USFOS Grouted Members

Theory Description of use Verification

2 ________________________________________________________________________

Table of Contents

THEORY .................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Modelling of grouted members........................................................................... 3 1.1.1 Plastic capacity............................................................................................ 3 1.1.2 Elastic properties....................................................................................... 11 1.1.3 Mass calculation........................................................................................ 11 1.1.4 Buckling.................................................................................................... 11 1.1.5 Mid-hinge.................................................................................................. 12 1.1.6 Concluding remarks .................................................................................. 12 2. DESCRIPTION OF USE.......................................................................................... 14 2.1 Grouted members.............................................................................................. 14 2.2 Grout material input to USFOS ........................................................................... 17 3. VERIFICATION....................................................................................................... 19 3.1 Cross-sectional properties................................................................................. 19 3.2 Comparison with grouted column buckling tests.............................................. 23 3.2.1 Description of the experimental study ...................................................... 23 3.2.2 USFOS simulation of buckling tests........................................................... 28 3.3 Analysis of plane frame with grouted members ............................................... 32 3.4 Conclusions....................................................................................................... 34 3.5 References:........................................................................................................ 35 APPENDIX-B Interaction relationships for grouted sections .......................................... 36

1.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

3 ________________________________________________________________________

1. THEORY
1.1 Modelling of grouted members

1.1.1 Plastic capacity The following principles are adopted when the plastic section properties are calculated, refer Figure 1-1: The steel tubes behaves as an ordinary pipe section The grout can only take compressive stresses, the yield stress is assumed to be constant over the compressive section. On the tension side the stress is zero

This complies with Eurocode 4 specifications

-fys

-fyc

D t +fys
Figure 1-1 Plastic stress distribution for grouted section On this basis the following interaction equation can be calculated: For the pipe section
N M = sin MP 2 NP
(1.1)

+fyc= 0

or alternatively

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

4 ________________________________________________________________________

M = sin , M Ps

N = 1 N Ps 2

(1.2)

where the plastic capacities in bending and axial tension/compression are

M Ps D 3 ( D 2t ) ( D 2t ) = f ys , N Pg = f ys 6 4
3 2

(1.3)

Where fys is the yield stress for steel and D and t represents the diameter and thickness of the tube, respectively For the grouted section there is obtained:
M = sin 3 , M Pg N 1 1 = sin 2 2 N Pg
(1.4)

where the plastic capacities in bending and axial compression are

M Pg = f yg

( D 2t )
12

, N Pg = f yc

( D 2t )
4

(1.5)

where fygs is the yield stress for grout. The grouted section contributes only on the compression side of the interaction. For the composite section the two interaction equation can be added. The angle to the neutral axis, , constitutes the interrelation. The resulting equation is plotted in Figure 1-2, for an example where all plastic capacities are set equal to unity. Compression is defined positive. It is observed that the maximum bending moment occurs when the plastic neutral axis is at midsection (i.e. = /2) when M D = M Ps + M Ps and ND = 0.5NPg. The points B and C correspond to bending moments MB = MC and NB = 0, ND = NPg. The bending moments can be determined solving for from the condition Nsteel = - Ngrout, see Section 1.1.1.1. The axial force at points A and F are NA = NPs + NPg and NF = - NPs , respectively

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

5 ________________________________________________________________________
2.5 2.0 1.5
Axial force
A Steel Grout Total C D B

1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
F

2.0

2.5

Moment

Figure 1-2 Example of plastic interaction function for grouted steel tube

Interaction equations that can be calculated for tubes with grout Durocrit D4 and S5 are compared with interaction equation and FE analysis results given in Safetec Report OD2000-0065, 2001. The diagrams are presented in Appendix B. It is observed that the agreement with Eurocode 4 curves is excellent, as expected.
1.1.1.1 Simplified interaction equation

Haukaas, M. and Yang, Q. (2000) proposed to use cos1/ type function as an approximation to the interaction curve. Two curves are defined; one above the maximum bending moment and the other below maximum bending moment. The equations are given as
NC N D ln cos N ND M 2 N A ND = cos1/ 1 , 1 = MD M 2 N A ND ln C MD
(1.6)

above the maximum bending moment and

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

6 ________________________________________________________________________
NB ND ln cos N ND M 2 NF ND = cos1/ 2 , 2 = MD M 2 NF ND ln B MD
(1.7)

below the maximum bending moment. It is seen that the factor is determined so that the interaction curve goes through the points (NC,MC) and (NB,MB) in addition to (ND,MD), (NA,0) and (NF,0). Confer Figure 1-3 for definition of the various points on the interaction curve.

Figure 1-3 Points on yield surface ( Haukaas, M. and Yang, Q. (2000))

The various points are, as shown before, defined by:

M D = M Ps + M Pg
1 N Pg 2 N c = N Pg ND = N A = N Ps + CompFac N Pg N F = - TensFac N Ps
(1.8)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

7 ________________________________________________________________________ The factor TensFac takes into account additional tension capacity due to the grout. If there is assumed that the grout prevents the steel from contracting when subjected to plastic tension, a tensile stress equal to Y is produced in the circumferential direction. The effective yield stress then becomes 1.12Y. Hence, the default value assumed in USFOS is TensFac= 1.12. The factor CompFac takes into account any reduction in the compression capacity of the grout. By default CompFac = 1.0 The moments MB and MC are determined from the requirement NB = 0. This yields the following equations: sin 2B (1.9) B ( N Pg + 2 N Ps ) = N Pg + N Ps 2 M B = M Ps sin B + M Pg sin 3 B (1.10) The angle B (0,/2) has to be solved by an iteration procedure. The Interval bi-section method, which is a stable method, is used. Figure 1-4 shows an example of the simplified interaction equation along with the exact relationship. The agreement is good. Note: The tension capacity is augmented by 12% on the tension side only for the approximate curve. The exponent = 1.14 below the maximum moment and = 1.25 above. The following data need to be stored for the grouted cross-section: MD = maximum plastic bending moment NA = Maximum compressive capacity NF = Maximum tension capacity 1 = Exponent for on compression side 2 = Exponent on tension side Alternatively the three first properties may be normalized against the yield stress for steel to obtain: M WP = D = equivalent plastic section modulus f ys

Ac = At = NA = equivalent plastic compressive area f ys NF = equivalent plastic tension area f ys

In addition the equivalent elastic area needs to be stored as discussed below

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

8 ________________________________________________________________________
8 6
Axial force

Steel Concrete Total cos-beta

4 2

0 -2 0 1 Moment 2 3

Figure 1-4 Exact (Total) and approximate (cos1/) interaction curve

1.1.1.2 Reduced bending capacity on compression side

It is possible to specify a reduced bending capacity of the grout, so that the nose on the compression side is not taken fully into account. This is done such that a new point D* is defined
' M D = M B + M Red M D - M B ) (

0 M Red 1

(1.11)

where the user can define the bending reduction factor MRed. Default is 1.0.
' The corresponding axial force, N D has to be determined from the interaction relationship

below the ND:

ND ND MD = cos1/ 2 MD 2 NF ND
(1.12)

The yield surface above ( M D , N D ) is then described by

N ND M = cos1/ 1 MD 2 N A ND
(1.13)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

9 ________________________________________________________________________ For simplicity the 1-factor will not be changed, i.e. the shape of the yield surface is assumed to remain unchanged.
Below the point D ( M D , N D ) the non-modified interaction equation will be used.

The modified interaction function is illustrated by the dotted line in Figure 1-5 If MRed = 1 the surface is not modified, if MRed = 0, the maximum bending moment is at N = 0 and is equal to MB.
8 6 Axial force Steel Concrete Total cos-beta

Reduced capacity
0

MD`,ND`
-2 0 1 Moment 2 3

Figure 1-5 Possible modification of yield surface (dotted line)

1.1.1.3 Yield surface convexity

The yield surface should preferably be convex. Otherwise, spurious elastic unloading from the yield surface could result. A convex surface is achieved as long as the beta factor is larger than unity. For potential combinations of plastic section moduli and plastic axial capacities of the grout and the steel, the yield surface could become nonconvex. This is evident in the example given in Figure 1. The plastic capacities used to derive Figure 1 are, however, probably not realistic for grouted steel sections. Another factor that could trigger non-convex surface is if the tension capacity is considerably larger than 1.12 of the steel plastic tension force.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

10 ________________________________________________________________________ A warning be given if < 1 and is put equal to 1.This will relax the requirement that M = MB for N = 0. (M will be slightly larger than MB). Another option is to reduce the plastic axial capacity until > 1. For the various Durocrit sections studied it seems that > 1 for all the cases.
1.1.1.4 Local buckling

Finite element analysis shows that the effect of local buckling is significant for members with D/t exceeding 40. Haukaas, M. and Yang, Q. (2000) propose to take this into account by the reducing the compressive strength of the grout by the factor D (1.14) yg = max 1 , 0.003 + 0.88 t so that f yg f yg / yg
(1.15)

1.1.1.5 Shear force interaction

For short members the shear force may become significant, notably because the bending moment capacity may increase significantly due to the grout. In order to limit the shear force it must be implemented in the interaction equation. This is accomplished by modifying the bending moment term in the interaction equation. In the three-dimensional case the following equivalent non-dimensional bending moment is calculated:
m
2 4 4 my + mz2 + mx + q y + qz4

(1.16)

where m y =

My MD

, mz =

Q Mx Mz Q , mx = , q y = y , qz = z MD MT QP QP

The influence from shear (and torsion) is moderate until the shear force becomes significant. The shear force and torsional moment is assumed carried primarily by the steel pipe. The shear capacity may be augmented beyond the steel shear capacity by a user-defined factor, ShearFac 1, such that
QP = ShearFac t Y As
(1.17)

where As is shear area of the steel tube.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

11 ________________________________________________________________________
1.1.2 Elastic properties

The effective bending stiffness is taken as the sum of the steel and grout bending stiffness: (EI )= (EI )s + I Red EI )g ( (1.18)

Red is a factor that accounts for a reduced contribution from the grout. According to Eurocode 4, Red = 0.8, while Haukaas, M. and Yang, Q. (2000) recommend Red = 1.0. It is possible to specify value in the input. The default value is Red = 1.0
The elastic axial stiffness is taken as the sum of the steel and grout axial stiffness ( EA) = ( EA)s + ( EA) g (1.19) The same stiffness is used for axial tension and compression for the following reasons: It is practical to have the same elastic properties, because the sign of the axial force is not known a priori It is physically plausible that the grout will take moderate tension The bending stiffness used assumes implicitly that the grout acts in tension It is better to limit the tension taken by the grout by means of the plastic interaction function, as shown in the previous paragraph It is beneficial to modify the elastic bending stiffness such that the steel properties can be used, i.e. equivalent moment of inertia and equivalent area are defined E E (1.20) Aeq = As + g Ag I eq = I s + I Red g I g Es Es
1.1.3 Mass calculation

An equivalent density may be defined such that the total mass of the grouted pipe is correct: A (1.21) r eq = r s + r g g As where s is density of steel and g is density of grout. At present the user needs to specify the equivalent density of the grouted members in to obtain correct weight. In most cases the weight contribution may probably be neglected.

1.1.4 Buckling

USFOS calculates the exact buckling load for members subjected to end forces and end moments for a given imperfection. According to Eurocode 4 buckling shall be calculated according to Eurocode 3, curve a for concrete-filled hollow sections. USFOS contains an
Grouted Members 2005_07_01

12 ________________________________________________________________________ automatic module for generation of shape imperfections according to curve a, so this requirement is easily complied with. For simultaneous bending and compression, the resistance will be governed by the combined effect of elastic buckling and the plastic interaction function for the grouted section.
1.1.5 Mid-hinge

The grouted section model is easily implemented for beam ends. The conventional beam element used in USFOS allows automatic subdivision of a beam into two new beams once the yield surface is exceeded at beam mid-span. This is, however, not straightforward to accomplish when it comes to grouted beams. The reason for this is that the plastic surface for a grouted section due to its asymmetry (about N = 0 axis) can be considered a surface with an off-set corresponding to N = ND = 0.5NPg. This is analogous to the surface offset produced by kinematic hardening of conventional non-grouted pipe sections. In order to introduce artificial hardening caused by the asymmetry, the code needs significant careful rewriting. At present it is therefore suggested that this problem is circumvented by modelling grouted members with two beams, thus avoiding the need for introduction of mid-span hinges. The code seems to work reasonably well, even if mid-hinges are introduced, but there will be small jumps in the bending moment-axial force histories

1.1.6 Concluding remarks

The grouted section model is based upon the plastic hinge concept assuming grout to contribute to the resistance only when subjected to compression. A plastic interaction relationship for pipes with internal grout is established, mainly according to the propositions given y Haukaas and Yang (2002) The module developed is quite flexible, allowing user defined efficiency of the grout properties in bending and axial compression and tension. The elastic axial stiffness and moment of inertia are modified to account for the contribution of the grout. It is found very inconvenient to use different axial stiffness in compression and tension, so that equal stiffness is assumed. It is believed, however, that this has a negligible impact on the results in practical cases. It is verified that the model works correctly by comparing axial force-bending moment interaction relationships obtained in simulations of column buckling with analytical relationships (see Verification manual).

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

13 ________________________________________________________________________ Grouted column tests carried out at Chalmers University of Technology (1999) have been analysed, see Verification manual. Very good agreement between tests results and numerical predictions are obtained when Durocrit D4 and Durocrit S5 are used as grout material. When Densiphalt is used the accuracy is fairly poor, but this is due to poor behaviour of the Densiphalt as such. A significantly better agreement may be obtained by using reduced yield stress of Densiphalt. Best correspondence between buckling tests and simulations are obtained when the yield surface size is set to 0.6 of the fully plastic surface. This is smaller than the default value 0.79 for ungrouted pipes. When design or reassessment analysis is performed it is recommended to introduce imperfections calibrated to column curves, e.g. to Eurocode 3, curve a. Then the default value 0.79 for the yield surface size may be used, i.e. no modification is necessary (GBOUND command)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

14 ________________________________________________________________________

2. DESCRIPTION OF USE

2.1 Grouted members

The grouted member model is based on the following principles regarding plastic capacity refer Figure 1-1: The steel tubes behaves as an ordinary pipe section The grout can only take compressive stresses, the yield stress is assumed to be constant over the compressive section. On the tension side the stress is zero

This complies with Eurocode 4 specifications

-fys

-fyc

D t +fys
Figure 2-1 Plastic stress distribution for grouted section

+fyc= 0

This yields a non-symmetric plastic surface as illustrated in Figure 2-2. The grout contributes mainly on the compression side of the interaction diagram. USFOS allows for user modification of the plastic surface by specifying three factors; one governing the contribution from the grout on in pure compression, one accounting for the effect of grout in tension and one factor reducing the maximum bending moment which can be resisted by the cross-section.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

15 ________________________________________________________________________ Further, the contribution from grout to the moment of inertia and to the plastic shear capacity may be given.
NA = CompFac Nplastic,grout + Nplastic,steel

4
A

Steel Grout Composite

Axial force N

2
D D* B F NF = TensFac Nplastic,steel MD*=MB+M-Red(MD-MB)

-2 0 20 40 60 Moment M 80

Figure 2-2 Plastic interaction surface for grouted section

The weight of the grout is not included automatically in the load effect calculations. Normally, the weight is of little of importance compared to other loads. If the grout mass is important an equivalent density may be defined such that the total mass of the grouted pipe is correct. Otherwise the true grout density may be used Note that grout is an attribute to elements; i.e. the elements are filled with grout. (no change in the normal input) Commenting out the GROUTED command gives the normal, steel beam with no grout. It is recommended to model grouted members with two beam elements (use for example the REFINE command). Modeling with one beam element may give a discontinuous forcebending moment interaction history at member mid span, when a plastic hinge is introduced. Best correspondence between buckling tests and simulations are obtained when the yield surface size (GBOUND) is set to 0.6 of the fully plastic surface. This is smaller than the default value 0.79 for ungrouted pipes

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

16 ________________________________________________________________________ When design or reassessment analysis is performed it is recommended to introduce imperfections calibrated to column curves, e.g. to Eurocode 3, curve a (CINIDEF command). Then the default value 0.79 (pipe sections) for the yield surface size may be used, i.e. no modification is necessary (GBOUND command).

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

17 ________________________________________________________________________

2.2 Grout material input to USFOS

MATERIAL Mat ID Grout E Yield Dens TensFac CompFac M-Red I-Red

Parameter Description

ShearFac
Default

Mat ID Grout E Yield Dens TensFac CompFac M-Red I-Red ShearFac

User defined (external) material number Grout material Elastic modulus for grout Yield stress for grout Grout density or equivalent density (specific mass). See note below. Tension capacity factor ( NF = TensFac Nplastic,steel) 1.12 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Compression capacity factor ( NA = CompFac Nplasticgrout + Nplastic,steel ) Moment reduction factor ( MD =MB+M-Red(MD-MB) 0 < M-Red < 1 )
*

Moment of inertia reduction factor ( EI =(EI)steel+(I-RedEI)grout ) Shear capacity factor ( Qplastic = ShearFac (AY)steel )

See Figure below for definitions

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

18 ________________________________________________________________________
NA = CompFac Nplastic,grout + Nplastic,steel

4
A

Steel Grout Composite

Axial force N

2
D D* B F NF = TensFac Nplastic,steel MD*=MB+M-Red(MD-MB)

-2 0 20 40 60 Moment M 80

Plastic axial force-bending moment interaction for grouted tube

Density: If the weight of grout is important an equivalent density may be defined such that the total mass of the grouted pipe is correct i.e.: = stee + grout Agrout/ Asteel Agrout = Enclosedl area of tube Normally only important if inertia effects are significant (dynamic analysis)). Otherwise grout density may be used. Grout is an attribute to elements; i.e. the elements are filled with grout. (no change in the normal input) Commenting out the Grouted command gives the normal, steel beam with no grout. For tubular members with internal grout the material is referred to using the command: Grouted <MatID> Grouted <MatID> Grouted <MatID> Elem Mat Geo Elem1 Elem2 Mat1 Mat2 Geo1 Geo2

Note: It is recommended to model grouted members with two beam elements (use for example the REFINE command). Modeling with one beam element may give a discontinuous force-bending moment interaction history at member mid span when a plastic hinge is introduced.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

19 ________________________________________________________________________

3. VERIFICATION
3.1 Cross-sectional properties Example 1 The cross-sectional properties are checked against interaction curves for Durocrit D4 for a D/t = 40. Reference is made to Table 7.2, page 34 in report Development of a Grouted Beam Element for Pushover Analysis. Figure 3-1 shows the interaction curve derived form non-linear shell analysis of the grouted tube. It is noticed that the maximum resistance in compression is 3.2 MN and in bending 74.6 kNm.

The present analyses are carried out for a tubular beam with diameter D = 160 mm, thickness t = 4 mm and length L = 2.4 m. The tube, which is pinned at the ends, is subjected to axial compression. The axial force increases initially until the tube buckles and deforms laterally giving a rapid increase of the bending moment at midspan. The force bending moment interaction is recorded at mid-span and is shown in Figure 3-2. The figure demonstrates that USFOS predictions are in good agreement with the results of the nonlinear shell finite element simulation.

Figure 3-1 Interaction curve for Durocrit D4

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

20 ________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3-2 Interaction curve simulated with USFOS for Durocrit D4, D/t = 40 Case 1 M-Red = 1.0 Next, analysis is carried out assuming the grout bending moment factor to M-Red = 0.01. This yields a bending moment resistance of equal to MB = 43 kNM. The results of the simulation are plotted in Figure 3-3. The behavior is very satisfactory. For small axial force the bending moment appears to be slightly larger than 43 kNm, but this is due to strain hardening in the steel tube. Figure 3-4 shows results with the grout bending moment factor M-Red = 0.5. This yields ' a bending moment resistance M D = M B = 60 kNm and corresponding axial
' force N D = 0.39 MN . Again, the behavior is very satisfactory. The apparent, slight overprediction of bending moment for small axial force is due to strain hardening in the steel tube.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

21 ________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3-3 Interaction curve for Durocrit D4 moment reduction factor M-Red = 0.01. Case 2 M-Red = 1.0 Maximum bending resistance ' ' M D = M B = 43 kNm , N D = 0 MN

Figure 3-4 Interaction curve for Durocrit D4 moment reduction factor cM = 0.5. Case 2 M-Red = 1.0 Maximum bending resistance ' ' M D = M B = 60 kNm , N D = 0.39 MN

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

22 ________________________________________________________________________ In the case analyzed the elastic modulus of steel is Es= 2.1105 MPa and for the grout Es= 0.686105 MPa. The area of the steel tube is As =1.96010-3 m2 and the area of the grout is As =5.93010-3 m2. This yields an equivalent area of E Aeq = As + g Ag = 7.89 103 m 2 This area is identical to the one produced by USFOS. Es Correspondingly, the equivalent moment of inertia is calculated to be E I eq = I s + g I g = 1.45 105 m 4 when the moment of inertia of steel and grout is Is = Es -6 5.9710 m4 and Ig = 8.5610-6 m4 The equivalent axial stiffness for the column becomes: K = Es Aeq L = 690 MN / m The force level for an end shortening of 3 mm then becomes 2.07 MN. This agrees very well with the force end shortening relationship for the column calculated with M-Red = 1.0, see Figure 3-5

Figure 3-5 Force end shortening relationship for Case 1 with M-Red = 1.0 Example 2 Figure 3-6 shows the bending moment axial force interaction when the beam, now with axially fixed ends, is subjected to a lateral, concentrated force at mid-span. The beam deforms initially in bending, and, as the deformation becomes finite, a tensile axial force develops. When the bending moment- axial force reaches the plastic surface, the axial force becomes compressive for a while. This rather strange behaviour is due to the fact that the steel pipe, which acts in tension, elongates due the plastic straining. This elongation causes the axial force to become compressive. By further loading, the

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

23 ________________________________________________________________________ elongation due to lateral deformation overrides the expansion caused by the steel and the beam once again enters the tension region. The behaviour predicted by USFOS is exactly according to theory and is believed to be a true physical effect.

Figure 3-6 Bending moment-axial force interaction for ba beam with a concentrated load at mid span - axially fixed ends. Note the intermediate compressive axial force induced by plastic elongation of the steel during the bending phase. 3.2 Comparison with grouted column buckling tests

In this section the grouted beam model is compared with results from column buckling tests carried out at Chalmers, Chalmers University of Technology (1999). The tests and comparison FE analysis are also described in two reports by Offshore Design, Offshore Design (200) and Haukaas and Yang (2000). The information given in Section 3.2.1 is taken from the report by Haukaas and Yang.
3.2.1 Description of the experimental study

The tests specimens consist of a circular pipes with diameter D = 160 mm, thickness t = 4.5 mm and length L = 2500 mm. The pipes are filled with various types of grout. At the ends the specimens are supported by roller bearings located eccentrically to the pipe axis, thus producing an end moment in addition to axial compression, refer Figure 3-7.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

24 ________________________________________________________________________

Dxt= 160 x 4.5

Figure 3-7 Test geometry

The tests set-up and post-buckling shape of a test specimen are illustrated in Figure 3-8 while Figure 3-9 shows a close view of the support arrangement.

Figure 3-8 Test set-up and column in post-buckled condition

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

25 ________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3-9 Support arrangement for the columns

Tests are carried out for two steel materials (High and Low yield stress) and with three types of grout; Durocrit D4, Durocrit S5 and Densiphalt. In addition a few tests are carried out with ungrouted specimens. The test matrix is shown in Figure 3-10. Results from tension coupon tests for the steel and grout material are shown in Figure 3-11 and Figure 3-12, respectively. The quoted values of the yield stress and elastic modulus are used in the simulations. He steel exhibits significant strain hardening.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

26 ________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3-10 Test matrix (ref. Haukaas and Yang, 2000)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

27 ________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3-11 Stress-strain relationships for steel

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

28 ________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3-12 Grout material properties

3.2.2 USFOS simulation of buckling tests

For the USFOS simulation the column is modelled with two beam elements. The ends are modelled as simply supported. The eccentricity is taken into account by applying an end moment corresponding to the moment produced by the eccentricity. The axial force and end moment are increased proportionally. The column is given an initial shape distortion of 0.001 times the column length, i.e. 2.5 mm in the high yield stress analyses and 0.002 times the column length , i.e. 5 mm in the low yield stress analyses. The difference was not aimed at, but has a moderate influence on the results. The shape distortion is applied as a displaced (middle) node in the direction of the displacement caused by the end eccentricity. All analyses are run assuming full plastic bending capacity, i.e. MRed = 1.0 The axial force lateral displacement relationships for the tests are compared with USFOS simulations in Figure 3-14 for tests with high yield stress and in Figure 3-16 for tests with low yield stress. The test curves are reconstructed from Figure 3-13 and Figure 3-15, taken from the report by Haukaas and Yang (2000). The results form USFOS simulations are in very good agreement with the tests where the pipes are grouted with either Durocrit D4 or Durocrit S5. The accuracy is comparable to the one obtained with nonlinear finite element shell analysis of the tests, as reported by Haukaas and Yang (2000). As concerns the tests with Densiphalt as grout material, the agreement is fairly poor. This is attributed to poor properties of Densiphalt, not deficiency of the developed calculation
Grouted Members 2005_07_01

29 ________________________________________________________________________ model as such. The disagreement with tests results are also observed for the nonlinear shell analyses. A significantly better agreement with the Densiphalt tests may be obtained using a reduced value of the Densiphalt yield stress. No attempt is, however, made in the present investigation to determine such a reduced yield stress. The USFOS cross-sectional model is based on a two-surface yield hinge concept. The inner surface represents initial yielding and the outer surface the fully developed plastic surface. For ungrouted pipes, the default value is 0.79 corresponding to the ratio on initial yield moment and fully plastic moment. In case of grouted section it is likely that the grout starts yielding prior to yielding of the pipe, hence the yield surface should be smaller than the one used for ungrouted sections. On the basis of the results shown in Figure 3-14 and Figure 3-16, it seems that a yield surface size of 0.6 is a reasonable default value as concerns back-calculation of tests.

Figure 3-13 Force versus lateral displacement - tests with high yield stress, Haukaas and Yang (2002)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

30 ________________________________________________________________________
2.5

Force [kN]

1.5

Durocrit D4 - test USFOS - 0.8 USFOS - 0.6 Densiphalt - test USFOS - 0.8 USFOS - 0.5 Empty - test USFOS - empty

0.5

0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Displacement [m]

Figure 3-14 Force versus lateral displacement - tests with high yield stress and USFOS simulation

Figure 3-15 Force versus lateral displacement - tests with low yield stress, Haukaas and Yang (2002)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

31 ________________________________________________________________________

2 1.8 1.6 1.4

Durocrit D4-test USFOS - 0.6 Durocrit S5-test USFOS - 0.6 Densiphalt-test USFOS - 0.6 USFOS - 0.3

Force [MN]

1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

Displacment [m]
Figure 3-16 Force versus lateral displacement - tests with low yield stress and USFOS simulation

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

32 ________________________________________________________________________
3.3 Analysis of plane frame with grouted members

The so-called Zayas frame, which is often used for verification/benchmarks studies, is used to test the effect of grouting members. The frame is shown in Figure 3-18. For details about structure dimensions it is referred to USFOS User Manuals. The diagonal members have yield stress 248 MPa, while the grout applied is assumed to have a yield stress of 80 MPa and elastic modulus of 0.71105 MPa. The load versus lateral displacement at the top of the frame is depicted in Figure 3-17. When no members are grouted the ultimate load factor is approximately equal to 5 and failure takes place when the K-brace compressive members buckle, as shown in Figure 3-18. When the K-braces are grouted the axial capacity in compression exceeds the tension capacity (which is 1.12 times the steel yield force). The compression braces do not buckle and the resistance increases significantly beyond 5. Failure occurs once the upper horizontal compression member buckles. This causes an intermediate drop in the resistance, but the resistance increases again until the lower horizontal brace buckles. Afterwards the resistance is fairly constant above a load factor of 8. When also the horizontal members (which buckled) are grouted buckling no longer takes place in the frame. It deforms by yielding of the tensile members and the resistance in the large deformation range increases continuously due to geometric stiffening effects. Yielding of tensile braces initiates at a load level of 6.5 and is identified by a drop in the stiffness of the resistance curve, see Figure 3-17. In both cases with grouted members the resistance of the frame is dramatically increased and apparently is not limited. In practice the resistance will be limited because the tension member is subjected to significant straining. Ultimately the tension member will be subjected to fracture, implying collapse of the frame.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

33 ________________________________________________________________________
12 10 8
Load factor

K+horisontal grouted 6 4 2 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Horisontal displacment [m] 0.5 0.6 K-braces grouted Ungrouted

Figure 3-17 Load factor versus lateral displacement of frame

Figure 3-18 Displaced shape of frame with a) No grouted members b) K-braces grouted and c) K-braces and horizontals in centre grouted

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

34 ________________________________________________________________________

3.4 Conclusions

It is verified that the model works correctly by comparing axial force-bending moment interaction relationships obtained in simulations of column buckling with analytical relationships. The grouted column tests carried out at Chalmers University of Technology (1999) have been simulated. Very good agreement between tests results and numerical predictions are obtained when Durocrit D4 and Durocrit S5 are used as grout material. When Densiphalt is used the accuracy is fairly poor, but this is due to poor behaviour of the Densiphalt as such. A significantly better agreement may be obtained by using reduced yield stress of Densiphalt. Best correspondence between buckling tests and simulations are obtained when the yield surface size is set to 0.6 of the fully plastic surface. This is smaller than the default value 0.79 for ungrouted pipes. When design or reassessment analysis is performed it is recommended to introduce imperfections calibrated to column curves, e.g. to Eurocode 3, curve a. Then the default value 0.79 for the yield surface size may be used, i.e. no modification is necessary (GBOUND command)

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

35 ________________________________________________________________________

3.5 References:

Haukaas, M. and Yang, Q. (2000): Development of a Grouted Beam Element for Pushover Analysis, Report OD-2005-0065, Offshore Design A/S, Sandvika. European Prestandard Eurocode 4 (1992): Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, Ref No. ENV 1994-1-1:1992 Chalmers University of Technology (1999), Structural behaviour of Circular Composite Columns An Experimental Study, ARB Nr. 46, Report 99:3, Gteborg. Offshore Design A/S (2000), Background Documentation on Ultimate Capacity Analysis using FE Codes FE Analysis versus Structural Component Testing Tests series 4 Beam Column Buckling, Tech. Rep. No. OD-1999-0140, Rev. 1.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

36 ________________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX-B Interaction relationships for grouted sections

Axial force

Steel Grout Total

-2 0 20 40 Moment 60 80

Interaction diagram for Durocrit D4, D/T=40.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

37 ________________________________________________________________________

Axial force

-2 0 20 40 Moment

Steel Grout Total 60 80

Interaction diagram for Durocrit D4, D/T=60.

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

38 ________________________________________________________________________

Axial force

Steel Grout Total

-2 0 20

40 60 Moment

80

Interaction diagram for Durocrit D4, D/T=80

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

39 ________________________________________________________________________

4 Axial force

-2 0 20 40 60 Moment

Steel Grout Total

80

Interaction diagram for Durocrit S5, D/T=40

Grouted Members

2005_07_01

40 ________________________________________________________________________

Axial force

-2 0 20 40 Moment

Steel Concrete Total

60 80

Interaction diagram for Durocrit S5, D/T=80

Grouted Members

2005_07_01