Advanced Steel Construction Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.

17-26 (2011) 17

EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATIONS

OF STEEL AND COMPOSITE TRUSSES

S.L. Chan1,* and M. Fong2

1
Professor, Department of Civil and Structural Engineering
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
2
Ph.D, Research Student, Department of Civil and Structural Engineering
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
*(Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected])

ABSTRACT: The experimental and analytical investigations on bare and composite rectangular hollow sections
(RHS) used as members of trusses are presented in this paper. The load resistances of the trusses consisted of steel
and concrete-filled RHS tubes are compared to quantify the beneficial effects due to the in-filled concrete. The
maximum loads on the trusses are also computed by the design method in Eurocode 3 (Steel member) and Eurocode
4 (Composite member) and compared with the test results. The results showed that the use of effective length method
in linear analysis and design method is less convenient and accurate than the second-order analysis. The second-order
analysis and design method not only gives a more accurate prediction than the linear analysis, but it also provides an
efficient design as the assumption of effective length is not required to guess.

Keywords: Steel hollow sections, Concrete-filled steel hollow sections, Second-order analysis, Effective length
method, Eurocode 3, Eurocode 4

1. INTRODUCTION

Experimental studies on concrete-filled steel tubes under different end conditions have been
extensive conducted and the works include those by Knowles and Park [1], Bridge [2],
Shakir-Khalil [3] and Lu and Kennedy [4] who investigated the axial and flexural behavior of the
sections. Most experiments were focused on the behavior of single member with ends restrained
against lateral movement. In this paper, the end movements of the members were restrained by
other connecting truss members. The end movements of the member induce the P-Δ effect its
inclusion is important in the analysis and design.

Several commonly used design codes provide different design methods on composite members
such as Eurocode 4 [5], BS5400 [6] and CoPHK [7]. These codes contain various design methods
for several types of composite columns and these methods include the first order linear analysis and
effective length method for member buckling strength check. The accuracy of those design methods
depend heavily on the precision of determination of effective length factor which is not quite
possible to estimate since the idealized assumption for simple end conditions like pin and rigid ends
are unrealistic in most practical structures. In this paper, two effective length factors were used to
predict the design load, and the results will be compared with test results.

As an alternative to the first order linear analysis with effective length assumption, the second-order
analysis and design method for steel tube and concrete-filled steel tube members is recommended
in many design codes such as Eurocode 4 [5] and CoPHK [7] as a preferred design method,
especially when the elastic critical load factor is small. In the second-order analysis, the nonlinear
effects such as P-δ, P-Δ effects and initial imperfection can be directly included in the analysis, and
the estimation of the effective length is no longer required, and the member section capacity can be
directly used for buckling strength check without modification factors. The individual member
check is replaced by the section capacity check in a single equation in place of the approach
18 Experimental and Analytical Investigations of Steel and Composite Trusses

requiring the use of several parameters embedded in the few checking equations such as the section
capacity and the member buckling checks.

The pointwise equilibrium polynomial (PEP) element would be used in the paper for second-order
analysis because of its simplicity and computational stability and efficiency allowing modeling one
member by a single element. This modeling convenience reduces significantly the computational
time and the process of separating the compressive and the tensile load cases is not needed because
the matrix is valid for positive, negative and zero axial force. After modification of the PEP
element by Chan and Zhou [8] and Zhou and Chan [9], not only the equivalent initial imperfection,
which simulates the effect of geometric imperfection and residual stress, but also the semi-rigid
joint at the ends of the member could be included in the PEP element. In the past few years, the
second-order analysis and design method has been widely used for quite a few types of structures
and the accuracy has been verified in many examples.

2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

2.1 Specimens

Two trusses were tested and their dimensions are shown in Figure 1. One truss was composed of
RHS and square hollow section (SHS) steel tubes in all members and another truss was composed
of concrete-filled RHS and SHS steel tube in compression members and SHS bare steel tube in
tension members. Each three-dimensional truss consisted of 19 members which included two
50x30x3 RHS tubes and seventeen 60x60x3 SHS tubes. The two target failure members were
50x30x3 RHS tube and the remaining members were 60x60x3 SHS tube and the deflections of
these target members are measured with full attention. The length of each truss member was 2m
approximately and the tie members connecting the two plane trusses were 0.8m approximately. The
ends of the members were connected rigidly by using 8mm butt weld.

Target failure member

50x30x3 mm

Other members
60x60x3mm

Figure 1. The Dimension of the Trusses

 S.L. Chan and M. Fong 19

The average width, depth and thickness of both sections are listed in Table 1. The coupon test was
carried out to determine the stress-strain curve of the steel section. The average yield stress (fy),
ultimate tensile stress (fu) and the Young’s modulus (Es) are summarized in Table 1.

The high strength concrete was used in filling in the steel tubes The composition of concrete mix
was water (238.1kg/m3), Ordinary Portland Cement (479.5kg/m3), coarse aggregate (862.5kg/m3),
fine aggregate (709kg/m3) and Pulverized Fly Ash (205.5kg/m3). The average compressive cube
and cylinder strength were 91.65N/mm2 and 89.87N/mm2 respectively and the modulus of elasticity
of concrete was 37.45kN/mm2.
Table1. Material Properties of RHS Tube
Ultimate tensile Young’s
B D t Yield stress (fy)
Steel section stress (f ) modulus (Es)
(mm) (mm) (mm) N/mm2 u
2
N/mm kN/mm2
50x30x3 50.00 30.08 2.96 399.17 448.30 203.87
60x60x3 60.58 60.53 3.25 376.12 439.91 217.50

2.2. Test Results

The trusses were simply supported at the two ends and loaded by the hydraulic jack of capacity
400kN and placed between the pair of trusses as shown in Figure 1. Totally 12 displacement
transducers were placed at the loading point and the top, bottom and middle of the target failure
member to measure the deflection of the member and deflection of the truss. 18 strain gauges were
placed at 3 locations at the top, middle and bottom of each target failure member and six strain
gauges were mounted at each location. The detailed locations of displacement transducers and
strain gauges are shown in Figure 2.
Displacement transducers
Out-of -plane direction In-plane direction

Strain gauges

Figure 2. Displacement Transducers and Strain Gauges Location

The test results for both steel and concrete-filled steel tube are given in Table 2. The applied load at
the top of the truss against mid-span in-plane deflection (the component normal to the truss
member) of the failure members are plotted in Figure 3. For bare steel tube, the member deflection
increased linearly with the applied load until it reached 36.85kN, and the load-deflection
relationship then became non-linear. The maximum applied load on the steel truss was 76.61kN.
For concrete-filled steel tube, the member deflection under applied load was similar to the steel
tube in which linear relationship was observed before the applied load reaching 26.20kN. After this
load, the deflection increased with applied force nonlinearly and the maximum applied load was
found to be 90.00kN. The flexural buckling about the principal minor axis of the failure member
took place and shown in Figures 4 and 5 for both trusses. The internet links of the videos are shown
below.
http://www.nida-naf.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=121%3 .
20 Experimental and Analytical Investigations of Steel and Composite Trusses

Table2. Test Results

Maximum Applied Force (kN)
Truss member
Pt
Steel Tube 76.61
Concrete-filled Steel Tube 90.00

Concrete-filled RHS steel tube member

RHS steel tube member

Figure 3. Load against in-plane Deflection of Failure Member

Figure 4. The Failure Shape of Steel Member Truss

 S.L. Chan and M. Fong 21

Figure 5. The Failure Shape of Composite Member Truss

The maximum load, which was taken by the member in composite truss, was 17.5% higher than the
bare steel truss. The applied load against out-of-plane mid-span deflection of the failure members is
also plotted in Figure 6. The curves showed that the out-of-plane deflection was small compared
with the in-plane deflection at maximum applied load in both trusses.

Concrete-filled RHS steel tube member

RHS steel tube member

Figure 6. Load against Out-of-plane Deflection of Failure Member

22 Experimental and Analytical Investigations of Steel and Composite Trusses

Applied load against the strain plots at the mid-length of the failure members are shown in Figure 7.
As expected, non-linear relationship was observed and the post-failure behaviour could be
obverved in both RHS steel and concrete-filled RHS steel tubes. The RHS steel and concrete-filled
RHS steel tube gave similar behaviour in strain as shown in Figures 7a and 7b. The variation on the
strain along the top fiber (SG1 and SG2) and along the bottom fiber (SG4 and SG5) is small, hence
the average strain in top and bottom was plotted against the applied load and large compressive
strains was developed at bottom fiber which gave a consistent result with displacement transducers.
The readings from SG6 and SG3 were identical up and close to the failure load for concrete-filled
RHS steel tube and these readings are slightly different in RHS steel tube, due to the out-of
straightness imperfections in major axis direction. The result implied that the out-of plane
deflection was insignificant before failure load after which the out-of plane deflection increased
significantly with decreasing load, hence the load-strain curve started to diverge.

Aver. SG4 SG5 Aver. SG1 SG2

Aver. SG4 SG5 Aver. SG1 SG2

SG1 SG2
SG1 SG2
SG6 SG3 SG3 SG6
SG3 SG6 SG6 SG3
SG5 SG4
SG5 SG4

Figure 7a. Steel RHS Tube Member Figure 7b. Concrete-filled RHS Steel Tube Member

Figure 7. Load-Strain Cruve for the Failure Member

3. CODE AND SECOND-ORDER ANALYSIS AND DESIGN METHOD

3.1 Predicted Results from Eurocode 3 and Eurocode 4

The design method in Eurocode 4 [5] for concrete-filled steel tubular columns is briefly described
here for clarity and completeness. The section capacity of concrete-filled steel tubular members is
determined by simply adding the capacity of two components of concrete and steel tubes. The
reduction factor χ, which is a function of the effective slenderness ratio and section type, is
multiplied to the section capacity to consider the stability. Thus, the member resistance is obtained
as,

Pcp   ( As f yd  Ac f cd ) (1)

in which As , Ac, fyd and fcd are the cross-sectional area and design strength of the steel and concrete
respectively.

The reduction factor χ is given by

 S.L. Chan and M. Fong 23

1 (2)

2
  2  

and

1 2
 (3)
 1   (   0.2)  
2  

in which  is the imperfection factor and  is the relative slenderness.

The predicted results using the design methods in Eurocode 3 [10] and Eurocode 4 [5] for RHS
steel and concrete-filled RHS steel tube are summarized in Table 3. The effective length factor
equal to 0.5 (Le=1000) and 1.0 (Le=2000) were assumed to simulate the fix end with fixed and free
translations which are the upper and lower conditions to the actual behavior of the members in the
truss. Predicted maximum applied loads according to the design codes were 31.77kN and 106.14kN
for RHS steel tube, and 36.10kN and 130.49kN for concrete-filled RHS steel tube under these two
different effective length factors. The ratios of tested to predicted load were about 0.7 and 2.4 for
effective length factors (Le/L) equal to 0.5 and 1.0. The results indicate that the true effective length
of the members should be between these two values.

Table 3. Predicted Results by Design Codes

Test Load/Predicted
Maximum Applied Force (kN)
Load
Test Results by Eurocode 3
Truss member result & Eurocode 4 Pt/Pec Pt/Pec
Pt Pec
Le=1000 Le=2000 Le=1000 Le=2000

Bare Steel Tube 76.61 106.14 31.77 0.72 2.41

Concrete-filled Steel Tube 90.00 130.49 36.91 0.69 2.44

3.2 Second-order Design and Analysis Method

The use of second-order analysis and design method has been widely adopted for different types of
structures because this analysis and design method not only simplifies the design process, but also
gives an accurate result. The non-linear effects, which including member imperfection, P-δ and P-Δ
second-order moments, are included in analysis and hence, the uncertain design process
demonstrated in the last section requiring determination of effective length and buckling reduction
factors is not required. The formulation of the element tangent stiffness and secant stiffness matrix
for steel and composite members have been detailed by Chan and Zhou [11, 12] and Chan et al. [13]
and will not be repeated here.

3.3 Section Capacity Check

In the second-order analysis and design method, the section capacity check equation is used. For
steel member, the equation below is adopted.
24 Experimental and Analytical Investigations of Steel and Composite Trusses

P M y  P ( y   y ) M z  P ( z   z )
   1 (4)
Pp M py M pz

For composite member, two section capacity equations are used for the two load conditions. When
the applied force is larger than the section capacity of concrete section (i.e. P>Ppm), Eq. 5 will be
used and it accounts for the effects of axial force and moments in the section capacity equation.
When the applied force is not greater than the capacity of concrete section (i.e. P≤Ppm), only
applied moments are considered since the axial force does not reduce the failure load and Eq. 6 is
then used for section capacity check. These two sets of section capacity equations are given as
follows.

P  Ppm M y  P ( y   y ) M z  P ( z   z )
For P>Ppm    1 (5)
Pcp  Ppm M cpy M cpz

For P≤Ppm M y  P ( y   y ) M z  P ( z   z ) (6)

  1
M cpy M cpz

in which P is the applied force, Pp, Ppm, Pcp is compressive capacities of steel, concrete and
composite cross-section, My and Mz are the external moments about the y and z axis, P(δy+∆y) and
P(δz+∆z) are the P-δ and P-Δ moments about the y and z axes, Mpy, Mcpy, and Mpz, Mcpz are the
moment capacities of composite cross-section about the y and z axes.

As shown in the section capacity check equations that the P-Δ and P-δ effects have been included
such that the assumption of effective length is no longer required. Further, the inclusion of initial
imperfection has been directly considered in analysis that the concept of section capacity check for
imperfect columns can be applied directly in the integrated analysis and design model.

3.4 Numerical Procedure

The load control Newton Raphson method combined with the minimum residual displacement
method [14] is used and the method is capable of tracing the path up to and beyond the limit point
without numerical divergence.

3.5 Analysis Results

The analytical model and the deformed shape of the truss are shown in Figure 8. The average yield
stress and Young’s Modulus of steel and concrete from tested material were used in computer
model. The initial imperfection of the member was taken as L/300, where L is the member length,
according to Table 5.1 in Eurocode 3 [10] and Table 6.5 in Eurocode 4 [5] for steel and composite
columns respectively. The center-to-center member length was used and rigid connection between
each member was assumed. Two point loads were applied to the top of the truss on each side and
load increment of 0.05kN was used in analysis until the section capacity factor was equal to 1. The
analysis results were presented together with test results in Table 4. The failure loads of steel and
composite truss were 77.80kN and 90.35kN respectively and the ratios of test to analysis result are
0.98 and 1.0 for RHS steel and concrete-filled RHS steel tube members. The analysis results show
that the second-order analysis gives accurate results on prediction of resistance of the bare steel and
concrete-filled steel tube members in a consistent manner.
 S.L. Chan and M. Fong 25

Table 4. Predicted Results by Second-order Analysis and Design Method

Test Load /
Maximum Applied Force (kN)
Predicted Load
Truss member Second-order analysis
Test result
and design method Pt/Pa
Pt Pa
Bare Steel Tube 76.61 77.80 0.98
Concrete-filled Steel Tube 90.00 90.35 1.00

4. CONCLUSIONS

Experimental investigation on behavior of RHS steel and concrete-filled RHS steel tubes used as
members in a truss was presented in the paper. The load capacity of the concrete-filled RHS steel
tube member is 17.5% higher than the RHS steel tube member. The results by the Eurocode 3 [10]
and Eurocode 4 [5] show that, with the assumption of effective length factor to be 0.5, the code
over-estimates the resistance of the failure member which leads to an unsafe design. On the other
hand, when the assumption of the effective length factor as 1.0 is adopted, the code under-estimates
the member resistance and the design is uneconomical. The second-order analysis and design
method without assumption of effective length with non-linear buckling effects are directly
included in analysis gives results much closer to the test results and this indicates clearly the
superior performance of the second-order analysis for design of trusses made of steel and
composite RHS sections. When dealing with the design of practical steel structures, the
second-order analysis further improves the efficiency by skipping time for approximating a correct
effective length for each member under different load case.

Figure 8. The Analytical Model of the Truss

26 Experimental and Analytical Investigations of Steel and Composite Trusses

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors acknowledge the financial support by the Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong
SAR Government and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University on the projects “Advanced analysis
for progressive collapse and robustness design of steel structures (PolyU 5115/07E), “Second-order
and Advanced Analysis and Design of Steel Towers Made of Members with Angle Cross-section
(PolyU 5115/08E)” and “Simulation-based Second-order and Advanced Analysis for Strength,
Stability and Ductility Design of Steel Structures (PolyU 5120/09E)”.

REFERENCES

[1] Knowles, R.B. and Park, R., “Strength of Concrete-filled Steel Tubular Columns”, Journal
of Structural Division, ASCE, 1969, Vol. 95, No. 12, pp. 2565-87.
[2] Bridge, R.Q., “Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Columns”, Civil Engineering Transactions,
1976, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 127-133.
[3] Shakir-Khalil, H., “Tests on Concrete-filled Hollow Section Columns”, In: Proceedings of
the Third International Conference on Steel-Concrete Composite Structures, Wakabayashi,
M. (ed.), Fukuoka, Japan, September 26-29, 1991, Association for International
Cooperation and Research in Steel-Concrete Composite Structures, pp. 89-94.
[4] Lu, Y.Q. and Kennedy, D.J.L., “The Flexural Behavior of Concrete-filled Hollow Structural
Sections”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 1994, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 111-130.
[5] CEN, EN1994-1-1, Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, Part
1.1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, 2004, BSI, London.
[6] BS5400. Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges – Part 5: Code of Practice for the Design
of Composite Bridges, 2005, BSI, London.
[7] CoPHK, Code of Practice for Structural Use of Steel 2005, Buildings Department, 2005,
Hong Kong SAR Government.
[8] Chan, S.L. and Zhou, Z.H., “Second-order Elastic Analysis of Frames using Single
Imperfect Element per Member”, J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 1995, Vol. 121, No. 6, pp. 939-45.
[9] Zhou, Z.H. and Chan, S.L., “Self-equilibrating Element for Second-order Analysis of
Semirigid Jointed Frames”, J. Eng. Mech. ASCE, 1995, Vol. 121, No. 8, pp. 896-902.
[10] CEN, EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures – Part 1.1: General Rules and
Rules for Building, 2005, BSI, London.
[11] Chan, S.L. and Zhou. Z.H., “Pointwise Equilibrating Polynomial Element for Nonlinear
Analysis of Frames”, Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, 1994, Vol. 120, No. 6, pp.
1703-1717.
[12] Chan, S.L. and Zhou, Z.H., “Second-order Elastic Analysis of Frames using Single
Imperfect Element per Member”, Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, 1995, Vol. 121,
No. 6, pp. 939-945.
[13] Chan, S.L. Fong, M. and Liu, Y.P., “Advanced and Second-order Analysis of Composite
Columns”, In: Proceeding of the Steel Concrete Composite and Hybrid Structures, D. Lam,
Editor. 2009, Research Publishing Services: Leeds, UK. pp. 66-73.
[14] Chan, S.L., Geometric and Material Non-linear Analysis of Beam-columns and Frames
using the Minimum Residual Displacement Method”, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 1988,
Vol. 26, No. 12, pp. 2657-69.