Kina25913enn 00

Valorisation action of
plastic member capacity of semi-compact

steel sections a more economic design
(SEMI-COMP+)
doi:10.2777/96448
V
a
l
o
r
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

a
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

m
e
m
b
e
r

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

o
f

s
e
m
i
-
c
o
m
p
a
c
t

s
t
e
e
l

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

a

m
o
r
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

d
e
s
i
g
n

(
S
E
M
I
-
C
O
M
P
+
)
E
U
E
U
R

2
5
9
1
3
K
I
-
N
A
-
2
5
9
1
3
-
E
N
-
N
The objective of this project is the dissemination of knowledge gained through
the former European research project SEMI-COMP on semi-compact steel
sections. The obtained results demonstrated substantial reserves in load-
carrying capacity, which so far cannot be utilised by a designer using the current
Eurocode 3. Considering increasing use of high-strength steel grades, the
problem becomes more severe. Implementation into amended design rules of
codes seems to be a subject of priority.
For the purpose of dissemination of the SEMI-COMP results the work was
divided into the following main steps:
Completing and supplementing the basic findings of SEMI-COMP by further
investigation of the warping end conditions on the plastic member capacity,
by extending the cross-section shapes to such with high webs governing the
local buckling behaviour and by developing correct limit ratios c/t for internal
parts of sections.
Preparing dissemination material as Design Guidelines, comprehensive
background, worked examples and tabulated resistance values.
Developing a member design software for practical use covering design to
the current code and to the new Semi-Comp rules.
Organising seminars in different European countries together with the
presentation and elaboration of the seminar material as well as promotion
of the new rules in technical committees.
Keywords:
semi-compact sections, Class 3, steel structures, cross-section capacity,
member behaviour, statistical evaluation, Eurocode 3, seminars, design
guidelines, design software
Studies and reports
Research and
Innovation EUR 25913 EN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Directorate G Industrial Technologies
Unit G.5 Research Fund for Coal and Steel
E-mail: rtd-steel-coal@ec.europa.eu
RTD-PUBLICATIONS@ec.europa.eu
Contact: RFCS Publications
European Commission
B-1049 Brussels
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS
Free publications:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
at the European Unions representations or delegations. You can obtain their
contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax
to +352 2929-42758.
Priced publications:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).
Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the
European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice
of the European Union):
via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union
(http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

European Commission
Research Fund for Coal and Steel
Valorisation action of plastic member capacity
of semi-compact steel sections a more
economic design
(SEMI-COMP+)
R. Greiner, A. Lechner, M. Kettler
Graz University of Technology, Institute for Steel Structures and Shell Structures
Lessingstrae 25, 8010 Graz, AUSTRIA
J.-P. Jaspart
Universit de Lige, Dpartement M&S
Chemin des Chevreuils, 1, 4000 Lige, BELGIUM
K. Weynand, R. Oerder
Feldmann + Weynand GmbH
Vaalser Strae 259, 52074 Aachen, GERMANY
V. Dehan
ECCS European Convention for Constructional Steelwork
Avenue des Ombrages 32, 1200 Brussels, BELGIUM
Grant Agreement RFS2-CT-2010-00023
1 July 2010 to 31 December 2011
Final report
2013 EUR 25913 EN
LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is
responsible for the use which might be made of the following information.
The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission.
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2013

ISBN 978-92-79-29312-2
doi:10.2777/96448

European Union, 2013
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Luxembourg

Printed on white chlorine-free paper
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

Table of Contents

Final Summary ................................................................................................................................. 5
1 General ...................................................................................................................................... 5
2 Work Package 1 ........................................................................................................................ 6
3 Work Package 2 ........................................................................................................................ 7
4 Work Package 3 ........................................................................................................................ 8
5 Work Package 4 ........................................................................................................................ 9
Scientific and Technical Description of the Results ....................................................................... 11
1 Objectives of the Project .......................................................................................................... 11
1.1 Preface ........................................................................................................................ 11
1.2 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 12
2 Comparison of Initially Planned Activities and Work Accomplished ....................................... 14
2.1 Meetings ...................................................................................................................... 14
2.2 Website SEMI-COMP+............................................................................................... 14
2.3 Seminars and Design Guidelines ................................................................................ 15
2.4 Schedule ..................................................................................................................... 17
3 Description of Activities and Discussion .................................................................................. 18
3.1 Overview on the Design of Frame-Structures ............................................................. 18
3.1.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................... 18
3.1.2 Isolated members with other than fork type support conditions ............................. 19
3.1.3 Members in building frames ...................................................................................... 19
3.1.4 Individual member design ......................................................................................... 24
3.1.5 Extraction of individual frame members .................................................................... 27
3.2 Classification Procedure ............................................................................................. 32
3.2.1 General ...................................................................................................................... 32
3.2.2 Classification for global analysis ............................................................................... 34
3.2.3 Classification for member buckling design ................................................................ 35
3.2.4 Classification for cross-section design ...................................................................... 36
3.2.5 Modification of the c/t-limits for internal compression parts ...................................... 38
3.2.6 Classification examples ............................................................................................. 41
3.3 Cross-Section Resistance ........................................................................................... 47
3.3.1 Existing rules in EN 1993-1-1 .................................................................................... 47
3.3.2 New proposed rules for class 3 according to the project SEMI-COMP .................... 50
3.3.3 Continuity with existing rules for semi-compact sections in EN 1993, Part 1-1 and 1-3
54
3.3.4 General load carrying behavior of class 3-sections background of the design
formulae .................................................................................................................... 56
3.3.5 Transition to class 2 and to class 4 ........................................................................... 59
3.3.6 Statistical evaluation ................................................................................................. 61
3.4 Member Resistance .................................................................................................... 62
3.4.1 Existing rules in EN 1993-1-1 .................................................................................... 62
3.4.2 New proposed rules for class 3 according to project SEMI-COMP .......................... 63
3.5 Calculation Procedure ................................................................................................. 64
3.5.1 Calculation procedure for cross-section design ........................................................ 64
3.5.2 Calculation procedure for member buckling design .................................................. 67
3

3.5.3 Definition of utilisation factor UF ............................................................................... 69
3.6 Tabulated Values for W
3,y
and W
3,z
............................................................................. 72
3.7 Worked Examples ....................................................................................................... 76
3.7.1 Overview ................................................................................................................... 76
3.7.2 Example 2: IPE 500 under bending and compression .............................................. 76
3.8 Software Development ................................................................................................ 87
3.8.1 Classification of double symmetric H- and I- Profiles ............................................... 87
3.8.2 Classification of Rectangular Hollow Sections (RHS) ............................................... 94
3.8.3 Classification of Circular Hollow Sections (CHS) .................................................... 101
3.8.4 PNA Iteration-Tool ................................................................................................... 102
3.8.5 About Microsoft Visual C#....................................................................................... 105
3.8.6 Programming SemiComp Member Design ............................................................. 106
3.8.7 Working with SEMICOMP Member Design ............................................................ 108
3.9 Influence of Warping on the Cross-Section Resistance............................................ 114
4 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 115
5 Exploitation and Impact of the Research Results ................................................................. 116
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. 117
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... 120
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 121
ist of References ........................................................................................................................ 121
ppendices ................................................................................................................................... 124

4

Final Summary
1 General
This publication gives an overview on the project objectives, results obtained, conclusions and
applications of the RFCS-Research project
SEMI-COMP+: RFS2-CT-2010-00023 Valorisation Action of Plastic Member Capacity of Semi-
Compact Steel Sections a more Economic Design,
that was carried out under grants of the Research Fund for Coal & Steel (RFCS) of the European
Commission, DG by the following four financially independent partners
Institute for Steel Structures, Graz University of Technology, Austria (TU Graz)
Department M&S, University of Lige, Belgium (ULg)
Feldmann +Weynand GmbH, Aachen, Germany (F+W)
ECCS - European Convention for Constructional Steelwork, Brussels, Belgium (ECCS).
The project coordination was handled by the Graz University of Technology. The project was organised
so, that all contributions had to be accomplished within a 18-months project duration:
Commencement 01/07/2010 and finalisation 31/12/2011
The project was monitored by Technical Group TGS8 Steel products and applications for building,
construction and industry of the RFCS.
The work was subdivided into the following four work packages (WP):
WP 1: Preparation of the Dissemination Material for Seminars and Workshops
WP 2: Design Software
WP 3: New Developments on the Cross-Section Slenderness Limits
WP 4: Dissemination Strategy
In total about 4790 working hours were planned for this dissemination work. The project organisation is
shown by Table 1. Each work package was lead by one partner being responsible for the work
accomplished and the achieved results.
Table 1 WP leaders and partners
WP N WP Leader WP Partner
WP 1 TU Graz ULg F+W ECCS
WP 2 F+W TU Graz ULg
WP 3 ULg TU Graz F+W
WP 4 ECCS TU Graz ULg F+W

The work undertaken in the 18-months period of the project covers the establishment and translation of
the design guidelines including background documentation and worked examples (WP 1), the software
development including validation (WP2), work on the preparation of correct c/t-limit values for
structural hollow section specimens (WP 3) as well as the dissemination of the knowledge gained
through the organisation and hosting of the seminars and the creation of the SEMI-COMP+website
(WP 4). Further, the new results have already been formulated for the amendment of the Eurocode 3 in
the process of evolution of the code.

In the following, the main issues of the individual work packages are reported.
5

2 Work Package 1
OBJ ECTIVES and RESULTS OBTAINED

Preparation of background documentation for the cross-section classification in the elasto-plastic
stress states for general loadings by N, M
y
and M
z

Preparation of background documentation concerning the influence of warping end restraints to the
cross-section capacity
Preparation of background information for the assessment of the decaying length of the warping
influence for unrestrained warping end-conditions of double-symmetric sections
Preparation of background documentation for new design model of double-symmetric sections in
Class 3: accuracy study, Monte Carlo-study, statistical evaluation
Preparation of worked examples on I-, H- and box sections
Preparation of tabulated M
3,Rd
-values (additional)
Drafting of the Design Guidelines on the new and improved rules for the Class 3 cross-section and
member buckling resistances (Method 1 and Method 2)
Preparation of a calculation procedure acc. to EC3 for cross-section and member buckling behaviour
(additional)
Preparation of Powerpoint-presentations
Development of web platform for SEMI-COMP+, including a logo
www.stahlbau.TUGraz.at/semicompplus
Upload of documents to SEMI-COMP+website
Translation of Design Guidelines into French, German, Italian and Portuguese language

Design Guidelines

Background Documentation Logo

Fig. 1 Cover pages of Design Guidelines and background documentation, logo for dissemination

Fig. 2 Website Semi-Comp+, overview
6

Fig. 3 Overview on Powerpoint presentations
It may be summarised, that all objectives have been fully achieved (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2 and Fig. 3).
Moreover, additional information was provided dealing with tabulated resistance values for Class 3 and
with frame analysis. The original commitment to have a Dutch translation was abandoned after decision
to transfer the seminar in the Netherlands to Slovenia. Due to the international character of the events
held in Romania and Sweden, the audience was perfectly comfortable with English versions and did not
need translation. These amendments were reported and clarified at RFCS.

APPLICATIONS

The new results are already formulated for the amendment of the Eurocode 3 in the process of
evolution of the code.
The Semi-Comp website provides extensive background material with worked examples, tabulated
resistance values and information on the design of frame structures. All this material supports better
use of current steel design.
The calculation procedure for beam columns includes important information about the correct
extraction of a member cut out of a structural frame system.

3 Work Package 2

Development of a software called SEMICOMP MEMBER DESIGN (current version 1.0.10) to
perform cross section checks as well as member checks for class 1, class 2 and class 3 sections in
accordance with EN 1993-1-1 and SEMI-COMP design model. Member checks are available for
members with intermediate restraints. For the determination of M
cr
, the software LTBeam [24] has
been integrated. The software runs within Excel 2007 and Excel 2010. Worked examples and
benchmark examples are created. This design software covers the elastic and plastic cross-section
classification on general loading conditions specifically (Fig. 4).
7

Benchmark study for the validation of the SC+software with EN 1993-1-1 (Method 1 and Method
2) and new SEMI-COMP-design model on basis of worked examples.
Upload of software to SEMI-COMP+website

Fig. 4 Software SEMICOMP MEMBER DESIGN
APPLICATIONS

The Semi-Comp Design Software which allows the code-conform member design and the design
based on the new rules for class 3-sections. This software can be used by free downloading from the
SEMI-COMP+website and is of direct benefit for steel designers.

4 Work Package 3

Interaction with CIDECT for:
Clarification about definition of c/t ratio for RHS and SHS profiles
Improvement of Method 1 approach for column buckling when applied to tubular profiles (see
report CIDECT 2X on Resistance and stability of structural members with hollow sections under
combined compression and bending by Ly, J aspart, Weynand, Ole, J uly 2011)
Access to databases of test results (see above CIDECT report)
Derivation of improved c/t ratios allowing consistency between EN1993-1-1 and EN1993-1-5 and
providing a better fit with test results
Accomplishment of a Finite-Element study for limiting cases of I-, H- and box sections (rolled and
welded)
Preparation of thorough background documentation on modified slenderness limits for internal
elements (classes 1, 2, and 3)
Comparisons of FE-study with new SEMI-COMP design model
8

Preparation of the dissemination m
Graz (both 2011)
Preparation of the dissemination m
2011)

APPLICATIONS

New improved c/t-slenderness rati
for Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 in
By extending the scope of cross-se
could be developed to cover the fu

5 Work Package 4
OBJ ECTIVES and RESULTS OBTA

The following achievements
Design Guidelines for Class 3 stee
new improved c/t-limit ratios for i
design software SEMICOMP ME
including detailed information on
cut out of frame structures
have been disseminated by
10 seminars in Hungary (EUROST
Meetings and workshop in Stuttga
Sweden, Portugal (VIII Congresso
500 participants representing the f
fabricators, education and universi
SEMI-COMP+website www.stah
www.steelconstruct.com

APPLICATIONS

Presentations in technical committ
Publications in conference proceed

Fig. 5 Pi

material for the TC8-meetings in Ljubljana (fall 20
material for the EC3-Evolution Group-meeting in V
ios elaborated for internal parts in compression (ne
n Eurocode 3 Part 1-1)
ection forms to such with high webs the proposed d
ull range of practical section shapes.
AINED
el sections,
internal parts in compression,
EMBER DESIGN
how to perform the code conform extraction of a b
TEEL 2011), Romania (ICTWS 2011), Germany (E
art), Austria, Italy (XXIII Italian Steel Conference)
o de Construo Metlica e Mista) and Slovenia (F
field of structural steel designers, consultants, steel
ities were attending the seminars (Fig. 5, Fig. 6).
hlbau.tugraz/semicompplus, including a link on
tees
dings and technical journals
ictures of seminar at EUROSTEEL 2011
10), Lisbon and
Vienna (spring
ew class borders
design rules
beam-column
ECCS Annual
, Belgium,
ig. 7). In total
work
9

Fig.

Fig. 7 Locatio

6 Pictures of seminar in Slovenia
n of organised seminars within SEMI-COMP+

10

B Scientific and Technical Description of the Results
1 Objectives of the Project
1.1 Preface
The present work is the outcome of two recent research projects funded by the European Research Fund
for Coal and Steel (RFCS) and respectively entitled:
SEMI-COMP Plastic member capacity of semi-compact steel sections a more economic design
(RFSR-CT-2004-00044) [4];
SEMI-COMP+Valorisation action of plastic member capacity of semi-compact steel sections a more
economic design (RFS2-CT-2010-00023).
Both projects relate to the development of new evaluation procedures for the design resistance of class
3steel cross-sections. These ones, according to Eurocode 3 Design of Steel Structures [1] are
assumed to transfer no more than an elastic level of resistance while it is nowadays widely recognized
that an internal plastic redistribution may, sometimes significantly, increase their capacity to resist
forces.

The first project, SEMI-COMP [4], has been completed in 2008, after three years of intensive research
involving Graz University of Technology (coordinator), Lige University, Ingenieurbro Feldmann +
Weynand and ArcelorMittal Research Lige. As an outcome of this project, an original model fully in
line with the Eurocode 3 principles and allowing an increase of the design resistance of Class 3 steel
cross-sections has been proposed as an alternative to the safe design approach presently followed in
Eurocode 3. It has further been extended to the design of members made of Class 3 profiles and has
been validated through numerical and experimental testing and advanced numerical simulations.
Finally, its safety level (
M
factor) has been defined through appropriate statistical evaluations.
The quality and the economical importance for practice of this SEMI-COMP model have convinced
RFCS to fund a complementary project called SEMI-COMP+aimed at disseminating, to professionals,
the new developed design procedures through the drafting of design guidelines, the diffusion of the
specific software Semi-Comp Design and the organization of seminars for practitioners, at the
European level. To achieve this task, ArcelorMittal Research Lige has been substituted, in the
partnership, by the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork (ECCS).

The present document is part of this global dissemination project; it contains design guidelines,
background information and selected worked examples for the classification. All notations are chosen
in accordance to Eurocodes.
More info on SEMI-COMP+may be found on the two following web sites:
www.stahlbau.tugraz.at/semicompplus or www.steelconstruct.com.

The use in daily practice of design approaches not explicitly covered by the norms, Eurocode 3 in the
present case, may represent a difficulty in terms of design responsibility even, as already mentioned
before, the proposed design methods are in full conformity with the basic principles of Eurocode 3. In
order to overcome this difficulty, the authors have established direct contacts with the Technical
Committee 8 Stability of the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork (ECCS) with a view
to publish so called European Design Recommendations providing to the practitioners and control
bodies a due validation by the recognized European experts in the field of resistance and stability of
steel structures.
As a recognition of the key support of RFCS to the development and to the dissemination of the design
guidelines, but also to the organization of seminars in various European countries, the SEMI-COMP
and SEMI-COMP+partners would like to express their sincere acknowledgments to the European
Research Fund for Coal and Steel and, more particularly, to its TGS8 Committee.

11

1.2 Introduction
In EN 1993-1-1 the evaluation of the cross-section and member resistances is based on a classification
system; four different classes are identified according to the risk of early or late appearance of plate
buckling phenomena in the constitutive cross-section walls subjected to compression (Fig. 8). The
specific level of resistance (plastic, elastic or even lower than elastic) varies according to the four
classes, respectively named:

Fig. 8 Moment-rotation curve depending on
cross-section classes 1 to 4

The classification of a cross-section requires the classification of the individual cross-section walls
(plates) in compression. To achieve it, reference is made to the width-to-thickness ratio c/t, to the
loading and to the support conditions (internal and outstand character) of each wall. The definition of
the c/t ratio for internal and outstand walls is illustrated in Fig. 9 below.

Fig. 9 Definitions for the determination of the c/t-ratio according to EN 1993-1-1 for rolled and tubular
sections (left) and welded sections (right)

Classification criteria for walls in partial or complete compression are provided by EN 1993-1-1 where
the class of the cross-sections is finally defined as the higher class of those of the individual walls. For
class 1 and class 2 sections, a plastic level of resistance is allowed but only an elastic one is suggested
for Class 3 sections. This results in a sudden jump of resistance at the class 2 to class 3 border as shown
in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 below.

Fig. 10 Cross-section resistances for strong-axis bending according to EN 1993-1-1, shown for classes 1
to 4
M
Rd
Class 1 Class 3 Class 4 C
l
a
s
s

2
c/t
M
pl
M
el
Elastic global analysis
Plastic global analysis
M
pl
M
el
M
eff
class 1: plastic cross-sections
class 2: compact cross-sections
class 3: semi-compact cross-sections
class 4: slender cross-sections
12

Fig. 11 Cross-section resistances for biaxial bending according to EN 1993-1-1, shown for classes 1 to 4

The RFCS-Project SEMI-COMP [4] had the objective to propose and validate a physically more
appropriate continuous transition resistance model for semi-compact class 3 sections (Fig. 12).

Fig. 12 Overview of SEMI-COMP research project

This has been achieved in the form of a linear transition between class 2 and class 4 borders through the
development of a calculation model duly justified by statistical safety evaluations, as requested by EN
1990-Annex D, see Fig. 13.

Fig. 13 3-D-illustration of cross-section resistance for biaxial bending according to SEMI-COMP (improved
capacity for class 3)
M
Rd
Class 1 Class 3 Class 4 C
l
a
s
s

2
c/t
M
pl
M
el
Continuous transition
13

The SEMI-COMP project raised aspects of cross-section resistance but also of member stability (for
rolled and welded I- and H-sections and rectangular hollow sections with double-symmetric cross-
section shape). The objective of the Design Guidelines is to disseminate the knowledge gained along
this project to practitioners.

2 Comparison of Initially Planned Activities and Work
Accomplished
2.1 Meetings
In the 18 -months period four project meetings were held in Graz, Aachen and Brussels as follows:
First project meeting: 4
th
October 2010, Graz
The first project meeting was held in Graz/Austria. In this meeting the new project Semi-Comp+was
started officially. All project partners showed their work performed starting with 1
st
J uly 2010. During
the meeting the project work plan and the distribution of tasks could be fixed in general. In the
discussion of the dissemination strategy it was decided that all seminars/workshops should be organized
in close cooperation with the National Steelwork Associations (NSA) respectively with the Eurosteel
2011 Conference in Hungary. In addition, an overview on mechanical problems of the Eurocode 3
design procedure was given.

Second project meeting: 1
st
and 2
nd
December 2010, Aachen
The second project meeting was held in Aachen/Germany. In this meeting the main technical topics
were discussed in detail. This concerns the correction of c/t-limit ratios for structural hollow sections
and the applicability of the Semi-Comp formulae to limiting cases (web +flanges in Class 3 both at
borders to Class 2 or to Class 4 respectively). Solutions for the correct assessment of c/t limit ratios for
structural hollow sections were presented. Results of a Finite-Element study of limiting cases for I-
sections and structural hollow sections were also shown.

Third project meeting: 16
th
and 17
th
March 2011, Brussels
Issues on project organisation, definition of the scope of the design software, content and duration of
the seminars were discussed and agreed until the end of the third project meeting.

Fourth project meeting: 15
th
and 16
th
J une 2011, Brussels
Seminar preparation, Design Guidelines, Software presentation, distribution of tasks for background
documentation were elaborated during the last project meeting.

All meetings have been organised as initially planned.

2.2 Website SEMI-COMP+
An individual website for the dissemination strategy of Semi-Comp+was established. This website is
located on the website of the Graz University of Technology www.tugraz.at under the Institute of Steel
Structures, where it can be supported for long time:
www.stahlbau.TUGraz.at/semicompplus
In addition, a link to the SEMI-COMP+website is available fromthe ECCS website
www.steelconstruct.com

14

2.3 Seminars and Design Guidelines
Seminar presentations are a core part of Work package 4 Dissemination strategy and they were held
in the period of September to December 2011.
In the course of the preparation of the seminars together with ECCS and the National Steel Associations
in the different countries it turned out that the views and expectations how to best meet the interests of
practical designers and of the steel industry was very different. The form of seminars varied from half-
hour presentations at the Annual Steel Constructors congress to two-hours seminars within national or
international conferences and to stand-alone half day courses.
According to this situation the initially intended standard seminars of 4-hours lectures (plus coffee
breaks and lunch) could only be kept in few cases. The rest of them had be adapted to the specific
national events and their audience (designers, conference participants, academics, students,
representatives of the steel industry).
Beside the power-point presentations seminar material was distributed in form of Design Guidelines,
which were printed brochures in English or translations in German, French, Italian and Portuguese. The
oral presentations were sometimes supported by local presenters who gave introductions or
explanations in the local language. In addition, the full content of the power-point slides was made
accessible at the Semi-Comp website as well as the Background Document and the worked examples,
so that the participants could use the full information.
A summary of the seminar data is given in the following Table 2.
Changes of the original program had to be made in two cases resulting from the response of the national
associations dealing with the local organization, i.e. the seminar in The Netherlands had to be replaced
by one in Slovenia and the seminar in France had finally to be cancelled because of lack of participants.
The 4 hours seminars covered a larger scope than the Semi-Comp results alone. The additional part
dealt with the general guidance on the Eurocode-concept for frame design and design of the members
extracted out of the frame structure. This chapter was developed in addition to the original scope of the
Semi-Comp-work. In fact, it became clear during the preparation of the seminars that such a chapter
would be needed to provide a conceptual background into with the newly developed rules for semi
compact sections could be embedded. Accordingly, this part served particularly well for students and
practical engineers not so deeply involved in steel design, who were also invited by the local steel
associations. The title of the seminar was, therefore, chosen as Best use of Eurocode 3 for semi
compact members.
The content of the 2-hours-seminars was directly concentrated on the results of the Semi-Comp-
projects, i.e. guidelines for classification and member design, worked examples and the design
software. In addition, an introduction was given on the overview of the main aspects of the Eurocode-
philosophy for the frame and member design. The presentation was mainly focused on the practical
outcome of the project for design engineers.
The presentation at the ECCS Annual Congress in Potsdam was a compact overview on the above,
mainly highlighting the benefits of the new developments since the audience there represented the
leading experts of the steel construction industry.
In addition to the originally planned 10 seminars an extra presentation of the Semi-Comp project was
given within the Eurocode course held by F+W at SBP in Stuttgart, which can practically make up for
the cancelled one in France.
Further dissemination activities were made in this period within the regular meetings of ECCS-
Technical Committee 8, Stability in Ljubljana, Lisbon and Graz as well as in the meeting of the
Eurocode-Evolution Group to EN 1993-1-1 of SC3 in Vienna. The data on these dissemination
activities are summarized in Table 3. The above committees are set up by the European experts on
stability of steel structures and they are also involved in the amendment of the Eurocode rules for the
next revision. Placing the information on the new developments of the Semi-Comp projects directly into
these bodies and discussing the potential implementation into the next Eurocode 3-version with them
seems to be an efficient way of enlarging the dissemination strategy of the project.
15

In similar intention a comprehensive overview on the Semi-Comp results has been summarized in a
journal paper which will be published in the April-issue 2012 of the J ournal Stahlbau, which is the
standard publication for constructional steelwork in the German speaking countries and even beyond
(see Table 3).
In conclusion, the promised work of WP4 in the field of dissemination has been put in action by the
seminar program as close and effective as possible in the given context with the interests of the National
Steel Associations.

Table 2 SEMI-COMP+ seminars

16

Table 3 SEMI-COMP+ Additional dissemination activities

2.4 Schedule
All work on the project has been carried out in close accordance with the programme bar chart/
Amendment March 2011 as follows (Table 4).

Table 4 Programme schedule

17

3 Description of Activities and Discussion
3.1 Overview on the Design of Frame-Structures
3.1.1 Generalities
As explained in the introduction chapter, new design methods for the evaluation of the resistance of
Class 3 cross-sections have been made available through the SEMI-COMP project. These ones are
presented in Chapter 3.2 and Chapter 3.3 of the present publication.
These rules may directly be used for the verification of the design resistance of cross-sections, by
simply comparing the applied internal forces resulting from the frame analysis (M
Ed
) to the Class 3
corresponding increased design resistances (M
Rd
), with due account of the possible interactions with
axial forces.
The benefit from the less conservative design approaches for Class 3 cross-sections presented in
Chapter 4 may also be taken into account when evaluating the resistance and the stability of members
subjected to bending moments and axial forces (beam-columns).
How to achieve this is addressed in Chapter 3.4 where it is explained how to slightly amend the
Eurocode 3 beam-column formulae to profit from a higher Class 3 cross-section resistance.
The so-amended Eurocode 3 beam-column formulae are directly applicable to isolated members
characterised by fork type support conditions. In these isolated members, the critical buckling lengths
for flexural buckling around the weak and strong axes but also for lateral-torsional buckling are all to be
taken as the actual member length (system length); besides that, no second order effects are affecting
the value of the bending moments possibly applied at both member ends.
The application of the Eurocode 3 beam-column formulae (amended or to profit from a higher Class 3
section resistance) to isolated members with other end conditions or to members in building frames is
much less obvious and many misuses of the formulae in daily practice may be foreseen at that level.
The difference with respect to the simply supported end conditions may involve arbitrary combinations
of full, partial or null (i) warping restraint, (ii) flexural rotation restraint and (iii) transverse
displacement restraint at the member end sections. Members torsionally restrained at some distances
along their length to limit or prevent lateral-torsional buckling effects belong also to this category.
ECCS publication N119 [5] provides detailed information about the application of the Eurocode 3
beam-column formulae to isolated members with other end conditions or to members in building frames
(see Fig. 14).
In the next paragraphs, this topic is briefly addressed. But before looking at these ones, users should be
aware that, due to the complexity of the phenomena affecting the beam-column behaviour and the lack
of extensive studies and thorough calibration procedures, a loss of accuracy is to be expected when
applying the interaction formulae to non-simply supported members. The major concern is safety, i.e.,
the application of the formulae should yield practically always safe strength estimates, even if
sometimes rather conservative.

Fig. 14 Individual member design

Individual member design
Various different ways to approachthe design process of
- members with other than fork conditions
- members in frames
EC3-rules: buckling length = member length
alternative: use of non-sway buckling length
C
m
-factors accounted by the so-called
- equivalent moment factors method EMF
- equivalent column method ECM
are described in - Semi-Comp+ design guidelines
- ECCS publication n 119 (2006)
extractionof members
18

3.1.2 Isolated members with other than fork type support conditions
For such members, the task of determining the appropriate buckling length L
cr
for flexural and lateral-
torsional buckling is a straightforward one (unlike in frame members) and can be performed either
analytically (numerically) or resorting to one of the various tables, charts or approximate expressions
available in the literature. Thus, the only issues addressed next concern the definition of the diagram of
bending moments M
Ed
and the determination of the appropriate equivalent moment factors C
m
.
Two different approaches are traditionally used in Europe as far as the evaluation of the distribution of
bending moments M
Ed
and the corresponding equivalent moment factors C
m
are concerned:
the equivalent moment factors method
the equivalent column method
Both approaches are detailed and illustrated through worked examples in [5].

3.1.3 Members in building frames
The design of the frame and of its components consists of a two-step procedure involving a global
frame analysis followed by individual cross-section and/or member design checks (Fig. 15).

Fig. 15 General approach in frame design
Global frame analysis is conducted based on assumptions regarding the component behaviour (elastic or
plastic) and the geometric response (first-order or second-order theory) of the frame. Once the analysis
is complete, i.e. all relevant internal forces are determined in the whole structure, then the design checks
of all the frame components are performed.

Fig. 16 Elastic/plastic frame analysis and member check
By following this approach the designer has to make three different choices concerning
(1) the elastic or plastic analysis for frame and member design
(2) the 1. or 2. order analysis acc. to the sway or non-sway character of the frame
(3) the kind of frame analysis in relation to the kind of member design.
Frame Design consists of a 2-step procedure:
Sectionclassificationplays a role on both levels
Different kinds of analysis arise regarding the
component behavior: elastic or plastic behaviour of members
and/or joints
geometrical response: first-order or second order theory +effect of
imperfections and/or e
o
Individual cross-section
and/or member checks
Global frame analysis
Choice between elastic/plastic frame analysis and
member check
Classification Global Analysis Member Check
Class 1 Plastic Plastic
Elastic Plastic
Elastic Elastic
Class 2 Elastic Plastic
Elastic Elastic
Classes 3 and 4* Elastic Elastic
class 4* elastic global analysis with A,I (gross section) if >0,5
A
eff
, I
eff
(effective section) if 0,5
19

Choice (1) differentiates between elastic and plastic approach when performing the global frame
analysis and for the member check. Fig. 16 illustrates the different alternatives, which closely depend
on the cross-section classes.

Choice (2) deals with the application of different types of global analysis in relation to the sway or non-
sway behaviour of the frames. In Eurocode 3, frames are classified as sway or non-sway. The
description non-sway frame applies to a frame when its response to in-plane horizontal forces is so
stiff that it is acceptable to neglect any additional forces or moments arising from horizontal
displacements of its storeys (so-called P- effects). This means that the global second-order effects may
be neglected. When the second-order effects are not negligible, the frame is said to be a sway frame.
As criterion for differentiation the ratio
cr
=F
cr
/ F
Ed
may be used (see Fig. 17).

Fig. 17 Global analysis related to the sway/non sway frame behaviour
By choice (3) the designer selects the kind of frame analysis in relation to the kind of member design.
Depending on whether member buckling checks are made or if the design is based on full second
order moments and cross-section checks Eurocode 3 opens various ways of analysis. In addition to the
above, Eurocode 3 specifies that together with the second-order effects imperfections need to be
considered for the structural stability of frames. These should be allowed for in the frame analysis by
means of an equivalent imperfection in the form of an initial sway imperfection and individual bow
imperfections of members if relevant (Fig. 18).

Fig. 18 Choice of frame analysis related to the kind of member design
Various opportunities offered by Eurocode 3 to perform the global analysis and design process are
illustrated in Table 2 and Table 3.
For the verification of the resistance and the stability of beam-columns, reference has again to be made
here either to the equivalent moment factors method or to the equivalent column method. The
critical buckling length for in-plane flexural buckling may be taken as non-sway buckling length
connected with the specific C
m
-factors for the given boundary conditions of the individual member.
Choice between 1. or 2. order analysis according to
the sway/non sway character of the frame
A frame is non-sway when :
if elastic global analysis
if plastic global analysis
where :
F
Ed
design value of the total vertical load
F
cr
elastic critical value for instability of frame in a
sway mode
cr Ed
F F 10
cr Ed
F F 15
Choice between frame analyses regarding
the kind of member design:
Design by member buckling checks
Design by 2. order moments +cross-section checks
Methods dependon the account of
2. order effects imperfections and/or e
0
P
P
P
P
e
0
20

Alternatively, the critical buckling length may be taken equal to the system length and may then be
connected with the factor C
m
given for simply supported members in Eurocode 3.
Obviously, as an alternative to Table 2, a full second order analysis in which all geometrical second
order effects (sway and member), all effects of imperfections (sway and local bow imperfections about
both axes), and material non-linearities (plasticity) may be performed. In this case, no cross-section and
member check has to be achieved further to the structural analysis.
However, this approach requires the use of advanced software codes integrating the warping effects (7
th

degree of freedom), local plate imperfections and material non-linearities.

Table 2 Frame design methods for use with member buckling checks

In practice, another intermediate way to proceed is to perform an elastic second order analysis (with
geometrical sway and member effects and the effects of the corresponding imperfections); only cross-
section checks under internal forces are then to be achieved as the P- effects (related to member
instability) have been explicitly considered in the frame analysis, see Table 2.

Global analysis
Account for 2nd order
P- effects
1st order analysis
Sway frame Non-sway frame
Sway Mode Buckling Length
Method
Amplified Sway Moment
Method
(
cr
3)
2nd order analysis
Amplified sway
moments
No limitation
1st order analysis
Check of components
and frame
Cross-section resistances and local stability
J oint resistances
Out-of-plane stability of the members
In plane member stability
with non sway buckling length with sway buckling length
In plane member stability
cr < 10 resp. 15 cr 10 resp. 15
Account for
sway imperfection
Account for
local bow imperfection
e0,d
Yes Yes No No
No No
Yes, where the following conditions are met:
at least one moment resistant joint at one
member end

y Ed
0.5 A f N >
No Yes
No
21

For a 3-D structure, this approach can also be followed in a simplified manner: just perform a second
order in-plane analysis and check the out-of-plane instability of the members by means of member
design formulae, see Alternative in Table 2. The practical implementation of this procedure is however
not obvious to achieve when reference is made to the so-called Method 1 beam-column formula
recommended by Eurocode 3 as they integrate coupling phenomena between both buckling directions.
This is not the case with the so-called Method 2 beam-column formula recommended by Eurocode 3.

Table 3 Frame design methods with full 2
nd
order moments

The here-above described approach on basis of elastic second-order analysis plus imperfection (see
Table 3 and Table 4 Approach B) is also capable of covering frame structures with non-uniform
members and sections.
For uniform members the two-step procedure is most straight forward when the frame analysis is
performed with sway effects alone (if relevant) and the forces/moments at the member ends are used for
the cross-section check and the member check by the design formulae of EN 1993-1-1 (see Table 2
respectively Table 4 Approach A).
A traditional design method has been based on sway mode buckling lengths to cover the P- effect of
sway frames. The cross-section and member checks are then performed by the design formulae of EN
Global analysis
Check of components
and frame

P effects
-

2ndorder
analysis
Sway frames
cr < 10 resp. 15
Non-sway frames
cr 10 resp. 15
Alternative:
2nd order analysis
only in-plane
Amplified Sway Moment
Method
2nd order
analysis

Joint resistances
cross-section resistance
Account for
sway imperfection
Account for
local bow imperfection
e0,d
Yes
No
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
P effects
Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Amplified sway
moments
Amplified local
moments
No
member buckling check
in plane
out of
plane
P

P
22

1993-1-1 (see Table 2 and Table 4 Approach A). Thus, only first-order frame analysis without
imperfection is sufficient.

Table 4 Design approaches for members in frames

Application of the different frame design methods for steel structures in practice may either face
structural systems built up by uniform profiles or by non-uniform ones, e.g. tapered or curved members.
This means, that just Table 2 applies to structures with uniform members, because member buckling
formulae are available in Eurocode 3 only for uniform members. In contrary, structures with non-
uniform members can only be designed by the methods addressed in Table 3. This is illustrated by
examples in Fig. 19 and Fig. 20.
23

Fig. 19 Frame design for structures with uniform/non-uniform members

Fig. 20 Frame design for structures with uniform/non-uniform members (continued)

3.1.4 Individual member design
The second step in the design procedure is the design of the individual frame elements in form of
isolated members (Fig. 21). As members in compression plus bending constitute the most general load
case the following descriptions are related to this type of member.

Fig. 21 Individual member design, different types of loading

Structures, where stability effects may be covered...
... by member buckling check
(Imperfection )
... by full 2. order moments +
(Imperfections e
0
) +
-
M
e
II M
e
I
M
II
M
II
e
0 -
+
CS-checks
Main application:
Uniform members (standard profiles)
Main application:
Non-uniform or curved members
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
e
II M
e
II
M
e
II M
e
II
M
e
II
M
II
M
II
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
e
II
M
II
Beam in bending
Column in compression
Member in compression
and bending
24

Eurocode 3 provides formulae for the buckling check of such members under pure bending, pure
compression and for the combination of bending plus compression (Fig. 22).

Fig. 22 Member design formulae acc. to Eurocode 3
Buckling formulae were derived for isolated members with end fork conditions, uniform cross-section
along the member length and they may also include intermediate lateral restrains (see Fig. 23). This
means that members in frames must be transformed to equivalent isolated members by the way of
appropriate extraction out of the frame system. By doing so, the buckling length must be defined in
context with the end-conditions of the member and the corresponding moment diagram must be
specified. Moreover, if the internal forces change along the member length and classification leads to
different cross-section classes it must be specified which class is the equivalent one for the member
check.

Fig. 23 Extraction of frame members
The buckling design formulae in Eurocode 3 for bending and axial compression are defined in form of
interaction formulae (6.61) and (6.62). The interaction factors may be chosen from the Annexes A and
B for the so-called Method 1 and Method 2, which differ in the background of theoretical derivation
and in the complexity of the formulaic expression of the coefficients. For a brief illustration of the
context the approach acc. to Method 2 is described in the following.
The structure of the buckling interaction formulae is given in Fig. 24 for the two relevant buckling
modes about the axes y-y and z-z together with plots of the interaction-factors k
y
and k
LT
.

Individual member design: EN 1993-1-1
Cross-sections
Members
+

y.Ed
Ed
yy
y pl .Rd LT y.Rd
M
N
k
N M
1
1 +

y.Ed
Ed
zy
z pl .Rd LT y.Rd
M
N
k
N M
, ,
y Ed y Rd
M M
ANALYSIS LEVEL
RESISTANCE LEVEL
INTERACTION FORMULAE
Basis of member design:
Isolated member with uniform cross-section,
forktype supports
andintermediate lateral restraints
Extraction out of the system:
which buckling length?
which moment diagram/c
m
-factor?
which cross-section class?
M
e
N
Ed M
y
II
Ed
N
Ed
q
z,Ed
q
y,Ed
L
25

Fig. 24 Buckling interaction formulae, Method 2
The effect of non-uniform moment diagrams on the buckling failure in span and the need of checking
the cross-sections at the member ends, if relevant, is addressed in Fig. 25.

Fig. 25 Effect of non-uniform moment diagrams
The equivalent uniform moment factors c
m
are provided in form of the table in Fig. 26. The application
and the meaning of the different terms is addressed there and is further described by an example in Fig.
27.
L
cr,z
L
cr,y
Governing buckling
behaviour
Flexural buckling LT- buckling
Type of section
Member buckling
formulae (Method 2)
Torsionallystiff sections
RHS
Torsionallyflexible sections
I and H sections

C M
N
my y,Ed
Ed
y y: k 1
y N M
y pl,Rd LT pl,y,Rd
M
N
y,Ed
Ed
z z : k 1
LT N M
z pl,Rd LT pl,y,Rd
+

+

C M
N
my y,Ed
Ed
y y: k 1
y N M
y pl,Rd pl,y,Rd
C M
N
my y,Ed
Ed
z z : 0,6 k 1
y N M
z pl,Rd pl,y,Rd
k
yy
=k
y
. C
my
k
zy
=k
LT
(C
mLT
) Interaction factors
Standard case for beam-
column formulae
z
0 1 2 3
k
LT
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
Interaction factors k
for class 1, 2, (3)
y
0 1 2 3
k
y
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
n
y
=0.1
n
y
=0.8
M
y
EC3 (EN)
( )
y
y y y
k 1 0.2 n 1 0.8 n = + +
z
z z
LT
mLT mLT
0.1 n 0.1 n
k 1 1
C 0.25 C 0.25

=

Ed
y
y Rd
Ed
z
z Rd
N
n
N
N
n
N
=

=

k
y
k
LT
M
y C
mLT
=1.0
Moment diagram for C
my
Moment diagram for C
mLT
C
my
and C
mLT
allow for the effect of non-uniform moment diagrams for
buckling failure in span
Buckling failure induced at the member ends to be covered by additional
cross-section checks
Uniform moment factors C
m
26

Fig. 26 Equivalent uniform moment factors

Fig. 27 Use of equivalent uniform member factors, example

The above procedure shows that the buckling check of an isolated member acc. to Eurocode 3 is
straight forward and well defined. The analogous procedure acc. to Method 1 is illustrated in the ECCS
publication No. 119 (2006).
The point missing so far is the extraction of the member out of the systems, which is described in the
next paragraph for individual frame members. It should be noted that this approach considers the
individual members like local elements in an idealized non-sway condition, since both sway effects,
i.e. P -effect and sway imperfection , have already been accounted for in the end-moments of the
frame structure, if relevant (see Table 2). An exception to this is the alternative of the sway buckling
length method in Table 2, where the second order effects are approximately accounted for by the
equivalent buckling length of the sway system.

3.1.5 Extraction of individual frame members
As already addressed in chapters 3.1.1 to 3.1.3 the extraction of a member out of a frame system is
the transformation of the real member behavior into that of an idealized isolated member, for which
buckling formulae are provided by the code. As mentioned, this transformation is usually accompanied
by a number of idealizations in order to be able to cope with the large variety of end-conditions of the
members and the different shapes of the moment diagrams. In order to give an illustration of the typical
extraction procedure the application of the equivalent column method (ECM) will be presented in
the following, since a number of frame structures have been investigated for this procedure. For the use
of the equivalent moment factors method (EMF) specifications may be found in the ECCS
publication No. 119 [5].

Austin- formula
Uniform moment factors C
my
and C
mLT
1
2
+
M
s
s ... sagging at midspan
M
h
h ... hogging
at midspan
Examples:
Case 1 M
h
> M
s

s
Case 2 M
h
< M
s

h
27

For the extraction of frame members it is recommended in Eurocode 3 to take the buckling length equal
the member length and accordingly to take the moment diagram equal that of the whole member. The
idea of the ECM is to specify the buckling length according to the end-conditions of the column in the
non-sway buckling mode. This means that the moment diagram must be taken as the part that
corresponds to the buckling length.
The simple example in Fig. 28 for a single member with other than fork type end conditions may be
understood as comparison between the approach of EC 3 (using L
cr
=L and C
m
=0,4) and the ECM
(using L
cr
=0,7 L and C
m
=0,60).

Fig. 28 Extraction of other than fork type member, EC 3 versus ECM
In Fig. 29 the analogous extraction is shown for a frame column. The left hand part illustrates the
approach recommended by Eurocode 3. The right hand part demonstrates that using the non-sway
buckling length needs an extension of the buckling mode in order to specify the corresponding moment
diagram of the equivalent column, which must include the moment maximum. Accordingly, the
procedure is not always simple when general cases are faced and mechanical consistency is not always
obvious, without comparative investigations.

Fig. 29 Extraction of frame member, EC3 versus ECM
In conclusion of these facts it may be stated that for usual design situations the recommendations of
Eurocode 3 could be well accepted, being always on the conservative side without losing a note worthy
degree of capacity since the effects of the buckling length and the axial force are usually small
compared to bending in frames. However, in order to illustrate the detailed effects of the ECM an
overview on a number of structural systems have been investigated.
In the following a collection of examples illustrating the correct application of the stability check
according to ECM and EMF is given with respect to the choice of member buckling length and
corresponding moment diagram. Four different cases of beam-columns (see Table 5 and Table 6) and
two approaches provided for rafter design (see Table 7) of a single storey frame are worked out for the
daily design practice in engineering offices.
Extraction of individual members
Example: EC3-1-1 ECM
L
M
max
C =0.40
m
L =0.7L
cr
L
M
max
C =0.60
m
Extractionof individual members
- L systemlength: - L
cr
non-sway buckling length
EC3-1-1 ECM
M
e
end moment M
II
C
m
-factors as specified in EC 3
M
e
end moment M
II
C
m
-factor to be adapted
to support conditions
H L =H
M
e
M
e
M
e
L
c
r
L =L
cr,non-sway
L

=

L
c
r
28

T
a
b
l
e

5

D
E
S
I
G
N

A
P
P
R
O
A
C
H
E
S

F
O
R

M
E
M
B
E
R
S

I
N

F
R
A
M
E
S

C
O
L
U
M
N

D
E
S
I
G
N

C
O
L
U
M
N

D
E
S
I
G
N

M
e
I

(
1
s
t

o
r
d
e
r

t
h
e
o
r
y
)

M
e
I
I

(
2
n
d

o
r
d
e
r

t
h
e
o
r
y
)
:

P

(
)

S
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h

S
y
s
t
e
m

l
e
n
g
t
h

N
o
n
-
s
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

C
o
l
u
m
n

M
e
t
h
o
d

(
E
C
M
)

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

M
o
m
e
n
t

F
a
c
t
o
r
s

(
E
M
F
)

C
A
S
E

1

C
A
S
E

2

(
n
o

s
w
a
y

e
f
f
e
c
t
)

M
e
I
I

e
q
u
a
l
s

M
e
I

U
E
d
m
S
c
r
K
N
C
0
.
7
5
0
.
2
5
K
N

29

T
a
b
l
e

6

D
E
S
I
G
N

A
P
P
R
O
A
C
H
E
S

F
O
R

M
E
M
B
E
R
S

I
N

F
R
A
M
E
S

C
O
L
U
M
N

D
E
S
I
G
N

M
e
I

(
1
s
t

o
r
d
e
r

t
h
e
o
r
y
)

M
e
I
I

(
2
n
d

o
r
d
e
r

t
h
e
o
r
y
)
:

P

(
)

S
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h

S
y
s
t
e
m

l
e
n
g
t
h

N
o
n
-
s
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

C
o
l
u
m
n

M
e
t
h
o
d

(
E
C
M
)

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

M
o
m
e
n
t

F
a
c
t
o
r
s

(
E
M
F
)

C
A
S
E

3

C
A
S
E

4

30

T
a
b
l
e

7

D
E
S
I
G
N

A
P
P
R
O
A
C
H
E
S

F
O
R

M
E
M
B
E
R
S

I
N

F
R
A
M
E
S

R
A
F
T
E
R

D
E
S
I
G
N

R
A
F
T
E
R

D
E
S
I
G
N

M
e
I

(
1
s
t

o
r
d
e
r

t
h
e
o
r
y
)

M
e
I
I

(
2
n
d

o
r
d
e
r

t
h
e
o
r
y
)
:

P

(
)

S
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h

S
y
s
t
e
m

l
e
n
g
t
h

N
o
n
-
s
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

C
o
l
u
m
n

M
e
t
h
o
d

(
E
C
M
)

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

M
o
m
e
n
t

F
a
c
t
o
r
s

(
E
M
F
)

P
L
A
S
T
I
C

D
E
S
I
G
N

D
e
s
i
g
n

w
i
t
h

s
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h

i
s

u
n
h
e
l
p
f
u
l

C
m

f
o
r

s
p
a
n

a
n
d

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
s

E
L
A
S
T
I
C

D
E
S
I
G
N

D
e
s
i
g
n

w
i
t
h

s
w
a
y

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

l
e
n
g
t
h

i
s

u
n
h
e
l
p
f
u
l

C
m

f
o
r

s
p
a
n

a
n
d

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
s

31

3.2 Classification Procedure
3.2.1 General
This chapter presents the procedure to be followed for the classification of sections of simple members
or members in frames. The background of the classification is the behaviour of the plate elements of a
cross-section in axial compression, which is always connected with local plate buckling effects, either
elastic or plastic (see Fig. 30).

Fig. 30 Background of classification of cross-sections

This classification may be performed on basis of Table 5.2 of EN 1993-1-1. In principle, the
classification is based on c/t-ratios of parts in compression reaching the limit state of f
y
. As an outcome
of the Semi Comp-Projects it has been found that new limits for internal compression parts would be
needed, firstly to accomplish the requirements of the model safety factor and secondly to reach
accordance with the other parts of EN 1993-1-3 and EN 1993-1-5 (see Fig. 31).

Fig. 31 c/t-Limits acc. to Table 5.2 in EN 1993-1-1

Additional special rules are provided in EN 1993 for the design of class 4-sections where use may be
made of the reduced stress state of the design stress
com,Ed
when determining the c/t-ratios. The specific
use of c/t-ratios based on f
y
or on
com,Ed
is relevant only in case of class 4-sections and it depends on
the design method applied to the member. In case that uniform members are designed on basis of the
member buckling formulae of section 6.3 of EN 1993-1-1 (see Approach A of Table 4) the c/t-ratios
must be based on f
y
. If the member design is performed with internal forces from full second order
analyses (see Approach B of Table 4) or if no second order effect exist at all then
com,Ed
can be used for
determining the c/t-ratio.

Classification of a cross-section
Classification of each of the plate elements (in full or
partial compression) composing the section
Local plate buckling
Dependence on the:
Slenderness c/t
Support conditions
Distribution of direct stresses
Remark:
Isolated plate conditions do not allow to account
for elastic restraints
for plastic redistribution
b
L
Free edge
Simple
support
t
between adjacent parts
c/t-limits acc. to Table 5.2 in EN 1993-1-1
however modifications for internal parts in compression are needed for
safetyreasons
New limits for internal compression parts
in accordance with EN 1993-1-5 for class 3 (local plate buckling) and
with basic assumptions for class 1 and 2 (plastic behaviour)
See Semi Comp
c/t (f
y
) for limit state f
y
32

In general, the classification of cross-sections is used to select the appropriate design method with
respect to
the global analysis
the member buckling design
the cross-section design (see Fig. 32)

Fig. 32 Use of classification

At the level of global analysis the classification allows to decide whether elastic or plastic analysis
can be used. In case of elastic global analysis it has to be verified that the stiffness properties of the
sections are not reduced by local buckling effects. In case of plastic global analysis it must be
checked if appropriate rotation capacity is provided (section 3.2).
At the level of member design the classification is needed to decide which type of buckling formula
(for class 2, 3, 4) applies. In the case of axially non-uniform internal forces and bending moments
the varying stress states may lead to different classes along the member length (section 3.3).
At the level of cross-section design the classification dictates the type of cross-section resistance,
i.e. plastic, elastic or effective resistance. Accordingly, the limit 2/3 indicates whether full plastic
capacity can be exploited in class 2 or just partial plastic capacity in class 3. The limit 3/4 indicates
that reduced effective section properties must be accounted for in class 4 (section 3.4).

Principles: A general principle of classification is that it has to be made on basis of the loading
condition of the section including all internal forces/moments N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
, if
relevant, in a combined stress-state. This has to be investigated for each load
combination resulting from the global analysis of the structure (see Fig. 33).
In general, the section classification is needed at the level of
global analysis,
member buckling design and
cross-section design

The classification procedure itself distinguishes between the elastic stress state and the plastic stress
state of the section. The first one determines the limit between class 3 and class 4 (called limit 3/4) and
the second one between class 2 and class 3 (called limit 2/3) as well as class 1 and class 2 (limit 1/2).
The procedures are described in sections 3.2.2 to 3.2.4 and section 6 below.

Classification is required for:
Selection of the global frame analysis:
Elastic frame analysis
Plastic frame analysis
Decision on the member buckling formulae with respect to
the degree of local plastic capacity
Plastic interaction : class 1, 2, (3)*
Elastic interaction
Decision about the type of cross-section verification:
Elastic verification
Plastic (or partial plastic)* verification
Effective cross-section properties *Semi Comp
33

Fig. 33 Principles of classification

3.2.2 Classification for global analysis
Two different aspects have to be dealt with (see Fig. 34):

Fig. 34 Classification for global analysis
The first one considers the check, whether the section is in class 4 or not; this means that the limit 3/ 4
has to be checked. This step is needed already at the level of global analysis, since if the section was in
class 4 the effective section properties of A and I may be influenced. It may occur then, that the reduced
values A
eff
, I
eff
have to be used for the global analysis.
The second aspect considers whether plastic global analysis can be adopted. For this behaviour the
cross-section must provide sufficient rotation capacity according to the class 1-behaviour. Therefore,
the limit 1/2 has to be checked.

The general procedure for the classification for global analysis - limit 3/4 applies as follows (see also
paragraph 3.2.4.1):
calculate M
II
, N for the structural system based on A, I (brutto)
classify on basis of elastic stress distribution under N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
in 1/10 points using
c/t (f
y
), whereas c/t (f
y
) indicates the cross-section slenderness limit c/t based on the yield
strength f
y
according to Table 5.2 of EN 1993-1-1
if the class is 3 or better: global analysis with A, I is ok
if the class 4 governs, calculate for all relevant elements of the cross-section using c/t (f
y
)
if all >0,5: global analysis with A, I is ok
if is 0,5: use Annex E of EN 1993-1-5 to calculate I
eff
and make global analysis with
I
eff

Classification procedure of a cross-section
Principles: Classification must be made
for loading states including all internal forces/moments
N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
for each load combination resulting from the global
analysis of the structure.
Cross-section class =
most unfavourable class of all
plate elements
M
y,Ed
N
Ed
M
z,Ed
Classificationand global analysis:
Limit class 1/2: class 1 plastic global analysis allowed
class 2 elastic global analysis
Limit class 3/4: class 3 elastic global analysis
class 4* elastic global analysis with
A,I (gross section) if >0,5
A
eff
, I
eff
(effective section) if 0,5
* Remark for class 4:
provided that real stresses are determined
com,Ed
may be used for
c/t (
com,Ed
) for calculation of the limit 3/4
and for calculation of A
eff
, I
eff
p,red
34

If no stability check according to EN 1993-1-1 section 6.3. is needed (i.e. that a full second order
analysis is performed) the classification may be based on
com,Ed
instead of f
y
:
limit c/t (
com,Ed
/brutto) may be applied:

y M0
limit com,Ed
f
c c
t t

class 4 governs, if the limit value c/t (
com,Ed
/brutto) is exceeded
if
com,Ed
>f
y
/
M0
then the limit value c/t (f
y
) is to be applied. This is relevant when the section
capacity exceeds the elastic limit
The procedure for classification at the limit 1/2 is described in paragraph 3.2.4.2.

3.2.3 Classification for member buckling design
The buckling resistance of members is considerably affected by the degree of plastic capacity provided
by the cross-section behaviour. Therefore, the member buckling formulae in section 6.3 of EN 1993-1-1
depend on the cross-section classes (see Fig. 35).

Fig. 35 Classification for member buckling design
In general load cases of members the stress state of the cross-sections may vary significantly along the
member length. Accordingly, the cross-section-classes may vary along the length too. Since the
member buckling formulae were developed for uniform members the decisive cross-section class needs
to be defined as the equivalent one (Fig. 36 and Fig. 37).

Fig. 36 Member buckling design equivalent section class

Classification and member buckling design
To decide whether the elastic or plastic format of the
beam-column formulae should be used
N
Rd
, M
y,Rd
, k
yy
, k
zy
,
LT
depend on the
cross-sectionclasses: plastic behaviour in class 1,2,(3)*
elastic behaviour in Class 3,4
* Semi Comp
+

y.Ed
Ed
yy
y pl .Rd LT y.Rd
M
N
k
N M
1
+

y.Ed
Ed
zy
z pl .Rd LT y.Rd
M
N
k
N M
1
(6.61)
(6.62)
Classification and member buckling design
Equivalent section class
Non-uniform loading states in the sections along the
member different classes
Need to define an equivalent cross-section
Proposal to consider the worst cross-section as the
decisive one ...
... and to define it as the one of maximum utilisation
Utilisation factor to be evaluated in 10
sections along the member length
35

From the mechanical point of view it may be proposed to take the point of maximum utilisation and the
given class there as the decisive section. Apart from cases where the maximum point of utilisation is
evident, this leads to the procedure of determining the utilisation factor UF along the member length in
all 1/10 points together with the corresponding section class. (For definition of UF see chapter 3.5.3).

Fig. 37 Equivalent section class example

3.2.4 Classification for cross-section design
The aspects to be considered deal with the determination of the limits 3/4 in the elastic range and the
limits 2/3 in the plastic range.
The limit class 1/2 concerns the rotation capacity and is relevant for the selection of the method of
global analysis. It may be executed analogous to the limit 2/3 (Fig. 38).

Fig. 38 classification for cross-section design

3.2.4.1 Classification-procedure for limit 3/4
basis is the elastic stress distribution under N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
of the brutto-section (A, I)
class 4 governs, if the limit value c/t (f
y
) of class 3 is exceeded at any part of the cross-section
for class 4-sections the kind of classification (f
y
or
com,Ed
) is related to the kind of member
check as summarized in Table 8 as follows:

Classificationand member bucklingdesign
Equivalent sectionclass:
Example:
UF class
Use the class at maximum of
UF for the member check
UF utilisation factor
Classificationand cross-sectiondesign
Limit 3/4 class 4: effective A
eff
, W
eff
*
class 3: partial plastic W
3
(new) or W
el
Limit 2/3 class 2: full plastic W
pl
* Remark for class 4:
A
eff
, W
eff
may be based on different stress states:
pure N for A
eff
pure M for W
eff
or (N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
) for A
eff
, W
eff
Iteration needed
36

Fig. 39 Elastic stress distribution for N
Ed
+ M
y,Ed
+ M
z,Ed
for H-section

Table 8 Classification for limit 3/4 in relation to the member checks according to EN 1993-1-1
and the cross-section capacity of class 4 according to EN 1993-1-5
Member check
acc. EN 1993-1-1
based on
Classification limit 3/4
based on
Resistance in Class 4
acc. EN 1993-1-5
based on
chapter 6.3.1 c/t (f
y
)
p,red (
com,Ed
/effective)
y
)
p,red (
com,Ed
/effective)
y
)
p (f
y
)
full 2
nd
order calculation c/t (
com,Ed
/brutto)
p,red (
com,Ed
/effective)

A summary of the peculiarities for class 4 sections is given in Fig. 40 and Fig. 41.

Fig. 40 Peculiarities of classification of class 4-sections

Particularities for Class 4 sections
Classification may be based on
com,Ed
instead of f
y
potential upgrading to class 3
com,Ed
(insteadof f
y
) maybe used for A
eff
and I
eff
My,Ed
-
-
-
NEd
Mz,Ed
+
com,Ed
= 0
y
M0
limit com,Ed
f
c c
t t

p
b/ t
28,4 k
com,Ed
p,red p
y M0
f
upgrade of
M
y,Ed
-
-
-
N
Ed
M
z,Ed
+
com,Ed
=0
37

Fig. 41 Peculiarities for class 4-sections, continued

3.2.4.2 Classification-procedure for limit 2/3 and 1/2

Fig. 42 Procedure for the amplification of the internal forces and moments N
Ed
+ M
y,Ed
+ M
z,Ed
up to the
plastic cross-section resistance (left) and corresponding plastic stress distribution (right) for H-
sections
basis is the plastic stress distribution under N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed

increase (N
Ed
+ M
y,Ed
+ M
z,Ed
) stepwise until the plastic limit is met and then use the
corresponding stress blocks for classification
(pre-condition: (N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
) increases linearly-proportional up to the limit state, see
section 3.5.3 of this document)
y
) of class 2 is exceeded, otherwise the section is class 2
or better
y
) of class 1 is exceeded, otherwise the section is class 1
The determination of the plastic neutral axis requires in general cases of load combinations N
Ed
+M
y,Ed

+M
z,Ed
an iterative process, for which normally a computer module will be needed. Such a module has
been developed in the Semi Comp design Software (see chapter 3.8). In cases where the loading
consists of two internal forces only (e.g. N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
, N
Ed
+M
z,Ed
, M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
), the plastic neutral axis
can be determined analytically for the given double-symmetric section shapes. The corresponding
formulae may be found in chapter 3.8.

3.2.5 Modification of the c/t-limits for internal compression parts
By the results of the SEMI-COMP Project it came out that the c/t-limits given in Table 5.2 of EN 1993-
1-1 for internal parts in compression need a modification towards lower limit-values, in order to reach
the specified safety level.
For better understanding the reasoning for these changes is given below:
Particularities for Class 4 sections
In Class 4 use of
com,Ed
(instead of f
y
) may be made for
specific member design methods provided that
the 2. order effects on the member are negligible
the member check consists in verifying the cross-
sections resistance based on full 2. order analysis
the member buckling checks are made for pure N or
pure M
y
resp. M
z
, however not checks for N+M
y
+M
z
M
pl,y
N
pl
M
pl,z
(plast.)
N
Ed
, M
y,Ed
, M
z,Ed
+
-
+
-
-
38

The ESDEP-background of the classification criterion [7] is compared with the c/t-limits given in Table
5.2 of EN 1993-1-1 in the following Table 9. For the limit 3/4 the values
p,min
are in accordance with
the plateau-values of EN 1993-1-5.
A discrepancy between EN 1993-1-1 and EN 1993-1-5 is obvious for the internal parts in compression
at the limit between class 3/4. The reason for it may be found in the change of the
p,min
-value from
0,74 to 0,673 made in the latest versions of EN 1993-1-5. However, such discrepancies are also found
for the limits between class 2/3 and class 1/2.
In contrast, EN 1993-1-3 provides the analogous limit between class 3/4 in accordance with EN 1993-1-
5. Also DIN 18800 uses c/t =38 instead of c/t =42 for the class 3/4 limit.
In BS 5950-1:2000 higher limit values up to c/t =44 are used for classification of RHS-sections in
bending. Since in this case the web acts as restraint for the internal flange in compression the increased
limit value is understandable in tendency. The c/t-limits of BS 5950 are illustrated in Table 10; thereby
these values had to be converted to the definitions of EN 1993-1-1 (E, f
y
, c/t).
However, in general design situations, where the web may also be in compression or a single sided fillet
weld connection in box-sections would not allow restraining effects of the flange, these beneficial
conditions cannot be assumed. On the other hand, if c/t =42 can be validated by test results for bending
of RHS-sections, it could be kept in Eurocode with the restriction to the case of pure bending and
certain aspects ratios h/b.
Table 9 Background of c/t-limit values [7]
Classification criterion for
compression parts:
ESDEP-Background EN 1993-1-1
p p,min
c / t
28,427 k
= =

p,min

c/t-limit ()
Limit between class 3/4:
internal part in compression
in bending
outstand flange in compression

0,673 *
)

0,874
0,748

38,23
121,35
13,93

42
124
14
in bending

0,6
0,6
0,6

34,11
83,38
11,18

38
83
10
in bending

0,5
0,5
0,5

28,43
69,48
9,32

33
72
9
*
)
previously 0,74 42,07 42

Table 10 c/t-limits of BS 5950-1
class 1/2 class 2/3 class 3/4
RHS hot finished, box sections 30,7 35 43,8
RHS cold formed (B-3t EC3)
(B-5t)
30,7
28,5
32,8
30,7
40,5
38,3

39

Conclusion:
For general section shapes the c/t-limits in Table 5.2 of EN 1993-1-1 for internal parts in compression
should be modified to 38 (instead of 42) at the limit 3/4 and to 34 (instead of 38) at the limit 2/3, see
Table 11. The limit 1/2 indicates the same discrepancy for internal parts in compression, and should
although not subject of this project also be revised to 28 (instead of 33) accordingly.

Table 11 Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for compression parts according to project SEMI-
COMP (modified Table 5.2 of EN 1993-1-1, sheet 1 of 3)
Internal compression parts

axis of bending

axis of bending
Class
Part subject to
bending
Part subject to
compression
Part subject to bending and compression
Stress
distribution in
parts
(compression
positive)

1
(modified
limits)
c / t 72 c / t 28
when
126
0.5: c / t
5.5 1
>

when
36
0.5: c / t
2
(modified
limits)
c / t 83 c / t 34
when
>
188
0.5: c / t
6.53 1

when
41.5
0.5: c / t
Stress
distribution in
parts
(compression
positive)

3
(modified
limits)
c / t 124 c / t 38
when
>
+
38
1: c / t
0.653 0.347

when ( ) ( )
a
1 : c / t 62 1
=
y
235 / f
y
f
235 275 355 420 460
1.00 0.92 0.81 0.75 0.71
a
1 applies where either the compression stress
y
f or the tensile strain >
y y
f / E

40

3.2.6 Classification examples

3.2.6.1 Example 1: IPE 400 S355

2
3
,
3
,
4
84.46
1156
1307
23128
el y
pl y
y
A cm
W cm
W cm
I cm
=
=

(a) Section in bending M
y
:

Fig. 43 Elastic and plastic stress distribution for section in pure bending M
y

Web in bending:
2 2
400 213.5 221
38.5 124 100.4 ... the web is class 3 or better
8.6
83 67.2 ... the web is class 2 or better
72 58.3 ... the web is class 1
f
w w
h t r
c
t t

= = = < =
< =
< =

Flanges in compression:
2 2 180 2 8.6 2 21
4.8 14 11.3 ... the web is class 3 or better
13.5
10 8.1 ... the web is class 2 or better
9 7.3 ... the flange is class 1
w
f f
b t r c
t t

= = = < =
< =
< =

Result: Web Class 1
The cross-section is class 1.
Flange Class 1

400
180
8.6
13.5
21
w
f
h mm
b mm
t mm
t mm
r mm
=
t
f

h
b
r
t
w

ENA =PNA
-
+
-
-
+
41

(b) Section in compression N:

Fig. 44 Stress distribution for section under pure compression N
Web in compression:

( )
( )
2 2
400 213.5 221
38.5 42 34.0 ... the web is class 4
8.6
38 30.8with new limits
38 30.8 ... the web is not class 2
34 27.5with new limits
33 26.7 ... the web is not cla

= = = > =
> =
> =
> =
> =
f
w w
h t r
c
t t

( )
ss 1
28 22.8with new limits > =


2 2 180 2 8.6 2 21
4.8 14 11.3 ... the flange is class 3 or better
13.5
10 8.1 ... the flange is class 2 or better
w
f f
b t r c
t t

= = = < =
< =
< =

Result:
Web Class 4
Flange Class 1

(c) Section in compression and bending N+M
y
:

,
550
350
Ed
y Ed
N kN
M kNm
=

To classify the given section under the combined action of compression and bending, a plastic stress
distribution may be assumed for class 1 and class 2 limits and an elastic distribution may be assumed
for the class 3 limits.

First the check against class 3 is shown:

Web in combined bending and compression:
-
-
42

2 2
400 213.5 221 42 42 0.81
38.5
8.6 0.67 0.33 0.67 0.33 0.59
71.6 ... the web is class 3 or bette
f
w w
h t r
c
t t

= = = < = =
+
=
( )
r
68.7with new limits =

Fig. 45 Elastic stress distribution for section in bending M
y
plus axial compression N


2 2 180 2 8.6 2 21
13.5
w
f f
b t r c
t t

= = = < =

The cross-section is class 3 or better.

The check against class 2 reads:

Fig. 46 Plastic stress distribution for section in axial compression plus bending N + M
y


2 2
400 2 13.5 2 21 456 456
38.5
8.6 13 1 13 0.83 1
37.7 ... the web is class 3
34.5with
f
w w
h t r
c
t t

= = = > = =

=
= ( ) new limits

ENA
,
1
2
2
2
550 350 10 40
1.35 2.1 31.5 /
84.46 23128 2
y Ed
Ed
f
y
M
N h
t r
A I
kN cm

= =

= =

2
2
1 2
550 350 10 40
1.35 2.1 18.5 /
84.46 23128 2
kN cm

= = + =

18.5
0.59
31.5
= =
ENA
PNA
-
+
c =
=0.83c
c
can be obtained
- from an appropriate software that is
able to calculate the plastic neutral
axis (PNA) =0.83
- or by using the following formula
from Gardner et al [6] (for I sections
under N +M
y
only):

See the following section for more details.
( )
1 1
1
2 2
Ed
f
w y
N h
t r
c t f

= + +

-
+
2
7
5
m
m

2
0
8
m
m

2
36.8 / kN cm
-
2
35.5 /
y
kN cm f =
-
43


2 2 180 2 8.6 2 21
13.5
w
f f
b t r c
t t

= = = < =
< =

Result:
Web Class 3
Flange Class 1

Calculating the parameter for I sections under N +M
y
(discussion on the analytical formula):
By calculating the plastic neutral axis with an appropriate software (increasing the loading
proportionally) a value of =0.83 can be obtained, see previous figure. Applying the given analytic
formula results in:

( ) ( )
3
1 1 1 400 1550 10
13.5 21 0.77
2 2 331 2 28.6 355
Ed
f
w y
N h
t r
c t f

= + + = + + =

This value of 0.77 only holds true if the axial force is kept constant to N
Ed
=550kN and the bending
moment M
y,Ed
is increased separately until the full plastic limit state is reached (i.e. M
N,Rd
see figure
below). Compared to =0.83 the formula gives lower values for the case of bending moment plus
axial compression resulting in more generous slenderness limits.

Fig. 47 Load amplification leading to the plastic limit for section in axial compression plus bending N + M
y

By introducing the utilisation factor UF in the formula for , the portion of the web in compression in
the full plastic situation gives:

( ) ( )
3
1 1 1 400 1550 10 0.82
13.5 21 0.83
2 2 331 2 2 8.6 355
Ed
f
w y
N UF h
t r
c t f

= + + = + + =

This value fits well with the numerical calculation based on the appropriate software.

N
M
Ed
M
Ed
N
N,Rd
M
N,Rd
M
Ed
N
UF
pl
N
+22%
pl
M
For the given example, the loading can be
increased proportionally by 22% until the full
plastic cross-section resistance is reached, see
figure. Therefore, the utilisation factor reads
UF =1/1.22 =0.82.
For more details on the definition of the
utilisation factor see section D3.5.3.

44

3.2.6.2 Example 2: HEA 300 S355

2
3
,
3
,
4
112.5
1260
1383
18263
el y
pl y
y
A cm
W cm
W cm
I cm
=
=

3
,
3
,
4
420.6
641.2
6310
el z
pl z
z
W cm
W cm
I cm
=

(a) Section in compression and biaxial bending N+M
y
+M
z
:

,
, , , , ,
, , , ,
,
500 ( 0.125)
200 ( 0.407)
( 0.439)
100
= = =
= = =
= =
=
Ed Ed pl Rd
y Ed pl y y Ed pl y Rd
pl z z Ed pl z Rd
z Ed
N kN n N N
M kNm m M M
m M M
M kNm


2 2
290 214 227 208
24.5
8.5 8.5
42 42 0.81
24.5 64.8 ... the web is class 3 or better
0.67 0.33 0.67 0.33 0.44
61.5with new
f
w w
w
h t r
c
t t
c
t

= = = =
= < = =
+
= ( )
( )
limits
456 456 0.81
45.6 ... the web isclass 2 or better
13 1 13 0.70 1
42.6with new limits
396 396 0.81
39.6
13 1 13 0.70 1
< = =

=
< = =

( )
... the web is class 1
35.8with new limits =

Flange in combined bending and compression:

( )
2 2
0.21 0.07 0.57 0.21 0.57 0.07 0.57 0.47
2 2 300 2 8.5 2 27
8.5
14
8.5 21 21 0.81 0.47 11.7 ... the flange is class 3 or better
w
f f
f
k
b t r c
t t
c
k
t
= + = + =

= = =
= < = =
> =

290
300
8.5
14
27
w
f
h mm
b mm
t mm
t mm
r mm
=
h
b
r
t
f

t
w

45

Fig. 48 Diagrams of elastic stress distribution (left) and plastic stress distribution (right) for the
determination of and

Result: Web Class 1
Flange Class 3

The following conservative and compact approach leads to the same result
Web in pure compression (conservative approach):

2 2
290 214 227 208
24.5 33 26.8 ... the web is class 1
8.5 8.5
(note: the web is class 2 with new limits)
f
w w
h t r
c
t t

= = = = < =

Flange in pure compression (conservative approach for class 3 limit):

2 2 300 2 8.5 2 27
14
w
f f
b t r c
t t

= = = < =
> =

Therefore, the cross-section is class 3.

ENA
=0.57
= -0.44
6.95 kN/cm
-15.8 kN/cm
-
-25.4 kN/cm
-44.1 kN/cm
-
3.5 kN/cm
35.2 kN/cm +
-

PNA
=1.0
=146/208 =0.70
2
0
8
m
m

1
4
6
m
m

-
+
+
+
-
-
-35.5 kN/cm
35.5 kN/cm
46

3.3 Cross-Section Resistance
3.3.1 Existing rules in EN 1993-1-1
The existing design procedure of EN 1993-1-1 is illustrated separately for I- and H-sections and for
RHS. For a better overview the rules for elastic and for plastic resistances are visualized in diagrams
(Fig. 49 and Fig. 50) respectively Table 12 and Table 13.

The plastic design check can be presented in three steps:
Step 1: Determination of the mono-axial bending resistances (i.e. M
pl,Rd
)
Step 2: Interaction of mono-axial bending and axial force ( M
N,Rd
)
Step 3: Interaction for biaxial bending

Fig. 49 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of I- and H-sections according to EN 1993-1-1

M
M
N,y,Rd
N,z,Rd
y
z
Design procedure for plastic CS-resistance of I and H sections (EN 1993-1-1)
class 3 class 4 class 2
M
M
M
c/t
Rd
pl,Rd
el,Rd
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
M
a
a/2
el,y,Rd
M
M
M
pl,y,Rd
y
z
M
pl,z,Rd
M
el,z,Rd
N
N
n =
1.0
pl,Rd
Ed
47

Table 12 Cross-section resistance of I and H sections according to EN 1993-1-1
Class 2: Step 1:
= =
y,Rd pl,y,Rd z,Rd pl,z,Rd
M M M M
Step 2:
( )
( )
N,y,Rd pl,y,Rd pl,y,Rd
1 n
M M M
1 0.5a

N,z,Rd pl,z,Rd
2
N,z,Rd pl,z,Rd
n a: M M
n a
n a: M M 1
1 a
=

> =

( )
=
f
A 2bt
a 0.5
A

=
Ed
pl,Rd
N
n
N

Step 3:
= = 2; 5n 1
y,Ed z,Ed
N,y,Rd N,z,Rd
M M
1
M M

+

Class 3
y,Ed z,Ed
Ed
el,Rd el,y,Rd el,z,Rd
M M
N
1
N M M
+ +
Class 4: + +
+ +

y,Ed Ed Ny z,Ed Ed Nz
Ed
eff y M0 eff,y y M0 eff,z y M0
M N e M N e
N
1
A f / W f / W f /

Table 13 Cross-section resistance of RHS and box sections according to EN 1993-1-1
Class 2: Step 1:
= =
y,Rd pl,y,Rd z,Rd pl,z,Rd
M M M M
Step 2:
( )
( )
N,y,Rd pl,y,Rd pl,y,Rd
w
1 n
M M M
1 0.5a

( )
( )
N,z,Rd pl,z,Rd pl,z,Rd
f
1 n
M M M
1 0.5a

( )
f
w
A 2bt
a 0.5
A
=
( )
w
f
A 2ht
a 0.5
A
=
=
Ed
pl,Rd
N
n
N

Step 3:
= =
2
1.66
6
1 1.13n

y,Ed z,Ed
N,y,Rd N,z,Rd
M M
1
M M

+

Class 3
y,Ed z,Ed
Ed
el,Rd el,y,Rd el,z,Rd
M M
N
1
N M M
+ +
Class 4: + +
+ +

Ed
eff y M0 eff,y y M0 eff,z y M0
M N e M N e
N
1
A f / W f / W f /

48

Fig. 50 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of tubular sections according to EN 1993-1-1

It should be mentioned that in the existing Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 plastic or partial design of semi-
compact sections is already provided for in clause 6.2.2.4 (see Fig. 54). However, this special rule is
just valid for specific sections where only the web may be class 3 and not the flanges. Further, the
loading of these sections is restricted to pure bending M
y,Ed
. If this rule is transformed into a graphical
form it leads to an almost linear transition between class 2 and class 4 related to the plate slenderness
ratio c/t (see Fig. 54).
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Design procedure for plastic CS-resistance of RHS and box sections (EN 1993-1-1)
M
M
N,y,Rd
N,z,Rd
M
N
N
n =
1.0
a /2
a /2
w
f
el,y,Rd
pl,Rd
Ed
M
M
M
pl,y,Rd
y
z
M
pl,z,Rd
M
el,z,Rd
M
M
M
c/t
Rd
pl,Rd
el,Rd
class 1
Flange 33 42 38
class 3 class 4
c
l
a
s
s

2
M
M
M
c/t
Rd
pl,Rd
el,Rd
class 1
Web 72 124 83
49

A similar rule for partly plastic design of semi-compact sections is given in Eurocode EN 1993-1-3,
clause 6.1.3 (see Fig. 56) for cold formed sections. Again a linear transition is specified for the bending
capacity between the elastic and fully plastic ranges. Instead of the c/t-ratios the transition is related
here to the plate slenderness
p
.
In view of this normative situation of the current design rules of Eurocode 3 the new proposed rules
could be regarded as amendment or completion of the given design rules. However, concerning the
scope of design situations they constitute a significant extension of the application range:
they cover all forms of standard profiles of I-, H and RHS, rolled an welded, independently
whether web or flange are in class 3,
they cover all kinds of loading N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
and not pure bending alone,
they cover not only rules for the cross-section capacity, but also buckling rules for the member
capacity (buckling under axial compression and bending).

3.3.2 New proposed rules for class 3 according to the project SEMI-COMP
The proposed design procedure is illustrated for I and H sections and for RHS by Fig. 52 and Fig. 53
separately. For a better overview the proposed formulae are visualized in similar form like the existing
rules in section 3.3.1. It can be realized that the existing and new design procedures are in close
accordance, when the plastic resistances M
pl,Rd
are replaced by the interpolated values M
3,Rd
.
In accordance with the design process in Eurocode again a three-step procedure has been established.
However, before entering step 1 a preliminary stage it may be called step 0 has to be performed by
classifying the given cross-section, i.e. to ascertain that the section falls into class 3 and not into class 4.
Follows that the section is class 3 or more favourable, then the precondition of the new proposed rules
is given. Is the section in class 4 then the relevant design rules with effective section properties have to
be applied. The classification at the limit between class 3 and class 4 has to be made for the full set of
loading, which in general is N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
, see Fig. 51. The interpolation in Step 1, however, is
made for the stress distributions of isolated bending moments, i.e. pure M
y
or pure M
z
, where reference
values c/t
ref
are used.

Fig. 51 Step 0 classification and interpolation

The reference values c/t
ref
are used for scaling the class 3-range between 0 and 1,0. The lower end 0
denotes plastic behaviour and the upper end 1,0 denotes elastic behaviour. In view of the complexity of
the partial plastic behaviour of such a wide range of section shapes it has been decided to follow a
simplified approach by determining the uniaxial bending capacities M
3,y,Rd
and M
3,z,Rd
in isolated way,
i.e. independently of the mutual effects or the effects of the axial force. This has the beneficial
consequence that the bending capacities of standardized section shapes can also be provided in
tabulated form (see chapter 3.6) and that the design procedure can follow the same steps as given in the
current Eurocode-rules.
In step 2 the interaction of uniaxial bending and axial force is defined in the same way as in the existing
code, however the small plateaus at the transition to class 2 (small values of n =N
Ed
/N
pl,Rd
) had to be
eliminated in order to achieve the required level of the model safety factor. This results in a small
discontinuity at the transition from class 3 to class 2 (see also chapter 3.3.5), however for the sake of
simplicity of the design rules this fact has been accepted.
Step 3 describes the interaction between M
N,3,4,Rd
and M
N,3,z,Rd
. It could be shown that the exponential
interaction formulae can also be applied to the partial-plastic behaviour in class 3 leading to the well-
known convex interaction curve.

Step 0
50

For I- and H-sections it can be found that all results of the numerical and experimental tests approve the
convex shape of the curve based on the same exponents as used in the current code. This convex
behaviour not only appears along the class 3-range but extends also further on into class 4, where fully
elastic behaviour with linear interaction is assumed by the code. The new proposed rules, however,
make use of this beneficial behaviour in class 3, although there is at present no continuation in class
4 in the code. It would, therefore, be advisable to carry on the given investigations of partial behaviour
in class 4 (see Rusch [45]). In case that one would abstain from this beneficial effect in favour of a
normative continuity between the two classes 3 and 4, an adaptation of the exponents by the c/t
ref
-values
could easily be provided. According to the work in [26] the exponents would read:
=2 c/t
ref,y

=5n (5n 1) c/t
ref,z
1
For SHS- and RHS-sections the convex behaviour has also been found for the interaction curve in step
3, however, the very high exponents of class 2 up to 6,0 needed a limitation when the c/t-rations
increase. At the limit between class 3 and class 4 exponents in the range of 2,0 can be confirmed. The
limitation could be realized in this case by a limit value of = =2 +4 [1 max (c/t
ref (y,z)
)]
4
.

Fig. 52 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of I- and H-sections according to SEMI-COMP

The formulae for the new proposal are summarized in Table 14 and Table 15 as follows:

y
z
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Design model for CS-resistance of I and H sections in class 3
M
M
M
c/t
0.0
Rd
pl,Rd
el,Rd
ref
1.0
M
3,Rd
c/t
ref
M
el,y,Rd
M
3,y,Rd
y
z
M
3,z,Rd
M
el,z,Rd
M
M
N
N
n =
1.0
pl,Rd
Ed
N,3,z,Rd
M
M
N,3,y,Rd
N,3,z,Rd
M
M
N,3,y,Rd
51

Table 14 Cross-section resistance of I and H sections according to new class 3 design model
Interpolation
parameters:
2,y,f
10 =

3,y,f
14 =

2,z ,f
10 =

3,z ,f
16 =

2,y,w
83 =

3,y,w
124 =

( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
f 2,y,f w 2,y,w
ref,y
3,y,f 2,y,f 3,y,w 2,y,w
f 2,z,f
ref,z
3,z,f 2,z,f
c / t c / t
c / t max ; ;0 1
c / t
c / t max ;0 1

=

=

Step 1:
( )
y
3,(y/z),Rd 3,(y/z) pl,(y/z),Rd pl,(y/z),Rd el,(y/z),Rd ref ,(y/z)
M0
f
M W M M M c / t = =

Step 2:
( )
( )
2
N,3,y,Rd 3,y,Rd N,3,z,Rd 3,z,Rd
M M 1 n M M 1 n = =
Step 3 = = 2; 5n 1
y,Ed z,Ed
N,3,y,Rd N,3,z,Rd
M M
1
M M

+

Table 15 Cross-section resistance of RHS and box sections according to new class 3 design model
Interpolation
parameters:
2,y,f
34 =

3,y,f
38 =

2,z,w
34 =

3,z,w
38 =

2,y,w
83 =

3,y,w
124 =

( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
f 2,y,f w 2,y,w
ref,y
3,y,f 2,y,f 3,y,w 2,y,w
w 2,z,w
ref,z
3,z,w 2,z,w
c / t c / t
c / t max ; ;0 1
c / t
c / t max ;0 1

=

=

Step 1:
( )
y
3,(y/z),Rd 3,(y/z) pl,(y/z),Rd pl,(y/z),Rd el,(y/z),Rd ref ,(y/z)
M0
f
M W M M M c / t = =

Step 2:
( ) ( )
N,3,y,Rd 3,y,Rd N,3,z,Rd 3,z,Rd
M M 1 n M M 1 n = =
Step 3
( )

= = +

4
ref,(y/z)
2
1.66
2 4 1 max c / t
1 1.13n

y,Ed z,Ed
N,3,y,Rd N,3,z,Rd
M M
1
M M

+

52

Fig. 53 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of tubular sections according to SEMI-COMP

Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Design model for CS-resistance of RHS and box sections in class 3
M
el,y,Rd
M
M
y
z
M
el,z,Rd
N
N
n =
1.0
pl,Rd
Ed
M
3,y,Rd
M
3,z,Rd
N,3,z,Rd
M
M
N,3,y,Rd
N,3,z,Rd
M
M
N,3,y,Rd
M
M
M
c/t
Rd
pl,Rd
el,Rd
c
l
a
s
s

1
Flange
28 34 38
M
3,Rd
c/t
ref
0.0 1.0 c/t
ref
current EC3
class 3 class 4
c
l
a
s
s

2
M
M
M
c/t
Rd
pl,Rd
el,Rd
class 1
Web
72 124 83
M
3,Rd
c/t
ref
0.0 1.0 c/t
ref
53

3.3.3 Continuity with existing rules for semi-compact sections in EN 1993, Part 1-1 and
1-3
3.3.3.1 EN 1993-1-1, clause 6.2.2.4 [8][9]
In the existing EN 1993-1-1, clause 6.2.2.4 [1] allowance is made to make use of partial plastic capacity
of a class 3-section in pure bending, where the flanges are in class 1 or 2 and the web in class 3.
The Fig. 54 below illustrates the result of the given code-provision, which is plotted in a diagram for the
class 3-range by the dash-dotted and double dot-dashed lines. It appears as a nearly linear transition
from the class 2/3-limit to the class 3/4-limit. The two curves represent the cases where the flanges are
either in class 1 (i.e. c/t
f
=5 ) or at the limit of class 2/3 (i.e. c/t
f
=10 ). The SEMI-COMP design
proposal is illustrated by the dashed line.

Fig. 54 Current design situation and Semi-Comp proposal for I-sections with class 3-webs in bending

Fig. 55 FE-results for I-sections with class 3-webs in bending
For comparison also the results of numerical calculations of such cases c/t =5 and 10 are presented
(Fig. 55). It has to be mentioned, that the local imperfections of these numerical results were based on
the assumption of b/400, while the investigations in Semi-Comp [4] were based on b/200 (It may be
noted that b/400 has been found as the local imperfection which leads to numerical buckling resistances
corresponding to the buckling curve in EN 1993-1-5 [3]).
In conclusion, it is obvious that the SEMI-COMP design proposal with linear transition is in close
accordance with the given code-provision of sections in bending.

3.3.3.2 EN 1993-1-3, clause 6.1.4 [8][9]
In the existing EN 1993-1-3, clause 6.1.4 [2] gives design provisions for the bending moment
resistances, which allow to use a linear transition between plastic and elastic moment (Fig. 56). Even
though the EN 1993-1-3 does not formally use cross-section classes, the
e0
- limits applied in the
formulae correspond to the c/t-limit values for class 3 of EN 1993-1-1 in theoretical sense.
c/t
ref
-1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
c/t
f
=5
c/t
f
=10
EN 1993-1-1 (c/tf =5)
EN 1993-1-1 (c/tf =10)
Class 3 Class 4 Class 1 +2
flangegoverning
c/t
ref
-1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
New Design Model
EN 1993-1-1 (c/tf =5)
EN 1993-1-1 (c/tf =10)
54

c/(t
f
x )
6 8 10 12 14 16
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
New Design Model
EN 1993-1-3
(revised)
EN 1993-1-3
(current version)
Class 3 Class 4 Class 1
Outstand flange governing
C
l
a
s
s

2
My

Fig. 56 Design provision for members in bending according to EN 1993-1-3
The following figures give a comparison of the design rules of EN 1993-1-3 with the new design rules
of the project SEMI-COMP in the range of class 3-sections. The diagrams in Fig. 57 for internal
elements in bending and outstand elements in compression show fairly good accordance with EN 1993-
1-1, if the
eo
-value for outstand flanges would be shifted from the previous value 0,673 to the current
value 0,748 (this discrepancy follows from the implementation of a new buckling formula for outstand
flanges in the latest versions of EN 1993-1-5, which was not taken into account in the EN 1993-1-3 at
this time). The small differences at the transition to full plastic design (class 2) follow from the
assumptions, that in EN 1993-1-3 this occurs at
p,pl
=0,75*
eo
while in EN 1993-1-1
p,pl
=0,6 has
been taken (see section 3.5).

Fig. 57 Comparison between EN 1993-1-3 and SEMI-COMP design proposal, web in bending (left)
respectively outstand flange governing for mono-axial bending M
y
(right)
In Fig. 56 numerical results are plotted for comparison. Concerning the imperfections it is to be
mentioned, that the numerical results were based on local imperfections b/400. Further numerical
results can be found in [8].
The numerical results for the welded box-sections with high webs shown in [8] indicate that towards the
limits of class 2/3 together with flanges at the limit of class 2/3 the full plastic capacity could not be
reached. This means that the discrepancy has to be covered by the safety margin for these extreme
cases.
In Fig. 58 the current limits for internal parts in compression are compared with the proposed new
limits. The left figure shows graphically what has been explained in chapter 3 before; the current limits
in EN 1993-1-1 are in conflict both with the continuity to class 4 and with the rules in EN 1993-1-5.
The right hand figure illustrates the diagram for the modified c/t-limits of the SEMI-COMP proposal.
Thereby, the limits between class 2/3 and class 3/4 have been revised. Accordingly, the limit between
class 1/2 was shifted to the value of c/t =28 corresponding to =
p
0,5 .
c/t
ref
-1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
c/t
f
=5
c/t
f
=10
EN 1993-1-3
0
0,75
e

flangegoverning
c/(t
w
x)
60 80 100 120 140
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
New Design Model
EN 1993-1-3
Class 3 Class 4
Class 1
Web in Bending governing
124 83
C
l
a
s
s

2
72
My
=
eo
0,874

eo
0,75
0,6 0, 5
=
eo
0,748

eo
0,75 eo 0,75
= eo 0,673
0,6 0, 5
55

c/(t
f
x)
26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
New Design Model
EN 1993-1-3
Class 3 Class 4
Internal flange governing (new limits)
C
l
a
s
s

1
Class 2
My
Concerning the limit 0,75*
eo
of the current EN 1993-1-3 this seems to be too conservative for internal
flanges and should be amended to achieve harmonisation of the Eurocode-parts.

Fig. 58 Comparison between EN 1993-1-3 and EN 1993-1-1 (left) respectively SEMI-COMP design
proposal (right), shown for internal plate element in compression

In summary, it may be concluded that the modification of the c/t-limits in a small number of points
would lead to a good harmonisation of the rules in EN 1993-1-1, EN 1993-1-3 and EN 1993-1-5.

3.3.4 General load carrying behavior of class 3-sections background of the design
formulae
In this chapter information on the real load carrying behavior of class 3-sections is given for better
understanding of the physical background of the proposed design rules. The presentation of results has
been based on the plate slenderness ratios c/t
ref
in order to simplify the comparisons for different load
combinations, section shapes and steel grades.

Fig. 59 Comparison of moment interaction for pure bending EN 1993-1-1 vs. analytical resistance and
results of MNA calculations
The limit capacities R
pl
, R
el
and R
FEM
describe the plastic, elastic and numerically obtained capacities,
determined for simultaneous (proportional) increase of the reference load components (Fig. 59 and Fig.
60). The dimensionless term (R
FEM
R
el
)/R
pl
R
el
) specifies the plastic part of the numerically obtained
capacity related to the fully plastic reserve (margin) for a specified load combination. The value 0
means that elastic behavior (e.g. pure normal force) is present, the value 1,0 denotes the fully plastic
state. It is to be noted that R
pl
in the present study is the limit capacity acc. to EN 1993-1-1, which may
c/(t
f
x)
26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46
(
M
F
E
M

-

M
e
l )
/
(
M
p
l
-

M
e
l )
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
EN 1993-1-3
Class 3 Class 4 Class 1
Internal flange governing (current limits)
Class 2
My
=
eo
0,673

eo
0,75
0,67 0,58
EC3-1-5
qualitatively

eo
0,75
0,6 0, 5
EC3-1-5
qualitatively
=
eo
0,673
56

lead to conservative results for biaxial bending of I- and H-sections compared to the analytical results of
R
pl
. Fig. 59 illustrates this situation for a HEAA 260 exemplarily, where the analytical R
pl
is up to 5,4 %
above that of EN 1993-1-1 and may surmount the plastic reserve by up to 13 %. In Fig. 60 this effect
can also be found if capacities are larger than 1,0.

In the Semi Comp Project the model development has been based on a parametric study of 729 FE-
simulations of double-symmetric I- and H-sections and quadratic SHS and rectangular RHS-sections.
The parameters were so selected that a large number of European Standard profiles and similar welded
sections in class 3 could be covered. The investigations comprised the following sections:
profiles: HEA 280, HEAA 220, HEAA 300, RHS 250/150/6 and SHS 180/5
steel grades: S 235, S 355 and S 460 for H-Profile, S 275, S 355 and S 460 for SHS furthermore
S 235, S 275 and S 355 for RHS
additional welded sections with thin webs:
h377/b300: h=377 mm, b=300 mm, t
f
=10.5 mm, t
w
=4 mm, steel grades S 235 and S 355
h500/b300: h=500 mm, b=300 mm, t
f
=12.5 mm, t
w
=4 mm, steel grade S 235

The parametric study was performed with nominal input parameters. This study was called accuracy
study. In the Semi Comp +project the scope of the accuracy study was extended by profiles with high
webs (IPE 300 in steel grade S355, IPE 500 in S460 and HEA 1000 in S460), in order to provide
additional results for the verification of the design model of the interaction of M
y
+N.
For the FE-simulations in form of geometrically and materially nonlinear analyses with imperfections
(GMNIA) the following imperfections have been taken into account as follows:
geometrical imperfection acc. to the 1. eigenform, which due to the large number of different load
conditions have been taken as the 1. eigenform for constant axial force,
the amplitudes were scaled by h/200 for high profiles (h >b) and by b/200 for stocky profiles (h <
b), which approximately corresponds to the recommended value in EC 3-1-5/Annex C of 80 % of
the manufacturing tolerances,
residual stresses were applied with parabolic shape for H-profiles and with linear shape for hollow
sections.
The results of the GMNIA-calculations for I- and H-profiles are presented in Fig. 60 Fig. 60 a) and b)
show the totality of all result; the partial plastic behavior is well observable in the range of class 3. At
the transition to class 4 this behavior is still existent, just one welded section (thin web) is close to the
elastic limit. In Fig. 60c) to f) the results are presented in separated form for the individual forces N,
M
y
, M
z
and their combination.
In Fig. 60 c) the behavior is shown for pure bending M
y
. In class 2 the GMNIA results are in the plastic
range of M
pl,y
as expected, in class 3 the capacities are close to M
pl,y
at c/t =0 and still considerably
above the elastic limit at c/t =1,0. This is the consequence of the classification of EC 3-1-1, which does
not account for the mutual restraint of flange and web. Accordingly, different partial plasticity occurs in
the results depending on the different c/t-ratios of web and flanges. Therefore, additional GMNIA-
studies have been carried out in the Semi Comp +project, in order to validate the design model for I-
and H-sections with high webs (the flange is no longer restrained by the web). The result of it was that
the capacities may decrease to an almost linear transition curve in class 3 when the mutual restraint of
web and flanges is low or missing at all [9]. In consequence, the variety of different ratios of mutual
restraint in practical steel sections may lead to very different impact on the plastic capacity, which
unfortunately cannot be captured by the elementary rules of classification in EC 3-1-1.
Summarizing the result of the studies it can be stated that a linear transition curve from M
pl,y
to M
el,y
in
class 3 can be confirmed as unified rule of I- and H-profiles.
In Fig. 60 d) the results for the loading M
y
+N are presented on 4 levels of axial force n =0,15/0,3/0,5
and 0,7 (n =N/N
pl
). While rolled sections with rather stocky web plates show pronounced plastic
capacity in the whole class 3-range, welded sections with web and flange in class 3 have just reduced
partial plastic capacity. At the transition to class 2, however, it can be observed, that even the sections
with stocky web plates do not reach the full plastic capacity acc. to EC 3-1-1. The design model for
class 2-sections covers this fact by the model safety factor. In the new design model for class 3 sections,
however, it is accounted for numerically through the modified interaction rule for N +M
y
.
Fig. 60 e) presents the results for biaxial bending M
y
+M
z
. It confirms the convex interaction rule also
in class 3 for both rolled and welded sections. The data plotted in the diagram are GMNIA results for
57

the load condition M
y
/M
el,y
=M
z
/M
el,z
=1,0; for other rations the results are comparable. Similar
behavior was found for the load condition N +M
y
+M
z
, as illustrated in Fig. 60 f), so that the new
design model for class 3-sections can be approved also for interaction with axial forces and the same
exponential curves can be applied as for class 2.
The partial plastic behavior of hollow sections will be discussed in paragraph 3.3.5.1 in more detail. In
general, similar behavior has been found for N +M
y
, however, for N +M
y
+M
z
differences appear
towards reduced convexity with increasing plate slenderness and effect of axial forces, so that
adaptations have to be made.

Fig. 60 Parametric study with finite-element calculations: all load cases a) and b), and selected load cases
c) to f)

class 2 class 2
class 2 class 2
class 2 class 2
class 4 class 4
class 4 class 4
class 4 class 4
Eurocode
class 3
Eurocode
class 3
Eurocode
class 3
Eurocode
class 3
Eurocode
class 3
Eurocode
class 3
58

3.3.5 Transition to class 2 and to class 4
3.3.5.1 Loading by bending and axial force (N + M
y
)
The interaction of M
y
+N is illustrated in Fig. 61 for 3 different I- or H-profiles in form of GMNIA-
results and the design curves for elastic and plastic behavior of EC 3-1-1 (curves 1 and 4) as well as the
new design model for class 3 (curve 2) and the analytical plastic capacity (curve 3). In addition, the
ratios c/t
ref
for the GMNIA points are plotted, showing that all three profiles are in class 1 or 2 for
bending and small axial force, but in class 4 for bending and high axial force. Thus, the transition to
class 2 and to class 4 can well be illustrated.

Fig. 61 M-N-Interaction curves for sections whose cross-section class is governed by the web

For the IPE 300 (S355) the GMNIA-results are close to the analytical plastic resistance for small axial
force, however, for high axial force (n =0,5 to 0,7) they are just a bit above the linear interaction.
The diagram for the IPE 500 (S460) shows that even for small values of c/t
ref
(e.g. c/t
ref
=0,22) the
resistance is significantly lower than the plastic capacities of EC 3-1-1 and the analytical solution. The
diagram for the HEA-1000 (S460) again confirms this behavior for the data points of c/t
ref
in class 3; all
points nearly coincide with the linear interaction curve of the new design model. The comparison
underlines that a linear interaction for N + M
y
(without plateau) is an appropriate model for a
generalized design rule of I- and H-sections in the class 3-range.
For the analogous behavior of hollow sections see paragraph 3.3.5.2.

3.3.5.2 Loading by biaxial bending and axial force (N + M
y
+ M
z
)

Fig. 62 Comparison of selected FE-calculations from the parametric study with the section capacity
according to EN 1993-1-1 for a) N/Npl = 0 and b) N/Npl = 0,50

The interaction of biaxial bending plus axial force can well be illustrated in three dimensional form
related to the c/t
ref
-ratios of the section. Fig. 62 shows the behavior of 4 sections, in the left hand part for
59

biaxial bending alone, in the right part for biaxial bending plus axial force (n =0,5). The grey regions
indicate the reference-resistances acc. to EC 3-1-1 for class 1 to 4. In addition, GMNIA-data points
were plotted for different ratios of c/t
ref
in class 3, showing convex interaction curves in the class 3-
range and further also at the transition to class 4.
Further diagrams dealing with this subject are given in Fig. 63 and Fig. 64 for I- and H-sections as well
as hollow sections in class 3.

Fig. 63 shows in the left hand part 4 diagrams of a FE-parametric study of an HEAA 300 (S355) under
biaxial bending and axial forces (N/N
pl
=n =0,0/0,15/0,30 and 0,50). The moments are related to the
elastic reference resistances M
el,y
and M
el,z
. At the axis of M
y
the ratio c/t
ref
=1,05, so that the design
model leads to the elastic limit resistance for all cases of M
y
+N. At the axis of M
z
the ratio c/t
ref
=0,75,
which leads to partial plastic resistances due to the new design model. Between these two points the
design model describes convex interaction curves with the exponents =2 and =5n. The diagrams
for n =0,3 and 0,5 show the same pronounced convex interaction, even though the ratios c/t
ref
=0,80
and 1,05 are marking the transition to class 4. The two diagrams at the right illustrate the interaction for
uniaxial bending M
y
and M
z
together with the axial force N for the same profile. Even for the high
ratios c/t
ref
the resistances are above the elastic ones, which has been used by the new design model. For
bending about M
z
+N the parabolic interaction (however without plateau) leads to a good accordance
with the FE-results, which confirms the validity of the new design model in class 3.

Fig. 63 Comparison of FE-results with the elastic and plastic cross-section capacity according to EN 1993-
1-1 and the new design model for HEAA 300 S355
For rectangular hollow sections the analogous results are presented in Fig. 64. Again, the four left hand
diagrams illustrate the interaction of biaxial bending and axial force (N/N
pl
=0,0/0,20/0,50 and 0,70) for
a RHS 250/150/6 (S275). The resistances are related to the elastic reference values M
el,y
and M
el,z
. In the
graphs for all GMNIA-results the ratios c/t
ref
are plotted, showing that the major part is in class 3 (0 <
c/t
ref
1,0), just for uniaxial bending M
z
the profile is in class 4 (c/t
ref
=1,96) and for M
y
in class 1 (c/t
ref

=-1,0). Accordingly, the design model ever leads to elastic limit resistances for M
3,z
and M
N,3,z
and for
M
3,y
and M
N,3,y
to plastic or partial plastic resistances. Between these points a convex interaction curve
is described by the design model with the exponents = =1,66/(1-1,13 n), however, the upper
limitation for and has been fixed by 2 +4 [1-max(c/t
ref,(y,z)
)]
4
instead of 6 in class 2 of EC 3-1-1.
This means that for the increase of axial force and of c/t-ratio the exponents are limited such that they
take on 2,0 at the border to class 4. This is illustrated in the diagrams for n =0,5 and 0,7 (Fig. 64) where
it may be noticed that the dashed line for = =2,0 much better approximates the shape of the
GMNIA-resistances for high axial force than the line for the plastic exponents of class 2 (dashed/dotted
line). As a consequence, the exponents had been more strictly limited for the design model of hollow
sections than the existing ones in class 2.
60

The two right hand diagrams of Fig. 64 show the interaction of uniaxial bending M
y
and M
z
together
with N for the same profile, however, the steel grade is S235. For the load condition of M
y
+N the
section is in class 1 or 2 up to n =0,5 and in class 3 for higher values of n. For pure axial compression
N the profile is in class 4. The new design model describes the GMNIA-results in class 3 quite well, in
particular for bending M
z
+N. The section there has indeed a ratio c/t
ref
=1,17, which means the first
region of class 4, but it can still be used to evaluate the transition from class 3 to class 4. It is well
noticeable that the linear interaction curve (without plateau) nearly exactly describes the GMNIA-
results. (For pure axial force N the resistance is 0,94 N
pl
, because it is in class 4).

Fig. 64 Comparison of FE-results with the elastic and plastic cross-section capacity according to EN 1993-1-
1 and the new design model for RHS 250/150/6 S 235 and S 275 (BemModell relates to Design
Model)
3.3.6 Statistical evaluation
The validation of the new design models have been based on both an accuracy study with nominal
values as well as a statistical evaluation acc. to EN 1990 Annex D with Monte-Carlo-Simulations (see
[4]). The parametric studies of the Monte-Carlo-Simulations were carried out with scattered input
parameters in the form, that the yield strength scattered about the mean value while the geometrical data
and imperfections scattered about the nominal values with log normal or normal distributions. The
statistical evaluations of the new design model for class 3 led to similar model safety factors
*
M
than
found for class 2 in the existing EC 3-1-1. For I- and H-sections all data points were above the design
model, (reference line 1,0) showing a scatter band with the mean value of 1,13 (Fig. 65a). The model
safety factor using Least Tail-Approximation then was obtained for class 3 with
*
M
=1,075 (Fig.
65 b and c). In comparison, this factor was found to be 1,05 for the class 2 range, which means that the
new model would well fit into the Eurocode 3 concept. Concerning RHS the model safety factor was
found to be
*
M
=1,098 considering the new modified c/t-limit ratios, however still using the
interaction exponents of class 2 (without the new limitation); this means that the real model safety
factor of the last version of the design model would be lower. Independently of that the
*
M
-value still
is in similar order of magnitude that that found for class 1 or 2 RHS-profiles in the existing EC 3-1-1.
61

Fig. 65 Cross-section resistances of FE-calculations for H-shaped sections vs. design model a) and
statistical evaluation of Monte-Carlo simulation b) and c)

3.4 Member Resistance
3.4.1 Existing rules in EN 1993-1-1
The member buckling rules for beam columns in the existing EN 1993-1-1 are given in form of two
interaction formulae, equ. (6.61) and (6.62), which cover the potential buckling modes about the yy-axis
and the zz-axis.
buckling y-y:
+ +
+ +

y,Ed y,Ed z,Ed z,Ed
Ed
yy yz
y Rk y,Rk z,Rk
LT
M1 M1 M1
M M M M
N
k k 1
N M M

buckling z-z:
y,Ed y,Ed z,Ed z,Ed
Ed
zy zz
z Rk y,Rk z,Rk
LT
M1
M1 M1
M M M M
N
k k 1
N M M
+ +
+ +

62

The definition and the values of each of the constitutive coefficients are provided in EN 199311 for
Class 1, Class 2, Class 3 and Class 4 cross-sections.
The interaction factors k
yy
, k
yz
k
zy
and k
zz
may be taken from two alternative approaches, called Method
1 and Method 2. The formulae for these factors are given in Annex A and Annex B.
Remark: It is important to notice that, in addition to this stability check, the resistance check of the
member end sections if relevant has also to be carried out.
The formulae have been validated for members with double-symmetrical cross-section and only slightly
unsymmetrical shapes.

3.4.2 New proposed rules for class 3 according to project SEMI-COMP
The application of the linear transition of the bending resistances M
3,y,Rd
and M
3,z,Rd
in class 3 has a
corresponding effect also on the member resistances.
The cross-section properties used for the calculation of the design values N
Rd
, M
y,Rd
M
z,Rd
and for the
coefficients
y z LT
, , , which determine the reduction factors
y
,
z
,
LT
depend on the specific cross-
section class. The correlation between the classes and the properties is given in Table 16 (taken from
EN 1993-1-1 and amended by the results of project SEMI-COMP for class 3):

Table 16 Values for N
Rk
= f
y
A
i
, M
i,Rk
= f
y
W
i
and M
i,Ed

Class 1 2 3 4
A
i
A A A A
eff

W
y
W
pl,y
W
pl,y
W
el,y
or W
3,y
W
eff,y

W
z
W
pl,z
W
pl,z
W
el,z
or W
3,z
W
eff,z

M
y,Ed
- - - e
N,y
N
Ed

M
z,Ed
- - - e
N,z
N
Ed

Method 1:
The general format of the Method 1 (Annex A) beam-column formulae for class 1 and class 2 sections
presented in EN 199311 can be rearranged for class 3 as follows:

, ,
, ,
1
, 1 , 1
0,6 1
1 1
my y Ed mz z Ed
Ed mLT z
y
Rk
LT y y Rk z Rk
Ed Ed
y
yz yy
M
cr z M cr y M
C M C M
N C w
N
w M M
N N
C C
N N

+ +

, ,
, ,
1
, 1 , 1
0,6 1
1 1
y my y Ed mz z Ed
Ed mLT
z
Rk
z LT y Rk z Rk
Ed Ed
z
zz zy
M
cr z M cr y M
w C M C M
N C
N
w M M
N N
C C
N N

+ +

Both expressions remain identical for Class 3 sections for which the bending resistance (M
3,y,Rd
and
M
3,z,Rd
) is evaluated through the new resistance model proposed in Section 3.3.2 of the present
publication. Only some of the above-mentioned constitutive coefficients have to be evaluated in a
different way compared to the present EN 199311. Table 17 summarises the changes to be achieved
for members susceptible to torsional deformations. Similar changes are to be considered for members
not susceptible to torsional deformations; in this case, the coefficients c
LT
and d
LT
are equal to 0,0 while
C
mLT
and
LT
are equal to 1,0.

63

Table 17 Values of coefficients to adopt in the case of increased Class 3 resistance
Coefficients Values to adopt
M
y,Rk
M
3,y,Rk
M
z,Rk
M
3,z,Rk
C
yy
and C
zz
1,0
C
yz

( )
2
2
max
,
5
3,
1
1 1 2 14 0,6
el z
mz Ed z
z LT
Rk
z y z
M
W
C N w
w c
N
w w W

+

C
zy

( )
2
2
max
,
5
3,
1
1 1 2 14 0,6
my y el y
Ed
y LT
Rk
y z y
M
C w W
N
w d
N
w w W

+

c
LT
2
0 ,
4
3, ,
10
5
y Ed
LT
my LT y Rd z
M
a
C M
+

d
LT

0 , ,
4
3, , 3, ,
2
0,1
y Ed z Ed
LT
my LT y Rd mz z Rd z
M M
a
C M C M
+

W
pl,y
W
3,y

W
pl,z
W
3,z

w
y
W
3,y
/ W
el,y

w
z
W
3,z
/ W
el,z

Method 2:
In Method 2 (Annex B) the effect of the linear transition should be accounted for by replacing the
plastic resistances by the partial plastic resistances M
3,y,Rd
and M
3,z,Rd
as illustrated by the following
equations. The same holds for the calculation of the slenderness
LT
. The interaction factors should be
the same as for plastic behaviour (class 1, class 2) in Annex B of EN 1993-1-1.

Table 18 Member resistance for class 3-sections according to new design model
buckling about
y-y:
N
Ed
y
N
Rk
M1
+k
yy
N
y,Ed
LT
N
3,y,Rk
M1
+k
yz
N
z,Ed
N
3,z,Rk
M1

buckling about
z-z:
N
Ed
z
N
Rk
M1
+k
zy
N
y,Ed
LT
N
3,y,Rk
M1
+k
zz
N
z,Ed
N
3,z,Rk
M1

coefficient for
Method 2:
LT
= _
W
3,y
f
y
N
cr
-
LT

k
yy
, k
yz
, k
zy
and k
zz
as for plastic behavior (class 1 and 2) in Annex B

3.5 Calculation Procedure
3.5.1 Calculation procedure for cross-section design
The following procedure applies to the cross-section design for the given internal forces of the global
analysis:
calculate the stress diagrams of the sections in 1/10 points of the member length
64

for reasons of member-check only the end-sections would need a check of the member resistance
however for reasons of finding the point of the highest utilisation factor all 1/10 points need to be
calculated
classify the section in 1/10 points according to chapter 3.2.4 for the limits 3/4 resp. 2/3
perform the cross-section checks according to chapter 3.3.1 and 3.3.2:
in class 1+2: calculate the cross-section check acc. to equ. (6.41) of EN 1993-1-1 using M
pl,Rd

y,Ed z,Ed
N,y,Rd N,z,Rd
M M
1
M M

+

in class 3: calculate the cross-section check acc. to the SEMI-COMP procedure in 4.2 using M
3,Rd

y,Ed z,Ed
N,3,y,Rd N,3,z,Rd
M M
1
M M

+

in class 4:
If the design is based on the formula (6.44) of EN 1993-1-1 for the cross-section resistance:

Ed
eff y eff,y,min y eff,z,min y
M0 M0 M0
M N e M N e
N
1
A f W f W f
+ +
+ +

calculate
A
eff
for pure N and e
N

W
y,eff
for pure M
y

W
z,eff
for pure M
z

thereby, determine on basis of p (based on f
y
)
for I- and box-sections the 2-step procedure of EN 1993-1-5 (4.4.3) may be used
for other sections use iterative procedure
execute cross-section check by equ. (6.44) of EN 1993-1-1

If the design is based on the stress verification (formula 6.43 of EN 1993-1-1):

y
x,Ed
M0
f

calculate A
eff
, W
y,eff
, W
z,eff
and e
N
on basis of the stress-distribution of the load-combination
(N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
) of the relevant point of the member
thereby, determine on basis of p,red (based on
com,Ed
/effective)

com,Ed
is calculated for the load-combination (N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
) elastically using the effective
cross-section by iteration
for elements with free end the stress
1
has to be calculated for the outside fibre of the original
section (brutto section) in order to determine =
2
/
1
and . In such cases
com,Ed
at the outside
fibre must be limited by f
y
/
M0
for the calculation of p,red
calculate cross-section check by equ. (6.43) of EN 1993-1-1.

Result: UF utilisation factor in each of the 1/10 points together with relevant section-class
UF 1,0 must be verified
Remark: The utilisation factor UF is to be determined appropriately for the given problem. This
means that it must be based on the ratio of the resistances R and not on ratios of single forces (e.g.
M
N
).
An example for illustration is given for a beam-column under N +M
y
+M
z
as follows:
(EN 1993-1-1, 6.44)
(EN 1993-1-1, 6.43)
(EN 1993-1-1, 6.41)
(SEMI-COMP, ch. 3.3.24.2)
65

Example 3: IPE 500 S 235

2
3
,
3
,
4
115.5
1928
2194
48200
el y
pl y
y
A cm
W cm
W cm
I cm
=
=

3
,
3
,
4
214
336
2142
el z
pl z
z
W cm
W cm
I cm
=

Fig. 66 Structural system, loading (left) and diagrams of internal forces and moments (right)

Fig. 67 Diagram of cross-section utilisation (left) and section class along the member length (right)

The classes were determined on basis of c/t (f
y
)
The full line in Fig. 67 illustrates the utilisation according to the SEMI-COMP approach (line
UF)
The left dashed line in Fig. 67 illustrates the utilisation for class 2 (full plastic, line UF-EP)
The right hand dashed line in Fig. 67 illustrates the elastic utilisation (line UF-EE)
The member buckling check should be carried out for class 3-sections, i.e. the class at the location with
the highest utilisation factor.
0,51
0,52
0,52
0,59
0,54
0,56
0,44
0,38
0,32
0,23
0,13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0
P
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
UF(decisive class of Profile)
UF
UF-EP
UF-EE
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
P
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
Class
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
P
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
N
250
247,5
240
227,5
210
187,5
160
127,5
90
47,5
0
My
0,0
-6,2
-7,9
-5,1
2,3
14,0
2,3
-5,1
-7,9
-6,2
0,0
Mz
N
Ed
M
y
II
E
N
Ed
L

=

2
x
5

=

1
0

m

q
z,Ed
=5 [kN/m]

q
y,Ed
[kN] [kNm] [kNm]
q
y,Ed
=4,5 [kN/m]

500
200
10.2
1.6
21
w
f
h mm
b mm
t mm
t mm
r mm
=
t
f

h
b
r
t
w

relevant class for
member buckling
check
66

3.5.2 Calculation procedure for member buckling design
Procedure for member buckling check according to approach A, Table 19:
The member resistance for each member is calculated as follows:
the relevant class of the cross-sections is given for the 1/10 points of the member through the
cross-section checks
identify the class, where UF is maximum; this class is decisive for the member check, see Example
3/clause 3.5.1
execute the member check on basis of the buckling formulae of EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.1, 6.3.2 or 6.3.3:

Ed
b,Rd
N
1
N
. (EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.1)

Ed
b,Rd
M
1
M
. (EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.2)

buckling y-y:
+ +
+ +

y,Ed y,Ed z,Ed z,Ed
Ed
yy yz
y Rk y,Rk z,Rk
LT
M1 M1 M1
M M M M
N
k k 1
N M M
(EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.3)

buckling z-z:
y,Ed y,Ed z,Ed z,Ed
Ed
zy zz
z Rk y,Rk z,Rk
LT
M1
M1 M1
M M M M
N
k k 1
N M M
+ +
+ +

According to the given section class N
Rk
and M
Rk
are applied as follows:
in class 1+2: with plastic resistances N
pl
and M
pl
based on A and W
pl

in class 3: with SEMI-COMP resistances N
pl
and M
3
based on A and W
3

in class 4: with effective resistances N
eff
and M
eff
as follows:
for pure compression N (approach A1, Table 19):
A
eff
can be based on p,red (
com,Ed
/effective section) for sections where e
N
=0; this means, that
only double-symmetric sections or such, where no reduction of area occurs for A
eff
, can be dealt
with p,red (
com,Ed
),
otherwise A
eff
must be based on p (f
y
)
for pure bending M
y
(approach A2, Table 19):
W
eff
can be based on p,red (
com,Ed
/effective section)
for bending plus axial compression N +M:
A
eff
and W
eff
must be based on p (f
y
) without
com,Ed

Procedure for member check for sections by full 2
nd
order theory (approach B, Table 20):
the member check is based on 2
nd
order theory plus imperfections leading to cross-section checks
for the increased forces and moments
compact and semi-compact sections (classes 1, 2 and 3):
In case that the member check is based on cross-section checks for the 2
nd
order forces and
moments
M1
should be used instead of
M0
. If plastic behaviour is considered, it should be taken
into account that the elastic global analysis does not account for the effects of plastic deformations
of members in compression (method E-P). Therefore, the check should be based on the linear
cross-section interaction according to equ. (6.2) of EN 1993-1-1. This holds also for sections in
class 3 according to SEMI-COMP (clause 3.3.2).
class 4-sections:
67

A
eff
, W
eff
are to be determined on basis of p,red using
com,Ed
calculated on the effective section:
com,Ed
p,red p
y M0
f

Table 19 DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR MEMBERS OF APPROACH A

Table 20 DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR MEMBERS OF APPROACH B
68

3.5.3 Definition of utilisation factor UF
The definition of an appropriate utilisation factor UF (of the cross section resistance) is needed in
order to determine the relevant cross section of a member and the corresponding cross section class, see
section 3.5.1.
The utilisation factor UF is defined as presented in the following Fig. 68. The given loading (N
Ed
+M
Ed
)
is increased proportionally until the design resistance is reached. This holds true for the resistance
functions of all classes (i.e. class 1 to class 4).

69

Fig. 68 Explanation of the utilisation factor UF for mono-axial bending plus axial force

Remarks on the erroneous use of formulae for UF:

Utilisation factor and using formula (6.31) of EN 1993-1-1
The result of M
Ed
/M
N,Rd
(mono-axial bending plus axial force) is in principle not to be interpreted as
utilisation factor in terms of a percentage against the ultimate state. The formula calculates the
resistance M
N,Rd
on basis of a fixed axial force N
Ed
. A value of M
Ed
/M
N,Rd
=0.5 therefore only means that
the moment can be increased by a factor of two to reach the ultimate state, given that N
Ed
is kept
constantly. By increasing N
Ed
and M
Ed
simultaneously a different (i.e. smaller) value is obtained.
Generally, the utilisation factor is defined as the reciprocal of the load amplifier that is achieved by
increasing all internal forces simultaneously.

When this formula is applied for M
y
only (e.g. when M
z
is negligible small), the value M
Ed
/M
N,Rd
has to
be increased by an exponent of 2 for I- and H-sections. In comparison with the above example a value
of (M
Ed
/M
N,Rd
)=0.5=0.25 is obtained. It is now obvious also by a comparison with the result of
formula (6.31) that this value of 0.25 is not the utilisation factor. Only for the case that N
Ed
and M
Ed

exactly reach the ultimate state (i.e. M
Ed
/M
N,Rd
=(M
Ed
/M
N,Rd
)=1.0) the results of the discussed formulae
are equal and correspond to the utilisation factor.
For using the formula the parameter
ult,k
(i.e. the minimum load amplifier of the design loads to reach
the characteristic resistance of the most critical cross section) has to be evaluated. This parameter can be
calculated with formulae (6.31) or (6.41), but the loading N
Ed
and M
Ed
has to be increased
simultaneously until the characteristic resistance is reached. Therefore, using the reciprocal of the result
of formulae (6.31) or (6.41) as the value for
ult,k
is in principle wrong and leads to unconservative
results for the case of M
Ed
plus N
Ed
. In the case that
ult,k
is calculated by FE-analysis for the each
individual load combination, then the reciprocal of formula (6.63) matches the utilisation factor.

In the following some examples for the determination of the utilisation factor are shortly presented (Fig.
69 to Fig. 71).
N
M
= =
Ed Ed Ed
Rd N,Rd N,Rd
R M M
UF
R M M
Ed
M
Ed
N
N,Rd
M
N,Rd
M
Ed
N
UF
pl
N
pl
M
UF ... utilisation factor
R
Ed
R
Rd
70

Fig. 69 Example for calculation of utilisation factor in CS-class 1 and 2, IPE 400 S 235 N+M
y

Fig. 70 Example for calculation of utilisation factor in acc. SEMI-COMP proposal, IPE 400 S 355 N+M
y

Fig. 71 Example for calculation of utilisation factor in CS-class 3 acc. SEMI-COMP proposal, IPE 400 S
355 N+M
y

N
M
Ed
M
Ed
N
N,Rd
M
=
N,Rd pl
M M
Ed
N
UF
pl
N
+29%
+33%
N
M
Ed
M
Ed
N
N,Rd
M
pl
M
Ed
N
UF
pl
N
+7.5%
+9%
N,Rd
M
N
M
Ed
M
Ed
N
N,Rd
M
pl
M
Ed
N
UF
pl
N
+25%
+67%
N,Rd
M
Ed Ed
pl pl,y
IPE 400, S235
N M
0.18 0.75
N M
Bilinear interaction curve for class 2 section.
= =
Ed Ed
pl pl,y
IPE 400, S355
N M
0.18 0.75
N M
Linear interaction curve for class 3 section,
(new design model).
= =
Ed Ed
pl pl,y
IPE 400, S355
N M
0.5 0.3
N M
Linear interaction curve for class 3 section,
(new design model).
= =
1
UF 0.76
1.29
= =
Ed Ed
pl pl,y
N M 1
UF 0.93 0.18 0.75
1.075 N M

= = = + = +

Ed Ed
pl pl,y
N M 1
UF 0.80 0.5 0.3
1.25 N M

= = = + = +

71

3.6 Tabulated Values for W
3,y
and W
3,z

Further to the above formulaic approach it should be noted, that the calculation of the bending
resistances M
3,Rd
by interpolation can be omitted by providing these values in form of tables for the
different section shapes and steel grades. The values of W
3,y
and W
3,z
for commercial European hot-
rolled sections (IPE, HEAA, HEA, HEB and HEM) and the three steel grades S235, S355 and S460 are
given in the Annex B of the background document [11]. In this document tabulated the values are
shown for IPE, HEAA and HEA sections by Table 21 to Table 23.

Apart from geometric data (i.e. h, b, t
w
, t
f
, r) and common section properties A, W
el,y
, W
pl,y
, W
el,z
, W
pl,z
a
cross-section classification is given for pure major axis bending and for pure compression. The
classification for pure compression is done for the current EN 1993-1-1 limits as well as for the new c/t-
limits for internal elements under compression. Note that the classification of I- and H-sections
according to pure bending is not touched by the new limits (because the limits for internal elements
under bending are unchanged).

The classification of sections is based on the resultant stress distribution (i.e. N +M
y
+M
z
). Therefore,
only the sections that are classified as class 3 or class 4 sections due to pure compression could
potentially be class 3 sections under a given combined loading (e.g. N +M
y
). In that context the
following example is given: An IPE 500 section, steel grade S355, under pure compression is classified
as class 4 section because of the web (based on the current c/t-limits as well as for the new limits), see
Table 21 or Annex B of [11]. The same section under pure major axis bending is in class 1. Therefore,
the section under the combined loading N +M
y
could be in class 3 depending on the ratio of axial
compression and bending moment.

Based on this fact, all sections that are classified as class 3 or class 4 section due to pure compression
(new limits) are highlighted in the tables of the Annex B of [11]. For these sections (and steel grades
S235, S355 and S460) the auxiliary terms c/t
ref,y
and c/t
ref,z
and the class 3 section moduli W
3,y
and W
3,z

are given based on the formulae in Table 14. It should be stated in this context that the terms c/t
ref,y
and
c/t
ref,z
do not classify the section they are simply a parameter to calculate the class 3 bending
resistances (based on the action of the corresponding bending moment only). As an example, again the
above mentioned IPE 500, S355 is given. It is assumed that the section is in class 3 due to the combined
loading N +M
y
. So the new design model (Table 14) can be applied and c/t
ref,y
=0. That does not mean
that the section is at the border to class 2 it only states that the class 3 bending resistance can be taken
as the plastic one (i.e. W
3,y
=W
pl,y
). The interaction between N and M
y
should then be accounted for
according to the new SEMI-COMP design model for class 3 sections.

72

Table 21 Tabulated values for IPE-sections

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
w
i
d
e

f
l
a
n
g
e

b
e
a
m
s
I
P
E

8
0

-

6
0
0
C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
e
w

l
i
m
i
t
s
h
b
t
w
t
f
r
A
W
e
l
.
y
W
p
l
.
y
W
e
l
.
z
W
p
l
.
z
P
u
r
e

P
u
r
e

P
u
r
e

c
/
t
r
e
f
,
y
W
3
,
y
c
/
t
r
e
f
,
z
W
3
,
z

m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
c
m
2
c
m
3
c
m
3
c
m
3
c
m
3
b
e
n
d
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
-
c
m
-
c
m
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
I
P
E

8
0
8
0
4
6
3
,
8
5
,
2
5
7
,
6
4
2
0
,
0
2
3
,
2
3
,
6
9
5
,
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
P
E

1
0
0
1
0
0
5
5
4
,
1
5
,
7
7
1
0
,
3
2
3
4
,
2
3
9
,
4
5
,
7
9
9
,
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
P
E

1
2
0
1
2
0
6
4
4
,
4
6
,
3
7
1
3
,
2
1
5
3
,
0
6
0
,
7
8
,
6
5
1
3
,
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
P
E

1
4
0
1
4
0
7
3
4
,
7
6
,
9
7
1
6
,
4
3
7
7
,
3
8
8
,
3
1
2
,
3
1
9
,
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
P
E

1
6
0
1
6
0
8
2
5
,
0
7
,
4
9
2
0
,
0
9
1
0
9
1
2
4
1
6
,
7
2
6
,
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
1
2
4
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
2
6
,
1
I
P
E

1
8
0
1
8
0
9
1
5
,
3
8
,
0
9
2
3
,
9
5
1
4
6
1
6
6
2
2
,
2
3
4
,
6
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
2
4
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
1
6
6
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
3
4
,
6
I
P
E

2
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
5
,
6
8
,
5
1
2
2
8
,
4
8
1
9
4
2
2
1
2
8
,
5
4
4
,
6
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
3
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
2
2
1
2
2
1
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
4
4
,
6
4
4
,
6
I
P
E

2
2
0
2
2
0
1
1
0
5
,
9
9
,
2
1
2
3
3
,
3
7
2
5
2
2
8
5
3
7
,
3
5
8
,
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
2
3
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
2
8
5
2
8
5
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
5
8
,
1
5
8
,
1
I
P
E

2
4
0
2
4
0
1
2
0
6
,
2
9
,
8
1
5
3
9
,
1
2
3
2
4
3
6
7
4
7
,
3
7
3
,
9
1
1
1
1
2
4
2
3
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
3
6
7
3
6
7
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
7
3
,
9
7
3
,
9
I
P
E

2
7
0
2
7
0
1
3
5
6
,
6
1
0
,
2
1
5
4
5
,
9
5
4
2
9
4
8
4
6
2
,
2
9
7
,
0
1
1
1
2
3
4
2
4
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
4
8
4
4
8
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
9
7
,
0
9
7
,
0
I
P
E

3
0
0
3
0
0
1
5
0
7
,
1
1
0
,
7
1
5
5
3
,
8
1
5
5
7
6
2
8
8
0
,
5
1
2
5
1
1
1
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
6
2
8
6
2
8
6
2
8
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
2
5
1
2
5
1
2
5
I
P
E

3
3
0
3
3
0
1
6
0
7
,
5
1
1
,
5
1
8
6
2
,
6
1
7
1
3
8
0
4
9
8
,
5
1
5
4
1
1
1
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
8
0
4
8
0
4
8
0
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
5
4
1
5
4
1
5
4
I
P
E

3
6
0
3
6
0
1
7
0
8
,
0
1
2
,
7
1
8
7
2
,
7
3
9
0
4
1
0
1
9
1
2
3
1
9
1
1
1
1
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
0
1
9
1
0
1
9
1
0
1
9
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
9
1
1
9
1
1
9
1
I
P
E

4
0
0
4
0
0
1
8
0
8
,
6
1
3
,
5
2
1
8
4
,
4
6
1
1
5
6
1
3
0
7
1
4
6
2
2
9
1
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
3
0
7
1
3
0
7
1
3
0
7
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
2
2
9
2
2
9
2
2
9
I
P
E

4
5
0
4
5
0
1
9
0
9
,
4
1
4
,
6
2
1
9
8
,
8
2
1
5
0
0
1
7
0
2
1
7
6
2
7
6
1
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
7
0
2
1
7
0
2
1
7
0
2
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
2
7
6
2
7
6
2
7
6
I
P
E

5
0
0
5
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
,
2
1
6
,
0
2
1
1
1
5
,
5
1
9
2
8
2
1
9
4
2
1
4
3
3
6
1
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
2
1
9
4
2
1
9
4
2
1
9
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
3
3
6
3
3
6
3
3
6
I
P
E

5
5
0

5
5
0
2
1
0
1
1
,
1
1
7
,
2
2
4
1
3
4
,
4
2
4
4
1
2
7
8
7
2
5
4
4
0
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
2
7
8
7
2
7
8
7
2
7
8
7
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
4
0
1
4
0
1
4
0
1
I
P
E

6
0
0
6
0
0
2
2
0
1
2
,
0
1
9
,
0
2
4
1
5
6
,
0
3
0
6
9
3
5
1
2
3
0
8
4
8
6
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
3
5
1
2
3
5
1
2
3
5
1
2
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
4
8
6
4
8
6
4
8
6
73

Table 22 Tabulated values for HEAA-sections

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
w
i
d
e

f
l
a
n
g
e

b
e
a
m
s
H
E
A
A

1
0
0

-

1
0
0
0
C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
e
w

l
i
m
i
t
s
h
b
t
w
t
f
r
A
W
e
l
.
y
W
p
l
.
y
W
e
l
.
z
W
p
l
.
z
P
u
r
e

P
u
r
e

P
u
r
e

c
/
t
r
e
f
,
y
W
3
,
y
c
/
t
r
e
f
,
z
W
3
,
z

m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
c
m
2
c
m
3
c
m
3
c
m
3
c
m
3
b
e
n
d
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
-
c
m
-
c
m
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
H
E
A
A

1
0
0
9
1
1
0
0
4
,
2
5
,
5
1
2
1
5
,
6
0
5
1
,
9
8
5
8
,
3
6
1
8
,
4
1
2
8
,
4
4
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
H
E
A
A

1
2
0
1
0
9
1
2
0
4
,
2
5
,
5
1
2
1
8
,
5
5
7
5
,
8
5
8
4
,
1
2
2
6
,
4
7
4
0
,
6
2
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
-
0
,
0
6
0
,
4
2
-
8
3
,
5
9
8
0
,
6
5
-
0
,
0
4
0
,
2
8
-
4
0
,
0
1
3
6
,
6
7
H
E
A
A

1
4
0
1
2
8
1
4
0
4
,
3
6
,
0
1
2
2
3
,
0
2
1
1
2
,
4
1
2
3
,
8
3
9
,
2
6
5
9
,
9
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
-
0
,
3
6
0
,
7
6
-
1
1
9
,
7
1
1
5
,
2
-
0
,
2
4
0
,
5
0
-
5
4
,
9
7
4
9
,
5
2
H
E
A
A

1
6
0
1
4
8
1
6
0
4
,
5
7
,
0
1
5
3
0
,
3
6
1
7
3
,
4
1
9
0
,
4
5
9
,
8
4
9
1
,
3
6
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
-
0
,
2
5
0
,
6
4
-
1
8
6
,
1
1
7
9
,
6
-
0
,
1
7
0
,
4
2
-
8
6
,
0
1
7
8
,
0
1
H
E
A
A

1
8
0
1
6
7
1
8
0
5
,
0
7
,
5
1
5
3
6
,
5
3
2
3
5
,
6
2
5
8
,
2
8
1
,
1
1
2
3
,
6
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
-
0
,
4
7
0
,
8
8
-
2
4
7
,
6
2
3
8
,
3
-
0
,
3
1
0
,
5
9
-
1
1
0
,
3
9
8
,
6
4
H
E
A
A

2
0
0
1
8
6
2
0
0
5
,
5
8
,
0
1
8
4
4
,
1
3
3
1
6
,
6
3
4
7
,
1
1
0
6
,
8
1
6
3
,
2
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
-
0
,
5
4
0
,
9
6
-
3
3
0
,
5
3
1
7
,
7
-
0
,
3
6
0
,
6
4
-
1
4
2
,
7
1
2
6
,
9
H
E
A
A

2
2
0
2
0
5
2
2
0
6
,
0
8
,
5
1
8
5
1
,
4
6
4
0
6
,
9
4
4
5
,
5
1
3
7
,
3
2
0
9
,
3
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
1
2
0
,
7
2
1
,
0
0
4
4
1
,
0
4
1
7
,
8
4
0
6
,
9
0
,
0
8
0
,
4
8
0
,
7
7
2
0
3
,
7
1
7
4
,
9
1
5
3
,
5
H
E
A
A

2
4
0
2
2
4
2
4
0
6
,
5
9
,
0
2
1
6
0
,
3
8
5
2
1
,
0
5
7
0
,
6
1
7
3
,
1
2
6
4
,
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
1
6
0
,
7
7
1
,
0
0
5
6
2
,
7
5
3
2
,
5
5
2
1
,
0
0
,
1
1
0
,
5
1
0
,
8
1
2
5
4
,
7
2
1
7
,
6
1
9
0
,
1
H
E
A
A

2
6
0
2
4
4
2
6
0
6
,
5
9
,
5
2
4
6
8
,
9
7
6
5
4
,
1
7
1
4
,
5
2
1
4
,
5
3
2
7
,
7
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
2
0
0
,
8
2
1
,
0
0
7
0
2
,
2
6
6
4
,
8
6
5
4
,
1
0
,
1
4
0
,
5
5
0
,
8
6
3
1
2
,
3
2
6
5
,
6
2
3
0
,
9
H
E
A
A

2
8
0
2
6
4
2
8
0
7
,
0
1
0
,
0
2
4
7
8
,
0
2
7
9
9
,
8
8
7
3
,
1
2
6
1
,
7
3
9
9
,
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
3
1
0
,
9
6
1
,
0
0
8
5
0
,
2
8
0
3
,
0
7
9
9
,
8
0
,
2
1
0
,
6
4
0
,
9
6
3
7
0
,
7
3
1
1
,
6
2
6
7
,
7
H
E
A
A

3
0
0
2
8
3
3
0
0
7
,
5
1
0
,
5
2
7
8
8
,
9
1
9
7
6
1
0
6
5
3
1
5
,
6
4
8
2
,
3
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
3
4
0
,
9
9
1
,
0
0
1
0
3
5
9
7
6
,
5
9
7
5
,
6
0
,
2
3
0
,
6
6
0
,
9
8
4
4
4
,
6
3
7
2
,
3
3
1
8
,
7
H
E
A
A

3
2
0
3
0
1
3
0
0
8
,
0
1
1
,
0
2
7
9
4
,
5
8
1
0
9
3
1
1
9
6
3
3
0
,
6
5
0
5
,
7
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
2
0
0
,
8
2
1
,
0
0
1
1
7
5
1
1
1
1
1
0
9
3
0
,
1
4
0
,
5
5
0
,
8
6
4
8
1
,
8
4
0
9
,
5
3
5
5
,
8
H
E
A
A

3
4
0
3
2
0
3
0
0
8
,
5
1
1
,
5
2
7
1
0
0
,
5
1
2
2
2
1
3
4
1
3
4
5
,
6
5
2
9
,
3
3
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
4
0
,
0
8
0
,
6
7
1
,
0
0
1
3
3
1
1
2
6
1
1
2
2
2
0
,
0
5
0
,
4
5
0
,
7
4
5
1
9
,
3
4
4
6
,
9
3
9
3
,
1
H
E
A
A

3
6
0
3
3
9
3
0
0
9
,
0
1
2
,
0
2
7
1
0
6
,
6
1
3
5
9
1
4
9
5
3
6
0
,
7
5
5
3
,
0
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
4
-
0
,
5
3
0
,
9
5
-
1
4
2
2
1
3
6
5
-
0
,
3
6
0
,
6
4
-
4
8
4
,
5
4
3
0
,
7
H
E
A
A

4
0
0
3
7
8
3
0
0
9
,
5
1
3
,
0
2
7
1
1
7
,
7
1
6
5
4
1
8
2
4
3
9
0
,
8
5
9
9
,
7
2
3
3
2
3
4
2
4
4
-
0
,
2
9
0
,
6
8
-
1
7
7
4
1
7
0
8
-
0
,
2
0
0
,
4
5
-
5
5
8
,
6
5
0
4
,
8
H
E
A
A

4
5
0
4
2
5
3
0
0
1
0
,
0
1
3
,
5
2
7
1
2
7
,
1
1
9
7
1
2
1
8
3
4
0
5
,
8
6
2
4
,
4
1
3
3
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
1
9
0
,
5
6
2
1
8
3
2
1
4
4
2
0
6
5
0
,
0
0
0
,
1
2
0
,
3
7
6
2
4
,
4
5
9
7
,
3
5
4
3
,
2
H
E
A
A

5
0
0
4
7
2
3
0
0
1
0
,
5
1
4
,
0
2
7
1
3
6
,
9
2
3
1
5
2
5
7
6
4
2
0
,
9
6
4
9
,
3
1
3
3
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
8
0
,
4
4
2
5
7
6
2
5
5
4
2
4
6
1
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
6
0
,
2
9
6
4
9
,
3
6
3
6
,
5
5
8
2
,
0
H
E
A
A

5
5
0
5
2
2
3
0
0
1
1
,
5
1
5
,
0
2
7
1
5
2
,
8
2
7
9
2
3
1
2
8
4
5
1
,
1
6
9
8
,
6
1
2
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
2
3
3
1
2
8
3
1
2
8
3
0
4
9
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
1
6
6
9
8
,
6
6
9
8
,
6
6
6
0
,
0
H
E
A
A

6
0
0
5
7
1
3
0
0
1
2
,
0
1
5
,
5
2
7
1
6
4
,
1
3
2
1
8
3
6
2
3
4
6
6
,
2
7
2
4
,
5
1
2
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
1
4
3
6
2
3
3
6
2
3
3
5
6
6
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
9
7
2
4
,
5
7
2
4
,
5
7
0
0
,
4
H
E
A
A

6
5
0
6
2
0
3
0
0
1
2
,
5
1
6
,
0
2
7
1
7
5
,
8
3
6
7
6
4
1
6
0
4
8
1
,
4
7
5
0
,
7
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
5
4
1
6
0
4
1
6
0
4
1
3
5
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
3
7
5
0
,
7
7
5
0
,
7
7
4
1
,
3
H
E
A
A

7
0
0
6
7
0
3
0
0
1
3
,
0
1
7
,
0
2
7
1
9
0
,
9
4
2
6
0
4
8
4
0
5
1
1
,
5
7
9
9
,
7
1
1
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
4
8
4
0
4
8
4
0
4
8
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
7
9
9
,
7
7
9
9
,
7
7
9
9
,
7
H
E
A
A

8
0
0
7
7
0
3
0
0
1
4
,
0
1
8
,
0
3
0
2
1
8
,
5
5
4
2
6
6
2
2
5
5
4
2
,
2
8
5
6
,
6
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
6
2
2
5
6
2
2
5
6
2
2
5
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
8
5
6
,
6
8
5
6
,
6
8
5
6
,
6
H
E
A
A

9
0
0
8
7
0
3
0
0
1
5
,
0
2
0
,
0
3
0
2
5
2
,
2
6
9
2
3
7
9
9
9
6
0
2
,
8
9
5
7
,
7
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
7
9
9
9
7
9
9
9
7
9
9
9
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
9
5
7
,
7
9
5
7
,
7
9
5
7
,
7
H
E
A
A

1
0
0
0
9
7
0
3
0
0
1
6
,
0
2
1
,
0
3
0
2
8
2
,
2
8
3
8
0
9
7
7
7
6
3
3
,
4
1
0
1
6
1
1
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
9
7
7
7
9
7
7
7
9
7
7
7
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
0
1
6
1
0
1
6
1
0
1
6
74

Table 23 Tabulated values for HEA-sections

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
w
i
d
e

f
l
a
n
g
e

b
e
a
m
s
H
E
A

1
0
0

-

1
0
0
0
C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
e
w

l
i
m
i
t
s
h
b
t
w
t
f
r
A
W
e
l
.
y
W
p
l
.
y
W
e
l
.
z
W
p
l
.
z
P
u
r
e

P
u
r
e

P
u
r
e

c
/
t
r
e
f
,
y
W
3
,
y
c
/
t
r
e
f
,
z
W
3
,
z

m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
c
m
2
c
m
3
c
m
3
c
m
3
c
m
3
b
e
n
d
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
-
c
m
-
c
m
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
2
3
5
3
5
5
4
6
0
H
E
A

1
0
0
9
6
1
0
0
5
,
0
8
,
0
1
2
2
1
,
2
4
7
2
,
7
6
8
3
,
0
1
2
6
,
7
6
4
1
,
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
H
E
A

1
2
0
1
1
4
1
2
0
5
,
0
8
,
0
1
2
2
5
,
3
4
1
0
6
,
3
0
1
1
9
,
5
3
8
,
4
8
5
8
,
8
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
H
E
A

1
4
0
1
3
3
1
4
0
5
,
5
8
,
5
1
2
3
1
,
4
2
1
5
5
,
4
1
7
3
,
5
5
5
,
6
2
8
4
,
8
5
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
H
E
A

1
6
0
1
5
2
1
6
0
6
,
0
9
,
0
1
5
3
8
,
7
7
2
2
0
,
1
2
4
5
,
1
7
6
,
9
5
1
1
7
,
6
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
H
E
A

1
8
0
1
7
1
1
8
0
6
,
0
9
,
5
1
5
4
5
,
2
5
2
9
3
,
6
3
2
4
,
9
1
0
2
,
7
1
5
6
,
5
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
1
5
-
-
3
2
0
,
2
-
-
0
,
1
0
-
-
1
5
1
,
1
H
E
A

2
0
0
1
9
0
2
0
0
6
,
5
1
0
,
0
1
8
5
3
,
8
3
3
8
8
,
6
4
2
9
,
5
1
3
3
,
6
2
0
3
,
8
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
2
5
-
-
4
1
9
,
1
-
-
0
,
1
7
-
-
1
9
1
,
9
H
E
A

2
2
0
2
1
0
2
2
0
7
,
0
1
1
,
0
1
8
6
4
,
3
4
5
1
5
,
2
5
6
8
,
5
1
7
7
,
7
2
7
0
,
6
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
3
1
-
-
5
5
1
,
8
-
-
0
,
2
1
-
-
2
5
1
,
1
H
E
A

2
4
0
2
3
0
2
4
0
7
,
5
1
2
,
0
2
1
7
6
,
8
4
6
7
5
,
1
7
4
4
,
6
2
3
0
,
7
3
5
1
,
7
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
2
8
-
-
7
2
5
,
4
-
-
0
,
1
8
-
-
3
2
9
,
4
H
E
A

2
6
0
2
5
0
2
6
0
7
,
5
1
2
,
5
2
4
8
6
,
8
2
8
3
6
,
4
9
1
9
,
8
2
8
2
,
1
4
3
0
,
2
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
-
0
,
0
1
0
,
3
6
-
9
1
8
,
7
8
8
9
,
7
-
0
,
0
1
0
,
2
4
-
4
2
8
,
9
3
9
4
,
5
H
E
A

2
8
0
2
7
0
2
8
0
8
,
0
1
3
,
0
2
4
9
7
,
2
6
1
0
1
3
1
1
1
2
3
4
0
,
2
5
1
8
,
1
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
-
0
,
1
5
0
,
5
1
-
1
0
9
7
1
0
6
1
-
0
,
1
0
0
,
3
4
-
5
0
0
,
6
4
5
7
,
2
H
E
A

3
0
0
2
9
0
3
0
0
8
,
5
1
4
,
0
2
7
1
1
2
,
5
1
2
6
0
1
3
8
3
4
2
0
,
6
6
4
1
,
2
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
-
0
,
1
1
0
,
4
7
-
1
3
7
0
1
3
2
6
-
0
,
0
7
0
,
3
1
-
6
2
5
,
6
5
7
2
,
5
H
E
A

3
2
0
3
1
0
3
0
0
9
,
0
1
5
,
5
2
7
1
2
4
,
4
1
4
7
9
1
6
2
8
4
6
5
,
7
7
0
9
,
7
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
1
7
-
-
1
6
0
2
-
-
0
,
1
2
-
-
6
8
1
,
4
H
E
A

3
4
0
3
3
0
3
0
0
9
,
5
1
6
,
5
2
7
1
3
3
,
5
1
6
7
8
1
8
5
0
4
9
5
,
7
7
5
5
,
9
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
0
1
-
-
1
8
4
9
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
7
5
4
,
7
H
E
A

3
6
0
3
5
0
3
0
0
1
0
,
0
1
7
,
5
2
7
1
4
2
,
8
1
8
9
1
2
0
8
8
5
2
5
,
8
8
0
2
,
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
2
0
8
8
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
8
0
2
,
3
H
E
A

4
0
0
3
9
0
3
0
0
1
1
,
0
1
9
,
0
2
7
1
5
9
,
0
2
3
1
1
2
5
6
2
5
7
0
,
9
8
7
2
,
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
3
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
2
5
6
2
-
-
0
,
0
0
-
-
8
7
2
,
9
H
E
A

4
5
0
4
4
0
3
0
0
1
1
,
5
2
1
,
0
2
7
1
7
8
,
0
2
8
9
6
3
2
1
6
6
3
1
,
0
9
6
5
,
5
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
3
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
3
2
1
6
3
2
1
6
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
9
6
5
,
5
9
6
5
,
5
H
E
A

5
0
0
4
9
0
3
0
0
1
2
,
0
2
3
,
0
2
7
1
9
7
,
5
3
5
5
0
3
9
4
9
6
9
1
,
1
1
0
5
9
1
1
1
1
3
4
2
4
4
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
3
9
4
9
3
9
4
9
-
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
-
1
0
5
9
1
0
5
9
H
E
A

5
5
0
5
4
0
3
0
0
1
2
,
5
2
4
,
0
2
7
2
1
1
,
8
4
1
4
6
4
6
2
2
7
2
1
,
3
1
1
0
7
1
1
1
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
4
6
2
2
4
6
2
2
4
6
2
2
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
1
0
7
1
1
0
7
1
1
0
7
H
E
A

6
0
0
5
9
0
3
0
0
1
3
,
0
2
5
,
0
2
7
2
2
6
,
5
4
7
8
7
5
3
5
0
7
5
1
,
4
1
1
5
6
1
1
1
2
4
4
3
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
5
3
5
0
5
3
5
0
5
3
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
1
5
6
1
1
5
6
1
1
5
6
H
E
A

6
5
0
6
4
0
3
0
0
1
3
,
5
2
6
,
0
2
7
2
4
1
,
6
5
4
7
4
6
1
3
6
7
8
1
,
6
1
2
0
5
1
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
6
1
3
6
6
1
3
6
6
1
3
6
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
2
0
5
1
2
0
5
1
2
0
5
H
E
A

7
0
0
6
9
0
3
0
0
1
4
,
5
2
7
,
0
2
7
2
6
0
,
5
6
2
4
1
7
0
3
2
8
1
1
,
9
1
2
5
7
1
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
7
0
3
2
7
0
3
2
7
0
3
2
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
2
5
7
1
2
5
7
1
2
5
7
H
E
A

8
0
0
7
9
0
3
0
0
1
5
,
0
2
8
,
0
3
0
2
8
5
,
8
7
6
8
2
8
6
9
9
8
4
2
,
6
1
3
1
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
8
6
9
9
8
6
9
9
8
6
9
9
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
2
H
E
A

9
0
0
8
9
0
3
0
0
1
6
,
0
3
0
,
0
3
0
3
2
0
,
5
9
4
8
5
1
0
8
1
0
9
0
3
,
2
1
4
1
4
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
0
8
1
0
1
0
8
1
0
1
0
8
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
4
1
4
1
4
1
4
1
4
1
4
H
E
A

1
0
0
0
9
9
0
3
0
0
1
6
,
5
3
1
,
0
3
0
3
4
6
,
8
1
1
1
9
0
1
2
8
2
0
9
3
3
,
6
1
4
7
0
1
1
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
2
8
2
0
1
2
8
2
0
1
2
8
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
1
4
7
0
1
4
7
0
1
4
7
0
75

3.7 Worked Examples
3.7.1 Overview
Worked examples for different types of members are given in Annex A of [11]. Several different design
situations of single span members with different moment diagrams and transversal restraints are
presented. H-sections and tubular sections are considered. In the present document only Example 2 is
shown exemplarily.

It comprises the following seven examples:

Example 1: HEAA 300 under biaxial bending and compression
Example 2: IPE 500 under bending and compression with intermediate restraints
Example 3: Welded section under pure bending
Example 4: RHS 250x150x6 under biaxial bending and compression
Example 5: SHS 200x6.3 under bending and compression
Example 6: SHS 200x6.3 under pure bending
Example 7: IPE 500 under N+My+Mz with detailed derivation of its equivalent section
class for member design

3.7.2 Example 2: IPE 500 under bending and compression
3.7.2.1 Loading
The second worked example detailed herein deals with an IPE 500 in S355 steel. It is assumed as
simply supported beam-column (L =10 m) with an intermediate restraint in the middle of the length
(L =5 m), and is subjected to the following combined axial force and axial bending moments:

3.7.2.2 Material
According to EN 1993-1-1, the material properties of the mentioned S355 steel are:
2
2
2 2
0
210000
81000
355 35.5
1.0
y
M
N
E
mm
N
G
mm
N kN
f
mm cm
=
=
= =
=

1,
2,
700
250
75
Ed
y Ed
y Ed
N kN
M kNm
M kNm
=
=
=
76

3.7.2.3 Geometry and section properties
The geometrical dimensions as well as relevant properties of the studied cross-section IPE 500 are:

The plastic and elastic resistances of the studied cross-section are obtained as follows:
,
0
2
, , ,
0
2
, , ,
0
35.5
116 4118
1.0
35.5
2194 10 778.87
1.0
35.5
1928 10 684.44
1.0
y
pl Rd
M
y
pl y Rd pl y
M
y
el y Rd el y
M
f
N A kN
f
M W kNm
f
M W kNm
= = =
= = =
= = =

3.7.2.4 Internal forces
The major axis bending moment distribution is linear. The maximum value is at the left support of the
studied beam-column. The following figure illustrates the investigated system and the loading case.

3.7.2.5 Cross-section classification
The check whether the cross-section at the left support (i.e. the location of the maximum cross-section
utilisation) is Class 3 or better is done with the actual elastic stress distribution. For this purpose it is
necessary to determine the
web
parameter that indicates the variation of direct stresses in the web.

500
200
10.2
16
21
w
f
h mm
b mm
t mm
t mm
r mm
=
=
=
=
=
t
f

h
b
r
t
w

M
y
5 m 5 m
250 kNm
-75 kNm
2 4
4 3 6
3
,
3
,
4
3
,
3
,
116 89.29
48200 1249 10
20.43
1928
4.31
2194
2142
214
336
t
y w
y
el y
z
pl y
z
el z
pl z
A cm I cm
I cm I cm
i cm
W cm
i cm
W cm
I cm
W cm
W cm
= =
= =
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
77

2
2
1,
2
5.01
700 250 10 50
1.6 2.1
116 48200 2
17.08
5.01
0.293
17.08
y Ed
Ed
y
web
M kN cm
N
z
A I
kN cm

= =

= =

The flange is under pure compression due to N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
. The stress distribution in the fully plastic state
leads to the web being in full compression (i.e. =1.0).

As well, the maximum admissible width-to-thickness ratios for the studied load combination is showed
to clarify the new limits that later determine the class of cross-section.
235 235
0.8136
355
y
f
= = =

200 10.2
21
2 2 2 2
4.62 14 11.39 ... the flange is Class 3 or better
16
<10 8.14 ... the flange is Class 2 or better

w
f f
t b
r
c
t t

= = = < =
=
<9 7.32 ... the flange is Class 1
2 2
500 216 221 38
41.76 56.08
10.2 0.653 0.347

f
w w web
h t r
c
t t
=

= = = < =
+
... the web is Class 3 or better
>34 27.66 ... the web is Class 3 =

Maximum ratios
Outstand flanges under
compression
Internal compression parts under bending
and compression
Plastic limit (Class 2-3) 10 c t
if 0.5 > ;
188
6.53 1
c t

if 0.5 ;
41.5
c t

Elastic limit (Class 3-4) 14 c t
if 1 > ;
38
0.653 0.347
c t

+

if 1 ; ( ) ( ) 62 1 c t
-
+
-17.08 kN/cm
2
5.01 kN/cm
2
-
+
=1.0
web
=-0.29

78

So the cross-section at the left support is found to be in Class 3. Although the flange under compression
can be considered as Class 1, the decisive part -for this case of study- is the web which is in Class 3.

3.7.2.6 Cross-section design check
It is worth to remark that in this example there is no bending moment in z-axis, therefore the design
model for cross-section resistance is rather simplified. The capacity of the section is checked using the
design model for H-shaped sections from the Semi-Comp Design Guidelines.

The decisive cross-section check at the left support reads:

Interpolation:
2, ,
10 8.14
y f
= =
3, ,
14 11.39
y f
= =
2, ,
83 67.53
y w
= =
3, ,
124 100.89
y w
= =
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
2, , 2, ,
,
3, , 2, , 3, , 2, ,
4.62 8.14 41.76 67.53
/ max ; ;0 max ; ;0 0
11.39 8.14 100.89 67.53
f y f w y w
ref y
y f y f y w y w
c t c t
c t

= = =

Step 1:
( ) ( )
3, , , , , , , , ,
778.87 778.87 684.44 0 778.87
y Rd pl y Rd pl y Rd el y Rd ref y
M M M M c t kNm = = =

Step 2:
,
700
0.17
4118
Ed
pl Rd
N
n
N
= = =
( ) ( )
,3, , 3, ,
1 778.87 1 0.17 646.46
N y Rd y Rd
M M n kNm = = =
With only moment in y-axis being present, the design check simplifies as follows:
1,
,3, ,
250
0.39 1
646.46
y Ed
N y Rd
M
M
= = <
The previous value of 0.39 is a ratio that indicates the fraction of the design bending moment M
y,Ed
to
the design resistance moment reduced to the axial force N
Ed
. This ratio shows how much the bending
moment can be increased by keeping a constant axial force (i.e. 1/0.39=2.56). Note that this is not the
utilisation factor of the cross-section. The utilisation factor can be determined as follows:

,
3
, , ,
,3
700 250
0.49 1
4118 778.87
2.04
y Ed
Ed
pl Rd pl y Rd
u
M
N
N M
= + = + = <
=

It can be compared to
el
:
,
, , ,
,
700 250
0.54 1
4118 684.44
1.85
y Ed
Ed
el
pl Rd el y Rd
u el
M
N
N M
= + = + = <
=

Utilisation factor along the member length according to SEMI-COMP proposal:
79

Utilisation factor along the member le
3.7.2.7 Member design check
The member capacity is checked with
are those for compact sections and M
3

1
21000
76.4
35.5
y
E
f
= = =
,
,
1000
500
cr y
cr z
L cm
L cm
=
=

ength according to EN 1993-1-1:

Method 2
h the existing Eurocode method 2 formulae. The in
3,y,Rd
are used instead of M
pl,y,Rd
:
1

nteraction factors

80

,
, 1
1000
0.641
76.41 20.43
pl cr y curve
y
a
cr y y
N L
N i
= = = =

0.21
0.874
y
y

0.34
0.336
z
z

So as to calculate the normalized slenderness for lateral-torsional buckling, it is necessary to calculate
the elastic critical moment for LT-buckling considering bending about the major axis.

( )
( )
( ) ( )
2 2
2
2
, 1 2 3 2 3 2 2
z t w z z
cr y g j g j
w z z
z
k L G I I E I k
M C C z C z C z C z
k I E I
k L

= + +

In order to calculate M
cr,y
of the given member, the following conservative approach can be used: The
left part of the structure, which is more loaded, is cut out and treated as a simply supported beam.
Consequently, the previous formula can be simplified as follows:

2 2
, 1 2 2
w t z
cr y
z z
I L G I E I
M C
L I E I

= +

where C
1
=1.44 according to moment distribution.
2 3 2
2
, 2 2
21000 2142 1249 10 500 8100 89.29
1.44 10 804.8
500 2142 21000 2142
cons
cr y
M kNm

= + =

The corresponding critical moment using the LTBeam software with the mentioned approach is:
, ,
811.1
cons
cr y LTBeam
M kNm =

To make use of the stiffening effect of the right part of the member, the value of the critical moment of
the whole member is taken from the LTBeam software considering the intermediate lateral restraints at
midspan. Therefore, the critical moment for this more realistic approach is:

, , ,
1008.3
cr y cr y LTBeam
M M kNm = =

Then, the normalized slenderness can be determined as:
3,
,
0.49
778.87
0.879
0.714 1008.3
y y LT curve
LT
c
LT cr y
W f
M
=
= = =

( )
( )
( )
( ) ( )
2
2
,mod
1 0.3 1 1
0.35 0.823
2 1.33 0.33 1.33 0.33 0.35
1 0.5 1 1 2 0.8 1 0.5 1 0.823 1 2 0.879 0.8 0.913 1
0.714
0.782
0.913
c
LT
c
LT
LT
k
f k
f
+
= = = = =

= = = <

= = =

,
, 1
500
1.518
76.41 4.31
pl cr z curve
z
b
cr z z
N L
N i
= = = =

81

Remark: the normalized slenderness according to EN 1993-1-1 would lead to
,mod
0.49
0.824
0.821
=
=
LT
curve
LT
c
LT

So as to obtain the values of the moment factors, the following formulae have been used:
(value calculated previously)
( ) 1 0.3
0.35
2
0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.35 0.74
mLT
C
+
= =
= + = + =

Next step is to determine the interaction factors for members susceptible to torsional deformations:

plastic interaction factors for Class 3 according to the SEMI-COMP approach
,
700
0.194
0.874 4118
Ed
y
y pl Rd
N
n
N
= = =

,
700
0.506
0.336 4118
Ed
z
z pl Rd
N
n
N
= = =

( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
,
,
1 0.2 0.48 1 0.641 0.2 0.194 0.521
0.6 0
0.1 0.1
1 1 0.506 0.896
0.25 0.74 0.25
0
Ed
y
yy my
y pl Rd
yz zz
Ed
zy
mLT z pl Rd
zz
N
k C
N
k k
N
k
C N
k

= + = + =

= =
= = =

=

For comparison, the elastic interaction factors according to EN 1993-1-1 lead to
0.516
0
0.948
0
=
=
=
=
yy
yz
zy
zz
k
k
k
k

Finally, the member check for strong and weak axis results in the following expressions:

Strong axis:
,
, ,mod 3, ,
1
y Ed
Ed
yy
y pl Rd LT y Rd
M
N
k
N M
+

250
0.194 0.521 0.408 1
0.782 778.87
+ = <

( )
0.3
0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.48
my
C
=
= + = + =
82

Weak axis:
,
, ,mod 3, ,
1
y Ed
Ed
zy
z pl Rd LT y Rd
M
N
k
N M
+

250
0.506 0.896 0.874 1
0.782 778.87
+ = <

So the criteria for member resistance are fulfilled for the given beam-column.

For comparison, the member buckling check according to EN 1993-1-1 is shown:

Strong axis:
,
, ,mod 3, ,
1
y Ed
Ed
yy
y pl Rd LT y Rd
M
N
k
N M
+

250
0.194 0.516 0.43 1
0.821 684.4
+ = <

Weak axis:
,
, ,mod 3, ,
1
y Ed
Ed
zy
z pl Rd LT y Rd
M
N
k
N M
+

250
0.506 0.948 0.93 1
0.821 684.4
+ = <

Comment:
The difference between the buckling check of the given example 2 according to the SEMI-COMP
approach and the present EN 1993-1-1 is approximately 6 %.

The SEMI-COMP approach leads to more economic results.

3.7.2.8 Member design check according to Semi-Comp+, Method 1
Stability verification
Reduction factors for compression buckling
2
, 2
,
9990,0
y
cr y
fl y
EI
N kN
L
= =

,
0,641
y
y
cr y
A f
N
= =

( )
2
0,5 1 0,2 0,751
y y y y

= + + =

2
2
1
0,874 1
y
y y y

= =
+

83

2
, 2
,
1775,8
z
cr z
fl z
EI
N kN
L
= =

,
1,520
y
z
cr z
A f
N
= =

( )
2
0,5 1 0,2 1,879
z z z z

= + + =

2
2
1
0,335 1
z
z z z

= =
+

Auxiliary terms
,
,
1
0,991
1
Ed
cr y
y
Ed
y
cr y
N
N
N
N
= =

3,
,
1,138 1,5
y
y
el y
W
w
W
= =

,
,
1
0,698
1
Ed
cr z
z
Ed
z
cr z
N
N
N
N
= =

3,
,
1,568 1,5
z
z
el z
W
w
W
= =
thus 1,5
z
w =
C
m0
factor
The major axis bending moment diagram is linear, thus the formula for linear bending moments
is used.
, ,2
, ,1
0,3
y Ed
y
y Ed
M
M
= =

( )
,0
,
0,79 0,21 0,36 0,33 0,711
Ed
my y y
cr y
N
C
N
= + + =

Resistance to lateral torsional buckling
For the considered support conditions (fork supports at both ends and lateral restraint at mid-
length), the lateral torsional buckling length is 5 meters; and the stability to lateral torsional
buckling is checked considering the left half of the beam, for which the major axis bending
moment diagram is linear and varies from 250 kNm to 87,5 kNm.
84

Because
t y
I I < , the cross-section shape is such that the member may be prone to lateral
torsional buckling. Lateral torsional buckling has to be taken into account if
0 0,lim
> with:
2 2
,0 2 2
558,5
z
cr t
LT LT
EI EI
M GI kNm
L L

= + =

3,
0
,0
1,181
y y
cr
W f
M
= =

2
, 2
4030,3
cr T t
y z LT
EI A
N GI kN
I I L

= + =

+

2
1
1,77 1,04 0,27 1,439 2,60
LT LT
C = + = for a linear bending moment diagram with
87,5
0,35
250
LT
= = .
4
0,lim 1
, ,
0,2 1 1 0,202
Ed Ed
cr z cr T
N N
C
N N

= =

0 0,lim
1,181 0,202 = = Lateral torsional buckling has to be taken into account.
The support conditions of the member (left half) are such that both on plan rotation (minor axis
bending) and cross-section warping are free at both extremities, thus 1,0
z w
k k = = . There are no
transverse loads acting on the beam, so
2
0
g
C z = ; and the cross-section is bi-symmetrical, such
that
3
0
j
C z = .
( )
( )
( )
( )
2 2
2
2
1 2 3 2 3 2 2
2 2
1 2 2
803,8
z LT t z z
cr g j g j
z z
z LT
LT t z
z z
z
k L GI I EI k
M C C z C z C z C z
k I EI
k L
I L GI EI
C kNm
I EI
k L

= + +

= + =

3,
0,984
y y
LT
cr
W f
M
= =

( )
2
0,5 1 0,4 0,75 1,007
LT LT LT LT

= + + =

2
2
2
1 1
0,649 min 1,0 ; 1,0
0,75
LT
LT
LT LT LT

= = =

+

85

1
0,823
1,33 0,33
c
LT
k
= =
for a linear bending moment diagram with 0,35

LT
= .
( )
( )
2
1 0,5 1 1 2 0,8 0,918 1,0
c LT
f k

= =

,mod
0,707 1,0
LT
LT
f
= =

1 0,998 0
t
LT
y
I
a
I
= =

,
,
2,140
y Ed
y
Ed el y
M
A
N W
= =

( )
,0 ,0
1 0,883
1
LT y
my my my
y LT
a
C C C
a
= + =
+

2
, ,
1,099 1,0
1 1
LT
LT my
Ed Ed
cr z cr T
a
k C
N N
N N
= =

Elastic-plastic bending resistance
,
4100,3
c Rk y
N A f kN = =

max
1,520
z
= =

1,0
yy
C =

0
LT
d =
because
,
0
z Ed
M kNm = .
( )
2
2
max ,
5
,
3,
1
1 1 2 14 0,736 0,6 0,459
my y el y
Ed
zy y LT
c Rk
y z y
M
C w W
N
C w d
N
w w W

= + = =

Verification
86

,
,
,mod 3, ,
1
, 1
0,664 1
1
my y Ed
Ed LT
y
c Rk
LT y Rk
Ed
y
yy
M
cr y M
C M
N k
N
M
N
C
N

+ =

,
,
,mod 3, ,
1
, 1
0,6 0,744 1
1
y my y Ed
Ed LT
z
c Rk
z LT y Rk
Ed
z
zy
M
cr y M
w C M
N k
N
w M
N
C
N

+ =

Satisfactory.

3.8 Software Development
Within the SEMI-COMP+project a design software Semi-Comp Design has been developed for
cross-section and member design, which is provided as freeware. This software covers the classification
of cross-sections and the design of single span members with axial compression, end moments and
transverse loading for the beam-column behaviour with distinct intermediate restraints transversal to the
beam axis in regular spacing. The software tool allows for a direct comparison of the different
approaches for calculating the cross-section capacity. The code development of this software was
performed at Feldmann +Weynand GmbH, see [10].

3.8.1 Classification of double symmetric H- and I- Profiles
The nomenclature of the dimensions and axes of H- and I-sections is adopted from EN 1993-1-1 [1],
and is shown in Fig. 72:

Fig. 72 Nomenclature of H- and I- sections
The values of the width c which are needed to calculate the c/t-ratios may be calculated as follows:
2 2
w f
c h t r =
(1)
( )
1
2
2
f w
c b t r = (2)
The indices are used to indicate that the values refer either to the web or the flange of the section and
will be used throughout this chapter to avoid any confusion. To check whether a cross-section (CS) is
within the class 3 range, the elastic stress distribution is required. Therefore the following variables will
be used in this chapter:

Ed
N
N
A
= (3)
h
c
f
cw
tw
t
f
r
b
y
z
87

,
,
y Ed
My
y el
M
W
= (4)
,
,
z Ed
Mz
z el
M
W
= (5)
Compressive stresses are notated with a negative sign (unlike in some parts of Eurocode 3) which is the
common convention. This chapter deals with rolled profiles, but is applicable for welded profiles also,
if the radius r is set to zero.

3.8.1.1 Axial Force (LC N)
If N is a tensile force the CS is automatically in class 1. If N is a compressive force the CS has to be
classified after EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2 or eq.(6) - (8). For compression this load case (LC) is the most
unfavourable one, meaning that if the CS is in class 2 for compression, it will be at least class 2 for any
other LC and will always have the full plastic capacity.
Class 1: 33
w w
c t and 9
f f
c t (6)
Class 2: 38
w w
c t and 10
f f
c t
(7)
Class 3: 42
w w
c t and 14
f f
c t
(8)

3.8.1.2 Strong Axis Bending (LC M
y
)
The position of the plastic neutral axis (PNA) for this LC is illustrated in Fig. 73:

Fig. 73 Position of the PNA for pure strong-axis bending
For this LC the CS has to classified after EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2 or eq.(9) - (11).
Class 1: 72
w w
c t and 9
f f
c t (9)
Class 2: 83
w w
c t and 10
f f
c t
(10)
Class 3: 124
w w
c t and 14
f f
c t
(11)

3.8.1.3 Weak Axis Bending (LC M
z
)
In this LC the PNA lies in the web as illustrated in Fig. 74:

Fig. 74 Position of the PNA for pure weak-axis bending
88

For class 1 and 2 the CS can be classified as follows:
Class 1: 9
f f
c t
(12)
Class 2: 10
f f
c t
(13)
Since the neutral axis lies in the web, no classification of the web is necessary. In order to check if the
CS is in class 3, the factor k
has to be calculated according to EN 1993-1-5 [3], table 4.2. Then the

condition for class 3 is:
Class 3: 21
f f
c t k
(14)
with
2
0,57 0,21 0,07 k
= +
and
2
1
2
w
r t
b
+
= =
and 1 3

3.8.1.4 Axial Force and Strong Axis Bending (LC N+M
y
)
(a) Class 1 and Class 2 check
For this LC three cases for the positions of the PNA are possible:
1. The PNA is in the web
2. The PNA lies in the fillets
3. The PNA lies in the flange

The positions are illustrated in Fig. 75:

Fig. 75 Possible positions of the PNA
For the 2
nd
case, the position of the PNA does not have to be calculated, because flange and web will
either be completely in compression or tension. Furthermore the position of the PNA wont be needed
for the 3
rd
case also, because the Eurocode 3 does not distinguish between a flange fully or partly in
compression for this LC. The flange has to be classified as if it was in full compression according to
eq.(6) and (7).
In order to calculate the PNA, the design loads N
Ed
and M
y,Ed
have to be increased linearly until the
plastic limit state is achieved. Some formulas in the literature just calculate the PNA for N=const. which
is a legitimate simplification. This will not presented here for the sake of continuity. If the PNA lies
within the web, the condition that results from increasing N
Ed
and M
y,Ed
linearly to N
pl
and M
y,pl
is
,
, , ,
pl
Ed
y pl y Ed
N
N
M M
= =
(15)
The factor represents the position of the PNA in the web according to EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2.
89

Fig. 76 Factor for bending and compression
The area and the section modulus can be calculated as follows (if the PNA lies in the web,
see eq.(19)):
( )
,
2 1
pl w w
A c t
=
(16)
( )
2 2
, , , ,0 y pl w w y pl
W c t W
= +
(17)
2
, ,0 ,
4
w w
y pl y pl
c t
W W = (18)
The value W
y,pl,0
is the first moment of inertia of the upper part of the CS (flange and radii) as illustrated
in Fig. 77:

Fig. 77 Position of the PNA
In order to know if the PNA is really in the web you should check if the following condition is satisfied:
, 0
, , , 0 , ,0
pl
Ed w w
y Ed y pl y pl
N
N c t
M M W
=
=
= < =
(19)
Please note that in order to use these formulas only positive values of M
y,Ed
are allowed as indicated in
eq.(15), because
, ,
0
y pl
M

if 0 1 . That makes no difference because we are dealing with
double-symmetric cross sections anyway. Additionally tensile forces are positive and compression is
negative. By solving eq.(15) - (17) for the factor we receive:
( )
2
2
, ,0
4
1 1 1
4
2 2
y pl
w
w w w
W
c
c c t

= + + + (20)
The factor can then be used to check if the CS is in class 1 or 2.
Class 1:
396
13 1
w w
c t

and 0,5 > (21)

or:
36
w w
c t

and 0,5 < (22)

W
y,pl,0

web
90

Class 2:
456
13 1
w w
c t

and 0,5 > (23)

or:
41,5
w w
c t

and 0,5 < (24)

(b) Class 3 check
If there are compressive stresses within the CS the flange should always be classified for compression
like in eq.(6) - (8). For the classification of the web the elastic stress distribution is considered. Stresses
greater than f
y
should not exist if the CS is neither in class 1 or 2. First it should be checked if there are
compressive stresses within the web:
w
N My
c
h
< (25)
Again compression is notated with a negative sign. If there are only tensile stresses in the web, it is at
least class 3. Else the factor for the elastic stress distribution is:
( )
( )
N w My
N w My
c h
c h

=
+

(26)
The CS can then be checked according to EN 1993-1-1 or eq.(27) and (28):
for 1 > :
42
0,67 0,33
w w
c t

+

(27)
for 1 : ( ) 62 1
w w
c t (28)

3.8.1.5 Axial force and Weak Axis Bending (LC N+M
z
)
This section is quite similar to section 3.8.1.4. Again the position of the PNA has to be calculated but
there are some simplifications: If N
Ed
is a compressive force the web and the flange will have to be
classified for pressure according to section 3.8.1.1 since the flanges will be in full compression on one
side and at least most of the web will be in compression (see Fig. 78).

Fig. 78 Position of the PNA for compression and bending
Other possible positions of the PNA are shown in Fig. 79.

Fig. 79 Positions of the PNA for tensile Force and weak axis bending
compression
91

If N
Ed
is a tensile force the PNA will lie in the flange if:
,0
, ,0 ,
pl
Ed
z pl z Ed
N
N
M M
= >
(29)
with
( )
2
,0 ,0
4 4
pl y pl y w f
N f A f h t r t r = = + +

(30)
( )
, ,0 , ,0
2 2
z pl y z pl y f f f w
M f W f t c c t r

= = + +

(31)
If eq.(29) is not satisfied and N
Ed
is a tensile force, the PNA lies in the fillets or in the web. The flange
has to be classified for compression and the web can be classified as a class 1 element since it will be in
tension. If eq.(29) is satisfied, we obtain the following condition by increasing the design loads linearly:
,
, , ,
pl
Ed
z pl z Ed
N
N
M M
= =
(32)
with
( )
, ,0
4 1
pl y pl f f
N f A c t
= +

(33)
( ) ( ) ( )
, , , ,0
2 1 2 1
z pl y z pl f f w f
M f W c t r t c

= + +

(34)
The factor is defined in Fig. 80 (see also [1]).

Fig. 80 Factor for tip in compression
Note that
, pl
N

is positive since it is assumed that N
Ed
is a tensile force. If the PNA lies in the flange,
then the factor (according to EN 1993-1-1 for flanges) can be calculated by solving eq.(29) - (34) for
as follows:
( ) ( )
2
, ,0 ,0
2
2 2 2 2
1
2 2 2
z pl pl w w
f f f f
W A r t r t
c c c t

+ + + +
= + +

(35)

Then it can be checked if the CS is within class 1 or 2:
Class 1:
9
f f
c t

(36)
Class 2:
10
f f
c t

(37)
(b) Class 3 check
If N
Ed
is a compressive force, the web has to be classified for compression (with eq.(8)) and if N
Ed
is a
tensile force it is in class 1. It should also be checked if there is compression within the CS:
N Mz
< (38)
92

If there is no compression within the elastic stress distribution, the CS does not have to be checked for
class 3 (meaning it is at least in class 3). If eq.(38) is satisfied, the c
f
/t
f
limit can be calculated by eq.(39)
:
21
f f
c t k
(39)
with
2
0,57 0,21 0,07 k
= + and 1 3

( ) ( )
2
1
2
N w Mz
N Mz
r t b

+ +
= =
+
(40)
Eq.(40) calculates the value for the case Tip in compression according to EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2
and EN 1993-1-5 table 4.2, since this is the less favourable case (at least for double symmetric cross-
sections).

3.8.1.6 Biaxial Bending (LC M
y
+M
z
)
The calculation of the PNA is not necessary for classifying a double symmetric I- or H- profile for this
LC, since it will always cross the centre of gravity and at least one flange will always be in full
compression (see Fig. 81). Since there is no influence of M
z
on the web, its classification can be
performed according to section 3.8.1.2. The class 1 and class 2 checks of the flange can be performed
according to section 3.8.1.1.

Fig. 81 Position of the PNA for biaxial bending
The class 3 check of the flanges is similar to section 3.8.1.5, yet we have to replace the compression by
N
Ed
through the influence of M
y,Ed
:
( ) ( )
2
1
2
My w Mz
My Mz
r t b

+ +
= =
+
(41)
Then we can calculate the c
f
/t
f
border for class 3 using eq.(14) and:
2
0,57 0,21 0,07 k
= + with 1 3 (42)
3.8.1.7 Axial Force and Biaxial Bending (LC N+M
y
+M
z
)
In order to efficiently classify a CS for a combination of the loads N
Ed
, M
y,Ed
and M
z,Ed
the calculation of
the PNA is necessary. The design loads have to be increased until the plastic limit state is reached which
results in the following condition:
, ,
,( , ) , ,( , ) , ,( , )
y Ed z Ed
Ed
pl p y pl p z pl p
M M
N
N M M

= =
(43)
For this LC finding the position of the PNA, so that eq.(43) is satisfied, is problematic for several
reasons: First of all there are several different possible positions of the PNA which makes it difficult to
compression
93

come up with an analytical solution. Second the calculation of the plastic section moduli themselves can
be a task difficult to solve.

Fig. 82 Selection of possible positions of the PNA
Nevertheless H. Rubin made an effort to derive formulae in [12] and [13] in order to calculate the
plastic interaction of double symmetric RHS and I-sections analytically. Theoretically such formulae
could be used to calculate the position of the PNA for the condition given by eq.(43). Another compact
representation of this can be found in [14]. However an exact solution of this problem will usually
require the help of computational methods. A tool has therefore been developed within this thesis that is
capable to find the correct position of the PNA within I- and RHS- sections.

(b) Class 3 check
In contrast to the class 1 and 2 classification of this LC the class 3 classification is clear. Since there is
no influence of M
z,Ed
on the web, it has to be classified according to section 3.8.1.4.
The flange may be classified as follows:
21
f f
c t k
with
2
0,57 0,21 0,07 k
= +
and 1 3
(44)
( ) ( )
2
1
2
N My w Mz
N My Mz
r t b

+ + +
= =
+ +
(45)

3.8.2 Classification of Rectangular Hollow Sections (RHS)
Since both web and flange are internal compression parts the classification of RH-Sections is simpler
than the classification of open sections. The nomenclature of the dimensions and axes of RH - sections
is adopted from EN 1993-1-1, Fig. 1.1 [1] and is shown in Fig. 83:

Fig. 83 Nomenclature of an RHS-profile
t
r
y
z
h
b
c
f
c
w
94

The c values which are used to calculate the c/t ratios may be calculated as follows:
3
w
c h t = (46)
3
f
c b t =
(47)
This is according to the EN 1993-1-5 [3] for plated structures, which might be conservative. However
the definition of the clear width is not clearly defined in EN 1993-1-1, so it is recommended to use the
values mentioned above.
Like before the following stresses will be used in this chapter:
Ed
N
N
A
= (48)
,
,
y Ed
My
y el
M
W
= (49)
,
,
z Ed
Mz
z el
M
W
= (50)

3.8.2.1 Axial Force (LC N)
If N is a tensile force the CS is automatically in class 1. If N is a compressive force the CS has to be
classified after EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2 or eq.(51) - (53). This LC is the most unfavourable one, meaning
that if the CS is in class 2 for compression it will be at least in class 2 for any other LC and will always
have the full plastic capacity.

Class 1: 33
w
c t and 33
f
c t (51)
Class 2: 38
w
c t and 38
f
c t
(52)
Class 3: 42
w
c t and 42
f
c t
(53)

3.8.2.2 Strong Axis Bending (LC M
y
)
The position of the PNA for this LC is illustrated in Fig. 84:

Fig. 84 Position of the PNA for strong axis bending
For M
y
, the CS has to classified after EN 1993-1-1, tbl. 5.2 ((CEN), EN 1993-1-1:2010-12, Eurocode 3:
Design of steel structures Part 1-1:General rules und rules for buidlings; German version EN 1993-1-
1:2005+AC:2009) or eq.(54) -.(56)
Class 1: 72
w
c t and 33
f
c t (54)
95

Class 2: 83
w
c t and 38
f
c t
(55)
Class 3: 124
w
c t and 42
f
c t
(56)

3.8.2.3 Weak Axis Bending (LC M
z
)
The position of the PNA for this LC is illustrated in Fig. 85:

Fig. 85 Position of the PNA for weak axis bending

For M
z
the CS has to be classified after EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2 [1] or eq.(57) - (59).
Class 1: 33
w
c t and 72
f
c t (57)
Class 2: 38
w
c t and 83
f
c t
(58)
Class 3: 42
w
c t and 124
f
c t
(59)

3.8.2.4 Axial Force and Strong Axis Bending (LC N+M
y
)
For this LC three cases for the positions of the PNA are possible:
1. The PNA is in the web
2. The PNA lies in the corner
3. The PNA lies in the flange
The three different cases are illustrated in Fig. 86:

Fig. 86 Positions of the PNA for axial force and strong axis bending

The position of the PNA does not have to be calculated for the 2
nd
case because flange and web will
either be completely in compression or tension. Furthermore the position of the PNA wont be needed
for the 3
rd
case also because the Eurocode 3 [1] does not distinguish between a flange fully or partly in
96

compression for this LC. The flange has to be classified as if it was in full compression according to
eq.(6) and (7).
In order to calculate the PNA the design loads N
Ed
and M
y,Ed
have to be increased linearly until the
plastic limit state is achieved. If the PNA lies within the web, the condition that results from increasing
N
Ed
and M
y,Ed
linearly to N
pl
and M
y,pl
is
,
, , ,
pl
Ed
y pl y Ed
N
N
M M
= =
(60)
The factor represents the position of the PNA in the web according to EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2.
( )
,
2 1 2
pl w y
N c t f
=
(61)
( )
2 2
, , , ,0
2
y pl w y pl
W c t W
= +
(62)
2
, ,0 ,
1
2
y pl y pl w
W W c t =
(63)
In order to know if the PNA is really in the web you first must check if
, 0
, , , 0 , ,0
2
pl
Ed w
y Ed y pl y pl
N
N c t
M M W
=
=
= =
(64)
with
, ,0
, ,0
y pl
y pl
y
M
W
f
=
Please note that in order to use these formulas only positive values of M
y,Ed
are allowed as indicated in
eq. (60) because
, ,
0
y pl
M

if 0 1 . That makes no difference because we are dealing with
double-symmetric cross sections anyway. By solving eq.(60) - (62) for the factor we receive:

( )
2
2
, ,0
2
1 1 1
4
2 2
y pl
w
w w
W
c
c c t

= + + + (65)
The factor can then be used to check if the cross section is in class 1 or 2:
Class 1:
396
13 1
w w
c t

and 0,5 > (66)

or:
36
w w
c t

and 0,5 < (67)

Class 2:
456
13 1
w w
c t

and 0,5 > (68)

or:
41,5
w w
c t

and 0,5 < (69)

(b) Class 3 check
The flange should always be classified for compression like in eq.(51) - (53). For the classification of
the web the elastic stress distribution is considered. Stresses greater than f
y
should not exist if the CS is
neither in class 1 or 2. First of all it should be checked if there is compressive stress within the web:
,
,
<
w y Ed
Ed
y el
c M
N
A h W
(70)
97

Again compression is notated with a negative sign. If there are only tensile stresses in the web within
the elastic stress distribution, it is at least in class 3. Else the factor for the elastic stress distribution
is:
( )
( )

=
+
N w My
N w My
c h
c h

(71)
The CS can then be checked according to EN 1993-1-1 or eq.(27) and (28):
for 1 > :
42
0,67 0,33
w w
c t

+

(72)
for 1 : ( ) 62 1
w w
c t
(73)

3.8.2.5 Axial Force and Weak Axis Bending (LC N+M
z
)
The classification for this LC can be performed as shown in chapter 3.8.2.4 by rotating the CS 90
degrees.

3.8.2.6 Biaxial Bedning (LC M
y
+M
z
)
(a) Class 1 and class 2 check
For an RHS the PNA should be calculated to check whether the CS is in class 1 or 2. Since the CS is
double symmetric the PNA will cross the centre of gravity. Three possible positions of the PNA can be
distinguished (see also Fig. 87):
1. the PNA lies in the web
2. the PNA lies in the corner
3. the PNA lies in the flange

Fig. 87 Possible positions of the PNA for biaxial bending

Again we utilise -factors in order to calculate the position of the PNA:
,
,
y Ed
Ed
z Ed
M
M
= ;
, ,1
1
, ,1
y pl
z pl
W
W
= ;
, ,2
2
, ,2
y pl
z pl
W
W
=
(74)
with
2
, ,1 ,
2
4
w
y pl y pl
c
W W t = (75)
( )
, ,1 z pl w
W c t b t =
(76)
98

( )
, ,2 y pl f
W c t h t =
(77)
2
, ,2 ,
2
4
f
z pl z pl
c
W W t = (78)

W
i,pl,1
(W
y,pl,1
and W
z,pl,1
) corresponds to the following position of the PNA (Fig. 88):

Fig. 88 Position of the PNA for reference values

W
i,pl,2
(W
y,pl,2
and W
z,pl,2
) corresponds to the following position of the PNA (Fig. 89):

Fig. 89 Position of the PNA for reference values

With these factors a distinction of cases can be made:
If
1 Ed
> the PNA lies in the web:
The flange has to be classified for full compression:
Class 1: 33
f
c t
(79)
Class 2: 38
f
c t
(80)
For the classification of the web the factor can be calculated as follows:
( ) ( )
2
, ,1
2 2
1
2 4 2 4

= + + +
y pl w Ed Ed
w w w
W c b t b t
c c t c

(81)
Class 1:
396
13 1
w
c t

and 0,5 > (82)

Class 2:
456
13 1
w
c t

and 0,5 > (83)

If
2 Ed
< the PNA lies in the flange
The web has to be classified for compression:
99

Class 1: 33
w w
c t (84)
Class 2: 38
w w
c t (85)
For the classification of the flange, the factor can be calculated as follows:
( ) ( )
2
, ,2
2 2
1
2 4 2 4

= + + +
f Ed z pl Ed
f f f
c h t W h t
c c t c

(86)
Class 1:
396
13 1
f
c t

and 0,5 > (87)

Class 2:
456
13 1
f
c t

and 0,5 > (88)

If
2 1 Ed
the PNA lies in the corner:
Both web and flange have to be classified for full compression:
Class 1: 33 c t (89)
Class 2: 38 c t (90)

(b) Class 3 check
The class 3 check is similar to section 0:
for 1 > :
42
0,67 0,33
c t

+

(91)
and for 1 :
( ) 62 1 c t (92)
For the classification of the flange, may be calculated as follows:
( )
( )
2
1

= =
+
My f Mz
f
My f Mz
c b
c b

(93)
For the classification of the web, may be calculated as follows:
( )
( )
2
1

= =
+
Mz w My
w
Mz w My
c h
c h

(94)

3.8.2.7 Axial Force and Biaxial Bending (LC N+M
y
+M
z
)
In order to efficiently classify a CS for a combination of the loads N
Ed
, M
y,Ed
and M
z,Ed
the calculation of
the PNA is necessary. The design loads have to be increased until the plastic limit state is reached which
results in the condition:

, ,
,( , ) , ,( , ) , ,( , )
y Ed z Ed
Ed
pl p y pl p z pl p
M M
N
N M M

= =
(95)
100

Fig. 90 Selection of possible positions of the PNA
The PNA-Iteration tool will be used to find the correct position of the PNA.

(b) Class 3 check
The class 3 check is similar to section 3.8.2.4:
for 1 > :
42
0,67 0,33
c t

+

(96)
for 1 : ( ) 62 1 c t (97)
For the classification of the flange, may be calculated as follows:
( )
( )
2
1
+
= =
+ +
N My f Mz
f
N My f Mz
c b
c b

(98)
For the classification of the web, may be calculated as follows:
( )
( )
2
1
+
= =
+ +
N Mz w My
w
N Mz w My
c h
c h

(99)

3.8.3 Classification of Circular Hollow Sections (CHS)
The classification of tubular sections or circular hollow sections does not depend on the cross-section
loading. The rules for the classification are valid for any combination of bending and compression
according to EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2, sheet 3 of 3 [1].
The nomenclature of the dimensions and axes of CH - sections is adopted from EN 1993-1-1 and is
shown in Fig. 91.

The section has to be classified according to EN 1993-1-1, table 5.2 or eq.(100) - (102).
Class 1:
2
50 d t (100)
Class 2:
2
70 d t (101)
Class 3:
2
90 d t (102)

Fig. 91 Nomenclature of a Circular Hollow Section
y
z
D t
101

3.8.4 PNA Iteration-Tool
3.8.4.1 Introduction and previous work
For the classification of cross sections, it is necessary to calculate the position of the plastic neutral axis
(PNA). This is not a problem if there are only two of three forces acting on the cross-section. Formulas
for those cases have been derived in section 3.8.1 and. 3.8.2.
The plastic limit state can be achieved by increasing all loads by a common factor , thus the
precondition for the PNA is:
,( , ) Ed pl p
N N

=
(103)
, , ,( , ) y Ed y pl p
M M

=
(104)
, , ,( , ) z Ed z pl p
M M

=
(105)
The problem is that there are different possible positions of the PNA, which means that the equations
for the plastic state depend on the position of the PNA. H. Rubin [12] [13] derived formulae in order to
describe the interaction of the cross-sections forces in the plastic limit state for I- and Box-sections. One
would have to solve the equations derived by Rubin for given external forces in order to get the position
of the PNA. Since the type of the position or the case is not known (different cases are shown by the
first five drawings in Fig. 82 for I-sections and by the first three drawings in Fig. 90), one would have to
try all different possibilities.
In addition to that it is possible that the PNA will lie completely in the flange or web as shown in Fig.
92:

Fig. 92 Additional case of PNA-positions
Altogether it can be said, that it would be complex to write code that consists of solving these
equations. A different approach for this topic was chosen by [15] in which the PNA can also be curved
(Fig. 93). Yield-Surface diagrams were presented which also include torsion and bimoments.

Fig. 93 Curved plastic neutral axis [15]
Another approach was presented in [16]. This solution includes warping moments as well as torsion.
The cross-section is discretisized into elements and the calculation of the plastic capacity is interpreted
as an optimization task [17]. The numerical algorithm is based on a revised simplex method.
Different strategies for a computational solution of the task were presented in [18] as an aid for cross-
section checks in the plastic range according to the steel standard DIN 18800.
When dealing with a fully plastified state, the condition M
w
=0 cannot be satisfied if the Bernoulli-
hypothesis shall be valid. The aforementioned approaches take into account the effect of warping
moments which is not done within the SEMI-COMP software, since the PNA would not be a line but
some kind of curve or it would not be possible to reach the plastic limit state. This was also pointed out
in [19] [20].

102

3.8.4.2 Approach for the SEMICOMP software
Calculating the position of the PNA by hand with the pre-conditions given by eq.(103) - (105) is
virtually impossible due to time constraints. A PNA-Iteration tool has therefore been developed
which is able to find the correct position of the PNA within seconds.
First the PNA is computed in the Hesse-Normal form (eq.(106)). The benefit is that it is very easy to
know on which side of the PNA a point lies by just inserting its coordinates into the Hesse-equation. If
the result is zero, the point lies exactly on the line. If the point does not lie on the line, the result is
either negative or positive, depending on the side.

The following equation is the one defining the Hesse-normal form of the PNA [21]:
cos sin 0
hesse
y z p + = (106)

Fig. 94 Definition of the Hesse-parameters

The cross-section is divided into several rectangles as shown in Fig. 95. The nodes of each rectangle is
then stored in a matrix.

Fig. 95 Discretisation of a cross-section
The Iteration process is started by initially assuming a position of the PNA, which is usually p
hesse
= 0
and = 0 (with = - 90). The program then calculates the internal forces of the cross-section. Since
all cross-sections are double-symmetric it is possible to divide the cross-section into regions which are
assigned to axial forces and bending moments. Fig. 96 shows the mid corridor (not hatched) that is
assigned to axial forces. The hatched regions thus create bending moments.
103

Fig. 96 Plastified region in a cross-section
The code constantly alters the position of the PNA in order to achieve equilibrium according to eq.(103)
- (105). If the PNA cuts a rectangle, new rectangles are created by the code including the correct centre
of gravity. This approach is very beneficial because only a very small number of elements is needed in
order to achieve a good convergence.

Fig. 97 Sectioning of Cross-section elements
The PNA-Iteration tool was not designed to be an independent release but to be a part of the Semi-
Comp software. Nevertheless it was temporarily put into the shape of a Windows Forms application in
order to check the results of the code. Two examples are shown in Fig. 98 and Fig. 99. The program
returns the reference values n, m
y
and m
z
. If these values are equal, it means that an exact convergence
was achieved which is the case in the presented examples.

Fig. 98 Example 1 of the PNA Iteration Tool
Axial force
New rectangles
104

Fig. 99 Example 2 of the PNA Iteration Tool

3.8.5 About Microsoft Visual C#
The C#(C-Sharp) language was developed on the basis of the C programming language, which was
developed in the 1970s. The C language was followed by C++in the 1980s, which was capable of
object-oriented programming (OOP). The basic idea of OOP is that objects are components that are
similar to real world items and thus create a modular or capsuled code, making the development of
applications far more effective [22].
The C#language was introduced by Microsoft in 2000. It was specifically created for the so-called
.NET (dotnet) platform and has roots in C, C++and also J ava. The .Net platform inhabits a .NET
Framework Class Library, a collection of prebuilt components, which helps realizing software projects
more quickly. For example it is very easy to integrate events, such as keystrokes or mouse clicks, into
the code or to make use of the benefits of a graphical user interface (GUI). However the key function of
the .NET Framework is the built-in common language runtime (CLR), that translates applications into
machine-specific instructions. The program itself is first compiled into Microsoft Intermediate
Language (MSIL) and its instructions are transferred into the CLR. In this way, a platform can run any
.NET program which makes it platform independent. Also different parts of a program may be
computed with different languages (language interoperability). An overview of the Infrastructure is
illustrated in Fig. 100.
Microsoft Visual Studio is an integrated development environment (IDE). It is a strong aid for
developing numerous types of applications, especially for the .NET framework. It includes a code
editor, a debugger and a forms designer for GUI applications, just to name a few features. For the
Office 2003 package a set of development tools was added, the Microsoft Visual Studio Tools for
Office (VSTO), that allows for computing code behind Office applications such as Word or Excel. With
these tools, solutions can be computed for Office programs, using all the benefits of OOP and the tools
integrated into Microsoft Visual Studio [23].

Fig. 100 Common language infrastructure
105

3.8.6 Programming SemiComp
3.8.6.1 The Visual Studio Enviro
Fig. 101
The Code for the SEMICOMP Mem
2010 Premium Edition using VSTO f
in Fig. 101.
The code is designed using code beh
behind, because they are hooked-up
simultaneously when the document is
Excel surface. In the background the
the C#language has been used exclu
easily be used in other applications. A
also well documented.
Microsoft Excel 2010, .NET Frame
opening the document.

3.8.6.2 Scope and requirements
The software should be able to perfo
plastic range according to EN 1993-1
simply supported beam, forked at bo
beam. The cross-sections types includ
(RHS) and circular hollow sections (C
A beam with one lateral restraint at th

Fig. 102
The lateral restraints prevent torsion
elastic critical moment for lateral tors
of the software, but there is an interf
which is the LTBeam (Lateral To
especially designed to be executed by
p Member Design
onment

Microsoft Visual Studio surface
mber Design program is computed using Microso
for Excel 2010. The program surface of the enviro
hind a document. The classes of such a program a
p with particular worksheets within a workbook
s started and any events such as buttons can be add
code can be designed like in any other application
usively, because any code programmed in this lan
A large number of programmers already use C#, w
work 3.5 or later and VSTO Runtime 4.0 will
s of the software
form cross-section and member checks of membe
1-1 and the SEMICOMP approach. The system of
oth ends with lateral torsional restraints up to the
de double symmetric I- and H-profiles, rectangular
CHS).
he midpoint is shown in Fig. 102:

Simply supported beam with restraints
n and lateral deflection (in the x-y-plane) and thu
sional buckling M
crit
of the beam. The calculation o
face to existing software in order to calculate the
orsional Buckling of Beams) software by CTI
y other programs and it can calculate the critical m
ft Visual Studio
onment is shown
are called code-
. The code runs
ded to the regular
n. For this thesis,
nguage can later
which is why it is
be required for
ers in the elasto-
the member is a
5
th
points of the
r hollow sections
us influence the
f M
crit
is not part
critical moment,
ICM [24]. It is
moment of beams
106

for any restraints and loads. The load cases included in the SEMICOMP software are external end
moments, uniformly distributed loads and point loads at the midpoint of the beam, all in both the x-y
and x-z plane.
The software includes the classification of cross-sections according to EN 1993-1-1, sec. 5.5 and
table 5.2 for all combinations of axial force and bending moments. When regarding a member, the
cross-sections have to be classified at the governing points of the member. The utilisation factor of
these points due to the cross-section checks according to EN 1993-1-1, sec. 6.2 has to be calculated and
the cross-section class at the point of the highest utilisation factor is being defined as the overall
member class (see also sec. 3.8.7.3). This procedure is not explicitly given in Eurocode 3, but it is fairly
reasonable. Afterwards the member checks according to EN 1993-1-1, sec. 6.3 are performed.
The cross-section checks that are included in the software are the following:
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.3 Tension
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.4 Compression
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.5 Bending Moment
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.6 Shear
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.9 Bending and axial force
Since torsional moments will not occur, there is no check according to EN 1993-1-1, sec. 6.2.7. Shear
Interaction is not part of the program as well. When the SEMICOMP method is chosen, the check for
bending and axial force differs from the Eurocode 3 check. The capacity of class 3 sections might also
be higher.

Fig. 103 Program Flow Chart (selection)
The member checks that are included in the software are the following:
EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.1 Uniform members in compression
EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.2 Uniform members in bending
EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.3 Uniform members in bending and axial compression
107

Within the software there is also the possibility of performing cross-section checks independently by
entering loads manually.
A part of the structure of the code is illustrated by a program flow chart in Fig. 103. It shows some of
the different classes and the way they exchange data by creating objects.

3.8.7 Working with SEMICOMP Member Design
3.8.7.1 Entering Data
Once the Excel file has been opened the user can immediately start to work with it. At the bottom of the
Excel window there are the different available sheets which are Disclaimer, 1.1 System data, 1.2
Member check, 1.2.1 Additional info and 1.3 Cross section check.

Fig. 104 Different Sheets in the Workbook
Starting point is the 1.1 System data-sheet where all of the information has to be entered. First you
have to choose the cross-section type and then the finishing. If the profile is hot-rolled or cold-formed
there are also libraries of common profiles available. The measurements can also be entered manually.
On the right side of Fig. 105 the cells for the partial factors are shown. They can also be modified, since
they differ within the National Annexes.

Fig. 105 Entering the profile data
The cross-section data is then either loaded from a database or can be entered manually as show in Fig.
106. The steel grade can also be chosen in a dropdown-list or be entered manually as well as the
Youngs modulus. The cross-section values are calculated automatically and it is not possible to enter
them manually.

Fig. 106 Cross-section data and steel grade
Next the boundary conditions have to entered, which are the length of the beam as well as the number
of restraints as shown in Fig. 107.

Fig. 107 Entering the boundary conditions
Cross-section type
Finishing

M0 =1,00
Select from library

M1 =1,00
(optional)
SEMICOMP Member Desi gn
Partial factors
M
Cross-section data Material
H = 500,0 [mm] Steel grade S235
B =
200,0 [mm]
f
y
= 235,0 N/mm
Tw = 10,2 [mm] E = 210000,0 N/mm
Tf = 16,0 [mm]
R = 21,0 [mm]
A [cm
2
] I
yy
[cm
4
] I
zz
[cm
4
] W
el,y
[cm
3
] W
el,z
[cm
3
] W
pl,y
[cm
3
] W
pl,z
[cm
3
]
115,52 48198,53 2141,69 1927,94 214,17 2194,12 335,88
Boundary conditions It [cm
4
] Iw [cm
6
]
LBeam= 3,500 m 89,01 1254238,95
nfork= [-]
108

There are also options available in case that torsion or bending is restrained. If one or all of the fields
are activated, the corresponding -values will be equal to 1.0. If the profile is not an I- or-H section but
an RHS or CHS profile, lateral torsional buckling is not likely to occur. In this case the field Torsion
restrained is activated by default as shown in Fig. 108. The cross-section values for torsion and
warping are not calculated for the latter case.

Fig. 108 Boundary conditions for an RHS for CHS profile
In the next step the loads can be entered into the sheet as shown in Fig. 109.

Fig. 109 Entering the loads
Loading in the x-z-plane will cause a momentum about the strong axis and loading in the x-y-plane
about the weak axis. Loads in both planes may also occur on the same time. Usually the loads are
applied on the top of the beam, so the distance of the load to the shear centre is minus half the height of
the cross-section by default. This value can also be modified. It is quite important to enter a correct
value since the critical moment is influenced very strongly by where the load is applied.
Next the path of the LTBeam.exe-file should be entered as shown in Fig. 110. It is recommended to
use the software, since the critical moment is then calculated automatically for every loading. Otherwise
the Enter M
cr
manually (Fig. 110) button can be chosen where the critical moment has to be entered
manually (as well as M
cr,0
if Method 1 is used), if torsion is not restrained.

Fig. 110 Specification of the LTBeam path
At the bottom of the page the axes are defined within a drawing and different worked examples from
the TC8 RedBook and the SEMICOMP Final Report can be chosen as shown in Fig. 111.

Fig. 111 Definition of axes and worked examples
Boundary conditions It [cm
4
] Iw [cm
6
]
LBeam= 3,500 m 0,00 0,00
nfork= [-]
Loading in z-x-plane Loading in y-x-plane
NEd = -800,00 kN
qz,Ed
(*)
=
30,00 kN/m
qy,Ed
(*)
=
0,00 kN/m
My,left,Ed = 0,00 kNm Mz,left,Ed = 0,00 kNm
My,right,Ed = -350,00 kNm Mz,right,Ed = 0,00 kNm
Pz,Ed
(*)
= 0,00 kN Py,Ed
(*)
= 0,00 kN
Distance of Loading to shear center
zSi = -250,00 mm
(*)
M
cr
= 0,00 kNm
M
cr,0
= 0,00 kNm
Specify path of LTBeam.exe file:
c:\Users\Martin\LTBeam\LTBeam.exe
Definition of axes
Worked examples
109

By clicking the Calculate Forces! button (see Fig. 109) the cross-section forces and deflections are
calculated. The results are then shown in Excel diagrams as well as the maximum values as illustrated
in Fig. 112 and Fig. 113.

Fig. 112 Cross-section forces

Fig. 113 Deflection of the cross-section

3.8.7.2 Performing Member Checks
In order to perform a member check the 1.2 Member check sheet has to be activated as shown in Fig.
114.

Fig. 114 The Member Check sheet
One of the two available methods according to the Annex of EN 1993-1-1 has to be chosen as well as
the method for the calculation of the cross-section resistance (see Fig. 115).

Fig. 115 Choosing methods
By clicking on the Perform member design check button all calculations are performed. The results
are then presented within the sheet. First the member classification is performed as shown in Fig. 116.
The c/t- ratios and the reference values for the classification (,) are shown as well as the limits of the
single cross-section classes. The overall member class is the class of the cross-section at the point of the
highest utilisation factor as explained in section 3.5.1.

The different cross-section values and reference values for stability are shown in Fig. 118 and the
utilisation of the member check and cross-section checks at the end sections is shown within the sheet
as illustrated in Fig. 119. The meaning of the different variables should be clear from EN 1993-1-1.
Nevertheless commentaries were added to each variable which were adopted from EN 1993-1-1 as
shown in Fig. 117.
My,Ed,max= 350,00 kNm
Vz,Ed,max= 152,50 kN
M
y,Ed
[kNm]
V
z,Ed
[kN]
-500,00
0,00
-200,00
0,00
z,max= 2,16 cm
y,max= 0,00 cm
z
[cm] (corresponding to design loads)
y
[cm] (corresponding to design loads)
-5,00
0,00
0,00
1,00
SEMICOMP Member Check
Choose method for
Choose method for
member check
110

Fig. 116 Member Classification

Fig. 117 Commentary of variables

Fig. 118 Cross-section values and reference values for member checks

Fig. 119 Results of the member check

Other member checks from EN 1993-1-1 which do not have to be performed if the member check
according to EN 1993-1-1, sec. 6.3.3 is performed are also calculated as shown in Fig. 120.
(based on I. order cross-section forces)
Reference values for classification in the worst section along the member
c/tw = 41,765 web = 0,970 web = -0,381 = 1,000
c/tf = 4,619 flange = 1,000 flange = 1,000
Boundaries Class 1 Class 2 Class 3
c/tw c/tw, max = 34,121 39,290 77,190
c/tf c/tf, max = 9,000 10,000 13,771
Member class = 3
Section classification for member design check
Member Check
Mpl,y,Rd = 515,618 kNm
NRd = 2714,757 kN Mpl,z,Rd = 78,932 kNm NEd = -800,000 kN
My,Rd = 453,066 kNm Mel,y,Rd = 453,066 kNm My,Ed,max = 350,000 kNm
Mz,Rd = 50,330 kNm Mel,z,Rd = 50,330 kNm Mz,Ed,max = 0,000 kNm
Lcr,y = 3,500 m Lcr,z = 3,500 m Mcr = 2315,674 kNm
Ncr,y = 81548,652 kN Ncr,z = 3623,590 kN LT = 0,49 [-]
y = 0,21 [-] z = 0,34 [-] LT = 0,442 [-]
y = 0,182 [-] z = 0,866 [-] LT = 1,000 [-]
y = 1,000 [-] z = 0,683 [-] fmod = 0,872 [-]
Lateral torsional buckling Strong axis buckling Weak axis buckling
EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.3
Uniform member in bending and axial compression Global interaction factors
kyy = 1,008
Eq. (6.61): U = 1,185 1,0 not ok kyz = 0,000
Eq. (6.62): U = 1,248 1,0 not ok kzy = 0,925
kzz = 0,000
Cross-section check at each end of the member
Left end: UF = 0,295 1,0 ok
Right end: UF = 1,067 1,0 not ok
111

Fig. 120 Results of additional member checks

The check of bending and compression requires the calculation of certain auxiliary terms, especially if
Method 1 is used. In order to make all calculations comprehensible, all the auxiliary terms are also
given on the same sheet as shown in Fig. 121 and Fig. 122.

Fig. 121 Auxiliary Terms of the Method 1

Fig. 122 Auxiliary Terms of the Method 2

3.8.7.3 Additional information
For the classification of the member worst cross-section along the member has to be classified. This
would be the one with the highest utilisation factor. The utilisation factor is the inverse of the factor by
which all loads can be increased, so that the utilisation is equal to 1.0. For a linear interaction the
utilisation factor is simply the result of the equation of the cross-section check, but for a non-linear
interaction (e.g. for the plastic interaction) the utilisation factor has to be calculated by iteration which
is being done by the SEMICOMP software. The information about the utilisation along the member is
stored in the 1.2.1 Additional info sheet, shown in Fig. 123.

Fig. 123 Additional information sheet

Additional member checks
EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.1
Strong axis flexural buckling check
Eq. (6.46): NEd/Nb,Rd = 0,295 1,0 ok
Weak axis flexural buckling check
Eq. (6.46): NEd/Nb,Rd = 0,431 1,0 ok
EN 1993-1-1, 6.3.2
Lateral torsional buckling
Eq. (6.54): MEd/Mb,Rd = 0,773 1,0 ok
Reference values
Correction factor k c table 6.6
kc = 0,655 [-]
y = 1,000 [-] max = 0,866 [-]
z = 0,918 [-] 0 = 0,668 [-]
wy = 1,138 [-] 0,lim= 0,278 [-]
wz = 1,500 [-] LT = 0,442 [-]
npl = 0,295 [-] y = 2,621 [-]
aLT = 0,998 [-] Cmy,0 = 0,995 [-]
bLT = 0,000 [-] Cmz,0 = 1,000 [-]
cLT = 0,623 [-] Cmy = 0,998 [-]
dLT = 0,000 [-] Cmz = 1,000 [-]
eLT = 1,333 [-] CmLT = 1,000 [-]
Mcr,0 = 1014,557 [-] C1 = 2,329 [-]
Cyy = 0,989 [-] Czy = 0,859 [-]
Cyz = 0,780 [-] Czz = 0,844 [-]
Method 1 auxiliary terms (if applicable):
Cmy = 0,000 [-]
Cmz = 0,000 [-]
CmLT = 0,000 [-]
Method 2 auxiliary terms (if applicable):
112

In order to know where point of the highest utilisation is located the cross-section checks are performed
at 61 points along the member (see Fig. 124). The point of the highest utilisation is identified (marked
red in Fig. 124) and the corresponding cross-section class is the overall member class.

Fig. 124 Additional information about the classification of the member

3.8.7.4 Performing cross-section checks
The user also has the possibility to perform an additional cross-section check independently from the
member check. In order to do that the 1.3 Cross section check sheet has to be activated (Fig. 125).

Fig. 125 Sheet for cross-section check

The geometry from the profile has to be entered on the 1.1 System data sheet as described in
sec. 3.8.7.1. On the 1.3 Cross section check sheet the cross-section loading can be entered
independently as well as the method (either Eurocode or SEMICOMP Method). The calculation is
started by clicking the Perform cross-section checks button (see Fig. 126)

Fig. 126 Entering Data for cross-section checks

The results of the classification and resistances are then shown in the sheet as well as the results of the
different cross-section checks (see Fig. 127 and Fig. 128).
Section classification for member design check
Additional information
Point No.
x-coordinate
[m]
NEd
[kN]
My,Ed
[kNm]
Mz,Ed
[kNm]
Utilization
Factor
CS-Class
51 2,92 -800,00 -266,15 0,00 0,882 3
52 2,98 -800,00 -274,07 0,00 0,900 3
53 3,03 -800,00 -282,10 0,00 0,917 3
54 3,09 -800,00 -290,23 0,00 0,935 3
55 3,15 -800,00 -298,46 0,00 0,953 3
56 3,21 -800,00 -306,80 0,00 0,972 3
57 3,27 -800,00 -315,23 0,00 0,990 3
58 3,33 -800,00 -323,77 0,00 1,009 3
59 3,38 -800,00 -332,41 0,00 1,028 3
60 3,44 -800,00 -341,16 0,00 1,048 3
61 3,50 -800,00 -350,00 0,00 1,067 3
Choose method
NEd = -100,000 kN
My,Ed = 100,000 kNm Vz,Ed = 0,000 kN
Mz,Ed = 0,000 kNm Vy,Ed = 0,000 kN
SEMICOMP Cross-Secti on Check
113

Fig. 127 Results of the classification and resistances

The utilisation of the different checks is calculated except for shear interaction. However the user can
see immediately if shear interaction would have to be considered through the check of shear (Shear
interaction does not have to be considered if the utilisation for shear is lower than 0.5).

Fig. 128 Results of the cross-section checks

3.9 Influence of Warping on the Cross-Section Resistance
In this section it is shown that a double-symmetric three-plate cross-section under N, M
y
and M
z

interaction reaches its full plastic cross-section resistance only via the existence of the warping moment
M
. (Mono-symmetric or non-symmetric cross-sections can show this phenomenon even for mono-
axial bending.) Moreover, it is illustrated that the actual existence of such warping effects is a general
problem for all cross-sections. It is not a specific Class 3 problem and therefore not only specific to the
current research.
It is further demonstrated that the internally statically indeterminate torsional equilibrium between the
primary and secondary torsional moment is sufficient to resist the warping moment resulting from
plasticity effects. The resulting deformations are very small for tubular profiles and the warping
disturbances are locally restricted. Therefore, tubular profiles are always able to activate their full
plastic cross-section capacity because of their very high torsional stiffness. For I-profiles it is shown
Reference values for classification
c/tw = 41,765 web = 0,740 web = -0,672 = 1,000
c/tf = 4,619 flange = 1,000 flange = 1,000
Boundaries Class 1 Class 2 Class 3
c/tw c/tw, max = 45,927 52,885 93,728
c/tf c/tf, max = 9,000 10,000 13,771
Cross section class = 1
Mpl,y,Rd= 515,62 kNm Mpl,z,Rd= 78,93 kNm Vpl,z,Rd= 812,35 kN
Mel,y,Rd=
453,07 kNm
Mel,z,Rd=
50,33 kNm
Vpl,z,Rd=
868,33 kN
NRd= 2714,76 kN
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.3 / 6.2.4
Tension or compression
U(6.5)/(6.9) = 0,037 1,0 ok
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.5
Bending moment
Ustrong A. = 0,194 1,0 ok
UweakA. =
0,000 1,0 ok
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.6
Shear
U z-plastic=
0,000 1,0 ok
U y-plastic=
0,000 1,0 ok
U z-elastic= 0,000 1,0 ok U y-elastic= 0,000 1,0 ok
hw/tw =
47,020
72 / =
60,000 ok
EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.9
Bending and axial force
U(6.41)/(6.42)=
0,038 1,0 ok UF = 0,194
Comment: Shear Interaction is not considered within this
software tool. If the utilization for shear is higher that 0.5,
an additional check for shear interaction is necessary.
114

that the needed rotations can become large and that the warping effects are not limited to the plastic
zones only, but may extend over large parts of the member. It is questionable if these deformations are
always acceptable, whereas it is also shown that the influence of warping on the full plastic cross-
section capacity is negligible for small axial forces.
The following condition is valid for double-symmetric H-shaped cross-sections:

Since the existing interaction-formulae of Class 1 and Class 2 for compact sections are also based on
the assumption that the cross-section is able to build up the needed warping moment M
, the present
assumptions for SEMI-COMP [4] and SEMI-COMP+[11] are in line with the general conditions of EN
1993-1-1.

This section is documented in detail in the background information [11], which is available on
www.stahlbau.tugraz.at/semicompplus.

4 Conclusions
The achievements made in the project Semi-Comp+are summarized as follows:
By extending the scope of cross-section forms to such with high webs producing just small
restraint to the flanges the proposed design rules could be developed to cover the full range of
practical section shapes.
By investigation of the c/t-limit ratios of internal parts in compression the need for reduction of
these limits was found necessary and new limit ratios for code-implementation are given.
The new design proposal for member-design of class 3-sections could be formulated for code-
implementation and tabulated values for the bending resistances have been provided.
The Know-how transfer to practitioners and academics has been achieved by seminars and
presentations at conferences. Design Guidelines and extensive background material as well as
worked examples are open to the public at the Semi-Comp website. The scope of the design
guidelines has been extended to also cover the use of Eurocode 3 in the frame design, the extraction
of members and the classification procedure.
The implementation into the Eurocode 3 has been initialized by presentation in European Technical
committees and code-committees for the next revision of the code.
A Design Software is now available to the public covering the design of members in the class 3-
range conform to the current code and to the new Semi-Comp rules.
In conclusion, the issue of member design of standard profiles in the range of class 3 has been solved by
research and has been brought to simple design rules for practical use leading to a more economical and
consistent design. In many European countries currently using the Eurocode the dissemination of the
new rules by seminars was successful.

M
y
+M
z

N +M
y

N +M
z

no warping effect to
be considered
N +M
y
+M
z

M
needed to develop full

plastic resistance
115

5 Exploitation and Impact of the Research Results
The research results of the Semi-Comp+project constitute new design rules and tools for design
purposes for practical application.
Actual applications of the research results are:
The Semi-Comp Design Software which allows the code-conform member design and the design
based on the new rules for class 3-sections. This software can be used by free downloading from the
Semi-Comp+website and is of direct benefit for steel designers.
The new results are already formulated for the amendment of the Eurocode 3 in the process of
evolution of the code.
The Semi-Comp+ website provides extensive background material with worked examples,
tabulated resistance values and information on the design of frame structures. All this material
supports better use of current steel design.
The technical and economic potential of the use of the research results are:
Class 3-sections potentially cover a large range of standard I-, H-sections and RHS in design. The
new rules will lead to a more economic design by using the plastic resistances in this range. The
new design rules will, therefore, lead to a more beneficial steel design.
The replacement of the discontinuous design procedure by a continuous one is a more consistent
and physically more transparent approach. This results in a better technical understanding of the
behavior of steel members in academic education and in design practice.
The project led to a number of
Presentations in conferences and technical committees
Publications in conference proceedings and technical journals
The investigations of the project led to the conclusion, that further research in the field of member
design of class 4-sections would be advisable, i.e. to investigate the plastic capacity of such sections for
standard forms of steel profiles in analogous way.

116

C List of Figures

Fig. 1 Cover pages of Design Guidelines and background documentation, logo for dissemination .... 6
Fig. 2 Website Semi-Comp+, overview .............................................................................................. 6
Fig. 3 Overview on Powerpoint presentations ...................................................................................... 7
Fig. 4 Software SEMICOMP MEMBER DESIGN............................................................................... 8
Fig. 5 Pictures of seminar at EUROSTEEL 2011 ................................................................................. 9
Fig. 6 Pictures of seminar in Slovenia ................................................................................................ 10
Fig. 7 Location of organised seminars within SEMI-COMP+............................................................. 10
Fig. 8 Moment-rotation curve depending on cross-section classes 1 to 4 ......................................... 12
Fig. 9 Definitions for the determination of the c/t-ratio according to EN 1993-1-1 for rolled and tubular
sections (left) and welded sections (right) ................................................................................ 12
Fig. 10 Cross-section resistances for strong-axis bending according to EN 1993-1-1, shown for
classes 1 to 4 ............................................................................................................................ 12
Fig. 11 Cross-section resistances for biaxial bending according to EN 1993-1-1, shown for classes 1
to 4 13
Fig. 12 Overview of SEMI-COMP research project .............................................................................. 13
Fig. 13 3-D-illustration of cross-section resistance for biaxial bending according to SEMI-COMP
(improved capacity for class 3) ................................................................................................. 13
Fig. 14 Individual member design ........................................................................................................ 18
Fig. 15 General approach in frame design ........................................................................................... 19
Fig. 16 Elastic/plastic frame analysis and member check .................................................................... 19
Fig. 17 Global analysis related to the sway/non sway frame behaviour .............................................. 20
Fig. 18 Choice of frame analysis related to the kind of member design .............................................. 20
Fig. 19 Frame design for structures with uniform/non-uniform members............................................. 24
Fig. 20 Frame design for structures with uniform/non-uniform members (continued) ......................... 24
Fig. 21 Individual member design, different types of loading ............................................................... 24
Fig. 22 Member design formulae acc. to Eurocode 3 .......................................................................... 25
Fig. 23 Extraction of frame members ................................................................................................... 25
Fig. 24 Buckling interaction formulae, Method 2 .................................................................................. 26
Fig. 25 Effect of non-uniform moment diagrams .................................................................................. 26
Fig. 26 Equivalent uniform moment factors .......................................................................................... 27
Fig. 27 Use of equivalent uniform member factors, example ............................................................... 27
Fig. 28 Extraction of other than fork type member, EC 3 versus ECM .............................................. 28
Fig. 29 Extraction of frame member, EC3 versus ECM ....................................................................... 28
Fig. 30 Background of classification of cross-sections ......................................................................... 32
Fig. 31 c/t-Limits acc. to Table 5.2 in EN 1993-1-1 .............................................................................. 32
Fig. 32 Use of classification .................................................................................................................. 33
Fig. 33 Principles of classification ........................................................................................................ 34
Fig. 34 Classification for global analysis .............................................................................................. 34
Fig. 35 Classification for member buckling design ............................................................................... 35
Fig. 36 Member buckling design equivalent section class .............................................................. 35
Fig. 37 Equivalent section class example ......................................................................................... 36
Fig. 38 classification for cross-section design ...................................................................................... 36
Fig. 39 Elastic stress distribution for N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
for H-section ................................................. 37
Fig. 40 Peculiarities of classification of class 4-sections ...................................................................... 37
Fig. 41 Peculiarities for class 4-sections, continued ............................................................................ 38
Fig. 42 Procedure for the amplification of the internal forces and moments N
Ed
+M
y,Ed
+M
z,Ed
up to
the plastic cross-section resistance (left) and corresponding plastic stress distribution (right)
for H-sections ........................................................................................................................... 38
Fig. 43 Elastic and plastic stress distribution for section in pure bending M
y
....................................... 41
117

Fig. 44 Stress distribution for section under pure compression N ........................................................ 42
Fig. 45 Elastic stress distribution for section in bending M
y
plus axial compression N ........................ 43
Fig. 46 Plastic stress distribution for section in axial compression plus bending N +M
y
..................... 43
Fig. 47 Load amplification leading to the plastic limit for section in axial compression plus bending N +
M
y
44
Fig. 48 Diagrams of elastic stress distribution (left) and plastic stress distribution (right) for the
determination of and .......................................................................................................... 46
Fig. 49 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of I- and H-sections according to EN 1993-1-147
Fig. 50 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of tubular sections according to EN 1993-1-1 49
Fig. 51 Step 0 classification and interpolation ................................................................................... 50
Fig. 52 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of I- and H-sections according to SEMI-COMP51
Fig. 53 Design procedure for cross-section resistance of tubular sections according to SEMI-COMP 53
Fig. 54 Current design situation and Semi-Comp proposal for I-sections with class 3-webs in bending54
Fig. 55 FE-results for I-sections with class 3-webs in bending ............................................................ 54
Fig. 56 Design provision for members in bending according to EN 1993-1-3 ...................................... 55
Fig. 57 Comparison between EN 1993-1-3 and SEMI-COMP design proposal, web in bending (left)
respectively outstand flange governing for mono-axial bending M
y
(right) .............................. 55
Fig. 58 Comparison between EN 1993-1-3 and EN 1993-1-1 (left) respectively SEMI-COMP design
proposal (right), shown for internal plate element in compression ........................................... 56
Fig. 59 Comparison of moment interaction for pure bending EN 1993-1-1 vs. analytical resistance
and results of MNA calculations ............................................................................................... 56
Fig. 60 Parametric study with finite-element calculations: all load cases a) and b), and selected load
cases c) to f) ............................................................................................................................. 58
Fig. 61 M-N-Interaction curves for sections whose cross-section class is governed by the web ........ 59
Fig. 62 Comparison of selected FE-calculations from the parametric study with the section capacity
according to EN 1993-1-1 for a) N/Npl =0 and b) N/Npl =0,50 .............................................. 59
Fig. 63 Comparison of FE-results with the elastic and plastic cross-section capacity according to EN
1993-1-1 and the new design model for HEAA 300 S355 .................................................... 60
Fig. 64 Comparison of FE-results with the elastic and plastic cross-section capacity according to
EN 1993-1-1 and the new design model for RHS 250/150/6 S 235 and S 275 (BemModell
relates to Design Model)........................................................................................................... 61
Fig. 65 Cross-section resistances of FE-calculations for H-shaped sections vs. design model a) and
statistical evaluation of Monte-Carlo simulation b) and c) ........................................................ 62
Fig. 66 Structural system, loading (left) and diagrams of internal forces and moments (right) ............ 66
Fig. 67 Diagram of cross-section utilisation (left) and section class along the member length (right) . 66
Fig. 68 Explanation of the utilisation factor UF for mono-axial bending plus axial force ...................... 70
Fig. 69 Example for calculation of utilisation factor in CS-class 1 and 2, IPE 400 S 235 N+M
y
.......... 71
Fig. 70 Example for calculation of utilisation factor in acc. SEMI-COMP proposal, IPE 400 S 355
N+M
y
71
Fig. 71 Example for calculation of utilisation factor in CS-class 3 acc. SEMI-COMP proposal, IPE 400
S 355 N+M
y
.............................................................................................................................. 71
Fig. 72 Nomenclature of H- and I- sections .......................................................................................... 87
Fig. 73 Position of the PNA for pure strong-axis bending .................................................................... 88
Fig. 74 Position of the PNA for pure weak-axis bending ...................................................................... 88
Fig. 75 Possible positions of the PNA .................................................................................................. 89
Fig. 76 Factor for bending and compression ........................................................................................ 90
Fig. 77 Position of the PNA ................................................................................................................... 90
Fig. 78 Position of the PNA for compression and bending ................................................................... 91
Fig. 79 Positions of the PNA for tensile Force and weak axis bending ................................................ 91
Fig. 80 Factor for tip in compression .................................................................................................... 92
Fig. 81 Position of the PNA for biaxial bending .................................................................................... 93
Fig. 82 Selection of possible positions of the PNA ............................................................................... 94
Fig. 83 Nomenclature of an RHS-profile ............................................................................................... 94
118

Fig. 84 Position of the PNA for strong axis bending ............................................................................. 95
Fig. 85 Position of the PNA for weak axis bending............................................................................... 96
Fig. 86 Positions of the PNA for axial force and strong axis bending................................................... 96
Fig. 87 Possible positions of the PNA for biaxial bending .................................................................... 98
Fig. 88 Position of the PNA for reference values.................................................................................. 99
Fig. 89 Position of the PNA for reference values.................................................................................. 99
Fig. 90 Selection of possible positions of the PNA ............................................................................. 101
Fig. 91 Nomenclature of a Circular Hollow Section ............................................................................ 101
Fig. 92 Additional case of PNA-positions ........................................................................................... 102
Fig. 93 Curved plastic neutral axis [15] .............................................................................................. 102
Fig. 94 Definition of the Hesse-parameters ........................................................................................ 103
Fig. 95 Discretisation of a cross-section ............................................................................................. 103
Fig. 96 Plastified region in a cross-section ......................................................................................... 104
Fig. 97 Sectioning of Cross-section elements .................................................................................... 104
Fig. 98 Example 1 of the PNA Iteration Tool ...................................................................................... 104
Fig. 99 Example 2 of the PNA Iteration Tool ...................................................................................... 105
Fig. 100 Common language infrastructure ........................................................................................... 105
Fig. 101 Microsoft Visual Studio surface .............................................................................................. 106
Fig. 102 Simply supported beam with restraints .................................................................................. 106
Fig. 103 Program Flow Chart (selection) .............................................................................................. 107
Fig. 104 Different Sheets in the Workbook ........................................................................................... 108
Fig. 105 Entering the profile data ......................................................................................................... 108
Fig. 106 Cross-section data and steel grade ........................................................................................ 108
Fig. 107 Entering the boundary conditions ........................................................................................... 108
Fig. 108 Boundary conditions for an RHS for CHS profile ................................................................... 109
Fig. 109 Entering the loads ................................................................................................................... 109
Fig. 110 Specification of the LTBeam path .......................................................................................... 109
Fig. 111 Definition of axes and worked examples ................................................................................ 109
Fig. 112 Cross-section forces ............................................................................................................... 110
Fig. 113 Deflection of the cross-section ............................................................................................... 110
Fig. 114 The Member Check sheet ...................................................................................................... 110
Fig. 115 Choosing methods .................................................................................................................. 110
Fig. 116 Member Classification ............................................................................................................ 111
Fig. 117 Commentary of variables........................................................................................................ 111
Fig. 118 Cross-section values and reference values for member checks ........................................... 111
Fig. 119 Results of the member check ................................................................................................. 111
Fig. 120 Results of additional member checks ..................................................................................... 112
Fig. 121 Auxiliary Terms of the Method 1 ............................................................................................. 112
Fig. 122 Auxiliary Terms of the Method 2 ............................................................................................. 112
Fig. 123 Additional information sheet ................................................................................................... 112
Fig. 124 Additional information about the classification of the member ............................................... 113
Fig. 125 Sheet for cross-section check ................................................................................................ 113
Fig. 126 Entering Data for cross-section checks .................................................................................. 113
Fig. 127 Results of the classification and resistances .......................................................................... 114
Fig. 128 Results of the cross-section checks ....................................................................................... 114

119

D List of Tables

Table 1 WP leaders and partners .......................................................................................................... 5
Table 2 SEMI-COMP+seminars ......................................................................................................... 16
Table 3 SEMI-COMP+Additional dissemination activities .................................................................. 17
Table 4 Programme schedule ............................................................................................................. 17
Table 2 Frame design methods for use with member buckling checks .............................................. 21
Table 3 Frame design methods with full 2
nd
order moments ............................................................ 22
Table 4 Design approaches for members in frames ........................................................................... 23
Table 5 DESIGN APPROACHES FOR MEMBERS IN FRAMES COLUMN DESIGN .................... 29
Table 6 DESIGN APPROACHES FOR MEMBERS IN FRAMES ....................................................... 30
Table 7 DESIGN APPROACHES FOR MEMBERS IN FRAMES RAFTER DESIGN ...................... 31
Table 8 Classification for limit 3/4 in relation to the member checks according to EN 1993-1-1 and the
cross-section capacity of class 4 according to EN 1993-1-5.................................................. 37
Table 9 Background of c/t-limit values [7] ........................................................................................... 39
Table 10 c/t-limits of BS 5950-1 ............................................................................................................ 39
Table 11 Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for compression parts according to project SEMI-COMP
(modified Table 5.2 of EN 1993-1-1, sheet 1 of 3) ................................................................. 40
Table 12 Cross-section resistance of I and H sections according to EN 1993-1-1 ............................... 48
Table 13 Cross-section resistance of RHS and box sections according to EN 1993-1-1 ..................... 48
Table 14 Cross-section resistance of I and H sections according to new class 3 design model .......... 52
Table 15 Cross-section resistance of RHS and box sections according to new class 3 design model 52
Table 16 Values for N
Rk
=f
y
A
i
, M
i,Rk
=f
y
W
i
and M
i,Ed
......................................................................... 63
Table 17 Values of coefficients to adopt in the case of increased Class 3 resistance .......................... 64
Table 18 Member resistance for class 3-sections according to new design model .............................. 64
Table 19 DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR MEMBERS OF APPROACH A ........................................... 68
Table 20 DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR MEMBERS OF APPROACH B ........................................... 68
Table 21 Tabulated values for IPE-sections .......................................................................................... 73
Table 22 Tabulated values for HEAA-sections ...................................................................................... 74
Table 23 Tabulated values for HEA-sections ........................................................................................ 75

120

E List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

In the present report the abbreviations for the four project partners and the following other abbreviations
(which are in accordance with the contract) are in use:
TU Graz Graz University of Technology, Institute for Steel Structures & Shell Structures
ULg Universit de Lige, Dpartement M&S
F+W Feldmann +Weynand GmbH
ECCS European Convention for Constructional Steelwork

WH Working Hours
WP Work Package

F List of References

[1] European Committee for Standardisation, EN 1993-1-1: Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures
Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings, Brussels, 2005 +AC:2009.
Part 1.3: Supplementary rules for cold-formed members and sheeting, Brussels, 2006 +
AC:2009.
Part 1.5: Plated structures, Brussels, 2006 +AC:2009.
[4] Greiner, R., Kettler, M., Lechner, A., J aspart, J .-P., Boissonade, N., Bortolotti, E., Weynand, K.,
Ziller, C., rder, R.: SEMI-COMP: Plastic Member Capacity of Semi-Compact Steel Sections a
more Economic Design, RFSR-CT-2004-00044, Final Report, Research Programme of the
Research Fund for Coal and Steel RTD, 2008.
[5] Boissonade, N., Greiner, R., J aspart, J .-P., Lindner, J .: Rules for Member Stability in EN 1993-1-
1: Background documentation and design guidelines, ECCS Technical Committee 8 Structural
Stability, P 119, Brussels, 2006.
[6] Gardner, L., Nethercot, D. A.: Designers Guide to EN 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3: Design of steel
structures General rules and rules for buildings, Thomas Telford, SCI, 2005.
[7] European Steel Design Education Programme, ESDEP Course, WG 7: Lecture 7.2 Cross-Section
Classification.
[8] Greiner, R., Kettler, M., Lechner, A.: Design proposal for the transition of cross-section and
member resistances from class 2 to class 4, ECCS TC 8 2011-06-007.
[9] Kettler, M., Greiner, R.: Extended design rules for semi-compact sections cross section
resistance of hot-rolled and welded I-sections, Eurosteel 2011, Budapest, 2011.
121

[10] Herbrand, M.: Querschnittstragfhigkeit und Klassifizierung von doppelsymmetrischen
Querschnitten im elastisch-plastischen Bereich nach Eurocode und Semi-Comp-Ansatz,
Diplomarbeit RWTH Aachen, Feldmann +Weynand GmbH, Aachen, 2011.
[11] Greiner, R., Lechner, A., Kettler, M., J aspart, J .-P., Weynand, K., Ziller, C., rder, R.: SEMI-
COMP+: Valorisation Action of Plastic Member Capacity of Semi-Compact Steel Sections a
more Economic Design, RFS2-CT-2010-00023, Background Documentation, Research
Programme of the Research Fund for Coal and Steel RTD, 2011.
[12] Rubin, H.: Interaktionsbeziehungen fr doppeltsymmetrische I- und Kasten-Querschnitte bei
zweiachsiger Biegung und Normalkraft, Stahlbau, vol. H. 6, pp. 174181, 1978.
[13] Rubin, H.: Interaktionsbeziehungen fr doppeltsymmetrische I- und Kasten-Querschnitte bei
zweiachsiger Biegung und Normalkraft, Stahlbau, vol. H. 5, pp. 145151, 1978.
[14] Li, G. Q., Li, J in-J un: Advanced analysis and design of steel frames, Chichester: J ohn Wiley,
2007.
[15] Yang, Y.-B. et al.: Yield Surfaces for I-Sections with Bimoments, J ournal of Structural
Engineering, vol. 115, no. 12, pp. 3044-3058, 1989.
[16] Osterrieder, P., Werner, F., Kretzschmar, J .: Biegedrillknicknachweis Elastisch-Plastisch fr
gewalzte I-Querschnitte, Stahlbau, vol. J g. 67, H. 10, pp. 794801, 1998.
[17] Kindmann, R., Frickel, J .: Elastische und plastische Querschnittstragfhigkeit. Grundlagen,
Methoden, Berechnungsverfahren, Beispiele. Berlin: Ernst & Sohn , 2002.
[18] Maier, W., Weiler, P.: Bemessungshilfen fr den Nachweis von Stabquerschnitten im plastischen
Zustand nach DIN 18 800, November 1990. Kln: Stahlbau-Verlagsges. (Forschungsbericht /
Deutscher Ausschu fr Stahlbau, 1997,2), 1997.
[19] Rubin, H.: Grundlage fr die N-My-Mz Interaktionsbeziehungen von I-Querschnitten. Bernoulli
oder Mw=0?, Stahlbau, vol. J g. 69, H. 10, pp. 807812, 2000.
[20] Rubin, H.: Zur plastischen Tragfhigkeit von 3-Blech-Querschnitten unter Normalkraft,
doppelter Biegung und Wlbkrafttorsion, Stahlbau, vol. J g. 74, H. 1, S. 47 61, 2005.
[21] Sanal, Z.: Mathematik fr Ingenieure. Grundlagen, Anwendungen in Maple und C++, 2nd ed.
Wiesbaden: Vieweg +Teubner (Studium), 2009.
[22] Deitel, P., Deitel, H.: C# 2010 for Programmers, 1st ed.: Pearson Education, Inc., 2011.
[23] Carter, E., Lippert, E.: Visual Studio Tool for Office 2007, 2nd ed.: Addison-Wesley, 2009.
[24] Centre Technique Industriel de la Construction Mtallique: LTBeam software version 1.0.10,
www.cticm.com, 2011
[25] Guggenberger, W.: Effect of Bending Torsional Coupling on the Elastoplastic Limit Behaviour
of Steel Beams under Combined Loading, 9th Nordic Steel Construction Conference NSCC,
Helsinki - Finland, J une 2001.
[26] Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen: Abaqus 6.4 Users Manual, Pawtucket, R.I., 2003.
[27] Kettler, M, Elastic-Plastic Cross-Sectional Resistance of Semi-Compact H- and Hollow Sections,
PhD thesis, Graz University of Technology, Institute for Steel Structures and Shell Structures,
2008.
[28] Kindmann, R., Frickel, J .: Elastische und plastische Querschnittstragfhigkeit Grundlagen,
Methoden, Berechnungsverfahren, Beispiele, Ernst & Sohn Verlag, 2002.
[29] Kindmann, R., Wolf, C.: Ausgewhlte Versuchsergebnisse und Erkenntnisse zum Tragverhalten
von Stben aus I- und U- Profilen, Stahlbau 73, 2004, Issue 9, pp. 683-692.
122

[30] Kindmann, R. Kraus, M., Wolf, C.: Cross-section carrying capacity of hot rolled I-sections,
Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Steel and Composite Structures, EUROSTEEL
2008, Graz, Ljubljana, Vienna, 2008.
[31] Kraus, M.: Zur Anwendung der Wlbkrafttorsion auf Systeme mit Wlbfedern, Werner-Verlag
GmbH, 1993.
[32] Krenk, S., Damkilde, L.: Warping of Joints in I-Beam Assemblages, J ournal of Engineering
Mechanics 117, 1991, No. 11, pp. 2457-2474.
[33] Petersen, C.: Statik und Stabilitt der Baukonstruktionen, Vieweg Verlag, 1982.
[34] Roik, K., Sedlacek, G.: Theorie der Wlbkrafttorsion unter Bercksichtigung der sekundren
Schubverformungen Analogiebetrachtung zur Berechnung des querbelasteten Zugstabes,
Stahlbau 35, 1966, Issue 2, pp. 43-52.
[35] Rubin, H.: Grundlage fr die N-M
y
-M
z
-Interaktion von I-Querschnitten, Stahlbau 69, 2000, Issue
10, pp. 807-812.
[36] Rubin, H.: Das Tragverhalten von I-Trgern unter N-, M
y
-, und M
z
-Beanspruchung nach
Fliezonentheorie I. ind II. Ordnung unter Bercksichtigung der Torsionseinflsse, Stahlbau 70,
2001, Issue 11, pp. 846-856.
[37] Rubin, H.: Zur plastischen Tragfhigkeit von 3-Blech-Querschnitten unter Normalkraft,
doppelter Biegung und Wlbkrafttorsion, Stahlbau 74, 2005, Issue 1, pp. 47-61.
[38] Rubin, H.: Wlbkrafttorsion von Durchlauftrgern mit konstantem Querschnitt unter
Bercksichtigung sekundrer Schubverformungen, Stahlbau 74, 2005, Issue 11, pp. 826-842.
[39] Rubin, H.: Vereinfachte Berechnung der Wlbkrafttorsion von Stben mit dnnwandigen
Hohlquerschnitten, Bauingenieur 81, 2006, pp. 538-544.
[40] Rubin, H.: Torsions-Querschnittswerte fr rechteckige Hohlprofile nach EN 10210-2:2006 und
EN 10219-2:2006, Stahlbau 76, 2007, Issue 1, pp. 21-33.
[41] Rubin, H.: Zur Wlbkrafttorsion geschlossener Querschnitte und ihrer Irrtmer Einfhrung,
Grundlagen, Beispiele, 29. Stahlbauseminar (2007), Fachhochschule Biberach, Band 140.
[42] Saal, H.: Biegedrillknicken von Hallenrahmen, 13. Stahlbauseminar (1991), Fachhochschule
Biberach, Band 62.
[43] Salzgeber, G.: Nichtlineare Berechnung von rumlichen Stabtragwerken aus Stahl, Institut fr
Stahlbau, Holzbau & Flchentragwerke, Technische Universitt Graz, Institutsverffentlichung
der Dissertation, 2000.
[44] Tong, G.S., Yan, X.X., Zhang, L.: Warping and bimoment transmission through diagonally
stiffened beam-to-column joints, J ournal of Constructional Steel Research 61, 2005, pp. 749-763.
[45] Vayas, I.: Interaktion der plastischen Grenzschnittgren doppelsymmetrischer I-Querschnitte,
Stahlbau 69, 2000, Issue 9, pp. 693-706.

123

G Appendices

The following documents are provided as attachment to the present publishable report and can be
downloaded from www.stahlbau.tugraz.at/semicompplus.

(1) DESIGN GUIDELINES ENGLISH
SC+_Design_Guidelines_English.pdf

(2) DESIGN GUIDELINES GERMAN
SC+_Design_Guidelines_Deutsch.pdf

(3) DESIGN GUIDELINES FRENCH
SC+_Design_Guidelines_French.pdf

(4) DESIGN GUIDELINES ITALIAN
SC+_Design_Guidelines_Italian.pdf

(5) DESIGN GUIDELINES PORTUGUESE
SC+_Design_Guidelines_Portuguese.pdf

(6) SEMICOMP MEMBER DESIGN - SOFTWARE
SemiComp Member Design_1.0.10_Setup.zip

(7) BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO DESIGN GUIDELINES ENGLISH
SC+_BackgroundDocumentation_March2012.pdf

(8) SEMINAR PRESENTATIONS LONG SEMINAR (4 hours)
SC+ Part1A+B_long.pdf
SC+ Part2_long.pdf
SC+ Part3.pdf
SC+ Part4.pdf

124
European Commission

EUR 25913 Valorisation Action of Plastic Member Capacity of Semi-Compact Steel Sections
a more Economic Design (SEMI-COMP+)

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union

2013 124 pp. 21 29.7 cm

ISBN 978-92-79-29312-2
doi:10.2777/96448

EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate G Industrial Technologies
Unit G.5 Research Fund for Coal and Steel
E-mail: rtd-steel-coal@ec.europa.eu
RTD-PUBLICATIONS@ec.europa.eu
Contact: RFCS Publications
European Commission
B-1049 Brussels
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS
Free publications:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
at the European Unions representations or delegations. You can obtain their
contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax
to +352 2929-42758.
Priced publications:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).
Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the
European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice
of the European Union):
via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union
(http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

Valorisation action of
plastic member capacity of semi-compact
steel sections a more economic design
(SEMI-COMP+)
doi:10.2777/96448
V
a
l
o
r
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

a
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

m
e
m
b
e
r

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

o
f

s
e
m
i
-
c
o
m
p
a
c
t

s
t
e
e
l

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

a

m
o
r
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

d
e
s
i
g
n

(
S
E
M
I
-
C
O
M
P
+
)
E
U
E
U
R

2
5
9
1
3
K
I
-
N
A
-
2
5
9
1
3
-
E
N
-
N
The objective of this project is the dissemination of knowledge gained through
the former European research project SEMI-COMP on semi-compact steel
sections. The obtained results demonstrated substantial reserves in load-
carrying capacity, which so far cannot be utilised by a designer using the current
Eurocode 3. Considering increasing use of high-strength steel grades, the
problem becomes more severe. Implementation into amended design rules of
codes seems to be a subject of priority.
For the purpose of dissemination of the SEMI-COMP results the work was
divided into the following main steps:
Completing and supplementing the basic findings of SEMI-COMP by further
investigation of the warping end conditions on the plastic member capacity,
by extending the cross-section shapes to such with high webs governing the
local buckling behaviour and by developing correct limit ratios c/t for internal
parts of sections.
Preparing dissemination material as Design Guidelines, comprehensive
background, worked examples and tabulated resistance values.
Developing a member design software for practical use covering design to
the current code and to the new Semi-Comp rules.
Organising seminars in different European countries together with the
presentation and elaboration of the seminar material as well as promotion
of the new rules in technical committees.
Keywords:
semi-compact sections, Class 3, steel structures, cross-section capacity,
member behaviour, statistical evaluation, Eurocode 3, seminars, design
guidelines, design software
Studies and reports
Research and
Innovation EUR 25913 EN

Kina25913enn 00

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Kina25913enn 00

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Valorisation action of

plastic member capacity of semi-compact

for a linear bending moment diagram with 0,35

has to be calculated according to EN 1993-1-5 [3], table 4.2. Then the

and 0,5 > (21)

and 0,5 < (22)

and 0,5 > (23)

and 0,5 < (24)

and 0,5 > (66)

and 0,5 < (67)

and 0,5 > (68)

and 0,5 < (69)

and 0,5 > (82)

and 0,5 > (83)

and 0,5 > (87)

and 0,5 > (88)

needed to develop full

Anda mungkin juga menyukai