Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Informstson Service
AD-A023 670
f I
PREPARED FOR
DEFENCE RESEARCH INFORMATION CENTRE
MAY 1975
L J
REPRODUCED Pv
MCOSIM fr
ITlt
WC
nuiMMCEi
W<e SKtiN
NH S«cllM
K
Q
a
NSTIfKATtM
ii
WtlUWTIM/ÄlAILIBIllTY CODES
I
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF WELDED
STEEL SHIP GRILLAGES
/
DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET
(Notes on completion overleaf)
(As far as possible this sheet should contain only unclassified information. If is is necessary to enter
classified information, the box concerned must be marked to indicate Che classification eg (R),(C) or (S)).
1. DRIC Reference (if known) 2. Originator's Reference 3. Agency Reference 4. Report Security
Classification
NCRE/R511 UNLIMITED
7. Title
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF WELDED STEEL SHIP GRILLAGES
SMITH C S 0575
Rigs 1-26
11. Contract Number 12. Period 13. Project 14. Other References
Abstract
REPORT NO NCRE/R611
(Item N6A2)
ABSTRACT
Superintendent
L_^
ii
CONTENTS
Page Nos
Title i
Para Nos
INTRODUCTION 1-3
TEST PROCEDURE
Deflection Measurements 17
Strain Measurement 18
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Initial Deformations 19
Plate Stiffness 60
iii
CONTENTS (Contd)
Para Nos
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 75
REFERENCES 1-72
TABLES 1-8
FIGURES 1:26
ABSTRACT CARDS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF WELDED STEEL
' "" SHIP GRILLAGES
by
C S Smith
INTRODUCTION
The importance and complexity of this requirement have resulted over the years in
PRESTON, BRUCE, ALBÜERRA and OCEAN VULCAN (1)*. Introduction of welding in place
of riveting and adoption of longitudinal framing in most large ship hulls have
welded plate grillages having closely spaced longitudinal girders and relatively
ical and experimental studies have also been carried out referring to
of compressive strength for ship type grillages referring to all possible modes
of failure, allowing for the complex interactions which occur between plating
and stiffeners and for the influence of initial distortions and residual
standing of grillage behaviour and hence more accurate design methods, a series
of tests has been carried out at NCRE on large-scale grillages representing war-
ship single-bottom and deck structures under compressive load combined in some
cases with lateral pressure. The object of the present report is to present the
**• Except in the case of light superstructure decks, where overall grillage
are, in addition to the material yield strength a and Young*s modulus E, the
- 2 -
a = spacing of transverse frames
b s spacing of longitudinals
t = plating thickness
cated values of 8 in the range 1.0 to H.5 and X in the range 0.15 to 0.9. Test
(la, lb, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, Ha, 4b) representing possible ship-bottom configura-
Grillages Ha and Hb, all stiffeners were standard Admiralty tee bars.
each structure was formed by two strakes joined by a longitudinal butt weld at
(or close to) the grillage centreline. All stiffeners were continuously welded
operating first on one side of each stiffener and then the other, giving in
- 3 -
stiffener; as indicated in Table 5, weld-induced residual stresses were notice-
ordering twice the required quantity of steel and selecting plates and stiffen-
ers for grillage construction on the basis of measured dimensions and material
properties. The mean total area of weld metal deposited at each longitudinal
Yield strengths obtained from standard tensile tests with a strain rate of
also carried out on a total of 170 specimens from selected plates and tee-bars;
values.
*• Tests were carried out in the Large Testing Frame (LTD at NCRE in a
against lateral pressure by light flexure plates and along their sides by tie-
ends and sides of test structures» with the ends and sides free to move longi-
tudinally in the plane of the grillage and the sides also free to move trans-
versely in-plane.
hydraulic jacks evenly spaced across the ends of the grillages. Compression was
applied by activating the jacks at one end of the rig from a coooon pressure
source and reacting loads through a passive set of jacks» also connected to a
>n (closed) hydraulic line» at the other end. At the active end loads were
i - 4* -
applied through calibrated hydraulic load transducers giving an indication of
each applied jack force with better than 2% accuracy. Differences between jack
loads, attributable to friction in the jacks, were always less than 10% and in
most cases less than 5%. Differences between total loads at active and passive
ends, attributable to friction between grillages and the support platform and
normally less than 5%. Jacks and load-transducers were mounted on cradles
10. In order to distribute jack loads into the test structure in a reasonably
uniform manner, avoiding the risk of premature failure close to the ends, each
grillage was reinforced by fitting doubler plates to the webs and tables of
longitudinal girders and to plate panels between girders over 2/3 of the span of
end bays. Because of the conditions of simple support at the ends, reinforce-
between test panel and support platform as shown in Figure 1. Provision was
TEST PROCEDURE
12. Before testing, the initial deformations of each grillage were thoroughly
- S -
also measured, together in some cases with sideways distortion of stiffener
tables. Extensive measurements were made of plating distortion along the centre-
13. During construction of the grillages (with the exception of la and lb) weld-
sides of the plating and on the stiffeners before and after welding using a Demec
typical structures having high and low plate slenderness. Grillage 7 was subse-
quently tested to collapse; Grillage 8 was instead used for further assessment
were also measured,' together with strains in the webs and tables of longitudinal
and transverse stiffeners. Strain readings were corrected where necessary for
strains.
Load Application
15, Grillages la, 2b, 3b, ^a, 5, 6 and 7 were tested to collapse under com-
pressive load alone. Grillages lb, 2a, 3a and 4b were tested to collapse under
compressive load combined with lateral pressure. The applied lateral load,
- 6 -
each case as the pressure just sufficient, when acting alone, to cause yield in
was subjected within the elastic range to various combinations of in-plane and
lateral loads. During collapse tests compressive loads were applied incre-
a slight initial upward eccentricity of jack loads. It was found, however, that
reinforced end bays, the effect of jack eccentricity had largely disappeared
(and even in some cases caused slight upward bending) in adjacent, unreinforced
stiff transverse frames and reinforced end-bays, the effect of load eccentricity
ship bottom and deck structures in which the effective line of action of com-
pressive load will to some extent follow any shift of neutral axis caused by
shifting neutral axis may in some cases cause serious experimental error.
Deflection Measurements
were carried out using dial gauges. Overall vertical deflections of each
grillage were measured at stiffener intersection positions by gauges mounted on
Strain Measurement
18. Extensive measurements of strain in stiffeners and plating were carried out
during the tests. Single gauges were attached to the tables of longitudinal and
longitudinal webs; these were used to evaluate bending stresses under lateral
Each of these structures was fitted with over 270 strain gauges. Considerable
tests, although detailed strain distributions were recorded across at least one
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Initial Reformations
the bounding transverse frames. Mean values and coefficients of variation (cov =
- 8 -
longitudinal girders was usually upwards but was in some cases downward; per-
centages of upward and downward displacements, together with maximum and mean
values and cov estimated separately for upward and downward deflections, are
indicated in Table 4.
strains on the assumption that transverse stresses were negligible, are listed
Grillages 2a and 2b. Mean plating and outer-fibre stiffener residual stresses
for Grillages 7 and 8 are also included in Table 5. Plating stresses in these
structures were estimated from both longitudinal and transverse strains; dis-
lower, than those in Grillages 5 and 6; results for Grillage 8 confirmed the
pressive residual stress a shown in Figure 2(b) should be noted; this differs
commonly assumed in theoretical analysis (7, 8, 15, 70). Published data (9, 29,
39, 50, 51, 53) referring to weld-induced residual stresses in stiffened plating
2
as high as TO.,and of non-uniform distributions of o similar to those shown in
3 y re
21, Residual stresses measured in the outer fibres of stiffeners were very
- 9 -
X
Stresses were in most cases compressive, though much lower than a in the
re
plating, but were tensile in some cases. Weld-induced residual stresses in the
webs of deep fabricated tee girders in Grillage 8 are shown in Figure 2(b);
agreed well with theoretical deflections and stresses estimated by beam grillage
generally higher than theoretical values even where all the applied lateral load
was assumed to act on the longitudinal girders. This effect, which is not at
parabolic distribution of normal force along plate edges or by the fact that
distributed edge forces exceed the applied lateral load, being balanced by con-
centrated forces close to the plate corners; the discrepancy may be caused
plating effective breadths b .in the range 0.75b to 1.0b may .safely be assumed
for closely spaced stiffeners (b/t < US) while for more widely spaced stiffeners
(b/t > 60) the recommendation by Clarkson that an effective breadth of 0.5b or
- 10 -
Solution 1 : b ,/b =1.0 for longitudinal girders,
along both longitudinal and transverse members; in Solution 4 lateral load was
2 2
- * Et: (1)
er " 0/, 2N. 2.
3(l-u )b
if2EI
1 + (2)
a2GA.
(iv) overall grillage buckling estimated using the formula for a simply
- 11 -
2
n ir 2Dn • D B2 2ni2D 4r2
x
2 T
T^ 4 2 (3)
2
hB DxL n Dx n B^
y u
in which L and E are overall length and breadth, m and n are the
Grillages 2, 3 and 5 (see Figures 10, 12 and 19). The collapse mode of
Gri.'.lage 6 (see Figure 21) was consistent with computed n = 2 and n = 3 overall
elastic buckling modes. Elastic buckling data are also of use as a basis for
Grillages la and lb
27, Failure of Grillages la and lb was preceded by buckling of plate panels
- 12 -
effectiveness in Grillage la is illustrated in Figure 5, which shows distribu-
initial load application, during which early permanent set of plating strains
deformations and permanent set of selected plate panels are shown in Figure 7.
that tripping deformation of the girders was more marked than flexural deforma-
tion. A photograph taken at an early stage in the collapse of Grillage la, show-
ing plate buckling and incipient stiffener failure, is contained in Figure 8(a);
photographs showing fully developed collapse are contained in Figures 8(b) to 8(e).
collapse load was slight. The form of stiffener failure was almost identical
with that in Grillage la, collapse occurring primarily between Frames T4 and T5.
Grillages 2a and 2b
flexural mode with negligible sideways displacement (except for the edge girders
bays some sideways tripping of girders occurred close to the transverse frames.
The lower side of the grillage following collapse is shown in Figure 10(b) illus-
- 13 -
31. Collapse of Grillage 2b occurred at an average compressive stress of
1^.7 tsi. The form of collapse was virtually identical with that of Grillage 2a.
Buckling deformations of plate panels were not observed until collapse occurred
and were then confined primarily to the collapse bay in each grillage. Signifi-
Grillages 3a and 3b
average compressive stress of 11.1 tsi combined with a lateral pressure of 3 psi.
upward flexural buckling of girders occurred in one of the central bays together
pressure and involving some tripping of stiffeners close to the central trans-
verse frame. I
adjacent bay. Downward deflection was associated with some local stiffener
35. In both grillages substantial permanent set of lon^. tudinal strains, attrib-
pressive stress of about 7.5 tsi. As illustrated in Figures 13 and It, which
The marked downward buckling and permanent set of longitudinal girders between
- lU -
ßrilläges ka and Mb
36. Grillage *ta collapsed at a mean compressive stress of 13.3 tsi. Failure
ping of deep fabricated girders between Frames T2 and T3, accompanied by local
inelastic buckling of the plating and of the webs of deep girders. The form of
failure is indicated in Figure 15(a), which shows the initial stages of collapse,
13.5 tsi combined with a lateral pressure of 8 psi. As shown in Figures 16(a),
(b) and (c), failure was similar in form to that of Grillage Ha except that
collapse occurred in the central bay and deep girders all buckled in one
that buckling in which deep girders deflect in the same direction would occur at
opposite directions.
set in typical longitudinal girders and plate panels is shown in Figures 17 and
Grillage 5
flexural in one of the central bays, downwards and involving some tripping in the
Grillage 6
- 15 -
X
well as longitudinal girders, as illustrated in Figure 21. Failure was preceded
Grillage 7
HI. Collapse occurred at a mean compressive stress of 12.0 tsi. The form of
under conpressive load can be assumed to fall into the following four
categories:
Plate Failure
*»3, In this case the ultimate strength of plate panels is exceeded before exten-
point, reduction of load in the plating proceeds more rapidly than increase
of load in the stiffeners so that the ultimate load for the stiffened panel is
experimental collapse data (2, 3, <*, 7, 8, 9, 11, 16, 70). Most existing data
refer to plates in which unloaded edges are free to deflect in-plane; it has
been shown (52) that the difference between this boundary condition and the con-
panels remain straight (~ = 0) is negligible for steel plates of low and medium
- 16 -
loads for edges-free and edges-straight conditions was found to be no more than
and lateral pressure but reference to theoretical analysis (10) and test
data (11, 13) suggests a linear interaction between compressive and lateral
loads and indicates that lateral pressure is unlikely to cause significant loss
theoretically (8, 15, 16) and experimentally (9) for a wide range of plate
plate stress-strain curves, based on Cambridge University and TRRL data (8, 9,
15), are shown in Figure 23. It is evident that in plates with slendemess in
the range - > 50 having little or no residual stress and only slight initial
the yield strength of the stiffeners is substantially higher than that of the
residual stresses, and in grillages incorporating very stocky plating (- < us),
little if any load-reduction occurs in the plating; the ultimate strength of the
plating will not normally be reached until the average compressive strain is well
in excess o. the yield strain e ; at this stage extensive yielding and hence
initial distortion nay be directed towards the plating inducing buckling in this
direction; bending of the stiffeners away fron the plating in one interfrane bay
nay also induce buckling towards the plating in adjacent bays. Where buckling
occvr>K towards the plating, as illustrated in Figures 11, 12, 19 and 21, flexure
1*7. Provided that correct account is taken of reduced plating stiffness and that
stiffened panel nay be investigated using inelastic column analysis based either
Data curves developed using analysis of this type (59, 62, 63) provide an approxi-
nate neans of estimating collapse strength under combined compression and lateral
pressure.
the present report, a computer program developed for analysis of inelastic buck-
ling of plane frames (58) has been adapted to deal with beam-column failure of
girder with attached strip of plating along its length into uniform beam elements
illustrated in Figure 25. Any dist. Nition of residual stress over an element
applied incrementally, a line«* solution being obtained for each incremental load
- 18 -
(K + KG)6 = K
fibre stresses and strains are updated; the state of stress in each fibre of
each element is examined and where the total stress (including initial residual
shear on yield being ignored. Allowance is made for recovery of elastic stiff-
do
ave
from the plating stiffness bt . , derived directly from the slope of load-
shortening curves of the type shown in Figure 23 which are represented numeri-
evaluating the determinant of the stiffness matrix (K ■♦■ Kg) in each incremental
solution; collapse is assumed to occur when the determinant changes sign. The
(ii) a plot of stiffness matrix determinant against applied axial load for
i*9. Collapse loads computed for Grillages 3a and 5, in which flexural buckling
a plane of symmetry assumed at mid-span. Each half-span was divided into ten
larly subdivided while the plating was represented by a single fibre (except in
calculations 1, 2 and 15, where the plating was subdivided in the same Way as
that of Grillage 3a). P- condition of simple support at the ends of the column
for plating and stiffeners were taken to be 6% higher than the tensile values
listed in Table 2.
50, Standard initial vertical deformation of the stiffener and plating was
assumed to have the form of uniform curvature towards the stiffener with central
amplitude equal to the mean value indicated in Table H; downward initial defor-
mations were also examined. Zero, standard and double-standard deformations are
tive sign. The influence of lateral load on compressive strength was examined
using a standard pressure for each grillage equal to the experimental value
tions the line of action of applied compressive load was assumed to follow any
Table 8) is believed to be more realistic both for test grillages and for actual
ship structures than the alternative assumption that the line of action of axial
- 20 -
load was kept fixed in order to examine the significance of the assumption.
to have the idealized distribution shown in Figure 3; the assumed width 2nt of
the tension block adjacent to the stiffener attachment was adjusted so that the
total initial force on the cross-section was zero in each case. The average
Figure 2(b), that a was distributed parabolically across each plate panel; it
was assumed vhat plate buckling effects were negligible and that loss of plating
stress, was estimated (except in calculations 1, 2 and 15) from the load-
fibre;
2.5 tsi in both Grillages 3a and 5, consistent with measured values in similarly
- 21 -
equal to the mean measured value indicated in Table 5.
23 were carried out for two continuous spans of each structure assuming a condi-
tion of simple support at the central transverse frame and a plane of symmetry
at the centre of each interframe span. Each half-span of stiffener and plating
was divided into ten equal-length elements and each cross-section was subdivided
with various upward and downward deformations of the left-hand span as indicated
19 and 23; in both cases the right-hand span buckled upwards and the left-hand
was found to commence at the base of the stiffener, where the compressive
residual stress was highest, and to spread along the length and upwards over the
full height of the stiffener at the centre of the left-hand span, the plating
remaining elastic; this process was influenced by the fact that the yield
strength of the plating was 10% higher than that of the stiffener. In calcula-
tion 23 (assuming that only the plating carried residual stress) stiffener yield
was found to start in the outer-fibre at the centre of the left-hand span and to
stress.
53. From the results listed in Table 8 the following observations may be made,
(towards the plating) the collapse load may be substantially less than
- 22 -
between upward and downward collapse occur where plating stiffness is
(ii) Calculations 1 and 2 indicate that plating residual stresses can have
which the line of action of load follows the shift of neutral axis.
(v) Calculations 5, 8 and 9 show that upward lateral pressure reduces the
even where all initial deformations are towards the stiffener, upward
bending in the span with largest deformation may cause downward bending
Theoretical collapse loads for Grillage 5 are slightly lower than the
likely to occur in short, flexurally stiff girders and in stiffeners with low
and 12, tripping may take place in association with flexure of the stiffeners
- 24 -
where buckling occurs towards the plating.
can be estimated using approximate formulas (64) or, more accurately, by folded-
plate (25, 26) or finite element analysis. Evaluation of initial elastic buckling
behaviour may provide a pointer to the likely failure mode but gives no direct
moduli are established referring to the appropriate stiffener geometry and allow-
ing correctly for initial deformations and residual stresses; such tangent
ity and warping rigidity, including the effects of initial distortion and
the type used in civil engineering structures (66, 67, 68). It seems clear that
this type of analysis could be extended to deal with coupled tripping and bend-
verse rotational restraint exerted by the plating on the base of the stiffener
(folded-plate analysis (25) has shown that such restraint may have a dominant
- 25 -
mm attkam*L,».> -. -i- -.:z-■ -.^r^^atm^A'.jii^i-- -..
stiffener table; where stiffeners are formed by flat-bars or bulb-plates a
grillage over its entire length into one or more half-waves with bending of
58. Elastic overall buckling loads and modes can be estimated accurately for
analysis. In a very slender grillage for which the elastic buckling stress is
analysis methods for grillages under combined loads, allowing for large-
analysis method of this type has been developed by Parsanejad and Ostapenko (U8);
within 5% of the value indicated in Table 7, Further comparisons with test data
and with alternative theoretical solutions are however needed before the
- 26 -
reliability of this and other analysis methods (49) can be judged conclusively.
59. Tests described in the present report have demonstrated various forms of
examined carefully in design. Most ship grillages contain heavy continuous weld-
ing and hence are affected by substantial residual stresses and plate distor-
unlikely to occur (except where the yield strength of stiffeners is higher than
high residual stresses and in slender plating by buckling, will however in many
Plate Stiffness
60. For design purposes the stiffness of plate panels under uniaxial compression
shown in Figure 23. Plate panels may in some cases also carry transverse com-
welded plates under biaxial compression (11) suggest that where the transverse
and stiffness may be estimated from a parabolic interaction formula (70). This
however for further test data and theoretical analysis referring to plates under
biaxial compression. Existing finite element (8, 15) and finite difference (23,
21) programs appear to offer, an effective means of generating design data and are
can be examined fairly accurately, allowing for residual stresses, initial defor-
mation and reduced plating stiffness, using incremental finite element analysis
of the type described in the present paper. For design purposes analysis of this
type appears to provide the best basis presently available for evaluation of
grillage compressive strength and also offers a means of computing design column-
62. The most serious deficiency of flexural column analysis is that it takes no
with flexural buckling as shown in Figures 10, 11, 12 and 21. (It cannot unfor-
ical analysis that the tripping deformations shown in Figures 10, 11, 12 and 21
until after the maximum load was reached. Equally however the possibility cannot
of course always involve coupled flexure and tripping. An urgent need exists
also clearly exists for further test data referring to flexural-torsional failure
of stiffened panels. The present lack of adequate test data and analysis methods
is a compelling reason for cautious design and for avoidance where possible of
- 28 -
carry high compressive.load.
trated by Tables t and 5 and Figure 2, may have widely different initial deforma-
tions and residual stresses and might therefore, as indicated by Table 8, have
a stiffened panel may lie in correlation of grillage test data with individual
ive initial deformation and residual stress, perhaps as a function of mean and
maximum values, for use in column analysis. The statistical aspects of this
64. Deep girders susceptible to tripping failure are sometimes provided with
lateral support in the form of tripping brackets which impose rotational con-
tinuity between plating and stiffeners at one or more positions along their span.
and of introducing hard spots at the toes of brackets which may cause fatigue
problems and may also, in warships, weaken the structure under explosive loading.
span brackets would at least have forced changes in the collapse modes of
65. No proven theoretical analysis method and very little test data exist at
present for this form of failure, A need clearly exists for provision of
further test data, for use of such data to evaluate existing theory (IS, 49)
accurate design method it is suggested that the initial elastic overall buckling
stress, which is readily calculated, should be kept above yield point and well
above the expected maximum service stress level. It should usually be possible
an early stage and that pillars, minor bulkheads etc should be carefully posi-
tioned and designed with sufficient strength and stiffness and sufficiently
67. Test results and beam-column calculations described in the present paper
together with previous theoretical (10) and experimental data.(11, 13) referring
proportioned single bottom and deck structures. Lateral pressure may have a
more marked effect on plate stiffness and hence on grillage strength where
- 30 -
..■m iMiimii ■■■ I
evidence is however very scanty and a need clearly exists for further data
with lateral pressure. Existing finite element and finite difference programs
(8, 159 23, 24) appear to offer an effective means of generating design data and
panels may be examined using finite element analysis of the type described in the
in developing data curves for ship-type sections under combined later il and com-
pressive loads. Such curves have already been derived for single-span panels
(62, 63) but these should be used with caution because of the possibility of
69. Recent theoretical and experimental studies (8, 9, 15, 16, 23) have led to a
biaxial compression.
70. The results sumnarized in Table 8 indicate that high compressive plating
stiffened panels. Results also indicate that strength of stiffened panels nay be
apparent importance of residual stress effects suggests that some priority should
be given to
- 31 -
(ii) seeking an improved understanding of the influence of welding pro-
which high tensile residual stressesy induced in the table by welding and flame-
stiffeners which may occur during the fabrication process: recent analysis (58)
has shown that residual stresses induced in tee-bars by fully elastic cold-
71. It should be borne in mind that residual stresses induced in a ship's hull
by welding and other manufacturing operations will to some extent be "shaken out"
of the ship's hull* This process has been discussed by Faulkner (70), who
suggests that for design purposes effective residual stresses should be assumed
which residual stresses reduce before extreme compresslve loads occur, perhaps
vice.
- 32 -
which delay coopressive yield in stiffener outer-fibres; the influence of
73• A need has been indicated for further collapse tests on welded steel gril-
lages, both as a basis for evaluating new theory and as a source of empirical
design data. In carrying out such experiments it is suggested that the follow-
variability,
m *Mmm
using a scanning device in order to allow evaluation of modal deflec-
tion components.
manent sets.
where stiffness is ]ow and may be negative, and a record may be obtained
ship where collapse of one deck might not precipitate hull failure).
- 34 -
JMitfiMiflTthllWT iTiii
effectively using a mechanical, screw-jack type of testing machine
mations and residual stresses, which are inherently irregular, whose exac values
cannot be specified for design purposes and which should therefore be defined
strength.
^ÜüiiiÜMl^^fe*^" i MI I iiiiiiiilMiiiliiiiiifliiiirfiiirr rn ;
interactions between different components of a grillage and different
modes of failure.
Further experimental evaluation of grillage strength also has a key part to play
strength; large-scale tests of the type described in the present report are too
expensive to carry out in sufficient numbers and small-scale tests are statisti-
the main object of further grillage tests should therefore be to guide the
methods and design data with provision of empirical corrections where necessary.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
75. The author is indebted to Messrs W Kirkwood, A Potten and L Somerville for
extensive assistance in carrying out tests and processing experimental data and
- 36 -
REFERENCES
16. Y Ueda: "Ultimate Strength of Square Plate with Initial Deflection and
Residual Stress Subjected to Compression". Unpublished paper,
summarized by Y Fujita, ISSC Committee II.2 Report, Sept 1974
- 37 -
rflMM^"^iM*lW-r't-j:^; iüliigilÜBi ■■ a —^ *-■- a** - -
17. M Kmiecik: "Behaviour of Axially Loaded Simply Supported Long Rectangular
Plates having Initial Deformations". Skipsteknisk Forskningsinstitutt
Report No R-8U, Trondheim, Sept 1971
21. N C Lind, M K Ravindra, J Power: "A Review of the Effective Width Formula".
1st Speciality Conf on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, Univ Missouri,
Aug 1971
22. B Aalami, A A Bayati: ^ew Developments in the Analysis and Design of Thin
Plates". Paper presented at Sympos on Non-Linear Techniques and
Behaviour in Structural Analysis, Transport & Road Research Lab,
Dec 1974
24. L P C Yam: "Finite Difference Method for Non-Linear Plate Problems and
Parametric Study". Paper presented at Sympos on Non-Linear Techniques
and Behaviour in Structural Analysis, Transport S Road Research Lab,
Dec 1974
• ■'■iaftn^tm^'-*"^- _j5L_ag_-_
32. D Faulkner: "Strut Panel Test Data", unpublished Report on Tests carried
out at RN College, Greenwich, submitted to Merrison Committee, 1973
41. A Mansour: "Ship Bottom Structure under Uniform Lateral and In-Plane Loads".
Schiff und Hafen, Heft 5/1967, 19, Jahrgang
L^. • 39 •»
^9. C Massonnet, R Maquoi: "New Theory and Tests on the Ultimate Strength of
Stiffened Box Girders". Conference on Steel Box Girder bridges,
Inst of Civil Engrs, London, Feb 1973
iaa^aajsaftMMMaiiiifliiiii — ÜO m yaMüfeaasaä^
65. R S Barsoum, R H Gallagher: "Finite Element Analysis of Torsional and
Torsional-Flexural Stability Problems". Int Jour Num Methods in
Engrg, Vol 2, 1970
mmm
^
%
01 H>-/
co
o
• O
3
.
i
o
•
ON
o
UN
o
s^o UN
O
2f
o
i
1
^S« o O o o o o o o o o
i
1
h
«•>
ON « f^- CO CO H ON VO rH •
1*1a 3
Ö ^ fi
^• ^• %• :* vO H Si CNI
o o o
•
CM CM
o
CM
o
CVJ CM
o o O O O O O
h
1 H
«B "~
' 1• 551 fit Pi c^ • ft
vO ft 3• -*
VO
• ft
r-
^ ft 4"
VO
•
O H -H o o o o o o O o o o o o
2
s
3^5 •o -4- o •o
ON i -4-
o
CM
r-t O i o S8 H
-* liN -4 J K^ KN -4" J *N H KN -*
•O 8• ifN UN UN rH
S •o
at M o«
^ • O « ON O
• o UN
• •
Sii o
H H
o CO CO VO VO r»- 00 VO J- VO CO
«0
^ o o O o o O
1
in
% 3 VO VO NO 3 3 VO 3 vO 5
h- q
3 H»w
JJ - ^• ■
i 3o o o
«N
O
ft
o
^
o 8 *
O
UN
MN
O
1
* » «J
O
i
o o o
• O o o
• o o o
1
1 to w to
o o o
3 «
S3 • o •
i (NI
CO
CNJ
4
CM
21
CM
?e
H
00
^ ON
H
IB
H
H
CM
15
H
WN
o
CM
o
fvi
o o o O O o O O O O O o 3o o
-*vo
n
g
h „
1
H |ll
8 H -H
«• ^R•
o o o
• o
• CM
O
• CM
O
ITN
CM
o
•
UN
CM
o
•
UN
*N
o
•
UN
CM
O
i*N
O
UN
i^N
O
on«
.• ••
2
T
TJ «Ö "0
1 0 0 0
«o
• 4»
«*
+a
q)
+*
*
S4| d ä )e 3 O
8 3 sr R CN
5i ■5i» t* u u
K> •A rH <-4 ■H H H ^H H
1
»<N WN1^.
•o •UN
«A
o • UN
• &• s• 5t• 3• o
• UN §• U^ o do
*l* NO
t
•4 *N
....
-1 KN J J K M X
"^ • • •
*N <M ">
c
Q +
♦
♦
•• X K K
-*
a CM CM 3 ^ Si 3 O
<-* 3 ^ 4
CM CM % UMT« UN
CM tM "N
O C? O
mm-i X K K
«
a M M O
•*> s
i8 so 3 O
• 3• 3 Ö 8 8 3• O Ö O
c o o O O o o o o O O O o
•H
g J3 Ä -O
o o
d
•i t^V
•
H
•
K^ i• CM
•
Ä
(M
Ä
CM
•
KN
CM
JX
CM
UN
CM
•
5 5
CM CM
UN
5 1
*N
•
3 TJ -O •«
sss
h L. t.
-4» a o o o o o O o o o O O O
8. S.S.
i 3
«MM
u u u
8 4» M **
ft
A 5 «1
CM Ä Ä Ä 5 5 UN VO r^ CD
äaaateaaägtafaa^
(Q
CD
03
s
0
LA
0
•
r-
0
•
H
H
•
r-
0
•
CM
H
•
r-
0
•
O
fH
•
r»-
0
•
OS
0
•
-4-
O
•
lA
O
•
rA
H
■
U 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 O O O
O
>
CO
iA -4- H m lA 0 ON H 00 LA -d- »A
3 §3.H • • • • • • • • • • « •
r^ r- r^
b
E^ £.%£ 00
-1
00
H
vo
H
»A
H H
00
H
vo
H
VO
iH H
r-
H H
lA
H
►<
03
ad 1 1 1 1 1 1 r- r^ 1 1 1 CO
« § 1 1 1
I
1 I 0
•
0
•
1 1 O
•
O 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 O
©
-0
0
laO §3.H 1 1 i 1 1 1 r- r^ j
I 1 »A
• • *
•H
U ä-S^
><
1 1
1
1
1 1 1
1 1
1
1
1
1 ON
CM
1 H H H
6O <*
•
i• S• O
H
•
s• 8• »A
0
•
S• ^A
O
•
H
O
•
«
•
CO
O
•
1 0 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O 0 O
3 ö »d h- m r^ H 0 r- ^ O CM a\ H 00
■p eö H «H • • • • • • • • • • • •
1^-
ti
5 ►»5^ H H H
CO
H
lA
H 4 lA
H
lA
H
lA
H
tA O
CVJ H
a
(NO §O
O
•
lA
O
•
t• S• €• fA
O
•
«
•
lA
O
•
€• 8• «
•
0
•
O O O O O O O O O O 0 0
vo lA VO
5B. CO H «H
V£>
• •
VX>
CM
•
c^. N-
• • •
vo
•
r^
•
h*
•
vo
•
H
•
0
•
00
£^ H H H H
VO
H H H H H
VO
H
CTS
rH H
6
■1
^0
A 5 (0
CNJ CNJ Ä « 5 5 lA VO r^ 00
h
0
-«-
-■■JM:.^-.J^.. ^ .
TABLE 3
Plating Longitudinals
Grillage
I No b/t
'-it a/k tu
bt
la 76.2 2.67 21 0.24 0.42
-U-
S i
§
I i o
1 ^2
o
O
5 » pi
I 8 g o
o
io 8
o o
« o 8o
o o
I
1 Ä *
I 3 CD
I o o O
CO
o c
8 SI
o o
8
o 8o
o
er*
8 8
c? o
'S
hi s »
i 1o «
l_ o
«ft
Ioe ■ I 8 o
>
3
c
o
-* ■5 3
o o 5 % 3 o
c 2" C
I
3s
ir
"
u
9 ■>
5 8-5 So
1 1
• • 1 1 1 1 i 1 3• •
C3 4* > 1 1 o o
1
1 j
1
1
1
1
t
i
1
1 O CM
M -H
H «
^mmm.
lie mmmm amm^ 1 _
iss- s 00
10 •v^ s
1
1
1
!
CO
•
CM o
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 i 1
1
•
CM O
•
s -e
J5
m 4»
H 0
ii | 1
m
r>~
*>
-4
3. 6o 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1
• «
• 8u i 1 1 1
1 1 1
1
1
1 1 i 1 o o O
i •
e s j i
e
4*
e
1
ON
4» %
s 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
• •
»n
« 4*
m
e
4»
m
CO
s 8 •Ö
•
4*
I
>
4»
« • • • • • •
4»
to «^^ IP 1 1
• *
NO
•
CM
•
»A
m
•
00
•
-4-
•
-4
•
-*
•
r**
•^
•
M
s H
4»
m
vO iC\ SO P** lA ON ^4 lA
<:
s»
«
1 M
. |||... |
CM
1 2
e
3 1
5 So i i
i
i 1
R•
o
*
o
Ä
O
•
CM
o
4
ITS
o
•
SO
d
CM
O d
CO
CM
d 6
* C
«
•9
■
1 11 s
r» r<- o -*
e 9 i
1
1
-t
•
»O
• -t
«
o
•
00
• •
j
CM
• •
-*
• 10
1
O
1 21 00
r4 -4
CM
i
ft '
41 O m ja
^4 X « J 3 in \D fN*
00
du B
! «^
^_ _. wrnrnm^- mmmm mmmm ... — ■MM IMH^ L-LJ
-4*-
CM H. CM »A
i^""*. x"v o»-»» O—N
CM ^ -4" rH II i: It II II
.«^
•sas. II
ä
H
ß C
It
1
1 !
II
c
ß
>—<
ftn •*-m* N«< *—» 1 1 >-• fA r^- -4 fA ON
»•MC • « • • •
1,. r-l ON OS o
3 rH
3 4
a. *"N
rH
rH
rH
-t
■H
H
rH
lA H H
*—V
K> -* 'A H rA
=145 o
^5
^^ ^"-s
•^
^~s
CM
^"«v
CM CM
* r-4 CNJ -* II II tl H II II M M II
U ^ a as
• o pen II II II fi c c II fl C c G C
> 3 u 4» 2 •w »w^ 1 'W N-*' N—r
O A c \
O H C N> N^
• -4 \ CM -4 CM lA O
JC ou p • • • • • • •
£
1 00
3 3 3 ■4-
rH
H 3 »<rN CM
rH
H
4
<•■"*
rH
8 " «9
25 •Ö
• * «
«H
• • • •
v *
U M>
'S 4» >>
r-l «} fH
OS
•
iTN
•
1
1
1
1
o
•
O
• 1 1
I
p H rt »^ 1 I
55 fc cu 2
<
P^.
'XN
ON
I ON
<M
ON
CM
5ä^H
b
!-•
•a
-H •O fl
2^ © « « • •
1
g-1
•Ö 4»
OH«
>> Os
f-4 11 1
K^
H
• 1
3 5 " ma. |
CM 1
LTN
——
I-3 • Os
•
IA
•
in
• NX)
•
"ti a 11
« o
£
21 S 00
CM 5 NO
CNJ
H lA <r-«s
01 II M
II n
• • « C C c
♦Ö 4* >> t C c
5 -SJ-S
fc» ft. cj
•
^t
•
-H
V-r»
CM
i 1
I
v-*
i^
•
r»-
s^
O
i i
•H oj • • • • • •
S
H
-H
rH
rH R ON
CM «
MMM-
• *—V
^~*
*^s
<* ry *"«■ ^-v CM CM
« tjr\ iA -4
r-l n II
0. c3 c
II II
c
II
m o
hi c
v-#
e
>w s--»
Ok« CM
• • • • • •
CM lA
CM CM
ft
4 3
H as
CO
(M X 3 m NX>
^i
b
ö
-47 -
irarWiMffni«Mr—- -
4» n
© ß TI
0) *« W J
H tl
no
11 II
ll Ö
c «
C\]
Ä 04 O
o 3 3 3
§ " n
© a) n
•d +> >»
^ HO H cd H
5.3 OH (Ö
■§
u
En
Iä © (D
CQ
CQ
tj +» >J
H <Ö H
s
a)
lA
15 3
&
0>
XJ «H
©©BO
I Sä 5
o
(D CM
I ß
II
a)
H O
-48 -
jütotetefea^i^ui^^,-..^.-.!,... M... .>„.....!...: -..^. -
TABLE 7
la 0 12.4 0.76
lb 15 12.1 0.73
2a 7 15.9 0.91
2b 0 14.7 0.83
3a 3 11.1 0.69
3b 0 9.8 0.61 ;
4a 0 13.3 0.82
4b 8 13.5 0.83
5 0 11.4 0.72
6 0 8.1 0.49
7 0 12.0 0.65
**=cyu/a^yave
VOVÄ (fief 45)
o ft •
«3 •
^10 % VD -d- O ^• IfN
•
VO
•
CM O
•
O
•
VD
• ON
•
ON
• •
• • • • • •
ä-g ac^h
aj«^N
Lf> O o o O o\ <r\ o O ON ON ON »^N
O4*
H 4 H rH H H
ON
H H H
MMMH
O 03
8) r- 00 00 CJ ^t O CM ON so -*• -^• O NO O NO
P4 4> H «ö • • • « • • • • • • • • •
o
8M
o
d^ -4-
H a 3 9 p-l H a ON H
H
00 ON ON ON
S
H
S »tJ
o a)
3 O o o O o O o H CM O O o O H o
J-3
H
a) 4>
o o
o 4* 'H »rl H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
© •< CO
%
H
o «J 03
o ' 5 «
00
Sfi
«9 4>
O H H CM r-O ^t K> KO •^ KN ro KN K> K> O
M
5
g
H -H
fltj
■HI P
•H C
H H H rH H H H O H T-|(V H
55 H H CM
1 1 1
<S
tO
CO
e «H fc e e r S C r c s e r c C «
3 TJ a>
O ti H
A O &
O
5
CO
§
•rl
O
H
0}
o
mm
ft
o 0)
r^-
03 CM ON r^ 00 ON ON r^ r^ ON
P« • • • • • • • • • •
CÖ^-N ^ O C7N ON ON ON ON Os o ON ON
H «H b H H
H 01 e»
o+>
0%^
•tj «3
O 01
6) r^ vo o vo
0) -*• N"N
•
00
•
-4"
•
00
•
oo
• • •
rH Ot • •
0 O o H
fl CO
o
L>
d* H
H
H
H
ON ON
H H
ON
H
ON ON
H
a
O O O O O O rH O o H
5^
H
CO 4»
■e "d •" 1 , , 1 , 1 1 , 1 1
^ >< x:
a> <{ o
ss
1 SS
d 03
P 03
^ fO KN f^ KN r<N N^ H r^i KN
03 43
00 ® co
«
c
9 o
H H H H H H -|w -Iw
4^
•P s
•H U
H H
1 ^1« O *-H -|W -K O H
1 1
P
so
01
-p
o
>> C
u o •d
»d 4> A
§a« ©
fi »H
3 rd
fl e 03 r r c c e e r
a)
5 ö
Ö o
H
U
h»
Ü EH
o
i
o
c p
•3
■P
4
« O \o r- 00 ON O H CO KN -4- m
H H
1* H H CM CNI CNI Csl CSJ CM
rH
4
O
-51 -
So Q
o
^2 a:
^tf UJ
52
Ss /^
Ui
O
o <
**^J r\
S -J
DC
i
N.
^^— r- "^^^^^^S '
o
I,
0 r* ""
iü oc
h- —
u. Z
o
r^
i
^ j
V-
—
fri
op u
O H
U)
H
1-
-
(.> uiUJ
— u)a 3-J
lil FO
I- </) <
z UI —
j-« h- -
OC
iOO __
Ui
ID > J-P=i JP O
Z z r'"^
ILJ
< $
H1 a*.
(7) K UJ
< 0C3
^^ 0)
to:'
000
ttu.<
FIGURE I
NCRE/R6II
MMMMiliMMi rrmr lAn-'iii ii" "' r
GRILLAGE 7. WELD -INDUCED RESIDUAL STRESSES
MEAN VALUES IN PLATING. OUTER FIBRE VALUES IN GIRDERS
A 1
KlYi-
IMTIAL CONOmON«:
; «flit » TAKES TACK WELOCO
| It-«HOLE amiXAGE «ELOEO
LI __ U-J
[MITT WILD
WITT WSLO
-294 -I •O -324
TOMS/IM9
■• i/^%—i/V
-^
SECTION A
t^f ■
i-SUTT «ELD
-i-so -ass
•• -sso
-SSO f OO -SO« -1*42
4^ 1E T! >L T I I FIGURE 2(Q)
STRESS
TONS/IN*
'-^ SECTION S
O:
STKL- -S
TONS/Wi1
.s:
-IO:
: |
*
1 i *
'V i * i
*-SUTT WELD i
TONS/JH 1
^
-«O V L
t-BUTT WCLD
SUTT WELD
KCTI9N I
^ *
FIGURE 2,(b)
STRESS
TONS/INa
iliiPG SüTT WELD
* i j* !I
\
Al *i *i
STRESS TONS/IN*
-40 -S -4 0 4 -4 n «
I % S3
STRESS TONS/IN*
0 4 -4 0
Cl a £1
1
t^2rt)t-4«—b~2«T) t—*j
TT TT /ft/t> '^/f
TTT m* Oy (TENSILt)
FIGURE 3
mmam
GRILLAGES la AND lb
COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STIFFENER
DEFLECTIONS t STRESSES UNDER 9PS1 LATERAL PRESSURE
X GRILLAGE la I EXPERIMENTAL
THEORETICAL
SOLUTIONS O GRILLAGE IbJ RESULTS
FIGURE 4
Bjjm ^^^***^M**miimmmimaM
Ill
<
er
IT
ui
Q
o
u|
tu
<
H o
z
IJ
h
-J
u
a D
UI
o H
a
0
ü
UJ
<
UJ
Jz n v«. 01 N
u ^5
UJ
(0
< <
-J UI
-J
S D
UJ
H
3
a
2?
0
o
I i
NCRE/R6II
■MMMMHMIM Mute
o
z
<
a! i
«2
ui
a o
i- <
10
3
z
< HI
III >
2
u. m
O ac
a
2
O
u
o a
S in
o
H
«o z
m
o
<
-I
-I
S
o
f— I SI - SS3W1S
J L
m •A
FIGURE 6
GRILLAGE la
LS
"1
— nr- ■ ■
0 H
L4
ra T3 T4
INITIAL DCFOMMATIOK
PAHKL O »»ANIL N
iI 0-4 H-fTtl OIFLfCTION
m
4TSI
INITIAL OCPONMATION
0*1 lO-l
i O •'[-=
Tl T4 Tl T4
CFLECTtON UNOIN LOAD litTtl
(NffLATIVt TO INITIAL SNAK) / -.01 | #»
II
NCRE/W6il
CWLLAGE io
GRILLAGE Io
EARLY STACCS OF COLLAPSE
FULLY DEVELOPED COLLAPSE
FIGURE Bfa)
FIGURE •(>)
GRILLAGE Io
GRILLAGE Io
FULLY DEVELOPED COLLAPSE
FULLY DEVELOPED COLLAPSE
ttftun
FIGURE jfc)
FIGURE j (d)
GRILLAGE Io
FULLY DEVELOPED COLLAPSE
FIGURE ■ (o)
GRILLAGE lb
L5
N G
L4
T2 T3 T4 T5
INITIAL DEFORMATION
o-4r
5
PANCL N " PANEL G
ISPSI + II6TSI OCFLECTIOM UNDER LOAD
i
JSflH (RELATIVE TO INITIAL SNARE)
z
o
«I
Ik
8
2
5
i
FIGURE 9
<;9UAP^E aufm P^^ OFFENER ^IDE COLLAPSE VIEWED FROM PLATING SIDE
GRILLAGE 3a - COLLAPSE
FIGURE 11
GRILLAGE 3b - COLLAPSE
[ I
FIGURE ta
iHWHMBWi»
GRILLAGE 3a
Q o L4
T2 T3 T4
PANEL Q PANEL D
INITIAL DEFORMATION
0-2r
2 I PS I+10-4 TSI
i
v) ,3+91
z DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD
o 0-4
P (RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHAPE)
a
-i
0-2 -
UJ
o
I
y3PSItlO^TSI
,3^91 PERMANENT
/3t7« SET
\l INITIAL DEFORMATION
3PSI + IO-4TS
DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD
3 + 7-8
(RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHAPE)
ff
9 U.
Es
as
3PSI+ IO-4TSI
PERMANENT
0-2 SET
<
ü at
Z w
HI £
> Ö
FIGURE 13
^ .... »■^■^^A--
GRILLAGE 3b
1L4
1t3
T2 T3 T4
PANEL R PANEL C
INITIAL
DEFORMATION
FIGURE 14
NCRE/R6II
mm* imiiimwiiiiiiiiliilwiir rT-trtiiMirfir
GRILLAGE 4o GRILLAGE 4q
INITIAL STAGES OF COLLAPSE FULLY DEVELOPED COLLAPSE
GRILLAGE 4b GRILLAGE 4b
INITIAL STAGES OF COLLAPSE FULLY DEVELOPED COLLAPSE
GRILLAGE 4b
COLLAPSE VIEWED FROM PLATING SIDE
FIGURE 16(c)
'i i L7
\ LS
AA I c L4
i L3
!
Ta T3 T4 T5
MNCL A A PANEL C
INITIAL DEFORMATION
01 01
^:
o
0 3r
DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD
l
oa^ *?J.ml\J \ (RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHAPE)
,^
•oTS, -jo a
4o.i
INITIAL DEFORMATION
of
DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD
IJOTSI (RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHAPE)
u at ia-
m m
0
Si
o o
0 1
f-O
INITIAL DEFORMATION
o a
O
is' Ta
x
O * IJOTfl (nftATIVl TO INITIAL SHAPE)
P .. o-ar ias \
• OTll
iaa
FIGURE 17
NCRE/H6M
IgitfiriiHtiiiiTiiiil i - -^-■.^^^^-fftiiBrf»^'*^-- ^■--■■^ ^■:
GRILLAGE 4b
L7
L$
AA " e L4
L3
xa T3 T4 T5
PANEL A A PANEL C
INITIAL DEFORMATION
T3 T4 T5
*
• PSI+12 tTJ*
< t-f 11-4
PERMANENT SET
• ♦ 4-«/
INITIAL DEFORMATION
T;3
O
z
o • PSI * 12 STSI
• ♦ 121
t+M*4
28
DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD S+» i
(RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHAPE)
• PSI
PERMANENT • PSI4>l2iTSI
SET + 12*1
O-lr
0
j «
H
it - "- 0
■"T^tia**"^—
mm 't
GRILLAGE 5 - COLLAPSE
FIGURE 19
MCHe/Rdll
GRILLAGE 5
N G
L4
T2 T3 T4
PANEL N PANEL G
0-4
INITIAL DEFORMATION
0*2
O
-0-2
DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD
I 0*6 (RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHAPE)
w
z 0-4
o
0-2
O
141
J 0
U.
Ill
o -0-2
-0-4
< 0-4
a
0*2
-0-2
PERMANENT SHAPE
T4
FIGURE 20
NCRE/R6II
GRILLAGE 6 - COLLAPSE
FIGURE 21
. ** A .m 1 M ^ A .
GRILLAGE 6
LS
0 c
L4
T2 T3 T4 TS
PANEL O PANEL G
INITIAL DEFORMATION
0 2
-0 2
-04
DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD
0-4 (RELATIVE TO INITIAL SHARE)
0-3
-oa
-0-4
II
-I
s
i
5
i
i
C
FIGURE aa
NCRE/R 611
AND INITIAL DISTORTIONS
30
FIGURE 2 3(b)
'ovt
OS
30
(a) PLASTIC COLLAPSE OF GRILLACE 3a
GIRDER UNDER CONCENTRATED LATERAL LOAD
3-Or
I
THCOftiTICAL COMPUTED
FULLY - PLASTIC COLLAPSE
7a-o COLLAPSE LOAD « l-SIT / LOAD«IS2ST
a
m
a
<
an
u
20
CBN THAL LOAD TONS
COMPUTED DUCKLING
LOAD •119-4 TONS
A
EXACT EULEN
m DUCKLING LOAD • lit O TONS
o
J. JL
SO 40 SO SO lOO ISO
.
SUBDIVISION OF CROSS-SECTION INTO VlBRCS*
FIGURE 25
NCRE/R6II
2c
<
s *••
Ml
32
M I
> r
m •-b'
w
«•
m
o Si
m X
o
HI fh
O <
< -1
«i 3
-I U
or -1
o <
o S o g 5 o « o
M
O «i o ^ O m
Z 9 9 9 9 9 9 Or
o o ö ö 9
N-ldVHS TVI1IMI Ol 3AUn3« NOIX^nilO
a x
HI
o
r
< _
I*ul