Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jcsr

The effect of the non-linear stressstrain behaviour of stainless steels on member capacity
G.J. van den Berg
*

Department of Civil and Urban Engineering, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg 2006 South Africa

Abstract In recent years several countries have developed specications for the design of stainless steel structural members. Research work over the past 15 years by the Chromium Steels Research Group at the Rand Afrikaans University in Johannesburg, South Africa was used extensively by the American Society of Civil Engineers to update their stainless steel coldformed design specication which was published in 1991 and will be revised again soon. In Europe a design specication for stainless steel structural members was published recently as part of Eurocode 3. This specication also refers to research results of the Chromium Steels Research Group. The South African Code of Practice for the design of stainless steel structural members will be published soon. This design specication is based on the Canadian design specication for carbon steel cold-formed structural members. This paper will give an overview of some of the research that was carried out at the Rand Afrikaans University to publish the two above mentioned new stainless steel design specications. It will highlight the different approaches to determine the strength of members and sections and will make recommendations on which methods are best to use in design. Experimental results and conclusions will be discussed. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Stainless steel; Stressstrain behaviour; Member capacity

* Tel.: +27-11-489-2540; fax: +27-11-489-2343. E-mail address: gjvdb@rau.ing1.ac.za (G.J. van den Berg).
0143-974X/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 1 4 3 - 9 7 4 X ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 5 3 - X

136

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

1. General remarks During the early 1980s a need was identied at the Rand Afrikaans University in South Africa to update the then existing AISI Stainless Steel Design Specication [1]. Research work over the rst 10 years, jointly undertaken by the Rand Afrikaans University and the University of Missouri-Rolla in the USA, resulted during 1991 in the publication by the American Society of Civil Engineers of a specication for the design of cold-formed stainless steel structural members and connections [3]. This specication covers the stainless steels given in Table 1. During 1994 EURO INOX published as part of Eurocode 3 a design manual for structural stainless steel for Europe [14]. This design manual covers Type 304L and 316L austinitic stainless steels and a Type 2205 duplex stainless steel. During 1997 a specication for the design of cold-formed stainless steel structural members was prepared for South Africa and will be published by the South African Bureau of Standards [21]. This specication is based on the South African [20] and Canadian [11] cold-formed carbon steel design specication and modied to take into account the differences in the behaviour between carbon steels and stainless steels. Because stainless steels show gradual yielding stressstrain behaviour it is necessary to be familiar with the material properties before designing structural members.
Table 1 Design mechanical properties for longitudinal tension Type of steel Types 201, 301, 304, 316 Annealed a Elastic modulus Eo (GPa) Yield strength fy (MPa) Proportional limit fp (MPa) Ultimate strength fu (MPa) 201 301 304 316 Shear yield strength fyv (MPa) Shear modulus Go (GPa)
a b c

409 1/4 193 310 208 186 517 259 1/2 186 759 342 186 207c 157

430, 439

1/16 hard b 193 310 208 193 276 185

193 207 139

186 276c 193

621 621 571 571 117 75

655 172 75

571 621 621 159 75

621 621 552 586 172 75

861 861 861 861 290 72

1034 1034 1034 1034 386 72

379

448

131 72

166 72

Right column: for Type 201-2 (class 2). Left column: for bars, for Type 201 only. Adjusted yield strengths: ASTM yield strength is 207 MPa for Types 409, 430 and 439.

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

137

Not only the difference in mechanical properties in tension and compression should be taken into account, but aspects like the low proportional limit, which could be considerable lower than the yield strength, the different moduli like the initial elastic modulus, the tangent modulus and the secant modulus should be considered. The mechanical properties of different stainless steels are discussed and the effect of the difference in mechanical properties with regard to carbon steels on the behaviour of structural members and elements are given in this paper.

2. Mechanical properties 2.1. Theoretical model for stressstrain curves The stressstrain relationships for annealed and cold-rolled stainless steels are nonlinear and anisotropic. This leads to a relatively difcult design because the stress strain curves cannot be represented by a linear function. It is thus desirable to have an analytical expression for the study and design of stainless steel structural elements and members. Stainless steels yield gradually under load and a typical stressstrain curve is shown in Fig. 1. The average stressstrain curves can be drawn by using the RambergOsgood [18] equation as revised by Hill [15]. A detailed discussion of the RambergOsgood equation is given in Refs. [2428]. The revised equation is given by Eqs. (1) and (2). e where f f 0.002 Eo fy
n

(1)

Fig. 1.

Typical stressstrain behaviour of a stainless steel.

138

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

log(ey/ep) log(fy/fp)

(2)

where e is the strain, f is the stress, Eo is the initial elastic modulus, fy is the yield strength, fp is the proportional limit and n is a constant. Van der Merwe [30] found in a study that by selecting the yield strength, fy, and proportional limit, fp, as the two stresses in Eq. (2), a conservative value in good agreement with the experimental results is obtained. These two stresses and the initial modulus are normally mechanical properties that are determined in experimental work of this nature. The tangent modulus, Et, is dened as the slope of the stressstrain curve at each value of stress. It is obtained as the inverse of the rst derivative with respect to strain and can be computed by using Eq. (3). Et fyEo fy+0.002nEo f fy
n1

(3)

The secant modulus, Es, is dened as the stress to strain ratio at each value of stress and can be computed by using Eq. (4). Es Eo 1+0.002Eo f n1 fn y (4)

2.2. Mechanical properties in the ASCE design specication The mechanical properties for the stainless steels that are included in the ASCE [3] and South African [21] stainless steel design specications are given in Tables 1 and 2 for longitudinal tension and compression only. Typical stressstrain curves for stainless steel Type 304 in the different temper grades are given in Fig. 2. Typical stressstrain curves for the stainless steels in the annealed condition for longitudinal compression are given in Fig. 3. 2.3. Experimental procedure for mechanical properties Uniaxial tensile and compression tests were carried out on specimens taken from the steel in the longitudinal and transverse directions. The tensile tests were carried out in accordance with the procedures outlined by the ASTM Standard A370-77 [2]. The compression test specimens were mounted in a specially manufactured test xture, which prevents overall buckling of the specimen about its minor axis. Average strain was measured by two strain gauges mounted on either side of the test specimen in a full bridge conguration with temperature compensation. A more detailed discussion can be found in various papers in the Collected Papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group [2428].

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

139

Table 2 Design mechanical properties for longitudinal compression Type of steel Types 201, 301, 304, 316 Annealed a Elastic modulus Eo 193 (GPa) 193 Yield strength fy (MPa) Proportional limit 89 fp (MPa) Shear yield strength 117 fyv (MPa) 75 Shear modulus Go (GPa)
a b c

409 1/4 193 283 130 172 75 186 345 173 290 72 1/2 186 448 220 386 72 186 207c 151 131 72

430, 439

1/16 hard b 193 283 130 172 75 193 248 114 159 75

186 276c 171 166 72

Right column: for Type 201-2 (class 2). Left column: for bars, for Type 201 only. Adjusted yield strengths: ASTM yield strength is 207 MPa for Types 409, 430 and 439.

2.4. Experimental mechanical properties Stainless steels yield gradually under load. The experimental mechanical properties for longitudinal tension and compression given in Tables 3 and 4 have been collected from experimental tests on coupons taken from stainless steel sheets for the past 15 years. They are the means of all the results reported in the ve volumes of the Collected Papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group [2428]. In addition to the stainless steels given in the design specication of the American Society of Civil Engineers [3], the mechanical properties of the South African developed stainless steel Type 3CR12, or better known in Europe as Type 1.3004 stainless steel, are also given in Tables 3 and 4. The experimental stressstrain curves for these steels are given in Fig. 4. From Tables 3 and 4 it can be seen that the experimental properties for Types 201, 205, 301, 304 and 316 are considerably higher than the mechanical properties prescribed by the ASTM [2] in the design specication of the American Society of Civil Engineers [3]. These stainless steels are covered in one group in the design specication. The mechanical properties of Type 409 stainless steel are higher but compare well with the mechanical properties in the design specication. The experimental mechanical properties for Type 430 stainless steel are also considerably higher than the mechanical properties in the design specication. It is possible and recommended to revise the prescribed mechanical properties in the design specication of the American Society of Civil Engineers [3] to take into account the additional strength that can be utilised when designing structural members.

140

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Fig. 2.

Stressstrain curves for Type 304 stainless steels.

3. Structural behaviour of members The design of cold-formed stainless steel structural members is similar to that of cold-formed carbon steel. Because the mechanical properties of stainless steels are more complex than those of carbon steels, the design procedures for stainless steels are more complex. In order to account for the different response to load between stainless steels and carbon and low alloy steels, certain modications to the design equations are needed. In the following sections some of the modications in the stainless steel design specications are given and the design recommendations are compared with experimental results that were carried out at the Rand Afrikaans University. 3.1. Local buckling of at elements The critical local buckling stress for a rectangular plate can be predicted by using Eq. (5) [32]:

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

141

Fig. 3.

Stressstrain curves for stainless steels in the ASCE specication for longitudinal compression.

Table 3 Mean experimental mechanical properties for longitudinal tension Type of steel (annealed) 201 Elastic modulus Eo (GPa) Yield strength fy (MPa) Proportional limit fp (MPa) Number of different sheets Coefcient of variation Ultimate strength fu (MPa)
a

205 193 310 208 1 a

301 193 276 185 1 a

304 196 290 187 8 2.42 704

316 184 275 180 2 0.87 622

409 186 224 167 1 a 389

430 195 323 241 9 4.29 498

3CR12 197 293 212 11 6.59 461

196 360 197 1 a 745

Not enough samples to determine coefcient of variation.

142

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Table 4 Experimental mechanical properties for longitudinal compression Type of steel (annealed) 201 Elastic modulus Eo (GPa) Yield strength fy (MPa) Number of different sheets Coefcient of variation Proportional limit fp (MPa)
a

205 193 310 1 a 208

301 193 276 1 a 185

304 204 292 8 7.22 168

316 192 267 2 0.93 157

409 191 229 1 a 167

430 202 331 9 9.73 225

3CR12 207 301 11 6.91 211

190 296 1 a 160

Not enough samples to determine coefcient of variation.

Fig. 4. Experimental stressstrain curves for various stainless steels for longitudinal compression.

fcr

hkp2Eo 12(1v2)(w/t)2

(5)

where fcr is the critical local buckling stress, h is the plasticity reduction factor, k is the buckling coefcient, Eo is the initial elastic modulus, n is the Poisson ratio, w is the at width of the element and t is the thickness of the element. The buckling

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

143

coefcient k depends upon the edge rotational restraint, the type of loading and the aspect ratio of the plate. When local buckling of an element occurs at a compression stress that exceeds the proportional limit of the steel, the resulting inelastic behaviour leads to instability of stainless steel compression elements at lower stresses than those of carbon steels. The reduced stiffness of the at elements is taken into account by the introduction of the plasticity reduction factor, h, in Eq. (5). 3.1.1. Stiffened and unstiffened compression elements The values for k are 0.425 for unstiffened compression elements, 4 for stiffened compression elements and between 0.425 and 4 for partially stiffened compression elements and are given in the design specications [3,11,20,21]. The plasticity reduction factors suggested are h=Es/Eo for unstiffened compression elements and h=Et/Eo for stiffened compression elements. In Fig. 5 a comparison is made between theoretical predictions and experimental results for Type 3CR12 steel for stiffened and unstiffened compression elements when the above two plasticity reduction factors are used [22]. 3.2. Partially stiffened compression elements The plasticity reduction factor for partially stiffened compression elements is not dened and was investigated in a study by Buitendag [9,10], Reyneke [19] and Van den Berg [29]. Different plasticity reduction factors for stainless steel Types 304, 430 and 3CR12 were investigated. The results for Type 304 stainless steel Hat and

Fig. 5.

Critical buckling stress for stiffened and unstiffened compression elements.

144

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Zed section compression elements in columns [9,10,19] are given in Fig. 6 and the results for compression elements in stainless steel I-section beams [29] are given in Fig. 7. It is difcult to determine the critical local buckling stress from experimental results accurately. The strain reversal method suggested by Johnson [16] and Wang [31] was used. It can be seen from the experimental results for partially stiffened compression elements in Figs. 6 and 7 that a reduction in critical stress is found in the inelastic stress range. A secant or tangent modulus plasticity reduction approach show good agreement with the experimental results for certain cases. 3.3. Post buckling of at elements For the theoretical calculation of the post buckling strength of partially stiffened compression elements the model suggested by the Canadian [11] and South African [20] carbon steel cold-formed design specications, which is similar to the ASCE [3] stainless steel specication, will be used. The proposed South African [21] stainless steel design specication is similar. The equations in the above specications will be revised to take into account the non-linear behaviour of stainless steels in the inelastic stress range by introducing plasticity reduction factors. The procedures described in the South African [20] and Canadian [11] carbon steel cold-formed design specications and the proposed South African [21] stainless steel design specication will be followed. When the width-to-thickness ratio (W=w/t) of a stiffened and unstiffened compression element exceeds the limiting width-to-thickness ratio given in Eq. (6) the

Fig. 6. Critical local buckling of partially stiffened compression elements in columns.

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

145

Fig. 7.

Critical local buckling strength of partially stiffened I-section beams.

146

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Fig. 7. (continued)

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

147

width of the compression element must be reduced according to Eq. (7). In these equations the values for the buckling coefcient k are 0.425 and 4 for unstiffened and stiffened compression elements, respectively. The plasticity reduction factors for stiffened and unstiffened compression elements given previously can be used. Wlim 0.644 hkEo f (6)

The effective width ratio of a compression element is given by:

B 0.95

hkEo 0.208 hkEo 1 f W f

(7)

The design procedure to calculate the effective width of partially stiffened compression elements is divided into three categories. Case 1 deals with compression anges that are fully effective, even if it has no lip and it is an unstiffened compression element. For this case it is not necessary to add a stiffener lip to the one side of the compression ange. The effective area of the compression ange is thus equal to the full unreduced area of the compression element. Only the stiffener lip has to be checked for local buckling. The following equations are used in all the cases. Wlim 1 0.644 Wlim 2 0.644 hkEo with k 0.425 f hkEo with k 0.4 f (8)

(9)

Case 1: W Wlim 1 No reduction in the width of the compression element is necessary. Case 2: Wlim 1 W Wlim 2 Case 3: W Wlim 2 For Cases 2 and 3 the value of the buckling coefcient k is calculated from the equations given in Table 1 of the Canadian [20] and South African [20] carbon steel design specication as revised by Schuster [13], with similar equations in the ASCE design specication [3]. The effective width is calculated using Eq. (7), where Wlim 1 is the the limit for the at width ratio above which an unstiffened compression element will buckle, Wlim 2 is the limit for the at width ratio above which a stiffened

148

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

compression element will buckle, h is the plasticity reduction factor, k is the buckling coefcient for different types of compression elements, Eo is the initial elastic modulus, f is the maximum stress in the compression element, B is the effective width ratio b/t for compression elements, W is the at width ratio w/t for compression elements, b is the effective width for compression elements, w is the at width of compression elements and t is the thickness of the steel. The results in Fig. 8 of the short axially loaded Hat and Zed section columns by Buitendag [9,10] show that by using a secant or tangent approach plasticity reduction factor a good agreement is found between the experimental results and the theoretical predictions. In the beam tests by Van den Berg [29] it is shown in Fig. 9 that some of the experimental results are lower than the predicted results when no plasticity reduction factor is used. All the experimental results are, however, higher than the predicted values when the two plasticity reduction factors are used. It can be concluded that, by using one of the plasticity reduction factors, conservative design estimates can be made. 3.4. Shear buckling of webs A study on the behaviour of cold-formed stainless steel beam webs subjected to elastic and inelastic shear buckling was carried out by Carvalho [12]. The materials under investigation were stainless steel Types 304, 316, 430 and 3CR12. The theoretical critical shear buckling stress of each prole was determined using Eq. (5) with a plasticity reduction factor =Es/Eo and k=5.34. The experimental critical shear buckling stresses are compared with the theoretical predicted values and are given

Fig. 8. Ultimate strength of partially stiffened compression members.

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

149

Fig. 9.

Ultimate strength of I-section beams.

150

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Fig. 9. (continued)

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

151

in Fig. 10. It can be concluded that a good agreement is found between the experimental results and the theoretical predictions when the plasticity reduction factors are used. 3.5. Web crippling An investigation on the web crippling strength of cold-formed stainless steel channel sections was done by Korvink [17]. The stainless steels that were considered in this investigation were Types 304, 430 and 3CR12. Experimental results for stainless steel Type 304 were compared with the theoretical predictions that are given in the ASCE [3] and South African [21] stainless steel design specications and shown in Fig. 11. In this study different bearing length to thickness ratios (N=n/t) and web height to thickness ratios (H=h/t) were investigated. It was concluded in this study that the experimental results compare reasonably well with the theoretical predictions except that they are conservative for larger bearing lengths and shorter web heights.

4. Stability of columns and beams 4.1. Strength of columns

Fig. 10. Critical shear buckling stress in beam webs.

152

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Fig. 11.

Web crippling strength of beam webs.

4.1.1. Flexural buckling A slender axially loaded column may fail by overall exural buckling if the crosssection of the member is a doubly symmetric shape (I-section), closed shape (square or rectangular tube), cylindrical shape, or point symmetric shape (Z-section or cruciform section). If a column has a cross-section other than the above shapes but is connected to other parts of the structure, such as wall sheeting material, the member can also fail in exural buckling. The elastic buckling stress can be determined by the Euler formula: f p2Eo (kL/r)2 (10)

where f is the critical elastic buckling stress, Eo is the initial elastic modulus, k is the effective length factor, L is the length of the column and r is the radius of gyration. Eq. (10) is applicable to ideal columns made of sharp yielding steels without consideration of residual stresses or the effects of cold working. In view of the fact that many steel sheets and strips used in cold-formed structural members are of the gradual yielding type and that the cold-forming process tends to lower the proportional limit, Eq. (10) would not be suitable for columns made of gradual yielding steel having small and moderate slenderness ratios. Whenever the stress is above the proportional limit, the column will buckle in the inelastic stress range. The carbon steel design specications [1,20] make use of a parabolic t between the proportional limit, which is taken as half the yield strength, and the yield strength to take into account the inelastic behaviour of the steel and it is given as:

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

153

f fy 1

fy 4fe

(11)

where fe is the Euler buckling stress in Eq. (10). For stainless steels, in the inelastic stress range, the value of the elastic modulus in Eq. (10) should be replaced by the tangent modulus, Et and the critical buckling stress is given by: f p2Et (kL/r)2 (12)

This takes into account the effect of the low proportional limit, the effect of residual stresses and the gradual yielding behaviour of stainless steels. 4.1.2. Torsional and torsionalexural buckling Axially loaded thin-walled compression members that have open sections can fail in exure, torsion and torsionalexural buckling. In the torsionalexural mode, bending and twisting of the section occur simultaneously. Usually, closed sections will not buckle torsionally because of their large torsional rigidity. The exural and torsional buckling loads are given by Eqs. (13)(15). The initial elastic modulus and the shear modulus are replaced by the tangent modulus and the tangent shear modulus to take into account the inelastic behaviour of a gradual yielding stainless steel. Px Py Pt p2EtIx (Lx)2 p2EtIy (Ly)2 1 p2EtCw GtJ r2 L 2 0 t (13) (14) (15)

4.1.3. Doubly symmetric shapes Doubly symmetric sections will fail either in pure exure or in pure torsion. Isection and cruciform sections are examples of doubly symmetric sections where the shear centre and the centroid coincide. The critical buckling load is the lowest value of Eqs. (13)(15). 4.1.4. Singly symmetric shapes Singly symmetric shapes are shapes such as angles, channels, hat sections, Tsections and I-sections with unequal anges. For torsional exural buckling the xaxis is chosen as the symmetry axis. Singly symmetric sections can fail in exural buckling about the y-axis or in torsional exural buckling and the torsionalexural buckling load is given by: Ptf 1 [(P P ) 2b x t (Px+Pt)24bPxPt] (16)

154

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

A singly symmetric section may buckle either in pure exure about the y-axis or in the torsional exural mode depending on the dimensions of the cross-section and the effective length of the column. Similar to exural buckling, the inelastic torsional exural buckling stress can be obtained by replacing the initial elastic modulus, Eo, by the tangent modulus, Et, and the shear modulus, G, by the tangent shear modulus, Gt=GEt/Eo. 4.1.5. Discussion of experimental results Various studies on the behaviour of cold-formed [23,29] and hot-rolled [6,8] singly and doubly symmetric stainless steel columns were carried out to determine the exural and torsional exural buckling strengths. Van der Merwe [30] studied the strength of doubly symmetric I-sections for Type 3CR12 steel. The comparison of experimental results with the theoretical predictions is given in Fig. 12. Van den Berg [23] carried out studies on singly symmetric hat sections to study the torsional exural buckling strength. The experimental results are compared with theoretical predictions by using the SSRC equation and the tangent modulus approach. The results for Type 304 stainless steel and Type 3CR12 stainless steel are given in Figs. 13 and 14, respectively. Bosch [4] studied the strength of hot-rolled singly symmetric Type 3CR12 stainless steel angle sections and the results are given in Fig. 15. It was concluded in all the studies that the tangent modulus should be used to

Fig. 12.

Flexural buckling strength of I-section columns.

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

155

Fig. 13.

Torsionalexural buckling strength of Type 304 stainless steel hat sections.

Fig. 14. Torsionalexural buckling strength of Type 3CR12 stainless steel hat sections.

156

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

Fig. 15. Strength of Type 3CR12 hot-rolled angle compression members.

predict the exural and torsional exural buckling strength of axially loaded compression members. The SSRC curve that is used in the carbon steel cold-formed design specications cannot be used for stainless steels. 4.2. Strength of beams When cold-formed steel exural members are loaded in the plane of the web, the beam may twist and deect laterally as well as vertically if braces are not adequately provided. Beams with large unbraced lengths may buckle between the braces and a lower compressive stress should be used for the design of beams in order to prevent failure due to possible lateral buckling [32]. In general, the elastic lateral buckling strength of a beam can be calculated using Eq. (17): p Mc Cb L EIyGJ+ pE 2 IC L y w (17)

To take into account the non-linear behaviour of cold-formed carbon steels in the inelastic stress range, Eq. (11) is used by the South African [20], Canadian [11] and American [1] carbon steel design specications. This equation is not valid for stainless steels. To take into account the non-linear behaviour of stainless steels in the inelastic stress range, the initial elastic modulus and shear modulus in Eq. (17) must be replaced by the tangent modulus and tangent shear modulus and the revised equation is given as:

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

157

p Mc Cb L

EtIyGtJ+

pEt 2 IyCw L

(18)

where Mc is the critical lateral buckling moment, Cb is the bending coefcient for the moment gradient, Et is the tangent modulus, Gt is the tangent shear modulus, L is the unbraced length, Iy is the moment of inertia about the y-axis, Cw is the warping constant of torsion and J is the St Venant torsion constant. 4.2.1. Doubly symmetric I-sections If it is assumed for doubly symmetric I-sections that the St Venant torsional stiffness in Eq. (18) is low and can be neglected, and with Iy=Iyc+Iyt, Eq. (18) results in the following conservative equation [32]: Mc p2EtCb dIyc L2 (19)

where Iyc is the moment of inertia of the compression ange. 4.2.2. Singly symmetric sections Eq. (17) also applies to singly symmetric sections and by rearranging Eq. (20) can be used to determine the ultimate moment capacity: Mc CbroA feyft where fey p2Et kL 2 r y 1 p2EtCw Gt J Ar2 (kL)2 o t (21) (20)

ft

(22)

4.2.3. Point symmetric sections The principal centroidal axes of point symmetric sections are not perpendicular to the web. When the section modulus about the axis perpendicular to the web is used in Eq. (20) the critical buckling moment should be divided by two and is given as: Mc 0.5CbroA feyft (23)

4.2.4. Discussion of experimental results The lateral torsional buckling strength of Type 3CR12 stainless steel singly symmetric lipped channel sections was investigated by Bredenkamp [7]. The experi-

158

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

mental results were compared with the SSRC curve that is used in the carbon steel cold-formed design specications and the tangent modulus approach that is used in the stainless steel design specications and is given in Fig. 16. The elastic critical moment curve is also shown. It is concluded in this study that the experimental results compare well with the theoretical predictions when the tangent modulus approach is used. Other studies on hot-rolled stainless steel sections showed similar results [5,8].

5. Conclusions The design mechanical properties given in the ASCE [3] stainless steel cold-formed design specication need to be revised. The yield strengths that are obtained through tensile and compression tests are considerably higher than those prescribed by the ASTM [2]. This specication should also be revised. It is stated in the ASCE [3] stainless steel design specication that it is not necessary to use plasticity reduction factors when local buckling is considered. This might be the case for stiffened and unstiffened elements that were tested by Johnson [16] and Wang [31]. Recent results on the local buckling strength of partially stiffened elements show that plasticity reduction factors should be considered. Studies on the ultimate capacity of stainless steel columns and beams conrmed that experimental results are in good agreement with theoretical predictions when the tangent modulus is used.

Fig. 16.

Lateral torsional buckling of beams.

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

159

References
[1] American Iron and Steel Institute. Cold-formed steel design manual. 1986. [2] American Society for Testing and Materials. A370-77. Standard methods and denitions for mechanical testing of steel products. Annual book of ASTM standards. 1981. [3] American Society of Civil Engineers. Specication for the design of cold-formed stainless steel structural members. ANSI/ASCE-8-90, 1991. [4] Bosch HH. The structural applications of hot-rolled Type 3CR12 steel. M.Ing dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1989 (in Afrikaans). [5] Bredenkamp PJ. The use of built-up Type 3CR12 I-sections. M.Ing dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1992. [6] Bredenkamp PJ, Human JJ, Van den Berg GJ. The strength of hot-rolled stainless steel columns. SSRC Annual Technical Session, 1994. [7] Bredenkamp PJ, Van den Berg GJ, Van der Merwe P. The lateral torsional buckling strength of cold-formed stainless steel lipped channel beams. Eleventh Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University of Missouri-Rolla, 1992. [8] Bredenkamp P. Development of design criteria for hot-rolled and built-up stainless steel members and connections. D.Ing thesis, Rand Afrikaans University, 1997. [9] Buitendag Y. The strength of partially stiffened stainless steel compression members. M.Ing dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1995. [10] Buitendag Y, Van den Berg GJ. The strength of partially stiffened stainless steel compression members. Twelfth Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, St Louis, MO, 1994. [11] Canadian Standard Association. Cold-formed steel structural members. CSA Standard Can3-S136, 1984. [12] Carvalho ECG. The behaviour of cold-formed stainless steel beam webs subjected to shear and the interaction between shear and bending. M.Ing dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1991. [13] Dinovitzer AS, Sohrabpour M, Schuster RM. Observation and comments pertaining to CAN/CSAs136-M89. Eleventh Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, St Louis, MO, 1992. [14] Eurocode 3: Part 1.4. Design of steel structures. General rules. Supplementary rules for stainless steels, March 1994. [15] Hill BN. Determination of stressstrain relationships from offset strength values. NACA technical note no. 927, February 1944. [16] Johnson AL. The structural performance of austenitic stainless steel members. Report no. 327, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, November 1966. [17] Korvink SA. Web crippling of stainless steel cold-formed C-sections. M.Ing dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1993. [18] Ramberg W, Osgood WR. Description of stressstrain curves by three parameters. NACA technical note no. 902, July 1942. [19] Reyneke WR. The strength of partially stiffened stainless steel compression anges. M.Ing dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1996 (in preparation). [20] South African Bureau of Standards. SABS 0162-2:1993. Code of practice. The structural use of steel. Limit-states design of cold-formed steelwork, 1994. [21] South African Bureau of Standards. SABS 0162-4:1996. Draft code of practice. The structural use of steel. Limit-states design of cold-formed stainless steel members, 1996. [22] Van den Berg GJ. The structural applications of the alloy 3CR12. B.Ing. dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1985 (in Afrikaans). [23] Van den Berg GJ. The torsional exural buckling strength of cold-formed stainless steel columns. D.Ing. thesis, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg, 1988. [24] Van den Berg GJ, Van der Merwe P. Collected papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group, vol. 1. Rand Afrikaans University, 1992. [25] Van den Berg GJ, Van der Merwe P. Collected papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group, vol. 2. Rand Afrikaans University, 1993.

160

G.J. van den Berg / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 54 (2000) 135160

[26] Van den Berg GJ, Van der Merwe P. Collected papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group, vol. 3. Rand Afrikaans University, 1994. [27] Van den Berg GJ, Van der Merwe P. Collected papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group, vol. 4. Rand Afrikaans University, 1995. [28] Van den Berg GJ. Rand Afrikaans University, Collected papers of the Chromium Steels Research Group, vol. 5. 1998. [29] Van den Berg GJ. Local buckling of partially stiffened Type 3CR12 stainless steel compression elements in beam anges. Second Conference on Thin-Walled Structures, Singapore, 1998. [30] Van der Merwe P. Development of design criteria for ferritic stainless steel cold-formed structural members and connections. Ph.D. thesis, University of Missouri-Rolla, 1987. [31] Wang ST. Cold-rolled austenitic stainless steel. Report no. 334. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, July 1969. [32] Yu WW. Cold-formed steel design. New York: John Wiley and Son, 1991.