Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Joint design using component method in 3D, ambient and fire Markku Heinisuo, Professor of Metal Structures

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

1

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Joint design using component method in 3D, ambient and fire On-going research in Research Centre of Metal Structures 2 PhD thesis under preparation (est 2010-2011) Motivation: All structures behave more or less in 3D Design of members between joints in 3D is a routine task in the design process We know about nothing of the behavior of joints in 3D ! In EN standards: nothing ! Behavior: stiffness, resistance and ductility To perform reliable structural steel design the behavior of joints should be known Both in ambient and fire conditions (impact, blast, earthquake as well => robustness requirements) ⇒ Designers are forced to make conservative assumptions of the joint behavior ⇒ Potential to enchance cost effectivity and safety of steel structures ! 4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

2

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Our solution: Enlargement of the well-known component method into 3D •

Heinisuo M., Laine V., Lehtimäki E., Enlargement of the component method into 3D. Proceedings of Nordic Steel Construction Conference, Luleå Unversity of Technology, SBI, Publication 181, Malmö, Sweden, September 2-4, 2009, pp. 430-437

Integration to product modeling, bolded new actions produced by us: Product model

Analysis model

(Tekla Structures)

(Autodesk Robot)

---------------------------

Model

3D FEM, Bernoulli-Euler beam elements

Entities •Members •Joints (macro including component model) •Loads Joint resistances (macro)

---------------------------

Model with updated members Stress resultants

•Members: OK •Joints: OK (stiffness, eccentricities) •Loads: OK Run analysis Member resistances

⇒ Stiffness of joints automatically, without no extra work by the desiger, to the global analysis model. Joint resistance checks integrated too. • Heinisuo M., Laasonen M., Anttila T., Integration of joint design of steel structures using product model. Sent to: ibbbce2010, Nottingham, UK. 4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

3

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

To do that:

Local joint model in Robot

Verified models for entire joints are needed. Verification: Tests, badly needed, METNET co-operation? Tests required in EN standards. FEM simulations, everybody can do this (?) Our strategy so far: Try to manage using components available in the literature as much as possible. Basically component behavior is in 3D already for many components! Develop new components only if really needed (so far compression components). Verification of FEM models: Against tests for planar cases (benchmarking). Use carefully the same FEM model for 3D cases (case study). Some tests will be completed during spring 2010 in TUT. Same idea proposed for other materials in a national RYM SHOK project. 4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

4

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

What is component method, history ? Developed in Austria, USA and Holland during 1980’s TSCHEMMERNEGG, F., TAUTSCHNIG, A., KLEIN, H., BRAUN, Ch. and HUMER, Ch., 1987. Zur Nachgiebigkeit von Rahmen-knoten – Teil 1, Stahlbau 5, Heft 10: pp. 299-306.

Enlarged into fire cases in UK and Portugal during 1990’s LESTON-JONES, L., 1997. The influence of semi-rigid connections on the performance of steel framed struc-tures in fire, PhD Thesis, University of Sheffield.

Accepted to the European standard in 2005 (2D cases) EN 1993-1-8, 2005. Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Part 1-8: Design of joints, CEN, Brussels.

Enlarged into 3D in Malmö 2009 by us.

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

5

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

What is component method, theory ? The joint is splitted into components which behaviors are known. Components: bolts, welds, end plate bending, web tension, etc (see EN 1993-1-8) The behavior (springs) can be elastic, elastic-plasic or elastic-plastic-ultimate. Using rigid links the springs are composed at the point where the member model is connected to the local joint model. => Global analysis model is ready. Elastic-plastic-ultimate

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

6

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Where is the local joint model locating ? EN 1993-1-8:

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

DEL SAVIO, A. A., et al, 2009:

Our studies:

(mid line of end plate)

(end section of the member)

7

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Why there ? We want to fix the local joint displacements u(s) to the member axis displacements:

To do that we minimise We end up

These are used when comparing FEM results for component method results, too. 4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

8

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Example, base bolt joint, Henri Perttola, PhD candidate, component results under preparation Strong axis bending, tests available New cases, weak axis bending and bimoment (Polish, Belgium research)

M-kiertymä-kuvaaja: HEA200, puhdas taivutus 40 FEM, pilari S235, pultit 4.6

35

M

[k N m ]

30

Koe, Guerlement

25 FEM, pilari S235, pultit 4.6, kiertymä tähtissuureena

20 15

Test and FEM comparison

10

FEM, pilari 235, pultit 8.8

5 0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus kiertymä [mrad]

70

80

90

100

9

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Example, beam to column joint, PhD candidate Hilkka Ronni, component results under preparation Strong axis bending, tests available New cases, strong (neg),weak axis bending Fire tests in Machester, UK, Wang

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

10

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

Tests, to be completed in spring 2010 in TUT 14 steel: loaded joints in ambient temperature 6 aluminium: loaded joints in ambient temperatures 2 steel: loaded joints in fire conditions (furnace of TUT)

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

11

Faculty of built environment, Department of structural engineering Research Centre of Metal Structures, Seinäjoki, Hämeenlinna

More information Perhaps in Istanbul 21-23 September 2010. Steel structures: Culture & Sustainability Perhaps in Wroclaw 15-17 June 2011. XII International Conference on Metal Structures Perhaps in future METNET meetings In the referred theses when completed Hopefully soon in macros for designers

Thank you

4-5.2.2010 METNET Gottbus

12