WG FEM 10.2.

07

FEM 10.2.07
Comparison of methods of global analysis
Option 2 and Option 6

Working group FEM 10.2.07

2nd Meeting in Amsterdam, 02/2009
D. mdek, K. Tilburgs

WG FEM 10.2.07

Contents
1. Geometry
2. Loading
3. Results
4. Conclusions

WG FEM 10.2.07

1. Geometry
Main dimensions
- net channel width
- no. of lanes
- frame height
- no. of levels
- spacing of levels
- frame depth
- spacing between frames
- channel depth

1 340 mm
20 lanes
11 350 mm
4 levels
2 250 mm
1 300 mm
1 250 mm
9 000 mm
3

WG FEM 10.2.07

4 examples of bracing configuration

Example B
- min. bracing acc. to Option 6 (numbers, shape ratios)
- profiles designed for sway imperfection 1/100
Example B2
- min. bracing acc. to Option 6 (numbers, shape ratios)
- profiles designed for sway imperfection 1/100
- without full-length plan bracing

WG FEM 10.2.07

4 examples of bracing configuration (pg. 2)

Example B3
- min. bracing acc. to Option 6 (numbers, shape ratios)
- profiles designed for sway imperfection 1/50
Example A
- bracing configuration corresponding to daily practise

WG FEM 10.2.07

Derivation of geometry of individual examples

See following pages.

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Global view

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Down-lane direction

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Down-lane direction

FEM 10.2.07 - Option 6 - requires
- max. 1 mono post
Here in Example B
- 1 mono post

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Cross-lane direction

10

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Spine bracing

FEM 10.2.07 - Option 6 - requires
- min. 1 lane in 5 braced
- max. Height / Width = 4 : 1
- minimum profiles
Here in Example B
- 1 lane in 5 braced
- Height / Width = 3.83 : 1
- minimum profiles

11

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Top view

12

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Top view

13

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B2 - Top view

14

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B - Plan bracing

FEM 10.2.07 - Option 6 - requires
- min. 1 lane in 5 braced
- max. Depth / Width = 3 : 1
- minimum profiles
Here in Example B
- 1 lane in 3.33 braced
- Depth / Width = 2.03 : 1
- minimum profiles

15

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Global view

16

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Down-lane direction

17

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Cross-lane direction

18

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Spine bracing

FEM 10.2.07 - Option 6 - requires
- min. 1 lane in 5 braced
- max. Height / Width = 4 : 1
- minimum profiles
Here in Example A
- 1 lane in 1.67 braced
- Height / Width = 1.92 : 1
- larger profiles

19

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Top view

20

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Top view

21

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A - Plan bracing

FEM 10.2.07 - Option 6 - requires
- min. 1 lane in 5 braced
- max. Depth / Width = 3 : 1
- minimum profiles
Here in Example A
- 1 lane in 1 braced
- Depth / Width = 0.87 : 1
- larger profiles

22

WG FEM 10.2.07

Structural model remarks

- modeling for geometric linear vs. non-linear analysis
- non-uniform upright loads (multi-span factor, kms):
Upright
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

kms
1.02 - 1.05
0.98 - 0.99
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95 - 0.98
0.91 - 1.06
23

WG FEM 10.2.07

Structural model remarks (pg. 2)

- torsional stiffness of uprights was for test purposes
reduced 10x, 100x, 1000x in order to prove, that
behaviour and stability of the model is not favourably
influenced by upright torsional rigidity or by applied
torsional restraints.

24

WG FEM 10.2.07

2. Loading
1. Selfweight
2. Product load
- mpal = 1 000 kg
- pallet depth 800 + 2*50 mm, 10 pcs in channel depth
3. Imperfection in cross-lane direction
- installation imperfection
- design imperfection (20 lanes)

1/350
1/236
25

WG FEM 10.2.07

Combinations
Geom. non-linear analysis (2nd order)
1.3 * G + 1.4 * Q

(incl. Imperfections in c.-l. dir.)

Geom. linear analysis (1st order)

1.3 * G + 1.4 * Q

(incl. Imperfections in c.-l. dir.)

Stability (Eulerian load)

1.3 * G + 1.4 * Q

26

WG FEM 10.2.07

3. Results
Reminder - Studied issues
1. Comparison of results according to Option 2 and 6
2. Requirements for bracing systems acc. to Option 6

27

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.1 Side sway

Option 2
- at 2nd line of uprights
- ULS combination

28

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.1 Side sway

Example

Option

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

Side sway
mm
80.8
23.5
---

k2nd
3.44

Side sway
%
308

B3

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

51.3
17.5
---

2.93

196

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

26.2
11.1
---

2.36

100

Example B2 was not stable.

29

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B

30

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B2

NOT STABLE !!!

31

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A

32

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B

33

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A

34

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B

35

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A

36

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.2 Normal force in standard upright

Standard upright
- upright is part of plan bracing (effect of glob. tors. considered)
- not part of vertical bracing; not mono post
Option 2
- usually 3rd to 4th line of uprights (high NSd, My.Sd)
Option 6
- hand calculated
- including multi-span factor (1.143)
- calculation method of global torsion effect is conservative
- including 2nd order in frame direction (App. G4; prEN 15512)
37

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.2 Normal force in standard upright

Example
B

B3

Option

k2nd

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

NSd
kN
90.867
85.655
131.083

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

89.288
85.602
131.083

1.04

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

82.799
82.005
100.929

1.01

1.06

NSd
%
69
100
68
100
82
100

38

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.3 Bending moment at base of standard upright

Option 2
- the same upright as upright with maximum normal force
Option 6
- higher cbase due to higher normal force

39

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.3 Bending moment at base of standard upright

Example
B

B3

Option

k2nd

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

MSd
kNm
1.957
0.620
0.499

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

1.470
0.555
0.499

2.65

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

1.165
0.520
0.471

2.24

3.16

MSd
%
392
100
295
100
247
100

40

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B

41

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A

42

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.4 Buckling length in cross-lane direction

Option 2
- 3D model with restricted sway of top plane
- anti-symmetric modes only
Option 6
- single upright with restricted sway at the top
- anti-symmetric modes only

43

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.4 Buckling length in cross-lane direction

Example

Option

Option 2
Option 6

Lcr.y
Beta*Lsys
0.445
0.441

Lcr.y
%
101
100

B3

Option 2
Option 6

0.445
0.441

101
100

Option 2
Option 6

0.442
0.449

98
100

44

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B

45

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example B

46

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A

47

WG FEM 10.2.07

Example A

48

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.5 Unity check of standard upright

General
- including flexural-torsional buckling
- one Lcr.y, My.Sd, My (i.e. ky)
- checked at least on two levels (variable Lcr.z and NSd)
Note
- My.Sd also for Option 6 calculated using design
imperfection (1/236)

49

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.5 Unity check of standard upright

Example

Option

Check

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 6

1.03
1.18

Check
%
87
100

B3

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 6

0.95
1.18

81
100

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 6

0.85
0.94

90
100

Option 6 is conservative with regard to unity check of upright.

50

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.6 Axial force in spine bracing

Option 2
- 2nd (and 1st) order
Option 6
- calculated by hand, 1st order
- mass of total block considered
- share to top calculated using model with upright
restricted at the top against translation

51

WG FEM 10.2.07

3.6 Axial force in spine bracing

Example
B

B3

Option

k2nd

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

NSd
kN
41.48
15.147
19.051

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

35.793
16.479
19.051

2.17

Option 2 - 2nd order

Option 2 - 1st order
Option 6

30.822
17.347
17.435

1.78

2.74

NSd
%
218
100
188
100
177
100

Opt. 6 is very unconservative with regard to bracing sys. stiffness.

52

WG FEM 10.2.07

4. Conclusions
a. Structures designed acc. to Option 6 are excessively
flexible (high influence of 2nd order).
b. Upright design to Option 6 is conservative (assuming
the use of multi-span factor and the effect of GT).
c. Spine bracing design to Option 6 is not conservative.

53

WG FEM 10.2.07

Further remarks
d. The specification of min. ammount of bracing systems
in Option 6 should be rephrased to avoid confusion.
e. Additional requirements (use of multi-span factor,
effects of global torsion, 2nd order in frame dir.) must
be added.
f. Requirement for design of min. bracing should be
applicable for gross cross-sections only.
g. Upright check procedure might be further discussed
(concerns all analysis options).
54