Advanced model of steel joints loaded by internal forces from 3D

frame structures

Lubomír Šabatka, IDEA RS s.r.o

František Wald, FSv ČVUT Praha
Jaromír Kabeláč, Hypatia Solutions s.r.o
Drahoslav Kolaja, IDEA RS s.r.o.

Abstract
Steel frame structures are commonly analyzed three dimensionally by 1D elements. Connection of
elements to joints is assumed to be perfectly rigid, nominally pinned or semi-rigid. The new CBFEM
method allows to properly model the connection. The bending/deformation stiffness, resistance and
deformation capacity of connections of individual members is evaluated. CBFEM model is loaded
with appropriate internal forces obtained by global analysis. The article explains loading of a detailed
3D model of a joint. It also addresses situation where actual structural design of the joint does not
match theoretical expectations of the global analysis.

CBFEM – new level of analysis steel joints and connections

FEM is a general method commonly used for structural analysis. Application of FEM for research
models of joints is studied from eighties, e.g. (Virdi, 1999). The elastic-plastic analysis is required. In
fact, the results of FEM analysis are useless for joint design without validation of models to
experiments.
For design of joints was hence developed the model taking the finite element analyses for
distribution of internal forces in joint and the components to analyse connectors itself, Component
based finite element method (CBFEM). The material is modelled on design level as bilinear.
In CBFEM model, both webs and flanges of connected member are modelled using plates for which
there is known and verified solution available. The fasteners – bolts and welds – are the most difficult
part of the analysis model. Modelling of such elements in general FEM programs is difficult because
these programs do no offer required properties. Thus special FEM components had to be developed
to model the welds and bolts behaviour in a joint.
Joints of members are modelled as massless points when analysing steel frame or girder structure.
Equilibrium equations are assembled in joints and after solving the whole structure internal forces on
ends of beams are determined. In fact, the joint is loaded by those forces. The resultant of forces
from all members in the joint is zero – the whole joint is in equilibrium.
The real shape of joint is not known in the structural model. The engineer only defines, if the joint is
assumed to be rigid or hinged.
To design the joint properly, it is necessary to create a verified model of a joint which respects the
real state. End segments of members are modelled using plate/wall elements.
 Figure 1 – Theoretical (massless) joint and the real shape of the joint without modified member ends.

For better precision of CBFEM model, the end forces on 1D members are applied as loads on
segment ends. Six components of internal forces from the theoretical node are transferred to the
outer end of segment – the values of forces are kept but the moments are modified by the actions of
forces on corresponding arms.
Inner ends of segments are not connected. The connection must be modelled. So called
manufacturing operations are used in CBFEM method to model the connection. Manufacturing
operations are above else: cuts, offsets, holes, stiffeners, ribs, end plates and splices, angles, gusset
plates and other. Fastening elements are added to them – welds and bolts.

Steel plates by shell model

All parts of 1D members and all additional plates are modelled as plate/walls. These elements are
made of steel (metal in general) and the behaviour of this material is significantly nonlinear.
Nonlinearity (plasticity) must be respected in the calculation.
The real stress-strain diagram of steel is replaced by the ideal plastic material for design purposes in
building practice – see the figure. The advantage of ideal plastic material is that only yield strength
and modulus of elasticity must be known to describe the material curve. The granted ductility of
construction steel is 15 %. The real usable value of limit plastic strain is 5% for ordinary design (1993-
1-5 appendix C paragraph C.8 note 1).
The stress in steel cannot exceed the yield strength when using the ideal elastic-plastic stress-strain
diagram. Thus it is worthless to perform the stress check. The relative plastic strain is sufficient as the
check value.

Figure 2 - Real tension curve and the ideal elastic-plastic diagram of the material

Welds
Steel plates are modelled as individual items. Their interconnection is provided by welds and bolts.
CBFEM method creates the model according to the real behaviour. The analysis plate/walls are not
interconnected and no intersections are generated between them, unlike when modelling structures
and buildings. Mesh of finite elements is generated on each individual plate independently from
mesh of other plates.
Welds are modelled as special massless force interpolation constrains which ensure the connection
between the edge of one plate and the surface or edge of the other plate.

Bolts
Bolted connection consists of two or more clasped plates and one or more bolts. Plates are placed
loosely on each other. A contact element is inserted between plates in the analysis model, which
acts only in compression. No forces are carried in tension. Contact is valid only if plates are parallel.
The analysis model of bolts is the same as described for anchor bolts. The contact between bolt
head/washer and plate is modelled using the interpolation constraint. Holes for bolts are generated
in plates.

Figure 3 - Tensile diagram of bolts

Equilibrium in node
Each node of 3D FEM model must be in equilibrium. The equilibrium requirement is correct but it is
not necessary to design simple joints. One member of joint is always „bearing“ and the others are
connected. If only the connection of connected members is checked, it is not necessary to keep the
equilibrium. Thus there are two modes of loads input available – see fig 4.

Figure 4 – Simplified and complex model of supports in CBFEM model of the joint
Loading of joint model
End forces of the frame analysis model are transferred to outer ends of member segments.
Eccentricities of members caused by the joint design are respected during the transfer.
The analysis model created by CBFEM method corresponds to the real joint very precisely. On the
other hand, analysis of internal forces is performed on a very idealised 3D FEM 1D model where
individual beams are modelled using centrelines and the joints are modelled using immaterial nodes.

a) Real shape of joint b) Theoretical shape in 3D FEM model

Figure 5 - Joint of vertical column and horizontal beam

Internal forces are analysed using 1D members in 3D model. Following picture shows an example of
courses of internal forces.

a) Bending moment b) Shear force

Figure 6 - Course of internal forces on horizontal beam. M and V are the end forces on the joint.

The effects caused by member on the joint are important to design the joint with its connections.
The effects are illustrated in the Fig. 7.

a) 1D member model b ) CBFEM model – dark blue color

Figure 7 – Load effects of member on the joint. CBFEM model is drawn in dark blue colour.
Moment MEd and force VEd act in theoretical joint. The point of theoretical joint does not exist in
CBFEM model thus the load cannot be applied here. The model is loaded by actions M and V which
are transferred to the end of segment in distance r
MEd,c = MEd – VEd . r
VEd,c = VEd
In CBFEM model, the end section of segment is loaded by moment MEd,c and force VEd,c.

When designing the joint, its real position relative to the theoretical point of joint should be
determined and respected. Internal forces in the position of the real joint are often different to
internal forces in the theoretical point of the joint. Thanks to precise CBFEM model the design is
performed on reduced forces – see moment MEd,r in Fig. 8.

Figure 8 - Course of bending moment in CBFEM model. The arrow points to the real position of the joint.

When loading the joint, it must be respected that the solution of the real joint must correspond to
the theoretical model used for calculation of internal forces. This is fulfilled for rigid joints but the
situation may be completely
different for hinges.

a) 1D members model b) CBFEM model

Figure 9 - Position of the hinge in theoretical 3D FEM model and in the real structure.

Figure 9 illustrates that the position of a hinge in the theoretical 1D members model differs from the
real position in the structure. The theoretical model does not correspond to the reality. When
applying the calculated internal forces, significant bending moment is applied into the shifted joint
and the designed joint is either overloaded or cannot be designed. The solution is simple – both
models must correspond. Either the hinge in 1D member must be defined in the proper position or
the courses of internal forces must be shifted to get the zero moment in the real position of the
hinge.

Figure 10 - Shifted course of bending moment on the beam. Zero moment is at the position of the hinge.

Joint modelling in 3D global analyses

The global behaviour of steel framed structures is influenced by the behaviour of the joints. Hence,
accurate modelling of the beam-to-column joint is essential. To assure the quality of global
modelling, Chapter 5 of EN1993-1-8 introduces classification of joints based on their relative stiffness
compared to the connecting element, e.g. beam or column for column bases. The classification of
stiffness provides accurate prediction of element´s and joint´s resistance. By comparing its initial
rotational stiffness Sj,ini with the classification boundaries, see Fig. 5.4., a joint may be classified as
rigid, nominally pinned or semi-rigid according to its rotational stiffness. A joint may be also classified
on the basis of experimental evidence, experience of previous satisfactory performance in similar
cases or by calculations based on test evidence. Joints may be modelled as nominally pinned, rigid or
semi-rigid joint. In case of semi-rigid joints, Chapter 5.3 in EN1993-1-8 offers a complex and
inaccurate transformation of the stiffness of the column web panel in shear into the connection
rotational stiffness’s.

a
Ma
      Mb
Ma Mb T
b

a) Physical model of double sided joints with two connections

b) Model of joint with the column web panel in shear and two springs representing the joints
c) A complex and inaccurate simplification

Figure 11 - Model of the semi rigid connections in global analyses

CBFEM is a tool for daily practice
CBFEM method is a synergy of standard component method and advance FE analysis. It provides
efficient, fast and accurate tool for structural engineers and fabricators. Steel joints and connections
which had to be simplified and estimated can now be calculated properly.

Figure 12 – Examples of complex joints analysed by CBFEM

References
Virdi KS et al, 1999, Numerical simulation of semi-rigid connections by the finite element method, Report of Working Group
6 Numerical, Simulation COST C1, Brussels Luxembourg.
Bayo E, Gracia J, Gil B and Goni R. 2012. An efficient cruciform element to model semirigid composite connections for frame
analysis. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 72: 97–104.
Cabrero JM and Bayo E. 2007. The semi-rigid behaviour of three-dimensional steel beam-to-column stel joints subjected to
proportional loading. Part II: Theoretical model and validation. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 63: 1254–1267.
N 1994-1-1. Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings.
European Committee for Standardisation. CEN. 2004. Brussels: 118.
EN 1993-1-8. Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Part 1-8: Design of joints. European Committee for Standardisation.
Brussels: CEN. 2005. 133.
Charney FA and Marshal J. 2006. A comparison of the Krawinkler and Scissors models for including beam-column joint
deformations in the analysis of moment-resisting steel frames. AISC Engineering Journal 43(1): 31-48.
Heinisuo M, Laine V, Lehtimäki E. 2009. Enlargement of the component method into 3D, Proceeding of Eleventh Nordic
Steel Construction Conference, NSCC2009.
Jaspart JP, Pietrapertosa C, Weynand K, Busse E, Klinkhammer R, Development of a full consistent design approach for
bolted and welded joints in buildings frames and trusses between steel members made of hollow and/or open sections,
CIDECT Report 5BP-4/05, November 2005.
Loureiro A, Lopez M and Bayo E. 2016. Shear behaviour of stiffened double rectangular column panels: characterization and
cruciform element. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 117: 126–138.
Simões da Silva L. 2008. Towards a consistent design approach for steel joints under generalized loading. Journal of
Constructional Steel Research 64: 1059–1075.