Imperfection Analysis of Structure with Solve Example

1. Introduction
Imperfection in structures can be described as deviations and inconsistencies in structures
and structural members, which can affect the behaviour of the structure from the
theoretically assumed perfect state. Imperfection in structures are often envisaged during
analysis, and their effects are taken into consideration, especially in cases where they
could be critical.
Types of imperfections;
(i) Geometrical imperfection
(ii) Material imperfection
(iii) Structural imperfection
(i) Geometrical Imperfection
As the implies, these are imperfections due to variance in the dimensions of the
members, or lack of straightness or verticality in a structural member.
For example, when a beam member that is supposed to be 400mm depth is finished as
395mm, then this is geometric imperfection. According to clause 5.2(1)P of Eurocode 2,
deviation in members cross-section is normally taken into account in material partial
factor of safety, and may not need to be analysed for again.
Also, when a 2-storey framed building that is supposed to be perfectly straight/vertical is
leaning by say an angle of 3 degrees, this is also geometric imperfection. This form of
geometric imperfection is taken into account when analysing sensitive structures.

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 1|Page

 (ii) Material imperfection
This type of imperfection always arises from deviation in the assumed material
properties. For instance, if the design engineer specified a concrete grade of M30, and
grade 28.5 was achieved on site, then this is material imperfection. Also, when the
modulus of elasticity of steel specified was 200 kN/mm2 and 195 kN/mm2 was
fabricated, this is also material imperfection. Another variance in material imperfection is
residual stresses, which occurs in steel members during welding or fabrication.
Material imperfection is often taken care of by introducing material factor of safety in
design.
(iii) Structural Imperfection
Structural imperfection often arises in structures due to issues like eccentricity in joints,
variations in support/boundary conditions, variation in stiffness/rotation of joints.
2. Application/Analysis of Imperfections in Structures
In frames, all types of imperfections are usually introduced as equivalent geometrical
imperfections with increased value of amplitude e0d, while in plated structures, geometric
imperfections and residual stresses are introduced to derive buckling factors.
According to clause 5.3.1(1) of Eurocode 3, the following imperfections should be taken
into account;
a) global imperfections for frames and bracing systems
b) local imperfections for individual members
Global imperfections for frames or bracing systems cover for lack of verticality for
frames or straightness of structures restrained by bracings, while local imperfections
cover for lack of straightness or flatness of a member and residual stresses of the
member.
We should note that other imperfections are covered by the partial factors in limit state
design.
3. Global Imperfection Analysis for frames
In framed structures, the assumed shape of global imperfection may be derived from the
elastic buckling mode of the structure in the plane considered. For frames sensitive
buckling in sway mode (e.g. tall buildings), the effect of imperfection is allowed for by

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 2|Page

 means of equivalent imperfection in the form of an initial sway imperfection. The effects
of initial sway imperfection may be replaced by systems of equivalent horizontal forces.
These initial sway imperfections are applied in all relevant horizontal directions, but need
only be considered in one direction at a time. For multi-storey buildings, equivalent
forces are used and they should be applied at each floor and roof level.
The imperfections may be determined from;
 = 0 h m
where;
0 is the basic value = 1 200
 h is the reduction factor for height applicable to columns
2 2
h = but   h  1.0
h 3
 m is the reduction factor for number of columns in a row
 1
 m = 0.5  1 + 
 m
where m is the number of columns in the row.
where m is the number of columns in the row.
What I am talking about is depicted below;

According to clause 5.3.2(4)B, building frames sway imperfections may be disregarded

whenever HEd≥ 0.15 VEd

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 3|Page

 Solved Example
We are to carry out the global sway imperfection of the beam loaded as shown below

BEAMS - UB 305 x 102 x 28

COLUMNS - 254 x 254 x 73
Solution
∑HEd = 15 + 23 + 45 = 83 KN
0.15∑VEd = 0.15(25 + 65 + 25 + 70 + 126 + 70 + 145 + 209 + 145) = 132 KN
Since HEd < 0.15 VEd sway imperfection will need to be considered.
αh = 2/√h = 2/√12 = 0.577 since it is < 2/3, take 2/3 (check specified limits)
m = 3 (3 columns in a row)
αm = sqrt [0.5 × (1 + 1/3)] = 0.8165
Therefore;
ϕ = ϕ0αhαm = (1/200) × (2/3) × (0.8165) = 0.00272
Therefore,
At the roof level, imp1 = ϕV1 = 0.00272 × (25 + 65 + 25) = 0.3128 KN
At the second floor, imp2 = ϕV2 = 0.00272 × (70 + 126 + 70) = 0.7235 KN
At the first floor, imp3 = ϕV3 = 0.00272 × (145 + 209 + 145) = 1.357 KN

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 4|Page

 These imperfections belong to each cross frame (bay). For the double bay frame in our
example, the imperfection will need to be doubled;
Analysing the structure using Staad Pro;

Analysis Results
The moment diagram below is for the external load only without the effect of
imperfections.

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 5|Page

 The moment diagram below is for external load with the effect of imperfection inclusive.

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 6|Page

 Analysis of results
Maximum Moment on ground floor column without the effect of imperfection (column
at RHS) = 99.979 KNm
Maximum Moment on ground floor column with the effect of imperfection (column at
RHS) = 109.048 KNm
This is about 8.316% difference.
A little consideration will show that for axial loads also;
Maximum axial load without the effect of imperfection (middle column) = 398.394 KN
Maximum axial load with the effect of imperfection (middle column) = 398.383 KN
This shows that these imperfections have more effect on the bending moment of the
structure than on the axial load.
For shear force on the columns, a difference of about 8.123% was observed.

រ ៀបរ ៀងរោយ លន ឡាវ ី 7|Page