Methods of analysis  in steel structures

S.Arul Jayachandran
Head, Steel Structures Laboratory
Structural Engineering Research Centre
CSIR Campus, Taramani, Chennai 600 113
arulsteel@yahoo.com
Range of the lecture
 Methods of Structural Analysis
• Linear Elastic Analysis 
• Linear Buckling Analysis
• Rigid Plastic Analysis
• Second Order Elastic Analysis 
• First Order Elasto‐Plastic Analysis 
• Second Order Inelastic Analysis
 Linear Elastic Analysis
• Conditions Satisfied
– equilibrium
– linear stress‐strain relationship
– compatibility of deformation
• Element Stiffness Martix
– [ke] {δe} = {pe} 

• System Stiffness Matrix
– [Ks] {Δs} = {Fs} 
• Short Comings
– Material & Geometric nonlinearities not considered 
– to be considered In design check 
 Linear Elastic Analysis
(a)
W

W
αW

βW

Δ
 Linear Buckling Analysis
Reduction in stiffness due to axial compression

[[Ks] ‐ P [Kg]] {Δs} = {0}

Short comings:
• Bifurcation Problem
• Linear Elastic Range
• Material Non‐Linearity not considered
• Beam Column non‐linear behaviour not considered
• Separate design check is to be done.
Wcr
Linear Buckling Analysis
(b)
(a)
W

W
αW

βW

Δ
 Rigid Plastic Analysis
Conditions to be Satisfied:
Kinematic Method
– equilibrium
– Mechanism Condition  Statical Method

– Yield Condition (M < MP)
 Rigid Plastic Analysis
• Merits:
– Easy to analyse even complex frames
– Even optimum design is possible
– Consistent with limit state of collapse method 
• Short Comings
– Does not account for P‐δ and P‐Δ effects
– Member instability, effect of axial and shear 
forces not accounted for in analysis
– Assumes the use of Plastic sections
Wcr
Rigid Plastic Analysis 
(a) (b)
W

(c) (c)
Wp
W
αW

βW

Δ
 Second Order Elastic Analysis 
Features:
– Second‐order elastic or geometric nonlinear analysis
– Equilibrium in the deformed configuration of the 
structure.
– it includes both P‐Δ and P‐δ effects
– Second‐order elastic analysis can account for these and 
other elastic stability effects
– Equivalent lateral loads method can be used 
Short Comings:
– Does not provide any direct information on the actual 
inelastic strength of the frame
– Design based on this analysis, the combined effects of 
plasticity and stability must be accounted for in the 
equations used for member proportioning.
Wcr
Second Order Elastic Analysis
(b)
(a)
W
(d)

Wp (c)

(d) W
αW

βW

Δ
 First Order Elastic Plastic Analysis 
• Method:
– Based on an idealized stress‐strain curve that has a constant 
slope equal to the elastic modulus up to the yield point and 
constant zero slope after this point. 
– Geometric nonlinearities are not considered
– elastic plastic‐hinge idealization of the cross‐section 
behavior. 
– The inelastic behavior is approximated by zero‐length plastic 
hinges
– Members are modeled as fully elastic elements between 
hinge locations.
– Predicts that the maximum capacity of a frame when a 
plastic collapse mechanism is formed.  
– The plastic limit load predicted by this type of analysis is the
same as the maximum load estimated by a rigid‐plastic 
analysis 
First Order Elastic Plastic Analysis 
Wcr
(b) (b)
(a)
W
(d)

Wp (c)

W
(e) (e) αW

βW

Δ
 Second Order Inelastic Analysis
• Method:

– Considers both stability and plasticity effects
– Not  all  second‐order  inelastic  analysis 
approaches  qualify  in  general  as  advanced 
analysis. 
– Idealization  of  the  members  as  elastic  elements 
with zero‐length elastic‐perfectly plastic hinges
– second‐order elastic‐plastic hinge analysis may in 
some  cases  over‐predict  the  actual  inelastic 
stiffness and strength of the structure. 
Wcr
Second Order Inelastic Analysis
(b)
(a)
W
(d)

Wp (c)
(e)
W
Wu αW
(f)
βW

Δ
Understanding Stability
Unable to carry loads – Since Unable to carry loads – Since it
material strength is reached has lost its stability
Strength Problem Stability Problem

Stability is an elastic phenomenon &  Energy is 
its language
 λ
(a) (b)

p1
λ λ

L
λb
p2
λb

p1 p2=pb
o o
Flexural Rigidity EI

Structures loose stability when potential of

external loads equals strain energy

Stability involves a phenomenon in which

the structures displaces perpendicular to
load
BEAM BEHAVIOUR – Displacement perpendicular to load

Lateral-torsional buckling

20
 Types of member buckling

local buckling distortional buckling lateral-torsional buckling

Equilibrium States of  Stability
Stable Equilibrium Unstable Equilibrium Neutral Equilibrium

States of Equilibrium
 P<Pcr P>Pcr P=Pcr

Stable Equilibrium Unstable Equilibrium Neutral Equilibrium

States of Equilibrium in a slender column

 λ λ
Stable λ Unstable

p p p

Asymmetric Symmetric Stable Symmetric Unstable

Ways in which structures loose stability!

 Inspection of energy to identify buckling paths!

π = π(λ , p)
p=εp1+ε2p2+ε3p3

λ=λcr(1+aε+bε2+ …)

1
_
λm 1
= 1 − 2( − a ) ε2
2
λcr

λm 1
= 1 − 2( −b / 4 ) 3 ε 3
2
λcr
 Bifurcations in real world structures
Structure Type of bifurcation
Column under axial load Symmetric stable 
Circular ring under 
Symmetric stable 
pressure
Strut on unidirectional 
Both symmetric stable and unstable
elastic foundation
Plate under axial load Symmetric stable 
Cylindrical shell under  A compound non‐linear coupling 
axial load bifurcation
Cylindrical shell under 
Symmetric unstable
axial load
Frames Symmetric unstable 

Shallow arches Snap through buckling
Tracing the equilibrium paths  of  
Stability  
Geometric Nonlinear Analysis
λ Secondary path

Stable path
B
Unstable path

L B Bifurcation point

L Limit Point

Fundamental path
p

Path following and pin pointing

 Geometric Nonlinear Analysis
Writing the equilibrium at time T1

q
P=(x,y,x) X P u

P’=(x1,y1,z1) p P’ time T1

Y time T0
Z
 Some Basics of Continuum mechanics

Lagrangian Eulerian
 Total Lagrangian (TL)

P(x,y) V0

2
∂u 1 ⎛ ∂w ⎞
∫ P(x1,y1)
ε 1 = 1 + ⎜⎜ 1 ⎟⎟
∂x 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠
V0

∫ ∂u 1 ⎛ ∂w ⎞
2

V0 P(x2,y2) ε 2 = 2 + ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟
∂x 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠
 Updated Lagrangian (UL)

2
∂u 1 ⎛ ∂w ⎞
∫ P(x1,y1)
ε 1 = 1 + ⎜⎜ 1 ⎟⎟
∂x 2 ⎝ ∂y ⎠
V0

∫ V2
∂u 1 ⎛ ∂w ⎞
2

V1 P(x2,y2) ε 2 = 2 + ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟
∂x1 2 ⎝ ∂y1 ⎠
 Co – Rotational procedure

Rotated
Polar
Decomposition
Initial State
Theorem Final State

v2 e
u1 tat
d s
m e
e for Stretched
D
v1

Undeformed state
x
u2
Concept of linear analysis

In FEM
[K] {y}={P}
L

d2y
EI = M = P × 0.9999 L
dx 2

d2y
EI = M = P×L
dx 2
Equilibrium at the fixed end
Concept of Geometric nonlinear analysis

L ΔL

2y In FEM
d
EI = M1 = P × (L − ΔL) [K] + [KG]{p}={q}
dx2
2
1 ⎛ dy ⎞
∫
ΔL = ⎜ ⎟ dx = ψ ( y)
2⎝ dx ⎠

d 2y
EI + Pψ ( y) = M = P × L
2
dx
 ⎡1 0 −1 0⎤ ⎡1 0 − 1 0⎤
⎢
AE ⎢ 0 0 0 0⎥ ⎢
P⎢ 0 0 0 0⎥
Ko = ⎥ K1 = ⎥
L ⎢− 1 0 1 0⎥ L ⎢− 1 0 1 0⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎣0 0 0 0⎦
⎣0 0 0 0⎦
Stiffness matrix Geometric Stiffness matrix

⎡ 1 − λ2 − λμ − ( 1 − λ2 ) λμ ⎤
⎢ ⎥
P ⎢ − λμ 1− μ 2 λμ 2
− ( 1 − μ )⎥
K1 = ⎢ ⎥
L − ( 1 − λ2 ) λμ 1 − λ2 − λμ
⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ λμ − ( 1 − μ2 ) − λμ 1 − μ 2 ⎥⎦

Global Geometric stiffness matrix

A geometric nonlinear problem solved using a set of
linear problems

Δ q = (K0 + K1 ) Δ p
Begin Load step ‘n’

Compute  σn in step n‐1

Form Tangent stiffness KT
Δ q = KT Δ p
Solve ∆q= KT  ∆p
Or Tangent Stiffness
∆p= KT‐1 ∆q matrix
Update displacements pn=pn‐1+∆p
Begin load step n+1
Stress and strain measures in continuum mechanics

Second‐Piola Kirchhoff stress 

(pseudo stress)

Cauchy stress (True Stress)
Conjugate pairs which 
produce strain energy
TL
Green’s strain tensor
Second Piola Kirchhoff
stress tensor

2nd PK   UL
Rate of deformation tensor   Almansi strain tensor
Cauchy Cauchy stress tensor
 Array of solution procedures for the postbuckling
analysis of structures

Explicit methods Implicit methods

¾ Direct substitution method
¾ Conjugate gradient method
¾ Conjugate Newton method
¾ Dynamic relaxation method
¾ Newton Raphson method
¾ Modified Newton Raphson
¾ Line search method
¾ Quasi Newton method
¾ Newton Secant algorithm
¾ Arc length method ?
¾ Minimum residual
displacement method
 How do choose a solution method ?

œ  ž

Ÿ   ¡
s

1. Newton - Raphson 4. Load control

2. Quasi - Newton 5. Displacement control
3. Line Search 6. Arc Length
 Stability indicators

Stability indicators
¾ Sign and change of sign of pivot of the factorised
tangent stiffness matrix
¾ Determinant of the tangent stiffness matrix
¾ Smallest value of the pivot of the factorised
tangent stiffness matrix
¾ Current stiffness parameter (CSP) Q δpt
T
ef
k=
δptδpt
CSP = k / k0
Arc Length works in load – displacement space !!

δp2R δp R
3

δλ1Arc δp2Arc δp3Arc

δλ2Arc

δλ3Arc

Δλ1 Δλ2 Δλ3 ΔL

Δp1 δp2 δp3

Δp2
Computational Stability in the 21st
Century
 Present day Stability Analysis

BP – Bifurcation point
LP – Limit Point
BP
?
? LP
Secondary Path
BP
?

1. Path Measuring
Primary 2. Path Tracing
Path
3. Pin Pointing
4. Branch Switching
5. Limit Tracing
Postbuckling paths encountered in 
real world structures
 λ λ

ϕ ϕ
L L
ελ ελ

L L

Stable behavior Unstable behavior

Stable /unstable behavior by small perturbations

 Asymmetric postbuckling of Roorda’s frame

1.15
2
λ/ λb
EAL /EI=1.e6
ε= 0.01
λb =13.8859 1.1
ε= 0.001
1.05 ε=−0.01
ε=−0.001
Q
λ 1 P

ελ ϕ 0.95
L
L 0.9
ϕ radians
0.85
-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15

06.12.07 ICASS‐07  48
Snap through buckling

λ
 Postbuckling of 24 member star dome
EI=4.22x104 kg-cm2
Dimensions in cm
700
Cichon - Without member buckling
600
Present - Without member buckling
500 Cichon - With member buckling
400 Present - With member buckling 1
300 2
200
100 Apex displacement - cm
0
P/EA x 100

-100 0 1 2 3 4 5
-200
P
-300
u
-400
2.0
-500 w
6.216
dQ A
=
1 δ0
dΔ ⎡ L0 L0 1 ⎤ δ = 50.0
⎢ + (1 − ⎥
1 + 2 / 3(2δ / l ) 2 ⎦
1 − QA
⎣ EA Q A Q
Ph.DEviva
83.6
50
 Postbuckling of Lee’s frame – Snap back buckling
λ
1.2 λ

1
Δ/100 CSP
Δ
L 0.24 L
0.8

0.6 L

0.4 Δ m,CSP

0.2

0 E=7.2e7kN/m 2
-0.35 -0.15 0.05 0.25 0.45 0.65 0.85 1.05 1.25
A=6e‐4 m 2
-0.2 I=2.e‐8 m 4
L=1.20 m
-0.4

-0.6

06.12.07 ICASS‐07 
 Symmetric sway buckling of a square frame

1.15
λ/ λb
λ λ ε =0.001
1.1 ελ ε =0.0001
u
1.05 L

L
1

0.95

0.9 EAL2/EI=1.e6
λb=1.82126
u
0.85
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

06.12.07 ICASS‐07  52
 Postbuckling behaviour of shallow cylindrical shell

P
1
B

0.5 A 504 mm

0.2rad

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

-0.5
R=2540 mm
Sabir and Lock (1973)@B
Ramm(1982)@B
E=3.303 kN/mm2
-1
Surana (1983)@B μ=0.3
present @ B h=6.35 mm
Present @ A
-1.5

26.07.04 Ph.D viva 53

 Postbuckling behaviour of shallow cylindrical shell

4
Present @A B
3.5 Present @B
m
Surana(1983)@A
A m
4
50
3 Surana(1983)@B
Madasamy(1994) - @A
0.2ra
2.5 Madasamy(1994) @B
d
2

1.5 R=2540 mm
E=3.303 kN/mm2
1
μ=0.3
0.5 h=12.7 mm
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

26.07.04 Ph.D viva 54

 PARAMETERS INFLUENCING STEEL FRAME DESIGN

• Material nonlinearity
(gradual yielding due to flexure and effects of residual 
stresses)
• Geometric nonlinearity
(P‐δ and P‐ Δ effects and geometric imperfection)
• Connection semi‐rigidity and nonlinearity
(nonlinear M‐θ relationships of connections)
• Plate elements of cross sections may buckle locally
 ADVANCED ANALYSIS METHODS

• Advanced  analysis  can  be  defined  as  an  analysis 

method  that  incorporates  both  strength  and  stability 
behaviour in  such  a  way  that  a  separate  member 
design  is  not  required.    It  can  directly  make  an 
assessment of the strength and stability of the overall 
structural system including the interaction of member 
and system strength and stability. 

Contd.
 ADVANCED ANALYSIS METHODS
• The  provisions  for  advanced  analysis  in  the 
Eurocode (EC3,  1991)  and  the  Australian  limit 
state specifications (AS4100, 1998), IS:800 state 
that  if  all  the  important  planar  behavioural
effects  are  modelled properly  in  the  analysis, 
design  checks  are  not  required.    While  the 
advanced  analysis  method  considers  the 
combined  effects  of  plasticity  and  stability 
theories,  other  methods  treat  stability  and 
plasticity separately.
ADVANCED ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

Based  on  the  extent  of  refinement  for 

representing yielding effects, there are several 
techniques of advanced analysis. They are: 

– Plastic zone or distributed plasticity
– Quasi‐plastic hinge method
– Elastic‐plastic hinge 
– Notional‐load plastic hinge method
– Refined or modified plastic hinge method
Spread of plasticity considered in advanced analysis
 PLASTIC ZONE METHOD

• 3‐D shell elements
• Beam‐column theory
• Computationally 
intensive
• Used as a benchmark 
for other methods
 ELASTIC‐PLASTIC HINGE METHOD

• Simple and approximate
• Plastic hinge only at critical locations; other portions 
elastic
• First order plastic hinge method – geometric 
nonlinearity not considered
• Second order plastic hinge method‐ geometric 
nonlinearity by stability functions; single member 
model
• Good results for frames with slender members
 QUASI‐PLASTIC HINGE METHOD

• Special elements for gradual plastification
• Initial yield surface using residual stress 
pattern and full plastification surface by 
plastic zone solution
• Full plastification equation by curve fit.
• Only 5% error in comparison to plastic zone 
solution
 NOTIONAL LOAD PLASTIC HINGE METHOD

• Large imperfection value to account for 
residual stresses, distributed plasticity, frame 
imperfections etc.
• Approach adopted in Euro, Australian and 
Canadian standards
• Simple and easy to use in design offices
• Error approximately 10% to 20%
 REFINED PLASTIC HINGE METHOD

• Refined elastic‐plastic hinge method
• Section stiffness degradation function –
gradual yielding effect
• CRC tangent modulus – residual stresses and 
geometric imperfection
• Rotation springs – connection flexibility
• Best approach for advanced analysis 
 ADVANTAGES OF ADVANCED ANALYSIS

• Effective design approach for steel frames
• Prediction of limit state strength and stability of 
system  and  members  explicitly;  hence  no 
separate capacity checks
• Detailed information on  frame behaviour
• Scope for economising in steel use
Practical stability analysis using 
General purpose FE software
Practical Computational Stability using
ANSYS or ABAQUS

√
√
√

√
√
Thank you !