Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper aims to present the axial behavior of a new composite column through an experimental and computational investigation. Four distinct configurations of novel CF-CFS columns were evaluated. The test setup and results were documented in detail, including load-bearing capacity, load–deformation, and failure modes. The buckling behavior of the steel components (thin-walled steel profiles) was investigated. The mitigation of local buckling caused by concrete supporting thin-walled plates was explored. Additionally, numerical simulations were performed and calibrated against the experimental results. A comparison was made between experimental results and analytical prediction according to EN 1994-1-1 formulations to assess the validity of current codes. The effective cross-sectional areas were also evaluated for the buckling load prediction since Class 4 profiles were used. The results showed that the analytical predictions according to the EN 1994-1-1 (taking to account steel gross cross-section and buckling curve a) are conservative for square CF-CFS columns and unconservative for rectangular sections. While for the case of rectangular CF-CFS columns, the experimental results and design prediction according to the EN 1994-1-1 are in good agreement when steel effective cross-section area and buckling curve-c are considered. Reliability analysis was also performed, resulting in a more reliable design methodology by considering the effective cross-sectional area for CFS profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rahnavard et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: