BS EN 1993-1-1:2005

EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)
(4) Second order effccts may be calculated by using an analysis appropriate to the structure (including
step-by-step or other itcrative procedures). For frames where the first sway buckling mode is prcdominant
first order elastic analysis should be carried out with subsequent amplification of relevant action effects (e.g.
bending moments) by appropriate factors.

(5)8 For single storey frames designed on the basis of clastic global analysis second order sway effects due
to vertical loads may be calculated by increasing the horizontal loads (e.g. wind) and equivalent loads
<p due to imperfections (sec 5.3.2(7)) and other possible sway effects according to first order theory by
the factor:

(5.4 )

U(;r

provided that au 3,0,

where an may be calculated according to (5.2) in 5.2.1(4)B, provided that the roof slope is shallow and
that the axial compression in the beams or rafters is not significant as defined in 5.2.1 (4)B.

NOTE B For (Xcr 3,0 a morc accurate second order analysis applies.

(6)B For multi-storey frames second order sway cfTects may be calculated by means of the method given in
(5)8 provided that all storeys have a similar
distribution of vertical loads and
distribution of horizontal loads and
distribution of frame stiffness with respect to the applied storey shear forces.

NOTE B For the limitation of the method see also 5.2.1(4)B.

(7) In accordance with (3) the stability of individual members should be checked according to the
fo11owing:
a) If second order effects in individual members and relevant member imperfections (see 5.3.4) are totally
accounted for in the global analysis of the structure, no individual stability check for the members
according to 6.3 is necessary.
b) If second order effects in individual members or certain individual member imperfections (c.g. member
imperfections for flexural and/or lateral torsional buckling, see 5.3.4) are not totally accounted for in the
global analysis~ the individual stability of members should be checked according to the relevant criteria in
6.3 for the effects not included in the global analysis. This verification should take account of end
moments and forces from the global analysis of the structure, including global second order effects and
global imperfections (see 5.3.2) when relevant and may be based on a buckling length equal to the system
length

(8) Where the stability of a frame is assessed by a check with the equivalent column method according to
6.3 the buckling length values should be based on a global buckling mode of the frame accounting for the
stiffness behaviour of members and joints, the presence of plastic hinges and the distribution of compressive
forces under the design loads . .In this case intenlal forces to be used in resistance checks are calculated
according to first order theory without considering imperfections.

NOTE The National Annex may give information on the scope of application.

5.3 Imperfections

5.3.1 Basis

(1) Appropriate allowances should be incorporated in the structural analysis to cover the effects of
imperfections, including residual stresses and geometrical imperfections such as lack of verticality, lack of

32
 BS EN 1993-1-1:2005
EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)
straightness, lack of flatness, lack of fit eccentricities greater than the essential to1cranccs give in
EN 1090-2 present in joints of the unloaded structure.

(2) Equivalent geometric imperfections, see 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, should be used, with values which rcflect thc
possible effects of all type of imperfections unless these effects are included in the resistance formulae for
member design, see section 5.3.4.

(3) The following imperfections should be taken into account:

a) global imperfections for frames and bracing systcms
b) local imperfections for individual members

5.3.2 Imperfections for global analysis of frames

(1) The assumed shape of global imperfections and local impcrfections may bc dcrived from the clastic
buckling mode of a structure in the plane of buckling considered.

(2) Both in and out of plane buckling including torsional buckling with symmetric and asymmetric
buckling shapes should be taken into account in the most unfavourable direction and form.

(3) For frames sensitive to buckling in a sway mode the effect of imperfections should be allowed for in
frame analysis by means of an equivalent imperfection in the form of an initial sway imperfection and
individual bow imperfections of members. The imperfections may be determined from:
a) global initial sway imperfections, see Figure 5.2:
(5.5)
where q)o is the basic value: <Po = 1/200
ah is the reduction factor for height h applicable to columns:

h is the height of the structure in metcrs

am is the reduction factor for the number of columns in a row: am =

m is the number of columns in a row including only those columns which carry a vertical load
not less than 500/0 of the average value of the column in the vertical plane considcred

h h

Figure 5.2: Equivalent sway imperfections

b) relative initial local bow imperfections of members for flexural buckling

eo / L (5.6)
where L is the member length

NOTE The values Co / L may be chosen in the National Annex. Recommended values are given in
Table 5.1.

33
BS EN 1993-1-1:2005
EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)

Table 5.1: Design value of initial local bow imperfection eo IL for members
IIEVBuckling curve elastic analysis plastic analysis
according to Table 6.2@l1 eo / L eo / L
ao 1 / 350 1 /300
a 1 /300 1/250
b 1/250 1 /200
c 1/200 1 / 150
d 1 / 150 1 / 100

(4)8 For building frames sway imperfections may be disregarded where

H Ed 0) 15 V Ed (5.7)

(5)8 For the determination of horizontal forces to floor diaphragms the configuration of imperfections as
given in Figure 5.3 should be applied, where ~ is a sway imperfection obtained from (5.5) assuming a single
storey with height 11, see (3) a).

h h

t NEd

Figure 5.3: Configuration of sway imperfections ~ for horizontal forces on floor

diaphragms

(6) \Vhen performing the global analysis for determining end forces and end moments to be used in
Inember checks according to 6.3 local bow imperfections may be neglected. However for frames sensitive to
second order effects local bow imperfections of l11enlbers additionally to global sway imperfections (see
5.2. J (3)) should be introduced in the structural analysis of the frame for each compressed member where the
following conditions are met:
at least one moment resistant joint at one l11ember end

-/1,>0,5,,1-'
/A fv (5.8)
V NEd

where NEd is the design value of the compression force

and A is the in-plane non-dimensional slendell1ess caleulated for the member considered as hinged at
its ends

NOTE Local bow imperfections are taken into account in member checks, see 5.2.2 (3) and 5.3.4.

34
 BS EN 1993-1-1:2005
EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)
(7) The effects of initial sway imperfection and local bow imperfections may be replaced by systems of
equivalent horizontal forces, introduced for each colUlnn, see Figure 5.3 and Figure 5.4.

~ initial sway imperfections initial bow imperfections

NEd !\JEd NEd

t t t ~L
4 NEd eo

Figure 5.4: Replacement of initial imperfections by equivalent horizontal forces

(8) These initial sway imperfections should apply in all relevant horizontal directions, but need only be
considered in one direction at a time.

(9)B Where, in multi-storey beam-and-column building frames, equivalent forces are used they should be
applied at each floor and roof level.

(10) The possible torsional effects on a structure caused by anti-symmetric sways at the two opposite faces,
should also be considered, see Figure 5.5.

A.--_ _ _ _ _ _---,B - -,
A.----_--",......-....:::-_ _..I..-.-,B

\
\

r--
\

AI JIB A ' -.. B

~--- ~----------t t
(a) Faces A-A and B-B sway (b) Faces A-A and B-B sway
in same direction in opposite direction

J translational sway
2 rotational swaJ'

Figure 5.5: Translational and torsional effects (plan view)

35
BS EN 1993-1-1:2005
EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)
(11) As an alternative to (3) and (6) the shape of the elastic critical buckling model1cr of the structure may
be applied as a unique global and local imperfection. The amplitude of this imperfection may be determined
from:

(5.9)

where:

for). > 0,2 (5.10)

and A is the relative slende111ess of the structure (5.11)

a is the imperfection factor for the relevant buckling curve, see Table 6.1 and Table
X is the rcduction factor for the relevant buckling curve depending on the relevant cross-section, see
6.3.1;
aullJ is the minimum force amplifier for the axial force configuration NEd in members to reach the
characteristic resistance NRk of the most axially stressed cross section without taking buckling
into account
an is the minimum force amplifier for the axial force configuration 111 members to reach
the elastic critical buckling load @II
MRk is the characteristic moments resistance of the critical cross section, e.g. MelJ~k or MpLRk as
relevant
is the characteristic resistance to normal force of the critical cross section, i.e. NpLRk
E'I '7;'r,max is the bending moment due to llcr at the critical cross section

11cr is the shape of elastic critical buckling mode

NOTE 1 For calculating the amplifiers aultk and acl' the members of the structure may be considered
to be loaded by axial forces NEd only that result from the first order clastic analysis of the structure for
the loads.(§) In case of elastic global calculation and plastic cross-section check the linear
formula + < 1 should be [email protected]
IV,JIJ'd }\11 1U1d -

NOTE 2 The National Annex may give infonnation for the scope of application of (11).

5.3.3 Imperfection for analysis of bracing systems

(1) In the analysis of bracing systems which are required to provide lateral stability within the length of
beams or compression members the effects of imperfections should be included by means of an equivalent
geometric imperfection of the members to be restrained, in the form of an initial bow imperfection:
eo = am L / 500 (5.12)
where L is the span of the bracing system

and am

in which 111 is the number of members to be restrained.

(2) For convenience, the effects of the initial bow in1perfections of the members to be restrained by a
bracing system, may be replaced by the equivalent stabilizing force as shown in Figure 5.6:
eo +_
8_ c5 1
}
(5.13)
L2
36
 BS EN 1993-1-1:2005
EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)
where <Sq is the inplane deflection of the bracing system due to q plus any external loads calculated from
first order analysis

NOTE Sq may be taken as 0 if second order theory is used.

(3) Where the bracing system is required to stabilize the compression flange of a beam of constant height,
the force NEd in Figure 5.6 may be obtained from:
NEd = M Ed / h (5.14)
where M Ed is the maximum moment in the beam
and h is the overall depth of the beam.

NOTE Where a beam is subjected to external compreSSIOn NEd should include a part of the
compression force.

(4) At points where beams or compression members are spliced, it should also be verified that the bracing
system is able to resist a local force equal to amN Ed / 100 applied to it by each beam or compression member
which is spliced at that point, and to transmit this force to the adjacent points at which that beam or
con1pression member is restrained, see Figure 5.7.

(5) For checking for the local force according to clause (4), any external loads acting on bracing systems
should also be included, but the forces arising from the imperfection given in (I) may be omitted.

NEd

eo impeliection
qd eqllivalentforce per unit length
1 bracing system

The force N Ed is assumed uniform within the span L of the bracing system.
For non-unifon11 forces this is slightly conservative.

Figure 5.6: Equivalent stabilizing force

37
BS EN 1993-1-1:2005
EN 1993-1-1:2005 (E)

am CPo : CPo = 1 /200

1 splice
2 bracing .">JJStem

Figure 5.7: Bracing forces at splices in compression elements

5.3.4 Member imperfections

(1) The effects of local bow imperfections of members are incorporated within the formulas given for
buckling resistance for members, see section 6.3.

(2) \Vhcrc thc stability of mcmbcrs is accounted for by second ordcr analysis according to 5.2.2(7)a) for
compression mcmbers imperfections eo according to 5.3.2(3)b), 5.3.2(5) or 5.3.2(6) should be considered.

(3) For a second order analysis taking account of lateral torsional buckling of a member in bending the
imperfections may bc adopted as keO,d, ~ where eo is @l] the equivalent initial bow imperfection of the
weak axis of the profile considered. In gcneral an additional torsional inlpcrfection need not to be allowed for.

NOTE The National Annex may choose the value ofk. The value k 0,5 is recommended.

5.4 Methods of analysis considering material non-linearities

5.4.1 General

(1) Thc intcrnal forces and l1101nents may bc determined using eithcr
a) elastic global analysis
b) plastic global analysis.

NOTE For finite element model (FEM) analysis sec EN 1993-1-5.

(2) Elastic global analysis may be used in all cases.

38