Generator

The load did not move; the section did

Rendered here at the parameters it defaults to, with every essay that calls it — which is the same list as the blast radius of changing it.

The load did not move; the section did. A lipped channel 200 by 65 mm at 2 mm thick, drawn twice on top of itself: the outline as fabricated, and the part of it still working once the plates have buckled. The web is held on both edges, so it loses its middle; the flanges are held at the web, so an unlipped one would lose its free edge. What survives is not symmetric with what was drawn, so the centroid moves 8.0 mm — and a load applied along the axis it was designed to arrives 8.0 mm off the section that has to carry it. At the 177 kN this section will take, that is 1.42 kNm of bending nobody applied.

4 essays call effective-section. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.

Sections and stress

What is left after it ripples

A thin plate that buckles locally has not failed. It has stopped taking load in its middle and gone on taking it near its edges, so the member is now made of a different section from the one that was drawn — and the new one has its centroid somewhere else, which turns a concentric load into an eccentric one.

Not where the two loads meet. How much a column loses below the weaker of its two single-mode capacities, against the ratio of its local critical load to its global one. The received claim is that the worst place is where the two coincide; the arithmetic says otherwise. The erosion is largest at a ratio of 0.47 — 23% — sits within a per cent of that for every ratio below about a half, and at exact coincidence is only 2%. What the curve does say is the useful half of the folk claim: once the plates are stocky enough that the local critical load is twice the global one, the interaction is nothing at all, and the section is worth thickening only up to there.

Stability

Two ways of buckling at once

A thin-walled column can bow as a whole or ripple in its plates, and each has its own critical load. The received advice is that the worst arrangement is the one where the two are equal. The arithmetic says the opposite — at coincidence the interaction costs two per cent, and the expensive region is where the plates go first.

Three minima, and only two of them get a check. Elastic buckling stress against half-wavelength for a 200 × 65 × 15 × 1.5 mm lipped channel in uniform compression. The local minimum is at 200 mm and 41 N/mm²; the distortional at 689 mm and 287; the global curve falls away to the right and reaches 489 at the 1.5 m member. The distortional branch is a strut on an elastic foundation — the flange and lip rotating about the web junction, restrained by the web's own bending at 627 N·mm per radian per millimetre — so its minimum is at π(EC_w/k_φ)^¼ and its value is (2√(EC_wk_φ) + GJ)/I₀, the same closed form a continuously braced strut has. The elastic stresses are in the order local, distortional, global, and the mode that governs the strength is not the lowest of them, because they have very different amounts of post-buckling reserve.

Stability

The mode between the two that get checked

A thin-walled strut has three ways of buckling and two of them have design rules. The third has a half-wavelength several times the section depth, a shape in which the fold lines themselves move, and an elastic stress that no effective-width calculation can produce.

The best design is where two failures arrive together. A fixed area of steel rolled into tubes of every proportion, with the three things that can end each one. Euler's load goes as r² because I = A r²/2; the local buckling stress goes as 1/r² because the wall thins as the tube grows; squashing does not care. The capacity is the lowest of the three, so it has a maximum — and the maximum is exactly where the two buckling curves cross, at r/t = 129 and 2364 kN, which the closed form r*, the fourth root of αAL² over π³β√3, reproduces to 0.52 per cent. That is the general result and it is not about tubes: the optimum of a minimum of a rising and a falling curve is always their intersection, so optimising a design against two failure modes puts both of them at the design point — which is the one configuration imperfections hurt most.

Stability

The best design is the most sensitive one

Take a fixed area of steel and roll it into a tube. Euler's load rises with the radius and local buckling falls with it, so the capacity has a maximum — and the maximum is exactly where the two failure modes arrive together, which is the one configuration imperfections hurt most.

The library, page 2 of 7 — where effective-section sits