Closed form

0.16

0.16

0.15

0.36

0.35

0.34

0.49

0.47

0.39

0.87

0.82

0.39

1.05

0.69

0.17

0.39

0.14

0.04

1.09

0.39

0.09

Present

0.19

0.16

0.15

0.33

0.30

0.28

0.51

0.44

0.32

0.87

0.79

0.32

0.85

0.55

0.13

0.49

0.17

0.048

0.92

0.34

0.078

I-shaped section

Closed form

Present

2.04

0.73

0.18

2.06

0.74

0.18

1.09

0.39

0.098

2.23

0.80

0.20

0.50

0.18

0.045

0.56

0.20

0.051

0.97

0.34

0.087

2.15

0.64

0.14

2.24

0.64

0.14

1.24

0.34

0.078

2.48

0.71

0.16

0.58

0.16

0.036

0.66

0.18

0.04

1.12

0.31

0.070

Table 9Effect of the web (or flange) thickness on the normalized critical buckling stresses for unstiffened cruciform-shaped section.

Unstiffened cruciform section

356 356 9.5 (Case 2)

305 305 9.5 (Case 3)

305 305 12.7 (Case 4)

Span (mm)

FEM

Closed form

3000

FSM [24]

0.19

0.33

0.51

0.87

0.16

0.36

0.49

0.87

0.16

0.35

0.47

0.84

FEM

0.16

0.30

0.44

0.79

Closed form

5000

FSM [24]

10,000

FEM

Closed form

FSM [24]

0.16

0.35

0.47

0.82

0.16

0.34

0.47

0.83

0.15

0.28

0.32

0.32

0.15

0.34

0.39

0.39

0.15

0.34

0.38

0.38

Table 10Effect of the web (or flange) thickness on the normalized critical buckling stresses for I-shaped section.

I-section

356 356 9.5 (Case 2)

305 305 9.5 (Case 3)

305 305 12.7 (Case 4)

Span (mm)

3000

FEM

Closed form

2.15

2.24

1.24

2.48

2.04

2.06

1.09

2.23

5000

FEM

Closed form

0.64

0.64

0.34

0.71

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

0.73

0.74

0.39

0.80

10,000

FEM

0.14

0.64

0.078

0.16

Closed form

0.18

0.18

0.098

0.20

Table 11Effect of the web (or flange) length on the normalized critical buckling stresses.

Unstiffened cruciform section

203 203 9.5 (Case 5)

305 305 9.5 (Case 3)

356 356 9.5 (Case 2)

Span (mm)

3000

5000

FEM Closed form FSM [24]

0.92

0.85

0.51

0.33

1.09

1.05

0.49

0.36

1.04

1.05

0.47

0.35

0.34

0.55

0.44

0.30

0.39

0.69

0.47

0.35

0.38

0.67

0.47

0.34

10,000

FEM Closed form FSM [24]

0.078

0.13

0.32

0.28

0.09

0.17

0.39

0.34

0.10

0.17

0.38

0.34

Table 12Effect of the web (or flange) length on the normalized critical buckling stresses.

I-section

203 203 9.5 (Case 5)

305 305 9.5 (Case 3)

356 356 9.5 (Case 2)

Span (mm)

3000

FEM

Closed form

1.12

0.58

1.24

2.24

0.97

0.50

1.09

2.06

5000

FEM

Closed form

0.31

0.16

0.34

0.64

0.34

0.18

0.39

0.74

10,000

FEM

0.070

0.036

0.078

0.14

Closed form

0.087

0.045

0.098

0.18

Table 13Effect of the vertical (or horizontal) stiffener width on the normalized critical buckling stresses.

Stiffened cruciform section

Span (mm)

3000

356 203 9.5 9.5 (Case 3)

FEM

Closed form

FSM [24]

1.49

2.70

1.55

2.75

1.55

2.74

5000

FEM

0.70

1.20

Closed form

FSM [24]

0.65

1.09

0.65

1.11

10,000

FEM

0.37

0.45

Closed form

FSM [24]

0.26

0.26

0.39

0.39

Table 14Effect of the vertical (or horizontal) stiffener thickness on the normalized critical buckling stresses.

Stiffened cruciform section

356 203 9.5 9.5 (Case 3)

Span (mm)

FEM

Closed form

3000

FSM [10]

2.65

2.70

2.69

2.75

2.64

2.74

increased the flexural rigidity and decreased the torsion

rigidity of the section.

This study shows that FEM is convenient for accurately estimating the flexural and torsional buckling of

FEM

1.09

1.20

Closed form

5000

FSM [10]

10,000

FEM

Closed form

FSM [10]

1.01

1.09

1.02

1.11

0.32

0.45

0.30

0.39

0.31

0.39

design guidelines for effective utilization of these products with structural safety.

Received September 16, 2013; accepted September 21, 2013

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

References

[1] Real PMMV, Piloto PAG, Franssen JM. J. Const. Steel Res. 2003,

59, 179199.

[2] Lee J, Lee S. Thin Wall Struct. 2004, 42, 12931305.

[3] Adany S, Schafer BW. Thin Wall Struct. 2006, 44, 585600.

[4] Andrade A, Camotim D, Dinis PB. Comput. Struct. 2007, 85,

13431359.

[5] Phuong TV, Lee J. Thin Wall Struct. 2007, 45, 790798.

[6] Minghini F, Tullini N, Laudiero F. Thin Wall Struct. 2008, 46,

223241.

[7] Bradford MA, Pi YL. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2008, 50, 143151.

[8] Kim N, Shin DK, Kim MY. Adv. Eng. Soft 2008, 39, 949961.

[9] Amoushahi H, Azhari M. Comput. Struct. 2009, 90, 9299.

[10] Phuong TV, Lee J. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2009, 51, 631641.

[11] Torkamani MAM, Roberts ER. Thin Wall Struct. 2009, 47,

463473.

[12] Kurniawan CW, Mahendran M. Thin Wall Struct. 2009, 47,

109119.

[13] Vo TP, Lee J. Comput. Struct. 2010, 88, 347356.

[14] Shen HS, Zhang CL. Comput. Struct. 2010, 92, 10731084.

[15] Silva NMF, Silvestre N, Camotim D. Comput. Struct. 2010, 93,

7992.

[16] Dinis PB, Camotim D, Silvestre N. Thin Wall Struct. 2010, 48,

786797.

14061416.

[18] Wu L, Mohareb M. Thin Wall Struct. 2011, 49, 208222.

[19] Ascione L, Giordano A, Spadea S. Compos. Part B 2011, 42,

819824.

[20] Erkmen RE, Attard MM. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2011, 53, 918925.

[21] Thumrongvut J, Seangatith S. Proc. Eng. 2011, 14, 24382445.

[22] Correia JR, Branco FA, Silva NMF, Camotim D, Silvestre N.

Comput. Struct. 2011, 89, 20522064.

[23] Silva NMF, Camotim D, Silvestre N, Correia JR, Branco FA.

Comput. Struct. 2011, 89, 20652078.

[24] Naderian HR, Ronagh HR, Azhari M. Comput. Struct. 2011, 93,

25752586.

[25] Challamel N, Girhammar UA. Eng. Struct. 2012, 34, 505513.

[26] Trahair NS. Eng. Struct. 2012, 34, 564571.

[27] He J, Liu Y, Chen A, Dai L. Const. Build Mater. 2012, 26, 4964.

[28] Silvestre N. Eur. J. Mech. A/Solids 2012, 32, 103108.

[29] Ibrahim SM, Carrera E, Petrolo M, Zappino E. Comput. Struct.

2012, 94, 563570.

[30] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Theory of Elastic Stability.

McGraw-Hill: Tokyo, 1961.

[31] Trahair NS. Flexural-Torsional Buckling of Structures. CRC

Press: London, 1993.

Unauthenticated | 115.112.107.62

Download Date | 6/23/14 1:17 PM

- Design for Torsion for Steel StructureЗагружено:Prantik Adhar Samanta
- White Etal 2001Загружено:Don White
- m Tech ElectiveЗагружено:iagoo
- Observations on Eigenvalue BucklingЗагружено:Venkatesh Pulivarthi
- Azhari-28B.pdfЗагружено:rs0004
- Superholor (Composite Floor)Загружено:adelalwaily
- Lecture 7-Unrestrained BeamЗагружено:Raimi Suhaimi
- ansysЗагружено:nanduslns07
- Extracts From EuroCode3Загружено:prabhu81
- Buckling of Thin Laminated PlatesЗагружено:Hesham Abd Elaziz Afifi
- A Finite Element Module for Undergraduates GUTЗагружено:bungyjumpy214
- 125760133 Buckling of Thin Metal Shells 35Загружено:pawkom
- SFD-CSA-S16-01Загружено:Richard Lara Rodriguez
- 40783-45459-1-SM(1)Загружено:Shalonda Blevins
- 02. Παραδειγμα Λυγισμού.pdfЗагружено:samkegiwta
- Lateral Capacity of Helix PiersЗагружено:hiyeon
- Steel SansЗагружено:Luc Tellier
- SimlasoftЗагружено:Angshuman Singha
- Smith, J. C.-structural Steel Design - LRFD Approach-John Wiley & Sons (1996)Загружено:Emma Martel
- Moment-curvature-thrust Program for Wide-flange Shapes, August 1963Загружено:fefahim
- LOCAL BUCKLING ANALYSIS OF THICK ANISTROPIC PLATES USING COMPLEX FINITE STRIP METHOD.pdfЗагружено:Aravind Bhashyam
- IndexЗагружено:Mahmoud Abbass
- EN 1993-1-5.pdfЗагружено:Горан Милојевић
- FEP_2nd_Edition_4th_Printing.pdfЗагружено:Isaí Tuc
- Cap5Загружено:Mamaru Nibret Desyalew
- Runway Beam-1 ETЗагружено:Sankar Cdm
- ICE Arch BridgeЗагружено:paramarthasom1974
- r963Загружено:Simon Tile
- IFEM.Ch07Загружено:Eng Alwardi
- Effective Lengths for Laterally Unbraced Compression Flanges of C.pdfЗагружено:G

- Common Yoga ProtocolЗагружено:tilakchandra
- examplesЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- SHAH AND KARVE.pdfЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Design and Construction of Anchored and Strutted Sheet Pile Walls in Soft ClayЗагружено:julius_x
- 2005 Nonstructural Elements ICJЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Civil v Structural Analysis II [10cv53] NotesЗагружено:Gagan Nagpal
- 2005 Nonstructural Elements ICJЗагружено:Gandhi Kalpesh
- Trimdek 1015Загружено:Shital Chaudhari
- 160810 QA EA Answering DirectionsЗагружено:Chetan Turkane
- Pune PWD DSR 2016-17Загружено:GaneshZombade
- Tmp 4224-Study of Seismic Separation Gap to Mitigate Pounding Between Two Adjacent Buildings-IJAERDV05I0463253(2)1554889866Загружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Exporting Data From E-tabs Post AnalysisЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Importing material property and loading from E-tabs.pdfЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Linking_with E-tabs.pdfЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Paper by ShahЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- 7207778-Ansys-Tutorial-1Загружено:jsridhar_347
- Ansys Buckling ProcedureЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Vol 5-1-52-66 Shahin Nayyeri AmiriЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- lec39Загружено:Shital Chaudhari
- boukhili1991Загружено:Shital Chaudhari
- 1-s2.0-1359836895000151-mainЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- 1-s2.0-S0950061813008180-mainЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari
- EScholarship UC Item 97s2r3s1[1]Загружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Wang Stress Analysis2009Загружено:Shital Chaudhari
- Algebra - Partial Fractions.pdfЗагружено:Shital Chaudhari

- Adoption of Energy Efficient TechnologyЗагружено:boe young
- DtmЗагружено:sgrrsc
- Tutorial 3_Gravimetry (question) (1).docxЗагружено:郑庆雄
- Statistical-Physical Models of Electromagnetic Interference.pdfЗагружено:Anonymous P2ZN8X
- Reporte Techo ParabolicoЗагружено:Elmer Sanchez Cieza
- Crack width estimate of concrete platesЗагружено:zfan
- 1200 LC SystemЗагружено:Carlos Silva
- Human Inhalation Exposures to Toluene, Ethylbenzene, And M-Xylene and Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Exposure Biomarkers in Exhaled Air, Blood, And UrineЗагружено:Hector Quezada
- Performance Qualification of HPLC Instrumentation in Regulated LaboratoriesЗагружено:dimi
- AR2007Загружено:dfghnb
- BENTUK KOROSI BWЗагружено:Renno Feibianto
- Final-133A Sp14 SyllabusЗагружено:MrFunkyMushroom
- 11dЗагружено:manek1989
- Definition of Corrosion AllowanceЗагружено:Isaac Flores
- MEC2404/CHE2161 introЗагружено:Nicholas Chia
- atomictheoryquantummechanicsanswerkeyЗагружено:api-305003239
- Stats Chapter 3Загружено:Vivek Narayanan
- Particle Dynamics SheetЗагружено:Akhilesh Soni
- Dynamic Range CalculationsЗагружено:Fabian Hartery
- Peak ShapeЗагружено:Achmad Ariebyo
- IS_PowerMethodЗагружено:Yun Jun Ng
- SignalsЗагружено:Maribel Mendez
- Three Dimensional Modeling Weld Solidification CracksЗагружено:Debabrata Podder
- Random Matrix Theory and Financial CorrelationsЗагружено:yekamu
- 1_How to read x-rays_Handout.pdfЗагружено:Mishal Ilyas
- Chapter 2 Free Vibration Of Single-Degree-Of-Freedom Systems (Undamped) In Relation Structural Dynamics During Earthq.pdfЗагружено:TugceTetik
- Pr Serie1 en Low[1]Загружено:Aline Cristina
- Modeling and Analysis of Base Plate for Brake Spider Fixture by Fem Using Ansys sЗагружено:IAEME Publication
- Heat Conduction in 2 and 3 DimensionsЗагружено:bogdyronnie
- Thesis.pdfЗагружено:Prajwal Niraula

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.