2.

INSTABILITY OF BARS

Chapter 2
INSTABILITY OF BARS

2.1. TORSION

Generally, torsion is avoided in structural metal (steel or aluminium alloy) members.

There are basically two types of torsion:

St. Venant torsion (torsiunea cu deplanare liber);

warping torsion (torsiunea cu deplanare mpiedicat).

As a simplification, in the case of a member with a closed hollow cross-section, such

as a structural hollow section, it may be assumed that the effects of torsional warping
can be neglected; similarly, in the case of a member with open cross section, such
as I or H, it may be assumed that the effects of St. Venant torsion can be neglected.

2.1.1. St. Venant torsion

It occurs when all the following assumptions are accomplished (Fig. 2.1):

the torsion moment is constant along the bar;

the area of the cross-section is constant along the bar;

there are no connections at the ends or along the bar that could prevent
warping.

the flanges remain rectangles

Fig. 2.1. St. Venant torsion

19

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
2.1.1.1. Stress and strain state

The following aspects can be noticed:

there is no increase or reduction of the length of the fibres (as there is no

longitudinal force):
x = 0 x = 0

(2.1)

warping (deplanarea) of the cross-section is a result of the assumption x = 0

(in order to keep the geometry);
T Ed = r dA

(2.2)

Fig. 2.2. St. Venant torsion stress state

each cross-section rotates like a rigid disk (it goes out of plane but the shape
does not change);

the rotation between neighbour cross-section is the same along the bar.
=

d
= const.
dx

(2.3)

2.1.2. Warping torsion

It occurs anytime when at least one of the St. Venant assumptions is not fulfilled
(Fig. 2.3).

20

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

Fig. 2.3. Warping torsion

2.1.2.1. Stress and strain state

The following aspects can be noticed:

there are longitudinal stresses and strains (Fig. 2.4):

x 0 x 0 w; w

(2.4)

the rotation between neighbour cross-section is variable along the bar.

=

d
const.
dx

(2.5)

Fig. 2.4. Warping torsion stress state

21

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
2.1.2.2. Equilibrium equations

The following aspects can be noticed:

there is no axial force acting on the bar:

Ed ,i

= 0 N Ed = 0 w dA = 0

(2.6)

there are no bending moments acting on the bar:

y , Ed ,i

= 0 M y, Ed = 0 w zdA = 0

(2.7)

z , Ed ,i

= 0 M z , Ed = 0 w ydA = 0

(2.8)

in each cross-section, the torsion moment is the sum of the St. Venant
component and the warping component (Fig. 2.5):
TEd = r dA + Vw h e = 0

(2.9)

TEd = Tt , Ed + Tw , Ed

(2.10)

where:
Tt,Ed

the internal St. Venant torsion;

Tw,Ed

the internal warping torsion.

Fig. 2.5. St. Venant torsion and warping torsion

2.1.3. Torsion and bending

2.1.3.1. Bi-symmetrical cross-section subject to bending moment and shear force

22

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
The force F, acting in the plane xOz, generates only bending moment about the y y
axis (and shear force) and no torsion moment, as the resultant forces Vw on the
flanges are balanced (Fig. 2.6).

Fig. 2.6. Shear stresses in a bisymmetrical cross-section in bending

2.1.3.2. Mono-symmetrical cross-section subject to bending moment and shear force

A force F, acting in the plane xOz in the centre of gravity of a mono-symmetrical

cross-section, generates not only bending moment about the y y axis (and shear
force) but torsion moment too (Fig. 2.7).

Fig. 2.7. Shear stresses for force acting in the centre of gravity
TEd = Ff h e + Fw e

(2.11)

The shear centre (centrul de tiere, centrul de ncovoiere-rsucire) is the point

through which the applied loads must pass to produce bending without twisting. A
force F, acting in the plane xOz in the shear centre of a mono-symmetrical crosssection, generates only bending moment about the y y axis (and shear force) and
no torsion moment (Fig. 2.8).

23

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

Fig. 2.8. Shear stresses for force acting in the shear centre

Notations:

TEd = VEd c

(2.12)

VEd c = Ff h e + Fw e

(2.13)

c=

Ff h e + Fw e
VEd

(2.14)

Ff
; Fw = VEd
VEd

(2.15)

c=

VEd h e + VEd e
VEd

(2.16)

c = he + e

(2.17)

F acting in the centre of gravity

F acting in the shear centre

Fig. 2.9. Effects of a force acting in or outside of the shear centre

24

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

2.1.4. Torsion calculation

2.1.4.1. St. Venant torsion

The case of open cross-sections

a) Rectangular cross-section
t

max =
IT =

TEd t
IT

t = minimum edge

1
b t3
3

(2.18)
(2.19)

T
d
= = Ed = const.
dx
G IT

(2.20)

TEd = G I T

(2.21)

b) Cross-section made of several rectangles

Rigid disk assumptions (simplifying assumptions):
1

1. each cross-section rotates one about the other;

2. the rotation varies from one cross-section to the other but it is constant
for all the points on the same cross-section; the cross-section does not

i
n

change its shape in plane but it can go out of plane;

3. the rotation occurs around an axis parallel to the axis of the bar.
As a result of assumption 2,
n

TEd ,1
G I T ,1

= ... =

TEd ,n
G I T ,n

Ed ,i

i
n

G I T ,i

TEd
G IT

(2.22)

1 n
I T = b i t 3i
3 1

(2.23)

Remark: For hot-rolled shapes,

IT =

n
b i t 3i
3 1

max =

TEd t max
IT

= 1,1 1,3

(2.24)

tmax = maximum thickness

(2.25)

TEd = G I T

(2.26)

25

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
The case of hollow sections (Fig. 2.10)
TEd = Va b + Vb a

(2.27)

Fig. 2.10. Torsion of hollow sections

It is accepted that: (Bredt relation)

Va b = Vb a =

TEd
2

(2.28)

Va =

TEd
T
; Vb = Ed
2b
2a

(2.29)

a =

Va
TEd
=
a ta 2 b a ta

(2.30)

b =

Vb
TEd
=
b tb 2 a b tb

(2.31)

max =

TEd
2 A t min

(2.32)

2.1.4.2. Warping torsion

An exact calculation would consider the bar as a sum of shells (Fig. 2.11).

Fig. 2.11. Shell modelling of a bar in torsion

26

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

In daily practice a simplified approach is used, based on the Vlasov theory. The
simplifying assumptions are the following ones:
1. rigid disk behaviour:

each cross-section rotates one about the other;

the rotation varies from one cross-section to the other but it is constant
for all the points on the same cross-section;

the rotation occurs around an axis parallel to the axis of the bar (Fig.
2.12);

Fig. 2.12. Axis of rotation of the bar

2. the shear deformations are zero in the mid-line of the cross-section (Fig.
2.13);

mid-line

Fig. 2.13. Mid-line of the cross-section

3. w and w are constant on the thickness of the cross-section, because it is

thin (the mid-line is representative for the cross-section);
4. when calculating w, it is assumed that w = 0.

27

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
Based on these assumptions, the cross-section of the bar is reduced to its mid-line
(Fig. 2.14) and the following relations can be written between in-plane strains and
longitudinal ones (Fig. 2.15), considering rotation around point C:
nn ' = dv

(2.33)

du dv
=
ds dx

(2.34)

nn' = nn cos

(2.35)

dv = nn ' = nn cos

(2.36)

mid-line

Fig. 2.14. Mid-surface of the member

nn = Cn d

(2.37)

dv = nn ' = Cn d cos

(2.38)

r = Cn cos

(2.39)

dv = r d

(2.40)

du r d
d
=
du = r ds
ds
dx
dx

(2.41)

du
=
dx

(2.45)

du
Fig. 2.15. Geometric relations

28

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
By definition (Fig. 2.15),
r ds = d = 2

r ds
2

(2 area of the triangle)

(2.42)

Notation (Fig. 2.15):

s

[ ]

= r ds = d L2 normalised warping function (coordonat sectorial) (2.43)

it is also known as sectorial area
du = r ds = d u =

(2.44)

Expressing w and w

x = w = E = E

(2.46)

w dA = E 2 dA

(2.47)

B = w dA = E 2 dA
A

(bimoment)

(2.48)

(bimoment de ncovoiere-rsucire)
I w = 2 dA

(warping constant [L6])

(2.49)

(moment de inerie sectorial)

Parallel between bending moment and warping torsion
x =
z =

M y, Ed
Iy

w =

Vz , Ed S y

w =

t Iy

S w = dA

Iw

M w , Ed S w
t Iw

(warping static moment [L4])

(2.50)

(2.51)
(2.52)

Sw = [L4] (moment static sectorial)

The coordinates of the shear centre about the centre of gravity are:

yC =

zC =

z dA
A

(2.53)

Iy

y dA
A

(2.54)

Iz

29

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
2.1.5. Cross-section characteristics associated to torsion

Considering a mono-symmetrical cross-section (Fig. 2.16), the following can be

calculated:

Fig. 2.16. Mono-symmetrical cross-section (SN030a-EN-EU [14])

the position of the shear centre S from the bottom fibre of the cross-section:

z SC =

t2
b3 t
+ hs 3 1 13
2
b 2 t 2 + b1 t 1

(2.55)

the St. Venant torsional constant:

b1 t 13 + b 2 t 32 + h w t 3w
IT =
3

(2.56)

the warping constant (SN030a-EN-EU [14]):

I w = h s2 I z

b13 t 1 b 32 t 2

(b

3
1

t 1 + b 32 t 2

(2.57)

2.2. BUCKLING LENGTH

The first known theoretical approach for solving a bar in compression belongs to
Euler (1744) [1]. He started by writing the following equilibrium equation (Fig. 2.17)
for a pin connected bar axially loaded in compression:

30

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
d2v
dx 2
dv
1 +
dx

2 32

M 1
=
EI

(2.58)

where:
M = F v

(2.59)
L

e0
Fig. 2.17. The equilibrium of a pin connected bar in compression

The solution he obtained is the very well known:

Fcr =

2 EI
L2

(2.60)

for the critical force that generates buckling of the bar and:
z = e 0 sin

x
L

(2.61)

for the deformed shape of the bar.

This relation was then extended to other types of restraints at the ends, by inscribing
the bar on an equivalent pin-connected bar (Fig. 2.18). To allow this, the buckling
length was defined as a concept. All these theoretical approaches are based on the
theory of bifurcation of equilibrium.

The system length (EN 1993-1-1 [6] def. 1.5.5) is the distance in a
given plane between two adjacent points at which a member is
braced against lateral displacement in this plane, or between one
Definition

such point and the end of the member.

The buckling length (Lcr) (EN 1993-1-1 [6] def. 1.5.6) is the system
length of an otherwise similar member with pinned ends, which has
the same buckling resistance as a given member or segment of
Definition

member.

31

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
It is also defined as the distance between two consecutive inflection
points along the deformed shape of a bar. Sometimes, in practice, it
is replaced by the system length.

Eulers relation is then expressed as:

2 EI
Fcr = 2
L cr

(2.62)

where Lcr = kL is the buckling length (Fig. 2.18).

k end fixity condition.

k = 1,0

k = 0,7

k = 2,0

k = 0,5

k = 1,0

Fig. 2.18. Different values of the buckling length factor

2.2.1. Buckling length of columns

In everyday situations, bars are part of a structure, they are connected to other bars
and so the joints are not purely fixed or purely pinned. As a result, the buckling
length of an element depends on its loading state and on the stiffness of the
neighbour bars. Relations for calculating it are given in different books and were
given in Annexe E (informative) of the previous version of Eurocode 3 ENV 19931-1 [111]. For defining the buckling length of a column, (parts of) structures are
separated in sway and non-sway, depending whether the (lateral) displacements of
the joints at the end of the bar are permitted or not. This separation is done by
means of stiffness criteria that will be presented later. Usually, the non-sway

32

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
behaviour is guaranteed by means of bracings. The distribution factors used in figure
2.19 2.22 are calculated using the following relations:
1 =

KC
K C + K11 + K12

(ENV 1993-1-1 [3], rel. (E.1))

(2.63)

2 =

KC
K C + K 21 + K 22

(ENV 1993-1-1 [3], rel. (E.2))

(2.64)

where:
KC stiffness of the column (I/L);
Kij stiffness of the beam ij.
Remark: A more precise formulation for Kij would be stiffness of the connection
between beam ij and column, as semi-rigid connections could be used. In this case a
more careful analysis should be carried out.

The buckling length for non-sway buckling mode is presented in figure 2.19 [111].

Fig. 2.19. Non-sway buckling mode (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Fig. E.2.3)

The buckling length for sway buckling mode is presented in figure 2.20 [111].

33

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

Fig. 2.20. Sway buckling mode (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Fig. E.2.3)

Fig. 2.21. End fixity condition, k, for non-sway buckling (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Fig.
E.2.1)

34

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

Fig. 2.22. End fixity condition, k, for sway buckling (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Fig. E.2.2)

This model can be expanded to continuous columns, presuming the loading factor
N/Ncr is constant on their entire length. If this does not happen (which is the actual
case) the procedure is conservative for the most critical part of the column [111]. In
this case, the distribution factors are calculated using the following relations:
1 =

K C + K1
K C + K1 + K11 + K12

(ENV 1993-1-1 [3], rel. (E.3))

(2.65)

2 =

KC + K2
K C + K 2 + K 21 + K 22

(ENV 1993-1-1 [3], rel. (E.4))

(2.66)

where K1 and K2 are the values of the stiffness of the neighbour columns (Fig. 2.23).

35

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

Fig. 2.23. Distribution factors for continuous columns (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Fig.
E.2.4)

2.2.2. Buckling length of beams

Presuming the beams are not subject to axial forces, their stiffness can be taken
from table 2.1, as long as they remain in the elastic range [111].

Table 2.1. Stiffness of a beam in the elastic range (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Tab. E.1)
Connection at the other end of the beam

Stiffness K of the beam

Fixed

1,0 I/L

Pinned

0,75 I/L

Rotation equal to the adjacent one (double curvature)

1,5 I/L

Rotation equal and opposite to the adjacent one

(simple curvature)

0,5 I/L

36

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS
General case: a rotation at the adjacent end and b
rotation at the opposite end

(1,0 + 0,5 a/b) I/L

For regular buildings with rectangular frames and reinforced concrete floors, subject
to uniform loads, it is accepted to consider the stiffness of the beams given in table
2.2.

Table 2.2. Stiffness K of beams structures with reinforced concrete floors ([111]
Tab. E.2)
Loading condition of the beam

Non-sway buckling
mode

Sway buckling mode

Beams supporting directly the

reinforced concrete slabs

1,0 I/L

1,0 I/L

Other beams under direct loads

0,75 I/L

1,0 I/L

Beams subjected only to

bending moments at the ends

0,50 I/L

1,5 I/L

When the beams are subject to axial forces, stability functions must be used for
expressing their stiffness. A simplified conservative approach is proposed in ENV
1993-1-1 [111], neglecting the increase of stiffness generated by tension and
considering only compression in the beams. Based on these assumptions, the
values in table 2.3 can be considered.

Table 2.3. Stiffness of beams in compression (ENV 1993-1-1 [111] Tab. E.3)
Connection at the other end of the beam

Stiffness K of the beam

Fixed

1,0 I/L (1,0 0,4 N/NE)

Pinned

0,75 I/L (1,0 1,0 N/NE)

Rotation equal to the adjacent one (double

curvature)

1,5 I/L (1,0 0,2 N/NE)

Rotation equal and opposite to the adjacent one

(simple curvature)

0,5 I/L (1,0 1,0 N/NE)

where:
NE =

2 EI
L2

(2.67)

37

2. INSTABILITY OF BARS

2.2.3. Empirical relations for the buckling length of columns

ENV 1993-1-1 [111] provides empirical expressions as safe approximations that can
be used as an alternative to the values from figures 2.21 and 2.22. The k coefficient
for the buckling length can be calculated by the following relations:
a. for non-sway buckling mode (Fig. 2.21)
k = 0,5 + 0,14 (1 + 2 ) + 0,055 (1 + 2 )

([111], rel. (E.5))

(2.68)

([111], rel. (E.6))

(2.69)

([111], rel. (E.7))

(2.70)

or, alternatively,
k=

1,0 + 0,145 (1 + 2 ) 0,265 1 2

2,0 0,364 (1 + 2 ) 0,247 1 2

b. for sway buckling mode (Fig. 2.22)

1,0 0,2 (1 + 2 ) 0,12 1 2
k=

1,0 0,8 (1 + 2 ) + 0,60 1 2

0,5

2.2.4. Comments on the buckling length of beams

If the buckling length is generally easy to identify for members subject to axial
compression forces, the effective lateral buckling length is a more delicate subject,
given the complexity of the deformed shape (at the same time buckling and torsion).
This leads to a temptation to simplified approaches, like considering the effective
lateral buckling length as equal to the distance between points of zero (Fig. 2.24) in
the bending moment diagram, or between inflection points of the strong axis
deformed shape [8].

In order to prevent this, the American code ANSI/AISC 360-10 [7]

states in the 6.3 commentary: In members subjected to double
curvature bending, the inflection point shall not be considered a
Important

brace point.

38