EUROSTEEL 2014, September 10-12, 2014, Naples, Italy

INSTABILITY MECHANISM STUDY OF SLEEVE TYPE BAR COMBINED

WITH HIGH STRENGTH AND ORDINARY STRENGTH STEEL
Zhengxian Baia, Hongyang Guana, Mingfei Chenb, Ximing Houa
a

Beijing University of Technology, College of Architectural and Civil Engineering, China

b
China Mobile Group Design Institute Co., Ltd, Institute of Civil Engineering, China
zxbai@bjut.edu.cn, guanhongyang@126.com, chenmingfly87@163.com, hou_ximing@126.com

INTRODUCTION
Application of high strength steel or even ultra high strength steel in civil engineering structures is
possible now with improved technology of steel production and processing [1]. For large span
structure, ratio of self-weight to overall load increases with the increase of the span, so high
strength steel with high ratio of strength to self-weight may be economically used in large span
structure. It is certainly favourable to use high strength steel in tension member, but its material
strength cant be taken advantage when it is used in mainly compressive member. With nearly
unchanged Youngs modulus, the flexural rigidity of high strength steel member hasnt been
improved simultaneously as the strength, which means instability problem usually controls the
design. Thus it becomes very necessary to study how to effectively control the buckling of highstrength-steel compression member.
The technology of stability control of compressive member is to use technical measures to restrain
the occurrence of buckling, or transform buckling mode from low order to high order [2]. Although
HPS-prestressed stayed column [3], shuttle-shaped column [4] and displacement-limited bolt device
[2] are effective stability control practices, but they are not applicable to large span structure.
Sleeved bar[5] is an effective stability control practice applicable for large span structure, whose
inner pipe occurs higher order buckling mode instability within outer pipe by selecting the
appropriate flexural rigidity of outer pipe. Double-tube buckling restrained brace [6] prevents the
inner tube from buckling, and occurs to yield failure through constraints of the outer tube. Because
the main function is to use the plastic deformation to dissipate energy, the ordinary strength steel is
used. For sleeved compression bar, the confinement of outer pipe to inner pipe begins to take effect
only when outer wall of inner pipe contacts inner wall of outer pipe by flexural deformation of inner
pipe, so the axial deformation is comparatively large and instability control is passive.
Sleeve-ring-composite bar with high-strength-steel inner pipe and ordinary-steel outer pipe
connected by plate rings (abbreviated as SRCB below) is proposed in order to control instability of
inner pipe actively and decrease axial deformation, shown in Fig. 1. For SRCB ,which can be
applied in large span grid structure, the inner strut buckling mode is actively controlled through
plate-rings by shortening the effective calculation length of inner pipe satisfactorily, so the
compression is mainly resisted by the high strength steel core tube with high order buckling mode
and elastic-plastic stability, while outer pipe plays the role of constraints, so advantages of highstrength-steel can be effectively used, and stability capacity is greatly increased[7].

Fig. 1. Structural diagram of SRCB with one ring and three rings

EUROSTEEL 2014, September 10-12, 2014, Naples, Italy

Despite that preliminary study[7] on influence of parameters, such as core pipe steel grades, core
tube slenderness ratio, flexural stiffness ratio of outer pipe to core pipe, etc., on stability behavior of
a combination bar, has carried on, systematic and deep study on stability behavior is still needed.
Thus, this article will focus on the stability of SRCB with single hoop and three hoops, and the
influence of bending stiffness ratio of outer tube to inner tube on overall stability capacity will be
calculated and analyzed through reactions of instability deformation and failure stress distribution.
This papers goal is to reveal the instability mechanism of SRCB and lays a theoretical preparation
for the rational design and application of this new type.
1

CALCULATION MODAL

FEM analysis models of one-ring and three-rings SRCB are established as shown in Fig.2, with
dimension of inner pipe of 764. The slenderness ratios of inner pipes are 80(L=2040mm),
100(L=2550mm), 120(L=3060mm) and 140(L=3570mm), while L is the length of the inner pipe.
Bending stiffness ratios of outer pipe to inner pipe are varied from 1 to 7. The gap between inside
and outside pipes is uniformly taken as 5mm.
The outer pipe is shorter than inner pipe 100mm at both ends in order to prevent it from resisting
axial load directly. Both core tube and outer tube are simulated by BEAM188, while the section
with PLANE82 cell division. The simplified nodal coupled manner is used where inner and outer
tubes are connected by end-plate or ring plate. The three linear displacements of middle nodes of
inner and outer tubes are tied together, and other connection nodes are only coupled lateral
displacement with no longitudinal displacement coupled in order that the tube deformation does not
transform to the outer tube axially.
One end of the core tube is constrained along X, Y, Z displacements, while the other end has
constraints of X and Y displacements. All nodes are constrained angular displacement around axial
Z direction, so that flexural instability performs on ZY plane.
FEM model is shown in Fig. 1 (3 times magnification of section for showing).

Fig. 2. FEM analysis model of SRCB

Residual stress is ignored and geometric defects are considered by applying the first order buckling
mode with biggest drawback taken as L/1000. Q460 steel is used for core tube while Q235 steel for
outer steel pipe, and both materials are taken as multiple linear kinematical hardening. Calculations
of ultimate stability capacity under axially concentrated load have been carried on. The Elastic
modulus, yielding strength, tensile strength and ultimate strain of both steels are shown in Table 1.
Table 1.
Steel type
Q235
Q460

E/N/mm
2.06e5
2.06e5

Properties of Steel

Yielding stress/MPa
235
460

Tensile stress/MPa
370
550

Ultimate strain
0.26
0.17

EUROSTEEL 2014, September 10-12, 2014, Naples, Italy

STABILITY BEHAVIOUR ANALYSIS

400

500

350

400

stress (MPa)

ultimate load (kN)

2.1 One-ring SRCB

A total of 28 SRCB FEM models are established with stiffness ratio of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7,
slenderness ratios of 80, 100, 120 and 140. The overall ultimate stability loads are calculated by
nonlinear finite element method of ANSYS. Relationship between bending stiffness ratio of outer
pipe to inner pipe (abbreviated as stiffness ratio below, and represented by the symbol i ) is shown
in Fig3. , and maximum compressive stress of inner and outer pipes at limit states is shown in Fig4.
The symbol s indicates slenderness ratio.

300
250

slenderness
slenderness
slenderness
slenderness

200
150

ratio=80
ratio=100
ratio=120
ratio=140
6

s=80(inner)
s=80(outer)
s=100(inner)
s=100(outer)
s=120(inner)
s=120(outer)
s=140(inner)
s=140(outer)

300
200
100
0

stiffness ratio

Fig. 3. Ultimate load of one-ring SRCB

stiffness ratio

Fig. 4. Stresses of one-ring SRCB

During stiffness ratio varied from 1 to 3, the overall stability capacity increases along two fold lines.
Stiffness ratio of 2 is the turning point. Increasing rate during i=1.0~2.0 is bigger than that of
i=2.0~3.0. And the larger the slenderness ratio is, the greater the increase rate is. Increasing rates
are respectively 8.6%, 24.8%, 58.6, 77.9% from i=1 to i=3 for relative slenderness ratios of
80,100,120 and 140. This is shown that the effectiveness of stability improvement increases with
increasing slenderness ratio.
From stress reaction (see Fig. 4.) can be seen that the inner pipe is always in the elastic-plastic state
when slenderness ratio is 80, which means occurrence of elastic-plastic instability. The outer tube is
in the elastic state, with the increase of stiffness ratio, axial compressive stress becomes smaller, so
it is economical to use ordinary strength steel in outer pipe. When slenderness ratio is 100, the stress
reaction is similar to that of slenderness ratio of 80, except for elastic-plastic yielding at i=1. When
the slenderness ratio is 120 and the stiffness ratio is 1.0, the inner tube is in elastic state. And from
the stiffness ratio of 2.0, elastic-plastic instability occurs for inner tube. The outside pipes stress is
in elastic-plastic state at i=1.0, and with stiffness ratio increase, the outer tube stress becomes
smaller. For slenderness ratio of 140, when the stiffness ratio varies from 1.0 to 2.0, the inner tube
is in elastic state. When the stiffness ratio is 3, the inner pipe plastic instability occurs, the outside
pipes stress variation similar with those of slenderness ratio of 120.

Fig. 5. Inner pipe of one-ring SRCB (i=3)

Fig. 6. Inner pipe of one-ring SRCB (i=7)

EUROSTEEL 2014, September 10-12, 2014, Naples, Italy

Ultimate loads are shown at stiffness ratio of 3.0, which stiffness ratio is named as critical stiffness
ratio. When stiffness ratio is bigger than critical stiffness ratio, bearing capacity decreases and then
tends to be stable. Compared with the extreme load, reducing rate is about 10%. It means that after
the stiffness ratio exceeds a certain value, increase of stiffness ratio contributes little to the stability
bearing capacity enhancement. Elastic-plastic instability occurs for inner pipe which can take
advantage of high strength. And stress of outer pipe is small, so outer pipe mainly play constraint
function, so application of ordinary strength steel in outer pipe is reasonable and economical.
2.2 Three-rings SRCB
A total of 28 FEM model of SRCB with 3-rings are established as the same as the single ring SRCB.
And calculation of the overall stability capacity is carried on too. Relationship between stiffness
ratio to ultimate load for three-ring SRCB is shown in Fig7. , and maximum compressive stress of
inner and outer pipes at limit states is shown in Fig8.
500

s=80(inner)
s=80(outer)
s=100(inner)
s=100(outer)
s=120(inner)
s=120(outer)
s=140(inner)
s=140(outer)

400

350

stress (MPa)

ultimate load (kN)

400

300

slenderness
slenderness
slenderness
slenderness

250
200

ratio=80
ratio=100
ratio=120
ratio=140

150

300
200
100
0

stiffness ratio

Fig. 7. Ultimate load of three-rings SCB

stiffness ratio

Fig. 8. Stresses of three-rings SCB

It can be seen from Fig. 7 that ultimate load increases with increase of stiffness ratio for three-rings
SRCB, but increasing rate becomes small. Ultimate load increases respectively by 10.9%, 32.8%,
67.1%, 90.4% for slenderness ratio of 80,100,120 and 140, from i=1 to i=3, which shows the bigger
the slenderness ratio, the more effectiveness of SRCB.

Fig. 9. Inner pipe of three-ring SRCB (i=3)

Fig.10. Inner pipe of three-ring SRCB (i=7)

From the stress response (see Fig.8.), inner tube occurs elastic-plastic buckling at the ultimate state.
The stress of outer tube decreases with increases of the stiffness ratio, which also shows the outer
pipe mainly provides constraint.
2.3 Comparison
Comparisons of ultimate loads of single-ring SRCB (F1), three-rings SRCB (F2)and independent
inner pipe(F0) are shown in table 2~table 5, calculations of increasing rates of R1 to R3 are shown
below. R1=(F1-F0)/F0, R2=(F2-F0)/F0, R3=(F2-F1)/F1.

EUROSTEEL 2014, September 10-12, 2014, Naples, Italy

Table 2.
slenderness
ratio

comparison of ultimate loads (i=1)

inner pipe

ultimate load/kN
one-ring SRCB

Three-ring SRCB

R1

R2

R3
1.66%

80

200

362

368

81.00%

84.00%

100

114

303

302

165.79%

164.91% 0.33%

120

106

215

225

102.83%

112.26% 4.65%

140

80

160.8

167

101.00%

108.75% 3.86%

Table 3.

comparison of ultimate loads (i=2)

slenderness
ratio

inner pipe

ultimate load/kN
one-ring SRCB

Three-ring SRCB

80

200

388

404

94.00%

102.00% 4.12%

100

114

360

379

215.79%

232.46% 5.28%

120

106

301

318

183.96%

200.00% 5.65%

140

80

232

249

190.00%

211.25% 7.33%

Table 4.
slenderness
ratio

R1

R2

R3

comparison of ultimate loads (i=3)

inner pipe

ultimate load/kN
one-ring SRCB

Three-ring SRCB

R1

R2

R3

80

200

393

408

96.50%

104.00%

3.82%

100

114

378

401

231.58%

251.75%

6.08%

120

106

341

376

221.70%

254.72% 10.26%

140

80

286

318

257.50%

297.50% 11.19%

Table 5.

comparison of ultimate loads (i=4)

inner pipe

ultimate load/kN
one-ring SRCB

Three-ring SRCB

80

200

353

409

76.50%

104.50% 15.86%

100

114

340

405

198.25%

255.26% 19.12%

120

106

304

395

186.79%

272.64% 29.93%

140

80

261

365

226.25%

356.25% 39.85%

slenderness
ratio

R1

R2

R3

Table 2~5 show that SRCB can significantly increase the stability capacity compared with
independent inner pipe, and with increase of stiffness ratio, the increasing rates also increase. And
when stiffness ratio is large (such as i=3 and i=4), the greater the slenderness ratio, the higher the
increasing rate. And stability capacity of three-ring SRCB is better than that of one-ring SRCB with
the same slenderness ratio.
It is can be seen from the above comparisons that the stability capacity is significantly improved for
SRCB, and with increase of slenderness ratio and stiffness ratio, the stability behaviour of threering SRCB is better than that of one ring.
3

CONCLUSIONS

Studies have shown the following conclusions.

(1) High-strength-steel core strut can take place elastic-plastic instability, which can effectively
utilize the strength of the advantages of high strength steels; outer tube is basically in elastic state,
mainly providing the constraints for the core strut. SRCB has significantly increased stability
compared to the core tube.
(2) For one-ring SRCB, ultimate load appears at the critical stiffness ratio. When the stiffness ratio
is less than the critical stiffness ratio, with increases of the stiffness ratio, the stability capacity are
increased, and the larger the slenderness ratio, the greater the margin of increase. And when the

EUROSTEEL 2014, September 10-12, 2014, Naples, Italy

stiffness ratio exceeds the critical stiffness ratio, stability capacity decreases and remains unchanged,
and successively increasing stiffness ratio contributes little to improve stability capacity.
(3) With the increase of the stiffness ratio, stability capacity of SRCB with three rings increases, but
the increase rate slows down.
(4)With increases of the slenderness ratio, the effectiveness of SRCB is also improved; the stability
of SRCB with three rings is better than that with one ring.
REFERENCES
[1] Shi Gang, Ban Huiyong, Shi Yongjiu, Wang Yuanqing, 2012. Engineering application and recent
research progress on high strength steel structure. Industrial Construction (in Chinese), Vol. 42, pp. 17,61.
[2] Wu Tianh,Deng Changgen,Shen Bo, , 2009. Bucking control and application of axial compression
steel member. Journal of Southeast University(Natural Science Edition, in Chinese), Vol. 39, pp. 5357.
[3] Liu Xuechun, Xu Keran, Zhang Ailin, 2011. Study on stability behavior of HPS-prestressed stayed
column. Journal of Building Structures, Vol. 32(11), pp. 156-161.
[4] Guo Yanlin, Deng Ke, Lin Bing, 2007. stability behavior and design of longitudinal shuttle-shaped
column. Industrial Construction (in Chinese), Vol. 37(7), pp. 92-119.
[5] Praas B K., 1992. Experimental investigation of sleeved column, Proc. 33rd AIAA/ASCE structures
structural dynamics and materials Conference, Dallas, USA, pp. 991-999.
[6] Yin Zhangzhong, Wang Xiuli, Li Xiaodong, 2010. A finite element analysis of double-tube buckling
restrained brace. Journal of Gansu Science (in Chinese), Vol. 22, pp. 109-113.
[7] Chen Mingfei, 2013. Study On Stability Behaviour Of High-strength Steel Combined Pressure Bar,
Master Thesis of Beijing University of Technology, China.