Axial crushing comparison of sinusoidal thin-walled corrugated tubes

Rahim, Mohd Reyaz Ur; Bharti, Prem Kumar; Azmi, Adil Ata; Umer, Afaque

doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2018.06.304

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The obtained outcomes were then compared with diverse design codes. In 2018, Rahim, M. Reyaz Ur et.al [15] examined the axial crushing response of corrugated tubes with sinusoidal thin walls. In 2019, Feng, Ran and Liu, Jiarui [16] conducted computational analysis and design evaluation of square hollow section (SHS) and rectangular hollow section (RHS) columns made of perforated aluminum alloy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of the buckling behavior of square hollow columns fabricated from 7A04-T6 aluminum alloy through numerical analysis.

Bashir,

Rong

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research employed ANSYS 17 finite element analysis software to numerically consider the investigation of the buckling behavior of columns made from square hollow sections (SHS) composed of aluminum alloy. A validated modeling with nonlinear finite elements was created through column pin-ended tests. The column samples were manufactured using heat-treated aluminum alloys of 7A04-T6. In the finite element model, geometric and material non-linearities were accounted for. Its accuracy was validated through a comparison of the model's results with experimental conditions. A thorough parametric analysis was carried out to explore the impact of fillet radii, cross-sectional slenderness, meshing size, and member slenderness on the stability of columns. The research juxtaposed experimental and numerical results with design strength parameters from various codes, including Chinese, European, American, and Australian/New Zealand standards. Additionally, alternative design approaches such as the direct strength technique and continuous strength method were considered for comparison. The test results indicated that the Direct Strength Method (DSM), Australian/New Zealand Standard (AUS/NZS), and Continuous Strength Method (CSM) overestimated the actual strength of the columns by 57.73%, 18.34%, and 15.21%, respectively. Conversely, the European, Chinese, and American codes underestimated the strength by 23.60%, 17.40%, and 9%, respectively. Upon examining the numerical data, it was evident that the actual strength of the columns was underestimated by 47.48%, 10.99%, and 7.99% when employing the Direct Strength Method (DSM), Australian/New Zealand Standard (AUS/NZS), and Continuous Strength Method (CSM), respectively. Similarly, the European (EN), Chinese (GB), and American (AA) methods underestimated the strength by 32.80%, 24.30%, and 15.70%, respectively. The majority of existing design guidelines and approaches tend to be conservative in forecasting the ultimate strength of columns made of 7A04-T6 aluminum alloy under eccentric stress. To improve accuracy, a modified formula predicated on the Eurocode was suggested, adjusting various factors for more precise predictions of the ultimate strength of columns made of 7A04-T6 aluminum alloy.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%