The lateral-torsional buckling (LTB) behaviour of steel beams is investigated through a combined methodology comprising analytical formulations, code-based beam-element checks, and high-fidelity shell-element linear eigenvalue buckling finite element analysis. Two end-restraint conditions, simple ( k z = k w = 1.0) and fixed ( k z = k w = 0.5), are examined under mid-span point loads applied at varying vertical load eccentricities relative to the shear centre (Z = + 100 mm, 0 mm, − 100 mm). The NCCI three-factor formulation for the elastic critical moment, used in conjunction with Eurocode 3 ( M cr , with C 1 , C 2 , C 3 ; \:χ\:LT = 0.34) yields up to 30% higher strength than the AISC M n –L b framework, which does not account for load-height and moment-gradient effects. Beam-element checks reproduce Eurocode predictions within a 3% margin when user-defined lateral–torsional buckling factors are specified. However, limitations in modelling warping stiffness independently of lateral stiffness result in a reduction of design moment resistance by approximately 4%. The finite element results show that critical moments align with Eurocode predictions within 1–6%, confirming the accuracy of shell-model-based buckling evaluation. The study also reveals that vertical load eccentricity significantly affects buckling capacity: moving the load from the top to the bottom flange increases the critical moment capacity, M cr by different code-based designs, due to stabilising counter-torsion induced by loading below the shear centre. These findings emphasise that accurate LTB assessment requires explicit consideration of both the magnitude and the application line of the load.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: