Welded plate girders with thin-wall corrugated webs, lower in weight than conventional plate girders, have gained in popularity in 90’s. Currently, SIN girders available on the market have three basic web thicknesses of 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 mm and heights ranging from 333 to 1500 mm. Guaranteed by the manufacturer, yield resistance of the corrugated web steel is
Due to the web thickness, SIN girders are more stressed in shear compared with flat webs. The buckling mechanism in sinusoidal corrugated web under shear load is still classified separately as a local and global instability [1]. However, for girders with the trapezoidal web used in bridge structures, web failure modes showing the characteristics of local and global instability, are currently classified as the web interactive instability [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Investigations into girders with trapezoidal web conducted so far have produced many models for estimating interactive shear buckling resistance [2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11]. The models are based on the interaction of stress in local and global web instability and shear yield strength. The solutions proposed did not include webs with corrugated folds. In 2009, Eldib [12] put forward a solution for bridge girders with corrugated webs of trapezoidal folds. The equation of the design buckling resistance was based on the regression curve obtained from FEM investigations.
In the author’s studies [13, 14], observations were made that in SIN girders, a relation holds between local and global mode of instability in shear. That results in the fact that shear buckling resistance of the corrugated web of SIN girders stated in the code [1] is overestimated. In studies [13, 15], it was shown that vertical stiffeners located at the ends of simply supported girders substantially contribute to an increase in shear buckling resistance of the corrugated web. The problem of instability in SIN girders with semirigid and rigid support stiffeners was discussed in study [15].
Based on preliminary investigations, it is known that for cantilever girders under two-sided symmetrical load on cantilevers (Fig. 1a), load
This study reports investigations into shear buckling resistance of the corrugated web of SIN girders with one-sided cantilever (Fig. 1b). The advantageous effect of support stiffeners, denoted as A1 in Fig. 1, was confirmed. The beneficial effect also included shear buckling resistance of girders. Furthermore, it was checked whether it is necessary to use additional flat transition sheet at beam-to-stiffener joints, which is recommended in the Guidelines [16].
Experimental investigations on end-loaded one-sided cantilever were conducted using ten girders with the web height of 500, 1000, 1250 and 1500 mm, composed of three pre-assembled units. Girders, the loading diagram of which corresponded to a simply supported beam with one-sided cantilever, were constructed from pre-assembled units, butt-connected using HV bolts.
The Finite Element Method was used to simulate experimental investigations [17]. The FEM analysis was applied to numerically estimate design buckling resistance of the corrugated web of cantilever girders. The FEM numerical analysis of buckling resistance of cantilever girders was carried out using models with the web height ranging from
For girders with trapezoidal profile of the web folds, the estimation of design shear buckling resistance was based on the computation of the interactive buckling resistance. The general form of the equation describing interactive buckling resistance
Equation (1) relates stresses at the web local
In 2009, Moon [18] proposed a solution (4) that was based on interactive buckling resistance Yi [7]. In Moon’s solution, in order to determine design buckling resistance, it is necessary to estimate slenderness
In 2011, Sause and Braxtan presented their solution [6] expressed in the form of equation (5), in which design buckling resistance was dependent on interactive slenderness computed acc. formula (6).
In the solution of concern, local and global slenderness was determined from formula (7) and (8). Additionally, the factor for global instability
All available solutions concerning the computation of design shear buckling resistance relate to webs with trapezoidal shape of folds. In 2009, Eldib [12] put forward a solution for wave-shaped webs. The shape corresponded to the trapeze geometry used in bridge girders. The solution was based on regression analysis obtained from FEM investigations.
As regards SIN girders utilizing sine-shaped folds, the solution currently used can be found in EC3 [1]. In this solution, it is necessary to calculate stresses separately at local
Next, the dependence describing shear buckling stress at global instability based on the stiffness relation of the orthotropic plate [19], a replacement for the corrugated web, can be expressed by equation:
The solution offered by EC3 [1] does not account for the interaction between local and global shear instability. The formula for estimating design shear resistance acc. [15] based on the determination of interactive buckling resistance was approximated for cantilever girders. It is presented in Chapter 6.
In order to determine shear buckling resistance of cantilever girders with support stiffeners, experimental investigations were conducted. They covered ten SIN girders with a loading diagram that corresponded to a simply supported beam with one-sided cantilever. (Fig. 2). All corrugated web girders were designed and fabricated compliant with the literature and standards [1, 16].
Girders were made from pre-fabricated pre-assembled units. Girders with the web height of
In WTA 500 girders (the first two letters WT mean the girder with corrugated web, the next letter means the thickness of the web, that is: A – 2 mm, B – 2.5 mm, C – 3 mm), 20 mm thick end plates were used (Fig. 2a, 2c). In the other girders, end plates 25 mm in thickness were employed (Fig. 2b, 2d).
The pre-assembled units of the girders of concern were butt-connected using HV M20 (
The girders were constructed from pre-assembled units. Openings in the connection end plates were adjusted at the experimental stand, which limited the occurrence of imperfections in end-plate connections. A frame (FR) (Fig. 3b) was constructed to load the girders. The load, in the form of a concentrated force P, was transferred from the frame (FR) by means of the actuator (1) to the pad (2), and then to the end plate of the cantilever part of the girder (3). On the pin support, dynamometers (4) were installed to measure reaction
The following quantities were measured in the investigations: reaction
In order to establish the point of the corrugated web instability, the profiles of strains were determined for all strain gauges glued onto the web. Based on the analysis of graphs for diagonal strain gauges, the onset of instability of the corrugated web was specified. The first buckling load
Based on the global displacement y measured at the end of the girder support (Fig. 6), load-displacement paths LDPs
Figures 7 and 8 show exemplary LDPs
The upper boundary of the rectilinear part of global displacement (point
Characteristic co-ordinates
The boundary of the range of displacements resulting from the effect of bending moments and shear forces was marked in the global LDPs
In cantilever girder with corrugated web, in which support stiffener made from two connected sheets is applied, a large range of elastic strains 0 –
Table 1 summarizes the results of experimental investigations into girders. Column 7 shows limit load
Experimental results of girders
Girder | Web |
Flange [mm] | Suport stiffener | Failure modes | Limit load |
First buckling load |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
M 1.12 | 500×2 | 300×15 | 2×300×20 | L | 184 | 147 | 0.80 |
M 2.12 | 500×2 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | L | 181 | 151 | 0.82 |
M 1.22 | 1000×2 | 300×20 | 2×300×25 | I | 342 | 298 | 0.87 |
M 2.22 | 1000×2 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | L | 343 | 296 | 0.86 |
M 1.32 | 1000×2.6 | 300×20 | 2×300×25 | I | 478 | 380 | 0.79 |
M 2.32 | 1000×2.6 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | I | 492 | 390 | 0.79 |
M 2.42 | 1000×3 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | I | 694 | 510 | 0.73 |
M 1.42 | 1250×2 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | I | 348 | 304 | 0.87 |
M 1.52 | 1500×2 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | I | 468 | 400 | 0.85 |
M 2.52 | 1500×2 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | I | 459 | 399 | 0.87 |
Failure of the examined girders occurred in the cantilever part, in the area affected by a load induced by a constant shear force. The failure took place suddenly.
The process of the corrugated web instability started from local instability of the sinusoidal panel. In the first stage of girder failure, plastic strains occurred in the corrugated web, adjacent to the tension flange, which led to formation of the web yield zone (1). The latter took the form of diagonal tension line (local instability – L) (Fig. 9a). In girders with the web height starting at
In all tested girders, support stiffener stayed straight and did not bend after the yield zone was formed. The end plate that makes the edging of the stiffeners and end – plate connections of the middle segment also remained intact in all girders.
The above indicates that support stiffener in cantilever girders restricted the action of the tension field and the resulting change in the interaction of compression and shear components along the generatrix of the web. That led to a narrowing of the range of plastic strains
As regards cantilever girders shown in Fig. 10, shear buckling resistance was also estimated numerically. In SIN girders, the dimensions of the web, support stiffeners and flanges interact to affect the failure mode of the corrugated web. Consequently, it was necessary to measure the web height, thickness and wave shape. Also, the dimensions of support stiffeners of flanges were checked. As in the fabrication of SIN girders, the sinusoidal web shape is ensured by the rolling control program, the actual web shape is that of the sine curve. The automation in sheet metal cutting and web welding to flanges and stiffeners in the manufacture of girders additionally limits the occurrence of geometric imperfections in the cross and longitudinal sections of SIN girders. The girders delivered for tests showed only minimal differences in the web thickness. That referred to the web with the nominal thickness of 2.5 mm, the actual thickness of which was 2.6 mm. As regards other experimental girders, their webs were 2 mm and 3 mm thick. Because imperfections of the girder sections may affect failure mode in the corrugated web, measurements of rectilinearity along girders and flange curvature were taken. Experimental girders did not show geometric imperfections either in longitudinal or cross sections. In the numerical models, the geometry of tested girders was simulated based on the experimental investigations. However, as all end – plate connections in experimental girders satisfied the condition that the rotation in the connection could be treated as a linear function of rotational stiffness, they were substituted with intermediate stiffeners.
Their thickness corresponded to that of connection sheets, i.e. 50 or 40 mm (in models with
The FEM analysis was conducted using 12 numerical models. All supports were modelled to have the length of
Current numerical program
|
|
Flange [mm] | Suport stiffener [mm] |
|
|
Number of models |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 |
500 | 2; 2.6; 3 | 300×15 | 2×300×20 | 1500 | 6350 | 3 |
1000 | 2; 2.6; 3 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | 1500 | 6350 | 3 |
1250 | 2; 2.6; 3 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | 1500 | 6350 | 3 |
1500 | 2; 2.6; 3 | 300×15 | 2×300×25 | 1500 | 6350 | 3 |
Materials tests on steel in the experimental cantilever girders were conducted using samples cut out of flanges and the web acc. EN [23]. The yield strength of girders was examined on six samples randomly collected from along the web fold of each girder (yield strength variation coefficient ranged from 0.001 to 0.003). As regards flanges, yield strength was examined using three randomly chosen samples. Selected results of the materials tests are shown in Table 3.
Material properties
Girder |
|
|
Percentage total elongation at maximum force ( |
Percentage total elongation at fracture [%] |
|
|
Percentage total elongation at maximum force ( |
Percentage total elongation at fracture [%] | E [GPa] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
web | flange | ||||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
M 1.12 | 334.7 | 430.6 | 16.1 | 22.1 | 297.5 | 443.1 | 23.9 | 30.3 | 196 |
M 2.12 | 337.9 | 429.1 | 15.7 | 20.8 | 311.2 | 476.7 | 24.5 | 30.8 | 188 |
M 1.22 | 339.4 | 435.4 | 15.9 | 22.2 | 287.2 | 448 | 24.1 | 31.4 | 200 |
M 2.22 | 336.3 | 427.3 | 14.9 | 22.5 | 323.5 | 461.4 | 23.1 | 29.6 | 234 |
M 1.32 | 312.5 | 453.9 | 13.8 | 20.2 | 264.2 | 460.9 | 22.6 | 28.0 | 199 |
M 2.32 | 324.6 | 451.5 | 13.6 | 19.2 | 293.9 | 442.1 | 25.1 | 32.3 | 241 |
M 2.42 | 445.9 | 544.1 | 10.7 | 14.6 | 301.5 | 439.8 | 21.3 | 27.7 | 205 |
M 1.42 | 267.2 | 360.9 | 13.4 | 19.9 | 302.8 | 440.4 | 22.9 | 30.8 | 199 |
M 1.52 | 299.1 | 380.5 | 16.8 | 23.3 | 312.5 | 445.6 | 24.1 | 30.0 | 200 |
M 2.52 | 281.0 | 375.5 | 17.2 | 24.6 | 306.7 | 449.3 | 21.9 | 28.6 | 203 |
In the materials tests conducted on girders, a very
In all numerical models (Fig. 11), the adopted boundary conditions were the same as for experimental girders (Fig. 2). Numerical models were pin-supported on one side. On the other side, roller support was used on the external end stiffeners. As regards the support beneath the cantilever part, the possibility of vertical (
Support conditions adopted in numerical investigations represent those used in actual structures. That caused slight extension of the cantilever part in numerical models. However, it did not affect the values of the limit load, buckling load, or shear buckling resistance. Conversely, in experimental girders support conditions included a roller bearing support, and also hinge support. The latter also supported the end of the girder.
The load (Fig. 11) having the form of a concentrated force
In the numerical analysis reported in this study, the Riks method was used. In this method, the load is proportionally applied in individual steps. The control parameter is the so-called path parameter. The Riks method allows finding a solution to a task regardless of the web failure mode. That is related to identifying load-displacement equilibrium at the end of each iteration step. While seeking load-displacement equilibrium, the load can be increased or decreased until the limit load is reached acc. [25]. The Riks method is very often used in static load analysis as it provides one of the most suitable tools for nonlinear analysis.
The numerical model was validated in two stages. The first stage of the model validation involved the use of a “perfect model”, in which no imperfections occurred, and the geometry of webs, flanges and stiffeners from measurements was accurately represented. For M 2.52 (1500×2) and M 1.42 (1250×2) girders, the ratio of first buckling load
In the second stage of the model validation, an “imperfect model” was considered. The imperfection consisted in the web thinning by 1/20 of its thickness acc. [22]. Based on the direct comparison of experimental results and the numerical analysis on the example of M 2.52 (1500×2) girder and 1500×2 “imperfect model”, it can be stated that the results of estimating the limit load
Numerical results of girders
Girder |
Support Stiffener | Failure modes | Limit load |
First buckling load |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
500×2 | 2×300×20 | L | 154.1 | 149.1 | 0.97 |
500×2.5 | 2×300×20 | L | 192.2 | 186.8 | 0.97 |
500×3 | 2×300×20 | L | 231.3 | 224.6 | 0.97 |
1000×2 | 2×300×25 | L | 308.1 | 297.2 | 0.96 |
1000×2.5 | 2×300×25 | I | 384.3 | 371.3 | 0.97 |
1000×3 | 2×300×25 | I | 462.2 | 445.3 | 0.96 |
1250×2 | 2×300×25 | I | 384.6 | 360.1 | 0.94 |
1250×2.5 | 2×300×25 | I | 480.4 | 449.9 | 0.94 |
1250×3 | 2×300×25 | I | 576.5 | 539.5 | 0.94 |
1500×2 | 2×300×25 | I | 460.8 | 419.2 | 0.91 |
1500×2.5 | 2×300×25 | I | 575.6 | 531.9 | 0.92 |
1500×3 | 2×300×25 | I | 687.5 | 635.7 | 0.92 |
In all remaining numerical models, because of lower yield strength than that in experimental girders, the results of first buckling load turned out to be slightly smaller. The effect of variable yield strength on the results of the design buckling resistance was accounted for in the theoretical solution adopted (Chapters 5 and 6).
Load-displacement paths LDPs
Figures 12b and 13b show exemplary LDPs
In load-displacement paths, characteristic coordinates
For each numerical model of cantilever girders, the web instability took place at point
The FEM analysis confirmed that in cantilever SIN girders, a large range of elastic strain 0 –
Table 4 lists resistance of girders estimated with the FEM analysis. Column 4 gives limit load
Figures 14, 15 and 16 show failure modes in numerical models of cantilever girders. Like it was the case with experimental girders, the web failure occurred suddenly in the cantilever part of the models. Support stiffeners remained undamaged.
For girders with the web height of
In numerical models of cantilever girders with
In girders with the web height of
For cantilever girders, shear buckling resistance at the point of instability
In cantilever girders of concern, similar to girders with the loading diagram of a simply supported beam, two modes of instability were found: local one and interactive one. Failure modes in cantilever girders indicate that the use of support stiffeners in cantilever girders produces an effect on the web failure mode similar to that brought about by rigid stiffeners in girders with the loading diagram of a simply supported beam. Stiffeners contribute to increase in shear buckling stress which leads to higher shear buckling resistance.
Thus, to estimate design shear buckling resistance
Interactive shear buckling resistance
It was based on estimating local
In the solution adopted, the value of coefficient
In addition, the value of coefficient
In the case of girders where only a local instability takes place, the slenderness should be determined as dependent on the critical stresses at the local loss of stability
As for cantilever girders with corrugated web, they were girder cantilever parts that suffered failure. The value of design buckling resistance of cantilever girders was affected by the web failure mode. For the height of
Table 5 shows the results for design shear buckling resistance
Comparison investigations, FEM analysis with design [6, 1] and proposed resistances (17)
Girder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
500×2 | 147.0 | 149.1 | 0.80 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.86 | 0.86 | 1.09 | 0.93 |
500×2.5 | 149.4 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.91 | 0.86 | 0.93 | |||
500×3 | 149.7 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.95 | 0.86 | 0.93 | |||
1000×2 | 149.0 | 148.6 | 0.78 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.83 | 0.86 | 1.10 | 0.94 |
1000×2.5 | 152.0 | 148.5 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.96 | 0.94 |
1000×3 | 170.0 | 148.4 | 0.75 | 0.91 | 0.79 | 0.93 | 0.86 | 1.26 | 0.94 |
1250×2 | 121.6 | 144.0 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 0.79 | 0.82 | 0.85 | 1.01 | 0.96 |
1250×2.5 | 144.0 | 0.89 | 0.79 | 0.88 | 0.85 | 0.96 | |||
1250×3 | 143.9 | 0.89 | 0.79 | 0.92 | 0.86 | 0.96 | |||
1500×2 | 133.0 | 139.7 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.79 | 0.82 | 0.84 | 0.96 | 0.98 |
1500×2.5 | 141.8 | 0.87 | 0.79 | 0.87 | 0.85 | 0.97 | |||
1500×3 | 141.3 | 0.87 | 0.79 | 0.92 | 0.85 | 0.97 | |||
AVG. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The comparison of normalized buckling resistances as a function of slenderness obtained on the basis of experimental investigations (
Cantilever girders with corrugated web analysed in the study lose stability in the elastic-plastic range. The results of normalized shear resistance obtained from the FEM analysis (
The results of normalized resistance (
Among all solutions analysed in the study that concern design shear buckling resistance, the solution put forward by the author gives the results that are closest to the experimental ones. The solution acc. equation (17) is based on the determination of interactive buckling resistance from equation (13). The solution of concern is also congruent with the FEM analysis results for high girders (
Similar to girders with the loading diagram of a simply supported beam, the experiment and FEM analysis show that cantilever SIN girders start losing stability below shear yield strength.
It should be noted that the formulas used for estimating interactive shear buckling resistance acc. equation (13) and design shear buckling resistance acc. equation (17) can be applied to the whole range of currently fabricated cantilever girders with support stiffener.
Cantilever girders with corrugated web are internally statically indeterminate systems. The failure of cantilever girders with corrugated web is related to the occurrence of tension line that affects the creation of the yield zone or the yield zone associated with the snap-through of the neighbouring waves of the web.
Shear buckling resistance depends on the web thickness and height. The resistance varies non-linearly with a change in the web height, due to local or interactive instability. Webs of cantilever girders with the height of
Shear buckling resistance of the web in cantilever girders can be affected by the use of support stiffeners. They increase shear buckling resistance and the range of linear elastic displacements. The web shear buckling resistance with appropriate reserve constitutes a limit on the resistance of supports in SIN girders.
Additionally, increasing shear buckling resistance of supports in SIN girders with support stiffener reduces the need to utilise flat transition sheets that are applied for that purpose.
Behaviour of cantilever girders with corrugated web and support stiffener is similar to that of girders with the loading diagram of a simply supported beam, ending in a rigid stiffener.
Based on laboratory tests and the FEM analysis, a solution was proposed for estimating design shear buckling resistance of cantilever girders with corrugated web and support stiffener. The solution put forward (17) relies on the determination of interactive buckling resistance acc. equation (13). The rage of the adopted solution congruence with experimental results and FEM analysis is 0.95–1.06.
The solution accounts for the effect of the mutual correlation between local and global instability of the corrugated web in cantilever girders, and also for the beneficial influence of the support stiffener on shear buckling resistance. In addition, the solution provides a better representation of the design shear buckling resistance than it is the case with EC3-based approach [1], or that proposed by Sause and Braxtan [6], which respectively, overestimate or underestimate the results compared with the experimental findings.
It should be mentioned that in the tests on the supports of SIN girders, shear displacements of the cantilever ends were found to occur. They substantially exceed the displacements induced by bending. Significant scatter of shear displacements and global displacements of the support ends indicates that a need may arise to apply tension diagonal stiffeners acc. [26, 27].