Cyclic testing and numerical modelling of carbon steel and stainless steel tubular bracing members

Abstract In order to study the cyclic response of tubular bracing members of three structural materials–hot-rolled carbon steel, cold-formed carbon steel and cold-formed stainless steel–a total of 16 square and rectangular hollow section members were tested under cyclic axial loading. The load–displacement hysteretic response, compressive resistance, lateral deflection, energy dissipation and fracture life of the specimens of these three materials were investigated. In addition, finite element models, verified against the experimental results from the current study and two other research programmes, were used in conjunction with a strain-based damage prediction method to conduct parametric studies. It is shown that existing empirical expressions for predicting the buckling resistance, post-buckling compressive strength and mid-length lateral deflections can be applied to both carbon steel and stainless steel specimens. However, the relationships between member ductility and slenderness are not representative over the full slenderness range, and are not applicable to cold-formed stainless steel members. New relationships, one for each material, are proposed to take into account the inter-relationship between global slenderness and local slenderness. The tangent stiffness throughout the loading cycle, which differed between the three materials, is found to be a crucial factor in determining the resistance to local buckling and number of cycles to failure of the braces.

[1]  Robert D. Hanson,et al.  Hysteretic Cycles of Axially Loaded Steel Members , 1980 .

[2]  Leroy Gardner,et al.  Strength enhancements induced during cold forming of stainless steel sections , 2008 .

[3]  Kenneth W. Karren Corner Properties of Cold-Formed Shapes , 1967 .

[4]  Subhash C. Goel,et al.  Brace Fractures and Analysis of Phase I Structure , 1989 .

[5]  Ehab Ellobody,et al.  Structural performance of cold-formed high strength stainless steel columns , 2005 .

[6]  Alastair C. Walker,et al.  Post-Buckling of Geometrically Imperfect Plates , 1972 .

[7]  David A. Nethercot,et al.  Numerical Modeling of Stainless Steel Structural Components—A Consistent Approach , 2004 .

[8]  Egor P. Popov,et al.  Cyclic Inelastic Buckling of Thin Tubular Columns , 1979 .

[9]  Tak-Ming Chan,et al.  Flexural Buckling of Elliptical Hollow Section Columns , 2009 .

[10]  Robert D. Hanson,et al.  Inelastic Cycles of Axially Loaded Steel Members , 1976 .

[11]  Leroy Gardner,et al.  Discrete and continuous treatment of local buckling in stainless steel elements , 2008 .

[12]  Leroy Gardner,et al.  Comparative experimental study of hot-rolled and cold-formed rectangular hollow sections , 2010 .

[13]  Brad Shaback,et al.  Behaviour of square hollow structural steel braces with end connections under reversed cyclic axial loading , 2003 .

[14]  A. Y. Elghazouli,et al.  Seismic design procedures for concentrically braced frames , 2003 .

[15]  Leroy Gardner,et al.  Extremely low cycle fatigue tests on structural carbon steel and stainless steel , 2010 .

[16]  Egor P. Popov,et al.  Steel Struts under Severe Cyclic Loadings , 1981 .

[17]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  Inelastic seismic response of steel bracing members , 2002 .

[18]  Alexander Remennikov,et al.  A note on compression strength reduction factor for a buckled strut in seismic-resisting braced system , 1998 .

[19]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  SEISMIC RESPONSE OF CONCENTRICALLY BRACED STEEL FRAMES MADE WITH RECTANGULAR HOLLOW BRACING MEMBERS , 2003 .