Strength and stability criteria for thin-walled stainless steel circular hollow section members under bending

Kıymaz, Güven

doi:10.1016/j.tws.2005.06.006

Cited by 39 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(6) in Fig. 14; stainless steel CHS [19][20][21] and carbon steel EHS [6] minor axis test data have been included for comparison purposes. The respective major axis data plotted against the cross-section slenderness defined by Eq.…”

Section: Class 3 Limitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Experimental and numerical results on stainless steel OHS stub and long columns, together with appropriate design recommendations have been presented by the authors in a prior study [18]. The present paper focuses on the flexural response of stainless steel OHS, though comparisons are also made with the experimental results from previous studies on carbon steel EHS [6] and stainless steel CHS [19][20][21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flexural behaviour of stainless steel oval hollow sections

Theofanous

Chan

Gardner

2009

Thin-Walled Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Class 3 Limitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flexural behaviour of stainless steel oval hollow sections

Theofanous

Chan

Gardner

2009

Thin-Walled Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…(11), where K c is the strength reduction factor for slender cross-sections, defined by Eq. (12), in which C is the ratio of material effective proportional limit to yield strength, and c  is equal to 3.084C, C m is the equivalent moment factor, which is equal to unity for a beam-column with constant first order bending moment along the member length, and α n is the magnification factor considering the induced second-order bending moment, defined as…”

Section: American Specification Sei/asce-8mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous experimental and numerical studies into the behaviour and design of circular hollow section structural members have been carried out, aiming at verifying their performance under varying loading conditions, assessing the efficiency of the established design codes, and developing more economic design approaches. A series of stub column [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] and bending [3,11,12] tests have been performed on CHS of varying cross-section classes, in order to investigate their local buckling behaviour and the corresponding loading-carrying and deformation capacities under isolated loading conditions. Zhao et al [13] conducted a comprehensive experimental programme on eccentrically loaded stub columns to study the structural performance of stainless steel CHS subjected to combined axial load and bending moment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing and numerical modelling of austenitic stainless steel CHS beam–columns

Zhao

Gardner

Young

2016

Engineering Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a comprehensive experimental and numerical study of the global stability of stainless steel circular hollow section (CHS) structural members subjected to combined axial load and bending moment. The experimental investigation, which was carried out on two grade 1.4301 austenitic stainless steel cross-section sizes (CHS 60.5×2.8 and CHS 76.3×3), included material coupon tests, initial geometric measurements, two column tests, and ten beam-column tests. The test results were employed in a parallel numerical simulation programme for the validation of finite element (FE) models, by means of which a series of parametric studies were carried out to extend the available results over a wider range of cross-section sizes, member lengths and loading combinations. The experimentally and numerically derived data were used to assess the structural performance of CHS beamcolumns and to determine the accuracy of the current design provisions given in the European code, American specification, Australian/New Zealand standard, and other recent proposed approaches. Generally, all the existing design methods were shown to yield a high degree of Zhao, O., Gardner, L., & Young, B. (2016). Testing and numerical modelling of austenitic stainless steel CHS beam-columns. Engineering Structures, 111,[263][264][265][266][267][268][269][270][271][272][273][274] scatter in the prediction of beam-column strength, with both conservative and over-predicted capacities. The scatter was attributed mainly to inaccurate predictions of the column buckling and bending end points of the design beam-column interaction curves (i.e. member strengths under pure compression and pure bending, respectively) and inaccurate interaction factors.The development of improved provisions for the design of stainless steel circular hollow section beam-columns is currently underway.

show abstract

“…The dataset includes stub column test results for hot-finished structural steel [23][24][25][26][27], very high strength structural steel [28,29], cold-formed structural steel [25, 26, 28, 30- [48,74,75], duplex stainless steel [74] and aluminium [76,77]. Note that the very high strength structural steel had a typical yield stress f y around 1300 MPa [29].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%