Lehigh Preserve
Fritz Laboratory Reports Civil and Environmental Engineering
1966
Recommended Citation
Tall, L., "Welded built-up columns, April 1966" (1966). Fritz Laboratory Reports. Paper 65.
http://preserve.lehigh.edu/engr-civil-environmental-fritz-lab-reports/65
This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Civil and Environmental Engineering at Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Fritz Laboratory Reports by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact
preserve@lehigh.edu.
elded Built-Up olumnl
LE IL ·
FRITZ ENG!NEERING by
LAiORATORY LIBRARY. Lambert Tall
by
Lambert Tall
April 1966
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2.1 FORMATION 4
3. COMPRESSION MEMBERS 18
3 • 2 WELDED COLUMNS 21
4. SUMMARY 36
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 42
6. NOMENCLATURE 43
8. REFERENCES 88
249.29
1. INTRODUCTION
of Task Group I of the Column Research Council. This Task Group origi-
which References 1 and 2 were the preliminary report and the summary
report respectively.
cance. These welded columns were fabricated from TIM plates and were
from 6" x 6" to 10" X 10" in size with platep from 3/8" to 3/4" thick-
plates. This recent work and its preliminary conclusions are des-
cribed briefly.
stresses on column strength. Based upon these ideas, and using the
-1-
249.29 -2-
column strength curve was prepared by the Column Research Council for
rolled columns of ASTM A7 steel, and this column curve was adopted as
the design curve for all columns by the American Institute of Steel
safety.
obtained from the stub column test * reflects the presence of residual
stresses. This is evident from Figo la where, for any fiber, when the
sum of the applied stress and the compressive residual stress acting on
that fiber becomes equal to the yield stress, yielding will commence in
residual stresses.
The column curve in Fig. ld results from the use of the stress-
strain relationship (Fig. lb) and the tangent modulus concept for buck~
ling. The tangent modulus curve (Fig. lc) may be used in the computa-
they must be regarded as the basic column, since all column specifica-
generally of ASTM A7 or A36 steel, but with some information for other
grades also.
249.29
it is only in the past decade that it was realized that they are a
and plates. This had lead to a rather complete study of their forma-
achieve.
2.1 FORMATION
the plastic deformations in welded shapes always occurs during the process
-4-
-5-
deformations result from the fact that some parts of the shape cool much
cooling portions.
"thick" plates and for "heavy" shapes. Both the manual shielded-arc
The two shapes which may be regarded as basic are the H-shape
and the box-shape, Fig$ 2 0 These shapes are made up of welded plates
lar in size o This means that the residual stress distribution can be
Plates
up to 10" wide and 1" thick are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, and in a welded
plate, 16" wide in Fig" 5. From these figures, it is seen that the dis~
equal to the yield point of the weld metal, generally about 50% higher
greater at the edge than at the weld. The second and third passes in-
creased the edge stress by about 50%0 (Figure 4). The experimental
along the plate, the residual stress is also uniform along the length.
Plates smaller than about ~ inch in thickness show the same longi-
249 29
0 -7-
tudinal residual stress on both faces e The welding process changes the
the most important change is that the yield stress is increased about
tude and distribution for plates of A7 and A36 steel, welded either manu-
AS14 steel have been studied. (9» Table 1 gives the estimated values
wide plate with a weld along the centerline, the residual stress would
be about 52 ksi tension at the center, and about 23 ksi at the edges.
plate thickness; actually, weld sizes and plate thickness are inherent
Shapes
and 6 for welded plates and welded shapes respectively, it is seen that
within about 15%0 Thus, the residual stress in a welded shape may be
the built-up shape. (The only reservation is that the free arm, or
away from the weld o ) Figure 8 shows the residual stress distribution
predicted by the use of Table 1 for a 10 x 10 inch box shape; this esti-
the same a~eas of the cross section o Welded box shapes have high ten-
sile residual stress at the corners (that is, at the welds) and com-
the welded box shapes, since welding is the final operation and has the
tips, that is, at the weld, (10) See Fig, 9. A similar effect can be
obtained merely by placing a line of weld along the flange tips, (4)
of heat input. Thus, after cooling, the flame-cut edge will have resi-
dual stresses 0,£ tension. When such flame-cut plates are used in the
residual stress distribution into the shape, one with tensile residual
str~sses at the weld, and with some modification to the residual stress
residual stress at the flame-cut edge will depend on the width of the
with the edg~s relati vely far from the weld, will show little<,change at
shape in Fig. 10 where the residual stresses are compared for A36
the hulls of ships and submarines. Unlike the "thin" plates considered
249.29 -10-
ing gantries for rockets and space vehicles. In addition to the differ-
{]I
ence in thickness, heavy shapes differ from the lighter ones also in
that the ratio of area of weld to that of parent metal is smaller for
heat input for heavy shapes than there is for lighter shapes, and so
magnitude.
A44l steel made up of TIM plates for a groove weld and a fillet weld
dual stress through the thickness of the ~lange and web of Specimen
comparatively high, similar for both the fillet and groove welds, and
not less than in smaller shapes o . This is not in line with what was
Column Cl. The former, with groove welds, has a higher heat input,
expected.
the whole topic of welded plates and heat input and presented a step-
by-step method to compute both thermal and residual stresses for any
that is, the residual stress is that existing when the plate or shape
depends upon the thickness and width of the plate, and speed of weld-
ing, the position of the weld, the thermal properties of the weld, and
constant with respect to the moving heat source 0 The computed tempera-
for this same plate and heat input are shown in Fig. 178 The effect
away from the weld; there is no direct relationship between heat in-
put and residual stress as there is between heat input and temperature
dual stress at the weld because this stress is limited by the, yield
not concerned 'with the thermal stress history, this represents a signi-
The residual stress set up depends on the elastic portion of the total
cooling temperature strain for each element when it reaches its maximum
temperature.
method.
the residual stresses in thi.ck plates, both the usual surface residual
stresses, and the residual stresses through the thickness o The use of
impractical for such plates. The two-step method and its application
2490,29 -14-
limited role in the final residual stress magnitude, and thus only the
·
maXlmum temperature 'enve 1ope lS
· nee d e d to b e use d·In t h e computatlono
· (12)
a knowledge of the heat flow from the welding, that is, the heat input
to the relative plate thicknesses, and that for very thick plates the
heat is divided equally among the h'eat sinks (that is, the plates)
for the large magnitudes of residual stress measured in the heavy welded
stresses for a heavy plate or shape is given in Fig. 21 where the resi-
14W426 shape. The high magnitudes of residual stress in this shape are
been mentioned above. Probably one mechanical property more than any
other plays a dominant role in the overall picture, and that is the
The "yield point" and the "yield strength" have been defined
by ASTM(13) and are given in the Nomenclature below. The "yield stress
rate remains constant.. The "yield stress" is a general term which en-
The influence of strain rate on the yield stress level was demonstrated Q
The "static yield stress lev'el", (J ,was defined as the yield stress
Y8
(14\
level for a zero strain rate o ) It was shown to be a basic value
for the yield value were conducted, and the values obtained are re-
One aspect of the yield value was studied in detail both for this
study and in collaboration with other studies; this was the effect of
Relationships were determined: between the ratio (0 clio ) and the strain
y ys
249 29
0 -17-
rate. These are not simple relationsh~ps and were determined through
95% of all test results ,lie between the two outside lineso
strain rates and very slowly at the higher strain rates included in this
curves all lie in.a narrow band over a wide range of strain rates.
cry d - 0
ys
= 3 2 + -0.001 ~
0
This expression may then be used to predict the static: yield stress
tion is valid for the range of strain rate ,ZOO < ~ < 1600. Since the
length per second may be' used in place of strain rate in the equation.
3 0 COMPRESSION MEMBERS
on its slenderness ratioo Only very slender columns will buckle elasti-
cally, and their buckling strength is defined by the Euler equation. (15)
(15 16)
The reduced modulus concept ' had been regarded as the
correct buckling theory for columns in the inelastic range until 1947
Research Council (18) a decade and a half ago, it was shown that the key
external load o
start to bend o The upper bound is the reduced modulus load since it
between these two limits o Generally, test results will tend to approxi-
mate the tangent modulus load o Further, since it is a lower bound, the
tangent modulus load has been used as the basis for a column strength
-18-
249.29 -19-
the bifurcation load, that is, the load at which the theoretically
column will deflect and will then continue to deflect laterally and to
take further load. (15,17) The "ultimate load" is the maximum load a
column can carry; it is reached gradually unlike the buckling load which
is an instantaneous phenomenon.
the Euler ,curve to the yLeld value, it was the practice in the past to
tangent modulus and reduced modulus theories for column buckling de-
fine buckling loads differing from those for the same column free of
stresses will have certain fibers yield before others when the column
longer homogeneous and the general equations for tangent modulus and
solution for column buckling strength may be obtained with the tangent
in fact, exist for most structural steels. (15) Thus, it was shown(2l)
Rolled Columns
carbon steel are prepared, it will be seen that the straight-line and
the weak and strong axes respectively. (2) The ultimate loads carried
for bending about both axes. It is the first column curve based on
structural carbon and high strength steels (yield points from 33 ksi
to 50 ksi).
depend mainly on the geom~try, and very little on the yield point of
Except for the very s lender co lumns, higher- c'olumn"" stren gths· 'are'- ob,taiited
1
most simply by using steel with a higher yield point. Hence, the use
the higher yield point and of the relatively decreased effect of resi-
( 23 24)
dual stresses. ' Figure 27 presents some experimental results on
weak axis column tests of the same cross-sectional shape for three
dicted by the same techniques as for rolled shapes with cooling resi-
the ta,n-gent modulus concept gives too conservative a result and there-
lower strengths.
columns.
load (in excess of the tangent modulus load) for the column in the
fectly general solution for the ultimate load except for very simple
column shapes which do not contain residual stresses and where the
manner and with the same approximations as tho~e used to determine the
account must be taken of the fact that the eccentrically loaded column
Ref o 4, and are given in detail in Refs o 11, 25, 26, 30 throu'gh.
35'.
10" x 10"). (27) The theoretical ultimate loads are compared with the
Figo 30, in comparison with the eRe curve adopted for design by the
AISC. The reason for the somewhat lower strengths is twofold: the
out-of-straightness.
reached; the process is more accelerated for the welded column than
for the rolled column -- for the welded column, the maximum load is
F_l.g
~ 0
21D(1,27)
below. For shorter columns, (L/r from 30 to 60.) the box shape tends
to be stronger than the H-shape bent about the weak axis, 'since box-
shapes retain the corners in the elastic condition throughout the life
a result of the weld. (For the same reason, box shapes are able to
sustain the maximum load for much larger deflections than the H-shapes. (11»
lose a major part of their rigidity very early under load, since the
residual stresses furthest from the axis of bending. Such a benefit may
and H-shapes are compared with their welded counterparts. In every case,
rolled 8~31 shape before and after reinforcing by welding cover p1ates(lO)
-25-
(Fig. 32c), and compare the Japanese welded H-shape before and after
~.
t h e d epos1t1on 0 f a b ea d 0 f we 1d a 1ong t h e f1 ange t1pS,
· F·~go 32 c. (36)
of the flange tips or due to the use of flame-cut plates leads to higher
columns made from either machined or flame-cut plates is the same, since
the process of welding does not change the favorable residual stress
rolled and welded o These factors may play an important part i~ design.
Those to be considered here are the shape of the cross section, higher
For the low slenderness ratios (L/r up to about 50) when out of straight-
then this material will yield first under load, leading to column failure
tained most simply by using steel of higher yield strengtho This was
considered for rolled shapes above, (Fig. 27), and the same general
comments apply for welded shapes, as may be seen in Figs. 33 and 340
the test results shown in Figo 300 The expected maximum out-of-
tions(22) will reduce the column strength about 25 percent below that
indicated by the eRC curve in the medium slenderness ratios (L/r about
not as great.
residual stresses. (37) This means that findings based on rolled mem-
have been modified by cold bendingo At present, there are no test data
on the effect of cold-straightening on welded columns. The effect of
ening process and changes the residual stress pattern completelyo In any
the higher grades of steel can be placed where the most strength is
needed 0
a multi-story frame would use high-strength steel columns for the lower
stories, and mild-steel columns for the upper stories. On the other
hand, the hybrid member uses different grades of steel within the
member itself -- a column section would use the high strength material
strength of hybrid columns(35) have shown that, except for very short
shape were investigated, one with A5l4 steel flanges, flame-cut, and
either A36 or A44l steel web, and the other with either A44l liM or A44l
flame-cut steel flanges, and A36 steel web. The residual stress distri-
bution for these hybrid shapes are the same as those of homogeneous
shapes. (35) Thus, the test results shown in Fig. 35 may be expected
Figure 35 shows the computed tangent modulus curves for each test
might be more economical because the lower-strength steel in. the web
proper bit ratios have been chosen; this is discussed below, Section 3.6.
cover plates to the flanges often the structure is· in use and so
the vicinity of the weld. The mechanical properties in the major por-
tion of the section are not affected' enough to reduce the strength of
the section. This holds true only when the weld is deposited along
with a splice, then the area affected by the weld becomes very large
Although the results presented thus far show that some welded
that this is necessarily true for all welded columns. Those results
plates. They were H-shapes whose maximum size was 9" x 10" with 3/4"
stances it has also been noted that the high tensile stresses at the
edges of such plates are not decreased substantially when they are
welded into shapes (see Fig. 10). Thus the shape retains the favor-
thick plates may be joined with welds that are considerably smaller
with respect to total shape area than is the case with thinner plates.
of smaller magnitude.
studies were undertaken into welded columns with flame-cut plates and
Fig. 37 for 6" x 7" and 9" x 10" welded H-shapes, both flame-cut plates
This pilot study indicates that welded shapes fabricated from flame-cut
plates are stronger than their liM counterparts and may even approach a
of the test program is shown above in Figs. 11, 12, and 13; based on
shape are available. (12) This is shown in Fig. 38 for a 14" x 15"
excess of that of a small 9" x 10" welded column. When the varia-
249.29 -32-
the tangent modulus load is quite high in the lower slenderness ratios,
but not for the higher slenderness ratios. That is, in the range of
the strength of rolled W shapes~ For higher strength steels, the in-
have been underway simultaneously with other phases of the overall in-
the component plates of welded shapes. The studies have been both
high strength steel have been of more interest than that of, structural
carbon steel, since the use of high strength steel leads to thinner
plates.
both, 'welding and (',ouling, for I',lates ·u.nd~~~c 'V8:r:':LOU.8 edge c(;ndit.ion,8~
and pIa s tic: b l1c.lc.l i ng ., :['0 reI as tic b u c~ k, 1. ing () f a p la, t E; "('1 1/ i t~1 re 8 i d, 1.1 a 1
evaluated frorn th,~. l'esidual str,BSS .distribut.ion; ~figso 39 ar!.d 4·00 11112:
posB:Lbil:Lty th.ut a plate with residual. stresses may l)"u.ck.le t<\r':Ltl"iou,t any
extern.B.l load is ShO~Ntl i.n Figs 0 39 arid, 40 1I This fact: 'f.;~'K:'Pla:LnB vd:-()l ·8.
plate can distort due only to welding. Tests showed, (Figs~ 39 and 40)
buckling of plates, this was not the Ca8E~ :tOT '81a.st.i.e.~p18A~ti('. buc"klin.go
on the aS8'U.ITJ.ption t'hat no plat,e buc.kling oecurs u,nt::1.1 th,'2; yie~ld load
of the secti.on is rea(,:hied and that the plate bu.ek.ling Ctlr'\Tr.:~ inte-rse.cts
tile yield line (line AI-) i.n Figo 39) at ?O!~ of thE: bit ratio for t118
tive for A514 steel, since residual stresses playa much smaller role
with the higher strength steels. (34) Although the pilot tests indi-
cated that the AISC bit ratios may be slightly optimistic, there seems
to be no reason for not using them for A514 steel o Thus, the AISC
ness ratioo
factor of safetY9
which a column would fall into one category or another. Such categories
due to: method of fabrication, yield point of the material, edge pre-
effects. Upon these results will depend the specific design recommenda-
tions.
4. SUMMARY
Column Strength
tion curve in the column curve for initially straight axially loaded
Residual Stress
from the rolled counterparts in that the shape of the pattern tends to
-36-
249.29 -37~
may be estimated from tables of stress values prepared from this study.
high, and was not less than that measured in smaller welded shapes.
249.29 -38-
the thick rolled component plates. (Section 203, Figs. 11 and 12.)
12. The effect of heat input dominates all other effects in the
also the thermal stresses, and the two-step method which· presents a
19.)
Mechanical Properties
static yield stress of steel and the strain rate of testing. (Section
15. Yield stress has a small but negligible effect on the magni-
of the weld,. The yield stress of the weld metal is about 50% higher
than that of the parent material for structural carbon steel. (Sec-
tion 2.2.) (On the other hand, weld metal in A5l4 steel will have a
lower yield stress than the parent material when a lower strength e1ec-
249.29 -39-
trode is used.)
Welded Columns
characteristics are different for such welded columns from those for
bent about the weak axis because of a more favorable residual stress
have ,indicated that heavy welded columns may have strengths greater
than small welded columns for slenderness ratios less than about 50.
the other hand the~e ~s evidence that other classes of welded columns
are stronger th~n the minimum observe~ up to the present time. The
present crit~cal need is to carry out st~dies which will enable one
commendations.
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
guidance.
ing, for his helpful criticism and advice in the preparation of this
leagues who assisted in various parts of the study and to whose work
-42-
249.29
6. NOMENCLATURE
E modulus of elasticity
Et tangent modulus
I moment of inertia
r radius of gyration
t thickness of plate
€ strain
stress·
residual stress
-43-
-44-
Yield point: The yield point is the first stress in the material,
less than the maximum attainable stress, at which an in-
crease in strain occurs without an increase in stress.
(ASTM A370-6lT)
Yield strength: The yield strength is the stress corresponding
to the load which produces in a material, under the speci-
fied conditions of the test, a specified limiting strain.
(ASTM A370~61T)
Yield stress level: The yield stress level is the average stress
during actual yielding in the plastic range; this stress
remains fairly constant9 When the stress is not constant
it is taken as the stress corresponding to a strain of
0.5 percent.
249.29
-45-
Table 1 Average of Experimental Values of Residual Stress Distribution inWelded~Plates
JOy
8000
Web 44 42 36 25 5.0
F;
10,000
Cover Plate 55 53 45 31 >5.0
Jay
N
+'
.
\.0
N
\0
f. rCoupon
residual FYJ -r---
stress FP -' - [stu b I column
applied I
J
stress -I
I
E Et L
r-
I
~
(X)
I
249.29 ~49-
•• •
:.1,' ' ._':.,:',' "
': I
B,ox-S'hope
, . ,
Residual
Stress
In
-51 .... ,..,."
5-0
ksi . P-LATES AFTER WELD-ING
-5~
n=n-" .......,..,... III I I ~ Ai I II I I I ~ ......-rrTTl ~ .Atflill []J
5J ~
~~
Y
~~, J
All V Welds
-51 ~ Oll.r:tb.~~~TIIII~
..A1111111 ~
5J Double-V
Weld .
Double..;V Weld Il
4
II
Edge Weld I II
/4 . Edge Weld
-:1 ~~ ~
1/4
.A1ITJ-.J:rrrn,...,
~
II Edge WeJd
' '~'
--=----'..... Ii
1/4 d- E.dgeWeld
o
,
5
I
Inch••
10
I
I
VI
-Fig. 3 Residual Stresses- and W~lded Plates oI
249 •. 29 -51-
~8 Single -V Weld
A 7 Steel
-16 ~12
3
Passes
3
.. 22 (ave.) - 26 (ave.)
o , . tI
\\ I
/
ksi
\ I
\ I --0-- ,Top Face
50
\ I
\\ 1+51 (ave.)
.
~
+50 Residual,
Stress
6x7H In
6 )( 1/2 Flange ksf 6 x 6 Box
i
9 x 10 H lOx 10 Box
9 x 3/4 Flang
9 x 1/2 web
1/4 In. fillet weld
A7 Steel
A 7 Steel
o 5 10
I, " I, ..' I
Inches
.
+'
\0
N
\0
11~2U
Side I
J2 "
jW-==1.==10"~.l'
ksi L 3/8 11 Fillet Weld
I , I. I I I
20 I I
60 40 20 0 20
o
ksi
20
40 ,~
20~
q,
40 0.::: ,tP---J '
y'
·-60 I
0-
20
40·
ksi
40
20
o
20
40
f'J)
<U
Cf.)
til
Q)
J..4
+J
Cf)
~
(U
='
'"d
.r-f
f'J)
Q) Q)
-c
.- ~
0 Q)
-c en c:
0 +- c
C\I
I I I
I I .-
en :J Q)
4-1
0
VI
c: 0 ::E r-4
ttl
f'J)
..:.:: J...t
0 <1 ~
~
0'\
.
b{)
.r-f
~
'I
N
+'
\0
I'V
\0
30
-30
Res-idual
Stress
/ In
IA7 Steel I KSI IA514 Steel I
<.to w. ~1..) I
249.29 -58-
v
11
COLUMN C3: 14 x 15" H (A36)
-30.1 'GROOVE WELD
-28.9 .
, ~
-''0.... .,.t:f
'q
,\
P"
\ .
b.
+38.4
Stress
Scale
o 30ksi
• Top Surface
~
o 3 in. ---0-- Bottom Surface
'Dimension + 49.2
Scale I
p
I
I
I '
-13.9
-28.5 -32.9
-29.7
p -10.2
" .
\
\ /
\ 1+27.6
\ I
Stress
+41.4 b I
Scale +47.6
o 30 ksi
• Top Surface
~
o ' 3 in. +55.8 ~-o-- Bottom Surface
Dimension
Scale I
I
+30.3 P
I
I +49.3
-11.4
""12.6
-27.4
-31.5
COLUMN 01
14 x15 H, (U. M.)
A 36 ,Fillet Weld
Thickness :.
-40
Surface:
o 50
I I I
Outside Face ksi
- ....- - Inside Face
COLUMN C9
14 x 15 H t (F. C..)
A36 Fillet Weld
Thickness
-40
Surface
o 50
,., I I
Outside Face ksi
Isothems Showing
Tempera,ture
Distribution
Temperature distribution
at C,rO$S- section shown.
\
1500
\
\
\
\
,.... \
LL.
' ... .j. -
.......,
0
\ \
e" x ~2 II Plate
Z 1000
\\\\ A7 Steel
lIJ
a::
:::)
t-
<t
0::
'\ 3/8 II Center Weld
~'\
I.LI
Q.
:E
LLJ
I-
.~"~\
5'00
~ " ..
\
\ "~ t=<D
t=O \, "'~",
t=50.....
"- ,~
~-
t - 200 sec.
y
0 2 3 4
40
e"x 1/2 " Plate
A 7 Steel
30
,
\
3/8 " Center weld
\
\
\
\ ~t·50
20 \ /; t=IOO
\
\
1/1
1--- .....
\
10
,
..'\ n ,
\
\ / I
~I ,
, I
I
(f)
\ t =0
~ 0
z I t = 300
(J) /.
UJ
IJJ -10 /
a::: /
.1- I
Cf)-
I
..J I
<t I
:E -20 /
a::: I
w /
:r:: I
l- I t =a> seconds
;
-30 (Residual Stress)
40
O. I 2 3 4
DISTANCE FROM ct IN INCHES
11
TENSION Edge. Welded 12 x 314 II Plate
Iii
40 ..............
,-
~;
,~
20 I
.. RESIDUAL I
:
:
STRESS
IN 0 "
I
12"
KSI I
I Distance from
-20
I
/ edge in Inches
~
" ...._ . . _tII'
~, ~8" Weld
-40 Heat' Input == 5.9 Kw
COMPRESSION 3/4 " Weld
Heat Input = 11.8 Kw
THEORETICAL DISTRIBUTIQN
Theory:
TOp face
- ..- - Bottom foce
Experimental:
• Top face
---0- -- Bottom face
-30
Top face
(side welded first)
Ksi Theory:
+50
• Top face
---- Bottom face
Experimental:
• Top face
o Bottom face
-30
• •
Fig. 20 Residual Stresses in Butt-Welded Thick Plate
249.29 -68-
Flanges
o ksi
Web
+6
30
~Mean 38.1 ksi
20 I
Frequency I
I
80 Specimens
°/0 10 I
I
0
35 40 45
1.20 "'ys ksi
CTyd
-
1.15 crys =1+O.0214!°·26
o-yd
____ Iff 10
crys ·
1.05
1.00----------------------a.....----------..a---
o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
E micro inch/in/sec.
CTXd .n
·=I+k E
1.15 o-ys
1.10
CTyd
CTys
1.05
I.OO~_--a...-_------_--&.._-~----_----a-_---,---
4
(cryd -crys ) o-yd - o-ys = C E'm
ksi 2
Load
Deflection
8
30
(J 20
ksi
1O
H-
0 50 100 150
L
r
(0) Weak Axis
30
20
(J
ksi
10 -jE
0"'------...-..-----....-.--------------
50 100 150
L
r
( b) Strong Axis
30
CRC
20
(J
ksi
10
o 50 100 150
L
r
(c) Design Curve
.Fig. 26 Column Curves and Test Results tor Rolled H-Shapes (A7 Steel)
249.29 -74-
1.0 .........--~-------..------.
a
o-cr o a
--.--
(J,y
o
0.5 STEEL
o A7 (cry =36 ksi)
A =..l./o-y . KL
..". E r'
I.OI-------------~--~
Euler Curve
o
Ultimate
Load
0.5
Toogent Modulus_
o - Welded H- Shope·
o 50 100 150
L
r
Ultimate Strength
Initially Straight
1.0 Column
~
-e- -CJ
0 0
(J
oy
[J
0.5 []
0
50 100 150
L
r
1.0
eRe ourve
0
~cr N 0 (A7 steel)
0
o-y 121
NH a
H'
Cl 0
0.5 H
H 9xl0 H- shape
N 6x 7 H--shape
CJ 10 xlO Box
I'ZI 6)(6 Box
o 50 100 150
L
r
SW31
Rolled' (~=0.038 ~ ~ =58 )
6X7H
0.5
Welded
( ercz =0.014; ~ =53 )
O---------~L...------~--..---a~--.-..-
2
8 t deflection ot
mid height in inches
I. 0 t-------.--.
&'Q
~
0.5
A= _I
7T
/BY. JSb.
vy r
1.0 t---~----..
0.5
.
.\0
I'J
\0
1.0
I
~
e
o-cr 0
o-y t )(
:-: )(-e
'6t o
~
0.51- ~
~ ~ ~
~
9x JO 6x9
I• -I
o : A7 ~: A7
)( : Welten-50
e :- A514 " : A514 (Japanese)
1 , , , , I I I I 1 I I
0 0.5 1.0 1.5
x.-V
---rr
CFy
E
• KL
r
1.0 ' •
~ o· ~
•
OCr
CTy ~
0.5
o~ .6x6
A7 ~:loxIO
. : 6x6
A5J4 ... : 10xi0
A. = ~
-n- / " O'"y KL
E .-
r
0.6
cr
---
cry
y
0.4
I
0.2
SYF31
0.8
0.6
or =0 (Web)
0.4
1_ b A 8YF 31 Reinforced Under Load
CI 8YF 31 Reinforced Under No Load
o 8YF 31 Unrei-nforced
Tanoent Modulus Load Curves
Based on Modified CTr Distribution
0.2
b~
O.475b
N O,265b J
o 0.95 b
.
\0
N
\0
I-0 I""'b:: ,
~ -----........... . 0.008
~~ fFCl
~
" ' -" ' - ---- [J 0 007 _
---~~
Rolled
~.~ Shapes
0.002
(J
-U: o ~
y Tangent Modulus
Load' Curves
Weak Axis
Nomenclature
[J :6x7
-FC
'lsl : 9 xlO
o : 6x7
UM
~ : 9xl0
0.008 indicates t
o 1.0
Uy L
\--
1\- --
r
7T 2E
-I
co
Fig. 37 The S~rength of Welded Shapes Fabricat~d ~
I
from Flame-Cut Plates
tv
.
~
\0
N
\.0
GQLWIIIN C 4
14·l x 15-1• H
1.0'" cc:: •
FULL PENETRATION -WELD
A36
-tTy
(T
J
(X)
V1
I
N
+:""'
.
\0
N
\.0
A Uri =0.23 =
b/t 45
1.00 tTy .{ 0" : Critical Stress
• : Ultimate Str~ss
~I =0.16
5-2 , 5-21: vy
_ b/t =64
_A : Critical Stress
{ .. : Ultimate Stress
b Uy 36
Tfor E =
20 40
.- I I -- ------~ I -I
!..~cry.
t --
_ E
N
\.0
U'rl
T-2A·, T-2B: <Ty =0.15
b~ =26
1.00 _._.-.-._. <Tri =0.15
tJy
To: Critical Stress
1. • ': Ultimate Stress
- CTr • .
T-IA,T-IB: a=-
y
=0.10
b/t =44
6. : Critical Stress
{ • : Ultimate Stress
+ for
(Ty
E = 30,000
110
20
~- ------- • -T----- I 1 I
~~(jy
t-r co
I
-.....J
I
Fig. 4-0 Plate Buckling Curve with L~st Points (A5l4- Steel)
8 1I REFEREJ:\JCES
1. A. W. Huber, L o S. Beedle
RESIDUAL STRESS AND THE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF STEEL
Welding Journal, Vol. 33, DeG. 1954
2. L. S. Beedle, L. Tall
BASIC COLUMN STRENGTH
ASCE Prac., ST7, Volo 86, July 1960
3. Lo Tall
STUB COLUMN TEST PROCEDURE
Fritz Laboratory Report No. 220A.36, Feb. 1961.
Also Document X-282-6l, International Institute of
Welding, Oslo, July 1962.
Also, Appendix of Ref. 18, ("eRG Guide ll )
4. L. Tall
RECENT DEVELOP:MENTS IN THE STUDY OF COLUMN BEHAVIOR
Journal, Institution of Engineers, Australia, Vol. 36,
Dec. 1954
6. No Ro NagarajaRao, L o Tall
RESIDUAL STRESSES IN WELDED PLATES
Welding Journal, Vol. 40, Oct. 1961
7• L. Tall
RESIDUAL STRESSES IN WELDED PLATES A THEORETICAL·STUDY
Welding Journal, Vol. 43, Jan. 1964
8. N. R o NagarajaRao, L. Tall
RESIDUAL STRESSES IN AUTOMATICALLY WELDED PLATES
Fritz Laboratory Report No. 249.22, in preparation
-88 ...
-89-
11. L. Tall
THE STRENGTH OF WELDED BUILT-UP COLUMNS
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University, May 1961
12. F. R Q •Estuar \
WELDING RESIDUAL STRESSES AND THE STRENGTH OF HEAVY
COLUMN SHAPES
Ph.D o Dissertation, Lehigh University, Sept. 1965
13. ASTM
METHODS AND DEFINITIONS FOR MECHANICAL
TESTING OF STEEL PRODUCTS
A370-65
16. F. Bleich
BUCKLING STRENGTH OF METAL STRUCTURES
McGraw-Hill, 1952
17. F R. Shanley
Q
22. AISC
SPECIFICATION FOR THE DESIGN, FABRICATION AND ERECTION
OF STRUCTURAL STEEL FOR BUILDINGS
AISC, 1961, revised 1963
25. Y. Fujita
BUILT-UP COLUMN STRENGTH
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University, Aug. 1956
30. A. Nitta
ULTIMATE STRENGTH OF HIGH-STRENGTH STEEL CIRCULAR
COLUMNS
Ph.D o Dissertation, Lehigh University, Oct. 1960
31. J. H. Pie1ert
THEORETICAL LOAD-DEFLECTION RELATIONSHIPS FOR WELDED
BOX COLUMNS WITH INITIAL DEFORMATION
M.S e Thesis, Lehigh University, Sept. 1965
32. B. G. Johnston
BUCKLING BEHAVIOR ABOVE tANGENT MODULUS LOAD
ASCE Proc., Va 1. 87, EM6, Dec',. 1961
-91-
34. F. Nishino
BUCKLING STRENGTH OF COLUMNS AND THEIR COMPONENT PLATES
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University, Oct. 1964
35. N. R. NagarajaRao
THE STRENGTH OF HYBRID STEEL COLUMNS
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University, May 1965
36. Y. Fujita
ULTIMATE STRENGTH OF COLUMNS WITH RESIDUAL STRESSES
Journal, Society of Naval Architects of Japan, Jan. 1960
37. A. W. Huber
THE INFLUENCE OF RESIDUAL STRESS ON THE INSTABILITY OF
COLUMNS
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University, Aug. 1956
39. Y. Ueda
ELASTIC, ELASTIC-PLASTIC, AND PLASTIC BUCKLING OF
PLATES WITH RESIDUAL STRESSES
Ph.D. Dissertation, Lehigh University, Aug. 1962