STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

5. Buckling analysis of plane structures: simplified methods

The present chapter addresses the basic concepts of stability analysis of (plane) frames; definition
of structures is firstly considered with the aim of recognizing various possible structural behaviours in
terms of stability. Secondly, a practical method for evaluating the critical multiplier (namely, the value
of normal and/or horizontal action resulting in global buckling of structures) will be formulated and
commented. Simplified methods of analysis which can used for taking into account the possible effects
of axial loads on lateral behaviour of steel structures will be finally described. EC3 [14] provisions will
be assumed and reported about the above topics.
The above concepts are applied in worked examples, while unworked ones are left to the reader
for further study.

5.1 Definition and classification of structures

Different possible classifications can be invoked and adopted for structures considering the
various aspects of their behaviour. In particular, if one looks after the behaviour in terms of response
to lateral actions the following classification can be introduced for the framed structures:
- non-sway structures, in which the influence of vertical loads on lateral displacements (and the
other related quantities such as ending and shear stresses in beam-columns) in negligible;
- sway structures, in which axial load contribution to lateral displacements is not negligible and
stresses in structural members cannot be easily evaluated by considering the axial loads on the
undeformed configuration of the frame structure.
The small displacements hypotheses, usually assumed in structural analysis of frames, is carried
out by considering all the action applied on the undeformed configuration of the structure, possibly
affected by some kinds of imperfections (typically, the lack of verticality) as provided by the relevant
Codes of Standards. The analysis carried out on the undeformed shape is usually called first order analysis
because the strain measures are simply derived as first order derivatives of the displacements and the
corresponding stresses neglect the change in eccentricity due to the actual configuration of the frame.
As far as lateral displacements increases, the effects of the eccentricity of vertical loads on the actual
value of stresses is more and more relevant and a second order analysis considering loads on the deformed
shape is needed for obtaining a careful estimation of the final state of stress of the structure as a whole.
Since loads on structures are always applied on their actual deformed configuration, second order
analysis always results in a more refined simulation of the structural response. Nevertheless, in non-
sway structures the difference of the results stemming out by first order analysis are reasonably close to
the ones derived by second order analysis. In particular, if the difference the lateral displacements Δ1
derived by first order analysis and the corresponding total displacement Δtot which takes into account of
the increase in displacements due to the increased eccentricity in vertical load is within the 10% of Δ1,
and then the corresponding effects can be neglected.
The condition assumed by Code of Standards for dividing non-sway structures by the sway ones
is often given in terms of the critical multiplier αcr, namely is the factor by which the design loading
would have to be increased to cause elastic instability in a global mode. Consequently, if FSd is the
design load on structure and Fcr is the corresponding values of forces resulting in global instability of
the same structure, the following limitation has to be checked for ascertain that the given structure
belongs to the class of non-sway-frames:
F
αcr = cr ≤ 0.10 . (5.1)
FSd
The above limitation is drawn out by EC3 [14] for elastic analysis of structures; a larger limitation
for the critical multiplier of non-sway structures is given when plastic analysis is performed:
F
αcr = cr ≤ 0.15 . (5.2)
FSd

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI 79 Draft Version 13/01/2008

STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

because structural behaviour may be significantly influenced by non linear material properties in the
ultimate limit state (e.g. where a frame forms plastic hinges with moment redistributions or where
significant non linear deformations from semi-rigid joints occur).
For reasons that will be hopefully clearer in paragraph 5.3, the limitation given in (5.1) is
conceptually and quantitatively equivalent to the 10% limitation on displacement increase due to
second order (otherwise called P-Δ) effects.

5.2 Critical multiplier of plane frames: Horne method

According to the content of the previous section, the classification of structures in non-sway and
sway basically reduced to the issue of quantifying the critical load multiplier αcr or, equivalently,
determining the critical load Fcr for the framed structure. Non-linear analysis carried out by refined
numerical methods, such as the Finite Element Method, are currently available for carrying out the so-
called buckling analysis of structures, evaluating the external forces resulting in indefinite lateral
displacements for the given structures. Mention, formulation and comments about these advanced
methods can be found, for instance, in [7] and other works on computational mechanics.
In the present section, a simplified method which can be easily utilized for ordinary design
purposes is the so-called Horne Method [5], which is also adopted (under certain limitations) by EC3
[14].
The following expression can be evaluated at each storey of the given frames structures:
H Sd ,k ⋅ hk
αcr ,k = , (5.3)
VSd ,k ⋅ δH ,Sd ,k
with the following meaning of the symbols:
- H Sd ,k the total (horizontal) shear force at the k-th storey;
- VSd ,k the total vertical load at the k-th storey;
- hk the storey height at the k-th storey;
- δH ,Sd ,k in interstorey drift displacement at the k-th storey.

Figure 5.1: Simply supported beam with torsional end restraints.

The critical load can be defined as the minimum value assumed by the quantity acr,k at the various
storeys:
αcr = min {αcr ,k } . (5.4)
k
If only vertical loads are applied on the structure, the following alternative expression can be
assumed for the critical multiplier αχρ:
⎧⎪ h ⎪⎫
αcr = 0.9 ⋅ min ⎨ k ⎬ . (5.5)
k ⎪ δ H ,Sd ,k ⎪
⎩ ⎭
Finally, the simplified method described above basically covers all the cases of rectangular frames
and can be applied by simply carrying out a linear first-order analysis of the structure without the need
for more advanced analysis tools.

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI 80 Draft Version 13/01/2008

 STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

5.3 Second-order analysis of sway structures: simplified methods

The methods reported in the previous chapter allows the designer to establish whether the given
frame can be regarded as non-sway or sway structure by checking relationship (5.1) after evaluating the
critical multiplier by equation (5.4) or (5.5).
Consequently, the present section is devoted to the case of sway structures which cannot be
easily analyzed with reference to the undeformed shape. General numerical procedures addressing the
issues of the so-called geometric non-linearity are available nowadays, but the present paragraph will
only focus on a simple procedure called the N-Δ method.
Let us consider the single storey rectangular frame represented in Figure 5.2: it is a shear-type
structure, in which no nodal rotation occur since the horizontal beam is infinitely stiff with respect to
the columns. Let Kt be its lateral stiffness and, under the shear type hypothesis, the following
expression can be assumed:
12EI 48EI
Kt = 4 ⋅ 3 = . (5.6)
H H3
Consequently, the first-order lateral displacement Δ1 can be easily determined as a function of the
lateral force:
F
Δ1 = . (5.7)
Kt
N N N N
Δ Δ Δ Δ

Figure 5.2: Single frame rectangular structure.

Due to the onset of the lateral displacement Δ1, the total axial loads 4N are eccentrically applied
and a total moment 4NΔ1 and, by equilibrium, a fictitious horizontal force ΔF1 can be introduced as
follows:
4N
ΔF1 = ⋅ Δ1 . (5.8)
H
resulting in a further contribution Δ2 to horizontal displacements
ΔF 4N
Δ2 = 1 = ⋅ Δ1 . (5.9)
Kt HK t
The above formula summarizes the so-called N-Δ method and the total displacement Δtot can be
approximately evaluated as follows:
Δtot ≈ Δ1 + Δ 2 . (5.10)
Nevertheless, the displacement Δ2 increases the vertical load eccentricities and a further lateral
force can be introduced for simulating its effect according to the equilibrium equation (5.8):
2
4N ⎛ 4N ⎞
ΔF2 = ⋅ Δ2 = ⎜ ⎟ ⋅ K t Δ1 , (5.11)
H ⎝ HK t ⎠
and the corresponding increase in terms of lateral displacements is:

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI 81 Draft Version 13/01/2008

STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

2
ΔF ⎛ 4N ⎞
Δ3 = 2 = ⎜ ⎟ ⋅ Δ1 . (5.12)
Kt ⎝ HK t ⎠
Consequently, on the bases of the above relationship, a recursive relationship can be written to
evaluate the i-th contribution to lateral displacements according to the above method:
i −1
ΔF ⎛ 4N ⎞
Δ i = i −1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⋅ Δ1 . (5.13)
Kt ⎝ HK t ⎠
Finally, the total displacement can be evaluated by summing all the partial contributions Δi
obtained by considering the axial loads on the deformed shape of the frame:
∞ ∞ i −1 ⎡ ⎛ 4N ⎞ ⎛ 4N ⎞ 2 ⎛ 4N ⎞3 ⎤
⎛ 4N ⎞
Δtot = ∑ Δ i = ∑ ⎜ ⎟ ⋅ Δ1 = Δ1 ⎢ 1 + ⎜ +
⎟ ⎜ +
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ + ... ⎥ . (5.14)
i =1 i =1 ⎝ HK t ⎠ ⎢⎣ ⎝ HK t ⎠ ⎝ HK t ⎠ ⎝ HK t ⎠ ⎥⎦
The above formula, stemming out by the recursive application, represent a geometric sequence whose
common ratio is 4 N HK t ; the sum of this sequence can be derived by the following equation:
⎡ ⎤
⎢ 1 ⎥
Δtot = Δ1 ⎢ ⎥ . (5.15)
⎢1− 4N ⎥
⎢⎣ HK t ⎥⎦
A deep mechanical meaning can be also recognized for the term 4 N HK t by applying the Horne
Method described in the previous section for determining the critical multiplier for the structure
represented in Figure 5.2:
H Sd ⋅ h F ⋅H
αcr = = . (5.16)
VSd ⋅ δH ,Sd 4N ⋅ Δ1
and introducing the relationship (5.7) between the lateral force F and the first-order displacement Δ1 the
following formula can be obtained:
K ⋅H 1 4N
αcr = t ⇒ = . (5.17)
4N αcr K t ⋅ H
Finally, the second equality reported in equation (5.17) can be introduced in (5.15), obtaining a
closed-form relationship between the total displacement Δtot and and its first order estimation Δ1,
involving the critical multiplier:
⎡ ⎤
⎢ 1 ⎥
Δtot = Δ1 ⋅ ⎢ ⎥ . (5.18)
⎢1 − ⎥1
⎢⎣ αcr ⎥⎦
EC3 [14] suggests the above formula for magnifying the first order effects (not only
displacements, but even stresses and the other terms of the structural response) by the factor reported
in equation (5.18). This procedure can be utilized in the following cases:
- single storey structures with α cr ≥ 3.0 , while for smaller values of the critical multiplier more
refined analysis methods are required;
- multi-storey buildings, provided that all storeys have a similar distribution of vertical loads
and distribution of horizontal loads and distribution of frame stiffness with respect to the
applied storey shear forces.
Two final observations are now relevant:
1) the factor defined in equation (5.18) for framed structures has the same expression of
the magnification factor introduced in paragraph 2.2 with the aim of evaluating the
parameters of the beam-column response (in terms of displacements, stresses etc.)
taking into account the effect of axial force on the deformed shape;

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI 82 Draft Version 13/01/2008

 STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

2) an explicit threshold has been mentioned in section 5.1 in terms of total-to-first-order

displacement ratio for a structure to be classified as non-sway. In particular, second-
order (N-Δ) were deemed negligible if
Δtot
≤ 1.10 ; (5.19)
Δ1
furthermore, the code limitation in terms of critical multiplier has been given in
equation (5.1) and the substantial equivalence between these two definitions can be
verified by evaluating equation (5.18) for the limit value αcr = 10 :
⎡ ⎤
Δtot ⎢ 1 ⎥
=⎢ ≈ 1.10 . (5.20)
Δ ⎥1 1 ⎥
1−
⎣ 10 ⎦

5.4 Worked examples

5.5 Unworked examples

The following unworked examples are proposed for verifying the understanding of the topics
described within the present section:
1) with reference to the frame structure represented in Figure 5.2, design the column profiles with
the aim of obtaining a non-sway structure according to EC3 provisions. Assume the following
geometric and mechanical data:
- beam-column height H 4.0 m;
- span length B 6.0 m;
- axial load N 300 kN;
- horizontal load F 100 kN.

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI 83 Draft Version 13/01/2008

STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

References
[1]. Bazant P. Z., Cedolin L.: Stability of Structures – Elastic, Inelastic, Fracture and Damage Theories, Oxford
University Press, 1991;
[2]. Bleich F.: Buckling Strength of Metal Structures, McGraw-Hill, 1952;
[3]. Chen W. F. and Lui E. M.: Structural Stability—Theory and Implementation, Elsevier, 1987;
[4]. Galambos T. V. (Editor.): Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures, 5th Ed., Wiley, 1988;
[5]. Horne M. R., Merchant W.: The Stability of Frames, Pergamon Press, 1965;
[6]. Timoshenko S. P., Gere J. M.: Theory of Elastic Stability, McGraw-Hill, 1961.
[7]. Corradi dell’Acqua L., Meccanica delle Strutture: la valutazione della capacità portante, vol. 3,
McGraw-Hill Italia, Milano, 1994;
[8]. Menditto G.: Statica delle strutture prefabbricate, clup, Milano, 1981;
[9]. Timoshenko S. P., Gere J. M., Theory of Elastic Stability, Second Edition, New York, 1985;
[10]. Trahair N. S., Bradford M. A., Nethercot D. A.: The behaviour and design of steel structures to
BS5950, Spon Press, London (UK), 2001;
[11]. Ballio G., Bernuzzi C.: Progettare costruzioni in acciaio, Hoepli, Milan (Italy), 2004 (in italian);
[12]. Italian Ministry of Public Works: Norme tecniche per il calcolo, l’esecuzione ed il collaudo delle
strutture in cemento armato, normale e precompresso e per le strutture metalliche, (in Italian).
[13]. UNI ENV 1993-1-1:2005 - Eurocodice 3 – Design of Steel Structures - Part 1-1: General rules
and rules for buildings.
[14]. UNI EN 1993-1-1:2005 - Eurocodice 3 – Design of Steel Structures - Part 1-1: General rules and
rules for buildings.

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI 84 Draft Version 13/01/2008

 STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

Table of Contents
1. Basic Concepts 3
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 Euler definition of stability ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Discrete systems ........................................................................................................................................... 4
1.3.1 Static approach 4
1.3.2 Dynamic approach 6
1.3.3 Energy approach 8
1.4 Post-buckling behaviour.............................................................................................................................. 9
1.5 Imperfection sensitivities........................................................................................................................... 12
1.6 Koiter’s theory ............................................................................................................................................ 14
1.7 Applications................................................................................................................................................. 14
1.7.1 Worked examples 14
1.7.2 Unworked examples 15
2. Elastic Buckling of Columns 16
2.1 Euler critical Load for beam-columns..................................................................................................... 16
2.2 Magnification factor ................................................................................................................................... 18
2.3 Theoretical classification of beam-columns ........................................................................................... 20
2.4 The role of imperfection ........................................................................................................................... 20
2.5 Differential equation of beam-columns .................................................................................................. 21
2.6 Critical loads of perfect columns with various end-restraint ............................................................... 23
2.7 Role of shear flexibility on stability of beam-columns.......................................................................... 26
2.8 Code specifications for beam columns ................................................................................................... 28
2.8.1 Stability check of beam-columns according to the Italian Code 28
2.8.1.1 Stability check under axial load 29
2.8.1.2 Stability check under eccentric axial load 30
2.8.2 Stability check of beam-columns according to Eurocode 3 31
2.8.2.1 Classification of steel cross sections 32
2.8.2.2 Stability check under axial load 34
2.8.2.3 Stability check under eccentric axial load 36
2.9 Applications................................................................................................................................................. 39
2.9.1 Worked examples 39
2.9.1.1 Euler load for a generally restrained beam-column 40
2.9.1.2 Stability check of an axially loaded beam-column 40
2.9.1.3 Stability check of an eccentrically loaded beam-column 42
2.9.2 Unworked examples 44
3. Stability of built-up members in compression 45
3.1 Definitions................................................................................................................................................... 45
3.2 Shear Flexibility of members and critical load ....................................................................................... 45
3.3 Braced members ......................................................................................................................................... 47
3.3.1 Theoretical insights 47
3.3.2 Code provisions 49
3.3.2.1 Italian Code [12] provisions 49
3.3.2.2 European Code [14] provisions 50
3.3.3 Worked example 51
3.4 Battened members...................................................................................................................................... 55
3.4.1 Theoretical insights 55
3.4.2 Code provisions 56
3.4.2.1 Italian Code [12] provisions 56
3.4.2.2 European Code [14] provisions 57
3.4.3 Worked examples 58

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI i Draft Version 13/01/2008

STABILITY OF STRUCTURES

3.5 Unworked examples................................................................................................................................... 58

4. Lateral-Torsional Buckling of Members in Bending 59
4.1 Definitions and phenomenological description ..................................................................................... 59
4.2 Theoretical insights .................................................................................................................................... 59
4.2.1 Lateral buckling of beams with rectangular section 60
4.2.2 Solution of some significant cases. 61
4.2.2.1 1st Case: Simply-supported beam under uniform bending moment M(z)=M0. 61
4.2.2.2 2nd Case: Simply supported beam under uniformly distributed load. 62
rd
4.2.2.3 3 Case: Simply-supported beam under a point load Q at mid-span. 64
4.2.2.4 4th Case: Cantilever beam under uniform bending moment M(z)=M0. 64
4.2.2.5 5th Case: Cantilever under uniformly distributed load. 65
4.2.3 Influence of the transverse section shape: symmetric I-shaped profiles 66
4.2.4 Solution of some significant cases. 68
st
4.2.4.1 1 Case: Simply-supported beam in uniform bending moment M(z)=M0. 68
4.2.4.2 2nd Case: Trave semplicemente appoggiata con carico uniformemente distribuito
q. 69
4.2.5 Influence of the position of the point load on the transverse section 69
4.2.5.1 Simply supported beam under an uniformly distributed load q. 70
4.3 Code Provisions.......................................................................................................................................... 71
4.3.1 Italian Code (CNR 10011, DM96) 71
4.3.2 European Code (EC 3) 72
4.4 Worked examples ....................................................................................................................................... 75
4.4.1.1 Lateral torsional stability check simply supported beam 75
4.5 Unworked examples................................................................................................................................... 78
5. Buckling analysis of plane structures: simplified methods 79
5.1 Definition and classification of structures .............................................................................................. 79
5.2 Critical multiplier of plane frames: Horne method ............................................................................... 80
5.3 Second-order analysis of sway structures: simplified methods............................................................ 81
5.4 Worked examples ....................................................................................................................................... 83
5.5 Unworked examples................................................................................................................................... 83
References 84

Dr. Enzo MARTINELLI ii Draft Version 13/01/2008