Crippling

In column buckling (Fig. 1), all points in the cross-section undergo the same lateral deflection, i.e., the
cross-section remains unchanged all along the column. In other words, the column buckles as a whole.
This happens in long columns.
In short columns with cross-sections composed of flange plate elements like formed or extruded sections,,
local buckling takes place (at a lower load) before column buckling happens. Here one or more flanges
buckle as panels independent of the others. For example, in Fig. 2, the flange BCDE has buckled whereas
the flange containing the leg AB has not. The compressive stress at which this happens is same as the
compressive buckling stress of BCDE treated as a panel simply supported along the loaded edges BC
and DE and the corner edge BE and free on the fourth edge CD. In the figure, the face BCGDEF assumes
the deflected position of BCG'DEF. That is, in local buckling, column cross-section changes and varies
along its length.
Crippling is a failure phenomenon which happens after local buckling in which corner sections
progressively take greater and greater share of load as the load is further increased until failure takes
place
Fig.1 Column Buckling
Source: Bruhn
A
B
Buckled
shape
Fig. 2 Local Buckling Fig. 3 Post-local Buckling
As the load is increased, the flange containing the leg AB also buckles as a panel. Then the column would
have undergone local buckling totally. At this point, the compressive stress would be constant throughout
the cross-section. Even after both the legs AB and BC have buckled, the column continues to take more
load without failing. As the load is increased, the corner regions which are relatively stiffer start taking
more and more share of load as in Fig. 3. Later at some load, the column fails. That is called crippling and
the corresponding load is called crippling load
Crippling
Fig.1 Column Buckling Fig. 2 Local Buckling Fig. 3 Post-local Buckling
A
B
Buckled
shape
Crippling
A few things to note about crippling:
Crippling is relevant only for short columns
The crippling load depends only on the cross-section of the column and not on its length
The crippling load cannot be determined by theoretically. It is determined by empirical formulae
substantiated by experiments
Crippling load is always greater than the local buckling stress. For a very short column, it can, in
the extreme case, be equal to the local buckling stress
Formulae for crippling
The following are the two most commonly used methods of determining the crippling load:
1. Gerard Method - applicable to sections in which all the segments are of the same thickness as in
formed sections
2. Method of segments applicable to sections in which all the segments need not be necessarily of
the same thickness as in extruded sections Also applicable to formed sections where the cross-
section is not one of the standard ones in the list specified in Gerard method
Gerard Method
For sections with distorted unloaded edges as angles, tubes, V groove plates, multi-corner sections
and stiffened panels,

(1)
0.85
1/2
CY
2
CY
CS
F
E
A
gt
0.56
F
F
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
Crippling
(2)
For sections with straight unloaded edges such as plates, tee, cruciform and H sections,
0.40
1/2
CY
2
CY
CS
F
E
A
gt
0.67
F
F
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
For 2 corner sections, Z, J, and channel sections,
0.75
1/3
CY
2
CY
CS
F
E
A
t
3.2
F
F
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
F
CS
= Crippling stress for section (psi)
F
CY
= Compressive yield stress (psi)
t = Element thickness (inches)
A = Section area (in.
2
)
E = Youngs modulus of elasticity
g = Number of flanges which compose the
composite section, plus the number of cuts
necessary to divide the section into a series
of flanges as defined in fig. 4
(3)
Crippling
A flange is defined as a plate element with one end being a corner and the other end free. An intersection
with another plate element is considered to be a corner. If both ends are corners, then a cut is introduced
to convert it into two flanges.
In addition to the above criterion in counting flanges and cuts, one must also take into consideration
whether the lips and bulbs provide supporting condition to the adjacent elements as in the next slide.
Equations (1) (3) are also represented in the form of charts in Figs, C7.7, C7.8 and C7.9 of Bruhn
Fig. 4 Definition of flanges and cuts
Angle
Basic section
g = 2
Plate
Cut
1 Cut
2 Flanges
3 = g
Cuts
Tube
4 Cuts
8 Flanges
12 = g
Basic section
g = 3
T-Section
0 Cuts
4 Flanges
4 = g
Cruciform
Cut
H-Section
1 Cut
6 Flanges
7 = g
Crippling
C7.9 Restraint produced by Lips and Bulbs.
Quite often in formed sections, the flange element which has a free edge is rather
small in width as illustrated in Fig. 5. Also for extruded sections, a bulb is often used as illustrated
in Fig 6. The question then arises, is the lip or bulb sufficiently large enough to provide a simple
support to the adjacent plate element? If it is not sufficiently large as to provide the simply
supported condition, counting the number of flanges and cuts must be done in a different way as
explained in slide 11.
We first proceed to see what are the criteria or the test/tests to be passed by the lip or bulb to
provide the simply supported condition to the adjacent element.
Fig 5
Fig 6
Crippling
The lower limit for the length of the lip is governed from the condition that it should be long enough to
have sufficient bending stiffness to provide the simply supported condition. This limit is given by
where the various dimensions are defined in Fig. 7. Note that t
f
= t
L
= t in equation (4), because lip is used
generally in formed sections for which the flange and lip are of the same thickness.
(4)
Fig. 7. Lip and bulb dimensions
t
b
5
t
b
t
b
0.910
f L
3
L
> |
.
|

\
|
Crippling
The upper and lower limits for the lip length are shown in Fig. 8 where the permissible length should lie
in the hatched portion
But the lip cannot be too long! If its length is more, its buckling stress will be less. Another condition for
the lip to be able to provide the simply supported condition is that its buckling stress should be not less
than that of the adjacent plate element. This condition provides an upper limit to the lip length. This
upper limit is given by
(5)
Fig. 8 Upper and lower limits for lip length
f
f
L
L
t
b
0.328
t
b
s
LIP PROVIDES AT LEAST SIMPLE SUPPORT
FOR FLANGE (ACCEPTABLE ZONE)
As an alternative to Fig. 8, one could also use the following figure from Niu to check whether the lip
qualifies to provide support to the adjacent segment. The abcissa is same in both the figures, but
the only difference is that the ordinate in the figure below is b
L
/b
F
rather than b
L
/t. It makes no
difference because both figures are applicable only to formed sections where the thickness is
constant. Both figures give the same result
Crippling
(of Niu)
Crippling
Fig. 7(b)
In case of a bulb, unlike in a lip, increase in diameter increases both the bending
stiffness and buckling stress. So, there is only a lower bound for the bulb size
which is given by the following equation:
The minimum bulb diameter as given by eq. (6) is represented graphically in Fig. 9
(6)
Fig. 9 Minimum bulb diameter to provide simply supported condition
In extruded section, a circular bulb is often used to stiffen a free edge as illustrated in fig. 7(b)
t
b
7.44
t
D
0.374
t
D
1.6
t
D
f
2 3 4
> |
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
Crippling
A
B
C
A
B
D
Method of counting flanges and cuts if the lip or bulb does not qualify to provide support to the adjacent
plate element
Consider the following figure showing three channel sections with unequal flanges AB and CD. Let us
consider the role of CD as a lip to the plate element BC. In Fig. (10a), the lip CD satisfies both the
criteria defined by equations (4) and (5). So, CD qualifies to provide support to BC and C is a corner.
Now, we have to introduce a cut in the middle of BC to make it into 2 flanges BE and EC (A flange
should have one corner and one free end). So, flanges + cuts = 4 + 1 =5
(a)
E
In Fig. 10(b), CD is a little short and fails the criterion of eq. (4). So, BC is to be considered free at C
and must be treated as one flange. Then, flanges + cuts = 3 + 0 = 3
In Fig. (10c), CD is a little too long and fails the test of eq. (5). So, again, CD fails the lip test. That is,
BC is to be considered free at C and must be treated as one flange. Then, flanges + cuts = 3 + 0 = 3
Note that in both cases Figs. 10(b) and 10(c), CD qualifies as a flange because BC provides support to
CD at C by automatically passing both the criteria of eqs. (4) and (5). Note that here the roles of BC
and CD as flange and lip are interchanged. The implication is that the area of CD must be included in
the sectional area A in equations (1) (3)
A
B
C
A
D
(a)
D
A
B C
(c)
C
D
(b)
B
A A
B
C
D
(a)
D
A
B C C
D
(b)
B
A A
B
C
D
D
A
B C C
D
B
A A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
Fig. 10 Qualification of lip to provide support
C
D
B
A
(b) (b)
Crippling
Crippling loads calculated from equations (1) to (3) should be limited to the values as given in the
following Table:
Type of section Max. F
CS
Angles .7 F
CY
V Groove plates F
CY
Multi-corner sections, including tubes .8 F
CY
Stiffened panels F
CY
Tee, Cruciform and H Sections .8 F
CY
2 corner sections. Zee, J, Channels .9 F
CY
C7.7 Correction for Cladding.
Since many formed sections are made from alclad sheets, the clad covering acts to
reduce the value of crippling stress and thus a correction factor must be used to take care of
this reduction in strength. This correction is
Where,
cl
= Cladding yield stress

cr
= Crippling stress
f = Ratio of total cladding thickness to total thickness. f =
0.10 for alclad 2024-T3 and .08 for alclad 7075-T3.
( ) 3f 1
f

3 1

cr
cl
+
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
Table 1
Crippling
Problem 1: Determine the crippling stress for the
formed section shown in Fig if the material
is Aluminum alloy 2024-T3. F
CY
=40000,
E
C
=10700000
Also calculate the crippling stresses if each
of the lips were (i) 0.225 long and (ii) 0.35
long
Solution:
Since the elements of the cross-section are of constant thickness, Gerard method is applicable. Also, since
the section is a multi-cornered one, equation (1) applies. For a formed section of this type, the cross-
sectional area will be generally given. Since it is not given here, let us calculate it assuming that corners
are all right-angled and sharp. The section is symmetric about the vertical centerline.
A = 2 0.04 [(0.325 0.02) + (1.0 - 0.04) + (1.5 0.04) + (0.625 - 0.02)] = 0.266 sq. in.
Let us first check the lips. b
L
= 0.305, b
f
= 0.96 and t = 0.04
Apply eq. (4)
t
b
5
t
b
t
b
0.910
f L
3
L
> |
.
|

\
|
.325
A
B C D
8 . 395
.04
.305
.04
.305
0.910 LHS
3
= |
.
|

\
|
=
125 . 38
.04
.305
5 RHS = =
Since LHS>RHS the eq. (4) is satisfied
Crippling
Now check eq. (5) which is equivalent to b
L
/b
f
<0.328
b
L
/b
f
=0.305/0.96=0.318<0.328, so eq. (5) is also satisfied
That means, the 0.325 in. lips satisfy both the conditions (4) and (5) and lie in the acceptable area shown
by hatched portion in Fig.8. They therefore provide simply supported condition to the two 1.0 in. horizontal
plate elements AB and CD at the bottom and we can introduce a cut in each of these elements.
g = number of flanges + number of cuts = 12 + 5 =17
Eq. (1) gives,
867 . 0
40,000
10 10.7
0.266
04 . 0 17
0.56
F
E
A
gt
0.56
F
F
0.85
1/2
6 2
0.85
1/2
CY
2
CY
CS
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
This value of F
CS
/F
CY
could have been straightaway read off from the chart in Fig C7.7 of Bruhn.
F
CS
=0.86740,000=34681 psi
From table C7.1, it is recommended for multi-corner sections that F
CS
maximum be limited to 0.8
F
CY
unless tests can prove higher values.
Fcs
MAX
=0.840,000=32,000 psi. Since this is less than the above calculated values it should be
used.
Crippling
Now let us calculate the crippling stresses if each of the lips were (i) 0.225 long and (ii) 0.35 long
Case (i): b
L
= 0.225

Solution:
The section is symmetric about the vertical centerline.
A = 2 X 0.04 X [(0.225 0.02) + (1.0 - .04) + (1.5 0.04) + (0.625 - 0.02)] = 0.258 sq. in.
Let us first check the lips. b
L
= 0.205, b
f
= 0.96 and t = 0.04
Apply eq. (4)
LHS < RHS. So, eq. (4) is not satisfied and the design point lies below the lower curve of Fig. 8. This
is a case of the lip being too short. Hence, the lips cannot provide simply supported condition to the
adjacent elements AB and CD and we cannot have cuts in these elements.
g = number of flanges + number of cuts = 12 + 3 =15
Eq. (1) gives,
= 0.56 X [ (15 X 0.04
2
/ 0.258) ( 10.7 X 10
6
/ 40,000)

]
0.85
= 0.8
t
b
5
t
b
t
b
0.910
f L
3
L
> |
.
|

\
|
37 . 117
0.04
0.205
0.04
0.205
0.910 LHS
3
= |
.
|

\
|
=
120
0.04
0.205
5 RHS = =
8 . 0
40,000
10 10.7
0.258
04 . 0 5 1
0.56
F
E
A
gt
0.56
F
F
0.85
1/2
6 2
0.85
1/2
CY
2
CY
CS
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
Crippling
This value of F
cs
/F
cy
could have been straightaway read off from the chart in Fig. C7.7 of Bruhn.
F
cs
= 0.8 X 40,000 = 32,000 psi.
The above calculated value of crippling stress is correct and should be accepted because it is just
equal to the limiting value of 0.8 F
cy
as given in Table 1 for multi-cornered sections.
Case (ii): bL = 0.35
Solution:
The section is symmetric about the vertical centerline.
A = 2 X 0.04 X [(0.35 0.02) + (1.0 - .04) + (1.5 0.04) + (0.625 - 0.02)] = 0.268 sq. in.
Let us first check the lips. b
L
= 0.33, b
f
= 0.96 and t = 0.04
Apply eq. (4)
LHS > RHS. So, eq. (4) is satisfied and the design point lies above the lower curve of Fig. 8. Now,
we have to try the next test of eq. (5) and check whether the design point lies below the upper curve
as it should. The condition represented by eq. (5) is equivalent to b
L
/b
f
0.328.
b
L
/b
f
= 0.35/0.96 = 0.364 > 0.328. Hence, the lip fails the test of upper limit for the lip length. The
design point lies in the unacceptable region above the upper curve of Fig.8. The implication is that
the lip is a little too long to qualify for supporting the adjacent element and we cannot have cuts in
the adjacent elements AB and CD.
t
b
5
t
b
t
b
0.910
f L
3
L
> |
.
|

\
|
7 . 502
0.04
0.33
0.04
0.33
0.910 LHS
3
= |
.
|

\
|
=
120
0.04
0.205
5 RHS = =
Crippling
This value of F
cs
/F
cy
could have been straightaway read off from the chart in Fig. C7.7 of Bruhn.
F
cs
= 0.775 X 40,000 = 31,000 psi
The above calculated value of crippling stress is correct and should be accepted because it is less
than the limiting value of 0.8 F
cy
as given in Table 1 for multi-cornered sections.

g = number of flanges + number of cuts = 12 + 3 =15
Eq. (1) gives,
775 . 0
40,000
10 10.7
0.268
04 . 0 5 1
0.56
F
E
A
gt
0.56
F
F
0.85
1/2
6 2
0.85
1/2
CY
2
CY
CS
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
Method of segments (Source: Michael Niu)
This method is applicable to sections in which all the segments need not be necessarily of the
same thickness as in extruded sections
Also applicable to formed sections where the cross-section is not one of the standard ones in the
list specified in Gerard method
The section is broken down into individual segments, as shown in Fig.11. Each segment has a
width b and a thickness t and will have either one or no edge free
Fig. 11 Method of segments
The allowable crippling stress F
cc
for each segment is found from the applicable material test
curve. Such curves are available for for different materials and different b/t ratios. Niu gives plots
for typical aircraft materials, 2024 and 7075 (Figs. 10.7.6 and Fig. 10.7.7 of Niu) .
Alternately, F
cc
for each segment can also be found from Gerard formula, eq. (1), with the use of
appropriate value of g (= 1 or 3, for one edge free and no edge free, respectively)
As a third alternative, Fig. 10.7.10 of Niu can be used in place of Gerard formula
(The relevant figures from Niu are reproduced in the subsequent slides for easy reference)

=
+ +
+ +
=
n n
ccn n n
cc
2 2 1 1
2 cc 2 2 1 cc 1 1
cc
t b
F t b
F or
........) t b t b (
........) F t b F t b (
F
where: b
1
, b
2
, - Lengths of individual segments
t
1
, t
2
, - Individual segment thicknesses
F
cc1
, F
cc2
, - Allowable crippling stresses of individual segments
Eqns. (4) and (5) defining the lower and upper limits for the lip length (to provide simply
supported condition to the adjacent segment ) hold good in the previous step
The allowable crippling stress for the entire section is computed by taking a weighted average of
the allowables for each segment
(7)
(of Niu)
Dotted (one edge
free)
1. 2024-T3 Clad
2. 7075-T6
(of Niu)
(of Niu)
Note: The cut-off value of F
cc
/F
cy
is wrongly marked corresponding to the ultimate stress
F
tu
. It should be marked at unity corresponding to the yield stress F
cy
cy
ccn
F
F
ccn
F
ccn n n
F b t
n n
t b
n
n
t
b
= =

n n
ccn n n
cc
t b
F t b
F
n
b
n
t
The value of F
ccn
/F
cy
in the above table could also have
been read-off from Fig. 10.7.7 of Niu since the material
is known to be 7075-T6 and it is an extruded section.
Alternatively, it could also have been calculated from the
Gerard formula, eq. (1).
Also, note that the cut-off stress is taken as F
cy
and not
F
tu
confirming that the marking of cut-off stress in Fig.
10.7.10 is not correct
Since this is a formed section with constant thickness, one could simply use the Gerard method using the
relevant formula from equations (1) to (3) whichever is applicable. However, it can also be solved by the
segment method as illustrated by Niu and shown next.
First, let us carry out lip test on segment 1 to see whether it provides at least simply supported condition to
segment 2.
b
L
= 0.25, b
F
= 0.863, t
L
= t
F
= t = 0.0255, b
L
/t = 9.8, b
F
/t = 33.8
0.910(b
L
/t)
3
- b
L
/t = 846.7, 5 b
F
/t = 169, So, 0.910(b
L
/t)
3
- b
L
/t > 5 b
F
/t
That is, the condition for minimum lip length, eq. (4) is satisfied

The upper limit for the lip length as defined by eqn. (5) is


which for the present section of constant thickness reduces to b
L
/b
f
0.328. The actual value of b
L
/b
f
= 0.25/0.863 = 0.29 0.328. Hence, the test for upper limit of the lip length is also satisfied. Hence,
segment 1 passes the lip test and qualifies to provide at least simply supported condition to segment 2
and be counted as a separate segment by itself.
Whether segment 1 passes the lip test or not can also be checked from the figure given by Niu (See
Fig. 8 of this PPT). Locating the point b
L
/t = 9.8 and b
f
/t =33.8 in this figure, one can see that the point
lies within the permissible range (Of course, some extrapolation will be required to locate the point on
the plot).
So, we now proceed to the method of segments by (i) counting segment 1 as a separate segment
with one end free and the other end simply supported and (ii) considering segment 2 as simply
supported at both ends.
f
f
L
L
t
b
0.328
t
b
s
The value of F
ccn
/F
cy
in the above table could
also have been calculated from the Gerard
formula, eq. (1).
ccn n n
F b t
ccn
F
n
b
n
t
n n
t b
n
n
t
b
= =

n n
ccn n n
cc
t b
F t b
F
Since the thickness is constant, let us also solve the problem by the Gerard method. Since it is a Z-
section, eq. (3) should be used.




or, psi
By the method of segments, we got the answer as 18,500 psi. The difference could be because it is
strictly not a Z-section, because of the extra lip. In such a case, it is recommended to use the method
of segments.
231 . 0
70000
10 x 5 . 10
1151 . 0
0255 . 0
2 . 3
F
E
A
t
3.2
F
F
75 . 0
3 / 1
6 2
0.75
1/3
CY
2
CY
CS
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
170 , 16 000 , 70 x 231 . 0 F
CS
= =