Determination of Elastic Critical Load FactorforSteel Structures PDF

INFORMATION PAPER
Determination of Elastic Critical Load Factor
for
Steel Structures
Structural Engineering Branch

Architectural Services Department
November 2012
Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page i of ii File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Information Paper on Calculation of Elastic
Critical Load Factor for Steel Structures CTW/MKL/CYK
Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Issue/Revision Date : November 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
2. Determination of Elastic Load Factor ..................................................................... 1
3. Effects of Horizonal Load ....................................................................................... 3
4. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 4
5. References ............................................................................................................... 4
Annex A Example 1 – Calculation of λcr by Deflection Method

Annex B Example 2 – Calculation of λcr by Eigenvalue Analysis
Annex C Example 3 – Considerations in the Determination of λcr by Eigenvalue Analysis
Annex D Example 4 – Effects of Horizontal Load on λcr
Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page ii of ii File code : LamdaCritical.doc

1. Introduction
1.1 Code of Practice for Structural Use of Steel 2011 (the “Code”) published by Buildings
Department clause 6.3.2 on the elastic critical load factor, λcr, has been revised to clarify
the determination of λcr by the deflection method. However, there had not been any
elaboration on the use of the eigenvalue analysis method though the correct
determination of λcr is a critical step in the design and analysis of steel structures.
1.2 The purposes of this paper are:
a) to summarize the available methods in the Code for the calculation of λcr;
b) to give examples to calculate λcr and to provide guidance on the correct
interpretation of λcr found by different methods; and
c) to study the effect of horizontal load on the calculation of λcr.
2. Determination of Elastic Critical Load Factor
2.1 In the Code, λcr of a steel frame is defined as the ratio by which the factored loads
would have to be increased to cause elastic instability. λcr is an important parameter that
is required to classify a steel frame into “non-sway”, “sway” and “ultra-sensitive sway”.
Clause 6.3.3 of the Code classifies frames with λcr ≥10 as non-sway, and specifies that
the P- effect is insignificant for such frames. For sway frames with λcr <10, they are
classified as either sway with 5≤ λcr <10 or ultra-sensitive sway with λcr <5, and clause
6.6.1 of the Code specifies that both the P- and P-δ effects should be considered in
their design. In accordance with clause 6.3.3 to 6.3.5 of the Code, λcr can be calculated
either by the eigenvalue analysis for general structures or the deflection method for
geometrically regular and rectangular frame.
2.2 Deflection method
In the deflection method, a frame is classified into either sway (or ultra-sensitive sway)
or non-sway by considering the magnitude of the horizontal deflection of each storey
due to the application of notional horizontal loads at each storey which are taken
typically as 0.5% of the factored dead plus live loads on and above the floor considered.
For clad structure provided that the stiffening effect of masonry infill wall panels or
diaphragms of profiled steel sheeting is not explicitly taken into account, the frame is
considered as non-sway if the deflection of every storey is less than 1/2000 of the storey
height under the action of the notional horizontal loads. With such limit on deflection,
equation (6.1) of the Code therefore gives the following equation to calculate λcr of a
steel frame, except for frames with sloping members having moment-resisting
connections in which the calculation of λcr should refer to clause 8.11 of the Code:
F h
λcr  N
FV δ N
where FV is the factored dead plus live loads on and above the floor considered;
FN is the notional horizontal force taken typically as 0.5% of FV for building
frames;
Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 1 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

h is the storey height;
and δN is the notional horizontal deflection of the upper storey relative to the lower
storey due to the notional horizontal force FN.
An example is included in Annex A to show how to determine the λcr for a typical
geometrically regular and rectangular frame by deflection method. Further example on
the calculation of λcr can also be found in NCCI: Calculation of alpha-cr (King 2005)
(available: http://www.access-steel.com/, accessed: 18 September 2012).
2.3 Eigenvalue analysis
2.3.1 The determination of λcr by eigenvalue analysis is usually calculated by commercially

available computer software (e.g. SAP2000, NIDA). In eigenvalue analysis, the
numbers of modes to be found can be specified in the computer program and each
eigenvalue found is associated with a buckled mode shape. λcr should be taken as the
eigenvalue corresponding to the first “sway” buckling mode. An example is included in
Annex B to demonstrate the determination of λcr by eigenvalue analysis with NIDA and
SAP2000. It should be noted that the eigenvalue determined by the computer
programme may either be a “sway buckling mode” or “non-sway buckling mode” (or
“local buckling mode”). Figure 1 has therefore been added in the Code in its 2011
version in order to distinguish sway buckling mode from local column buckling mode.
Both the P- and P-δ effects are only required for sway frame, and hence only λcr for
sway buckling mode is required.
Non-sway buckling mode Sway buckling mode

Figure 1 Sway and non-sway buckling modes
2.3.2 In the determination of λcr by eigenvalue analysis, it is therefore important to study the
form of each buckling mode to see if it is a sway mode or a non-sway mode. King (2005)
commented that when using eigenvalue analysis in finding the first sway-mode, “it is
important to study the form of each buckling mode to see if it is a frame mode or a local
column mode. In frames where sway stability is ensured by discrete bays of bracing
(often referred to as “braced frames”), it is common to find that the eigenvalues of the
column buckling modes are lower than the eigenvalue of the first sway mode of the
frame. Local column modes may also appear in unbraced frames at columns hinged at
both ends or at columns that are much more slender than the average slenderness of
columns in the same storey.” Similarly, Rathbone (2002) noted that “where the columns
are axial load predicated, many of the lower buckling modes will be [local] column
buckling modes. It is the [sway] buckling mode of the whole structure that is important”
to include second-order effects. Therefore, λcr should be taken as the factor
corresponding to the first sway buckling mode rather than the local buckling mode.

2.3.3 Therefore, if the first mode of the eignevalue analysis is a local buckling mode, then the
lowest eigenvalue found does not correspond to the first sway buckling mode. Instead,
the eigenvalue analysis finds the eigenvalue for the local buckling mode. In such case,
PSE should take care in using the eigenvalue analysis and not just use the lowest
eigenvalue which may only be local buckling mode, and it is not the original intent to
use it to define sway sensitivity. Should eigenvalue analysis be adopted, PSE should
scan the output to see which eigenvalue corresponds to the first sway buckling mode.
Alternatively, the deflection method can be used to calculate λcr for the first sway
buckling mode. An example is included in Annex C to illustrate the correct
determination of λcr for a typical portal frame by eigenvalue analysis. Further real
example can also be found in SEB Information Paper - A Case Study of Using Metal
Scaffold System for Demountable Grandstand: The Opening Ceremony of Hong Kong
2009 East Asian Games (available: http://asdiis/sebiis/2k/resource_centre/).
3. Effects of Horizontal Load
3.1 Clause 6.3.2.2 of the Code states that “… of a geometrically regular and rectangular
frame subjected to gravitational loads or gravitational loads plus horizontal load (e.g.
wind), the elastic critical load factor for a sway frame may be calculated as …”, and this
means that the deflection method is applicable to frames with or without horizontal load.
However, it should be noted that equation (6.1) of the Code is only a function of vertical
load and the storey height and is irrelevant of the horizontal load. Horne (1975)
remarked that “[i]t should be noted that the elastic critical load of a frame is affected to
an entirely negligible effect by horizontal loading, and only the vertical loads need be
considered.” In order to verify the accuracy of the deflection method and Horne’s
remark, the values of λcr of a simple portal frame (at Annex D) under various
combinations of horizontal and vertical loading by both deflection method and
eigenvalue analysis have been analysed.
3.2 From the example at Annex D, the following can be observed that:
a) The results from both deflection method and eigenvalue analysis are similar when
λcr is less than 10.
b) When λcr becomes larger, the differences between the deflection method and
eigenvalue analysis also become larger but this is not a concern as it has already
been a non-sway frame with λcr 10.
c) Under the same applied vertical load, λcr determined by deflection method remains
unchanged while that determined by eignevalue analysis remains of the same order
of magnitude under the action of different magnitude of horizontal loads.
d) For the case where the frame is subject to horizontal load only (from horizontal load
of small to large magnitude), the values of λcr so obtained are always substantially
larger than 10, i.e. non-sway frame.
Therefore, all of the above observations agree with Horne’s remark that “the elastic
critical load of a frame is affected to an entirely negligible effect by horizontal loading.”

4. Conclusions
4.1 In using eigenvalue analysis for the determination of λcr, PSE should use the eigenvalue
corresponding to the first sway buckling mode, not the local buckling mode, as λcr.
Alternatively, the deflection method can be used to calculate λcr for geometrically
regular and rectangular frame structure.
4.2 Horizontal loading has negligible effect on λcr of a frame, and hence only the vertical
loads need to be considered in the determination of λcr.
5. References
British Standard Institution (2005), BS EN 1993:2005 – Eurocode 3: Design of Steel

Structures (London: BSI).
British Standard Institution (2000), BS 5950-1:2000: Structural Use of Steelwork

Design of Steelwork in Building (London: BSI).
Buildings Department (2011), Code of Practice for the Structural Use of Steel 2011
(Hong Kong: Buildings Department) (available: http://www.bd.gov.hk/english/
documents/, accessed: 18 September 2012).
Buildings Department (2007), Explanatory Materials to Code of Practice for the

Structural Use of Steel 2005 (Hong Kong: Buildings Department) (available:
http://www.bd.gov.hk/english/documents/, accessed: 18 September 2012).
Horne, M R (1975), “An Approximate Method for Calculating the Elastic Critical
Loads of Multi-storey Plane Frames,” The Structural Engineer, 6(53), pp. 242-248
King, C (2005), NCCI: Calculation of Alpha-cr (Ascot: SCI) (available:

http://www.access-steel.com/, accessed: 18 September 2012).
Rathbone, A J (2002), “Second-order Effects – Who Needs Them?” The Structural

Engineer, 80(21), pp. 19-21 (available: www.istructe.org, accessed: 18 September
2012).

Annex A
Example 1
Calculation of cr by Deflection Method
This example shows the procedures to determine the value of cr of a 3-storey portal frame at
5m c/c (Figure A1) by using the deflection method.
Design Loadings:
Dead Load = 7.5 kN/m2
Live Load = 5.0 kN/m2
Steel Members:
Steel Grade: S355
Beam Size: 356×171×51 kg/m UB
Column Size: 254×254×107 kg/m UC
Design Load Case = 1.4  DL + 1.6  LL

Factored Load = (1.4  7.5 + 1.6  5.0)  5 = 92.5 kN/m
Load per floor = 92.5  12 = 1110 kN
Therefore, Notional Horizontal Force = 0.5% of vertical load = 0.5%  1110
= 5.55 kN
Figure A1

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex A Issue/Revision Date : October 2012
Annex A
The structrue was analsyed with QSE, and the displacement of each floor obtained is shown
in Figure A2:
Figure A2 Deformed Shape


1 = 5.585 mm h1 = 3.0m
2 = 4.230 mm h2 = 3.0m
3 = 2.704 mm h3 = 3.0m
Using equation (6.1) of the Code,

5.55 3000
cr,1 =  = 11.07  10
1110 5.585  4.230
5.55  2 3000
cr,2 =  = 9.83  10
1110  2 4.230  2.704
5.55  3 3000
cr,3 =  = 5.55  10
1110  3 2.704
Therefore, the value of cr should be taken as the smallest of cr,1, cr,2 and cr,3, i.e. 5.55.

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex A Issue/Revision Date : October 2012
Annex B
Example 2
Calculation of cr by Eigenvalue Analysis
The same example at Annex A is now analysed by the eigenvalue analysis with NIDA and
SAP2000.
Design Loadings:
Dead Load = 7.5 kN/m2
Live Load = 5.0 kN/m2
Steel Members:
Steel Grade: S355
Beam Size: 356×171×51 kg/m UB
Column Size: 254×254×107 kg/m UC
The computer analysis by NIDA and SAP2000 is carried out in accordance with the following
steps:
(A) NIDA
Step 1:
The geometry of the structure to be analyzed is input in the computer model with the factored
design load case of 1.4 DL +1.6 LL.

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex B Issue/Revision Date : October 2012
Annex B
Step 2:
In the analysis option, select the “Eigen-Buckling Analysis” as the analysis type.
Step 3:
After the completion of analysis, the load factor corresponding to the first buckling mode for
the load combination is found to be 5.36.

Annex B
Step 4:
Check the mode shape of the model to confirm if the structure deforms in a sway buckling
mode.
Therefore, λcr should be taken as 5.36 (the load factor corresponding to the first sway buckling
mode) which is about the same value as that obtained from the deflection method at Annex A.
(B) SAP2000
Step 1:
The geometry of the structure to be analyzed is input in the computer model with the factored
design load case of 1.4 DL +1.6 LL.

Annex B
Step 2:
In the definition of load cases, select the “Buckling” as the load case type.
Step 3:
After the completion of analysis, the load factor corresponding to the first buckling mode for
the load combination is found to be 5.29. Check the mode shape of the model to confirm if the
structure deforms in a sway buckling mode.
mode) which is about the same value as that obtained from the deflection method in Annex A
and NIDA.

Annex C
Example 3
Considerations in the Determination of cr by Eigenvalue Analysis
The value of λcr of a single storey portal frame with a diagonal bracing (Figure C1) is
determined by both the deflection method and eigenvalue analysis.
Design Loading:
1000kN at ¼ th span of the first bay (factored load)
Steel Members:
Steel Grade: S355
Beam Size: 152 × 152 × 23 kg/m UC
Column Size: 152 × 152 × 23 kg/m UC
Bracing Size: 88.9 × 6.3mm CHS
1000 kN
3m
3m 3m
Figure C1
By Deflection Method
5 kN
Notional horizontal defelction due to the notional horizontal force (0.5%×1000 = 5kN) is
0.149mm (using computer software NIDA)
Therefore, λcr = 3000/200/0.149 = 100.6

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex C Issue/Revision Date : October 2012
Annex C
By Eigenvalue Analysis
The ratio by
which the load has
Mode Mode Shape Sway Mode to be increased to
cause elastic
instability
Non-sway
st buckling mode/
1 7.1
Local column
buckling mode
Lateral deflection at top of frame = 0.72mm
Non-sway
nd buckling mode/
2 25.1
Local column
buckling mode
Non-sway
buckling mode/
3rd 27.4
Local column
buckling mode
Sway buckling
4th 99.0
mode
mode) which is of about the same value as that obtained from the deflection method.

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex C Issue/Revision Date : October 2012
Annex D
Example 4
Effects of Horizontal Load on cr
The value of λcr of a single storey portal frame (Figure D1) is determined by both the
deflection method and eigenvalue analysis under different combinations of horizontal and
vertical loads.
Steel Members:
Steel Grade: S355
Beam Size: 254 × 146 × 373 kg/m UB
Column Size: 203 × 203 × 46 kg/m UC
Vertical Load, Fv
Horizontal B C
Load, Fh
3m
A D
4.5m 1.5m
Figure D1
Horizontal Vertical λcr(Deflecton) λcr(Eigenvalue) Ratio

Case Load, Fh Load, Fv (Deflection (Eigenvalue (λcr(Deflection)/
(kN) (kN) Method) Analysis) λcr(Eigenvalue))
1 50 400 8.09 7.5 1.08
2 100 400 8.09 7.5 1.08
3 200 400 8.09 7.4 1.09
4 400 400 8.09 7.2 1.12
5 50 50 64.7 59 1.12
6 100 50 64.7 56 1.17
7 200 50 64.7 48 1.36
8 400 50 64.7 34 1.90
9 10 10 332.93 295 1.13
10 20 10 332.93 278 1.20
11 30 10 332.93 258 1.29
12 40 10 332.93 239 1.40
13 50 10 332.93 219 1.52

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex D Issue/Revision Date : October 2012
Annex D
From the analysis results, it can be observed that:
a) The results of both deflection method and eigenvalue analysis are similar when λcr is
less than 10.
b) When λcr becomes larger, the differences obtained from the deflection method and
eigenvalue analysis also become larger but this is not a concern as it has already been
a non-sway frame for λcr 10.
c) Under the same applied vertical load, λcr as determined by deflection method remains
unchanged while that as determined by eignevalue analysis remains of the same order of
magnitude under the action of different magnitude of horizontal loads.
Values of λcr of the same structure under the action of horizontal load only (Figure D2) has
also been determined as follows:
Horizontal B C
Load, Fh
3m
A D
6m
Figure D2
Horizontal Vertical λcr(Eigenvalue) Lateral

Deflection/
Case Load, Fh Load, Fv (Eigenvalue Deflection
Height
(kN) (kN) Analysis) (mm)
14 10 0 1783 9 1/333
15 20 0 891 18 1/167
16 30 0 594 27 1/111
17 40 0 446 36.1 1/83
18 50 0 356 45.1 1/67
19 100 0 178 90.2 1/33
20 200 0 89 180.3 1/17
21 400 0 45 360.6 1/8
In the above cases where the frame is subject to horizontal load only (from horizontal load of
small to large magnitude), λcr so obtained are always substantially larger than 10, i.e. non-
sway frame and therefore the horizontal load will not affect sway stability for frame
classification.

Issue No./Revision No. : 1/- Annex D Issue/Revision Date : October 2012

Determination of Elastic Critical Load FactorforSteel Structures PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Determination of Elastic Critical Load FactorforSteel Structures PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

INFORMATION PAPER

Determination of Elastic Critical Load Factor

Structural Engineering Branch

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page i of ii File code : LamdaCritical.doc

2. Determination of Elastic Load Factor ..................................................................... 1

3. Effects of Horizonal Load ....................................................................................... 3

Annex A Example 1 – Calculation of λcr by Deflection Method

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page ii of ii File code : LamdaCritical.doc

1.2 The purposes of this paper are:

2. Determination of Elastic Critical Load Factor

2.2 Deflection method

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 1 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

2.3 Eigenvalue analysis

2.3.1 The determination of λcr by eigenvalue analysis is usually calculated by commercially

Non-sway buckling mode Sway buckling mode

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 2 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

3. Effects of Horizontal Load

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 3 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

British Standard Institution (2005), BS EN 1993:2005 – Eurocode 3: Design of Steel

British Standard Institution (2000), BS 5950-1:2000: Structural Use of Steelwork

Buildings Department (2007), Explanatory Materials to Code of Practice for the

King, C (2005), NCCI: Calculation of Alpha-cr (Ascot: SCI) (available:

Rathbone, A J (2002), “Second-order Effects – Who Needs Them?” The Structural

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 4 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Design Load Case = 1.4  DL + 1.6  LL

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 1 of 2 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Figure A2 Deformed Shape

Using equation (6.1) of the Code,

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 2 of 2 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 1 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 2 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 3 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 4 of 4 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Therefore, λcr = 3000/200/0.149 = 100.6

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 1 of 2 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Lateral deflection at top of frame = 0.72mm

Lateral deflection at top of frame = 2.69mm

Lateral deflection at top of frame = 2.3mm

Lateral deflection at top of frame = 51.5mm

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 2 of 2 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Horizontal Vertical λcr(Deflecton) λcr(Eigenvalue) Ratio

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 1 of 2 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

From the analysis results, it can be observed that:

Horizontal Vertical λcr(Eigenvalue) Lateral

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Page 2 of 2 File code : LamdaCritical.doc

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi