New constructional steels and structural stability

Fukumoto, Yuhshi

doi:10.1016/0141-0296(96)00008-9

Cited by 69 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The observed trend of decreasing values of f u /f y with increasing yield stress f y is in line with previous findings [8,10,37], and reflects the fact that strengthening mechanisms used in the production of high strength steels bring about significant increases in the yield strength, but have less influence on the ultimate tensile strength [1]. Empirical relationships to describe the variation of f u /f y with yield strength have been proposed by Fukumoto [9] and Langenberg [10], as given by Eqs. (1) and (2) respectively; these expressions are also depicted in Figure 9 for comparison purposes.…”

Section: Assessments Of Materials Ductility Requirementssupporting

confidence: 77%

“…The material characteristics of high strength steels have been studied in references [1, [8][9][10], where the influence of increasing yield strength on parameters including the ultimate tensile strength to yield strength ratio f u /f y , strain at fracture ε f and strain at ultimate tensile strength ε u , were investigated. These three parameters have traditionally been employed in EN 1993-1-1 [5] as measures of the material ductility, and minimum requirements are specified for each before the design rules set out in EN 1993-1-1 may be applied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Material properties and compressive local buckling response of high strength steel square and rectangular hollow sections

Wang

Afshan

Schillo

et al. 2017

Engineering Structures

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experimental investigation into the structural performance of compressed high strength steel (HSS) square and rectangular hollow sections is described in this paper. Both hot-rolled and cold-formed HSS sections were examined. In total six S460NH and five S690QH hot-rolled section sizes and three S500MC, two S700MC and four S960QC cold-formed section sizes were tested. The experimental programme comprised tensile coupon tests on flat and corner material, measurements of geometric imperfections, full cross-section tensile tests and stub column tests. The results of the experiments presented in this paper have been combined with other available test data on high strength steel sections, and used to assess the existing design guidelines for high strength steels given in Eurocode 3. The focus has been on the material ductility requirements, the Class 3 slenderness limit for internal elements in compression and the effective width formula for Class 4 internal elements in compression.Reliability assessments of the Class 3 slenderness limit (both the current value of 42 and a proposed value of 38) and the effective width formula for Class 4 internal elements in compression were carried out. The analysis indicated that, based on the assembled test data considered in this study, and the assumptions made regarding the statistical distributions of material and geometric properties, a partial safety factor greater than unity is required for HSS. Similar findings have also recently been presented for ordinary strength steels.

show abstract

Section: Assessments Of Materials Ductility Requirementssupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Material properties and compressive local buckling response of high strength steel square and rectangular hollow sections

Wang

Afshan

Schillo

et al. 2017

Engineering Structures

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the above mentioned properties, the steels should have low yield ratio (yield strength/tensile strength) for the safety concern. The lower yield ratio means the higher resistance to deformation from yielding to plastic instability, 4,5) preventing the sudden decrease in the strength. According to the engineering specifications, API X-70 steels should have the yield strength higher than 480 MPa, impact energy larger than 100 J at Ϫ40°C and the yield ratio smaller than 85 %.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Microstructure on the Yield Ratio and Low Temperature Toughness of Linepipe Steels.

Kim²,

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linepipe steels, which transport oil and gas, should have high strength, high toughness, excellent corrosion resistance and superior weldability. [1][2][3] The current demand is towards the larger-diameter and higher-pressure linepipes to improve the efficiency of transmission, resulting in more stringent specifications for the linepipe steels. In addition to the above mentioned properties, the steels should have low yield ratio (yield strength/tensile strength) for the safety concern. The lower yield ratio means the higher resistance to deformation from yielding to plastic instability, 4,5) preventing the sudden decrease in the strength. According to the engineering specifications, API X-70 steels should have the yield strength higher than 480 MPa, impact energy larger than 100 J at Ϫ40°C and the yield ratio smaller than 85 %. It has been shown in the previous study that the achievement of low yield ratio (around 80 %) and high toughness (ductile-brittle transition temperature of around Ϫ100°C) is possible in the 440 MPa grade C-Mn steel by controlling the thermomechanical process.6) However, it becomes more difficult to maintain adequate values of yield ratio and toughness as strength increases to a higher level. The basic difficulty in optimizing these properties comes from the fact they are often inversely correlated, i.e. an increase in the strength is achieved at the expense of the yield ratio and toughness, and vice versa. Therefore to develop the high performance linepipe steels, the individual effect of microstructural features on these properties should be clearly understood.One of the ways of decreasing the yield ratio is the utilization of hard second phase in the microstructure. Numerous studies on so-called dual phase steels showed that these steels have low yield ratio due to the presence of hard martensite or bainite in soft ferrite matrix. 7,8) Shikanai et al.,9) analyzed the relationship between the volume fraction and morphology of second phase and the yield ratio by finite element method (FEM) and reported that the steel should have soft matrix with around 50 % volume fraction of hard second phase to obtain low yield ratio. It has also been suggested that the larger difference in the strength between the two phases is more desirable to obtain low yield ratio.9,10) However these dual phase steels generally have low yield strengths which do not meet the property requirement for X-70 linepipe steels. Moreover the large difference in the strength between the two phases might have a deleterious effect on toughness since cracks can easily nucleate at the hard second phase particles at low temperatures. Recently, more emphasis is placed on developing acicular ferrite or bainite base steels for linepipe applications.11-13) However, the toughness of these steels is often disappointing. Therefore new microstructures are needed to obtain the adequate combinations of strength, toughness and yield ratio. ISIJ International, Vol. 42 (2002) The present study aims at elucidating the effects of microstructu...

show abstract

“…According to Chinese Code for Seismic Design of Buildings GB 50011-2010 [7], the ductility requirement of steel is higher than Eurocode3 due to the consideration of inelastic behavior of structural members and connections under rare earthquakes. Based on the tensile coupon tests of various steel grade, Fukumoto [13] pointed out that the increase in strength will result in the increase in Y/T ratio and the decrease in elongation ratio, which indicates the HSS could hardly meet the ductility requirements for seismic design. For comparison with Table 2 and Table 3, respectively.…”

Section: Limits Of Current Design Codesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Art of Application of High-Strength Steel Structures for Buildings in Seismic Zones

Li¹,

Wang²,

Chen³

2015

Volume 11 Number 4

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Since recent advances of technology in material science and increasing demand for high strength materials, high-strength steel (HSS) has been applied to several landmark buildings and major projects. However, the application of high-strength steel in seismic structures is limited by the relative worse ductility, which usually decreases with the increase in yield strength. In this paper, key issues associated with the application of HSS in seismic structures are pointed out and discussed. The current state of the art of behavior of HSS and recent research on the seismic behavior of HSS carried out at Tongji University are presented. The effect of reheating and cooling during fabrication process on the mechanical properties of HSS is evaluated. Through the revisit and reconsideration on the basic level of seismic design philosophy, two new design methodologies for application of HSS structures for buildings in seismic zones are proposed. Finally, future works related to the application of high strength steels are recommended.

show abstract

New constructional steels and structural stability

Cited by 69 publications

References 4 publications

Material properties and compressive local buckling response of high strength steel square and rectangular hollow sections

Material properties and compressive local buckling response of high strength steel square and rectangular hollow sections

Effect of Microstructure on the Yield Ratio and Low Temperature Toughness of Linepipe Steels.

The Art of Application of High-Strength Steel Structures for Buildings in Seismic Zones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About