ZHENG et al 2024a - Revision history

Scipediacontent at 11:17, 25 June 2024

2024-06-25T11:17:51Z

Scipediacontent at 11:17, 25 June 2024

2024-06-25T11:17:31Z

Scipediacontent at 11:16, 25 June 2024

2024-06-25T11:16:56Z

Scipediacontent at 11:09, 25 June 2024

2024-06-25T11:09:24Z

Neon Yeah at 14:00, 22 June 2024

2024-06-22T14:00:39Z

Rimni: /* 3.2 Analysis of bearing capacity */

2024-05-29T12:24:09Z

‎3.2 Analysis of bearing capacity

Rimni at 12:23, 29 May 2024

2024-05-29T12:23:01Z

Rimni at 12:21, 29 May 2024

2024-05-29T12:21:40Z

Rimni at 12:19, 29 May 2024

2024-05-29T12:19:07Z

Rimni: /* 4 Conclusion */

2024-05-29T11:56:41Z

‎4 Conclusion

@@ Line 400: / Line 400: @@
 | style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 11'''. Load–deflection curves of Group 1 of specimens
 |}
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"
 |-style="background:white;"

@@ Line 374: / Line 374: @@
 | style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 9'''. Comparison of experimental and simulated <math display="inline"> F_y </math> values
 |}
+<br/>
 <div id='img-10'></div>
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"

@@ Line 370: / Line 370: @@
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"
 |-style="background:white;"
-|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[File:ZHENG_et_al_2024a_6339_9.png|298px]]
+|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[File:ZHENG_et_al_2024a_6339_9.png|330px]]
 |-
 | style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 9'''. Comparison of experimental and simulated <math display="inline"> F_y </math> values
 |}
 <div id='img-10'></div>
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"
 |-style="background:white;"
-|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[File:ZHENG_et_al_2024a_8763_10.png|288px]]
+|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[File:ZHENG_et_al_2024a_8763_10.png|330px]]
 |-
-| style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 10'''. Comparison of experimental and simulated <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> values
+| style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"|'''Figure 10'''. Comparison of experimental and simulated <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> values
 |}
 Specimens B2, B3, and B6 (hereafter referred to as Group 1) had the same <math display="inline">  k </math> (0.29) and <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> (0.5), but different <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> (4.0, 2.0, and 1.33, respectively) and different numbers of openings (3, 6, and 9, respectively). A comparison of <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of these three specimens revealed the following ([[#img-9|Figures 9]] and [[#img-10|10]]). 1): <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of the open-web beams decreased as <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> increased. <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> had a marked effect on the yield and ultimate loads. However, when <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> reached approximately 2, the yield and ultimate loads increased insignificantly as <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> was further decreased. 2) <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of the open-web beam increased with <math display="inline">  n </math>. More specifically, when <math display="inline">  n </math> increased from three to six, <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> increased markedly. When <math display="inline">  n </math> increased from six to nine, <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> did not increase markedly. 3) Group 1 specimens, i.e., B2, B3, and B6 had <math display="inline"> F_y </math> of 97.87, 196.25, and 210.61 kN, respectively, and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of 115, 218.22, and 244.94 kN, respectively. This indicates that for a given <math display="inline">  k </math>, decreasing <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> and increasing <math display="inline">  n </math> to achieve even opening distribution significantly increases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam.

@@ Line 370: / Line 370: @@
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"
 |-style="background:white;"
-|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[Image:Draft_ZHENG_949551429-image27.png|298px]]
+|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[File:ZHENG_et_al_2024a_6339_9.png|298px]]
 |-
 | style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 9'''. Comparison of experimental and simulated <math display="inline"> F_y </math> values
@@ Line 379: / Line 379: @@
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"
 |-style="background:white;"
-|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[Image:Draft_ZHENG_949551429-image28.png|288px]]
+|style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[File:ZHENG_et_al_2024a_8763_10.png|288px]]
 |-
 | style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 10'''. Comparison of experimental and simulated <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> values

@@ Line 402: / Line 402: @@
 | style="background:#efefef;text-align:left;padding:10px;font-size: 85%;"| '''Figure 11'''. Load–deflection curves of Group 1 of specimens
 |}
 {| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;width:auto;"
 |-style="background:white;"

@@ Line 389: / Line 389: @@
 Specimens B3, B4, and B5 (hereafter referred to as Group 2) had the same <math display="inline">  n </math> (6) and were compared next. Specimen B3 had an <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> of 0.5, <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> of 2.0, and <math display="inline">  k </math> of 0.29. <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> of specimen B4 was increased to 0.6. Consequently, <math display="inline">  k </math> was increased from 0.29 to 0.35. Compared with specimen B3, <math display="inline"> l_0 </math> of specimen B5 was increased to 362.5 mm. Consequently, <math display="inline">  k </math> was increased from 0.29 to 0.35.
-A comparison of Group 2 specimens revealed the following ([[#img-9|Figures 9]] and [[#img-10|10]]). 1) Compared with specimen B3, the yield and ultimate loads of specimen B4 decreased by 21.5% and 18.17%, respectively, due to the increased <math display="inline"> h_0</math>. This indicates that increasing <math display="inline">  k </math> by increasing <math display="inline"> h_0</math> decreases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam. 2) Compared with specimen B3, the yield and ultimate loads of specimen B5 decreased by 20.42%and 21.96%, respectively, due to the increased <math display="inline"> l_0 </math>. This indicates that increasing the opening aera ratio by increasing <math display="inline"> l_0 </math> decreases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam. 3) Compared with specimen B3, the yield and ultimate loads of specimens B4 and B5 decreased by similar magnitudes, which indicates that varying <math display="inline">  k </math> by varying either <math display="inline"> h_0</math> or length has similar effects on the bearing capacity.
+A comparison of Group 2 specimens revealed the following ([[#img-9|Figures 9]] and [[#img-10|10]]). 1) Compared with specimen B3, the yield and ultimate loads of specimen B4 decreased by 21.5% and 18.17%, respectively, due to the increased <math display="inline"> h_0</math>. This indicates that increasing <math display="inline">  k </math> by increasing <math display="inline"> h_0</math> decreases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam. 2) Compared with specimen B3, the yield and ultimate loads of specimen B5 decreased by 20.42% and 21.96%, respectively, due to the increased <math display="inline"> l_0 </math>. This indicates that increasing the opening aera ratio by increasing <math display="inline"> l_0 </math> decreases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam. 3) Compared with specimen B3, the yield and ultimate loads of specimens B4 and B5 decreased by similar magnitudes, which indicates that varying <math display="inline">  k </math> by varying either <math display="inline"> h_0</math> or length has similar effects on the bearing capacity.
 ===3.3 Analysis of load–deflection curve===

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:21, 29 May 2024
Line 385:		Line 385:


−	Specimens B2, B3, and B6 (hereafter referred to as Group 1) had the same <math display="inline"> k </math> (0.29) and <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> (0.5), but different <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> (4.0, 2.0, and 1.33, respectively) and different numbers of openings (3, 6, and 9, respectively). A comparison of <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of these three specimens revealed the following (Figures 9 and 10). 1): <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of the open-web beams decreased as <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> increased. <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> had a marked effect on the yield and ultimate loads. However, when <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> reached approximately 2, the yield and ultimate loads increased insignificantly as <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> was further decreased. 2) <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of the open-web beam increased with <math display="inline"> n </math>. More specifically, when <math display="inline"> n </math> increased from three to six, <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> increased markedly. When <math display="inline"> n </math> increased from six to nine, <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> did not increase markedly. 3) Group 1 specimens, i.e., B2, B3, and B6 had <math display="inline"> F_y </math> of 97.87, 196.25, and 210.61 kN, respectively, and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of 115, 218.22, and 244.94 kN, respectively. This indicates that for a given <math display="inline"> k </math>, decreasing <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> and increasing <math display="inline"> n </math> to achieve even opening distribution significantly increases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam.	+	Specimens B2, B3, and B6 (hereafter referred to as Group 1) had the same <math display="inline"> k </math> (0.29) and <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> (0.5), but different <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> (4.0, 2.0, and 1.33, respectively) and different numbers of openings (3, 6, and 9, respectively). A comparison of <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of these three specimens revealed the following ([[#img-9\|Figures 9]] and [[#img-10\|10]]). 1): <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of the open-web beams decreased as <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> increased. <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> had a marked effect on the yield and ultimate loads. However, when <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> reached approximately 2, the yield and ultimate loads increased insignificantly as <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> was further decreased. 2) <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of the open-web beam increased with <math display="inline"> n </math>. More specifically, when <math display="inline"> n </math> increased from three to six, <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> increased markedly. When <math display="inline"> n </math> increased from six to nine, <math display="inline"> F_y </math> and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> did not increase markedly. 3) Group 1 specimens, i.e., B2, B3, and B6 had <math display="inline"> F_y </math> of 97.87, 196.25, and 210.61 kN, respectively, and <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> of 115, 218.22, and 244.94 kN, respectively. This indicates that for a given <math display="inline"> k </math>, decreasing <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> and increasing <math display="inline"> n </math> to achieve even opening distribution significantly increases the bearing capacity of the open-web beam.

	Specimens B3, B4, and B5 (hereafter referred to as Group 2) had the same <math display="inline"> n </math> (6) and were compared next. Specimen B3 had an <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> of 0.5, <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> of 2.0, and <math display="inline"> k </math> of 0.29. '<math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> of specimen B4 was increased to 0.6. Consequently, <math display="inline"> k </math> was increased from 0.29 to 0.35. Compared with specimen B3, <math display="inline"> l_0 </math> of specimen B5 was increased to 362.5 mm. Consequently, <math display="inline"> k </math> was increased from 0.29 to 0.35.		Specimens B3, B4, and B5 (hereafter referred to as Group 2) had the same <math display="inline"> n </math> (6) and were compared next. Specimen B3 had an <math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> of 0.5, <math display="inline"> l_0/h_0 </math> of 2.0, and <math display="inline"> k </math> of 0.29. '<math display="inline"> h_0/H </math> of specimen B4 was increased to 0.6. Consequently, <math display="inline"> k </math> was increased from 0.29 to 0.35. Compared with specimen B3, <math display="inline"> l_0 </math> of specimen B5 was increased to 362.5 mm. Consequently, <math display="inline"> k </math> was increased from 0.29 to 0.35.

@@ Line 311: / Line 311: @@
 !  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|B6
 |-
-|  rowspan='2' style="text-align: center;vertical-align: center;"|Yield load <math display="inline"> F_y </math> (kN)
+|  rowspan='2' style="text-align: left;vertical-align: center;"|Yield load <math display="inline"> F_y </math> (kN)
 |  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|Experiment
 |  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|257.68
@@ Line 336: / Line 336: @@
 |  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|0.94
 |-
-|  rowspan='2' style="text-align: center;vertical-align: center;"|Failure load <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> (kN)
+|  rowspan='2' style="text-align: left;vertical-align: center;"|Failure load <math display="inline"> F_{\max}</math> (kN)
 |  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|Experiment
 |  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|281.98

@@ Line 417: / Line 417: @@
 As shown in [[#img-12|Figures 12]], the load–deflection curves of specimens B4 and B5 overlap each other, which indicates that varying <math display="inline">  k </math> by varying either <math display="inline"> h_0</math> or <math display="inline"> l_0 </math> has similar effects on the rigidity.
-=4 Conclusion=
+==4. Conclusions==
-The bending behavior of fixed open-web beams of different opening lengths, heights, and ratios under monotonic static loading was experimentally investigated and numerically verified. Our key findings are summarized as follows.
+The bending behavior of fixed open-web beams of different opening lengths, heights, and ratios under monotonic static loading was experimentally investigated and numerically verified. Our key findings are summarized as follows:
 ) The failure of the fixed open beams started from the opening corners in the shear-bending sections, with the diagonal corners experiencing tension and compression, respectively. When the beam failed, four plastic hinges were formed along the opening circumference, with the compressive opening corners experiencing flexion and the tensile corners experiencing tearing.
@@ Line 427: / Line 427: @@
 ) Increasing the opening height or length decreased the rigidity and bearing capacity of the open-web beam, and for a given increase in the opening area ratio, had similar effects on the bending behavior.
-<span id='_Hlk153205689'></span>
+==References==
-<br/>
+[1] Chen Q., Xiao J.C., Qi S.Y. et al. Analysis on influence of rigid region in steel vierendeel girder. Journal of Guizhou University (Natural Sciences), 34(01):95-98, 2017.
-==REFERENCES==
+[2] Chen Q., Xiao J.C., Ma K.J. et al. Effects of shear connector joints on static behavior in steel open-web sandwich plates. Journal of Guangxi University (Natural Science Edition), 43(01):41-49, 2018.
-[1] Chen Q., Xiao J.C., Qi S.Y. et al. Analysis on influence of rigid region in steel vierendeel girder. Journal of Guizhou University (Natural Sciences), 2017, 34(01): 95-98.
+[3] Liu Z.G., Ma K.J., Xiao J.C. et al. Effects of stiffened plate on static behavior of shear connector joints in steel open-web sandwich plate. Progress in Steel Building Structures, 19(02):29-37, 2017.
-[2] Chen Q., Xiao J.C., Ma K.J. et al. Effects of shear connector joints on static behavior in steel open-web sandwich plates. Journal of Guangxi University (Natural Science Edition), 2018, 43(01): 41-49.
+[4] Sun T., Ma K.J., Liu X.Q. et al. Equivalent shear stiffness analysis of steel vierendeel sandwich plate structure. Spatial Structures, 23(02):54-59+69, 2017.
-[3] Liu Z.G., Ma K.J., Xiao J.C. et al. Effects of stiffened plate on static behavior of shear connector joints in steel open-web sandwich plate. Progress in Steel Building Structures, 2017, 19(02): 29-37.
+[5] Jiang L., Ma K.J., Zhang H.G. et al. Practical method for deflection calculation of t-section steel vierendeel beams with shear connector. Spatial Structures, 25(02):39-45, 2019.
-[4] Sun T., Ma K.J., Liu X.Q. et al. Equivalent shear stiffness analysis of steel vierendeel sandwich plate structure. Spatial Structures, 2017, 23(02): 54-59+69.
+[6] Yang Q.Z., Ma K.J., Jian L. et al. Static behavior and response regularity of square steel-concrete composite open-web beam. Building Structure, 48(24):79-84, 2018.
-[5] Jiang L., Ma K.J., Zhang H.G. et al. Practical method for deflection calculation of t-section steel vierendeel beams with shear connector. Spatial Structures, 2019, 25(02): 39-45.
+[7] Bai Z.Q., Wei Y.H., Chen J. et al. A design method of chords in steel open-web girders with square-tube connectors. Spatial Structures, 28(01):86-96, 2022.
-[6] Yang Q.Z., Ma K.J., Jian L. et al. Static behavior and response regularity of square steel-concrete composite open-web beam. Building Structure, 2018, 48(24): 79-84.
+[8] Su R.Q., Xu J.X., Dong W.N. Numerical analysis of mechanical properties of castellated beam. Journal of Gansu Sciences, 31(05):107-112, 2019.
-[7] Bai Z.Q., Wei Y.H., Chen J. et al. A design method of chords in steel open-web girders with square-tube connectors. Spatial Structures, 2022, 28(01): 86-96.
+[9] Xu H.G. Theoretical and experimental study on hollow steel beam. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, 2020.
-[8] Su R.Q., Xu J.X., Dong W.N. Numerical analysis of mechanical properties of castellated beam. Journal of Gansu Sciences, 2019, 31(05): 107-112.
+[10] Xu H.G., Feng Q.X., Duanmu X.F. et al. Experimental study on influence of different chamfering forms on mechanical properties of hollow beams. Journal of Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, 32(03):222-231, 2020.
-[<span id='_Ref130049066'>9] Xu H.G. Theoretical and experimental study on hollow steel beam. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, 2020.
+[11] Xu H.G., Feng Q.X., Duanmu X.F. et al. Experimental study on the effect of openings on the bearing capacity and deflection of hollow beam. Building Structure, 52(06):104-110, 2022.
-−
-[10]Xu H.G., Feng Q.X., Duanmu X.F. et al. Experimental study on influence of different chamfering forms on mechanical properties of hollow beams. Journal of Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, 2020, 32(03): 222-231.
-−
-[<span id='_Hlk153205889'><span id='_Hlk153205585'>11] Xu H.G., Feng Q.X., Duanmu X.F. et al. Experimental study on the effect of openings on the bearing capacity and deflection of hollow beam. Building Structure, 2022, 52(06): 104-110.
 [12] GB/T 228.1-2021. Metallic materials Tensile testing—prat 1: method of test at room temperature. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2021.
@@ Line 459: / Line 456: @@
 [13] Li Q.R. Experimental study on static performance of h-section column end plate connection of castellated beam. Shenyang: Shenyang Jianzhu University, 2020.
-[14] Feng P., Qiang H.L., Ye L.P. Discussion and definition on yield points of materials, members and structures. Engineering Mechanics, 2017, 34(03): 36-46.
+[14] Feng P., Qiang H.L., Ye L.P. Discussion and definition on yield points of materials, members and structures. Engineering Mechanics, 34(03):36-46, 2017.