PSF For Resistance of Steel Frames To Ec3 Ec4

C.E.C.
Agreement 7210-SA/322
PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS

FOR RESISTANCE OF STEEL ELEMENTS
TO EC3 & EC4.
CALIBRATION FOR VARIOUS STEEL
PRODUCTS AND FAILURE CRITERIA
Final Report
ECSC RTD Contract SA 322 & al.
PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS FOR RESISTANCE OF STEEL
ELEMENTS TO EC3 & EC4.
CALIBRATION FOR VARIOUS STEEL PRODUCTS
AND FAILURE CRITERIA
Final report
June 2001
Author:
Bruno CHABROLIN, CTICM
Domaine de St Paul
B.P. 64
F - 78470 St-Rémy-lès-Chevreuse
i
FOREWORD
This report describes the investigations and results of a research project with a funding from the
ECSC Steel RTD Program. The partners in charge of this project were:
CTICM (France) – Coordinator

Labein (Spain)
ProfilARBED (Luxembourg)
Structura Engineering and University of Pisa (Italy)
StudienGesselschaft and RWTH (Germany)
The SCI and British Steel (United Kingdom)
TNO Building and Construction Research (Netherlands)
This report has been prepared by CTICM, the coordinator; contributions from the project’s
partners are gratefully acknowledged
iii
PROJECT SUMMARY
• Eurocode 3 and Eurocode 4 are at present ENVs. Those standards incorporate partial safety
factors γM for the resistance. γM0 is related to member resistance without instability, while γM1
is related to any limit state where instability governs. In the ENVs, γM0 is taken equal to 1,1
, contrary to the general opinion within the steel construction experts who had proposed a
value of 1,0.. Hence the first aim of this project is to collect data by anlysing the products of
as many as possible steel producers.
• On a second hand, the safety factors are now different from one country to another; So the
present research project reconsiders a large number of design limit states, in order that
future decisions for the value of γM1 may be based on clear evidence, tending to limit the
national deviations.
The first objective (γM0) is addressed by measurement campaigns in steel mills for hot rolled
products characteristics (dimensions and yield strength)
Those measured values are used to compute resistances, which are compared with resistances
resulting from the nominal values. A statistical analysis of deviations results in safety factors.
The results are quite satisfactory, a value of 1,0 being justified.
Concerning the second objective (γM1) , some experimentation was performed for specific cases,
but the main methodology was to gather existing test results and to proceed with extensive
statistical recalibration of the safety factors. Recalibrations were based on the same statistical
method described in chapter II.
The analysis does not lead to a simple generally applicable conclusion concerning the choice
of γM1, but the background information is summarised in chapter IV for consideration by expert
groups responsible for the conversion of EC3 and EC4.
iv
ABSTRACT
This research project has been motivated by two main reasons:
• Eurocode 3 and Eurocode 4 have been issued by CEN as ENVs in 1992 and 1993. Those
standards incorporate so-called partial safety factors γM in the resistance functions. In
particular, γM0 is related to member cross section resistance where no instability is governing,
while γM1 is related to any limit state where instability governs. in the ENVs, γM0 is taken equal
to 1,1 , contrary to the general opinion within the steel construction experts who had
proposed a value of 1,0. However, it is true that this opinion was not backed by extensive
data. Hence the first reason for this project is to collect those data by analysing the products
of as many as possible steel producers.
• On a second hand, member states have been allowed to fix specific national values for those
safety factors. It follows that the application of ENVs is now different from one country to
another, which is not a good thing. For this matter, the present research project will try to
reconsider a large number of design limit states, with a unique statistical method, in order
that future decisions for the value of γM1 may be based on clear evidence, tending to limit the
The project partnership thus includes logically both steel producers and steel or composite
design experts.
The first objective (γM0) is addressed by performing measurement campaigns in steel mills for
hot rolled products characteristics (dimensions and yield strength). A large variety of sections
and of steel grades (from S235 to S460) has been considered.
Those measured values are used to compute actual axial or bending resistances, which are
compared with the resistances resulting from the nominal values. A statistical analysis of the
deviations results in an evaluation of the safety factors. This method will give a safe-sided result,
since no advantage is considered from strength hardening for example.
A further activity was to discuss methods or requirements for the future production to achieve
identical performances through production control.
This first part of the research produced very positive results, as a gM0 safety factor of 1,0 instead
of 1,1 presently was proved to be safe-sided.
Specific proposals have been made for bolted connections. For other limit state, the analysis
does not lead to a single generally applicable conclusion concerning the choice of γM1. As the
solutions depend on possible modifications of relevant formulae in the code rules, the
background information is summarised in chapter IV for consideration by expert groups
responsible for the conversion of EC3 and EC4. In a few cases, however, the poor
documentation of many existing test results and the lack of suitable test results for specific
design situations such as loading interactions may present difficulties.
Thus, it is intended that the results of this project may be used by the experts in charge of the
conversion of ENVs into ENs, from 1999 to 2001.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER II STATISTICAL PROCEDURES 2

II-1. General 2
II-2. Step 1: Agreement on sampling and measurements 2
II- 3. Step 2: Evaluation of the data prepared in step 1 2
II-4 Summary of formulae 5
II-5 Agreed Procedure for Measurements 6
II-5-1. Generalities : 7
II-5-2. Characteristics to be measured: 8
II.5.3 Procedure of measurements: 8
II.5.4. Sampling and test units: 9
II.5.6. Presentation of results : 12
CHAPTER III - CROSS SECTION RESISTANCE AT ULS (γM0 for Hot Rolled profiles) 47
III-1. Introduction 47
III-2. Statistical evaluation 47
III-3. Conclusions for hot rolled I/H profiles 48
CHAPTER IV - OTHER LIMIT STATES OF RESISTANCE AT ULS (γM1 and/or γM1) 49

IV-1. Introduction 49
IV-2 Steel Elements 49
IV-2-1 Buckling strength for I and H profiles 49
IV-2-2 Lateral Torsional buckling 50
IV-2-3 Welded sections bending resistance 51
IV-2-4 Buckling of Hollow Sections 52
IV-2-4-1 Previous studies 52
IV-2-4-2 Results and conclusions 52
IV-2-5 Plate buckling 58
IV-2-5-1 Previous studies 58
IV-2-5-2 Results and conclusions 61
IV-3 Composite Elements 62
IV-3-1 Composite members 62
IV-3-2 Composite floor slabs 63
IV-4 Connections 63
IV-4-1 Bolted connections 63
IV-4-2 Steel-concrete shear connectors 67
CHAPTER V – FUTURE USE AND FUTURE VALIDITY OF RESULTS 68

V-1. Introduction 68
V-2. Use of the results 68
V-3. Future (long term) validity of conclusions for γM0 68
vi
CHAPTER VI – CONCLUSIONS 70
CHAPTER VII - LIST OF REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND WORK REPORTS 71

VII-1 Documents elaborated during the research works 71
VII-2 General references 76
VII-3 Background documents to eurocode 80
VII-4 References for Chapter IV 81
ANNEX A 85
ANNEX B 101
ANNEX C 139
vii
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION
This research project has been motivated by two main reasons:

Eurocode 3 and Eurocode 4 have been issued by CEN as ENVs in 1992 and 1993. Those
standards incorporate so-called partial safety factors γM in the resistance functions. In particular,
γM0 is related to member cross section resistance where no instability is governing, while γM1 is
related to any limit state where instability governs. in the ENVs, γM0 is taken equal to 1,1 ,
contrary to the general opinion within the steel construction experts who had proposed a value
of 1,0. However, it is true that this opinion was not backed by extensive data. Hence the first
reason for this project is to collect those data by anlysing the products of as many as possible
steel producers.
• On a second hand, member states have been allowed to fix specific national values for those
safety factors. It follows that the application of ENVs is now different from one country to
another, which is not a good thing. For this matter, the present research project will try to
reconsider a large number of design limit states, with a unique statistical method, in order
that future decisions for the value of γM1 may be based on clear evidence, tending to limit the
The project partnership thus includes logically both steel producers and steel or composite
design experts.
The first objective (γM0) is addressed by performing measurement campaigns in steel mills for
hot rolled products characteristics (dimensions and yield strength). A large variety of sections
and of steel grades (from S235 to S460) has been considered.
Those measured values are used to compute actual axial or bending resistances, which are
compared with the resistances resulting from the nominal values. A statistical analysis of the
deviations results in an evaluation of the safety factors. This method will give a safe-sided result,
since no advantage is considered from strength hardening for example.
This work is reported in chapters II and III. The permanent nature of the results is discussed in
chapter V.
This work is reported in chapter IV.
It is intended that the results of this project may be used in due time by the experts in charge of
the conversion of ENVs into Ens, in 1999 and 2000.
Page 1
CHAPTER II STATISTICAL PROCEDURES
II-1. General
This chapter gives detailed rules for the evaluation of the results of geometrical and strength
measurements on a series of profiles to determine adequate partial γM0 safety factors for
resistances.
The procedure given in this chapter is stepwise and comprises the following parts
1st step: Agreement on sampling and measurements of geometrical and strength data of
profiles to account for the negative correlation between plate thickness and
strength and to produce statistical data for plastic or elastic strength distributions.
2nd step: Evaluation of the data produced in step 1 to determine the lower tail distribution of
plastic or elastic strength and related γM values.
II-2. Step 1: Agreement on sampling and measurements
Measurements are made for the yield strength and for dimensions of cross-sections. They are
simultaneous, in order to retain the correlation between mechanical and geometric
characteristics.
The agreement concerns in particular the definition of the location where measurements and
samples for the determination of the yield strength are taken.
The agreement also includes the way in which the cross-section resistances Npl and Mpl are
calculated on the basis of those measurements for each profile i.
Details are given in the procedure presented in II-5.
As a basis, measurements are performed according to the product En steel products standard.
Hence, products that do not pass the requirements for the guaranteed yield strength or for the
required tolerances for dimensions are rejected, out of the production and out of the present
study.
II- 3. Step 2: Evaluation of the data prepared in step 1
The basis for the evaluation of the data prepared in the 1st step is Annex Z of Eurocode 3. Annex
Z has been used in the latest available version, given in Annex A to this report. Annex Z is to be
included in the forthcoming EN Eurocode 0 (Basis of Design).
Page 2
It is important to recognise that the cross-section strength depends heavily on the yield strength,
which is not a (statistical) characteristic value because it is guaranteed by the product standard.
This is the main reason why use is made of the so-called tangent method, stated in Annex Z to
Eurocodes, allowing for a precise account of the lower tail distribution of the strength.
The evaluation is carried out in the following way:
(a)Definition of the experimental values rei, equal to cross-sectional resistances calculated

from measured geometrical data and strength data fy,i for each beam i as follows:
Npl,i = Ai ⋅ fy,i ; see II-4
Mpl,i = Wpl,i ⋅ fy,i ; see II-4
Mel,i = Wel,i ⋅ fy,i ; see II-4
(b)Definition of the theoretical values rti, equal to the nominal values of cross-sectional
resistances calculated from nominal values of geometrical data and strength data.
Npl,nom
Mpl,nom
Mel,nom
For nominal geometrical data of rolled sections EN 10034 is used; for the nominal yield
strength two options might be applied.
option 1: definition of the nominal yield strength according to EC 3 (ENV 1993-1-1:1992)
option 2: definition of the nominal yield strength according to the material standards EN
10025 and EN 10113.
(c) The sensitivity investigations should be carried out for each type of profile, the steel
grades, production methods etc, to identify the test population for which all influences,
neglected in the cross-sectional strength formulae are approximatively constant.
Page 3
(d)The tangent method shall be used to obtain fictive mean values and error terms for the
lower tail of the distribution. The values rei/rti shall be ordered in descending order and
i
plotted on Gaussian-log-paper using the value as the i-th fractile.
n +1
Example: for 3 measured values x, the fractiles are
x1 → 1/4 = 25 %
x2 → 2/4 = 50 %
x3 → 3/4 = 75 %
The fictive mean values and error terms of the lower tail distributions are determined from either:
(1) Mean linear curve for measured data below the 50 % fractile (half the log-normal-
distributed population).
(2) Tangent approximation for the lower tail comprising not less than 20 tests. (This
procedure is recommended where a systematic tendency of the lower tail distribution
towards such a tangent is evident).
Page 4
(e)As sufficient measured data are available a penalty for a limited number of measured data
should not be considered. The design values should be calculated as the 3.04 fractile
(see EC Annex Z included as Annex A).
(f) The γΜ* value should be calculated using
* r nom,i
γM = where rnom,i = nominal resistance value for each member i
r d,i
rd,i = design resistance value for each member i
(g)The detailed formula flow is given in II-5.
II-4 Summary of formulae
(1) The resistances are determined according to:
Mpl,mes = Wpl,mes · fy,mes
Npl,mes = Ames · fy.,mes
Mpl,nom = Wpl,nom · fy,nom
Npl,nom = Wpl,nom · fy,nom
All the nominal values are according to II-5
Note: The nominal values for fy may be taken either from EC 3 or from EN 10025 or EN 10113
(2) Example with Moments:
1) Calculate:
 Mpl,mes 
bi =  

 Mpl,nom 
1
2) b= ∑ bi
n
bi
3) δi =
b
b 
4) δi’ = ln δi = ln  i  = ln bi - ln b
b
Page 5
5) δ = mean of δ ' i
6)
1 n
Sδ′ = ∑ (δi′ - δ)†
n -1 1
1 n 1
= ∑ (l nbi′ - l n b - ∑ l nbi + l n b)†
n -1 1 n
1 n 1
= ∑ (l nbi′ - ∑ l n bi)†
n -1 1 n
7) Use tangent method as described in this report.
8) Smδ’ = bm - (b (15.87 %))
9) Q = Smδ’
10) Finally the γM*-factor is derived as follows:
Mpl,nom
γM * =
Mpl, d
Mpl . nom
=
bm Mpl,nom exp(- ud • Sm δ′ - 0,5 Sm δ′)
1
=
bm • exp (- ud • Sm δ′ - 0,5 Sm δ′)
II-5 Agreed Procedure for Measurements
The following describes the adopted procedure for in mills measurements (yield strength and
geometric dimensions).
It is based on standard procedures for production evaluation according to the relevant product
standards (EN).
Page 6
Procedure to evaluate partial safety factors γM for H / I hot-rolled sections
II-5-1. Generalities :
(1) This procedure defines the way to carry out measurements of hot-rolled steel profiles
on production sites, in order to evaluate the following resistance models of
cross-sections according to Eurocode 3:
- model for tension or compression plastic resistance of cross-sections:
Npl = A . fv
- model for bending moment plastic resistance of cross-sections about major axis yy:
Mpl.y = Wpl.y . fv
- model for bending moment elastic resistance of cross-sections about major axis yy:
Mel.y = Wel.y . fv
- model for bending moment plastic resistance of cross-sections about minor axis zz:
Mpl.z = Wpl.z . fv
- model for bending moment elastic resistance of cross-sections about minor axis zz:
Mel.z = Wel.z . fv
The strength models correspond to cross-sections without holes for fasteners.

(2) The measurements of hot-rolled sections are related to profiles which are shipped on
the market. Consequently no measured data shall be excluded if their validity have
been controlled being within the limits imposed by standardised tolerances, according
to common practice in rolling mills.
(3) The values of the models which are issued from measurements on mills of different
steel producers, will be analysed by statistical evaluations according to Annex Z of
Eurocode 3, in order to determine the relevant partial safety factor: γm0 , which affects
each resistance model given above in clause 1. (1).
(4) This campaign of measurements and of statistical evaluations is intended to be
representative of the European market. Thus as many as possible steel producers
from différent countries should be involved as for instance:
- Aristrain (with mills in Spain),
- Preussag (with mills in Germany),
- British steel (with mills in United Kingdom),
- ProfilARBED (with mills in Luxembourg, France and Germany),
Page 7
II-5-2. Characteristics to be measured:
(1) Geometrical characteristics:

h = depth of section,
b = width of section,
tw = web thickness,
tf = flange thickness,
r = radius of root fillet (which will be taken as nominal value given in relevant
Euronorms: Euronorm 19-57 for IPE sections,
Euronorm 53-62 for HEA, HEB and HEM sections,
BS 4 part 1 - 1993 for HP, UB and UC sections).
(2) Mechanical characteristics:
fy = yield strength, according to EN 10025 and to EN 10113, which are both European
standards specifying the technical delivery conditions of hot-rolled
products of structural steels.
Important point: both mechanical and geometrical characteristics shall be measured
each time on the same specimen . Those characteristics shall be measured
according to Euronorms and according to daily practice of factories (measurements
from Quality Control Departments, usual testing machines, ... ).
II.5.3 Procedure of measurements:
Geometrical characteristics: the following measurements shall be carried out

according to EN 10034 (specifying the tolerances on shape and dimensions) (see
attached sketch in Annex 1 to this chapter) :
-h = the depth of cross-section measured in the web axis;
- b1 and b2 = the width of each flange of cross-section;
- tw = the web thickness measured at mid-depth (= h/2) of
cross-section;
- tf1, tf2, tf3 and tf4 = the flange thicknesses measured at each quarter of each flange
(= b1/4 and b2/4) of a cross-section.
It is recommended to control the following measurements in order to validate the cross-
section within EN10034 limits but it should not be necessary to mention them in the databank
of results; if those criteria are not fulfilled, specimens should be excluded as done by mills in
usual practice (see present chapter 1. Generalities: clause (2»:
- flange parallelism (" k+k'" values) (see Annex 2);
- web excentricity (' e " values) (see Annex 2);
Page 8
- tolerances on masses (± 4%).
(2) Mechanical characteristics: according to EN 10025 and EN 10113:
- the tensile test shall be carried out in accordance with EN 10002- 1;
in accordance with Euronorrn 18 the location of samples and test pieces shall be in
the flange of sections, at the sixth of width (= b/6) (see attached sketch in Annex 3);
according to EN 10025 and EN 10113, the yield strength fy shall be determined as:
* the upper yield strength ReH,
* or, if yield phenomenon is not present, the 0,2% proof strength Rp0,2(see Annex 4)
in the scope of this campaign of measurements, it should be useful to measure the

following features, for 10% (or more if possible) of all measured specimens and, to
keep them in stock:
* both values of ReH and Rp0,2 ,
* tensile strengths, Rm (or fu ) and ultimate strains εu and A5d (see Annex 4),
* full stress-strain curves.
- Those measurements (ReH, Rp0,2, Rm, εu, A5d, full stress-strain curves) will not be
given in a first step. Their use will be discussed afterwards because they could
improve other partial safety factors γm1 (resistance of steel members to local and
global buckling) and γmb (resistance of bolted connections).
II.5.4. Sampling and test units:
(1) Steel grades, qualities :

- Selection of steel grades and qualities:
I. "basic" steel grades: S 235 JR or S 275 JR,
II. high strength steels: S 355 J0,
II. very high strength steels: S 460 NL or S 460 ML.
Number of specimens to be measured for all mills of each steel producer for all
series of profiles and for différent steel grades and qualities :
Steel grades and qualities

Serie of Profiles I II III
S 235 JR or S 275 JR S 355 JO S 460 NL or S 460 ML
IPE
HE Total Number = Total Number = Total Number =

UB 600 200 100
UC
(2) Sampling: according to EN 10025 (see Annex 5) and to EN 10113 (see Annex 6).
Page 9
(3) Tests units: according to EN 10025 (see Annex 5) and to EN 10113 (see Annex 6).
(4) Types of cross-sections :
- It is proposed to carry out measurements by random selection of profiles in the scope
of usual works done by Quality Control Department of différent mills.
- The différent types of H and I cross-sections which shall be measured in the scope of this
campaign, are :
IPE European 1-bearm
IPE 80 - 600 in accordance with Euronorm 19-57
HE European wide flange bearns
HE A, HE B and HE M 100 - 1000 in accordance with Euronorm 53-62
HP Wide flange bearing piles
in accordance with BS 4 part 1-1993
UB British universal bearns
UC British universal columns
Nominal geometrical and statical characteristics of these cross-sections are given in
Annex 8.
The types of cross-sections to be measured should be specified. by european
specifications (Euronorm 19-57, Euronorm 53-62, BS 4 part 1-1993) (see Annex 8)
and should be selected at random according to the current production, trying to
cover all différent types of profiles.
(5) Number of measured profiles
From the.point of view of statistical evaluations better results will be obtained if we have
more measurements per profile for a lower number of profiles, instead of less
measurements per profile for a higher number of profiles.
Mills should try to, carry out 30 measurements per profile .
per steel grade ,
and per rolling .
(6) Tables of profiles :
- The tables of Annex 8 provide the nominal data of cross-sections :
* the geometrical characteristics,
* the statical characteristics and,
* the classification according to Eurocode 3 (see Annex 7 for the definition of
Page 10
classification):
. for different loading cases :
. NSd , compressive axial load,
. My.Sd , uniaxial bending moment about major axis yy,
. Mz.Sd , uniaxial bending moment about minor axis zz.
. for différent steel grades : S 235, S 355, S 460 (with yield strength (fy)
depending on material thickness (tf) according to Eurocode 3).
- According to Eurocode 3 a cross-section is normally classified by quoting the highest
(least favourable) class of its compression elements (web or flange). The tables of
Annex 8 mention the element which has the highest class, for example:
* 3w means class 3 web, class 1 or 2 flange and class 3 cross-section,
* 4f means class 4 flange, class 1, 2 or 3 web and class 4 cross-section,
* 3 means class 3 web, class 3 flange and class 3 cross-section,
- For the evaluation of partial safety factor γM0 , measured cross-section should be:
* class 1. 2 or 3 for evaluation of model for tension or compression plastic' resistance
of cross-section: Npl = A. fy
* class 1 or 2 for evaluation of model for bending moment plastic resistance of
cross-sections about major axis yy and minor axis zz: M pl.y = W
pl.y.fy and M pl.z = W pl.z.fy
* class 3 for evaluation of model for bending moment elastic resistance of

crosssections about major axis yy and minor axis zz: M el.y = W
el.y.fy and M el.z = W el.z.fy
No class 4 cross-sections should be used for the evaluation of partial safety factor γM0
for loading cases of M y.Sd and M z.Sd in priority and also for loading case of NSd if
possible (see Annex 8 for the selection of profiles).
II.5.5. Evaluation of statical characteristics A, Wpl and Wel:

(1) The following formulas should be used in all mills to evaluate the statical characteristics
of each measured cross-section:
- sectional area, A :
A = 2 . tf . b + (h – 2. tf) . tw + (4 - π) .
r2
- plastic section modulus about major axis yy, Wpl,y:
t w .h 2 4−π 2 3π − 10 3
Wpl.y = + (b − t w )(
. h − t f ).t f + .r .(h − 2t f ) + .r
4 2 3
Page 11
- elastic section modulus about major axis yy Wel.y :
2.Iy
Wel.y =
h
where the moment of inertia about major axis yy, Ey is
Iy =
1
12
[
. b.h 3 − (b − t w )( ]
. h − 2t f ) + 0,03.r 4 + 0,2146 .r 2 .(h − 2 t f − 0,4468 .r )
3 2
- plastic section modulus about minor axis zz, Wpl.z :
Wpl.z =
t f .b 2
+.
(h − t f ) .t 2 + 4 − π .r 2 .t − 3π − 10 .r 3
w w
2 4 2 3
- elastic section modulus about minor axis zz, Wel.z:
2.Iz
Wel.z =
b
where the moment of inertia about minor axis zz. Iz is:
Iz =
1
12
[ ]
. 2.t f .b 3 + (h − 2t f ).t 3w + 0,03.r 4 + 0,2146 .r 2 .( t w + 0,4468.r )
2
and where
b = (b1 + b2) / 2(= mean values).
tf = (tf1 + tf2 + tf3 + tf4) / 4(= mean values).
h, b1 , b2 , tw , tf1 , tf2 , tf3 and tf4 are measured as prescribed in present chapter
II.5.3 (according to EN 10034) and,
r is the nominal value given in relevant Euronorms (see present chapter II.5.2).
II.5.6. Presentation of results :
(1) Generalities:
The databank of results (nominal, measured and calculated characteristics) is proposed
to
be presented as shown in Annex 9 (6 parts) and is given on a floppy disk with Excel and
Lotus/Wysiwyg files.
For each measured cross-section, steel producers should fulfill 24 columns of the
table given in Annex 9 (pages 1/6 and 2/6) with :
*references data (columns 1 to 6),
* nominal characteristics (columns 7 to 12) and,
* measurements (columns 16 to 27).
Page 12
- Other characteristics will be automatically calculated by Excel or Lotus:
* nominal yield strength (fy) depending on the material thickness according to
Eurocode 3 (column 13) and to Euronorms EN 10025 and EN 10 113 (column 14),
* statical properties of cross-sections (columns 29 to 44):
. for nominal characteristics (columns 29 to 35) and,
. for measured characteristics (columns 36 to 44).
* resistance models of cross-sections (columns 54 to 69):
. for measured data (columns 54 to 58) and,
. for nominal data :
. with yield strength (fy) depending on the material. thickness according to
Eurocode 3 (columns 60 to 64) and,
. with yield strength (fy) depending on the material thickness according to
Euronorms EN 1 002YUd EN 10 113 (columns 65 to 69).
* ratios between measured and nominal resistance models (columns 71 to 80):
. with nominal resistance models using yield strength (fy) depending on
the material thickness according to Eurocode 3 (columns 71 to, 75) and,
. with nominal resistance models using yield strength (fy) depending on
the material thickness according to Euronorms EN 1 0OY5' and EN 10
113 (columns 76 to 80).
For the evaluation of partial safety factor γM0 each steel producer should send to
Professor Sedlacek (RWTH, Aachen University) the 3 last parts of the table given in
Annex 9 (from pages 4/6 to 6/6) (= all rows for columns 45 to 80) :
* with calculated values of resistance models issued from measurements,
* with calculated values of resistance models issued from nominal values and,
* with comparative ratios of measured to nominal resistance models.
In a first step details on measurements shall not be given (Annex 9 (pages 2/6 and
3/6): columns 16 to 27 and columns 36 to 44)
Page 13
Details : Example and formulas (Units : N and mm) :
* The following data shall be introduced in the table by steel -producers:
Data given as example :
- col. 1: the measurement number Ex. 1 ,
- col. 2 : the date of measurement 20/9/95,
- col. 3 : the cast number : 2,
- col. 4 : the rolling process (c = cast or i = ingot) c,
- col. 5 : the designation of the profile serie(IPE, HEA, HEB, HEM, HP, UB or UC): HEA,
- col. 6 : the profile number : 400,
- col. 7 : the nominal depth of profile, h 390 mm ,
- col. 8 the nominal width of profile, b 300 mm,
- col. 9 the nominal web thickness of profile, tw 11 mm,
- col. 10: the nominal flange thickness of profile, tf 19 mm,
- col. 11 the nominal radius fillet of profile, r : 27 mm,
- col. 12 the steel grade (S235 or s235, S275 or s275)(S355 or s355, S460 or s460): s460,
- col. 16: the measured upper yield strength, ReH (put 0 if R p0,2 ≠ 0) 0 N/mm2,
- col. 17 the measured. 0,2 % proof strength, R p0,2 (put 0 if ReH ≠ 0) : 472 N/mm2,
- col. 18 the tensile strength, Rm : 570 N/mm2,
- col. 19 the ultimate strain, A5d : 19%
- col. 20 the measured depth of profile, h : 391 mm ,
- col. 21 the measured width of profile, b1 : 301 mm ,
- col. 22 the measured width of profile, b2 : 302 mm ,
- col. 23 the measured web thickness of profile, tw 11,1 mm ,
- col. 24 the measured flange thickness of profile, tfl 19,1 mm ,
- col. 25 the measured flange thickness of profile, tf2 19,2 mm ,
* The following characteristics are automatically calculated:
- col. 13: the nominal yield strength, fy (depending on material thickness (≤100 mm)
according to Eurocode 3 (EC3): see Annex 10) 460 N/mm2
- col. 14: the nominal yield strength, fy depending on material thickness (≤100 mm) according
to Euronorms (EN 10025 & EN 10 113): see Annex 10): 440 N/mm2,
- from columns 29 to 35 nominal statical characteristics, are calculated with nominal
geometrical data (issued from colurans 7 to 11) and with formulas defined in present
chapter.5 :
. col.29 : the nominal sectional area , (A)n : 15 898 mm2,
. col. 30 : the nominal moment of inertia about major axis y, (Iy)n : 450 693 526 mm4,
. col. 31 : the nominal elastic section modulus about major axis y, (W el.y)n : 2 311 249 mm3,
. col 32. : the nominal plastic section modulus about major axis y, (W pl.y)n : 25 61 798 mm3,
. col. 33. : the nominal moment of inertia about minor axis z, (Iz)n : 85 638 203 mm4,
. col. 34. : the nominal elastic section modulus about minor axis z, (W el.z)n : 570 921 mm3,
. col. 35 : the nominal plastic section modulus about minor axis z, (W pl.z)n : 872 864 mm3,
. col. 36 : the mean value of measured widths of profile bm = (b1 + b2) / 2 301,5 mm,
. col. 37 : the mean value of measured flange thicknesses of profile
tf = (tf1 + tf2 + tf3 + tf4) / 4 19,3 mm,
- from columns 38 to 44 measured statical characteristics, are calculated with measured
geometrical data (issued from columns 20, 23 and 11 for respectively h, tw and r and
using mean values for b (col. 36) and for tf (col. 37)) and with formulas defined in present
chapter 5 :
. col.38 : the measured sectional area , (A)m 16 146 mm2,
. col.39 : the measured moment of inertia about major axis y, (Iy)m.: 460 063 148 mm4,
. col.40 : the measured elastic section modulus about major axis y, (W el.y)m : 2 353 264 mm3,
Page 14
. col.41 : the measured plastic section modulus about major axis y, (W pl.y)m : 2 608 920 mm3,
. col.42 : the measured moment of inertia about minor axis z, (Iz)m : 88 070 940 mm4,
. col.43 the measured elastic section modulus about minor axis z, (W el.z)m : 584 219 mm3,
. col.44 : the measured plastic section modulus about minor axis z, (W pl.z)m : 893 039 mm3,
- columns 45 to 53 are copied from related left-hand columns 1 to 6 and 12 to, 14.
- from columns 54 to 58 the resistance models are calculated from measured yield
strength fy (= ReH or R p0,2 , taken from columns 16 orl7 respectively) and irom calculated
statical characteristics (issued from columns 38 to 44) which are evaluated from
measured geometric al data:
. col. 54 : (Npl)m = (A)m . fy 7 621 041 N,
. col 55 : (M el.y)m = (W el.y)m . fy 1 110 740 695 Nmm,
. col 56 : (M pl.y)m = (W pl.y)m . fy 1 231 410 336 Nmm,
. col 57 : (M el.z)m = (W el.z)m . fy 275 751 136 Nmm,
. col 58 : (M pl.z)m = (W pl.z)m . fy 421 514 455 Nmm.
- from columns 60 to 64 the resistance models are calculated from nominal yield strength
(fy)EC3 (depending on material thickness according to Eurocode 3 (see Annex 10) : columns
13 & 52) and from calculated statical characteristics (issued from columns 29 to 35) which
are evaluated from nominal geometrical data:
. col 60 : (Npl)n = (A)n . (fy)EC3 7 312 976 N,
. col 61 : (M el.y)n = (W el.y)n . (fy)EC3 1 063 174 471 Nmm,
. col 62 : (M pl.y)n = (W pl.y)n . (fy)EC3 1 178 427 142 Nmm,
. col 63 : (M el.z)n = (W el.z)n . (fy)EC3 262 623 822 Nmm,
. col 64 : (M pl.z)n = (W pl.z)n . (fy)EC3 401 517 336 Nmm.
- from columns 65 to 69 the resistance models are calculated from nominal yield strength
(fy)EN (depending on material thickness according to Euronorms (EN 10025 and EN
16113)(see Annex 10) : columns 14 & 53) and from calculated statical characteristics
(issued from columns 29 to 35) which are evaluated from nominal geometrical data :
. col. 65 : (Npl)n = (A)n . (fy)EN 6 995 020 N,
. col. 66 : (M el.y)n = (W el.y)n . (fy)EN 1 016 949 494 Nmm,
. col. 67 : (M pl.y)n = (W pl.y)n . (fy)EN 1 127 191 179 Nmm,
. col. 68 : (M el.z)n = (W el.z)n . (fy)EN 251 205 395 Nmm,
. col. 69 : (M pl.z)n = (W pl.z)n . (fy)EN 384 060 060 Nmm.
- from columns 71 to 75 ratios between measured (m) and nominal (n) resistance models
are calculated from measured values (columns 54 to 58) and from nominal values using
yield strength (fy)EC3 depending on material thickness according to Eurocode 3 (columns
60 to 64) :
. col. 71 : EC3 (N pl)m / (N pl)n 1,042,
. col. 72 : EC3 (M el.y)m / (M el.y)n 1,045,
. col. 73 : EC3 (M pl.y)m / (M pl.y)n Class 3 or 4 ,
. col. 74: EC3 (M el.z)m / (M el.z)n 1,050,
. col. 75: EC3 (M pl.z)m / (M pl.z)n Class 3 or 4.
- from colunns 76 to 80 ratios between measured (m) and nominal (n) resistance models
are calculated from measured values (columns 54 to 58) and from nominal values using
yield strength (fy)EN depending on material thickness according to Euronorms (EN 10025
and EN 101 13)(columns 65 to 69):
. col. 76: EN (N pl)m / (N pl)n 1,089,
. col. 77 : EN (M el.y)m / (M el.y)n Class 1 or 2,
. col. 78: EN (M pl.y)m / (M pl.y)n 1,092,
. col. 79: EN (M el.z)m / (M el.z)n Class 1 or 2,
Page 15
. col. 80: EN (M pl.z)m / (M pl.z)n 1,098.
- remarks about calculations of ratios between resistance models (columns 71 to 80) :
. for calculations of Npl ratios, the result may be "Class 4", if the given crosssection
is Class 4,
. for calculations of Mel ratios, the result may be "Class 1 or 2" or "Class 4", if the
given cross-section is respectively Class 1 or 2 or Class 4,
. for calculations of Mpl ratios, the result may be "Class 3 or 4", if the given cross-
section is respectively Class 3 or Class 4.
. the calculation of the cross-section Class considers nominal geometrical data
(column 7 to 11) and nominal yield strength depending on the material thickness
either according to Eurocode 3 (columns 13 & 52) or to Euronorms (EN 10025
and EN 101 13)(columns 14 & 53); differences in classification may appear as
shown in this example n° 1 (EX. 1) for ratios about My and Mz.
Annexes : 10 Annexes (1 to 10) are given in the next pages.
Needed documents :
Euronorm 19-57, Euronorm 53-62, Euronorrn 18, BS 4 - Part 1 -1993, EN 10034,
EN 10025, EN 10113, EN 10002.
Page 16
ANNEXES TO § II-5
Annex 1 (2 pages): Geometrical characteristics (EN 10034)

measurements and tolerances of h, b, t, and tf
Annex 2 (1 page): Geometrical characteristics (EN 10034) :
tolerances of flange parallelisrn and web excentricity
Annex 3 (1 page) Mechanical characteristics (EN 10025 & EN 10 113) :
location of samples
Annex 4 (2 pages): Mechanical characteristics (EN 10025 & EN 10 113) :
refèrence points of stress-strain diagramms
Annex 5 (l page): Mechanical characteristics (EN 10025)
sampling & tests units
Annex 6 (3 pages): Mechanical characteristics (EN 10 113)
sampling & tests units
Annex 7 (4 pages) Definition of the cross-section classification according to
Eurocode 3
Annex 8 (10 pages): Tables of european profiles
(IPE, HEA, HEB, HEM, HP, UB and UC)
Annex 9 (6 pages) Presentation of results (Excel or Lotus application)
Annex 10 (1 page): Minimum guaranteed yield strength ReH (or R p0,2) in
function of nominal thickness t of material according to
Eurocode 3 and Euronorms (EN 10025 & EN 10 113).
Page 17
Annexes 1 to 10 are given in the next pages.
BENDING AXES : yy major axis

Zz minor axis
Page 18
Measurements of H or I hot-rolled sections Annex 1 (2/2)
Tableau 1 – Tolérances dimensionnelles des poutrelles I et H en acier de construction
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Annex 4 (1/2) Measurements of H or I hot-rolled sections
Page 19 of EN 10025 :1990+A1 :1993
8.6.3.4 Chemical analysis samples
The preparation of samples for product analysis shall be in accordance with
EURONORM 18.
8.7 Test methods
8.7.1 Chemical analysis
For the determination of the chemical composition the corresponding European
Standard or EURONORMS (see footnote 2 of clause 2) shall apply in cases of
dispute.
8.7.2 Mechanical tests
Mechanical tests shall be carried out in the temperature range 10°C – 35°C,
except where a specific temperature is specified for impact tests.
8.7.2.1 Tensile tests
The tensile test shall be carried out in accordance with EN 10002-1.
For the specified yield strength in table 5 the upper yield strength (ReH)
shall be determined.
If a yield phenomenon is not present, the 0,2 % proof strength (R p0,2) or the
R t0,5 shall be determined ; in cases of dispute the 0,2 % proof strength (R
p0,2) shall be determined.
If a non-proportional test piece is used for products with a thickness ≥ 3 mm

the percentage elongation value obtained shall be converted to the value for
a gauge length Lo = 5,65 So using the conversion tables given in ISO 2566/l.
8.7.2.2 Impact tests
The impact test shall be carried out in accordance with EN 10045-1.
The average value of the three test results shall meet the specified
requirement. One individual value may be below the minimum average value
specified, provided that it is not less than 70 % of that value.
Three additional test pieces shall be taken from the same sample in
accordance with 8.6.1 and tested in any one of the following cases :
-- if the average of three impact values is lower than the minimum average
value specified;
-- if the average value meets the specified requirement, but two
individual values are lower than the minimum average value specified;
-- if any one value is lower than 70 % of the minimum average value
specified.
The average value of the six tests shall be not less than the minimum average
value specified. Not more than two of the individual values may be lower than
the minimum average value specified and not more than one may be lower than
70 % of this value.
Page 22
NOTE : A 5d = Elongation at failure for a gauge length of L 0 = 5.65 S0

(see EN 10025 / 10113)
Page 23
Annex 5 Measurements of H or I hot-rolled sections
Page 17
FOR S 235, S 275, S 355
EN 10025 :1990+A1 :1993
8.3 Sampling
8.3.1 The verification of the mechanical properties shall be carried out :
-- by lot or by cast as specified at the time of the enquiry and order for
the quality JR and the steel grades E295, E335 and E360;
option 14;
-- by cast for the qualities J0, J2G3, J2G4, K2G3 and K2G4.
8.3.2 If it is specified at the time of the enquiry and order that
sampling should be by lot, it is permissible for the manufacturer to
substitute sampling by cast, if the products are delivered by cast.
8.4 Test units
8.4.1 The test unit shall contain products of the same form and grade and
of the same thickness range as specified in table 5 for the yield strength
and shall be:
-- by lot : 20 tonnes or part thereof,
-- by cast: 40 tonnes or part thereof,
60 tonnes or part thereof for heavy sections with a mass > 100 kg/m.
8.4.2 If specified at the time of the enquiry and order for flat
products of quality J2G3, J2G4, K2G3 and K2G4, the impact test only or the
impact test and the tensile test shall be carried out on each parent plate
or coil.
Option 20
8.5 Verification of chemical composition
8.5.1 For ladle analysis determined for each cast, the values reported
by the manufacturer shall apply.
8.5.2 Product analysis shall be carried out if specified at the time of
the enquiry and order. The purchaser shall specify the number of samples and
the elements to be determined.
Option 15.
8.6 Mechanical tests
8.6.1 Number of samples
The following samples shall be taken from one sample product of each test
unit :
-- one sample for tensile testing (see 8.2.1),
-- one sample sufficient for one set of six impact test pieces for quality
JO, J2G3, J2G4, K2G3 and K2G4 and if required for quality JR (see 8.2.1
and 8.2.2 a).
8.6.2 Position of samples (see Annex A)
The samples shall be taken from the thickest product in the test unit except
for flat products of quality J2G3 and K2G3, for which the samples
Page 24
Measurements of H or 1 hot-rolled sections Annex 6 (1/3)
FOR S 460 Page 15 of EN 10113-

1:1993
8.1.2 The purchaser shall specify the type of the inspection document
at the time of the enquiry and order (see 4.1 and 8.8).
8.1.3 The specific inspection and testing shall be carried out in
accordance with 8.2 to 8.7.
8.1.4 Unless otherwise agreed at the time of the enquiry and order
inspection of surface condition and dimensions shall be carried out by the
manufacturer.
Option 9.
8.2 Sampling
The verification of the mechanical properties shall be by cast.
8.3 Test units
The test unit shall contain products of the same form and grade and of the
same thickness range as given in table 3 of part 2 and table 3 of part 3 of
this European Standard for the yield strength.
For verifying the mechanical properties the test units specified in parts
2 and 3 of this European Standard shall apply.
8.4.1 For ladle analysis determined for each cast, the values reported
by the manufacturer shall apply.
8.4.2 Product analysis shall be carried out if agreed at the time of the
enquiry and order. The purchaser shall specify the number of samples and the
elements to be determined.
Option 3.
8.5.1 Preparation of samples
8.5.1.1 The following samples shall be taken from one sample product of
each test unit:
-- one sample for tensile testing ;
-- one sample sufficient for one set of six impact test pieces.
8.5.1.2 The sample product can be any product within the test unit.
8.5.1.3 For plates, sheet, wide strip and wide flats the samples shall be
taken approximately midway between the edge and centre line of the products.
Page 25
Annex 6 (2/3) Measurements of H or 1 hot-rolled sections
Page 8 of
EN 10113-2:1993 FOR S 460 NL
8 Inspection and testing

8.1 General
The products shall be supplied in accordance with 8.1 of EN 10113 part 1.
Option 9.
8.2 Sampling
Sampling shall be in accordance with EN 10113 part 1.
8.3 Test units
8.3.1 The test unit shall contain products of the same form and grade
and of the same thickness range as specified in table 3 for the yield
strength.
For verifying the mechanical properties the following test unit shall
apply:
-- 40 t or part thereof.
products the impact test only or the impact test and the tensile test shall
be carried out on each parent plate or coil.
Option 19a and 19b.
The verification of the chemical composition shall be in accordance with EN
10113 part 1.
Option 3.
The mechanical tests shall be in accordance with EN 10113 part 1.
8.6 Test methods
The test methods shall be in accordance with EN 10113 part 1.
8.7 Retests and resubmission for testing
The retests and resubmission for testing shall be in accordance with EN
10113 part 1.
8.8 Inspection documents
The inspection documents shall comply with EN 10113 part 1.
Page 26
Measurements of H or 1 hot-rolled sections Annex 6 (3/3)
Page 8
FOR S 4 60 ML
EN 10113-3:1993
7.7 Internal defects

The internal defects shall be in accordance with EN 10113 part 1.
Option 13 (for flat products).
Option 16 (for long products).
8 Inspection and testing
8.1 General
The products shall be supplied in accordance with 8.1 of EN 10113 part 1.
Option 9.
8.2 Sampling
Sampling shall be in accordance with EN 10113 part 1.
8.3 Test units
8.3.1 The test unit shall contain products of the same form and grade
and of the same thickness range as specified in table 3 for the yield
strength.
For verifying the mechanical properties the following test unit shall
apply:
-- 40 t or part thereof.
products the impact test only or the impact test and the tensile test shall
be carried out on each parent plate or coil.
Option 19a and 19b.
The verification of the chemical composition shall be in accordance with EN
10113 part 1.
Option 3.
The mechanical tests shall be in accordance with EN 10113 part 1.
8.6 Test methods
The test methods shall be in accordance with EN 10113. part 1.
Page 27
Annex 7 (1/4) Measurements of H or 1 hot-rolled sections
Definition of Eurocode 3 classification of cross-sections

According to chapter 5.3 of Eurocode 3, steel profiles are categorized in section classes
(see Table 1) which depend on:
- slenderness of cross-sections members (width/thickness ratios of flange and web)
235
- yield strength with the factor ε=
fy
- the internal forces and bending moments applied to the cross-section (Ncompression, My, Mz,
... : all inducing normal stresses).
The cross-section of class 1 allows the full plastic strength and a moment redistribution
due to the formation of plastic hinges which have sufficient available inelastic rotation. For
class 2 cross-sections, the available inelastic rotation becomes so limited that the plastic
cross-section capacity Mpl may be taken into account, but the redistribution of moments
has to be neglected. Hence the system is assumed to behave elastically though the
plastic capacity Mpl of the cross-section is exploited locally. Classes 3 and 4 concern
cross-sections with a distribution of elastic stresses, respectively on full or effective
cross-sections. Tables 2 and 3 summarise the existing rules in Eurocode 3 in loading
cases of Ncompression, My and Mz.
Figure 1 (Note: d = h - 2.tf - 2.r and c = b/2 )
Page 28
Page 29
Annex 7 (3/4) Measurements of H or I hot-rolled sections
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
CHAPTER III - CROSS SECTION RESISTANCE AT ULS (γM0 for Hot
Rolled profiles)
III-1. Introduction
This chapter describes the statistical evaluation (carried out at RWTH) for the measured
properties of rolled profiles with the aim to re-evaluate the γM0 value by taking into account actual
measurements of hot-rolled profiles in steel mills.
III-2. Statistical evaluation
The geometric and material properties of profiles are measured in different steel mills and they
are collected in a data bank at RWTH. The actual data bank contains the measured properties
of 3906 profiles provided by 5 project partners. For the γM0 evaluation, not all of the 3906 profiles
could be used because some of the profiles are class 4 cross-sections.
For obvious reasons of confidentiality, the steel producers are not named in the following
presentation, they are only identified by a simple number (1 to 5)
The analysed production is from:
• Germany
• Italy
• Luxembourg
• Spain
• United Kingdom
Hence the analysed production is representative of Western Europe steel-production for hot-
rolled I/H profiles.
Measures were taken in the mills during current industrial production, according to chapter II.
For the statistical evaluation the database was divided into individual subsets so that the
influence of an individual data set on the statistical results could be detected. The following
subsets were defined:
Subset 1: All profiles
Subset 2: All steel producers, each type of section
Subset 3: Each steel producer, all types of sections
Subset 4: Each steel producer, each type of section
The statistical procedure which was used in the evaluation was based on the revised draft of
Annex Z of Eurocode 3 (see chapter II and Annex A to this report) and were processed through
a computer programme prepared by CTICM.
The statistical evaluations of the subsets were carried out with the computer programme
Page 47
according to the following steps:
Step 1: In the first step the number of points for regression was selected as 50 % of all data
of the subset and the γM-value was determined with the appropriate standard
deviation Sδ.
Step 2: In a second step the statistical evaluation was carried out with the lower tail of the
frequency distribution while the number of points for regression was restricted to 20.
Step 3: This step was only necessary when the γM -value according to step 1 was lower than
the γM -value obtained by step 2. Then, the sensitivity of the γM -value was examined
while the number of points for regression were chosen between the 50% - value and
the 20 points.
For all subsets the statistical results are given in Annex B to this report.
III-3. Conclusions for hot rolled I/H profiles
For the actual database the following conclusions can be drawn:

• The value of γM0 =1.0 is justified for all examined sections from all steel producers.
• However, the simplified definition of fy according to EC 3, rather than according to EN 10025

and EN 10113, is to be abandoned in order to justify γM0 =1.0.
• The hot rolled sections that were measured performed better in the strong inertia plane (I-
sections) than in the weak inertia plane (H-sections) so that γM0 =1.0 is easier to justify for
the y-y plane while γM0 =1.1 would be a safe easy conclusion for the z-z plane.
• However, recalling that the analysis is only based on the yield strength value, and does not
account for other effects, especially strength hardening effects, our conclusion is that a
partial safety factor γM0 equal to 1,0 should be recommended for hot-rolled I/H profiles and
for any type of limit state where no local or member instability effect is governing.
• Those conclusions are dependent on the provisions for future validity, as investigated in
Chapter V.
Page 48
CHAPTER IV - OTHER LIMIT STATES OF RESISTANCE AT ULS (γM1
and/or γM1)
IV-1. Introduction
This part of the report will describe all the performed studies that were not directly related with
the purpose described in Chapter III, i.e. the γM0 partial safety factor for hot-rolled I or H cross
sections not subject to local or global instabilities.
While the reported topics were not the main subject of the research project, it was however
possible to gather a lot of information and to highlight some main tendencies, even if the
conclusions are not often readily transferable to Eurocode drafters.
The following distinction is made between:
Steel elements (see IV-2)
Composite elements (see IV-3)
Connections (see IV-3)
IV-2 Steel Elements
IV-2-1 Buckling strength for I and H profiles
The main problem with this topic is the gap when passing from the plastic or elastic resistance
of the cross section to the buckling strength of the member. This occurs for a reduced
slenderness λ = 0,2. Beneath this value, for cross-section resistance, one is allowed a γM0
safety factor, hence 1,0 from other findings of this research project. Above this value, γM1
(instability) applies, that is 1,1. So a sudden 10% step may occur in practical design.
Otherwise, Eurocode 3 makes use of the well-known ECCS buckling curves, with several
penalty levels, according to the type of the cross-section.
The buckling tests database (ECCS) was reviewed within the research project. No firm
conclusion was drawn from this study because:
When studying the compression buckling alone, one would suggest to modify the strength
formulae in order to make a smooth transition around the λ = 0,2 zone (ENV Eurocode 3
presents there a gap of 10% due to the sudden change from γM0 to γM1). However, this would
roughly mean modifying the ECCS buckling curves, which would go further than the subject of
this research project.
The subject is complicated by the need to rule out the coexistence of compression and bending,
also accounting for the risk of Lateral Torsional Buckling (LTB). This is a very difficult problem,
since it is recognised that the present formulation in ENV 1993-1-1 is far from perfect.
Hence the problem cannot be seen as a mere matter of calibration of γM. Presently various
options are being presented for the conversion of ENV EC3 into EN, and still subject to
discussion.
Page 49
IV-2-2 Lateral Torsional buckling
The lateral torsional buckling resistance of elements with I or H sections first safety evaluation
is from 1989 and the results are reported in the relevant EC3 background document [166]. The
method of evaluation used in this background document was according to the preliminary draft
version of the Annex Z of EC3.
Before calibrating the partial safety factor γM1 using the latest version of Annex Z of EC3, a
detailed study of the past experimental test reports results was necessary and a critical analysis
of this EC3 background document has been done.
This document [169] contains a summary of the lateral torsional buckling EC3 background
document [166], and remarks that were collected from this critical analysis.
A first study was performed, see [170]. This allowed to recalculate the value of the partial safety
factor γM1 for the resistance of the members with rolled I or H sections with the same past tests
database, but after the requalification of the tests results. New lateral torsional buckling tests
results were not found in order to eventually enlarge the initial database. Also, unfortunately, this
evaluation does not include members with welded I or H sections. The results are summarised
in the following table.
Lateral -torsionnal buckling of members

Summary of statistical results for γM1
Database Recalculated value γM1
All database 105 tests 1.18
105 tests, Adjusted procedure 1.39
105 tests, "Droite de Henry" 1.14
Subset λ LT ≤ 0.4 , 9 tests 1.18
Subset λ LT ≤ 0.4 , "Droite de Henry" 1.13
Subset 0.4 < λ LT ≤ 1 , 51 tests 1.13
Subset 0.4 < λ LT ≤ 1, "Droite de Henry" 1.07
Subset λ LT > 1, 45 tests 1.06
Subset λ LT > 1, "Droite de Henry" 0.97
"Mateescu formula", 0.4 < λ LT ≤ 1 1.18
"Mateescu formula", λ LT > 1 1.06
After some assumptions for these reevaluation, we find a global value of γM1 = 1.18 and few
Page 50
values of the partial safety factor γM1 that are slightly lower than 1.1. Only the case of the tests
subset (45 tests) with the reduced slenderness λ LT > 1 provides a value γM1 = 1.06. These
results indicates that the calibration gives "interesting" values (lower than 1.1) especially when
tests subsets are carefully defined. But it seems difficult to make final conclusions based on
these results.
- For example Annex Z is very difficult to use where some basic variables were not measured.
And, here, this is indeed the case, since only 50 % of the cross-sections properties have been
measured.
- Concerning the database, finally and principally, we have to note that the tests selected in this
database were not realised in the aim to evaluate the partial safety factor γM1. Thus, they have
not been realised with the same tests conditions and so we do not dispose of the same
informations for every test serials. We can also discuss about the representativity of this
database. We dispose of only 9 tests of profiles of Class 3 cross-section and of no tests of
profiles of Class 2 cross-section. Most of the tested beams have section depthes lower than 305
mm and 42 % of the tests were japanese tests realised with profiles H x 200 x 100 x 5,5 x 8
(similar section to IPE 200) and without measured dimensions. The steel grade of the rolled
sections was 85 % S235 steel grade.
On another hand, concerning the EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 design model, the results seem to show
that this theoretical model is more distant from the real behaviour when the reduced slenderness
λLT decrease. The discrepancy of the correction factor is then amplified and the value of the
partial safety factor increased. Elsewhere, we do not dispose of a theoretical model for the case
of the cantilever beams which is a critical case regarding this ultimate limit state. Regarding the
recent proposal to use the "Maatescu formula " for the reduced slenderness, see ref [171], it
seems that this proposal would not modify the actual partial safety factor value.
In the same time, in a second study, the problem has been addressed through numerical Monte
Carlo simulations. A numerical procedure have been used to calibrate the γM1 partial safety factor
for the ultimate limit state of lateral torsional buckling according to the EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 model
and for a wide set of rolled profiles, see ref [172]. The results of this simulation conclude to the
value γM1 = 1.04. But, it must be noted that the results refer to a well precise production,
characterised by a small variation coefficient, so that the following conclusions are based on this
production statistical parameters and are not valid for other productions whose parameters are
less favourable.
IV-2-3 Welded sections bending resistance
This subject is treated in IV-2-5-2 where the presentation of test data is given as well as results
for Class 4 hot-rolled sections.
The reason for this paragraph is only to stress that no study could be made on welded sections
of class 1 to 3 for lack of any test data.
Page 51
IV-2-4 Buckling of Hollow Sections
IV-2-4-1 Previous studies
The buckling resistance of Hollow Structural Sections have been evaluated in 1989 and the
results are reported in EC3 background document [183]. The method of evaluation used in this
background document is according to the preliminary draft version of the Annex Z of EC3.
IV-2-4-2 Results and conclusions
Before to recalibrate the partial safety factor γM1 using the latest version of Annex Z of EC3 and
for the buckling resistance under pure compression ultimate limit state, a detailed study of the
past twenty years research test reports results has been necessary and a critical analysis of the
EC3 background document have been done, see ref [185].
This document [185] contains a summary of the flexural buckling tests of hollow sections chosen
in the EC3 background document [183], essentials remarks that were collected from the critical
analysis and a database of the past flexural buckling tests of hollow sections complemented with
other recent tests that were collected in order to produce an updated hollow sections flexural
buckling tests database. The main comments on the database are reported in the document
[185], [186], [187] and are summarised hereafter.
- Database representativity : - Though all the 600 tests are not recent, they are representative
of the various types of fabrication, sections steel grade and slenderness that are commonly
available on the market. The main drawback is that all the CHS and SHS are Class 1 cross-
sections. The EC3 background document is not representative of the Class 2 and 3 HSS cross-
sections. The EC3 cross-section classification for SHS does not make differences between
Class 1,2 and 3 limit slenderness.
- HSS of Class 4 are not considered in EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 despite past research wotks.
- High strength steel : High strength steel (fy = 690 MPa) HSS buckling tests have been included
in the background document evaluation, but for HSS and contrary to the I section profiles, a
more favourable curve is not allowed in Annex D for high strength steels.
- Yield strength : - All the buckling tests data of CHS from CIDECT 2A have not been included
in the EC3 background document evaluation due to fy measurement data missing.
- Few tests include measured data of the base material yield strength fyb, and full measured data
of the yield strength of tensile coupon of the tested specimen.
- Recent HSS buckling tests : Many other buckling tests results from other countries (Finland,
Italy) or recent research (CIDECT 2R, etc.) are not included in the EC3 background document
and could now be used in the reevaluation.
- Slenderness : The radius of the corner of the SHS is not measured and we generally refer to
a nominal slenderness value. The slenderness limits for the subsets are different for each
research program.
The recalibration of the partial safety factor have been done using various methods of evaluation
related to the type of section (SHS, CHS) and fabrication process (cold formed, cold formed
with heat treatment, hot rolled). The diagram hereafter summarise the methods.
Page 52
Cold type of fabrication Hot
formed Rolled
Heat yes
treatment
SHS no CHS
section
( )(
f ya nom = f yb nom + knt nom 2 / A g nom f u nom − f yb nom )
yes no
f ya mes
( )(
f ya mes = f yb mes + knt mes 2 / A g mes f u mes − f yb mes )
method method method

method
Am
curve c Ac
curve b curve a
B C
(
rt = g Rt X mes , f ya mes ) (
rt = g Rt X mes , f yb mes ) (
rt = g Rt X mes , f y mes )
rN = g Rt (X nom , f ya nom ) rN = g (X
Rt nom , f yb nom ) rN = g Rt (X nom , f y nom )
(
rd = f X moy ) rd = f (X )moy (
rd = f X moy )
rN
γ *R =
rd
Page 53
The detailed results of the recalibration of γM1 for the cold formed profiles of the CIDECT 2R
(1995) research are reported in the following table :
Buckling of cold formed hollow structural sections

HSS γM1 Proposed
Recalculated
Producer Ac Am B γM1 values
T 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.22 1.11
1.10 1.11 1.12 1.24
1.06 1.08 1.12 1.12 1.10
M 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.13
1.07 1.10 1.14 1.14
1.08 1.10 1.15 1.15
R 1.03 1.06 1.06 1.13 1.06
1.02 1.05 1.05 1.12
VA 1.05 1.05 1.07 1.13 1.06
1.05 1.05 1.06 1.13
1.05 1.06 1.07 1.13
1.06 1.06 1.08 1.14
TSR 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.22 1.11
1.09 1.10 1.11 1.21
VA2 1.09 1.09 1.10 1.18 1.09
1.08 1.08 1.09 1.17
1.09 1.08 1.10 1.17
1.09 1.09 1.11 1.18
min 1.02 1.05 1.05 1.12 1.06
max 1.10 1.11 1.15 1.24 1.11
The profiles are well suited for the present value of the partial safety factor of the EC3-ENV1993-
1-1. The theoretical model Am satisfactorily predict the buckling load. The evaluation with the
« Henry line » method is not acceptable due to the lower number of tests results and the
theoretical model B under-estimates the experimental resistance.
Page 54
The detailed results of the recalibration of γM1 for the cold formed profiles of the Niemi &
Rinnevalli Finland research (1990) are reported in the following table :
Summary of statistical results for γM1 Summary of

statistical results for
Global analysis
γM1
Analysis with
subsets
Reference Ac Am B B Henry
1:3 1.09 1.12 1.24 0.97 0.99
4:6 1.08 1.11 1.24 0.97 0.99
7:9 1.08 1.10 1.24 0.96 0.99
10:12 1.07 1.09 1.24 1.09 1.11
13:15 1.07 1.08 1.24 1.08 1.10
16:18 1.06 1.08 1.25 1.08 1.10
19:21 1.07 1.08 1.25 1.12 1.14
22:24 1.07 1.08 1.26 1.13 1.14
25:27 1.07 1.09 1.27 1.13 1.14
28:30 1.08 1.09 1.28 1.13 1.15
31:33 1.08 1.09 1.28 1.14 1.15
34:36 1.08 1.10 1.29 1.14 1.16
37:39 1.09 1.10 1.29 1.14 1.16
min 1.06 1.08 1.24 0.96 0.99
max 1.09 1.12 1.29 1.14 1.16
The results of the recalibration are the same for the two methods :
- a global analysis for the Am model
- an analysis with slenderness subsets for the B model
Page 55
The final results of the recalibration of the γM1 for the cold formed profiles are summarised in
the following table
Buckling of cold formed hollow structural sections

Recalculated
Research Database Type of method
γM1 values
CIDECT 2R GLOBAL 1.11
(1995) SUBSETS 1.06 < <1.11
Niemi GLOBAL all 1.12
SHS f(λ)
SUBSETS
(1990) Henry (subsets)
CIDECT 2E All
GLOBAL
SHS Henry 0.97
(1976) SUBSETS subsets f(λ)
all
CIDECT 2C GLOBAL
minus 1 test
CHS
f(section) 1.06
(1974) SUBSETS
Henry
all
GLOBAL
minus 1 test 1.08
SHS
f(λ)
SUBSETS
f(t)
CIDECT 2B-CHS SUBSETS f(fy) 1.15
all 1.02
GLOBAL
SHS Henry
(1969) f(fy) 1.04
SUBSETS
Henry
The final results of the recalibration of γM1 for cold formed profiles with heat treatment are
summarised in the following table
Page 56
Buckling of cold formed heat treated hollow structural sections Summary of statistical
results for γM1
Recalculated γM1
Research Database Type of method
values
CIDECT 2R (1995) all 0.94 < < 0.95 0.95
GLOBAL
SHS Henry 0.97
all 1.13 < < 1.16
KEY
Henry 1.21 < < 1.24
SHS GLOBAL
minus 1 test 1.05 < <1.08 1.08
(1986)
Henry (-1 test) 1.08 < < 1.10
all 1.25
BIRKEMOE
GLOBAL minus 1 test 1.14 < < 1.15
SHS
Henry (-1 test) 1.20
(1978)
SUBSETS f(λ) 1.09 1.09
The global number of tests (35 tests) taken into account is too small. These profiles have been
considered as hot rolled profiles and the use of the EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 buckling curve “a” is
conservative.
The more recent research CIDECT 2R tests gives the better value of γM1 , but the number of
tests (8) is too small.
• The final results of the recalibration of γM1 for hot rolled profiles are summarised in the
following table.
Buckling of hot rolled hollow structural sections Summary of statistical results for γM1
Recalculated
Research Database, type of method and γM1
γM1 values
all 1.11 < < 1.13
GLOBAL
CIDECT 2D Henry 1.09 < < 1.11 1.11
CHS f(weld) 1.09 < < 1.12
(1976) SUBSETS f(λ) 1.07 < < 1.12
f(λ) Henry 1.08 < < 1.12
C.S.C.M (1975) all 1.01 1.01
GLOBAL
CHS-HLE Henry 1.03
all 1.19 < < 1.21
CIDECT 2A GLOBAL
Henry 1.19 < < 1.21
SHS
f(λ) 1.01 < < 1.17 1.17
(1968) SUBSETS
f(λ) Henry 1.04 < < 1.18
all 1.11 < < 1.14
CRIF GLOBAL
Henry 1.09 < < 1.13
CHS-SHS
f(λ) 1.00 < < 1.14 1.14
(1964) SUBSETS
f(λ) Henry 1.01 < < 1.16
Page 57
Except for the 12 tests of the C.S.C.M, it is difficult to justify a partial safety factor γM1 lower than
1.1.
The partial safety factor γM1 in the case of hot rolled sections was evaluated with the a and a0
buckling curves, for comparison. With the a0 curve, the partial safety factor γM1 remains close
to 1.1
The final conclusions of this study ( recalibration of the buckling resistance partial safety factor
γM1 for the HSS ) are :
- On the whole, the values of the partial safety factor γM1 are close to 1.1. This is due to the
small difference between theoretical and experimental resistances. The theoretical buckling
model of hollow structural sections, particularly the theoretical model based on the yield strength
of finished products seems realistic and correctly approximates the experimental resistances.
On the other hand, the theoretical model based on the yield strength of the base material
provides values of γM1 greater than 1.1. As a matter of fact, this one underestimates the
experimental resistance, and the re / rt ratio is lower than one. So, for the buckling resistance
under pure compression, it is not possible to justify a value of γM1 lower than 1.1 for all the type
of sections.
- The main parameters which influence the evaluation are the type of fabrication (cold formed,
cold formed heat treated, hot rolled), the type of section (CHS, RHS), the yield stress and the
slenderness λ.
- The yield stress is the most sensible parameter that influences the value of the partial safety
factor γM1 and the thickness is not a very sensible parameter.
- The sensibility of the residual stresses have not been quantified due to the lack of measured
values in the available database.
The reevaluation was made with the values of the coefficients of variation of the random
variables as previously adopted in the EC3 background documents, and based on past studies.
With these usually accepted statistical parameters for fy, the present partial safety factor γM1 of
EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 is correct. Accounting for lower scatter in fy values would lead to smaller γM1
values. It should then be useful to re-evaluate the values of these coefficients based on recent
mills measurement campaigns both for geometrical and mechanical hollow sections properties.
IV-2-5 Plate buckling
IV-2-5-1 Previous studies
Local buckling and Class 4 cross- section resistance (γM1) for EC3
The two background documents [175] and [176] to EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 that refer to Class 4
cross-sections were studied. The first one appears to be entirely based on cold-formed
sections. The second one covers local buckling and web buckling (shear buckling and patch
loading) ultimate limit states. It appears in these documents that only local buckling of beam
flanges and of beam webs under compression and bending, for which the background document
[176] refer to only seven test specimens with Class 4 webs are within the scope of the present
Page 58
research project.
Buckling of plates with or without stiffeners
In the case of building structures, the following ultimate limit states of plates buckling were
studied in the background document [178] to EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 :
• ultimate limit state of shear buckling
• ultimate limit state of I beam when large concentrated loads are introduced in unstiffened
webs, i.e. patch-loading
For the first ULS, the Rockey Model (called "Tension Field Method" in EC3-ENV 1993-1-1) was
shown to be the most accurate method of calculation for transversely stiffened beams, as it best
takes into consideration all of the components which make up the shear strength model. The
statistical evaluation, by Annex Z to EC3, for the Rockey Model resulted in a value of the partial
safety factor γM1 = 1.25. If the tension zone part is reduced by the correlation factor 0.9, then the
partial safety factor γM1 = 1.10 is sufficient. If the applied moment exceeds the capacity Mf.Rd,
then an interaction should be carried out and for this, the same safety factor γM1 =1.10 should
apply as for the case MSd < Mf.Rd
For the second ULS, the Roberts model (called “crippling” strength function in EC3-ENV 1993-
1-1) which is based on a failure model that corresponds to the true failure mechanism, can be
used for welded, thin-walled beams as well as rolled profiles. The comparison from tests with
the Roberts formula yields, with a statistical evaluation method according to the Annex Z to EC3,
in a partial safety factor γM1 = 1.10. In the case of important bending action, a tri-linear interaction
relationship is conservative and the proposal of γM1 = 1.10 has been adopted in the EC3 ENV
1993-1-1.
In the case of bridges structures, the following ultimate limit states of plates buckling were
studied in the background documents [179], [180] and [181] for the drafting of EC3 ENV 1993-2
(bridges):
• ultimate limit state of shear buckling of stiffened and unstiffened webs
• ultimate limit state of unstiffened or stiffened web loaded by a transverse force
• ultimate limit state of longitudinal stiffened plate loaded in pure compression
For the first ULS, which is reported in the background document [179], the design rules for the
shear buckling resistance of stiffened and unstiffened webs from the chapter 5.6 of the draft of
EC3 ENV 1993-2 are evaluated with test results according to the draft version of Annex Z of
EC3 in order to determine the partial safety factor γM1
A summary of the statistical results reported in the background document [179] is given in the
following table.
Page 59
Buckling of plates with or without stiffeners - First ultimate limit state Summary of statistical
results for γM1
Support conditions Test members γM1
steel welded sections with
0.92
stiffeners at the supports only
Non-rigid end post
1.01
transversal stiffeners
1.04
stiffeners at the supports only
steel welded sections with 0.89 < < 1.17

Rigid end post
transversal stiffeners mean value 0.99
longitudinal stiffened steel welded
1.07
sections
Interaction shear force & steel welded sections with
max value 1.10
bending moment transversal stiffeners
In conclusion, for this ULS, the partial safety factor γM1 = 1.10 can be applied to all the strength
functions.
For the second ULS, which is reported in the background document [180], the design rules (the
"Johansson and Lagerqvist" Model ) for the buckling resistance of unstiffened or stiffened web
loaded by a transverse force from chapter 5.7 of the draft of EC3 ENV 1993-2 are evaluated
with test results according to the draft version of Annex Z of EC3 in order to determine partial
safety factor γM1.
following table.
Buckling of plates with or without stiffeners - Second ultimate limit state

Type of load application γM1
0.95 < < 1.11
Opposite patch loading
mean value 1.05
0.73 < < 1.23 max value
Patch loading
mean value 0.97
0.79 < < 1.12
End patch loading
mean value 1.03
For the third ULS, which is reported in the background document [181], the design rules for the
resistance of Class 4 cross-sections with longitudinal stiffeners which are loaded in pure
compression from the chapter 5.3.6 of the draft of EC3 ENV 1993-2 are evaluated with test
results according to the draft version of Annex Z of EC3 in order to determine partial safety
factor γM1.
Page 60
following table.
The value of the partial safety factor are 0.72 < γM1 < 1.12. The mean value is γM1 = 0.98.
In conclusion, for this ULS, the partial safety factor γM1 = 1.10 can be applied to all the strength
functions.
IV-2-5-2 Results and conclusions
Local buckling & Class 4 cross section resistance γM1 for EC3 ENV 1993-1-1
A first study (UK) has been performed, see ref [173]. This study has considered the value of
the partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-sections to local buckling, (γM1 in EC3
ENV 1993-1-1), subject to pure axial loading as well as to combined axial / bending. The Class
4 cross sections considered are hot-rolled sections or sections fabricated from plates by welding,
e.g. welded or box sections. Cold formed sections are not considered.
The tolerances of hot rolled sections are well defined by the mills measurements being reported
in this report. Tolerances for sections made by welding flat elements together depend on the
different cutting and welding equipment and procedures in the different fabrication works. This
variability of tolerances is addressed in the report [173]. It is very difficult to have confidence in
the partial safety factors without assessing test results. Unfortunately, very few sets with suitable
test data have been found. Reports from Centre de Recherches Scientifiques et Techniques de
l'Industrie des Fabrications Métalliques (C.R.I.F) (J.Janss, 1993) and Cambridge University
(G.H. Little, 1976), have formed the basis for this project. The value of γM1 derived from these
tests has been established according to Annex Z of EC3 - ENV 1993.1.1 and checked by a
graphical method. The partial safety factor γM1 have been calculated for both cases using a
relatively small population. The two test series used different strengths of steel. The table of
results shows the importance of a large sample population in order to get consistent results.
Local buckling and Class 4 cross- section resistance Summary of statistical results for γM1
Cross-section Annex Z Graphical method
Number
& Tests Loading recalculated value recalculated value
of tests
slenderness γM1 γM1
Box sections University
Axial / Bending 6 0.85 0.86 - 1.08
b / t = 40 Cambridge
Box sections University
Axial / Bending 6 1.04 0.89 - 1.13
b / t = 55 Cambridge
IPE sections
C.R.I.F Pure axial 8 1.07 0.92 - 0.96
This first study has demonstrated that for the methods of calculating the cross-sectional
resistance of Class 4 cross-sections given in the EC3-ENV1993-1-1 there is a possibility to
lower the partial safety factor γM1 from 1.1 (which is the actual value) to 1.05 or 1,0, especially
if a larger population of data could be created. However, the current rules for calculating effective
Page 61
sections need to be checked for axial load for b / t greater than 40.
In the same time, in a parallel study (Italy), see ref [177], the problem has been addressed
through numerical simulations. A numerical procedure has been used to calibrate the γM1 partial
safety factor for the ultimate limit state of bending resistance for a wide set of welded profiles.
The test results for the bending resistance of fabricated I profiles were replaced with simulated
values obtained as follow :
- for fy, according to a distribution derived from a large statistical analysis performed on a
real set of laminated plates, representative of a past 3 years production of an European
producer (correlated with plate thickness); S235, S275 and S355 steel grades were
considered.
- for the dimensions : - plate thickness tolerances according to EN 10029 class A
- beam total depth and flange width according to a specific ILVA’s
welded beams fabrication standard
- for ε coefficient, using the value calculated with the nominal value for fy instead of the
actual one (because EC3 strength formulae are calibrated this way).
The cross-sections that have been used for this bending resistance simulation are deep ones
(from 690 to 1680 mm total depth), with equal or unequal flanges. A total of 34 different
symmetrical and unsymmetrical I cross-sections with various geometrical slenderness were
analysed.
The results of this second research show bending resistance partial safety factors γM1 lower than
1.0. But these results depend to the level of internal control and of the quality level of this steel
production used for these simulations. Thus it could be not valid for others productions.
In the case of building and bridges structures, the evaluations as reported in the background
documents were done with the preliminary draft version of the Annex Z to EC3. Recalibration
with the latest version of the Annex Z to EC3 have given very similar results, for lack of recent
plate measurements databases.
IV-3 Composite Elements
IV-3-1 Composite members
The work on calibration of composite beams and columns is described in a series of reports by
the University of Warwick to the SCI and to the UK Department of the Environment, see ref [161]
to [165].
This recent work has been based on the EC3 ENV 1993-1-1 values for partial safety factors (1,1)
for structural steel and EC2 ENV 1992-1-1 values for partial safety factors for concrete and
reinforcing bars. The conclusions are that the γM values for composite beams and columns
design with EC4 ENV 1994-1-1 are about right.
However, it is doubtful whether the introduction of 1,0 instead of 1,1 for steel would significantly
Page 62
change the resistance of the composite section. Anyway, time as well as lack detailed statistical
data (i.e. individual correlated data for dimensions and yield strength) did not allow too go
further.
The question has moreover to be re-examined by Eurocode drafters in the light of the possibly
modified safety format for concrete and composite construction (several materials).
IV-3-2 Composite floor slabs
This subject has been investigated from the point of view of the shear connection. Hence, refer
to IV-4-2.
IV-4 Connections
IV-4-1 Bolted connections
Bolted connections have first been evaluated in 1989 and the results are reported in EC3
background documents [188], [189] and [190]. The method used in these background
documents is described in [191], which is a preliminary draft version of the Annex Z of EC3
[192].
Within the present project :
Recalibrations were performed using the latest version of Annex Z of EC3.
Recalibrations have been considered for bolts in tension and/or shear, with improvements on
strength formulae in some cases. The following studies were finalised for the ten following limit
states (the numbering of the ten limit states is accordingly to EC3 1989 background documents).
• 1- simple tensile failure (TNO)
• 2- simple shear failure in the shank part (TNO)
• 3- simple shear failure in the threaded part (LABEIN)
• 4- combined shear and tensile failure in the threaded part (LABEIN)
• 5- combined shear and tensile failure in the shank part (TNO)
• 6- plate bearing failure (TNO)
• 7- failure in net section of attached plates (LABEIN)
• 8- failure in net section of angles connected with one bolt (LABEIN)
• 9- failure in net section of angles connected with two bolts (LABEIN)
• 10- failure in net section of angles connected with three bolts or more (TNO)
The results of the statistical evaluation of the 1st to 5th limit states (bolts strength) are
summarised in the following table, the strength functions are calibrated with the γMb partial safety
factor, the second column indicates the recalculated value of the γMb partial safety factor ( γMb*
Page 63
as noted below ) , the third column indicates the ratio between the actual γMb = 1.25 value and
the recalculated value.
Resistance of bolts Summary of statistical results for γMb

γMb* 1.25 / γMb*
All grades 1,273 0.982
Simple tensile failure
Grade 4.6 1,293 0.967
(ULS 1)
calibrated from Grade 5.6 1,238 1.009
1.0 fub As
Grade 8.8 1,194 1.047
instead of 0.9 fub As
Grade 10.9 1,231 1.016
Simple shear failure in All grades 1.220 1.025
the shank of bolts
Grade 4.6 1.205 1.037
(ULS 2)
Grade 5.6 1.218 1.027
0.7 fub As for 4.6, 5.6 and
8.8 grades Grade 8.8 1.273 0.982
0.6 fub As for 10.9 grade Grade 10.9 1.205 1.038
1.125
- All Grades 1.11
1.289
Simple shear failure in - Grade 4.6 0.97
1.342
the threaded part - Grade 5.6 0.93
1.076
(ULS-3) - Grade 8.8 1.16
0.938
- Grade 10.9 1.33
1.235
- All Grades, all angles φ 1.01
1.327
- Grade 4.6, all angles φ 0.94
1.209
Combined shear and 1.065
tensile failure in the - All Grades, angle φ = 15° 1.17
threaded part 1.259
- All Grades, angle φ = 30° 0.99
(ULS 4) 0.869
1.338
1.109
- All grades, angle φ = 75° 1.13
1.082
- All Grades, all angles φ 1.155
Combined shear and 1.142
tensile failure in the - Grade 4.6, all angles φ 1.095
shank part 1.053
(ULS 5) 1.162
see hereafter proposal -
- All Grades, angle φ = 15° −
on strength formulae 1.022
leading to those - All Grades, angle φ = 30° 1.223
calibration results 1.072
1.076
Page 64
- All Grades, angle φ = 60° 1.162 0.978
- All grades, angle φ = 75° 1.278
The results of the statistical evaluation of the 7thto 10th limit states are summarised in the
following table, the strength functions are calibrated with the γM2 partial safety factor. The second
column of the table indicates the recalculated value of the γM2 partial safety factor ( γM2* as
noted below ), the third column indicates the ratio between the actual γM2 = 1.25 value and the
recalculated value.
Resistance of bolted plates

γM2* 1.25 / γM2*
Plate bearing failure Plates, angles, 1 to 3 bolts,
(ULS 6) grades from S235 to S 355
Fbs=2.5 fu d t (α1 +(n-1) Ranging from 0.988 to 1.331 Ranging from :
α2) 0.939 to 1.266
Values above 1,25 are for whole test
α1=1.15 e1 / (3 d1) ≥ 1,0 population
α2= p / (3 d1) – 1 / 4 ≥ 1,0
- All steel grades 1.19 1.055
Failure in net section of
- FeE235 1.18 1.056
attached plates
- A43 1.08 1.157
ULS 7
- StE460 1.65 0.755
angles connected with - All steel grades 1.12 1.114
one bolt
- FeE235 1.12 1.114
ULS 8
Failure in net section of - All steel grades 1.26 0.991
angles connected with
two bolts - FeE235 1.25 0.997
ULS 9 - FeE355 1.47 0.852
Failure in net section of - All steel grades 1.212 1.031

angles connected with
three or more bolts - FeE235 1.262 0.991
ULS 10 - FeE355 1.210 1.033
The proposal of revision of the strength functions which presently includes so-called "model
coefficients" is summarised in the following table. The proposals are based keeping the actual
values of the partial safety factors of the EC3 - ENV 1993-1-1: the actual values are γMb = 1.25
and γM2 = 1.25 .
Page 65
Strength functions EC3 - ENV 1993-1-1 Proposal of revision
Simple tensile failure 0.9 fub A s fub A s
All grades Ft,Rd = Ft,Rd =
ULS 1 γ Mb γ Mb
Simple shear failure in 0.6fub A sh 0.6fub A sh
the shank part of bolt All grades Fv.Rd = Fv.Rd =
ULS 2 γ Mb γ Mb
EC3 Table 5.6.3
0.65 fub A s
0.6fub A s Fv.Rd =
Grade 4.6 and 5.6 Fv.Rd =
Mb
Simple shear failure in Mb
the threaded part of bolt 0.6fub A s
0.6fub A s Fv.Rd =
Grade 8.8 Fv.Rd =
Mb
ULS 3 Mb
0.45 fub A s
0.5fub A s Fv.Rd =
Grade 10.9 Fv.Rd =
Mb
Mb
Combined shear and Ft.Sd F Ft.Sd F

tensile failure in the
EC3 § 6.5.5(5) + v.Sd ≤ 1 + v.Sd ≤ 1
1.4Ft.Rd Fv.Rd 1.3Ft.Rd Fv.Rd
threaded part of bolt
Ft.Sd F Ft.Sd F
≤ 1 & v.Sd ≤ 1 ≤ 1 & v.Sd ≤ 1
ULS 4 Ft.Rd Fv.Rd Ft.Rd Fv.Rd
Interaction :
Combined shear and Ft F
tensile failure in the shank + v ≤ 1
part q Fts p Fvs
ULS 5 p = 1.1
q =1.7
Fbs=2.5 fu d t (α1 +(n-1) α2)
Plate bearing failure
α1=1.15 e1 / 3 d1
ULS 6
α2= p / 3 d1
Present formula valid for steel S235 but
questionable for other steel grades
attached plates no proposal
EC3 § 5.4.3(b) Nu.Rd = 0.9 Anet fu / γM2
ULS 7
Failure in net section of 2(e 2 − 0.5d0 )tfu 2.2(e 2 − 0.5d0 )tfu
angles connected with EC3 § 6.5.2.3(2) Nu.Rd = Nu.Rd =
one bolt ULS 8 γ2 γ2
Present formula valid for steel S235
Failure in net section of β 2 A net fu
EC3 § 6.5.2.3(2) Nu.Rd =
angles connected with γ M2 no proposal
two bolts ULS 9 (For steel S355 γM2 * = 1.47 instead of γM2 =
1.25)
Failure in net section of β 3 A net fu
EC3 § 6.5.2.3(2) Nu.Rd = Same format
angles connected with γ M2 β3 = 0,55 (p/d1 < 2.5)
three or more bolts β3 = 0,50 (p/d1 < 2.5) β3 = 0,70 (p/d1 > 5.0)
ULS 10 β3 = 0,70 (p/d1 > 5.0) + linear interpolation
+ linear interpolation
Page 66
IV-4-2 Steel-concrete shear connectors
The initial calibration of the partial safety factor γM for shear studs was performed in 1991 and
the results are available in the report [199] .
Within this project, the recalibrations were performed using the latest version of Annex Z of EC3,
and the test data contained in [199].
A preliminary calibration is reported in the report [198] and the final calibration and conclusions
are reported in the report [201].
The reports concludes the following :
- The partial safety factor γM = 1.25 is clearly appropriate for shear studs in solid concrete slabs
and re-entrant composite decking with through welded studs.
- There appears to be no possibility for reducing γM if one unique value is required for all forms
of slab and decking.
- The data collected and summarised in [199] forms a large number of separate statistical
populations which are difficult to combine without creating unrepresentative scatter but are too
small for statistical evaluation as individual populations. This is especially true for composite
decking.
- The simplicity of the EC4 - ENV resistance equations is helpful for designers. but the absence
of terms which reflect the actual behaviour, e.g. the plateau of fu < 500 N/mm2 instead of a more
exact function. means that the calculated reliability is always pessimistic.
- Excepting through-welded studs in re-entrant decking, studs in composite decking have lower
reliability than required by Annex Z, but the extensive use of this form of construction without
well-known failure suggests that there is no real problem. The Annex Z reliability level of αR β
= 3.04 probably is not appropriate for the calculation of reliability of studs, which are generally
used in large numbers on a given beam. This point needs addressing but was felt to lie beyond
the scope of this project.
- A major test effort using uniform test specimen. uniform test methods and uniform failure
criteria is required if the resistance equations and factors for studs in composite decking is to
be properly understood.
The report [201] on shear studs was checked and the problems in some particular cases were
presented, such as the cases of the trapezoidal decks shear stud locations or the situation of
the re-cut holes. Some conclusions to solve these problems as proposed are to draw specific
rules for shear connectors design. Additional test work with specific shear studs failure would
be necessary, because existing steel-concrete tests with these failure modes seem to be poor.
Page 67
CHAPTER V – FUTURE USE AND FUTURE VALIDITY OF RESULTS
V-1. Introduction
The present chapter focuses on :

• How the results of the project will be made useful to the industry via structural design
codes;
• How the results concerning gM0 (see chapter III of this report) will be deemed to be long
term-valid.
Results about other limit states (see chapter IV of this report) are a) less conclusive, and b) often
strongly dependant on future studies, quality level of fabrication, etc. So we can only
recommend to examine the proposed evidence on a case by case basis.
V-2. Use of the results
The research project schedule was in line with the process of transferring Eurocode 3 and
Eurocode 4 from ENV status to EN status (with modifications). The respective CEN Project
teams have started work at the beginning of 1999, aiming to produce a final draft within two
years. Moreover:
Several partners are involved in this Eurocode drafting process, through some of their high
scientific level staff:
• For ARBED, chairmanship of the EC3 conversion project team
• For CTICM, chairmanship of CEN TC 250 SC3 (Eurocode 3)
• For RWTH, technical secretariat or participation in CEN TC 250 SC3, SC4 and SC1, and
chairmanship of EC3 Conversion Validation Group
• For SCI, technical secretariat in CEN TC 250 SC3, and representation in ECISS TC 10
• For TNO, chairmanship of CEN TC 250 SC4, chairmanship of EC3 Conversion Advisory
Committee, vice-chairmanship of CEN TC 250 SC3,
Thus, and owing to the strong tissue of continuous relations between all members of the steel
construction research and Eurocodes fields, the spreading of this project’s findings should be
a natural process.
However, this in not only, of course, a matter of steel and composite Eurocodes. This research
and the present report are intended for presentation to the Eurocodes coordination group, which
has presently on its agenda the problem of safety format and factors. Again, the above
mentioned partners are in a suitable position for such an action.
V-3. Future (long term) validity of conclusions for γM0
The results on γM0 have been derived from in mill measurements which are representative of
the present production of five important Western Europe steel producers for hot rolled I/H
Page 68
beams.
Hence it is necessary to investigate the conditions for this production to retain the same quality
level, regarding the investigated performances, in the future. However, only proposals can be
made, since this is a matter of steel products standards (harmonized, with CE mark), or of
structural codes (Eurocodes). It is also possible to consider a situation where an ETA (European
Technical Agreement) would coexist with steel product standards, however this does not seem
realistic for standard construction products such as steel beams
Several ways have been discussed :
• To issue direct requirements for production performance criteria
• To issue guidelines for the kind of testing requirements that would be necessary in line
with an attestation of conformity procedure (according to the future CEN harmonized product
standard)
• To transfer a set of conclusions to Eurocodes conversion groups and leave it to them to
treat the question.
Most probably the best technical way would be for the steel producers to do again, at intervals,
a campaign of correlated (yield strength, dimensions) in mill measurements of strength and
geometric properties, followed by an analysis similar to what has been done within this project.
A logical process would include an initial assessment (such as the records proceeded within
this research project) followed with a periodic (e.g. yearly) production conformity assessment.
Several meetings between the main hot rolled beams producers (some of them involving high
level representatives from Eurocode 3 authorities) allowed an exchange of ideas, the
identification of parameters and problems, and the consideration of the different options.
A partial study from one producer (based on its production) suggested that controlling the
section area could be a way to ensure the conclusion of a safety factor of 1,0. Later on, another
proposal was made, which considers the target safety index, related with a one year statistical
analysis of production. This proposal has been checked by other steel producers by the end of
the project and has been noted as a possible way for introduction of adequate production
requirements within the future Mandate M120 (harmonised product standards, e.g. EN 10 025),
CE mark). This proposal is given in Annex C to this report.
So, in the end, it is expected that the results of this research project will be duly taken into
account by CEN TC 250 and ECISS TC 10 in the near future.
Page 69
CHAPTER VI – CONCLUSIONS
1) Concerning the first part of the project, it is concluded that the partial safety factor γM0 for hot
rolled steel sections may be safely taken as 1,0.
This conclusion is valid if adequate procedures are adopted for the production quality to be and
to remain similar to the tested production, as discussed in chapter IV. No definite proposal is
made regarding this point.
2) Concerning other limit states, involving γM1 or other components (connections), it is

concluded in some specific cases that modified (generally slightly lower) safety factor values
would be adequate, or in an equivalent way, modified strength formulae are proposed.
However, this analysis has been possible only for bolted connections, where the existing
tests are quite numerous and cover well the various situations. For the remaining limit states
that have been studied, it is either concluded that γM1 = 1,1 is quite satisfactory, or that it
would seem possible to reduce it but for certain specific design situations like interaction
between axial force and bending.
Indeed it is regretted that a large proportion of existing tests are insufficiently documented for
statistical exploitation, and also that all the design situations can hardly be covered by tests. To
overcome this situation would require very important research efforts in the future.
Finally, this research project conclusions are coming at the right moment for the project teams
in charge of converting ENV 1993 and ENV 1994 into EN to take advantage of them.
Page 70
CHAPTER VII - LIST OF REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND WORK
REPORTS
VII-1 Documents elaborated during the research works
(Note that all work documents may remain subject to confidentiality rules from author company.
However, all documents listed above have been examined and discussed within coordination
meetings and hence their conclusions have been adopted as they appear in the present final
report)
1st full meeting - 12th october 1994

1. « Gamma M proposal draft at 7th oct 1994 »
SCI, C.King
2. " Stability aspects for hollow section columns, beams and beam-column "
RWTH, D.Grotmann, G.Sedlacek
3. « Present values of Partial safety factors in NADs »
(from ECCS publication N°65)
CTICM, B.Chabrolin
4. « Proposed selection of products for testing at B.S »
BST, Ph.Wells
5. « List of Background documents for Eurocode 3, part 1 »
RWTH Aachen, G.Sedlacek
1st « statistic working group » meeting 16th february 1995
6. « Application of Annex Z »
Lateral torsional buckling - Working paper - february 1995
CTICM, A.Bureau
7. « Partial safety factors for resistance » - calibration exercice - february/march 1995
University of Pisa
8. « Lateral torsional buckling » - calibration exercice - march 1995
University of Pisa
9. « Measurements carried out by ProfilArbed on I or H hot rolled profiles »
Arbed - 14.12.1994
2nd « statistic working group » meeting 27th march 1995
10. « Procedure to evaluate Npl, Mpl and Mel of H or I hot-rolled sections »
Arbed, Ph.Chantrain
11. « Draft list of content of the report on γM factor for the resistance of steel structures to
structural design »
RWTH, G.Sedlacek
12. « Evaluation of the results with reference to plastic values »
RWTH, M.Feldmann
13. « Determination of ultimate load using moment-rotation characteristics »
RWTH, M.Feldmann
Page 71
14. Evaluation background document on bolted connections »
TNO draft report 94-CON-R1668 - 12th dec 1994
TNO, O.D.Dijkstra
2nd full meeting 19th may 1995
15. « List of partial safety factors (γ factors) »
Arbed, Ph.Chantrain
16. Measurements in steel mills :
« Procedure to evaluate Npl, Mpl and Mel of H or I hot-rolled sections »
(2nd version - 11 may 1995 - First & Second proposal)
Arbed, Ph.Chantrain
17. « Critical analysis of the background document for the lateral torsional buckling
resistance »; Document 5.03 (partim)
CTICM, Ph.Lequien
3rd full meeting 22nd september 1995
18. « Gamma M from mills results » Draft 12th sept 1995
SCI, C.King
19. Measurements in steel mills
"Procedure to evaluate partial safety factors γM for H/I hot-rolled sections"
(3rd version - 13 june 1995 )
Arbed, Ph.Chantrain
20. « Campaign of measurements on H or I hot-rolled profiles » 21st sept 1995
and Disk of the database spread sheet.
Arbed, Ph.Chantrain
21. "Critical analysis of the background document for buckling resistance of hollow sections
and database for the buckling tests of hollow sections" Document 5.03
CTICM, Ph.Lequien
22. "Evaluation of partial safety factor for the lateral torsional buckling resistance to Eurocode
3 of rolled I profiles"
Report CTICM N°8.009-6 - juin 1995
CTICM, A.Hollinger
23. Semestrial report / january-june 1995
SCI, C.King
24. Semestrial report / january-june 1995
CREA, P.Croce
3rd « statistic working group » meeting 2nd february 1996
25. « Evaluation of the partial safety factors from measurements» + floppy disk
CTICM, A.Bureau
26. Statistical procedure clarifications
RWTH, MM Sedlacek & Feldman
27. ENV 1993-1-1 : Eurocode 3 Teil 1-1
Annex Z
Determination of design resistance from tests
Page 72
RWTH, MM Sedlacek & Feldman
4 full meeting 4th march 1996
th
28. « Evaluation of the partial safety factors from measurements »

Software for the evaluation of γM0 from measurements
CTICM / 4-3-96
29. « Evaluation of partial safety factors from measurements and tests »
Draft - RWTH / 4-3-96
30. « γM Tail of distribution »
Diagram - BST / 4-3-96
31. « Minutes of the meeting held on 02.02.1996 at Aachen »
RWTH / 15-2-96
32. « Minutes of the meeting working group on bolted and shear connections »
22nd February 96
TNO / 28-2-96
33. « Sigma Plot » software documentation.
5th full meeting 21st june 1996
34. « Evaluation of the partial safety factors from measurements »
Program for the evaluation of γM0 from measurements
CTICM / 21-6-96
35. « Evaluation of partial safety factors from measurements and tests »
2nd Draft - RWTH / 21-6-96
36. Report 21/6/96
A.Cecconi - CREA
37. « Partial Safety Factor for Class 4 Cross-section Resistance »
Draft - SCI / 21-6-96
38. Transparency of the Presentation
« Pilot study for the evaluation of partial safety factor for bolted connection »
TNO / 21-6-96
39. « British Steel γM database » - 13th June 1996
BST
40. Background document to Eurocode 3, N°II.5.1
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of shear buckling resistance for stiffened and
unstiffened webs
RWTH / 21-3-96
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of stiffened and unstiffened webs, which are
loaded by transverse forces
RWTH / 11-3-96
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of longitudinal stiffened steel plates in
compression
RWTH / 1-12-95
Page 73
« Evaluation of partial safety factor for the buckling resistance to Eurocode 3 of hollow
structural sections »
CTICM / 21-6-96
44. CUST Report , Z’Hour Bekkouche
« Evaluation du coefficient partiel de sécurité pour la résistance au flambement des profils
creux »
Juin 1996
« Issues arising from composite connectors »
SCI / 21-6-96
6th full meeting 23rd september 1996
46. Report 23/9/96
A.Cecconi - CREA
47. « Class 4 Cross-section »
« Fabricated beams »
« Effect of strain hardening on gamma M0 »
SCI
8. « Preliminary results of gamma M0 - Subsets of the statistical evaluation »
RWTH
49. « Survey on statistical data from test evaluations for the determination of characteristic
values in Eurocode 3 - Part 1 »
CEN - TC250/SC3
CTICM
50. Background document to Eurocode 3 Part 2 - Bridges - Chapter 5, N°II.5.1
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of shear buckling resistance for tiffened and
unstiffened webs.
RWTH / sixth draft, 14-9-96
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of stiffened and unstiffened webs which are
loaded by transverse forces.
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of longitudinal stiffened steel plates in
compression.
53. Background document to Eurocode 3 Part 3.1 - Towers and Masts - Chapter 5, N°.3.5.1
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of buckling strength for angle struts in
transmission towers.
RWTH / fourth draft, October 96
7th full meeting 9th December 1996
54. « Summary of the statistical results for all subsets »
RWTH
55. « Summary of the γM values for the re-evaluated subsets »
RWTH
Page 74
56. Report to ECSC
« Ultimate moment of resistance of restrained I-beams »
Document RT618 - Version 01 - December 1996
SCI
57. Harmonized European Standard
CE Marking
Voluntary product certification
BNS
58. Product certification
THE KEYMARK
8th full meeting 17th February 1997
59. « Gamma M for shear studs »
Document RT609 - Version 01 Draft 01 - November 1996
SCI
60. « Partial safety factors for the resistance of fabricated beams »
Document RT620 - Version 01 - February 1997
SCI
61. « Partial safety factors γR for bolted connections »
Labein 1997 - 01 - 28
Document 94/254-IN-CL-002
Labein
62 « Strength function revision for bolted connections - Labein Provisional Conclusions »
Labein
9th full meeting 29th April 1997
63. Interim report N°5 - July 1996-December 1996
CTICM
64. Evaluation of Partial Safety Factors γM from measurements and tests
Plate material - April 1997
RWTH
65. Draft pre-conclusive report
CREA - University of Pisa
Page 75
VII-2 General references
STANDARDS (S)
66 CEN
Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures. Part 1.1 : General rules and rules for buildings. Ref.
No ENV 1993-1-1 : 1992 E
67 CEN
Eurocode 4 : Design of composite steel and concrete structures. Part 1.1 : General rules and
rules for buildings. Ref. No ENV 1994-1-1 : 1992 E
68 CEN
Eurocode 1 : Basis of design and actions on structures. Part 1 : Basis of design. Ref. No ENV
1991-1-1 : 1994 E
69 CEN
EN 10002-1 : Metallic materials - Tensile testing - Part 1 : method of test (at ambient
temperature)
70 CEN
Annexe Z : Determination of design resistance from tests. ENV 1993-1-1 : 1992/prA2 : 1994.
71 CEN
Survey on statistical data from test evaluations for the determination of characteristic values
in EC3 part 1 : Aachen may 1993. Doc. CEN/TC : 250/SC 3 N 330 E
72 ISO
ISO 8930 : Principes généraux de la fiabilité des constructions - Liste des termes
équivalents - Edition trilingue
(General principles on reliability for Structures -List of equivalent terms)
73 ISO
ISO 3898 : Bases de calcul des constructions - Notations - Symboles généraux.
(Basis of design for structures - Notations - General symbols)
74 ISO
General Principles on Reliability for Structures - Revision of IS 2394. Doc
ISO/TC98/SC2/WG1.
75 AFNOR (Association Française de NORmalisation)
Eurocode 3 "Calcul des structures en acier" et Document d'application Nationale - Partie
1.1 Règles générales et règles pour les bâtiments. Norme expérimentale P22-311.
76 AFNOR (Association Française de NORmalisation)
Règlement particulier de la marque NF Acier. Doc P22 A N40. 02/10/92
(Specific rules of product identification mark "NF Acier")
77 CNR 10011/85
Costruzioni in acciaio - Istruzioni per il calcolo, l'esecuzione, il collaudo, la manutenzione.
78 CNR 10012/85
Istruzioni per la valutazione delle azioni sulle costruzioni
79 BSI
National Application Document for use in the UK with ENV 1993-1-1 : 1992.
Page 76
OTHER GENERAL REFERENCES
80 P. Thoft-Christensen, M.J. Baker

Structural reliability theory and its applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New
York, 1982.
81 P. Thoft-Christensen, Y. Murotsu
Application of structural system reliability theory. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New
York, 1982.
82 H. Madsen, S. Krenk, N. C. Lind
Methods of structural safety. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs N.J. 1986
83 Augusti, Baratta, Casciati
Probabilistic methods in structural engineering - Chapman and Hall
84 E. J. Gumbel
Statistics of extremes - Columbia University Press, New York 1958
85 A. Vrouwenvelder, A. J. M. Siemens
Probabilistic calibration procedure for the derivation of safety factors for the netherlands
building codes. Revue HERON, TNO, Institute for building materials and structures. Vol. 32,
9-29, n°4 - 1987.
86 D. O'Leary, C. Moum, J. Brekelmans
Comparative study of composite slab tests. IABSE Symposium, Mixed structures, including
New Materials, Brussels 1990.
87 R.P. Johnson, Dongjie Huang
Calibration of safety factors γM for composite steel and concrete beams in bending.
Proceedings of the Institution of civil Engineers, Structures and Buildings, May 1994.
88 J. M. Aribert
Aspects actuels sur le dimensionnement plastique des assemblages en Construction
Métallique. Revue Construction Métallique n°2-1992.
(Present aspects about the plastic design of connections in constructional steelwork)
89 J. Goyet, B. Rémy
Fiabilité des structures - Méthodologie d'ensemble et application aux structures à barres.
Revue Construction Métallique n°4 - 1988. CTICM.
(Structural reliability - Global methodology and application to frames)
90 P. Bernard, M. Fogli
Une méthode de Monte-Carlo performante pour le calcul de la probabilité de ruine. Revue
Construction Métallique n°4 - 1987. CTICM.
(An efficient Monte-Carlo method for the evaluation of the failure probability)
91 J. P. Muzeau, M. Lemaire, K. Tawil
Méthode fiabiliste des surfaces de réponse quadratique (SRQ) et évaluation des réglements.
Revue Construction Métallique n°3 - 1992
(Reliability method of quadratic response surfaces and evaluation of codes)
92 B. Chabrolin
Détermination des coefficients partiels de sécurité à prendre en compte pour la vérification
à la fatigue d'un élément de structure. Revue Construction Métallique n°4 - 1988.
(Determination of partial safety factors for fatigue check of a structural member)
93 J. Goyet, A. Bureau
Sécurité probabiliste des structures - Evaluation de coefficients partiels de sécurité pour
l'élaboration des nouveaux règlements. Revue Construction Métallique n°1-1990. CTICM.
(Probabilistic safety of structures - Evaluation of partial safety factors for the new regulation)
Page 77
94 J. Goyet, A. Bureau
Détermination d'une valeur de calcul pour la résistance au flambement des tubes creux
circulaires - Revue Construction Métallique n °1 - 1990. CTICM.
(Determination of a design value for the buckling resistance of Circular Hollow Sections)
95 J. Berthellemy
Sécurité des assemblages dans les structures calculées en plasticité. Revue Construction
Métallique n°1 - 1990.
(Safety of connections in structures designed with plastic analysis)
96 A. M. Hasofer
Problème de statistiques des valeurs extrêmes - Revue Construction Métallique n°1 - 1993.
CTICM.
(Problem of extreme values statistics)
97 D. Grotmann, G. Sedlacek
Stability aspects for hollow section columns, beams and beam-columns. Institute of Steel
Construction, RWTH Aachen, Germany.
98 Basic notes on actions.
JCSS - Lisbon 1976
99 Definizione dei coefficienti parziali di sicurezza γm per i collegamenti da introdurre nella
versione italiana dell'EC3 - Università di Pisa - Istituto di Scienza delle Costruzioni
(Preliminare)
100 Urbano, Castiglioni, Poggi
La Normativa Europea per le strutture in Acciaio - EC3 - Confronti con le norme CNR
10011/85 - Diparmento Ingegneria Strutturale - Politecnico di Milano.
101 Casciati, Favarelli, Zanon
Valutazione probabilistica dei coefficienti di ponderazione dei carichi agenti sulle strutture
metalliche - CTA Torino 1979.
102 Castiglioni, Poggi, Urbano
Sui coefficienti "incasellati" EC3 - CTA Abano Terme 1991.
103 Casciati, Favarelli, Zanon
Criteri di combinazione di carichi accidentali di strutture metalliche in zona sismica - CTA
Verona 1977.
104 Del Corso, Sanpaolesi
Il codice europeo sulle azioni : le problematiche del carico neve - CTA Abano Terme 1991.
105 De Luca, Faella, Piluso
L'approcio dell'EC3 per la verifica di telai a nodi spostabili - CTA Abano Terme 1991.
106 C. Floris, C. Giommi
On stochastic load combination modelling and algorithmy for calculating probability of failure.
Proceedings of ICASP & ... , Mexico City 1991.
107 C. Floris, A. Colombo, M. Morello
Stochastic and non stochastic load combination analysis. Proceedings of ICASP & ..., Mexico
City 1991.
108 Casciati, Favarelli
La sicurezza strutturale nei confronti degli stati limite descrivibili come problemi di
ottimizzazione vincolata. Costruzioni Metalliche n°3 - 1977.
109 G. Ballio, F. Casciati
La sicurezza strutturale nella costruzione metallica : approcci probabilistici e considerazioni
progettuali. Costruzioni Metalliche n°4 - 1977.
110 A. Migliacci, F. Mola, S. Cristini, G. Mirabella
Valutazione della sicurezza di sezioni rettangolari in c.a. sogette a pressoflesione retta con
il metodo di livello 2 e confronti con i risultati del metodo di livello 1. Studi e Ricerche Vol. 7
1985, Corso di Perfezionamenti Costruzioni in C.A.F.lli Pesenti, Politecnico di Milano.
Page 78
111 C. Floris, A. Mazzicchelli
Reliability assessment of column under stochastic stresses. Journal of structural engineering
n°11 - 1991.
112 Ballio, Solari
The new italian recommendation for wind load on structures : basic assumptions and critical
considerations. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics n°30 - 1980.
113 Second International Colloqium on stability - Introductory report - European Convention for
Structural Steelwork.
114 R. Narayanan
Axially compressed structure. Stability and strength. Applied Science Publishers.
115 E.S. Ventsel
Teoria della Probabilita - Ed MIR
116 Ballio, Mazzolani
Costruzioni in Acciaio
117 Demidovic
Fondamenti di analisi numerica - Ed MIR
118 H. H. Snijder et al.
Evaluation of test results on welded connections in order to obtain strength functions and
suitable model factors. TNO report BI-88-139, October 1988.
119 M. Kersken-Bradley, W. Maier, R. Rackwitz, A. Vrouwenvelder
Estimation of structural properties by testing for use in limit state design. JCSS, Working
Document, November 1990.
120 J. Brekelmans
Evaluatie van de proefresultaten uit het SPRINT-project RA31. TNO report BI-89-138,
November 1989 (in Dutch)
121 J.W.B. Stark, B.W.E.M. Van Hove
Statistical analysis of push-out tests on stud connectors in composite steel and concrete
structures. TNO report BI-90-038, 1990
122 J.W.B. Stark, B.W.E.M. Van Hove
Statistical analysis of push-out tests on stud connectors in composite steel and concrete
structures. TNO report BI-91-163, September 1991
123 F. S. K. Bijlaard et al.
Procedure for the determination of design resistance from tests. TNO report BI-87-112,
November 1988.
124 Rationalisation of safety and serviceability factors in structural codes, CIRIA Report 63,
October 1976.
125 Beeby, Johnson, Nethercot and Beckett
Background document for the National Application Document (NAD) of Eurocode ENV EC1:
Relative levels of safety in Eurocodes, March 1993. Report to the department of the
environment.
(from SCI)
126 Evaluation des coefficients partiels de sécurité pour la vérification de la résistance en section
des profilés métalliques de la gamme UNIMETAL. Analyse de la campagne de mesures.
Rapport CTICM n°8.009-2 Avril 1993.
Evaluation of partial safety factors for resistance of cross-sections of UNIMETAL steel
profiles. Analysis of measured values. Report CTICM n°8.009-2 April 1993.
127 Evaluation des coefficients partiels de sécurité pour la vérification de la résistance en section
des profilés métalliques de la gamme UNIMETAL. Analyse de la campagne d'essais. Rapport
CTICM n°8.009-3 Avril 1993.
Evaluation of partial safety factors for resistance of cross-sections of UNIMETAL steel
profiles. Analysis of test results. Report CTICM n°8.009-3 April 1993.
Page 79
VII-3 Background documents to eurocode
The documents listed in this section are “background documents to Eurocode (3) “ , which have
been drafted under ENV Eurocodes mandates..
128 Background document for chapter 2 of Eurocode 3
129 Design against brittle fracture
130 Background document of the relation between the nominal value of the yield strength in
Eurocode 3 and the specification in material standards.
132 Background document for the justification of a safety factor γM* = 1,0 for beams in bending
about the strong axis made of rolled section
133 The b/t - ratios controling the applicability of analysis models in Eurocode 3.
134 Evaluation of test results on columns, beams and beam-columns with cross-sectional classes
1-3 in order to obtain strength functions and suitable model factors
135 (partim)
Evaluation of test results on beams with cross-sectional classes 1-3 in order to obtain
strength functions and suitable model factors
136 Evaluation of test results on columns and beam-columns with cross-sectional class IV in
order to obtain strength functions and suitable model factors
137 Design rules for thin-walled plate girders for the ultimate and serviceability limit state taking
account of the buckling phenomena
138 Evaluation of test results on hollow section lattice girder connections
(Background document for Annex K)
139 Imperfections for compressed members and sway frames
Evaluation of test results on bolted connections in order to obtain strength functions and
suitable model factors
140 Part A : Results
141 Part B : Evaluations
142 Part C : Test Data
143 Part C : Data sheets
144 Comparison of bolt strength according to Eurocode n°3 with bolt strength according to
national standards
145 Part A : Results
146 Part B : Evaluations
147 Part C : Test Data
148 Comparison of weld strength according to Eurocode n°3 with weld strength according to
national standards
149 Beam to column connections
150 Evaluation of test results on beam to column connections in order to obtain strength functions
and suitable model factors "In preparation"
151 Procedure for the determination of design resistance from tests
153 Report on the comparison of classification tables in existing national codes for fatigue in
Europe and statistical evaluation of large and small scale specimen test data
Background information on fatigue design rules for hollow sections; statistical evaluation
Page 80
154 Part A : Classification method Background document for annex A
Evaluation of test results on connections in thin walled sheetings and members in order to
obtain strength functions and suitable model factors
155 Part A : Evaluations and results
156 Part B : Test data Background document for annex D
157 Background document for design rules specific for high strength steels according to EN
10113
158 Statistical evaluations of the results of bolted connections
159 Evaluations of test results on welded connections made from FeE 460 in order to obtain
strength functions and suitable model factors
160 Statistical analysis of strength functions for welded H-sections joints with respect to available
experimental data
VII-4 References for Chapter IV
Composite members
161 Johnson R.P. and Huang D.J.
"Partial safety factors γM for composite beams in bending, found from test data"
University of Warwick - Department of Engineering
Research report CE 38
February 1992
"Reliability analysis for composite beams with ductile partial shear connection"
March 1992
"Reliability analysis for composite beams with non-ductile shear connection"
March 1993
164 Johnson R.P.
"Coefficients of variation of areas of flanges and webs of rolled steel I and H sections"
January 1993
"Partial safety factors for resistance of encased composite columns to compression and uniaxial
bending"
September revised October 1994
Lateral - torsional buckling of members
166 Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures - Part 1 - General Rules and Rules for Buildings
Background Documentation ; Chapter 5 ; Document 5.03 (partim)
"Evaluation of test results on beams with cross-sectional Class 1-3 in order to obtain strength
Page 81
functions and suitable model factors"
167 « Application of Annex Z »
Lateral torsional buckling - Working paper - February 1995
CTICM, A.Bureau
168 « Lateral torsional buckling » - calibration exercice - March 1995
University of Pisa
169 « Critical analysis of the background document for the lateral torsional buckling resistance »
Document 5.03 (partim)
CTICM, Ph.Lequien
170 "Evaluation of partial safety factor for the lateral torsional buckling resistance to Eurocode 3 of rolled
I profiles"
Report CTICM N°8.009-6 - Juin 1995
CTICM, A.Hollinger
171 D.Mateescu
"Considération sur la valeur du coefficient de réduction pour le déversement des éléments fléchis"
Revue Construction Métallique, n°1 - 1994.
172 Draft pre-conclusive report
Plate buckling
Local buckling and Class 4 cross-section resistance (γM1) for EC3
173 « Partial Safety Factor for Class 4 Cross-section Resistance »
Draft - SCI / 21-6-96
174 « Class 4 Cross-section »
« Fabricated beams »
« Effect of strain hardening on gamma M0 »
SCI
Background Documentation ; Chapter 5 ; Document 5.04
"Evaluation of test results on columns and beam-columns with cross-sectional Class IV in order to
obtain strength functions and suitable model factors"
"Design rules for thin-walled plate girders for the ultimate and serviceability limit state taking account
of the buckling phenomena"
177 Draft pre-conclusive report
"Design rules for thin-walled plate girders for the ultimate and serviceability limit state taking account
of the buckling phenomena"
179 Background documentation to Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures - Part 2 - Bridges
Chapter 5. Document N°II.5.1
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of shear buckling resistance for stiffened and
unstiffened webs.
Page 82
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of stiffened and unstiffened webs which are loaded by
transverse forces.
Evaluation of test results for the design rules of longitudinal stiffened steel plates in compression.
182 Evaluation of partial safety factors γM from measurements and tests
Plate material - April 1997
RWTH
Buckling of Hollow sections
"Evaluation of test results on columns, beams and beam-columns with cross-sectional Class 1 - 3
in order to obtain strength functions and suitable model factors"
April 1989
184 " Stability aspects for hollow section columns, beams and beam-column "
RWTH, D.Grotmann. G.Sedlacek
185 "Critical analysis of the background document for buckling resistance of hollow sections and
database for the buckling tests of hollow sections" Document 5.03
CTICM, Ph.Lequien
186 Transparency of the Presentation
« Evaluation of partial safety factor for the buckling resistance to Eurocode 3 of hollow structural
sections »
CTICM / 21-6-96
187 « Evaluation du coefficient partiel de sécurité pour la résistance au flambement des profils creux »
Rapport CUST, Z’Hour Bekkouche
Juin 1996
Resistance of connections
Bolted connections
Evaluation of test results on bolted connections in order to obtain strength functions and suitable
model factors.
Part A : Results
March 1989
model factors.
Part B : Evaluations
Page 83
model factors.
Part A : Test Data
April 1989
191 Bijlaard. F.S.K.. et al. :
Procedure for the determination of design resistance from tests
TNO report BI-87-112. November 1988
192 Draft Annex Z (Informative) : Determination of design resistance from tests
Document prENV 1993-1-1 / A2 (94 / 185226) with corrections 960201
193 Evaluation background document on bolted connections
TNO draft report 94-CON-R1668 - 12th dec 1994
TNO. O.D.Dijkstra
194 « Minutes of the meeting working group on bolted and shear connections »
22nd February 96
TNO / 28-2-96
« Pilot study for the evaluation of partial safety factor for bolted connection »
TNO / 21-6-96
196 « Partial safety factors γR for bolted connections »
Labein 1997 - 01 - 28
Document 94/254-IN-CL-002
Labein
197 « Partial safety factors γR for bolted connections » (final report)
TNO 1997 - 12 - 04
Document 96-CON-R1222
TNO
Shear connections
198 Calibration of Gamma M for Shear Studs
Document RT 580 - Preliminary Calculations
SCI
199 Stark. J.W.B. and Hove. B.W.E.M. van :
Statistical analysis of push-out tests on stud connectors in composite steel and concrete structures
TNO report BI-91-163, Parts 1, 2 and 3, September 1991
« Issues arising from composite connectors »
SCI / 21-6-96
201 « Gamma M for shear studs »
Document RT 609 - Version 01 Draft 01 - November 1996
SCI
Page 84
ANNEX A
This Annex reproduces Eurocode 3 Annex Z « Determination of design resistance from tests.
This document has been published by CEN as part of ENV 1993-1-1 :1992/A2 :1998
(Amendment 2) in 1998.
Page 85
Annex Z [informative]
Determination of design resistance from tests
Z.1 General
Z.1.1 Scope
(1) This annex gives guidance on evaluating the results of tests in accordance with Section 8, carried out in
connection with the design of steel structures.
(2) This annex gives specific guidance that supplements the more general information on the determination of design
resistance from tests given in annex D of ENV 1991-1.
(3) This annex covers cases where there is no structural redundancy.
Z.1.2 Symbols
(1) In this annex the following symbols are used:
b is the mean value correction factor;
bi is the correction term for test specimen i ;
b is the estimator for the mean value correction factor b ;
b (r) is the realisation of the estimator b ;
Ed is the design value of an effect of actions;
E(...) is the mean value of (...) ;
E(∆) is the mean value of ∆ ;
grt(X) is the resistance function (of the basic variables X ) used as the design model;
kc is the ratio of the nominal resistance rn to the characteristic resistance rk ;
n is the number of experiments;
P(.) = p is the probability p that ... (with p in %) ;
Q is the standard deviation of the variable ℓn(r) [Q = σ n(r) ] ;
Rd is the design value of the resistance;
r is the resistance value;
rd is the design value of the resistance;
re is the experimental resistance value;
ree is the extreme (maximum or minimum) value of the experimental resistance [i.e. the value of re that
deviates most from the mean value rem ];
rei is the experimental resistance for specimen i ;
rem is the mean value of the experimental resistance;
rk is the characteristic value of the resistance;
rm is the resistance value calculated using the mean values Xm of the basic variables;
rn is the nominal value of the resistance;
rt is the theoretical resistance determined from the resistance function grt (X) ;
rti is the theoretical resistance determined using the measured parameters X for specimen i ;
s is the estimator for the standard deviation σ;
s∆ is the estimator for σ∆ ;
sδ(r) is the realisation of the standard deviation estimator sδ ;
u is the value of the standardized normal distribution;
ud is the design fractile factor for the standardized normal distribution;
uk is the characteristic fractile factor for the standardized normal distribution;
V is the coefficient of variation [V  (standard deviation) / (mean value)] ;
Vδ is the estimator for the coefficient of variation of the error term δ ;
Vδ(r) is the realisation of the estimator Vδ ;
X is an array of j basic variables X1 ... Xj ;
Xm is the array of mean values of the basic variables;
Xn is the array of nominal values of the basic variables;
α is a weighting factor;
β is the reliability index;
γF is the partial factor for actions, combining the uncertainties included in γf and γSd ;
Page 86
γf is the partial factor for actions, taking account of possible deviations of values of actions from the
representative values;
γm is the partial factor for resistances, taking account of possible deviations of the material properties
and of manufacturing tolerances from the characteristic values;
γR is the partial factor for resistances, combining the uncertainties included in γm and γRd [γR = rk/rd];
γR* is the corrected partial factor [γR* = rn/rd so γR* = kc γR] ;
γRd is the partial factor for resistances, taking account of model uncertainties;
γSd is the partial factor for actions or effects of actions, taking account of model uncertainties;
∆ is the logarithm of the error term δ [∆i  ℓn(δi )] ;
∆ is the estimator for E(∆);
δ is the error term;
δi is the observed error term for test specimen i obtained from a comparison of the experimental
resistance rei and the mean value corrected theoretical resistance brti ;
ηK is the reduction factor applicable in the case of prior knowledge;
σ is the standard deviation [σ  variance 1];
σ∆2 is the variance of the term ∆ .
(2) In the examples the following symbols are also used:
do is the hole diameter;
di is the diameter of bolt i ;
e1 is the end distance;
fui is the ultimate tensile strength of plate i ;
fu is the ultimate tensile strength of the bolt;
ti is the thickness of plate i .
Z.2 Basis
(1) In ENV 1991-1 the design format adopted for ultimate limit states is:
Ed ≤ Rd
where:
Ed is the design value of an effect of actions;
Rd is the design value of the resistance.
(2) In ENV 1993-1-1, for internal forces and moments, the design format generally adopted is:
Sd ≤ Rd
where:
Sd is the design value of the internal force or moment.
(3) The partial factors used in ENV 1993 (see also annex A of ENV 1991-1) are indicated in figure Z.1.
Page 87
Note: In ENV 1993-1-1 γM is used in place of γR for the partial factors for resistance
Figure Z.1: Partial factors used in ENV 1993-1-1

(4) This annex describes a standard procedure for determining characteristic values, design values and partial factors
for resistance γR from the results of tests. This procedure complies with the basic safety assumptions outlined in ENV
1991-1.
(5) Based on observation of actual behaviour in tests and on theoretical considerations, a “design model” is selected,
leading to a resistance function. The efficiency of this model is then checked by means of a statistical interpretation of
all available test data. If necessary the design model is adjusted until sufficient correlation is achieved between the
theoretical values and the test data.
(6) The variation in the prediction of the design model is also determined from the tests (that is, the variation of the
“error” term δ). This variation is combined with the variations of the other variables in the resistance function. These
include:
- variation in material strength and stiffness;
- variation in geometrical properties.
(7) The characteristic resistance is determined taking account of the variations of all the variables.
(8) The design value is also determined from the test data and hence the γ-factor to be applied to the characteristic
resistance function is obtained.
(9) For clarity, the standard procedure is presented in Z.3 as a number of discrete steps. The assumptions regarding
the test population and data are also explained.
Z.3 Standard evaluation procedure

Z.3.1 General
(1) For the standard evaluation procedure the following assumptions are made:
a) The resistance function is a function of a number of independent variables;

b) A sufficient number of test results is available;
c) All actual geometrical and material properties are measured;
d) There is no correlation (statistical dependence) between the variables in the resistance function;
e) All variables follow a log-normal distribution.
NOTE: Adopting a log-normal distribution for all variables has the advantage that no negative values can occur
for the geometrical and resistance variables, which is physically correct.
(2) The standard procedure comprises the nine steps given in Z.3.2.1 to Z.3.2.9.
Page 88
NOTE: As an example, the procedure is illustrated for the resistance function for bolts in bearing.
(3) If the characteristic resistance is not required, the relevant portions of steps 7, 8 and 9 may be omitted.
Z.3.2 Standard procedure

Z.3.2.1Step 1: Develop a design model
(1) Develop a design model for the theoretical resistance rt of the member or structural detail considered,
represented by the resistance function:
rt = g rt ( X ) ... (Z.1)
(2) The resistance function should include all relevant basic variables X that affect the resistance at the relevant limit
state.
(3) All basic parameters should be measured for each test specimen i (assumption (c)) and should be available for
use in the evaluation.
Z.3.2.2Step 2: Compare experimental and theoretical values.
(1) Put the actual measured properties into the resistance function to obtain theoretical values rti for comparison with
the experimental values rei from the tests.
EXAMPLE: For bolts in bearing:
When e1 ≥ 3 do: rti = 2,5 di ti fui

(2) The points representing pairs of corresponding values ( rti, rei ) should be plotted on a diagram, as indicated in
figure Z.2.
(3) If the resistance function is exact and complete, all points ( rti, rei ) will lie on the bisector of the angle between
the axes of the diagram (i.e. θ  π/4). In general the points (rti, rei) will show some scatter.
Figure Z.2: re  rt diagram
Z.3.2.3Step 3: Estimate the mean value correction factor b .

(1) Represent the probabilistic model of the resistance r in the format:
r = b rt δ ... (Z.2a)
in which the error term δ is such that the mean value E(δ) is given by:
E(δ) = 1,0 ... (Z.2b)
Page 89
(2) The estimator b for the mean value correction factor b should be obtained by comparing the theoretical values
rti of the resistance function with the corresponding experimental values rei .
(3) For each specimen i (where i  1 to n ) the correction term bi should be determined from:
bi = rei / rti ... (Z.3a)
(4) The estimator b for the mean value correction factor b should be obtained from:
1 n
b = ∑ bi ... (Z.3b)
n i =1
(5) From the tests a realisation b(r ) of the estimator b should be calculated from:
1 n
b(r ) = ∑ bi ... (Z.4)
n i =1
EXAMPLE: For the case of bolts in bearing:
b (r) = 1,0
(6) In the (re , rt) diagram the mean value correction factor (r) may be represented by the slope of a straight line
passing through the origin, showing the mean value of the test results as a correction of the theoretical values,
see figure Z.3.
Figure Z.3: (re , rt) diagram with the mean value correction line re  (r) rt
NOTE: We have: E(r) = b rt E(δ) = b rt
and we also have: E( b rt ) = E( b ) rt = b rt

Therefore b rt is a good estimator for E(r).
(7) The theoretical resistance function, calculated using the mean values Xm of the basic variables, may be obtained
from:
rm = b (r) rt(X,_m) b (r) grt(X,_m) ... (Z.5)

Z.3.2.4Step 4: Estimate the coefficient of variation Vδ of the error term δ.
Page 90
(1) The error term δi for each experimental value rei relative to the corresponding mean value corrected theoretical
result b rti should be determined for i  1 to n from:
re i
δi = ... (Z.6)
b rt i
(2) From the values of δi an estimator for Vδ should be determined by defining:
∆i = ln ( δ i ) ... (Z.7)
(3) The estimator ∆ for E(∆) should be obtained from:
1 n
∆ = ∑ ∆i ... (Z.8)
n i =1
(4) The estimator s∆2 for σ∆2 should be obtained from:
2
1 n
s∆2 = ∑ ∆i − ∆
n − 1 i =1
( ) ... (Z.9)
(5) The estimator Vδ2 should be obtained from:
Vδ2 = ( )
exp s ∆ 2 - 1 ... (Z.10)
(6) The realisation Vδ(r) of Vδ may be used as the coefficient of variation Vδ of the error term δ.
EXAMPLE: For the example of bolts in bearing Vδ(r) = 0,08.
(7) Alternatively, for small values of sδ(r) the approximation Vδ(r) ≈ sδ(r) may be used.
Z.3.2.5Step 5: Analyse the compatibility
(1) The compatibility of the test population should be analysed with regard to the assumptions made in the resistance
function.
(2) If the scatter of the (rei , rti) values is too high to give economic characteristic resistance functions, this scatter
may be reduced in one of the following ways:
a) by correcting the resistance functions, such that additional parameters not adequately represented in the
resistance functions are taken into account;
b) by modifying the estimators for b (r) and Vδ(r).

(3) To ascertain which parameters have most influence on the scatter, the test results may be split into sub-sets with
respect to these parameters.
EXAMPLE: As an illustration, the results of shear tests on bolts are shown in figure Z.4, split into sub-sets according
to the bolt grade. Clearly in this case the resistance function can be improved if the coefficient 0,7 in the resistance
function is replaced by a function of the bolt strength fub .
Page 91
Figure Z.4: Shear failure of bolts with the shear plane in the threaded portion
(4) The purpose in such cases should be to improve the resistance function per sub-set by analysing each sub-set
using the standard procedure.
NOTE: The disadvantage of splitting the test results into sub-sets is that the number of test results in each sub-set
can become rather small.
(5) In determining the fractile factors uk (see step 7) the uk value for the sub-sets may be determined on the basis
of the total number of the tests in the original series.
(6) In this way, an improved resistance function may be obtained consisting of the original resistance function
multiplied by a factor dependent on the variation of a few additional parameters.
NOTE: It is often found that the frequency distribution for resistance from tests cannot be described by a uni-
modal function, because it represents two or more sub-sets which result in a bi-modal or multi-modal function.
This can be checked by plotting on Gaussian paper, see figures Z.5 and Z.6. When plotted with the horizontal
axis to a linear scale, a uni-modal function should give a straight line (if normally distributed) or a monotonically
curved line (if log-normal). It is more convenient to plot log-normally distributed functions with a logarithmic
horizontal axis because this gives a linear plot.
If no other way is found to separate the sub-sets, a uni-modal function can be extracted from bi-modal or multi-
modal functions using the procedure outlined in figure Z.7. The statistical data for the uni-modal function can
be taken from a tangent to the actual distribution. Thus b m(r) and smb(r) are obtained instead of b (r) and sb(r)
and hence smδ(r) instead of sδ(r). The evaluation procedure for uni-modal functions described hereafter can then
be used.
Commonly it is difficult to construct a representative tangent, in which case a linear regression of the lower end
of the data can be carried out and the regression line used in place of the tangent. Generally it is advisable to use
at least 20 data points for this regression.
Page 92
Figure Z.5: Uni-modal distribution
Figure Z.6: Bi-modal or multi-modal distribution
Figure Z.7: Extraction of a uni-modal function from a bi-modal or multi-modal distribution by construction of
a tangent, or alternatively by linear regression
Z.3.2.6Step 6: Determine the coefficients of variation VXi of the basic variables.
(1) Unless it can be shown that the test population is fully representative of the variation in reality, the coefficients
of variation VXi of the basic variables in the resistance function should not be determined from the test data. As this
is not generally the case, the coefficients of variation VXi should normally be determined on the basis of prior
knowledge.
EXAMPLE: For the resistance function considered for the bearing resistance of bolts, the following values have been
determined from studies on the variability of bolt dimensions and material properties:
Vdn = 0,005
Vt = 0,05
Vfu = 0,07
Z.3.2.7Step 7: Determine the characteristic value rk of the resistance.
(1) For a log-normal distribution the characteristic resistance rk should be obtained from:
Page 93
rk = E(r) exp(-uk Q - 0,5 Q2 ) ... (Z.11)
with:
Q = σℓn(r) = (
l n V r2 + 1 ) ... (Z.12)
where:
-uk is the characteristic value [with uk > 0] of the standard normal distribution:
P(u < -uk) =  p [e.g. p  5 % for uk  1,64]

Vr is the coefficient of variation of the random variable r
σ n(r) is the standard deviation of the variable ℓn(r)
(2) If the resistance function for j basic variables is a product function of the form:
r = b rt δ = b {X1 x X2 ... Xj }δ
the mean value E(r) may be obtained from:
E(r) = b {E(X1) x E(X2) ... E(Xj) }E(δ) =b grt (Xm) ... (Z.13a)
and the coefficient of variation Vr may be obtained from the product function:
Vr2 =
 j 2
(Vδ2 + 1)  ∏ V Xi
i =1
( 
+1 −1

) ... (Z.13b)
(3) Alternatively, for small values of Vδ2 and VXi2 the following approximation for Vr may be used:
2 2
Vr2 = V δ + V rt ... (Z.14a)
with:
j
Vrt2 = ∑ V Xi2 ... (Z.14b)
i =1
EXAMPLE: In the case of bolts in bearing (with e1/do > 3 ):
grt(Xm) = 2,5 dm tm fum
2 2 2
Vrt = V dn + V t + V fu = 0,0052 + 0,052 + 0,07 2 = 0,086
2 2
Vrt = V rt + V δ = 0,086 2 + 0,08 2 = 0,118
(4) If the resistance function is a more complex function of the form:
r = b rt δ = b grt (X1, ..., Xj) δ

the mean value E(r) may be obtained from:
E(r) = b grt (E(X1), ..., E(Xj)) E(δ) = b grt(Xm) x 1,0 ... (Z.15a)
and the coefficient of variation Vrt may be obtained from:
2
VAR [ g rt ( X )] 1  ∂g
j 
Vrt2 = = × ∑  rt × σLi  ... (Z.15b)
g rt 2 ( X m ) g rt 2 ( X m ) i =1 ∂X i 
EXAMPLE: The method is illustrated for the following fictitious resistance function:
grt(X) = bo0,5 to1,5 fu
Page 94
Assume:
Vbo = 0,005 from prior knowledge;
Vto = 0,05 from prior knowledge;
Vfu = 0,07 from prior knowledge;
Vδ = 0,09 from the evaluation of tests.
Substitute mean values for the variables in calculating VAR [grt] in expression (Z.15b) and thus calculate:
 2 2 2
g rt 2 
 sbo   sto   s fu  
( X m )   0,5 + 1,5 + 
VAR [ g rt ( X )]   bom   t om   f um  
Vrt2 = = 
g rt 2 ( X m ) g rt 2 ( X m )
Vrt2 = 0,25 Vbo2 + 2,25 Vto2 + Vfu2

Vr2 = Vrt2 + Vδ2 = 0,25 Vbo2 + 2,25 Vto2 + Vfu2 + Vδ2
Vr2 = 0,25 (0,005)2 + 2,25 (0,05)2 + (0,07)2 + (0,09)2 = 0,019
Vr = 0,14
(5) If a large number of tests (say n  100) is available, the characteristic resistance rk may be obtained by replacing
b by the realisation b ( r ) of b and using the realisation Vδ(r) of Vδ . Thus in this case the characteristic resistance
rk may be obtained from:
rk = (
b ( r ) g rt ( X m ) exp - u k ,∞ Q - 0,5 Q 2 ) ... (Z.16)
with:
Q = (
l n V r2 + 1 ) ... (Z.17)
(6) If the number of tests is limited to a smaller number n allowance should be made in the distribution of ∆ for
statistical uncertainties. The distribution should be considered as a central t-distribution with the parameters ∆ , V∆(r)
and n.
(7) In this case the characteristic resistance rk should be obtained from:
rk = (
b ( r ) g r ( X m ) exp - u k,∞ α rt Q rt - u k ,n αδ Qδ - 0,5 Q 2 ) ... (Z.18)
with:
Qrt = σ l n (rt) = (
l n V rt 2 + 1 ) ... (Z.19a)
Qδ = σ ln(δ ) = l n (V δ
2
+1 ) ... (Z.19b)
Q = σ l n (r) = l n (V r
2
+1 ) ... (Z.19c)
Q rt
αrt = ... (Z.20a)
Q
Qδ
αδ = ... (Z.20b)
Q
where:
uk,n is the characteristic fractile factor from table Z.1;
Page 95
uk,∞ is the value of uk,n for n → ∞ [uk,∞  1,64];
αrt is the weighting factor for Qrt
αδ is the weighting factor for Qδ
Table Z.1: Factor uk,n for determining 5% characteristic fractile values
Total number of available test results n 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 20 30 ∞
Factor uk,n for the case where Vδ is

- - - 2,63 2,33 2,18 2,00 1,92 1,76 1,73 1,64
unknown (see Note 2)
Notes:
1) This table is an extract from table D.1 in annex D of ENV 1991-1.
2) The value of Vδ is to be estimated from the test sample under consideration.
EXAMPLE: For the case of bolts in bearing and a large number of tests: [here Q ≈ Vr]
2
rk = rtm exp(-1,64 x 0,118 - 0,5 x 0,118 )
rk = rtm x 0,818
Z.3.2.8Step 8: Determine the design value rd of the resistance

(1) The procedure for determining the characteristic value rk of the resistance may be extended by replacing the
characteristic fractile factor uk by the design fractile factor ud related to a value of the reliability index β  3,8 to obtain
the design value rd of the resistance.
(2) For the case of a large number of tests the design value rd may be obtained from:
rd = (
b g rt ( X m ) exp - u d Q - 0,5 Q 2 ) ... (Z.21)
(3) According to annex A of ENV 19911, for a large number of tests the value of ud may be taken as:
ud = αR β = 0,8 β = 3,04
(4) For the case of a limited number of tests the design value rd should be obtained from:
rd = (
b g rt ( X m ) exp - u k,∞ α rt Q rt - u d ,n αδ Qδ - 0,5 Q 2 ) ... (Z.22)
where:
ud,n is the design fractile factor from table Z.2;
ud,∞ is the value of ud,n for n → ∞ [ud, ∞  3,04].
Table Z.2: Factor ud,n for determining design fractile values
Total number of available test results n 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 20 30 ∞
Factor ud,n for the case where Vδ is
- - - 11,40 7,85 6,36 5,07 4,51 3,64 3,44 3,04
unknown (see Note 2)
Notes:
1) This table is an extract from table D.1 in annex D of ENV 1991-1.
2) The value of Vδ is to be estimated from the test sample under consideration.
(5) The initial estimate for the partial factor γR may be obtained from:
γR = rk / rd ... (Z.23)
EXAMPLE: For the case of bolts in bearing and a large number of tests:
Page 96
γR = exp((3,04 - 1,64) Q ) = exp(1,40 x 0,118) = 1,18
Z.3.2.9Step 9: Final choice of characteristic values and γR values
(1) The design resistance functions may contain basic variables defined as nominal values Xn. The nominal value
of the material strength may be adopted as the characteristic value and the nominal values for the geometrical variables
may be adopted as mean values. However in such cases a suitable adjustment should be made in the final choice of the
γR values.
(2) The ratio kc between the nominal resistance rn and the characteristic resistance rk should be obtained from:
rn g rt ( X n )
kc = = ... (Z.24)
rk rk
(3) The corrected partial factor γR* for use with the nominal resistance function may be obtained from:
γR* = kc γR = ( rn / rk )( r k / rd )= rn / rd ... (Z.25)
EXAMPLE: For the case of bolts, the nominal values t and d are assumed to represent mean values, whereas the
nominal value of the ultimate tensile strength fu is assumed to be equal to the characteristic value defined by the fractile
factor uk,fu = 2.
Thus:
fu = exp(2 x 0,07 - 0,5 x 0,072 ) fum = 0,867 fum

Hence:
0,867
kc = = 1,06
0,818
and:
γR* = 1,06 x 1,18 = 1,25
(4) In order to avoid γR*
values that vary too widely between one resistance function and another, the classes of
γRi values given in table Z.3 have been established for use in ENV 1993.
Table Z.3: Classes for γRi
Resistance criterion Strength parameter Class Numerical value

Yielding of cross-section fy γR0 1,00 *)
Stability failure fy γR1 1,10
Fracture fu γR2 1,25
*) In ENV 1993-1-1 both γR0 and γR1 are set to 1,10.
(5) The final choice of γRi should be made according to the relevant class and the nominal resistance function grt(Xn)
should be modified to give the final resistance function r such that:
γR i γ
r = rt ( X n )  = g rt ( X n ) *
= rn R i = rd γR i ... (Z.26)
γR γ R*
EXAMPLE: In the case of bolts in bearing:

γR* = γR2 = 1,25 and therefore r = 2,5 dn t fu
Z.3.3 Simplified standard procedure

(1) A simplified version of the standard procedure for the determination of design resistances from a limited number
of tests, with small variability both in the test results and in the basic variables, may be carried out as summarized in the
Page 97
following step-by-step procedure:
Step 1: Develop a design model: rt = grt (X).

Step 2: Compare theory with tests: Plot re against rt .
Step 3: Estimate mean value correction factor b :
Mean value corrected resistance: rm= b(r ) rt
1 n
Calculate b(r ) = ∑ bi
n i =1
Step 4: Estimate variation Vδ of the error term δ :
Vδ = Vδ(r) = ( )
exp s ∆ 2 - 1
with:
2
1 n
s∆2 = ∑ ∆i − ∆
n − 1 i =1
( )
1 n
∆ = ∑ ∆i
n i =1
 r 
∆i = l n ( δi )  ln ei 
 b 
 rt i 
Step 5: Check compatibility of the test population.
Step 6: Determine the coefficients of variation VXi of the basic variables Xi from prior knowledge.
Step 7: Determine the characteristic resistance:
rk = (
b g rt ( X m ) exp - u k,∞ α rt Q rt - u k,n α δ Q δ - 0,5 Q 2 )
Qrt ≈ Vrt = ∑V X i 2
Qδ ≈ Vδ
2 2
Q ≈ Vr = V rt + V δ
Q rt
αrt =
Q
Qδ
αδ =
Q
Step 8: Determine the design resistance:
rd = (
b g rt ( X m ) exp _ u d,∞ α rt Q rt - u d,n αδ Qδ _ 0,5 Q 2 )
Calculate initial value of partial factor:
γR = rk / rd
Step 9: Final choice of characteristic values and γR values:
Page 98
rn g rt ( X n )
kc = =
rk rk
Calculate corrected value of partial factor:
γR* = kc γR  = rn / rd
Select final value of partial factor γRi from γR0 , γR1 or γR2
Adopt final resistance function:
γR i
r = rt ( X n ) = rn = rd γR i
γ R*
Z.4 Simplified procedure for the case of prior knowledge

(1) If the validity of the resistance function rt and an upper bound for the coefficient of variation Vr are already
known from a significant number of previous tests, the following simplified procedure may be adopted when further tests
are carried out.
(2) If only one further test is carried out, the characteristic value rk may be determined from the result re of this
test by applying:
rk = ηk re ... (Z.27)
where:
ηk is the reduction factor applicable in the case of prior knowledge.
(3) In the case of only one further test, the reduction factor ηk may be obtained from:
ηk = 0,9 exp(2,31 Vr  0,5 Vr2 ) ... (Z.28)

where:
Vr is the maximum coefficient of variation observed in previous tests.
(4) If two or three further tests are carried out, leading to a mean value rem , the reduction factor ηk may be obtained
from:
ηk = exp(2,0 Vr  0,5 Vr2 ) ... (Z.29)

provided that each extreme (maximum or minimum) value ree satisfies the condition:
r ee - r em ≤ 0,10 r em ... (Z.30)
(5) The values of the coefficient of variation Vr given in table Z.4 may be assumed for the types of failure specified,
leading to the listed values of ηk according to expressions (Z.28) and (Z.29).
Table Z.4: Reduction factor ηk
Reduction factor ηk
Type of failure observed in tests Coefficient of
variation Vr For 1 test For 2 or 3 tests
Excessive yielding or gross deformation 0,05 0,80 0,90
Local buckling 0,11 0,70 0,80
Overall buckling 0,17 0,60 0,70
Page 99
ANNEX B
CALIBRATION OF γM0 FOR I/H HOT ROLLED SECTIONS
DATA SET 1 : All SECTIONS
DATA SET 2 : ALL STEEL PRODUCERS, EACH TYPE OF SECTION
DATA SET 3 : EACH STEEL PRODUCER, ALL TYPES OF SECTIONS
DATA SET 4 : EACH STEEL PRODUCER AND EACH TYPE OF SECTION
Page 101
Page 102
Data set 1:
All profiles
Table : γM -values
1-5 Npl Mel.y Mpl.y Mel.z Mpl.z

Profil EC 3 EN EC 3 EN EC 3 EN EC 3 EN EC 3 EN
all n = 2639 n = 2717 n = 98 n = 95 n = 3755 n = 3758 n = 98 n = 95 n = 3755 n = 3758
nr = 1320 nr = 1358 nr = 49 nr = 48 nr = 1878 nr = 1878 nr = 49 nr = 48 nr = 1878 nr = 1878
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.035 γM =1.008 γM =0.981 γM =0.984 γM =1.037 γM =1.018 γM =0.990 γM =0.995 γM =1.065 γM =1.053
n = 2639 n = 2717 n = 98 n = 95 n = 3755 n = 3758 n = 98 n = 95 n = 3755 n = 3758
Data set 2:
All steel producer, each type of profile
Table : γM -values

HEA n = 820 n = 820 n = 72 n = 69 n = 812 n = 815 n = 72 n = 69 n = 812 n = 815
n = 820 n = 820 n = 72 n = 69 n = 812 n = 815 n = 72 n = 69 n = 812 n = 815
HEB n = 781 n = 794 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822
nr = 390 nr = 397 nr = 411 nr = 411 nr = 411 nr = 411
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.042 γM =1.011 γM =1.046 γM =1.016 γM =1.076 γM =1.048
Page 103
Page 104

n = 781 n = 794 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822
nr = 285 nr = 290 nr = 300 nr = 300 nr = 300 nr = 300
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.040 γM =1.009 γM =1.044 γM =1.015 γM =1.076 γM =1.050
n = 781 n = 794 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822
nr = 143 nr = 145 nr = 150 nr = 150 nr = 150 nr = 150
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.039 γM =1.006 γM =1.041 γM =1.013 γM =1.076 γM =1.051
n = 781 n = 794 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822 n = 822
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.039 γM =1.007 γM =1.042 γM =1.014 γM =1.085 γM =1.056
HEM n = 215 n = 215 n = 216 n = 216 n = 216 n = 216
nr = 108 nr = 108 nr = 108 nr = 108 nr = 108 nr = 108
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.070 γM =1.024 γM =1.069 γM =1.023 γM =1.066 γM =1.021
n = 215 n = 215 n = 216 n = 216 n = 216 n = 216
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.032 γM =0.989 γM =1.026 γM =0.983 γM =1.051 γM =1.010
HP n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46
nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.005 γM =0.961 γM =1.005 γM =0.961 γM =1.032 γM =0.987
n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.002 γM =0.959 γM =1.003 γM =0.959 γM =1.027 γM =0.983
n = 449 n = 514 n = 673 n = 673 n = 673 n = 673
IPE nr = 224 nr = 257 nr = 336 nr = 336 nr = 336 nr = 366
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.018 γM =1.022 γM =1.024 γM =1.026 γM =1.069 γM =1.072
n = 449 n = 514 n = 673 n = 673 n = 673 n = 673
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =0.981 γM =0.980 γM =0.991 γM =0.989 γM =1.060 γM =1.060
UBP n = 37 n = 37 n =7 n =7 n = 30 n = 30 n =7 n =7 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr =7 nr =7 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr =7 nr =7 nr = 20 nr = 20
Page 105
Page 106

UB n = 180 n = 180 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046
nr = 90 nr = 90 nr = 523 nr = 523 nr = 523 nr = 523
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.023 γM =1.008 γM =1.032 γM =1.026 γM =1.065 γM =1.063
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046
nr = 77 nr = 77 nr = 450 nr = 450 nr = 450 nr = 450
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09
γM =1.024 γM =1.009 γM =1.030 γM =1.024 γM =1.064 γM =1.062
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046
nr = 52 nr = 52 nr = 300 nr = 300 nr = 300 nr = 300
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.019 γM =1.004 γM =1.027 γM =1.023 γM =1.063 γM =1.064
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046
nr = 26 nr = 26 nr = 150 nr = 150 nr = 150 nr = 150
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.004 γM =0.998 γM =1.025 γM =1.023 γM =1.065 γM =1.066
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046 n = 1046
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09
γM =1.003 γM =0.994 γM =1.040 γM =1.038 γM =1.080 γM =1.080
UC n = 95 n = 95 n =8 n =8 n = 87 n = 87 n =8 n =8 n = 87 n = 87
n = 95 n = 95 n =8 n =8 n = 87 n = 87 n =8 n =8 n = 87 n = 87
n = 95 n = 95 n =8 n =8 n = 87 n = 87 n =8 n =8 n = 87 n = 87
Page 107
Page 108
Data set 3:
Each steel producer, all types of profiles
Table : γM -values
1 Npl Mel.y Mpl.y Mel.z Mpl.z

all n = 838 n = 868 n = 40 n = 40 n = 910 n = 910 n = 40 n = 40 n = 910 n = 910

n = 838 n = 868 n = 40 n = 40 n = 910 n = 910 n = 40 n = 40 n = 910 n = 910
All n = 957 n = 1005 n = 32 n = 30 n = 1096 n = 1098 n = 32 n = 30 n = 1096 n = 1098
n = 957 n = 1005 n = 32 n = 30 n = 1096 n = 1098 n = 32 n = 30 n = 1096 n = 1098
All n = 64 n = 64 n =6 n =5 n = 58 n = 59 n =6 n =5 n = 58 n = 59
n = 64 n = 64 n =6 n =5 n = 58 n = 59 n =6 n =5 n = 58 n = 59
All n = 447 n = 447 n = 14 n = 14 n = 1335 n = 1335 n = 14 n = 14 n = 1335 n = 1335
Page 109
Page 110
n = 447 n = 447 n = 14 n = 14 n = 1335 n = 1335 n = 14 n = 14 n = 1335 n = 1335

All n = 333 n = 333 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356
n = 333 n = 333 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356
n = 333 n = 333 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356
n = 333 n = 333 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356 n =6 n =6 n = 356 n = 356
Page 111
Page 112
Data set 4: Each steel producer, each type of profile

Data set 4.1: Steel producer 1
Table : γM -values (S235)
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
100 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09
γM =1.022 γM =1.022 γM =1.033 γM =1.033 γM =0.998 γM =0.998
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
200 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =0.879 γM =0.879 γM =0.886 γM =0.886 γM =0.892 γM =0.892
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
240 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.998 γM =0.998 γM =1.008 γM =1.008 γM =1.009 γM =1.009
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
450 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.948 γM =0.907 γM =0.949 γM =0.909 γM =0.966 γM =0.925
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
600 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =0.921 γM =0.882 γM =0.924 γM =0.885 γM =0.941 γM =0.901
HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
120 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.953 γM =0.953 γM =0.964 γM =0.964 γM =0.959 γM =0.959
HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
180 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =0.962 γM =0.962 γM =0.976 γM =0.976 γM =0.946 γM =0.946
Page 113
Page 114

HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
240 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.041 γM =0.996 γM =1.040 γM =0.995 γM =1.038 γM =0.994
HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
500 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.986 γM =0.944 γM =0.990 γM =0.948 γM =0.996 γM =0.954
HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
700 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.070 γM =1.024 γM =1.075 γM =1.029 γM =1.079 γM =1.033
HEM n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
180 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.160 γM =1.111 γM =1.163 γM =1.113 γM =1.150 γM =1.101
HEM n = 28 n = 28 n = 28 n = 28 n = 28 n = 28
240 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.095 γM =1.049 γM =1.094 γM =1.048 γM =1.080 γM =1.034
HEM n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
300 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.10 Sδ =0.12 Sδ =0.12
γM =1.190 γM =1.140 γM =1.200 γM =1.149 γM =1.271 γM =1.217
HEM n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
550 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.098 γM =1.052 γM =1.103 γM =1.056 γM =1.104 γM =1.057
HEM n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
600 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.141 γM =1.092 γM =1.139 γM =1.090 γM =1.137 γM =1.089
Page 115
Page 116

IPE 180 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =0.860 γM =0.860 γM =0.879 γM =0.879 γM =0.893 γM =0.893
IPE 220 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.959 γM =0.959 γM =0.966 γM =0.966 γM =0.994 γM =0.994
IPE 300 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =0.909 γM =0.909 γM =0.925 γM =0.925 γM =0.948 γM =0.948
IPE 450 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.978 γM =0.978 γM =0.994 γM =0.994 γM =1.030 γM =1.030
IPE 500 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.870 γM =0.870 γM =0.886 γM =0.886 γM =0.897 γM =0.897
IPE 600 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =0.861 γM =0.902 γM =0.864 γM =0.909 γM =0.870
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
240 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =0.989 γM =0.989 γM =0.990 γM =0.990 γM =0.994 γM =0.994
HEA n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
600 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =0.942 γM =0.915 γM =0.952 γM =0.926
HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
300 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.042 γM =1.013 γM =1.040 γM =1.010 γM =1.046 γM =1.016
Page 117
Page 118

HEB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
450 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.014 γM =0.986 γM =1.021 γM =0.992 γM =1.031 γM =1.002
HEM n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
280 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.081 γM =1.050 γM =1.081 γM =1.051 γM =1.082 γM =1.052
HEM n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
800 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.022 γM =0.994 γM =1.028 γM =0.999 γM =1.036 γM =1.007
IPE 270 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =1.005 γM =1.005 γM =1.005 γM =1.005 γM =1.005 γM =1.005
IPE 500 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.992 γM =0.992 γM =1.012 γM =1.012
UBP n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
305x30 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
5x180 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.01 Sδ =0.01 Sδ =0.01 Sδ =0.01 Sδ =0.01 Sδ =0.01
γM =0.955 γM =0.913 γM =0.951 γM =0.910 γM =0.946 γM =0.905
Page 119
Page 120
Table : γM -values
HEA n = 500 n = 500 n = 31 n = 29 n = 503 n = 505 n = 31 n = 29 n = 503 n = 505
n = 500 n = 500 n = 31 n = 29 n = 503 n = 505 n = 31 n = 29 n = 503 n = 505
HEB n = 374 n = 378 n = 415 n = 415 n = 415 n = 415
nr = 187 nr = 194 nr = 208 nr = 208 nr = 208 nr = 208
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.039 γM =0.999 γM =1.040 γM =1.002 γM =1.055 γM =1.017
n = 374 n = 378 n = 415 n = 415 n = 415 n = 415
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.028 γM =0.992 γM =1.033 γM =1.005 γM =1.053 γM =1.020
HP n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46
nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23
Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.015 γM =0.971 γM =1.016 γM =0.972 γM =1.045 γM =1.000
n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.012 γM =0.968 γM =1.014 γM =0.969 γM =1.040 γM =0.995
n = 18 n = 53 n = 109 n = 109 n = 109 n = 109
IPE nr = 18 nr = 26 nr = 54 nr = 54 nr = 54 nr = 54
Ud =3.814 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.130 γM =0.939 γM =1.007 γM =1.003 γM =1.012 γM =1.002
n = 18 n = 53 n = 109 n = 109 n = 109 n = 109
nr = 18 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.814 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.130 γM =0.937 γM =1.016 γM =0.999 γM =1.020 γM =1.003
HEA n = 456 n = 456 n = 458 n = 458 n = 458 n = 458
(S235) nr = 228 nr = 228 nr = 229 nr = 229 nr = 229 nr = 229
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.027 γM =0.987 γM =1.029 γM =0.990 γM =1.049 γM =1.007
Page 121
Page 122

n = 456 n = 456 n = 458 n = 458 n = 458 n = 458
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.012 γM =0.989 γM =1.018 γM =0.989 γM =1.036 γM =0.995
HEA n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130
240 nr = 65 nr = 65 nr = 65 nr = 65 nr = 65 nr = 65
(S235) Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.026 γM =1.026 γM =1.026 γM =1.026 γM =1.040 γM =1.040
n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130
nr = 45 nr = 45 nr = 45 nr = 45 nr = 45 nr = 45
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.032 γM =1.032 γM =1.033 γM =1.033 γM =1.044 γM =1.044
n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130 n = 130
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.036 γM =1.036 γM =1.037 γM =1.037 γM =1.033 γM =1.033
HEA n = 82 n = 82 n = 82 n = 82 n = 82 n = 82
360 nr = 41 nr = 41 nr = 41 nr = 41 nr = 41 nr = 41
(S235)
Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.013 γM =0.970 γM =1.019 γM =0.975 γM =1.031 γM =0.987
n = 82 n = 82 n = 82 n = 82 n = 82 n = 82
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143 Ud =3.143
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.014 γM =0.971 γM =1.019 γM =0.975 γM =1.033 γM =0.989
HEA n = 102 n = 102 n = 102 n = 102 n = 102 n = 102
600 nr = 51 nr = 51 nr = 51 nr = 51 nr = 51 nr = 51
(S235) Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.025 γM =0.981 γM =1.030 γM =0.986 γM =1.045 γM =1.001
n = 102 n = 102 n = 102 n = 102 n = 102 n = 102
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.034 γM =0.990 γM =1.037 γM =0.993 γM =1.041 γM =0.997
HEA n = 39 n = 39 n = 28 n = 28 n = 40 n = 40 n = 28 n = 28 n = 40 n = 40
(S355) nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
n = 39 n = 39 n = 28 n = 28 n = 40 n = 40 n = 28 n = 28 n = 40 n = 40
Page 123
Page 124

HEB n =303 n = 303 n = 315 n = 315 n = 315 n = 315
(S235) nr = 152 nr = 152 nr = 158 nr = 158 nr = 158 nr = 158
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.038 γM =0.991 γM =1.034 γM =0.987 γM =1.049 γM =1.004
n =303 n = 303 n = 315 n = 315 n = 315 n = 315
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.032 γM =0.986 γM =1.026 γM =0.981 γM =1.044 γM =0.998
HEB n = 38 n = 38 n = 38 n = 38 n = 38 n = 38
300 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
(S235)
Ud =3.394 Ud =3.394 Ud =3.394 Ud =3.394 Ud =3.394 Ud =3.394
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =0.972 γM =0.930 γM =0.981 γM =0.939 γM =0.987 γM =0.945
HEB n = 67 n = 80 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95
(S355) nr = 34 nr = 40 nr = 48 nr = 48 nr = 48 nr = 48
Ud =3.229 Ud =3.154 Ud =3.069 Ud =3.069 Ud =3.069 Ud =3.069
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.059 γM =1.020 γM =1.057 γM =1.025 γM =1.066 γM =1.036
n = 67 n = 80 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95
nr = 34 nr = 40 nr = 48 nr = 48 nr = 48 nr = 48
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.049 γM =1.015 γM =1.055 γM =1.023 γM =1.065 γM =1.034
n = 67 n = 80 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.229 Ud =3.154 Ud =3.069 Ud =3.069 Ud =3.069 Ud =3.069
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.049 γM =1.012 γM =1.058 γM =1.027 γM =1.077 γM =1.045
n = 67 n = 80 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95 n = 95
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.040 γM =1.007 γM =1.056 γM =1.026 γM =1.075 γM =1.043
IPE n = 18 n = 53 n = 53 n = 53 n = 53 n = 53
(S235) nr = 18 nr = 26 nr = 26 nr = 26 nr = 26 nr = 26
Ud =3.814 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.130 γM =0.939 γM =0.957 γM =0.932 γM =0.931 γM =0.945
n = 18 n = 53 n = 53 n = 53 n = 53 n = 53
nr = 18 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.814 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309 Ud =3.309
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.130 γM =0.937 γM =0.961 γM =0.928 γM =0.934 γM =0.949
IPE n = 55 n = 55 n = 55 n = 55
(S355) nr = 28 nr = 28 nr = 28 nr = 28
Ud =3.297 Ud =3.297 Ud =3.297 Ud =3.297
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.023 γM =1.005 γM =1.030 γM =1.019
Page 125
Page 126

n = 55 n = 55 n = 55 n = 55
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.297 Ud =3.297 Ud =3.297 Ud =3.297
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.035 γM =1.014 γM =1.039 γM =1.019
Table : γM -values
IPE n = 23 n = 23 n = 23 n = 23 n = 23 n = 23
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.580 Ud =3.580 Ud =3.580 Ud =3.580 Ud =3.580 Ud =3.580
Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.102 γM =1.102 γM =1.112 γM =1.112 γM =1.137 γM =1.137
Page 127
Page 128
Table : γM -values
HEA n = 54 n = 54 n = 54 n = 54 n = 54 n = 54
nr = 27 nr = 27 nr = 27 nr = 27 nr = 27 nr = 27
Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.031 γM =1.031 γM =1.045 γM =1.045 γM =1.048 γM =1.048
n = 54 n = 54 n = 54 n = 54 n = 54 n = 54
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.037 γM =1.037 γM =1.052 γM =1.052 γM =1.056 γM =1.056
HEB n = 28 n = 28 n = 28 n = 28 n = 28 n = 28
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.480 Ud =3.480 Ud =3.480 Ud =3.480 Ud =3.480 Ud =3.480
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.019 γM =1.019 γM =1.025 γM =1.025 γM =1.020 γM =1.020
IPE n = 84 n = 84 n = 122 n = 122 n = 122 n = 122
nr = 42 nr = 42 nr = 61 nr = 61 nr = 61 nr = 61
Ud =3.131 Ud =3.131 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.039 γM =1.039 γM =1.018 γM =1.018 γM =1.051 γM =1.051
n = 84 n = 84 n = 122 n = 122 n = 122 n = 122
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.131 Ud =3.131 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.3
γM =1.003 γM =1.003 γM =0.988 γM =0.988 γM =1.021 γM =1.021
IPE 360 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =1.013 γM =1.013 γM =1.008 γM =1.008 γM =1.037 γM =1.037
IPE 450 n = 54 n = 54 n = 92 n = 92 n = 92 n = 92
nr = 27 nr = 27 nr = 46 nr = 46 nr = 46 nr = 46
Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.086 Ud =3.086 Ud =3.086 Ud =3.086
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.995 γM =0.995 γM =1.008 γM =1.008 γM =1.070 γM =1.070
n = 54 n = 54 n = 92 n = 92 n = 92 n = 92
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.303 Ud =3.303 Ud =3.086 Ud =3.086 Ud =3.086 Ud =3.086
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.993 γM =0.993 γM =0.998 γM =0.998 γM =1.051 γM =1.051
UBP n =7 n =7 n =7 n =7 n =7 n =7
nr =7 nr =7 nr =7 nr =7 nr =7 nr =7
Ud =7.715 Ud =7.715 Ud =7.715 Ud =7.715 Ud =7.715 Ud =7.715
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =1.093 γM =1.093 γM =1.105 γM =1.105 γM =1.143 γM =1.143
Page 129
Page 130

n =7 n =7 n =7 n =7 n =7 n =7
nr =7 nr =7 nr =7 nr =7 nr =7 nr =7
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =0.963 γM =0.963 γM =0.964 γM =0.964 γM =0.979 γM =0.979
UC n = 94 n = 94 n =7 n =7 n = 87 n = 87 n =7 n =7 n = 87 n = 87
n = 94 n = 94 n =7 n =7 n = 87 n = 87 n =7 n =7 n = 87 n = 87
n = 94 n = 94 n =7 n =7 n = 87 n = 87 n =7 n =7 n = 87 n = 87
Ud = 3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
UC n = 64 n = 64 n =7 n =7 n = 57 n = 57 n =7 n =7 n = 57 n = 57
203x20 n = 32 nr = 32 nr =7 nr =7 nr = 28 nr = 28 nr =7 nr =7 nr = 28 nr = 28
r
3x46
n = 64 n = 64 n =7 n =7 n = 57 n = 57 n =7 n =7 n = 57 n = 57
UC n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
254x25 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
4x89 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =1.049 γM =1.049 γM =1.040 γM =1.002 γM =1.084 γM =1.045
n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03
γM =1.037 γM =0.999 γM =1.029 γM =0.991 γM =1.071 γM =1.032
UB n = 180 n = 180 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044
nr = 90 nr = 90 nr = 522 nr = 522 nr = 522 nr = 522
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.023 γM =1.008 γM =1.032 γM =1.027 γM =1.066 γM =1.063
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044
nr = 78 nr = 78 nr = 450 nr = 450 nr = 450 nr = 450
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.024 γM =1.009 γM =1.030 γM =1.024 γM =1.064 γM =1.062
Page 131
Page 132

n = 180 n = 180 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044
nr = 52 nr = 52 nr = 300 nr = 300 nr = 300 nr = 300
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.019 γM =1.004 γM =1.027 γM =1.023 γM =1.063 γM =1.064
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044
nr = 26 nr = 26 nr = 150 nr = 150 nr = 150 nr = 150
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.004 γM =0.998 γM =1.025 γM =1.023 γM =1.065 γM =1.066
n = 180 n = 180 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044 n = 1044
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.09
γM =1.003 γM =0.994 γM =1.040 γM =1.038 γM =1.080 γM =1.080
UB n = 285 n = 285 n = 285 n = 285
254x10 nr = 142 nr = 142 nr = 142 nr = 142
2x22
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09 Sδ =0.09
γM =1.042 γM =1.042 γM =1.057 γM =1.057
n = 285 n = 285 n = 285 n = 285
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.998 γM =0.998 γM =1.004 γM =1.004
UB n = 22 n = 22 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46
254x10 n = 20 nr = 20 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23 nr = 23
r
2x25
Ud =3.600 Ud =3.600 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.008 γM =1.008 γM =0.956 γM =0.956 γM =0.990 γM =0.990
n = 22 n = 22 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46 n = 46
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.600 Ud =3.600 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349 Ud =3.349
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.008 γM =1.008 γM =0.950 γM =0.950 γM =0.988 γM =0.988
UB n = 109 n = 109 n = 118 n = 118 n = 118 n = 118
254x14 n = 54 nr = 54 nr = 59 nr = 59 nr = 59 nr = 59
r
6x31.1
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.023 γM =1.023 γM =1.017 γM =1.017 γM =1.023 γM =1.023
n = 109 n = 109 n = 118 n = 118 n = 118 n = 118
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04
γM =1.009 γM =1.009 γM =1.000 γM =1.000 γM =1.020 γM =1.020
UB n = 100 n = 100 n = 100 n = 100
356x12 nr = 50 nr = 50 nr = 50 nr = 50
7x33 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.070 γM =1.070 γM =1.114 γM =1.114
Page 133
Page 134

n = 100 n = 100 n = 100 n = 100
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.093 γM =1.093 γM =1.137 γM =1.137
n = 100 n = 100 n = 100 n = 100
nr = 30 nr = 30 nr = 30 nr = 30
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.084 γM =1.084 γM =1.127 γM =1.127
n = 100 n = 100 n = 100 n = 100
nr = 40 nr = 40 nr = 40 nr = 40
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.074 γM =1.074 γM =1.118 γM =1.118
UB n = 36 n = 36 n = 36 n =36
406x17 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr =20
8x54
Ud =3.406 Ud =3.406 Ud =3.406 Ud =3.406
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.052 γM =1.052 γM =1.041 γM =1.041
UB n = 30 n = 30 n = 30 n = 30
457x15 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
2x52
Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440 Ud =3.440
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.012 γM =1.012 γM =1.030 γM =1.030
UB n = 68 n = 68 n = 68 n = 68
457x19 nr = 34 nr = 34 nr = 34 nr = 34
1x67 Ud =3.223 Ud =3.223 Ud =3.223 Ud =3.223
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.010 γM =1.010 γM =1.031 γM =1.031
n = 68 n = 68 n = 68 n = 68
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.223 Ud =3.223 Ud =3.223 Ud =3.223
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.016 γM =1.016 γM =1.039 γM =1.039
n = 68 n = 68 n = 68 n = 68
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =1.008 γM =1.008 γM =1.030 γM =1.030
n = 41 n = 41 n = 41 n =41
UB nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr =20
533x21 Ud =3.377 Ud =3.377 Ud =3.377 Ud =3.377
0x82
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.142 γM =1.142 γM =1.152 γM =1.152
n = 41 n = 41 n = 41 n =41
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr =20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.110 γM =1.110 γM =1.121 γM =1.121
Page 135
Page 136

UB n = 92 n = 92 n = 92 n = 92
610x22 nr = 46 nr = 46 nr = 46 nr = 46
9x101
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.994 γM =0.994 γM =0.999 γM =0.999
n = 92 n = 92 n = 92 n = 92
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.07
γM =1.017 γM =1.017 γM =1.015 γM =1.015
UB n = 36 n = 36 n = 36 n = 36
610x22 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
9x113 Ud =3.406 Ud =3.406 Ud =3.406 Ud =3.406
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.107 γM =1.063 γM =1.120 γM =1.077
n = 36 n = 36 n = 36 n = 36
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.082 γM =1.040 γM =1.095 γM =1.054
UB n = 32 n = 32 n = 32 n = 32
686x25 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
4x125 Ud =3.429 Ud =3.429 Ud =3.429 Ud =3.429
Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08 Sδ =0.08
γM =1.048 γM =1.010 γM =1.052 γM =1.014
Table : γM -values
HEA n = 38 n = 38 n =6 n =6 n = 32 n = 32 n =6 n =6 n = 32 n = 32
HEB n = 149 n = 149 n = 149 n = 149 n = 149 n = 149
nr = 74 nr = 74 nr = 74 nr = 74 nr = 74 nr = 74
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.07 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.072 γM =1.044 γM =1.081 γM =1.052 γM =1.128 γM =1.102
n = 149 n = 149 n = 149 n = 149 n = 149 n = 149
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr =20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =1.066 γM =1.043 γM =1.070 γM =1.048 γM =1.121 γM =1.094
Page 137
Page 138

IPE n = 144 n = 144 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173
nr = 72 nr = 72 nr = 86 nr = 86 nr = 86 nr = 86
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.995 γM =0.995 γM =1.012 γM =1.012 γM =1.076 γM =1.076
n = 144 n = 144 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173
nr = 50 nr = 50 nr = 60 nr = 60 nr = 60 nr = 60
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.04 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.986 γM =0.986 γM =1.009 γM =1.009 γM =1.076 γM =1.076
n = 144 n = 144 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173
nr = 33 nr = 33 nr = 40 nr = 40 nr = 40 nr = 40
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.05 Sδ =0.05
γM =0.976 γM =0.976 γM =1.004 γM =1.004 γM =1.081 γM =1.081
n = 144 n = 144 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173 n = 173
nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20 nr = 20
Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040 Ud =3.040
Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.02 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.03 Sδ =0.06 Sδ =0.06
γM =0.969 γM =0.969 γM =1.002 γM =1.002 γM =1.087 γM =1.087
ANNEX C
A Proposal regarding the way to control production of hot rolled beams, to ensure a γM0 of 1,0
according to the results of the project
Page 139
SAFETY INDEX FOR YIELD STRENGTH AND AREA
POPULATIONS
1) GENERAL
 yield strength R e : prob (R e ) = f (R e )

Population 
area A : prob (A) = g (A)
Probability of a product value : B = Re . A
+∞ 1  B 
prob (B) = ∫ . f (R e ). g   . dR e
−∞ R e  Re 
Mean value of this product : B = R e .A
Second order moment of

this product : E2 (B) = E2 (Re) . E2 (A)
+∞
Or in general E 2 ( x ) = ∫ x 2 .prob( x ).dx
−∞
and σ (2x ) = E 2 ( x ) − x 2
therefore with x = B = Re . A
σ (2B) = E 2 (R e ) . E 2 (A) − R e2 . A 2
and by taking x = Re resp. A this gives
Page 140
σ (2B) ( )( )
= σ 2R + R e2 . σ 2A + A 2 − R e2 . A 2
e
= σ 2R .σ 2A + A 2 .σ 2R + R e2 . σ 2A
e e
σ ( B) = σ 2R .σ 2A + A 2 .σ 2R + R e2 . σ 2A
e e
2) SAFETY CONDITION
B − k .σB ≥ R e. min . A nom
This corresponds to plastic load

resistance and for design with
factored loads
For normal service conditions however (uncertainties from loading being

removed, representing roughly a 1,4 factor), failure is prevented when the
following relation is fulfilled !
B − k * . σ B ≥ (R e. min . A nom ) / 1,4
k* represents how many times the standard deviation σB is contained

between B and [(R e.min . A nom )/1,4] !
Failure probability is equal to the probability that B gets smaller than

[(R e.min . A nom )/1,4] !!
Hence k* reflects the safety index β
Page 141
3) Following 1) and 2) we obtain
R e .A − k* σ 2R .σ 2A + A 2 .σ 2R + R e2 . σ 2A ≥ (R e. min .A nom ) / 1,4

e e
or
Re A σ 2R σ 2A A2 σ 2R R e2 σ 2A 1
* e e
. −k . + . + . ≥
R e. min A nom R e2. min A 2nom A 2nom R e2. min R e2. min A 2nom 1,4
lets assume
R e = R e. min + re  R e = R e. min + re  σ R e = σ re 
→ → 
A = A nom + a  A = A nom + a  σ A = σ a 
which leads to
 re   a  σ 2r σ a2 (a + A nom )2 σ 2r (re + R e. min )2 σ a2 1

1 +  . 1 +  − k * e
. + . e
+ . ≥
 R e. min   A nom  R e2. min A 2nom A 2nom R e2. min R e2. min A 2nom 1,4
and hence gives
 re a re a   1 
 + + .  ≥  − 1 +
 R e. min A nom R e. min A nom   1,4 
σ 2r σ a2  a 
2 σ 2r  re 
2
σ2
*  . a
k e
. + 1 +  . e
+ 1 +
R e2. min A 2nom  A nom  R e2. min  R e. min  A 2nom
or
 re a re a   1 
 + + .  + 1 − 
k* ≤  R e. min A nom R e. min A nom   1,4 
σ 2r σ a2  a 
2 σ 2r  re 
2
σ2
e
. + 1 +  . e
+ 1 +  . a
R e2. min A 2nom  A nom
2
 R e. min  R e. min
2
 A nom
Page 142
4)
For a population of yield strength and area corresponding to one year check,
we need a safety index β of 4,7!
This corresponds to a failure probability of 1,3. 10-6 as accepted in EC1, Part

1!
Hence we must have
k* = β ≥ 4,7
This may be used in production control
Page 143
Structural Steel Research Reports Established by PRF Department
[101] Gérardy J.C., Schleich J.B.; Elasto Plastic Behaviour of Steel Frames with Semi-Rigid Connections / NORDIC
STEEL COLLOQUIUM on Research and Development within The Field of steel Construction; Odense, Denmark,
9-11 September 1991, PRF Report N°101/91.
[102] Gérardy J.C., Schleich J.B.; Semi-Rigid Action in Steel Frames Structures / CEC agreement N°7210-SA / 507 ;
Final Report EUR 14427 EN, Luxembourg 1992, PRF Report N°102/91.
[103] Pépin R.,Schleich J.B.; Seismic Resistance of Composite Structures, SRCS / CEC agreement N°7210-SA / 506
; Final Report EUR 14428 EN, Luxembourg 1992, PRF Report N°103/91.
[104] Chantrain Ph.,Schleich J.B.; Interaction Diagrams between Axial Load N and Bending Moment M for
Columns submitted to Buckling / CEC agreement N°7210-SA / 510 ; Final Report EUR 14546 EN, November
1991, PRF Report N°104/91.
[105] Schaumann P., Steffen A.; Verbundbrücken auf Basis von Walzträgern, Versuch Nr. 1 Einstegiger
Verbundträger / HRA, Bochum, Juli 1990, HRA Bericht A 89199, PRF Report N°105/90.
[106] Schaumann P., Steffen A.; Verbundbrücken auf Basis von Walzträgern, Versuch Nr. 2 Realistischer
Verbundbrückenträger / HRA, Bochum, November 1991, HRA Bericht A 89199-2, PRF Report N° 106/91.
[107] Bruls A., Wang J.P.; Composite Bridges with Hot Rolled Beams in High Strength Steel Fe E 460, and Spans up
to 50 m / Service Ponts et Charpentes, Université de Liège; Liège, November 1991,PRF Report N°107/91.
[108] Schleich J.B., Witry A.; Acier HLE pour Ponts Mixtes à Portées Moyennes de 20 à 50 m / Journée Sidérurgique
ATS 1991; Paris, 4 et 5 décembre 1991, PRF Report N°108/91.
[109] Schaumann P, Steffen A.; Verbundbrücken auf Basis von Walzträgern, Versuch Nr. 5 Hauptträgerstoss mit
Stahlbetonauflagerquerträger / HRA, Bochum, Januar 1992, HRA Bericht A 90232-A, PRF Report N°109/92.
[110] Schaumann P, Schleich J.B., Kulka H., Tilmanns H.; Verbundbrücken unter Verwendung von Walzträgern /
Zusammenstellung der Vorträge anlässlich des Seminars "Verbundbrückentag" am 12.09.90 an der
Ruhruniversität Bochum, PRF Report N°110/92.
[111] Schaumann P., Steffen A.; Verbundbrücken auf Basis von Walzträgern, Versuche Nr. 3 u. 4 Hauptträgerstoss
mit geschraubten Steglaschen / HRA, Bochum 1992, HRA Bericht 90232-B, PRF Report N°111/92.
[112] Schleich J.B., Witry A.; Neues Konzept für einfache Verbundbrücken mit Spannweiten von 20 bis 50 m / IX.
Leipziger Metallbau-Kolloquium; Leipzig, 27. März 1992, PRF Report N°112/92.
[113] Bergmann R., Kindmann R.; Auswertung der Versuche zum Tragverhalten von Verbundprofilen mit
ausbetonierten Kammern; Verbundstützen / Ruhruniversität Bochum, Bericht N°9201, Februar1992, PRF
Report N°113/92.
[114] Bergmann R., Kindmann R.; Auswertung der Versuche zum Tragverhalten von Verbundprofilen mit
ausbetonierten Kammern; Verbundträger / Ruhruniversität Bochum, Bericht N°9202, März 1992, PRF Report
N°114/92.
[115] Mang F., Schleich J.B., Wippel H., Witry A.; Untersuchungen an stegparallel versteiften Rahmenknoten,
ausgeführt aus dickflanschigen hochfesten Walzprofilen . Entwurf hochbelasteter Vierendeelträger im
Rahmen des Neubaus des Zentrums für Kunst und Medientechnologie ( ZKM ), Karlsruhe / PRF Report
N°115/92.
[116] Chantrain Ph., Becker A., Schleich J.B.; Behaviour of HISTAR hot-rolled profiles in the steel construction -
Tests / PRF Report N°116/91.
[117] Bode H., Künzel R.; Composite Beams of Fe E 460 Quality, Research report 2/90; University of Kaiserslautern,
Mach 1990; PRF Report N°117/92.
[118] Bruls A., Wang J.P. ; Composite Bridges with Hot Rolled Beams in High Strength Steel Fe E 460, Fe E 600 up
to 60 meters / Service Ponts et Charpentes, Université de Liège; Liège, August 1992, PRF Report N°118/92.
[119] Chantrain Ph., Gérardy J.C., Schleich J.B. ; Elasto-Plastic Behaviour of Steel Frame Works / CEC agreement
N°7210-SA/508 ; Final Report EUR 15627 EN , Luxembourg 1992, PRF Report N° 119/92.
[120] Chantrain Ph., Schleich J.B.; Design Handbook for Braced or Non-Sway Steel Buildings according to
Eurocode 3 (also available in DE, ES, FR, IT& NL / CEC agreement N°7210-SA/513 and N° PHIN-94-0021, ECCS
N° 85; December 1996, PRF Report 120/96 (also available in DE, ES, FR, IT& NL).
[121] Chantrain Ph., Schleich J.B.; Simplified version of Eurocode 4 for usual buildings / CEC agreement N°7210-
SA/516 ; Final Report EUR (to be published) , April 1996, PRF Report 121/96.
[122] Chantrain Ph., Schleich J.B.; Improved classification of steel and composite cross-sections: New rules for local
buckling in Eurocodes 3 and 4 / CEC agreement N°7210-SA/519/319/934; Final Report EUR (to be published),
April 1996, PRF Report 122/96.
[123] Chantrain Ph., Schleich J.B.; Promotion of plastic design for steel and composite cross-sections: new required
conditions in Eurocodes 3 and 4, practical tools for designers (Rotation capacities of profiles…) / CEC
agreement N°7210-SA/520/321/935; Part I of the Final Report EUR (to be published) , July 1996, PRF Report
123/96.
[124] Chantrain Ph., Schleich J.B.; Ductility of plastic hinges in steel structures - Guide for plastic analysis; Part II of
the Final Report of the CEC agreement N°7210-SA/520/321/935; July 1996, PRF Report 124/96.
[125] Schleich J.B., Conan Y., Quazzotti S., Dubois C.; L'acier dans le logement; Rapport final; Juillet 1998, PRF Report
125/98.
[126] Conan Y., Schleich J.B.; Design Handbook for Braced Composite Steel-Concrete Buildings according to
Eurocode 4 (also available in DE, ES, FR, IT& NL) / July 1999, CEC agreement N°7210-SA/516, ECCS N° 96, PRF
Report 126/99.
[127] Chabrolin B.; Partial Safety Factors for Resistance of Steel Elements to EC3 and EC4 / CTICM, CEC
agreement N°7210-SA/322.422.936.123.521.124.838.622; Intermediate reports 94-97, PRF Report 127/99.
[128] Schleich J.B., Conan Y., Klosak M.; Modelling and Predesign of Steel and Composite Structures / CEC
agreement N°7210-SA/525.326.132; Final report, PRF Report 128/01.
[129] Schleich J.B., Cajot L.-G., Haller M.; Verwendbarkeit von Walzprofilen in Freileitungsbau / PRF Report 129/88.
[130] Schleich J.B., Witry A.; Steel column embedded in concrete foundations; CEC Agreement n° 7210-SA/511
(06/89 to 06/92), Final report, PRF report 130/95
*
[131] Schleich J.B., Cajot L.G., Haller M.; Use of High Strength Steel S460; CEC Agreement n° 7210-SA/524 (07/96
to 06/99), PRF Report 131/01.
*
[132] Schleich J.B., Cajot L.G, Haller M.; Composite Bridge Design for Small and medium Spans – Final Report;
CEC Agreement n° 7210-PR/113 (07/98 to 06/01), PRF Report 132/02.
*
[133] Schleich J.B., Cajot L.G, Haller M.; Composite Bridge Design for Small and medium Spans – Design Guide;
*
[134] Schleich J.B., Cajot L.G, Haller M.; Lateral Torsional Buckling in Steel and Composite Beams – Final Report;
[135] * Schleich J.B., Cajot L.G, Haller M.; Lateral Torsional Buckling in Steel and Composite Beams – Design
Guide; CEC Agreement n° 7210-PR/183 (09/99 to 08/02), PRF Report 135/03.
* This document is also available in an electronic form (PDF)

PSF For Resistance of Steel Frames To Ec3 Ec4

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

PSF For Resistance of Steel Frames To Ec3 Ec4

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

C.E.C.

PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS

PARTIAL SAFETY FACTORS FOR RESISTANCE OF STEEL

ELEMENTS TO EC3 & EC4.

CALIBRATION FOR VARIOUS STEEL PRODUCTS

AND FAILURE CRITERIA

CTICM (France) – Coordinator

CHAPTER II STATISTICAL PROCEDURES 2

CHAPTER IV - OTHER LIMIT STATES OF RESISTANCE AT ULS (γM1 and/or γM1) 49

CHAPTER V – FUTURE USE AND FUTURE VALIDITY OF RESULTS 68

CHAPTER VII - LIST OF REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND WORK REPORTS 71

This research project has been motivated by two main reasons:

II-2. Step 1: Agreement on sampling and measurements

Details are given in the procedure presented in II-5.

II- 3. Step 2: Evaluation of the data prepared in step 1

The evaluation is carried out in the following way:

(a)Definition of the experimental values rei, equal to cross-sectional resistances calculated

Npl,i = Ai ⋅ fy,i ; see II-4

Mpl,i = Wpl,i ⋅ fy,i ; see II-4

Mel,i = Wel,i ⋅ fy,i ; see II-4

option 1: definition of the nominal yield strength according to EC 3 (ENV 1993-1-1:1992)

Example: for 3 measured values x, the fractiles are

(f) The γΜ* value should be calculated using

rd,i = design resistance value for each member i

(g)The detailed formula flow is given in II-5.

II-4 Summary of formulae

(1) The resistances are determined according to:

Mpl,mes = Wpl,mes · fy,mes

Npl,mes = Ames · fy.,mes

Mpl,nom = Wpl,nom · fy,nom

Npl,nom = Wpl,nom · fy,nom

All the nominal values are according to II-5

(2) Example with Moments:

7) Use tangent method as described in this report.

8) Smδ’ = bm - (b (15.87 %))

10) Finally the γM*-factor is derived as follows:

II-5 Agreed Procedure for Measurements

The strength models correspond to cross-sections without holes for fasteners.

(1) Geometrical characteristics:

II.5.3 Procedure of measurements:

Geometrical characteristics: the following measurements shall be carried out

in the scope of this campaign of measurements, it should be useful to measure the

(1) Steel grades, qualities :

Steel grades and qualities

HE Total Number = Total Number = Total Number =

* class 3 for evaluation of model for bending moment elastic resistance of

II.5.5. Evaluation of statical characteristics A, Wpl and Wel:

- plastic section modulus about major axis yy, Wpl,y:

where the moment of inertia about major axis yy, Ey is

- plastic section modulus about minor axis zz, Wpl.z :

- elastic section modulus about minor axis zz, Wel.z:

where the moment of inertia about minor axis zz. Iz is:

II.5.6. Presentation of results :

Annexes : 10 Annexes (1 to 10) are given in the next pages.

Annex 1 (2 pages): Geometrical characteristics (EN 10034)

BENDING AXES : yy major axis

Tableau 1 – Tolérances dimensionnelles des poutrelles I et H en acier de construction

If a non-proportional test piece is used for products with a thickness ≥ 3 mm

NOTE : A 5d = Elongation at failure for a gauge length of L 0 = 5.65 S0

FOR S 460 Page 15 of EN 10113-

8 Inspection and testing

7.7 Internal defects