IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28

Theoretical study of axially compressed Cold

Formed Steel Sections
Sreedhar Kalavagunta , Sivakumar Naganathan, and Kamal Nasharuddin Bin Mustapha
Universiti Tenaga Nasional,
Jalan IKRAM-UNITEN, 43000,
Department of Civil Engineering,
Kajang, Selangor, Malaysia.

Abstract Conceptual and finite element

analysis oriented design of cold formed steel
columns are presented in this paper. Total four 1
meter channel lipped section with thickness of 1,
1.2, 1.5 and 1.9 are tested. All columns were
tested under a pure axial load, Conceptual design
results are compared with finite element analysis
for axially loaded compression members. The
results provide useful information regarding
allowable load estimation of cold formed steel
column section. Based on the results, design
recommendations were proposed. The proposed
design approach is recommended for the design
of complex shape of cold formed steel section,
where design rules are not available in
standards.
Keywords-Cold formed steel, Axial Stress, Design
Strength, Effective Width Method, Direct Strength
method.
I.

INTRODU CTION

production, fast and easy erection, installation etc.

In the recent decades, the use of Cold formed steel has
increased widely in the construction industry because of its
unique characteristics and advantages. The behaviors of CFS
structures are influenced by effects such as Local Buckling,
Distortional Buckling and Global Buckling [1, 2] which arises
due to the Slenderness of members. This makes the design and
analysis often more complex. The recent research and
investigation on cold formed steel shows advancements in
design specification and manufacturing processes for most of
the standard sections [3,4,5,6,7].
The Effective Width Method and Direct Strength Method
(DSM) are the only two basic designs that are accessible now
by the design codes including North American Specification
for Cold-Formed Steel Structural members (AISI-2007) [8].
Effective Width method can take into account the interaction

Cold Formed Steel (CFS) members are widely used in

between Local and Lateral buckling. However, as structural

building constructions, bridge constructions, storage racks,

shapes became more complex with additional lips and

highway

bins,

intermediate stiffeners, the accurate computation of the

transmission towers, car bodies, railway coaches and various

effective widths of individual elements of the complex shapes

types of equipment. These sections are cold formed from

becomes more difficult and inaccurate. In order to overwhelm

carbon or low alloy steel sheet, strip, plate, or flat bar in cold-

this problem, the Direct Strength method (DSM) was

rolling machines or by press brake or by bending brake

developed. However, finite element analysis like ANSYS,

operations. The thicknesses of cold formed steel members do

ABAQUS etc. are the best options for the design of CFS with

usually range from 0.378 mm to 6.35 mm. CFS sections

any cross sectional shapes, but most of the structural consulting

gained special attention in research due to its major

firms are using basic FEA software's like STAAD.Pro,

advantages like flexibility in drawing to any shape, high

SAP2000, RAM Structural System, STRAP etc., This paper

strength and stiffness, ease of prefabrication and mass

presents a comparative study of cold formed steel column

products,

www.ijascse.in

drainage

facilities,

grain

Page 67

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
section design using STAAD.Pro, FEA results with

Since the thickness of individual plate elements of CFS

conceptual design as per AISI.

structural members are normally small compared to their

width, buckling and post buckling strength are two major

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS

concerns for strength prediction of CFS structural members.

Cold formed steel sections are usually thinner and have a

Unlike hot rolled members, CFS members normally buckle

mode of failure and deformation, which are not commonly

prior to section yielding. Further, CFS compression elements

encountered in normal structural steel design. A thin

do not collapse when the buckling stress is reached.

walled member under compression loads most likely

Additional load can be carried out by the element after

undergoes various buckling modes like local buckling,

buckling called as post buckling strength, by means of stress

Distortional

redistribution [12].

buckling,

Flexural

buckling,

Torsional

buckling, Flexural-Torsional buckling. For a typical CShape column under pure axial compression, the Local

In this Effective Width approach [8], instead of considering

Buckling mode is the dominant mode. However, a small

the non-uniform distribution of stress across the width of the

change from this prototype, e.g., the addition of lip

element, it is assumed that the total load is carried by a

stiffeners and web stiffeners, can markedly increase the

fictitious width b, which is subjected to a uniformly

local buckling stress and make the distortional buckling

distributed stress fmax. Where, fmax equals the edge stress.

mode dominant, as indicated by Schafer[9].

Professor George Winter at Cornell university proposed a

P n= AeF n

(1)

formula to determine post buckling strength of a stiffened

element that appeared in AISI known as Winters equation.

where
P n = Design compressive force

b = w , for

Ae = Effective cross sectional area

b=

F n = Design Stress of Cold Formed Steel.

Thin walled CFS sections can be used efficiently as

where

reduction factor

structural members of light-weight structures when hot-

(2)

rolled sections or others are not efficient. Until recently, the

conventional Effective Width method (EWM) has been the

Where

plate slenderness factor

only way to estimate the member strength from the past 60

years. This method accounts the interaction between local
(3)

and the post-buckling strength. Nevertheless, as structural

shapes become more complex with additional lips and

Where k = plate buckling coefficient;

intermediate stiffeners, the accurate computation of the

t = thickness of compression element;

effective widths of individual elements of the complex

shapes become more difficult and inaccurate. In order to

been studied further by Hancock at al., [11].

www.ijascse.in

modulus

of

elasticity

= maximum compressive edge stress in the

overcome this problem, the Direct Strength method (DSM)

was developed by Shafer and Pekoz [10] in 1998 and has

element
(

, the yield stress for maximum capacity)

Page 68

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
For more complicated configuration, the effective width
must be determined for each compression portion, and then
the strength of the section can be obtained by assuming load
is resisted only by the effective areas.

--(5)

The Direct Strength Method [8] is initially proposed in

Where

1988 and has been adopted by the North American ColdFormed Steel Specifications in 2004 as an alternative to the
traditional Effective Width Method to estimate the
compression and the flexural member strength, which can
consider interaction of local or distortional and overall

P crl = Critical elastic local column buckling load.

Distortional Buckling (P nd)

buckling modes. This method does not require effective

width calculations or iteration, but as an alternative uses
gross properties and the elastic buckling behavior of cross
section to calculate section or member strength. With help
of software applications, this design procedure can be
implemented for any type of sections.

The Direct Strength Method uses the entire cross-section in

(6)

Where

the elastic buckling determination and offers specific

provisions for Local, Distortional and Global buckling
strength respectively. The design strength P n (4) to (6) is
determined as minimum of ( P ne, P nl and P nd) based on
P crd = Critical elastic distortional column buckling load.

DSM method.

Four cold formed lipped channels of C10010, C10012,

Flexural, Torsional, or Torsional-Flexural Buckling (Pne)

C10015 and C10019 were considered in this investigation.

The American specification (AISI 2007) design concepts
(4)

used, four finite element models created with sectional

properties that are tabulated in table 1.

where
The column was modeled with 3D shell elements (Figure 1)
with sharp corners neglecting the corner radius with applied
force of 24.3 kN. Boundary condition is fixed at the bottom
and released at top for vertical transaction to capture local
Pcre = Minimum of the critical elastic column buckling load
in Flexural, Torsional, Or Torsional-Flexural Buckling.
Local Buckling (Pnl)

bucking. Both conceptual design and FEA analysis were

carried out by using STAAD.Pro product. Provisions of the
AISI Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel
Structural members have been implemented in STAAD Pro.

www.ijascse.in

Page 69

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
This Program allow design of single members in tension,
compression, bending and shear. Figure 2 and 3 illustrates
stress contours and buckling modes.

TABLE I. Test cases of Lysaght Cold Formed Sections

Specimen

Area mm2

Depth mm

Width mm

Thickness mm

Lip mm

R mm

C10010

216

102

51

12.5

C10012

258

102

51

1.2

12.5

C10015

323

102

51

1.5

13.5

C10019

409

102

51

1.9

14.5

Figure 1: FEA shell element model and Conceptual Beam element model
for testing.

www.ijascse.in

Figure 2: FEA mode with Stress contour and Mode

Page 70

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
tabulated in Table 3.
Shear Stress in x-direction
Sxc = (Sx+ Sxb)

(7)

Shear Stress in y-direction

Syc = (Sy+ Syb)

(8)

Axial Stress in x-direction

Sxb = 6*Mx/t2

(9)

Axial Stress in y-direction

Syb = 6*My/t2
Axial Stress Fc= Ft

(10)

is Max (Sx, Sy)

(11)

The results in table 2 shows FEA analysis are a good

agreement with conceptual design. It also gives an idea that
the basic FEA analysis tools that are available in industry can
Figure 3: FEA mode with Stress contour and Mode shape.

be used for estimation of critical stress/ultimate load capacity

for a given cross section with any shape rather than limiting
to standard shapes. It also investigated with basic software

III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

analysis tool, STAAD.Pro, to find optimal shape of the cross

The critical stresses from FEA model and conceptual design
results as per AISI code provisions are recorded in Table 2
using

STAAD.Pro

(Structural

analysis

and

design

software). The membrane stress Sx, Sy, inplane shear stress

Sxy, Shear stress Sqx, Sqy (Force/ unit length/ thickness)
and moments Mx, My, Mxy (Force x Length/length) are
obtained from FEA analysis. Actually, stresses are

section for given force and area. Cold formed section C10010
with cross sectional area 216 mm2 taken for this investigation
and results are tabulated in table 3. Equivalent shapes RHS
and M shapes are analyzed and results are in table 4 and table
5 simultaneously. RHS section shows 37% more compression
strength compared to channel section for a given cross
sectional area.

calculated based on equations 7-11 and the results are

TABLE 2: Comparative results of STAAD.Pro Conceptual design Vs. FEA.

Specimen

STAAD.Pro

FEA

Actual Stress (N/mm^2)

Actual Stress (N/mm^2)

Fc

Fc

C10010

140.96

121.207

C10012

107.87

100.267

C10015

81.178

78.172

C10019

60.42

60.894

www.ijascse.in

Page 71

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
TABLE 3: Maximum Stresses of Channel section C102X51X1 mm.

Shear

Plate

Sqx N/mm2

Bending Moment

Membrane

Sqy N/mm2

Sx N/mm2

Sy N/mm2

Sxy N/mm2

Mx kNm/m

My kNm/m

Mxy kNm/m

Max Qx

2421

1.156

0.622

-106.942

-16.692

10.048

Min Qx

2414

-2.069

0.887

-107.22

-15.7

-7.158

-0.001

Max Qy

2414

-2.069

0.887

-107.22

-15.7

-7.158

-0.001

Min Qy

2403

-2.069

-0.887

-107.22

-15.7

7.158

-0.001

Max Sx

2390

-0.859

0.176

-99.583

-0.293

2.26

0.001

-0.001

Min Sx

2420

0.001

0.015

-167.022

-29.619

-31.979

Max Sy

2241

-0.002

0.001

-114.858

2.048

0.396

Min Sy

32

0.004

0.002

-116.563

-29.8

-1.648

Max Sxy

38

0.713

0.358

-137.487

-22.165

22.311

Min Sxy

2426

-0.001

-0.015

-167.022

-29.619

-31.979

Max Mx

2422

0.111

-0.108

-116.156

-22.287

11.984

0.001

Min Mx

2413

-0.056

-0.274

-115.355

-21.653

-10.044

-0.002

-0.001

Max My

2391

-0.227

-0.164

-100.303

-0.311

0.486

0.001

0.001

Min My

2397

0.227

0.164

-100.303

-0.311

0.486

-0.001

-0.001

Max Mxy

2379

-0.859

-0.176

-99.583

-0.293

-2.26

0.001

0.001

Min Mxy

2390

-0.859

0.176

-99.583

-0.293

2.26

0.001

-0.001

TABLE 4. Maximum Stresses of RHS 51X51X1 mm

Shear

Plate

Sqx N/mm2

Membrane

Sqy N/mm2

Sx N/mm2

Sy N/mm2

Bending Moment

Sxy N/mm2

Mx kNm/m

My kNm/m

Mxy kNm/m

Max Qx

3626

0.802

-0.405

-108.966

-14.255

-6.261

Min Qx

2420

-0.802

0.405

-108.966

-14.256

-6.261

Max Qy

2420

-0.802

0.405

-108.966

-14.256

-6.261

Min Qy

2415

-0.802

-0.405

-108.966

-14.255

6.261

Max Sx

2390

-0.196

0.066

-105.921

-0.104

2.237

Min Sx

2432

-0.663

-0.329

-121.378

-18.491

13.984

Max Sy

3606

0.003

-0.002

-116.587

1.664

0.886

Min Sy

41

0.023

0.011

-110.188

-23.792

-2.735

Max Sxy

38

0.661

0.327

-121.369

-18.471

13.992

Min Sxy

3027

-0.663

0.329

-121.377

-18.491

-13.983

Max Mx

3625

0.027

0.083

-117.057

-20.48

-6.213

0.001

Min Mx

2413

-0.027

-0.083

-117.057

-20.48

-6.213

-0.001

Max My

2390

-0.196

0.066

-105.921

-0.104

2.237

Min My

3620

0.196

-0.066

-105.921

-0.104

2.237

Max Mxy

2391

-0.196

-0.066

-105.921

-0.104

-2.237

Min Mxy

2396

-0.196

0.066

-105.921

-0.104

2.237

www.ijascse.in

Page 72

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
TABLE 5 : M Shape section .
Shear

Plate

Sqx N/mm2

Membrane

Sqy N/mm2

Sx N/mm2

Sy N/mm2

Bending Moment

Sxy N/mm2

Mx kNm/m

My kNm/m

Mxy kNm/m

Max Qx

2233

2.135

0.622

-99.069

-15.47

8.487

0.002

0.001

Min Qx

30

-0.463

-0.201

-132.859

-20.953

14.369

Max Qy

2233

2.135

0.622

-99.069

-15.47

8.487

0.002

0.001

Min Qy

2242

1.916

-0.625

-108.62

-15.269

-4.705

0.002

0.001

Max Sx

2211

1.186

0.228

-94.178

-0.643

-0.177

-0.001

Min Sx

2228

0.045

0.007

-172.587

-32.279

33.057

0.001

Max Sy

2174

0.065

-0.019

-112.065

2.824

-1.246

Min Sy

2247

0.034

-0.001

-172.18

-32.498

-33.71

Max Sxy

2228

0.045

0.007

-172.587

-32.279

33.057

0.001

Min Sxy

2247

0.034

-0.001

-172.18

-32.498

-33.71

Max Mx

2234

-0.13

-0.301

-102.448

-20.018

6.441

0.003

0.001

0.001

Min Mx

61

0.061

0.157

-113.714

-24.035

-6.96

-0.001

Max My

2234

-0.13

-0.301

-102.448

-20.018

6.441

0.003

0.001

0.001

Min My

2210

0.107

-0.182

-98.654

-0.356

0.556

-0.001

-0.001

Max Mxy

2212

-0.173

0.093

-104.2

-6.68

2.694

0.001

0.001

Min Mxy

2211

1.186

0.228

-94.178

-0.643

-0.177

-0.001

Concluding Remarks:
Modern design specifications have taken substantial steps in
providing analysis methodology, but these are limited to
some standard cross sections. Nowadays, design concepts
are becoming increasingly complex due to shape of cross
sections. So, when there is complexity due to cross section
or structural behavior then finite element analysis and
design will be the best practice.
This paper presents finite element investigation on cold
formed sections to determine load carrying capacity /
critical stresses. To substantiate these results, the standard
cold formed steel sections Table 1, designed using
STAAD.Pro Structural Analysis and design software per
AISI specifications. The FEA results are approximately
nearer to AISI conceptual design results. With this, author
suggested that one can follow this approach to design
complex shapes of cold formed steel section.

www.ijascse.in

References:
1.

Yu, W.W.1991. Cold-Formed Steel Design, John Wiley &

Sons, New York.
2. M.Macdonald, M.A Heiyantuduwa, J.Rohodes. Recent
development in the design of cold-formed steel members. ThinWalled Structures. 46(2008) 1047-1053.
3. Z. Li , B.W. Schafer, Application of the finite strip method in
cold-formed steel member design, Journal of Constructional
Steel Research 66 (2010) 971_980.
4. Schafer BW. Review: the direct strength method of coldformed steel member design. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 2008;64:766_78.
5. Cheng Yu_, Yujie Chen, Detailing recommendations for 1.83
m wide cold-formed steel shear walls with steel sheathing,
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 67 (2011) 93_101
6. C D. Moen, M.ASCE; and B. W. Schafer, M.ASCE, Direct
Strength Method for Design of Cold-Formed Steel Columns
with Holes, JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING.
ASCE / MAY 2011 / 559.
7. Eduardo de Miranda Batista, Effective section method: A
general direct method for the design of steel cold-formed
members under localglobal buckling interaction, Thin-Walled
Structures 48 (2010) 345356.
8. AISI Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel
Structural members, 2007 Edition.
9. Schafer, B.W. Distortional buckling of cold-formed steel
columns. American Iron and Steel Institute. 2000.
10. Schafer BW, Pekoz T. Direct Strength Prediction of coldformed steel members using numerical elastic buckling

Page 73

IJASCSE, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2013

Feb. 28
solutions. In: Shanmugam NE, et al., editors. Thin-walled
structures. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1998.
11. Hancock Gj, Murray TM, Ellifrit DS. Cold-formed steel
Structures to the AISI specification. Marcel Dekker,
Inc;2001.
12. Nuno Silvestre, Dinar Camotim , Pedro B. Dinis, Postbuckling behaviour and direct strength design of lipped
channel columns experiencing local/distortional interaction,
volume 73, June 2012, Pages 1230.

www.ijascse.in

Page 74