This Knowledge Base article discusses different methods for a stability analysis provided in EN 1993-1-1:2005 and their application in the RFEM 6 program.
The design of cross-sections according to Eurocode 3 is based on the classification of the cross-section to be designed in terms of classes determined by the standard. The classification of cross-sections is important, since it determines the limits of resistance and rotation capacity due to local buckling of cross-section parts.
The stability checks for the equivalent member design according to EN 1993-1-1, AISC 360, CSA S16, and other international standards require consideration of the design length (that is, the effective length of the members). In RFEM 6, it is possible to determine the effective length manually by assigning nodal supports and effective length factors or, on the other hand, by importing it from the stability analysis. Both options will be demonstrated in this article by determining the effective length of the framed column in Image 1.
In RF-/STEEL EC3, sets of members are calculated according to the General Method (EN 1993-1-1, Cl. 6.3.4) together with the stability analysis. To do this, it is necessary to determine the correct support conditions for the equivalent structure with four degrees of freedom. In most 3D models today, you can quickly lose track of the location of a set of members in the system.
In EN 1993-1-1, the General Method was introduced as a design format for stability analyses that can be applied to planar systems with arbitrary boundary conditions and variable structural height. The design checks can be performed for loading in the main load-bearing plane and simultaneous compression. The stability cases of lateral-torsional buckling and flexural buckling are analyzed from the main supporting plane; that is, about the weak component axis. Therefore, the issue often arises as to how to design, in this context, flexural buckling in the main load-bearing plane.
For the stability design of members and sets of members with a uniform cross-section, you can use the equivalent member method according to EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.1 to 6.3.3. However, as soon as a tapered cross-section is available, this method can no longer be used, or only used to a limited extent. The RF-/STEEL EC3 add-on module can automatically recognize these cases and switch to the general method.
The RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module automatically transfers the buckling line to be used for the flexural buckling analysis for a cross-section from the cross-section properties. The assignment of the buckling line can be adjusted manually in the module input for general cross-sections in particular, as well as for special cases.
The classification of cross-sections according to EN 1993-1-1 using Table 5.2 is a simple method for designing the local buckling of cross-section parts. For cross-sections of cross-section class 4, it is then necessary to determine the effective cross-section properties according to EN 1993-1-5 in order to consider the influence of local buckling in the ultimate limit state designs.
When connecting tension-loaded components with bolted connections, the cross-section reduction due to the bolt holes must be taken into account in the ultimate limit state design. This article describes how the design of the tension resistance according to DIN EN 1993‑1‑1 can be performed with the net cross-section area of the tension member in the RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module.
In this technical article, a hinged column with a centrally acting axial force and a line load acting on the strong axis will be designed by means of the RF-/STEEL EC3 add-on module according to EN 1993-1-1.
In this technical article, a hinged column with a centrally acting axial force and a linear load that acts on the major axis are designed according to EN 1993-1-1 with the aid of the RF-/STEEL EC3 add-on module. The column head and column base are assumed as a lateral and torsional restraint. The column is not held against rotation between the supports. The cross-section of the column is an HEB 360 from S235.
The following article describes designing a two-span beam subjected to bending by means of the RF-/STEEL EC3 add-on module according to EN 1993-1-1. The global stability failure will be excluded due to sufficient stabilizing measures.
This article is about the stability analysis of a steel column with axial compression according to EN 1993‑1‑1, Clause 6.3.1. Additionally, a variation study is carried out aiming at steel optimization.
This article deals with the stiffness of standardized joints according to the DSTV (German Steel Construction Association)/DASt (German Committee for Structural Steelwork) standards, often used in steel construction, and its effects on structural analysis and design results according to DIN EN 1993-1-1.
This example is described in technical literature [1] as Example 9.5 and in [2] as Example 8.5. A lateral-torsional buckling analysis must be performed for a principal beam. This beam is a uniform structural member. Therefore, the stability analysis can be carried out according to Clause 6.3.3 of DIN EN 1993‑1‑1. Due to the uniaxial bending, it would also be possible to perform the design using the General Method according to Clause 6.3.4. Additionally, the determination of the critical load factor is validated with an idealized member model in line with the method mentioned above, using an FEM model.
This example is described in technical literature [1] as Example 9.5 and in [2] as Example 8.5. A lateral-torsional buckling analysis must be performed for a principal beam. This beam is a uniform structural member. Therefore, the stability analysis can be carried out according to Clause 6.3.3 of DIN EN 1993-1-1. Due to the uniaxial bending, it would also be possible to perform the design using the General Method according to Clause 6.3.4. Additionally, the determination of the moment Mcr is validated with an idealized member model in line with the method mentioned above, using an FEM model.
According to EN 1993‑1‑1 [1], it is necessary to use the equivalent geometric imperfections with values that reflect the possible effects of all types of imperfections. EN 1993‑1‑1, Section 5.3, specifies basic imperfections for the global analysis of frames as well as member imperfections.
According to EN 1993-1-1 [1], it is necessary to use the equivalent geometric imperfections with values that reflect the possible effects of all types of imperfections. EN 1993-1-1, Section 5.3, specifies basic imperfections for the global analysis of frames as well as member imperfections.
The following structure is covered as Example IV.10 in [1] "Comment on Eurocode 3". For a support with a linearly varying cross‑section, a sufficient ultimate limit state design (cross‑section check and stability analysis) is to be performed. Due to the unequal structural component, it is necessary to perform the stability analysis (from the main support direction) using the method according to Section 6.3.4, or alternatively, according to the second‑order analysis.
Critical load factors and the corresponding mode shapes of any structure can be determined efficiently in RFEM and RSTAB, using the RF-STABILITY or RSBUCK add-on module (linear eigenvalue solver or nonlinear analysis).
RF-/STEEL EC3 allows you to perform plastic design checks of cross‑sections according to EN 1993‑1‑1, Sec. 6.2. You should pay attention to the interaction of loading due to the bending and axial force for I‑sections, which is regulated in Sec. 6.2.9.1.