Anda di halaman 1dari 30

NOTCH TOUGHNESS OF COLD FORMED HOLLOW SECTIONS

FINAL (REVISION 2) REPORT TO CIDECT ON PROGRAMME 1B

By:

N. Kosteski J.A. Packer R.S. Puthli

CIDECT Report 1B-2/03 October 2003

Notch Toughness of Cold Formed Hollow Sections


N. Kosteski
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada. Department of Steel and Light Metal Structures, University of Karlsruhe, Germany

J.A. Packer R.S. Puthli

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada. Department of Steel and Light Metal Structures, University of Karlsruhe, Germany Abstract: Since the Northridge and Kobe earthquakes in the 1990s, with their numerous brittle fractures of steel members and welded connections, there is much more awareness of material notch toughness for all applications where dynamic loading is a design condition. As a result, there has been renewed attention directed at assessment of the notch toughness of steel sections, along with tightening of requirements for welding consumables in welded joints. This report documents the Charpy V-Notch (CVN) toughness of contemporary Rectangular Hollow Sections (RHS) manufactured by companies in North America, South America and Europe. The hollow sections were produced as: hot-formed RHS and CHS (Circular Hollow Sections); cold-formed RHS (electric resistance welded); and cold-formed plus stress-relieved RHS (electric resistance welded). Also, the range of parameters included in the experimental study included specimen orientation (longitudinal versus transverse), cross-section location (flats, corner, and weld seam), and face exposure (interior face of tube versus exterior face). In total, 557 CVN specimens have been impact tested. A surprising difference in notch toughness was found between manufacturers and between production processes. Moreover, the notch toughness measured away from the position and orientation stipulated by specifications (the flat face location in the longitudinal direction) was often very much lower. 1 Introduction In the wake of the surprising brittle fractures sustained during the Northridge, California (1994) and Kobe, Japan (1995) earthquakes, requirements for notch tough weld filler metal have been made more explicit in many welding codes. Of the welding consumables specified for structural applications with a Charpy V-Notch (CVN) rating, most meet 27 Joules at -29 C or -18 C (AWS 2002). However, in a weld Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) the in-situ notch toughness will be a result of the weld filler metal, the base metal and the welding procedure. Although Welding Procedure Specifications (WPSs) can be written such that a demonstrated Charpy V-Notch (CVN) test value must be achieved at a particular location, there is often little information available to the structural engineer concerning the inherent notch toughness of the base metal itself. AWS (2002) reports that steel wide flange (I) sections and structural steel plates have recently been surveyed in the U.S., at the request of mill producers, in order to show that CVN [Charpy V-Notch] testing of base metal was unnecessary for most building applications. Charpy V-Notch (CVN) test values of 20 Joules or higher at +4 C were reported (AWS 2002). These surveys have not included manufactured hollow structural steel sections and moreover it is important to note that test values relate to the location in the cross-section where the governing specification stipulates the test coupon be taken, which may be very favourable. In fact there is even a precaution given by AWS (2002) for ASTM A500 (cold-formed) hollow sections: Products

manufactured to this specification may not be suitable for those applications such as dynamically loaded elements in welded structures, etc., where low-temperature notch toughness properties may be important. Special investigation or heat treatment may be required if this product is applied to tubular T, Y-, and K-connections. It is this concern that the research reported herein has sought to investigate. 1.1 Brittle fracture Brittle fracture is a catastrophic failure in which a crack will propagate at extremely high speeds without warning. Brittle fractures occur with little or no elongation or reduction in area and with very little energy absorption. Under conditions of low temperature, rapid loading and/or high constraint (e.g., when the principal stresses 1, 2, and 3 are nearly equal) a normally ductile material, such as structural steel for example, may exhibit brittle behaviour. 1.2 Notch toughness The conventional toughness of a material is defined as the ability of a smooth (unnotched) member to absorb energy, usually when loaded slowly (quasi-statically) under uniaxial tension. Alternatively, the notch toughness is defined as the ability of a material to absorb energy (usually loaded dynamically) in the presence of a flaw (notch). The fabrication of a structure will inevitably introduce some type of notch, flaw, discontinuity, or stress concentration. Thus, the notch toughness of a material is a useful property. Notch toughness is measured with a variety of test specimens; one of the most widely used is the Charpy V-Notch (CVN) impact specimen. The low cost and simplicity of the Charpy impact test have made it a common requirement in international codes and standards for critical structures such as pressure vessels and bridges. 1.3 Charpy V-Notch (CVN) toughness properties As detailed in ASTM E23 (1998), the Charpy V-Notch (CVN) test uses a standard 10x10x55 mm rectangular beam-type specimen (shown in Figure 1) with a machined notch of specified geometry. A test machine with a pendulum (shown in Figure 2) is used to impact the specimens at various temperatures. The absorbed energy required to fracture the specimen can be ascertained as a function of the test specimen temperature. A typical Charpy V-Notch (CVN) toughness versus temperature curve for mild structural steel, under both static and dynamic loading, is shown schematically in Figure 3. By plotting the CVN toughness as a function of temperature, as in Figure 3, a transition curve may be produced showing the temperature transition from ductile (shear fracture) to brittle (cleavage fracture) behaviour of the material in question. The CVN impact values shown at the lower left of Figure 3 are indicative of low levels of notch toughness and brittle behaviour. This lower left brittle region of the toughness-temperature curve is generally referred to as the "lower shelf". Alternatively, the CVN impact values shown at the upper right of Figure 3 are indicative of high levels of notch toughness and ductile behaviour. This upper right ductile region of the toughness-temperature curve is generally referred to as the "upper shelf". When a notched bar is loaded, there is a normal stress across the base of the notch that tends to initiate fracture. The "cohesive strength" of the material is the property that prevents it from cleaving. In cases of brittle fracture, the cohesive strength of a material is exceeded before significant deformation occurs and the fracture surface appears flat and crystalline. In addition to the normal stress, the applied

load creates shear stresses that are oriented at about 45 to the normal stress. In cases of ductile or shear-type failure, the shear stress exceeds the shear strength of the material. For ductile failures, considerable deformation precedes final fracture and the broken surface is characterised by large shear lips that appear fibrous instead of crystalline in nature. In intermediate cases, the fracture occurs after a moderate amount of deformation and is part crystalline and part fibrous in appearance [Barsom & Rolfe (1999)]. The region between the two extremes of ductile and brittle behaviour is called the transition region. Various transition temperatures are established as an indication of the notch toughness of a structural material. The Ductile-to-Brittle Transition Temperature (DBTT) is defined as the temperature at which the material changes from ductile to brittle fracture, such that the behaviour is 50% ductile and 50% brittle [Barsom & Rolfe (1999)].

90 45 0.25 mm radius

th m 2m ch dep ot n

Figure 1. Charpy "full-size, Type A" V-Notch (CVN) impact test specimen according to the ASTM E23 (1998) standard

10 mm
10 mm

L/2

5 L=

5m

Permissible variations shall be as follows: Notch length to edge, 90 2 Adjacent sides shall be at, 90 10 minutes Cross-section dimensions, 0.075 mm Length of specimen (L), +0. -2.5 mm Centering of notch (L/2), 1 mm Angle of notch, 1 Radius of notch, 0.025 mm Notch depth, 0.025 mm Finish requirements, 2 m on notched surface and opposite face; 2 m on other two surfaces

(b) Placement of CVN specimen using centreing tongs

(a) Liquid bath/cooler apparatus

Figure 2. Test setup

str i ke

r sw

ing

a rc

Static loading Dynamic loading (DBTT) Ductile-to-Brittle Transition Temperature (NDT) Nil-Ductility Temperature upper shelf

Charpy V-Notch toughness (J)

Cleavage Increasing Full-shear shear initiation initiation

DBTT NDT

lower shelf

Cleavage Increasing Full-shear propagation shear propagation

Temperature (C)
Figure 3. Fracture toughness versus temperature behaviour of steel [adapted from Barsom (1991)]

The ASTM E23 (1998) standard provides a methodology for determining the "percentage of shear fracture" on the fractured surface of a CVN test specimen as shown in Figure 4. The "shear area" is measured and simply expressed as a percentage of the total fractured area. Figure 5 shows a CVN toughness-temperature plot for a cold-formed RHS tube, annotated with photographs of the fractured surfaces at various temperatures. From Figure 5 it can be seen that the fractured surface corresponding to temperatures of +20 C and +45 C can qualitatively be characterised as a ductile or shear-type failure exhibiting a fibrous failure surface. Conversely, the fractured surface corresponding to temperatures of -50 C, -35 C, -20 C and 0 C can qualitatively be characterised as a brittle failure exhibiting a flat crystalline cleavage-type fracture surface. However, between the qualitative determination of a ductile versus a brittle failure surface, the quantitative evaluation of the "percent fibrous fracture" or "percentage of shear fracture" is imprecise at best and rather indeterminate in this case. Because of the subjective nature of the evaluation of the fracture appearance, the ASTM E23 (1998) standard does not recommend that this "percentage of shear fracture" determination be used in specifications. Using a CVN toughness-temperature curve (as in Figure 3), the Ductile-to-Brittle Transition Temperature (DBTT) can be taken to be the point on the curve, in the transition region, with the steepest slope. Alternatively, the Ductile-to-Brittle Transition Temperature (DBTT) has been defined as the temperature corresponding to the energy value halfway between values obtained at 100% and 0% fibrous fracture [Barsom & Rolfe (1999)].

Shear Area (dull) Cleavage Area (shiny)

Notch

A
NOTE 1 - Measure average dimensions A and B to the nearest 0.5 mm.

Figure 4. Determination of percent shear fracture [adapted from ASTM E23 (1998)]

200

RHS 102x102x12.7, cold-formed - Company B (Canada) [flat face, longitudinal, exterior notch]
weld seam
ne average li

150

Flat-A Flat-A exterior notch

+20 C

+45 C

Absorbed energy (J)

100

-50 C

-35 C

-20 C 0 C

50

-60 -55 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

Temperature (C)

Figure 5. Experimental CVN toughness-temperature plot annotated with photographs of fractured specimens 6

The Nil-Ductility Temperature (NDT) is another transition temperature used to describe the notch toughness of a structural material. The NDT, labelled in Figure 3, corresponds approximately to the first rise in fracture toughness, from the lower shelf region of the toughness-temperature curve. Below the NDT, the material is considered to be brittle under the conditions of impact loading. Figure 3 shows the CVN fracture toughness-temperature response of steel under both static and dynamic loading conditions. In addition to the change from ductile to brittle failure as the temperature decreases, Figure 3 also shows the influence of dynamic loads or the so-called dynamic shift. The CVN toughness decreases as the load changes from static to dynamic. The brittle fracture lower shelf region is essentially the same for static and dynamic loading conditions but the ductile failure upper shelf toughness is higher for impact loads [Bjorhovde et al. (2001)]. Of the three primary factors that influence the CVN fracture toughness of a given material (i.e. temperature, loading rate, and constraint), constraint is the most difficult to quantify. The primary definition of constraint deals with the plane strain to plane stress transition as affected by specimen thickness. Plane strain produces maximum constraint and occurs in very thick test specimens that have deep cracks. In contrast, plane stress produces minimum restraint and occurs in thin test specimens. Figure 6 is a schematic representation of the state of stress at the tip of a through-thickness crack in a sharply notched specimen loaded in tension. For a uniform state of stress, where the three principal stresses X, Y, and Z are equal, there are no shear stresses. This would result in complete constraint against plastic flow. In the case of most notched specimens, the principal stresses are not equal, with Y > X or Z. Thus, shear stresses will develop along a given plane leading to some plastic yielding. To satisfy compatibility conditions, the plastic "cylinder" (idealised plastic-zone region) in Figure 6 that develops ahead of the crack tip must increase in diameter with an increase in stress in the Y-direction due to the applied load. However, a corresponding through-thickness lateral contraction must occur in the Z-direction. This lateral contraction is constrained by the reaction-stress system of the elastically stressed material surrounding the plastic "cylinder". Furthermore, the material behind the notch is unstressed because of the free surface of the notch and adds to the lateral constraint ahead of the notch.

Y X Z Y strain
e ss

thickn

Z contraction

Figure 6. Constraint conditions for through-thickness cracks [from Barsom & Rolfe (1999)] 7

These constraints produce a triaxial state of stress that reduces the apparent ductility of the material by decreasing the shear stresses. Because yielding is restricted, the constraint ahead of the crack tip is increased and thus the relative fracture toughness is reduced [Barsom & Rolfe (1999)]. An increase in either the "width" (analogous to the "thickness" dimension in Fig. 6) or depth of a Charpy V-Notch (CVN) specimen will increase the volume of material subject to distortion, and by this factor tends to increase the energy absorption when breaking the specimen. However, an increase in specimen size, particularly in width, also tends to increase the degree of constraint. This increase in constraint can tend to induce brittle fracture and thus decrease the amount of energy absorbed by the specimen. Where a standard-size specimen is on the verge of brittle fracture, this is particularly true, and a double width specimen may actually require less energy for rupture than one of standard width. Thus, a general correlation between the energy values obtained with specimens of different size or shape is not feasible [ASTM A370 (1997)]. The standard "full-sized, Type-A" CVN test specimen according to the ASTM E23 (1998) standard is shown in Figure 1. However, when CVN specimens other than the standard size are necessary or specified, the ASTM E23 (1998) standard recommends so-called Subsize Type-A specimens be selected from Figure 7. As mentioned earlier in the discussion of induced constraint conditions, general correlation between energy values obtained with specimens of different size or shape is not feasible. However, "...limited correlations may be established for specification purposes on the basis of special studies of particular materials and particular specimens" as noted in the ASTM E23 (1998) standard. For example, the ASTM A673 (1995) specification for structural steel contains a table of equivalent absorbed energies for various subsize CVN specimens.
0.25 mm notch tip radius 45 ( 1) 55 mm length (+0, -2.5 mm) depth width notch depth

standard size (a) (b) 2.5 mm 5 mm (i) 10 mm 2 mm notch depth (ii) 5 mm 1 mm notch depth (iii) 3 mm 0.610 mm notch depth (e) 20 mm (c) 7.5 mm (d) 10 mm

Figure 7. Charpy "Subsize Type-A" impact test specimens [from ASTM E23 (1998) standard] 8

1.4 Related research The experimental research programme presented in this report involves sampling mainly standard size CVN test specimens from various orientations and locations within the cross-section of an RHS tube. Previous research by Dagg et al. (1989) involved determining the relationship between the transition temperature of material sampled from the flat face and that of material sampled from the corners of coldformed RHS tubes. In their research, the CVN test specimens were artificially aged at 170 C for 30 minutes. Figure 8 shows the average (average of three duplicate CVN tests) toughness-temperature results of two different RHS tube sizes; namely 203x203x9.5 mm and 76x76x6.3 mm. The wall thicknesses of the RHS tubes, being less than 10 mm, precluded the use of a standard size 10 mm x 10 mm CVN test specimen. Figure 8(b) shows a schematic of the subsize 5 mm x 10 mm CVN test specimen, and the sampling locations [Figure 8(a)] within the RHS tube cross-section, used in their study. As evidenced in Figures 8(c) and (d), Dagg et al. (1989) found little difference between the toughness-temperature results of CVN test specimens sampled from the flat face versus the corner region for both RHS tubes.

(a) CVN specimen locations 10 mm 5 mm 10 mm 5 mm

(b) 10 mm x 5 mm subsize CVN specimen 10 mm

m 55 m

5 mm

weld seam

(c) RHS 203 x 203 x 9.5 CVN results 80 Absorbed energy (Joules) Absorbed energy (Joules) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -70 -50 -30 -10 10 Flats Corners 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 50 0 -70

(d) RHS 76 x 76 x 6.3 CVN results

Flats Corners -50 -30 -10 10 30 50

30

Test temperature (C)

Test temperature (C)

Figure 8. CVN testing of flat face versus corner region of RHS tubes [from Dagg et al. (1989)] 9

Of particular interest, Dagg et al. (1989) used a through-thickness notch orientation. Thus the notch tip, the origin of the cleavage/fracture plane, may have characterised the average through-thickness material properties of the RHS tube. Thus, the CVN test specimens sampled from the corner region of the RHS tube may have, to some extent, "averaged-out" the cold-working material effects induced by the outside radius' tensile residual stresses, the inside radius' compressive residual stresses, and the neutral axis' lack of residual stresses. Thus, the through-thickness notch orientation may not have effectively exploited the maximum potential differences in notch toughness between the flat face versus the corner region of the RHS tube. Soininen (1996) has performed an extensive series of CVN tests on cold formed RHS. His CVN test specimens were sampled from the following materials and delivery states: base coil material with CVN test specimens taken longitudinal and transverse to the rolling direction of the coil flat side of the RHS with CVN test specimens taken longitudinal and transverse to the rolling direction of the coil flat side of the RHS after artificial ageing at 250 C/30 min corner area of the RHS in the delivery condition and after artificial ageing at 250 C/30 min

Soininen (1996) found that transverse specimens had, on average, 19 C higher transition temperatures both in the base (coil) material and in the flat face region of the cold formed RHS material, compared to the longitudinal specimens. The increase in the transition temperature from the base (coil) material to the cold formed RHS material (flat face location, longitudinal CVN orientation) was on average 15 C. The increase in the transition temperature from the base (coil) material to corner region of the cold formed RHS material was on average 23 C. Similar to the overall findings of Dagg et al. (1989), Soininen (1996) reported a surprisingly small difference in the average transition temperature (8 C) between the flat face and corner region of the RHS tubes tested. Both Soininen (1996) and Dagg et al. (1989) used through-thickness notch orientations. One of the overall conclusions of Soininen (1996) was that in order to fulfil a certain CVN toughness requirement in the finished cold formed RHS, at a certain temperature, the base (coil) material had to fulfil the same notch toughness at a temperature which was at least 30 lower. The experimental research programme presented in this report contains CVN notch tip orientations that lie along either the outer radius or the inner radius of the corner region of the RHS tubes. These notch orientations may serve to better exploit any differences between the flat face and corner regions of the RHS tube. The experimental research programme presented in this report also contains a comparison of CVN test results between a cold-formed and a cold-formed/stress-relieved tube. In terms of comparing the toughness properties of RHS that have undergone significant heat treatment, Figure 9 shows a comparison of CVN test results between RHS whose walls were locally thickened by a recent process developed in Japan. In an effort to avoid diaphragm-reinforced connections, the Japanese have developed a method for locally thickening the tube walls, in the connection region, through the application of induction heating and simultaneous axial compression force. As evidenced in Figure 9, this process of locally thickening the RHS walls has the added benefit of improving the CVN toughness curves.

10

300 250 Absorbed energy (J) 200 150 100 50

(a) RHS 300x300x12 original size Thickened base ( ) Thickened corner ( )

300 250 Absorbed energy (J) 200 150

(b) RHS 300x300x16 original size Thickened base ( ) Thickened corner ( )

orner ( )

Ori gin al b ase (

se (

Origin al c

50 0 -120 -100

0 -120 -100

-80

-60

-40

-20

20

-80

-60

-40

-20

Temperature (C)

Temperature (C)

Figure 9. CVN test data for locally thickened RHS [from Dai-Ichi High Frequency Co. (2002)]

2 Experimental Test Programme 2.1 Material properties Hollow sections produced to either North American or European standards were used in the experimental test programme. Tubes were obtained from six different international manufacturers; herein designated as Companies A & B (Canada), Company C (Germany), Company D (Brazil), Company E (France) and Company F (Finland). Table 1 contains complete details regarding the geometrical, mechanical, and chemical properties of the tubes. 2.2 Thermal conditioning of CVN specimens A liquid bath/cooler arrangement, shown in Figure 2(a), was used to hold the CVN specimens to the desired test temperature. The temperature of the liquid bath was measured using a thermocouple thermometer (Model No. 600-1040, with a Type J thermocouple probe, manufactured by the Barnant Company). The thermocouple has a temperature range of -200 C to +1000 C. All specimens were thermally conditioned for at least five minutes before being tested. To ensure complete and uniform immersion of the CVN test specimens in the liquid coolant, a perforated stainless steel plate [as can be seen in Fig. 2(a)] was used to elevate the CVN specimens 25 mm above the bottom of the cooler while the tops of the specimens were submerged by an additional 25 mm of the liquid coolant. Methanol was used as a liquid coolant with varying amounts of "dry-ice" (frozen carbon dioxide). The dry-ice, which has an ambient temperature of -87.5 C, was proportioned by trial and error in the methanol bath to achieve the desired conditioning temperature for the CVN specimens. Conditioning temperatures as low as -75 C were achieved using this methodology. 11

Orig inal corn er (


0 20

Orig inal ba

100

Table 1. Material properties of Hollow Structural Sections


(a) General tube description Company A (Canada) RHS 254x254x15.9 (mm) cold-formed cold-formed hot-rolled S355J2H EN10210-1 (1994) A500C ASTM A500-01 (2001) Class C CSA (1998) (b) Mechanical properties (reported by manufacturer) 430 MPa 511 MPa 35% 493 MPa 552 MPa 25% 377 MPa 534 MPa 30% 369 MPa 485 MPa 37% 470 MPa 547 MPa 24% 471 MPa 545 MPa 27% A500C ASTM A500-01 (2001) Class C CSA (1998) cold-shaped into RHS from hot-rolled CHS A53B ASTM A53/A53M-01 (2001) Company B (Canada) RHS 102x102x12.7 (mm) Company C (Germany) RHS 100x100x12.5 (mm)

Manufacturer

Nominal size

RHS 305x305x12.7 (mm)

Company D (Brazil) CHS 324x8.4 RHS 255x255x8.4 "original tube" "final tube" (mm) (mm)

Company F (Finland) RHS 250x250x12.5 (mm) cold-formed S355J2H EN10219 (1997)

Manufacturing process and steel grade

cold formed & stress-relieved A500B ASTM A500-01 (2001)

Company E (France) RHS 350x350x12.5 (mm) cold-formed & stress-relieved S355J2H conforming to EN10210-1 (1994)

Class H CSA (1998)

Yield strength, F y Ultimate Strength, F u

Elongation at failurea

449 MPa 566 MPa 36%

12
0.180% 0.230% 0.850% 0.008% 0.005% 0.210% 0.040% 0.790% 0.007% 0.005% 0.037% 0 0.160% 0.050% 0.060% 0.180% 0.050% 0.810% 0.011% 0.006% 0.041% 0.063% 0.020% 0.160% 0.230% 1.350% 0.015% 0.002% 0.038% 0.040% -

(c) Chemical composition by weight (reported by manufacturer) 0.100% 0.210% 0.960% 0.013% 0.004% 0.024% 0 0 0.010% 0.020% 0.020% 0.157% 0.190% 1.345% 0.014% 0.008% 0.036% 0 0.020% 0.020% 0.030% 0.010% 0.002% 0 0 0.017% 0.070% 0.210% 1.430% 0.012% 0.005% 0.039% 0.007% 0.018% 0.035% 0.027% 0.004% 0.004% 0.025% 0.016%

Carbon, C Silicon, Si Manganese, Mn Phosporous, P Sulphur, S Aluminum, Al Vanadium, V Copper, Cu Nickel, Ni Chromium, Cr Molybdenum, Mo Nitrogen, N Niobium, Nb Tin, Sn Titanium, Ti

For ASTM and CSA specifications, gauge length typically is 2 inches. For EN specifications, gauge length is typically 5.65(cross-sectional area of tensile test coupon).

2.3 Impact testing of CVN specimens A Tinius-Olsen Change-O-Matic impact machine (Figure 2) with a 260 ftlb (352 Nm or Joule) direct reading scale was used to perform all CVN impact tests. The CVN specimens were taken from the liquid bath/cooler apparatus [Figure 2(a)] and placed into the machine testing bed. Figure 2(b) shows a CVN specimen being placed between the inner walls of the testing bed support anvils using selfcentreing tongs. The self-centreing tongs comply with the ASTM E23 (1998) standard. In accordance with the ASTM E23 (1998) standard, each CVN specimen was tested within a strict time interval. Inside of a maximum-allowed five second time interval, the CVN specimen was removed from the liquid bath and placed in the testing bed using the self-centreing tongs; the striker pendulum was raised to the latched position and released without vibration to impact the CVN specimen. 2.4 Compliance of testing machine The ASTM E23 (1998) standard specifies annual verification of impact testing machines to ensure the quality and consistency of data collected therein. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducts a Charpy machine qualification programme (Vigliotti et al. 2000), originally developed by the U.S. army, that is referenced in the ASTM E23 (1998) standard. Under this programme verification specimens, supplied by NIST and stamped with individual specimen identification numbers, are used to certify a Charpy impact testing machine. A set of four Standard Reference Materials (SRM) 2092-Low Energy Charpy V-Notch, supplied by NIST, were used to check the compliance of the Tinius Olsen machine (Fig. 2) used in this experimental test programme. The four reference test specimens were tested in accordance with the ASTM E23 (1998) standard. The test results, the broken CVN test specimens, and a standardised verification questionnaire were mailed to the Charpy Program Coordinator at The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for analysis. The NIST evaluation confirmed that the numerical results of the four Standard Reference Materials (SRM) 2092-Low Energy Charpy V-Notch specimens fell within the acceptable range of energy values. 2.5 Scope of experimental test programme Figure 10 shows the sampling locations and orientations of the CVN test specimens. For each tube type and manufacturer, Charpy V-Notch (CVN) test coupons were taken from various locations around the cross-section. Numerous specimens were prepared from every location so that the complete toughnesstemperature transition curve could be generated (between approximately -75 C and +50 C) for various: cross-section locations (flats, corner, and weld seam) specimen orientations (longitudinal versus transverse) face exposures (notch on interior face of tube, versus exterior face).

13

weld seam transverse interior notch

weld seam exterior notch

longitudinal exterior notch

Fig. 10. Sampling locations and orientations of CVN test specimens

3 Discussion and analysis of results Figure 11 shows the toughness-temperature transition curves for the eight tube types sampled with CVN test specimens. Because of the inherent scatter of CVN test results, either two or three (usually three) replicate specimens were tested at each target temperature and the average result was used to plot the toughness-temperature curve. In total, 557 CVN specimens have been machined and impact tested. 3.1 CVN toughness requirements In Europe, the most common grade of cold-formed structural tubing available now is S355J2H to EN 10219-1 (1997). This guarantees a minimum notch toughness of 27 Joules at -20 C, which is likely adequate for most dynamic loading situations. The toughness-temperature curves, representing the results of this experimental programme, are annotated with this 27 Joule requirement as a general benchmark for comparison. In North America however, the prevailing ASTM A500 (2001) specification has no notch toughness classifications for various grades. Instead, within the Scope it states ...Note 1 - Products manufactured to this specification may not be suitable for those applications such as dynamically-loaded elements in welded structures, etc., where low-temperature notch-toughness properties may be important. The Canadian CSA G40.21-98 (1998) standard specifies minimum CVN requirements, for the base metal, according to four standard temperature categories as shown in Figure 12. However, structural tubing with a notch toughness category is not commonly produced in North America, yet this has not inhibited its ubiquitous use for all manner of applications. The International Institute of Welding (IIW 2003) has recently prepared a report to address the risk of fracture in seismically-affected moment connections. Table 2 shows two qualitative Risk Assessment Procedures (RAPs) based on the Charpy V-Notch toughness of the weld metal, heat affected zone and parent material. Table 2(a) represents a simple and generally conservative method based primarily on practical experience from the Kobe and Northridge earthquakes. Table 2(b) is based on a series of analytical studies using a combination of finite element and fracture mechanics methods by Burdekin & Kuntiyawichai (2001).

14

(i) Seam weld Seam weld (average trend) Longitudinal, exterior face Transverse, exterior face Transverse, interior face

(ii) Flat face Flat face (average trend) Longitudinal, exterior face Transverse, exterior face

(iii) Corner Corner (average trend) Longitudinal, exterior face Longitudinal, exterior face Longitudinal, interior face

400 350 300 Absorbed energy (J) 250 200 150 100 50 0

(a) RHS 305x305x12.7, cold-formed, stress-relieved. Company A (Canada)

(b) RHS 254x254x15.9, cold-formed. Company A (Canada) 400 350

weld (longitudinal)

Absorbed energy (J)

flat face (longitudinal)

300 250 200 150 100 50

weld (longitudinal)

flat face (longitudinal)

corner (exterior) corner (interior)

corner (exterior) 27 J

corner (interior)

27 Joules weld (transverse) -60 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 60

weld (transverse) -60 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 60

Temperature (C) (c) RHS 102x102x12.7, cold-formed. Company B (Canada) 400 350 300 Absorbed energy (J) 250 200 150 100 50 0 -60 -45 -30 -15 0 corner-B (exterior) 27 Joules flat face (transverse) corner-D (exterior) 400 350 300 flat face (longitudinal) Absorbed energy (J) 250 200 150 100 weld (transverse) weld (longitudinal) 15 30 45 60 50 27 Joules 0 -60 -45 -30

Temperature (C) (d) RHS 100x100x12.5, hot-rolled. Company C (Germany)

flat face (longitudinal)

corner (interior)

flat face (transverse) corner (exterior)

-15

15

30

45

60

Temperature (C)

Temperature (C)

Figure 11. Plots of Charpy toughness-temperature results for all tubes tested

15

(i) Seam weld Seam weld (average trend) Longitudinal, exterior face Transverse, exterior face

(ii) Flat face Flat face (average trend) Longitudinal, exterior face Transverse, exterior face

(iii) Corner Corner (average trend) Longitudial, exterior face Longitudinal, interior face

(e) Original tube: CHS 324x8.4, hot-rolled. Company D (Brazil) 100 90 80 Absorbed energy (J) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -75 -60 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 Temperature (C) (g) RHS 350x350x12.5, cold-formed, stress-relieved. Company E (France) 400 350 300 Absorbed energy (J) weld 250 (longitudinal)
co (ex rner ter ior )
or )
5 mm x 10 mm Subsize specimens used CHS (average trend) Longitudinal, exterior face (CHS)

100 90 80 Absorbed energy (J) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

(f) Final tube: RHS 255x255x8.4, cold-shaped into RHS from hot-rolled CHS. Company D (Brazil)

"Original" CHS tube (longitudinal)

flat face (transverse)

"Final" RHS flat face (longitudinal)

corner (interior) corner (exterior)

flat face (longitudinal)

5 mm x 10 mm Subsize specimens used

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

15

30

Temperature (C) 352 Joule test capacity exceeded 400 (h) RHS 250x250x12.5, cold-formed. Company F (Finland) flat face (longitudinal)

flat face (longitudinal) Absorbed energy (J)

350 300 250 200

weld (longitudinal)

er corn rior) te (ex


flat face (transverse)
co r (in ner teri o r)

200 150 100 50 0 -75 -60 -45

inte ri

ner (

flat face (transverse)

150 100 50 0

co r

weld (transverse) 27 Joules

27 Joules weld (transverse) -30 -15 0 15 30

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

15

30

Temperature (C)

Temperature (C)

Fig. 11 (...con'd). Plots of Charpy toughness-temperature results for all tubes tested

16

40

Specified minimum CVN energy (J)

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

34 J ( for 700 MPa steels*) 27 J ( for 350-550 MPa steels*) 20 J ( for 260-300 MPa steels*) *minimum specified yield stress of steel

Category 2

Category 4

-45

-30

Category 3

-20

Standard test temperature (C)

Figure 12. Canadian CVN toughness requirements [CSA G40.21-98 (1998)]

Table 2. Risk of fracture in seismically-affected moment connections [from IIW (2003)]


(a) Level I Assessment Charpy energy (J) @ Tmin 100 Cv 47 Cv < 100 27 Cv < 47 10 Cv < 27 Cv < 10 Temp. difference (C) 40C < (Tmin - T27) 20C (Tmin - T27) 40C 0C < (Tmin - T27) < 20C Risk of brittle fracture Very low risk Low risk Medium risk High risk Very high risk

(b) Level II Assessment Toughness level High toughness Medium toughness Low toughness

notes: Tmin is the minimum service temperature at which an earthquake is considered likely to occur Cv is the Charpy energy at the minimum service temp., Tmin T27 is the temp. for a minimum 27 J Charpy energy absorption

17

Category 1
0

The experimental research programme presented reports on the influence of sampling location and orientation on the CVN toughness for HSS. The IIW (2003) report prudently notes that Parent material Charpy properties may be obtained from supplier's test certificates but the possibility of carrying out check tests, particularly in the transverse direction should be considered. 3.2 Cold-formed versus cold-formed/stress-relieved tubes Class H is a Canadian Standards (1998) category of electric resistance welded (ERW) tube, coldformed to final shape, then stress-relieved by heating to 450 C or higher, followed by cooling in air, to produce stress-strain behaviour which is comparable to hot-rolled sections. In particular, this heat treatment provides partial relief of residual stresses and justifies the use of a higher column curve for use as a compression member. It is a common belief that this Class H heat treatment provides superior notch toughness properties, similar to hot-rolled sections, as well. Both a cold-formed and a cold-formed/stress-relieved (Class H) tube were tested in order to determine the relative benefit of stress-relieving with respect to notch toughness. Both tubes were produced by Company A (Canada) and possess similar mechanical and chemical properties as documented in Table 1. However, it is to be noted that the two tubes were produced in separate batches. Figures 11(a) and (b) show the toughness-temperature results of the cold-formed/stress-relieved and cold-formed tubes respectively. In particular, it was anticipated that any differences between the coldformed and cold-formed/stress-relieved tubes would be most pronounced in the corner location where the residual stresses would be highest. CVN specimens were taken from the corners of the tubes with the notches facing either the interior (predominantly compressive residual stresses) or the exterior (predominantly tensile residual stresses). Figures 11(a) and (b) show little difference between the CVN toughness of cold-formed/stress-relieved, and cold-formed tubes, even in the corner location where the effects of stress-relieving would be expected to be most pronounced and beneficial. This particular RHS in Fig. 11(a) was heated to 496 C ( 14 C) for at least 30 minutes then aircooled. However, to normalise the steel it must be heated to a temperature above the upper transformation temperature (approximately 830 C to 900 C) and cooled in air. Thus, the modest stress-relieving process will not produce a metallurgical change and this is evident in comparing Figs. 11(a) and 11(b), as there is little improvement in notch toughness by stress-relieving using this heat treatment. 3.3 Cold-formed versus hot-rolled tubes In the previous section, it was observed that the CVN toughness benefit of a cold-formed/stress-relieved tube over a standard cold-formed tube was insignificant. On the other hand, Fig. 11(d) shows what excellent toughness properties are achieved at all locations around the cross-section by the hot-rolling process. (This RHS was grade S355J2H to EN 10210 (1994)). Fig. 11 also displays some other interesting relationships between the cold-forming and hot-rolling (or hot-finishing) processes. In Brazil, a company produces CHS by the hot-rolling process then shapes these into RHS by cold-forming. Fig. 11(e) shows that this RHS manufacturing method causes only minor degradation of the notch toughness properties in the longitudinal direction, and little difference between the longitudinal and transverse coupon directions (Fig. 11(f)). The largest decrease in CVN levels from the hot-rolled CHS to the shaped RHS occurred in the corners, where cold-working was a maximum. One should note that the lower number of Joules reported in Figs. 11(e) and 11(f) is likely due to sub-sized 5 x 10 x 55mm CVN coupons being used, compared to the full-size 10 x 10 x 55mm CVN coupons, and as such the 27 Joule benchmark does not apply.

18

3.4 Toughness results versus CVN sampling location and orientation Standard CVN specimens are usually taken from the flat face of the RHS and are oriented parallel to the rolling direction of the source steel (i.e. longitudinal to the RHS axis). This standard longitudinal flat face CVN test specimen is specified by the Canadian CSA G40.21-98 (1998) standard, for example, as well as other international standards and specifications. The so-called CVN toughness of a RHS is highly dependent on the sampling location and orientation of the CVN test specimens. In general, the flat face RHS location and longitudinal rolling orientation produce the highest toughness values. Conversely, the corner and weld seam regions of the RHS generally produce lower CVN toughness values than the flat face. In addition, transversely-oriented CVN specimens tend to produce lower CVN toughness values than their longitudinally-oriented counterparts. These general trends can be seen in Figure 11 for all of the tubes tested. Of all the combinations of sampling locations and orientations, a CVN specimen sampled at the location of a weld seam, and oriented transversely to the weld seam, generally produced the lowest toughness values for the cold-formed RHS. These low toughness values for CVN specimens oriented transversely at the location of a weld seam are in stark contrast to the more favourable toughness values obtained from CVN specimens sampled longitudinally at the flat face location. 3.5 European versus North American CVN toughness requirements It is important to note the worth of requiring a certain CVN value to be demonstrated by the product. The European cold-formed RHS in Figures 11 (g) and (h) required 27 Joules at -20 oC. Although this is far exceeded at the specified testing location, it is even achieved at any location and direction, instilling confidence in the product. For the ASTM A500 RHS, which admittedly had no notch toughness requirement, this benchmark of 27 Joules at -20 oC is provided at the specified testing location in two of the three RHS (Figs. 11(a) and 11(b)), but in no cases is it met at the worst (critical) location. 4 Final Conclusions For dynamic loading situations where notch toughness is a design criterion, cold-formed RHS may be able to satisfy a required energy absorption capacity at the Lowest Anticipated Service temperature (LAST), providing the CVN coupon is taken longitudinally from the flat face region and away from the seam weld, according to typical specifications. High quality cold-formed hollow sections have also been shown to be able to provide excellent notch toughness properties, at various section locations. For the hot-formed sections tested the toughness at any location or orientation in the cross-section was good. For cold-formed RHS, there is little improvement in notch toughness achieved by stress-relieving the section by heat treatment according to CSA (1998) Class H requirements. Thus, cold-formed /stress-relieved RHS are not advocated over cold-formed RHS, for situations where dynamic loading is a design criterion. RHS manufacturing specifications typically require a CVN coupon to be taken longitudinally from the flat face region (and away from the seam weld if the RHS is cold-formed), if notch toughness properties need to be demonstrated because of a purchasing requirement. This leads to the most optimistic notch toughness result for the cross-section and serious consideration must be given to specifying alternate coupon locations, so that the RHS is fit for purpose. The flat face transverse

19

CVN coupon generally results in a lower notch toughness than the flat face longitudinal CVN coupon, for all RHS production methods. 5 Acknowledgements Financial support for this project was provided by the Comit International pour le Dveloppement et ltude de la Construction Tubulaire (CIDECT), the Steel Structures Education Foundation (Canada) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). All experimental work reported was performed at the University of Toronto. Special recognition goes to Kevin Yong-Ping and Ora Zobin who impact tested batches of CVN specimens as part of their undergraduate theses. 6 References ASTM A53/A53M-01 (2001). Standard specification for pipe, steel, black and hot-dipped, zinc-coated, welded and seamless, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. ASTM A370-97a (1997). Standard test methods and definitions for mechanical testing of steel products, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. ASTM A500-01 (2001). Standard specification for cold-formed welded and seamless carbon steel structural tubing in rounds and shapes, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. ASTM A673-95 (1995). Specification for sampling procedure for impact testing of structural steel, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. ASTM E23-98 (1998). Standard test methods for notched bar impact testing of metallic materials, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. AWS (2002). Structural welding code steel, American Welding Society, 18th Edition, Miami, Florida, USA. Barsom, J.M. (1991). Properties of bridge steels, Highway structures design handbook, Chapter 3, Vol. I, AISC Marketing Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA. Barsom, J.M., & Rolfe, S.T. (1999). Fracture and fatigue control in structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Bjorhovde, R., Engstrom, M.F., Griffis, L.G., Kloiber, L.A., & Malley, J.O. (2001). Structural steel selection considerations, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, USA. Burdekin, F.M., & Kuntiyawichai, K. (2001). Elastic plastic FE analyses of sub models of connections in steel framed moment resisting buildings under earthquake loading. IIW Doc. XV-1474-01, IIW Annual Assembly, Ljubljana, Slovenia. CAN/CSA-G40.20-98 (1998). General requirements for rolled or welded structural quality steel, Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Canada.

20

CAN/CSA-G40.21-98 (1998). Structural quality steels, Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Canada. Dagg, H.M., Davis, K., & Hicks, J.W. (1989). Charpy impact tests on cold formed RHS manufactured from continuous cast fully killed steel, Proceedings of the Pacific Structural Steel Conference, Australian Institute of Steel Construction, Queensland, Australia. Dai-Ichi High Frequency Co., Ltd., Nogata, Japan (2002). Private Communication. EN10210-1 (1994). Hot finished structural hollow sections of non-alloy and fine grain steels. Part 1Technical delivery requirements, European Committee for Standardisation, British Standards Institution, London, England. EN10219 (1997). Cold formed welded structural hollow sections of non-alloy and fine grain steels. Part 1: Technical delivery requirements, and Part 2: Tolerances, dimensions and sectional properties, European Committee for Standardisation, British Standards Institution, London, England. International Institute of Welding, JWG of Commissions X and XV-G (2003). IIW recommendations for assessment of risk of fracture in seismically affected moment connections, IIW Doc. XV-110203, IIW Annual Assembly, Bucharest, Romania. Soininen, R. (1996). Fracture behaviour and assessment of design requirements against fracture in welded steel structures made of cold formed hollow sections, Tieteellisi Julkaisuja Research Papers 52, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland. Vigliotti, D.P., Siewart, T.A., & McCowan, C.N. (2000). Installing, maintaining, and verifying your charpy impact machine, Special Publication 960-4, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Washington, DC, USA.

21

Table A1. CVN test results for cold-formed/stress-relieved RHS 305x305x12.7 (Company A - Canada)
(a) Steel grade: Class H (stress-relieved) [CAN/CSA-G40.20-98], Manufactured by: Company A (Canada), RHS designation: RHS 305x305x12.7 Specimen taken from: Seam weld Location C
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location A


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location B Location D


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

-18 C

CT11 CT12 CT13 CT17 CT18 avg. CT5 CT9 CT10 avg. CT7 CT8

-48.9 -48.9 -48.2 -48.7 -48.5 -48.6 -34.3 -34.3 -34.3 -34.3 -17.4 -17.3

8.1 CL9 -48.1 19.0 16.3 CL10 -48.1 25.8 16.3 10.8 8.1 11.9 avg. -48.1 22.4 12.2 CL7 -33.9 23.1 16.3 CL8 -33.9 40.7 13.6 14.0 avg. -33.9 31.9 19.0 CL5 -17.3 149.3 23.1 CL6 -17.2 135.7

-49 C

A11 A12 A13

-49.7 -49.7 -49.7

4.1 12.2 12.2

B13 B14

-49.5 -49.3

12.2 6.8

D10 D11 D12 D15 avg. D3 D6 D9 avg. D7 D8

-48.1 -47.9 -47.9 -48.8 -48.2 -33.9 -33.9 -33.9 -33.9 -18.6 -18.3

5.4 5.4 2.7 4.7 4.6 8.1 8.1 8.1 8.1 13.6 19.0

avg. A4 A10 A3 avg. A9 A8

-49.7 -35.1 -35.1 -35.0 -35.1 -18.7 -18.6

9.5 8.1 19.0 14.9 14.0 46.1 40.7

-34 C

avg. B11 B10 avg. B7 B9 B8 B3 avg. B4 B5 B6 avg. B1 B2

-49.4 -34.5 -34.3 -34.4 -18.6 -18.4 -18.3 -17.2 -18.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 17.0

9.5 17.6 16.3

1 C

avg. -17.4 CT4 1.0 CT6 1.0

21.0 36.6 31.2

avg. -17.3 142.5 CL3 1.0 157.4 CL4 1.0 184.6

avg. 1.0 33.9 avg. 1.0 171.0 CT1 17.0 48.9 CL1 17.0 175.1 CT2 17.0 40.7 CL2 17.0 177.8 CT3 17.0 40.0 avg. 17.0 43.2 avg. 17.0 176.4 CT16 45.5 67.9 CT15 46.0 61.1 CT14 46.2 81.4 avg. 45.9 70.1 Longitudinal Transverse Exterior face Exterior face note: aextraneous data point

17 C

avg. A5 A6 A7 avg. A1 A2 avg. A15 A14

-18.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 17.0

43.4 164.9 177.8 210.3a 171.3 203.6 196.8

17.0 38.0 111.3a 59.7 54.3 50.7 avg. 138.4 D4 122.1 D5 130.3 130.3 avg. 147.9 D1 154.7 D2

-18.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 17.0

16.3 32.6 38.0 35.3 55.6 52.9

46 C

17.0 200.2 avg. 47.0 199.5 B12 47.1 203.6 B15

17.0 151.3 avg. 46.1 162.8 D14 46.1 168.3 D13

17.0 54.3 46.5 157.4 46.6 165.6

Transverse Exterior face

avg. 47.1 201.5 avg. 46.1 165.6 avg. 46.6 161.5 Longitudinal Longitudinal Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face Interior face

weld seam

C transverse exterior notch

C longitudinal

Tube (a) RHS 305x305x12.7 Cold-formed/stress-relieved Company A (Canada)

interior notch B D A

exterior notch B

22

Table A2. CVN test results for cold-formed RHS 254x254x15.9 (Company A - Canada)
(b) Steel grade: Class C [CAN/CSA-G40.20-98], Manufactured by: Company A (Canada), RHS designation: RHS 254x254x15.9 Specimen taken from: Seam weld Location C
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location A


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location B Location D


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

-34 C

CT13 CT14 CT6 CT12 CT18 avg. CT10 CT11

-48.4 -48.1 -48.2 -48.0 -48.2 -48.2 -33.7 -33.6

17.6 14.9 8.1 16.3 6.8 12.8 27.1 19.0 23.1 23.1 19.0

CL9 -47.8

10.9

A13 A14

-48.9 -48.9

8.1 14.9

-49 C

B14 B13 B3

-49.1 -48.9 -48.6

14.9 8.1 6.8

D13 D14

-49.2 -49.0

5.4 4.1

avg. -47.8 CL7 -33.6 CL8 -33.6

10.9 21.7 31.2

avg. A10 A11 avg. A4 A5 A6 avg. A9 A8 A7 avg. A1 A2 A3 avg. A15 A12

-48.9 -33.9 -33.9

11.5 10.9 21.7

avg. B10 B11

-48.9 -33.9 -33.9 -33.9 -18.2 -18.1 -18.0 -18.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 19.6 19.6

10.0 8.1 9.5 8.8 10.9 62.4 38.0

avg. D10 D11 avg. D4 D5

-49.1 -33.7 -33.6 -33.7 -17.7 -17.7

4.7 6.8 6.8 6.8 13.6 6.8

-18 C

avg. -33.7 CT4 -17.8 CT5 -17.8

avg. -33.6 26.5 CL3 -17.9 141.1 CL4 -17.9 59.7

-33.9 16.3 avg. -18.2 130.3 B4 -18.2 57.0 B5 -18.1 146.6 B6 -18.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 19.6 19.6 19.6 111.3 avg. 196.8 B7 203.6 B8 217.1 B9 205.8 avg. 217.1 B1 207.6 B2 210.3

20 C

avg. -17.8 21.0 CT7 0.2 33.9 CT8 0.2 21.7 CT9 0.2 48.9 avg. 0.2 34.8 CT3 19.5 92.2a CT1 19.6 57.0 CT2 19.6 27.1

0 C

avg. CL5 CL6 avg. CL1 CL2

-17.9 100.4 0.2 149.3 0.2 149.3 0.2 149.3 19.6 152.0 19.6 162.8

avg. 19.6 42.1 avg. 19.6 157.4 CT16 48.7 73.3 CL10 48.8 181.8 CT17 48.7 65.1 CT15 48.9 57.0 avg. 48.8 65.1 avg. 48.8 181.8 Transverse Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face note: aextraneous data point

49 C

19.6 211.7 avg. 49.4 211.7 B12 49.6 230.7 B15

37.1 avg. 104.5 D7 162.8 D8 63.8 D3 110.4 avg. 172.3 D9 180.5 D12 D2 D1 19.6 176.4 avg. 49.3 181.8 D6 49.3 177.8 D15

-17.7 0.2 0.2 6.7 2.4 13.3 13.3 19.5 19.6 16.4 49.1 49.2

10.2 33.9 29.9 130.3 64.7 173.7 190.0 179.1 181.8 181.2 199.5 192.7

Transverse Exterior face

avg. 49.5 221.2 avg. 49.3 179.8 avg. 49.2 196.1 Longitudinal Longitudinal Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face Interior face

weld seam

C exterior notch interior notch D A

Tube (b) RHS 254x254x15.9 Cold-formed Company A (Canada) D A B

transverse

longitudinal exterior notch B

23

Table A3. CVN test results for cold-formed RHS 102x102x12.7 (Company B - Canada)
(c) Steel grade: Class C [CAN/CSA-G40.20-98], Manufactured by: Compnay B (Canada), RHS designation: RHS 102x102x12.7 Specimen taken from: Seam weld Location C
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location A


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location B Location D


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

13TW -46.3 13.6 8LW -49.8 5.4 14TW -46.2 9.5 15TW -47.2 10.8 avg. -46.6 11.3 avg. -49.8 5.4 16TW -34.8 10.8 9LW -35.3 10.8 17TW -34.5 23.0 10LW -35.3 6.1 18TW -35.8 13.6 avg. -35.0 15.8 avg. -35.3 8.5 10TW -19.3 28.5 6LW -19.9 8.1 11TW -19.3 16.3 7LW -20.1 6.8 12TW -19.2 20.3 avg. -19.3 21.7 avg. -20.0 7.5 7TW 0.3 27.1 5LW 0.3 10.8 8TW 0.3 31.2 9TW 0.3 13.6 avg. 0.3 24.0 avg. 0.3 10.8 1TW 19.8 40.7 1LW 19.6 27.1 2TW 20.1 32.5 2LW 19.7 71.9 3TW 19.9 29.8 avg. 19.9 34.3 avg. 19.7 49.5 4TW 45.4 105.8 3LW 45.9 146.4 5TW 45.3 94.9 4LW 46.2 146.4 6TW 45.3 74.6 avg. 45.3 91.8 avg. 46.1 146.4 Transverse Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face note: aextraneous data point

13T -49.2 8.1 14T -48.9 6.8 15T -48.4 6.8 avg. -48.8 7.2 16T -35.9 8.1 17T -34.7 16.3 18T -34.8 10.8 avg. -35.1 11.7 10T -19.4 19.0 11T -19.3 24.4 12T -19.2 16.3 avg. -19.3 19.9 7T 0.2 32.5 8T 0.2 24.4 9T 0.2 23.0 avg. 0.2 26.6 1T 20.0 59.7 2T 19.9 62.4 3T 20.1 82.7 avg. 20.0 68.3 4T 45.2 128.8 5T 45.1 120.7 6T 44.9 97.6 avg. 45.1 115.7 Transverse Exterior face

8L

-49.9

4.1

-49 C

11B 12B avg. 13B 14B 15B avg. 8B 9B 10B avg. 6B 7B

-46.9 -46.8 -46.9 -34.8 -34.6 -35.9 -35.1 -19.2 -18.9 -18.9 -19.0 0.3 0.2

2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 3.4 4.1 3.4 4.1 4.1 5.4 4.5 8.1 19.0

11A 12A avg. 13A 14A 15A avg. 8A 9A 10A avg. 6A 7A

-46.7 -46.2

2.7 4.1

-35 C

avg. 9L 10L avg. 6L 7L avg. 5L

-49.9 -34.4 -34.7 -34.6 -19.6 -19.6 -19.6 0.3

4.1 4.1 5.4 4.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 13.6

0 C

-46.5 3.4 -34.6 4.1 -35.3 5.4 -34.9 4.1 -34.9 4.5 -18.9 8.1 -19.3 6.8 -19.3 6.8 -19.2 7.2 0.1 94.9 0.2 147.8 0.2 121.4 20.1 143.7 20.2 151.9

-20 C

20 C

avg. 1L 2L avg. 3L 4L

0.3 13.6 avg. 19.6 181.7 1B 19.7 154.6 2B

0.3 13.6 avg. 20.1 137.0 1A 20.1 29.8a 2A

19.7 168.2 avg. 20.1 137.0 avg. 20.2 147.8 45.7 179.0 3B 44.8 165.4 3A 44.7 179.0 45.7 179.0 4B 44.9 137.0 4A 44.6 155.9 5B 44.9 149.2 5A 44.5 192.6 avg. 45.7 179.0 avg. 44.9 150.5 avg. 44.6 175.8 Longitudinal Longitudinal Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face Exterior face

45 C

note: corner of CVN specimen lacking due to offset weld seam location

Tube (c) RHS 102x102x12.7 Cold-formed Company B (Canada) weld seam D

C exterior notch

C longitudinal

transverse

interior notch exterior notch A

exterior notch B

24

Table A4. CVN test results for hot-rolled RHS 100x100x12.5 (Company C - Germany)
(d) Steel grade: Hot-rolled, Manufactured by: Company C (Germany), RHS designation: RHS 100x100x12.5 Specimen taken from: Seam weld note: Hot-rolled (NO SEAM WELD)
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location C


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location B Location D


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

-20 C

CT10 CT11 CT12 avg. CT3 CT6 CT9 avg. CT7 CT8

-45.6 -44.6 -44.6 -44.9 -35.4 -35.1 -34.4 -35.0 -19.1 -19.1

94.9 78.6 74.6 82.7 115.2 126.1 92.2 111.2 126.1 127.4

CL10 CL11 CL12 avg. CL3 CL6 CL9 avg. CL7 CL8

-46.7 -44.8 -43.9 -45.1 -33.8 -34.4 -33.9 -34.0 -19.1 -18.5

0 C

avg. -19.1 126.8 avg. CT1 0.1 160.0 CL1 CT2 0.1 157.3 CL2 avg. 0.1 158.6 CT4 20.6 168.1 CT5 20.6 187.1 CT16 20.7 271.2 avg. 20.6 208.8 CT14 48.2 216.9 CT13 48.2 212.9 CT15 48.2 227.8 avg. 48.2 219.2 Transverse Exterior face

avg. B7 B9 B8 B3 -18.8 165.4 avg. 0.1 241.3 B1 0.1 176.3 B2 avg. B4 B5 B6 avg. B12 B15

112.5 55.6 127.4 98.5 89.5 113.9 127.4 110.3 157.3 173.5

-45 C

B13 B14 avg. B10 B11

-47.1 -45.7

54.2 54.2

-35 C

-46.4 54.2 -35.5 126.1 -35.4 135.6 -35.5 -20.6 -19.9 -19.1 -19.2 -19.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 20.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 48.2 48.3

130.8 170.8 160.0 155.9 115.2 150.5 avg. 176.3 D1 180.3 D2 178.3 249.5 252.2 269.8 257.2 265.7 268.4

D11 D12 D13 avg. D4 D10 D3 avg. D9 D8

-49.3 -47.3 -46.3 -47.6 -35.7 -35.7 -35.5 -35.6 -19.2 -19.4

54.2 131.5 54.2 80.0 135.6 127.4 105.8 122.9 187.1 113.9

-19.3 150.5 0.1 181.7 0.0 199.3 0.1 20.4 20.4 20.4 20.4 48.4 48.4 190.5 250.8 244.0 245.4 246.8 244.0 303.7

avg. 0.1 208.8 CL4 20.6 227.8 CL5 20.6 254.9 CL16 20.7 199.3 avg. 20.6 227.3 CL14 47.9 329.5 CL13 47.9 268.4 CL15 47.7 314.5 avg. 47.8 304.2 Longitudinal Exterior face

48 C

avg. D5 D6 D7 avg. D15 D14

20 C

avg. 48.3 267.1 avg. 48.4 273.9 Longitudinal Longitudinal Exterior face Interior face

Tube (d) RHS 100x100x12.5 Hot-formed Company C (Germany)

C transverse interior notch exterior notch

C longitudinal

exterior notch B

25

Table A5. CVN test results for hot-formed CHS 324x8.4 (Company D - Brazil)
(e) Steel grade: Hot-formed, Manufactured by: Compnay D (Brazil), Circular hollow section designation: CHS 324x8.4 "Flat" face of CHS Location A
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

Transverse Exterior face

Longitudinal Exterior face

Transverse Exterior face

P1 -73.9 41.4 P2 -73.8 41.4 P3 -73.5 37.3 avg. -73.7 40.0 P16 -55.6 59.7 P17 -55.6 43.4 P18 -55.7 59.7 avg. -55.6 54.2 P4 -35.8 59.7 P5 -35.6 61.7 P6 -35.7 61.7 avg. -35.7 61.0 P7 -21.3 62.4 P8 -21.2 59.7 P9 -21.1 59.7 avg. -21.2 60.6 P10 -3.0 62.4 P11 -2.9 61.0 P12 -2.9 60.3 avg. -2.9 61.2 P13 19.6 62.4 P14 19.6 62.4 P15 19.6 62.4 avg. 19.6 62.4 Longitudinal Exterior face

20 C

0 C

-20 C

-35 C

-55 C

-75 C

Longitudinal Exterior face

Longitudinal Interior face

Note: Subsized (5 x 10 x 55 mm) coupons used

Tube (e) CHS 324.8.4 Hot-rolled Company D (Brazil)

A exterior notch

26

Table A6. CVN test results for "hot-rolled/cold-shaped" RHS 255x255x8.4 (Company D - Brazil) [shaped from hot-rolled CHS 324x8.4 parent tube]
(f) Steel grade: Hot-formed, Manufactured by: Company D (Brazil), RHS designation: RHS 255x255x8.4 Specimen taken from: Seam weld note: Hot-rolled (NO SEAM WELD)
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location A


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location B Location D


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

Transverse Exterior face

Longitudinal Exterior face

T1 -73.3 10.8 T2 -74.0 24.4 T3 -74.1 25.8 avg. -73.8 20.3 T16 -55.6 40.7 T17 -55.6 48.1 T18 -55.1 59.7 avg. -55.4 49.5 T4 -35.6 59.0 T5 -35.7 61.0 T6 -35.5 60.3 avg. -35.6 60.1 T7 -21.0 59.7 T8 -20.8 61.0 T9 -20.8 60.3 avg. -20.9 60.3 T10 -2.9 62.4 T11 -2.8 59.7 T12 -2.7 61.7 avg. -2.8 61.2 T13 19.7 62.4 T14 19.7 61.0 T15 19.7 61.7 avg. 19.7 61.7 Transverse Exterior face

L1 -73.9 27.8 L2 -74.0 28.5 L3 -74.1 23.0 avg. -74.0 26.4 L16 -55.6 44.7 L17 -55.4 44.1 L18 -55.3 55.6 avg. -55.4 48.1 L4 -35.2 56.9 L5 -35.4 57.6 L6 -35.4 55.6 avg. -35.3 56.7 L7 -20.7 56.9 L8 -20.6 57.6 L9 -20.5 57.6 avg. -20.6 57.4 L10 -2.7 59.0 L11 -2.6 59.7 L12 -2.6 59.7 avg. -2.6 59.4 L13 19.7 61.7 L14 19.7 61.7 L15 19.8 59.7 avg. 19.7 61.0 Longitudinal Exterior face

OUT1 -73.9 5.4 OUT2 -73.7 4.1 OUT3 -73.3 10.2 avg. -73.6 6.6 OUT16 -55.2 35.3 OUT17 -54.8 32.5 OUT18 -54.3 35.3 avg. -54.8 34.3 OUT4 -35.1 53.6 OUT5 -35.0 43.4 OUT6 -34.7 54.2 avg. -34.9 50.4 OUT7 -20.4 52.9 OUT8 -20.3 52.2 OUT9 -20.2 54.2 avg. -20.3 53.1 OUT10 -2.6 54.2 OUT11 -2.5 54.2 OUT12 -2.4 54.9 avg. -2.5 54.5 OUT13 19.9 54.2 OUT14 19.9 54.2 OUT15 19.9 54.2 avg. 19.9 54.2 Longitudinal Exterior face

IN1 -72.9 4.7 IN2 -72.9 4.1 IN3 -72.9 4.7 avg. -72.9 4.5 IN16 -54.2 29.8 IN17 -54.1 17.6 IN18 -53.9 13.6 avg. -54.1 20.3 IN4 -34.8 51.5 IN5 -34.6 51.5 IN6 -34.4 51.5 avg. -34.6 51.5 IN7 -20.1 52.9 IN8 -20.0 51.5 IN9 -19.7 53.6 avg. -19.9 52.7 IN10 -2.3 54.2 IN11 -2.3 53.6 IN12 -2.2 53.6 avg. -2.3 53.8 IN13 19.9 54.2 IN14 19.9 55.6 IN15 19.9 56.9 avg. 19.9 55.6 Longitudinal Interior face

20 C

0 C

-20 C

-35 C

-55 C

-75 C

A Tube (f) RHS 255x255x8.4 Hot-rolled/cold-shaped Company D (Brazil) D A B D Note: Subsized (5 x 10 x 55 mm) coupons used exterior notch interior notch

transverse

longitudinal exterior notch B

27

Table A7. CVN test results for cold-formed RHS 350x350x12.5 (Company E - France)
(g) Steel grade: Cold-formed, Manufactured by: Compnay E (France), RHS designation: RHS 350x350x12.5 Specimen taken from: Seam weld Location A
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location C


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location D Location B


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

AT16 -74.9 19.0 AL10 -75.0 179.0 AT17 -74.8 19.0 AT18 -74.9 16.3 avg. -74.9 18.1 avg. -75.0 179.0 AT1 -50.7 21.7 AL1 -50.6 218.3 AT2 -50.7 21.7 AT3 -50.7 24.4 avg. -50.7 22.6 avg. -50.6 218.3 AT4 -36.0 24.4 AL2 -35.7 234.6 AT5 -35.9 33.2 AL3 -35.7 225.1 AT6 -35.8 27.1 avg. -35.9 28.2 avg. -35.7 229.8 AT7 -20.9 32.5 AL4 -20.6 246.8 AT8 -20.8 39.3 AL5 -20.6 237.3 AT9 -20.8 43.4 avg. -20.8 38.4 avg. -20.6 242.0 AT10 -0.2 67.8 AL6 0.2 238.6 AT11 -0.3 61.0 AL7 0.2 242.7 AT12 -0.1 61.0 avg. -0.2 63.3 avg. 0.2 240.7 AT13 19.9 70.5 AL8 19.9 241.3 AT14 19.9 71.2 AL9 19.9 248.1 AT15 19.9 67.8 avg. 19.9 69.8 avg. 19.9 244.7 Transverse Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face note: aextraneous data point

CT16 -75.0 19.0 CT17 -74.9 17.6 CT18 -75.1 21.7 avg. -75.0 19.4 CT1 -50.5 24.4 CT2 -50.5 23.7 CT3 -50.4 23.7 avg. -50.5 24.0 CT4 -34.1 36.6 CT5 -35.5 32.5 CT6 -35.4 29.8 avg. -35.0 33.0 CT7 -20.6 43.4 CT8 -20.6 42.7 CT9 -20.4 44.1 avg. -20.5 43.4 CT10 -0.1 66.4 CT11 -0.1 56.9 CT12 -0.1 101.0a avg. -0.1 61.7 CT13 19.9 88.1 CT14 19.8 90.8 CT15 19.8 85.4 avg. 19.8 88.1 Transverse Exterior face

-70 C

CL10 -75.2

75.9

D15 D16

-75.1 -75.2

8.1 20.3

B15 B16

-75.2 -74.9 -75.1 -50.2 -50.1

9.5 3.4 6.4 8.1 16.9

-50 C

avg. -75.2 75.9 avg. CL1 -50.4 112.5 D1 D2

-75.2 14.2 avg. -50.4 113.2 B1 -50.3 119.3 B2

avg. -50.4 112.5 avg. -50.4 116.3 CL2 -35.3 286.1 D3 -35.2 97.6 CL3 -34.3 292.9 D4 -35.4 158.6 D5 -34.9 185.7 avg. -34.8 289.5 avg. -35.2 147.3 CL4 -20.4 292.9 D6 -20.2 233.2 CL5 -20.4 >352 D7 -20.2 226.4 D8 -20.2 233.2 avg. -20.4 322.0 avg. -20.2 230.9 CL6 0.0 336.2 D9 0.2 231.8 CL7 0.2 332.2 D10 0.3 240.7 D11 0.3 246.8 avg. 0.1 334.2 avg. 0.3 239.8 CL8 19.8 317.3 D12 19.9 229.1 CL9 19.9 >352 D13 19.8 268.4 D14 19.8 259.0 avg. 19.9 335.0 avg. 19.8 252.2 Longitudinal Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face

avg. -50.2 12.5 B3 -33.7 38.0 B4 -34.1 28.5 B5 -33.9 43.4 avg. -33.9 36.6 B6 -20.1 48.8 B7 -20.1 183.0a B8 -20.1 62.4 avg. -20.1 55.6 B9 0.3 222.4 B10 0.3 238.6 B11 0.3 174.9 avg. 0.3 212.0 B12 19.9 252.2 B13 19.8 244.0 B14 19.8 241.3 avg. 19.8 245.9 Longitudinal Interior face

20 C

0 C

-20 C

-35 C

C Tube (g) RHS 350x350x12.5 Cold-formed/stress-relieved Company E (France) B

interior notch

exterior notch

exterior notch D

C A exterior notch A longitudinal

weld seam

transverse

28

Table A8. CVN test results for cold-formed RHS 250x25012.5 (Company F - Finland)
(h) Steel grade: Cold-formed, Manufactured by: Company F (Finland), RHS designation: RHS 250x250x12.5 Specimen taken from: Seam weld Location A
ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Flat face of RHS Location C


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID

Corner of RHS Location D Location B


Temp. Energy (C) (J) ID Temp. Energy (C) (J)

AT1 -70.4 13.6 AL1 -70.1 317.3 AT2 -70.2 8.1 AL2 -69.9 295.6 AT3 -70.2 5.4 avg. -70.3 9.0 avg. -70.0 306.4 AT4 -50.6 32.5 AL3 -50.1 >352 AT5 -50.6 254.9 AL4 -49.9 >352 AT6 -50.3 138.3 avg. -50.5 141.9 avg. -50.0 >352 AT7 -35.8 272.5 AL5 -35.4 >352 AT8 -35.4 56.9 AL6 -35.3 >352 AT9 -35.6 230.5 avg. -35.6 186.6 avg. -35.4 >352 AT10 -20.9 172.2 AL7 -20.3 >352 AT11 -20.8 177.6 AL8 -20.1 >352 AT12 -20.7 28.5 avg. -20.8 126.1 avg. -20.2 >352 AT13 -0.5 >352 AL9 -0.3 >352 AT14 -0.5 >352 AT15 -0.4 183.0 avg. -0.5 >295.6 avg. -0.3 >352 AT16 18.2 271.2 AL10 18.1 >352 AT17 18.2 233.2 AT18 18.2 249.5 avg. 18.2 251.3 avg. 18.1 >352 Transverse Longitudinal Exterior face Exterior face note: aextraneous data point

CT1 -75.1 160.0 CT2 -71.8 5.4a CT3 -71.8 146.4 avg. -72.9 153.2 CT4 -50.4 173.5 CT5 -50.4 162.7 CT6 -50.3 265.7 avg. -50.4 200.7 CT7 -35.2 177.6 CT8 -34.9 263.0 CT9 -35.8 160.0 avg. -35.3 200.2 CT10 -20.2 189.8 CT11 -20.2 185.7 CT12 -20.6 199.3 avg. -20.3 191.6 CT13 -0.4 349.8 CT14 -0.3 259.0 CT15 -0.2 >352 avg. -0.3 >320.3 CT16 18.1 301.0 CT17 18.0 273.9 CT18 18.1 >352 avg. 18.1 >309 Transverse Exterior face

-70 C

CL1 -72.1 160.0 CL2 -72.2 203.4 avg. -72.2 181.7 CL3 -50.2 326.7 CL4 -50.5 >352 avg. -50.4 >339.4 CL5 -35.6 330.8 CL6 -35.5 >352 avg. -35.6 >341.4 CL7 -19.9 >352 CL8 -20.5 >352 avg. -20.2 >352 CL9 -0.2 >352

0 C

D1 D2 D3 avg. D4 D5 D6 avg. D7 D8 D9 avg. D10 D11 D12 avg. D13 D14 avg. D15 D16

-71.4 -71.2 -71.0 -71.2 -49.8 -49.6 -49.4 -49.6 -35.3 -35.2 -35.1 -35.2 -20.3 -20.1 -20.0 -20.1 0.1 0.0

14.9 19.0 12.2 15.4 120.7 141.0 183.0 148.2 54.2a 250.8 216.9 233.9 244.0 227.8 282.0 251.3 233.2 313.2

B1 B2 B3 avg. B4 B5 B6 avg. B7 B8 B9 avg. B10 B11 B12 avg. B13 B14

-70.9 -70.7 -70.5 -70.7 -50.8 -50.9 -50.7 -50.8 -35.5 -35.4 -35.3 -35.4 -19.9 -20.9 -20.7 -20.5 -0.1 0.1

8.1 10.8 10.8 9.9 174.9 176.3 139.6 163.6 189.8 177.6 197.9 188.5 206.1 208.8 212.9 209.2 276.6 238.6

-20 C

-35 C

-50 C

avg. -0.2 CL10 18.0

>352 >352

20 C

0.1 273.2 avg. 17.9 321.3 B15 18.0 >352 B16

0.0 257.6 17.9 252.2 18.0 245.4

avg. 18.0 >352 Longitudinal Exterior face

avg. 18.0 >336.6 avg. 18.0 248.8 Longitudinal Longitudinal Exterior face Interior face

C B Tube (h) RHS 250x250x12.5 Cold-formed Company F (Finland) A B weld seam A D

interior notch

exterior notch

exterior notch D

C exterior notch A longitudinal

transverse

29