GRD Journals- Global Research and Development Journal for Engineering | Volume 4 | Issue 1| December 2018

ISSN: 2455-5703

Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle

under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
A Paul Makesh Dr. S Arivalagan
Research Scholar Dean and Professor
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
Dr.M.G.R Educational and Research Institute Maduravoyal, Dr.M.G.R Educational and Research Institute Maduravoyal,
Chennai, Tamilnadu India Chennai, Tamilnadu India

Abstract
The effective sectional area concept was adopted to conduct the analysis of cold-formed Tension members. ANSYS software
was utilized to simulate the behavior of cold formed steel angle under tension load. The paper describes the results from a finite
element investigation into the load capacity tension members of single angle sections and double angles sections of 1.5 mm
and 1.6 mm under plain (without Lipped) and with Lipped conditions subjected to tension. Results were recorded as the load
carrying capacity increases for connected to the opposite side of the gusset than the connected to same side. It observed load vs
deflection, Analyses are compared with experimental results.
Keywords- ANSYS, Tension members, Cold-formed steel, FEM, Angle sections, Non-Linear Analysis

I. INTRODUCTION
Cold formed steel member are less weight and thinner than hot- rolled sections. They can be used to produce and forming of
almost any shapr and section to any desired geometry and length. Openings of cold formed steel beams used to facilitate sanitary,
electrical and mechanical works. These openings should have size, shape and location, as far as possible; have no effect on the
structural strength requriments. The main disadvantages of opening in cold formed steel sections are the local buckling due to
high width of open to thickness ratios. Recent codes of practice and standards have suggested simplified methods and processes
for the design of steel members with perforation.
However, numerical and experimental researches have been published to investigated the effect of openings on the load
capacity of cold formed steel (CFS) members subjected to monitonic axial load. An extensive parametric study have helped to
enhance the understanding the behaviour and buckling of wide range of opening angle sections under different combinations of
axial tension load moment. Numercial modeling is one of the important features in finite element analysis. This chapter discusses
the finite element modeling of the cold formed steel angles, the finite element analysis program ANSYS is used to create the
model of the tested specimens under these models, ultimate loads and total deformation of cold formed angles are compared with
experimental results angles.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

In order to understand flexural behavior of CFS members and why there is need of this study, a through literature review was
undertaken. This literature review included review of the characteristics, design methods and numerical methods to analyze and
accurate modeling of CFS sections followed by a summary which presents main findings and gaps in the literature.
Alireza Bagheri et.al [1] (2012) are presented the Cyclic behavior of bolted cold – formed angles. In this paper a finite
element (FE) procedure is described for simulating hysteretic moment – rotation behavior and failure deformations of bolted
cold- formed steel ( CFS).
K.F. Chung and K.H,Ip [2] (2012) are presented the Finite element investigation on the structural behavior of cold
formed steel bolted connections. A finite element model with three-dimensional soild elements established to investigate the
bearing failure of cold- formed steel bolted connections.
Valdier Francisco et al.[3] presented details of 66 experiments carried out on cold formed steel fastened with bolts
subjected to tension. They examined the reduction coefficient performance based upon the new tests and data available in the
literature, comprising of 108 tests.
Chi-Ling Pan[4] investigated the effect of shear lag on the angles cold formed steel sections, by testing 54 specimens
with different cross sectional dimensions. The Indian code for use of cold formed steel IS: 801[5] does not any provision for the
design of tension members. Hence during the code revision, experiments were conducted at CSIR-SERC on cold formed angle
tension members for the inclusion of design provisions.
Moen et.al[6] 2008 through analytical models showed that the variation of residual stress through the thickness is rather
complex and nonlinear similar finding was made by Shafter and Pekoz earlier in experimental analysis.

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 5

 Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
(GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 1/ 002)

III. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION

A total of 72 specimens have been tested by varying the angle sizes, number of bolts and the bold pitch distance. All the
specimens have been designed to undergo net section rupture failure or block failure. The specimens are equal angles 50x50,
60x60 and 70x70mm, and unequal angles are 50x25,60x30 and 70x35mm they have equal length and thickness of 1.5 and
1.6mm respectively. The angles are connected to the gusset plate under eccentric tensile loads on single and double angle
specimen.

IV. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

The goal of the Finite Element Analysis was to develop a model that could study the effect of connection eccentricity and
connection length on tension member. In order to test the validity, the results obtained from the analysis were used to compare
with the test results from the experiments. The Finite Element Analysis was performed using the commercial Finite Element
Program ANSYS, version 15.0.
FEM is best understood from its practical application, known as finite element analysis (FEA). FEA as applied in
engineering is a computational tool for performing engineering analysis. It includes the use of mesh generation techniques for
dividing a complex problem into small elements, as well as the use of software program coded with FEM algorithm. In applying
FEA, the complex problem is usually a physical system with the underlying physics such as the Euler-Bernoulli beam equation,
the heat equation, or the Navier-Stokes equations expressed in either PDE or integral equations, while the divided small elements
of the complex problem represent different areas in the physical system.
FEA is a good choice for analyzing problems over complicated domains (like cars and oil pipelines), when the domain
changes (as during a solid state reaction with a moving boundary), when the desired precision varies over the entire domain, or
when the solution lacks smoothness. FEA simulations provide a valuable resource as they remove multiple instances of creation
and testing of hard prototypes for various high fidelity situations.

A. Non-Linear Analysis
To perform the non-linear analysis, the single and double angle specimens are modeled based on the experimental set up
incorporating geometric imperfections. As the nonlinear problem is path dependant, the solution process requires a step by step
load incremental analysis. In the analysis, the solution usually converged very slowly after yielding, and the increment for each
load step had to be made very small. The geometric imperfections included the thickness of the section, width of the connected
leg, width of unconnected leg in case of single plain angles and it includes width of lip in case of lipped angles. Yielding is
determined using von-Mises yield criteria. A static structural analysis determines the displacements, stresses, strains, and forces
in structures or components caused by loads that do not induce significant inertia and damping effects. Steady loading and
response conditions are assumed.
A static structural analysis determines the displacements, stresses, strains, and forces in structures or components caused
by loads that do not induce significant inertia and damping effects. Steady loading and response conditions are assumed. The
loads and the response of the structure are assumed to differ slowly in time. Using ANSYS 15, a static structural load can be
carried out. ANSYS uses Newton- Raphson balance equilibrium and the solution obtained at the last converged load step was
used as the ultimate numerical load of the specimen.

V. NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION
To validate the experimental results, a finite element analysis package ANSYS (15.0) was used for the modeling and analysis. A
non-linear analysis was performed and the materials are assumed to behave as an isotropic hardening material. From the
experimental tension test results, the static material modeling was done. The element type used to model the test specimens is
SHELL 63. It is a 4-noded 3 dimensional quadratic shell element. This element has six degrees of freedom at each node. Finite
element mesh of size 2x2mm was implied and used in all the simulations. The friction or contact between connected leg of the
specimen and the gusset plate was ignored.
Numerical investigations on structural behavior of cold formed steel angle sections subjected to tensile loading are
presented in this paper. The ultimate strength capacity is arrived for cross section dimension with varying eccentricity load under
tension loading condition through Numerical analysis ANSYS 15 work bench. The effect of compressive stress was observed
more in the outstanding leg and therefore the outstanding leg experiences local buckling. From the figures, it is observed that the
lip experiences local buckling and the stress concentration is more nearer to the bolt holes as expected.It is seen that the
separation of angles take place in the connected portion.
Table 1: Comparison of Experimental load and Numerical load of thickness 1.5mm
Size of specimen Exp load (kN)
S.No Description Ansys load (kN) % increase in load
(mm)
1 Equal size 50x50xt 27.54 29.12 5.74
2 Single angle without Lip 60x60xt 32.45 34.28 5.64

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 6

 Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
(GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 1/ 002)

3 70x70xt 36.75 38.32 4.27

4 50x50x10xt 36.28 37.98 4.69
5 Single angle with Lip 60x60x10xt 42.58 44.32 4.09
6 70x70x10xt 48.56 51.28 5.60
7 50x50xt 59.78 63.25 5.80
8 Double angle opposite side without Lip 60x60xt 64.58 68.15 5.53
9 70x70xt 79.86 83.78 4.91
10 50x50xt 56.78 59.42 4.65
Double angle same side without Lip
11 60x60xt 64.58 68.18 5.57
12 70x70xt 78.54 82.37 4.88
13 50x50x10xt 69.74 72.87 4.49
14 Double angle opposite side with Lip 60x60x10xt 74.58 76.89 3.10
15 70x70x10xt 97.87 102.72 4.96
16 50x50x10xt 68.74 71.82 4.48
17 Double angle same side with Lip 60x60x10xt 80.47 83.51 3.78
18 70x70x10xt 96.47 99.72 3.37
19 50x25xt 18.27 19.28 5.53
Unequal size
20 60x30xt 22.47 23.81 5.96
Single angle without Lip
21 70x35xt 28.47 30.12 5.80
22 50x25x10xt 23.47 24.58 4.73
23 Single angle with Lip 60x30x10xt 30.79 32.18 4.51
24 70x35x10xt 33.48 35.28 5.38
25 50x25xt 38.78 40.91 5.49
Double angle opposite side without Lip
26 60x30xt 49.78 51.89 4.24
27 70x35xt 58.47 61.29 4.82
28 50x25xt 37.48 39.72 5.98
29 Double angle same side without Lip 60x30xt 49.72 52.41 5.41
30 70x35xt 58.78 61.29 4.27
31 50x25x10xt 50.43 52.38 3.87
32 Double angle opposite side with Lip 60x30x10xt 54.58 56.27 3.10
33 70x35x10xt 70.59 73.45 4.05
34 50x25x10xt 51.58 53.48 3.68
35 Double angle same side with Lip 60x30x10xt 60.72 63.72 4.94
36 70x35x10xt 70.58 73.82 4.59
Table’s 1 to 2 shows comparison between the experimental loads and ANSYS load of cold formed steel single angle
sections and double angle section under tension.
Numerical results shown that the ultimate strength of single equal plain angle sections without lip 5% higher than the
experimental loads under tension. To examine that the single equal angle lipped section under tension load is increase 4% times
greater than experimental loads.
In the case of Double angles specimens connected to opposite side without Lip 6% higher than the experimental loads.
Also it was observed that Double angles specimens connected to same side without Lip 5% higher than the experimental loads.
In the case of Double angles specimens connected to opposite side without Lip 5% higher than the experimental loads. Also it
was observed that Double angles specimens connected to same side without Lip 6% higher than the experimental loads.
Numerical results shown that the ultimate strength of single unequal plain angle sections without lip 4% higher than the
experimental loads under tension. To examine that the single unequal angle lipped section under tension load is increase 5%
times greater than experimental loads. In the case of Double unequal angles specimens connected to opposite side without Lip
6% higher than the experimental loads.
Also it was observed that Double unequal angles specimens connected to same side without Lip 5% higher than the
experimental loads. In the case of Double unequal angles specimens connected to opposite side without Lip 4% higher than the
experimental loads. Also it was observed that Double unequal angles specimens connected to same side without Lip 5% higher
than the experimental loads.
Table 2: Comparison of Experimental load and Numerical load of thickness 1.6mm
Size of specimen Exp load (KN)
S.No Description Ansys load (KN) % increase in load
(mm)
1 50x50xt 29.45 31.12 5.67
Equal size Single angle without Lip
2 60x60xt 34.56 36.41 5.35
3 70x70xt 40.58 42.89 5.69
4 50x50x10xt 39.15 41.28 5.44
5 Single angle with Lip 60x60x10xt 46.78 48.78 4.28
6 70x70x10xt 52.58 54.89 4.39
7 50x50xt 62.58 65.98 5.43
Double angle opposite side without Lip
8 60x60xt 68.41 71.28 4.20

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 7

 Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
(GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 1/ 002)

9 70x70xt 84.59 88.47 4.59

10 50x50xt 62.58 65.21 4.20
Double angle same side without Lip
11 60x60xt 76.24 79.34 4.07
12 70x70xt 84.25 87.87 4.30
13 50x50x10xt 76.28 79.89 4.73
14 Double angle opposite side with Lip 60x60x10xt 82.58 86.45 4.69
15 70x70x10xt 103.56 108.78 5.04
16 50x50x10xt 76.42 79.89 4.54
17 Double angle same side with Lip 60x60x10xt 88.48 92.89 4.98
18 70x70x10xt 106.58 111.28 4.41
19 50x25xt 21.58 22.75 5.42
Unequal size
20 60x30xt 25.46 26.91 5.70
Single angle without Lip
21 70x35xt 32.45 34.12 5.15
22 50x25x10xt 28.11 29.71 5.69
23 Single angle with Lip 60x30x10xt 31.44 32.76 4.20
24 70x35x10xt 39.58 41.75 5.48
25 50x25xt 40.48 42.79 5.71
26 Double angle opposite side without Lip 60x30xt 57.48 60.48 5.22
27 70x35xt 67.41 70.13 4.04
28 50x25xt 41.33 43.51 5.27
29 Double angle same side without Lip 60x30xt 52.58 55.18 4.94
30 70x35xt 68.47 72.26 5.54
31 50x25x10xt 58.45 61.81 5.75
32 Double angle opposite side with Lip 60x30x10xt 68.45 72.29 5.61
33 70x35x10xt 81.54 86.28 5.81
34 50x25x10xt 56.18 59.13 5.25
35 Double angle same side with Lip 60x30x10xt 67.28 71.28 5.95
36 70x35x10xt 81.59 85.89 5.27

A. Load vs Deflection
Fig 1 to 5 shows the typical load versus deflection behavior for single angles with and without lips and double angles. The
ultimate strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand before it breaks or weakens. From the graphs, it is observed
that the ultimate load of experimental valves is similar to numerical valves for specimens.

Fig. 1: Load vs Deflection behavior of single plain angle specimen (1.5mm)

Fig. 2: Load vs Deflection behavior of single unequal angle specimen t=1.5mm

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 8

 Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
(GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 1/ 002)

Fig. 3: Load vs Deflection behavior of Double plain angle (opposite side) t=1.5mm

Fig. 4: Load vs Deflection behavior of Double plain angle (same side) t=1.5mm

Fig. 5: Load vs Deflection behavior of single plain angle specimen t=1.6mm

B. Comparison of Experimental load and ANSYS load

Fig 6 to 8 shows comparison between Experimental load and ANSYS load of single angle sections and double angle sections. It
was found that ultimate strength of ANSYS loads are 4% to 6% higher than the ultimate strength of Experimental loads.

Fig. 6: Comparison of ultimate load for single equal angle specimens (1.5mm)

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 9

 Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
(GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 1/ 002)

Fig. 7: Comparison of ultimate load for single unequal angles specimens (1.5mm)

Fig. 8: Comparison of ultimate load for single unequal angles with Lip (1.6mm)

VI. CONCLUSION
ANSYS software was utilized to calculate the strength behavior of cold formed steel angle under tension load. The numerical
model developed using ANSYS to predict the behavior of single and double angles was found to simulate the experimental
valves are closely.
Numerical results shown that the ultimate strength of single equal plain angle sections without lip 5% higher than the
experimental loads under tension.
To examine that the single equal angle lipped section under tension load is increase 4% times greater than experimental
loads. In the case of Double angles specimens connected to opposite side without Lip 6% higher than the experimental loads.
Also it was observed that Double angles specimens connected to same side without Lip 5% higher than the
experimental loads.
In the case of Double angles specimens connected to opposite side without Lip 5% higher than the experimental loads.
Also it was observed that Double angles specimens connected to same side without Lip 6% higher than the experimental loads.
The ultimate strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand before it breaks or weakens.
From the graphs, it is observed that the ultimate loads of experimental valves are similar to numerical valves for
specimens.
It was found that ultimate strength of ANSYS loads are 4% to 6% higher than the ultimate strength of Experimental
loads.

REFERENCES
[1] Kulak, GL & Grondin, GY 2001, ‘AISC Rules for Block Shear in Bolted Connections’, Engineering Journal, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 199-203
[2] Li & Chen 2008, ‘An analytical model to predict the distortional buckling stress of cold formed steel sections’, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, vol.
12, no. 5, pp. 1043-1049
[3] Padma Priya, R 2015, ‘Experimental study on behavior of bolted cold formed steel angles under tension’, Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 6, no. 5,
pp. 614-618
[4] Schifferaw & Schafer 2007, ‘Inelastic bending capacity in cold formed steel members’, Construction research of steel structures, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 571-553

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 10

 Analysis of Cold Formed Sections of Steel Angle under Tensile Load by Numerical Method
(GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 1/ 002)

[5] Sonal Banchhor 2016, ‘Behavior of cold formed steel bolted angle tension members’, International journal of constructional steel Research, vol. 15, no. 6,
pp. 751-764
[6] Young & Hancock 2012, ‘Experimentally investigated the cold formed steel channel section to combined bending and web crippling’, Journal of cold
formed steel structures, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 105-112
[7] Yu & Schafer 2003, ‘Behavior of C and Z sections in cold formed steel structures’, Journal of steel structures Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 270-289
[8] AS/NZS: 4600 (2005), 'Cold-formed Steel Structures', Australia / New Zealand Standard.
[9] Gupta L.M and Mohan Gupta (2005), "Limit state design of bolted steel angles under tension", Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.31, No.4, pp265-274.
[10] AISI (2001). Cold-Formed Steel Standard, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
[11] ANSYS Release 8.1 (2004). ANSYS, Inc., USA.Google Scholar
[12] Lam, S. S. E., Chung, K. F., and Wang, X. P. (2006). “Loadcarrying capacities of cold-formed steel cut stub columns with lipped C-section.” Thin-Walled
Structures, 44, pp. 1077–1083.Google Scholar
[13] NAS (2001). Specification for the Design of Cold-formed Steel Structural Members, North American Specification, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar

All rights reserved by www.grdjournals.com 11