Experimental Study on Buckling Strength of Angle Steel Compression Members

with Built-up Bracing

* ** ***

Hiroshi KOMATSU* Keigo ISHII** Akio FUKUSHIMA***

ABSTRACT In the desert area of Libya, an incident involving the collapse of several
telecommunication towers became a very serious problem. Such incidents can be prevented by
taking adequate measures to strengthen the tower structures. However, most towers that needed
to be reinforced are located in the middle of the desert with frequent harsh windy conditions
and are difficult to reach. Any construction work at these locations faces great challenges in
mobilization of heavy equipment as well as materials and personnel. Therefore, it was
essential that any remedial measure should be simple and easy to undertake. In this paper, we
present a new structural steel reinforcement methodology that is both simple and easy to
implement, but yields effective and guaranteed results. It does not require any drilling or
welding of the existing tower structures. Such new and innovative methodology have now
been employed in the Libyan Desert, which were extensively tested and found to be very
effective and resulted in significant savings to the clients.

Key words: Telecommunication steel tower, Main post, Bracing for buckling, Buckling strength

1Introduction The objective is to reinforce the main

In a desert area such as the African Sahara in structural members of the tower using a simple
Libya, otherwise known as the Socialist but effective methodology that would maximize
Peoples Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the collapse the strength of the main structural members.
of several steel telecommunication towers Since most of the tower locations to be
became a very serious problem, caused by very reinforced are located in the desert area under
harsh and strong windy conditions. Moreover, harsh weather and terrain conditions, it was
there were also increases on the wind load on not practical to mobilize heavy machinery to the
the towers, which accumulated over the years sites. In addition, if the galvanized surface of
resulting from changes to the installed tower the tower members were to be damaged, it will
appurtenances from the towers original design diminish its resistance to rust. Considering the
load. In order to prevent further collapse of above circumstances, the new reinforcement
the other remaining and existing towers, it was methodology that was employed has had to be
necessary to strengthen these towers. both effective, easy to implement and cost
effective.
*
() The new methodology that we have invented,

which is explained in this paper, employs a
275-8575 1-2-1
**
built-up approach and does not require drilling
and/or welding of the tower members. The
102-0071 1-5-16 auxiliary reinforcement attachment is buckled
***
2 by bolts around the main member posts

together with the reinforcement flat bar. This
275-8575 1-2-1 method have been studied and analyzed by

18
various professionals in the field of Structural
Steel Reinforcement. Dr. Ono reported that the
reinforcement plate is fastened by using the
bolts of the tower junction part to intensify the
main post1). Moreover, they have also proposed
the reinforcement method which constitutes a
closed cross section using the angle steel as a
reinforcement2). Dr. Tamai proposed that the
carbon fiber plate is adhered to the main post
steel by means of bonding to increase the
maximum strength3). As an example, there is a
construction method which covers main post
material in a split pipe in the case of an overseas.
And reinforcement of truss material has attached
a rod, flat bar, and the angle steel by weld4). Thus,
there is little study on reinforcement of the angle
steel main post which main post material is not
made to damage.
In this study, the construction method is
simpler than a past case, and in order to
construct with a flat bar and small auxiliary
attachment, a lightweight thing is the
description. In this experiment, various
buckling loading tests at the center
axis of compression were carried out
on the angle steel reinforced by this
new method. The reinforcement
area of both materials in the reinforced and
non-reinforced models. The reinforcement effect
was analyzed by comparison study with the
obtained data considering the structural
characteristic.
2. Experimentation
2.1 Reinforcement Method
Fig. 1 shows the sectional diagram of the
specimen used in the experiment and Fig. 2
shows the whole configurations of the specimen,
which is composed of angle steel, flat bar and
auxiliary attachment material. As shown in Fig.
1, the flat bar is adhered to the fillet of the angle
steel by the auxiliary attachment. This contact
makes the reinforcement effect stronger. The
angle steel and the reinforcement bar are
fastened by the attachment with high-tension
bolts as shown in Fig. 1. This flat bar is
continuously adhered to the span of the angle
steel, so that it is highly effective to reinforce
the weak axial bending.
Angle Reinforcement
L10010010 (Flat bar)
6110

Lc
effect was observed by changing the
Lb

125 50
Lc

parameters such as the slenderness

Lb

ratio and reinforcement covering the

125 50

La

L
La

L
Lr

Lr
La
Lb

Lc

Lb

Lc

Auxiliary
Attachment

Angle
110 110

H.T.B(M16) Partial Whole

H.T.B(M16) reinforcement reinforcement
Reinforcement

Fig.1 Section of Specimen Fig. 2 Configurations and dimensions of specimen

28
2.2 Specimens The length L in Fig. 2 is the value subtracted
The specimens used in this experiment were 290mm of knife-edge length from the overall
an angule steel L10010010 (SS400) as length.
main post and flat steel bar 1106 (SS400) as
auxiliary attachment. Table 1 shows the outline c = Ny / Ne (1)
Ne = EI / L , Ny = yA
2 2
of the mechanical characteristics of the both
materials. Table 1 also shows the maximum A=19cm2, Iu=278cm4 Iv=72cm4 ,
compression strength obtained by stub column E=20500kN/cm2
compression experiment that the flat rigid c generalization slenderness ratio
compression is loading to 300mm length Ny : yield axial force
specimens of the same angle steel. The y tensile yield stress
parameters used in the experiment are the A : cross-section Area (a nominal value)
slenderness ratio, the reinforcement area, the IuIv : geometrical moment of inertia
reinforcement material interval and the (a nominal value)
buckling direction. Those parameters are E : Young's modulus
shown in Table 2. In this table, the slenderness L length between knife-edge
ratio means the generalized slenderness ratio
c obtained by formula (1), and when c is 0.8, Table 1 Mechanical Characteristics
1.0 and 1.2 in weak axial bending, the length L
ty tu cu
between the knife-edges becomes 1272mm, (N/mm )
2
(N/mm )
2
(N/mm )
2
(%)
1590mm and 1908mm, respectively. While, in
the case of the weak axial bending, the length L Angle 303.4 439.8 330.7 25.7

is same in c =1.0 and 1.2 of the weak axial

bending, so that the generalized slenderness Flat Bar 347.2 462.2 28.0

ratio c becomes 0.51 and 0.61, respectively.

tytensile yield stress tutensile stress

cucompression maximum stress of a stub column

elongation

Table 2 List of test specimen

Direction Number
L L Reinforcement Lr La Lb Lc
of flexural c Lr/L of Auxiliary
(mm) (mm) area (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
buckling Attachment
Non-reinforcement
0.80 65.2 1272 982 Partial reinforcement 491 266.0 358.0 245.5 0.50 2
Whole Reinforcement 832 303.5 187.5 75.0 0.85 3
Non-reinforcement
425.0 2
Weak Partial Reinforcement 650 437.5 325.0 0.50
212.5 3
axial 1.00 81.5 1590 1300
bending 462.5 3
1150 187.5 75.0 0.88
Whole Reinforcement 231.0 5
1280 527.5 122.5 10.0 0.98 3
Non-reinforcement
1.20 97.8 1908 1618 Partial Reinforcement 809 292.0 517.0 404.5 0.50 3
Whole Reinforcement 1468 311.0 187.5 75.0 0.91 5
Non-reinforcement
0.51 41.5 1590 1300 462.5 3
Strong Whole Reinforcement 1150 187.5 75.0 0.88
231.0 5
axial
bending Non-reinforcement
0.61 49.8 1908 1618 Partial Reinforcement 809 292.0 517.0 404.5 0.50 3
Whole Reinforcement 1468 311.0 187.5 75.0 0.91 5
cgeneralization slenderness ratio slenderness ratio L length between the knife-edges
Llength of test specimen Lrlength of reinforcement

38
 Fig. 2 shows two reinforcement methods,
which are partial reinforcement and the whole 1000kN
Testing machine
reinforcement. The interval of the auxiliary
attachments in both methods is intentionally
varied from narrow to large for comparison. Lr in
Table 2 is the length of the reinforcement flat bar, Knife-edge
and Lr/L represents the ratio of the
Displacement
reinforcement bar to the whole angle steel in

L=L-290mm
meter
length. This Lr/L ratio in partial reinforcement

L
is 2 to 1. The length of the reinforcement bar is
Spechimen
shorter than the angle steel in order not to
receive the loading directly instead of the angle
Knife-edge
steel. For that reason, 75mm non- reinforcement
interval is placed between the end-plate and the
edge of the reinforcement bar, but 10mm
non-reinforcement interval is also placed in case
of c=1.0. The auxiliary attachment is 125mm in
length and fastened to the main post with the
reinforcement bar by M16 high-tension bolts
with the torque 100N m. The auxiliary
attachment is placed in three points, one at the
center and the two other are placed on both
edges of the flat bar at regular intervals. In the
case where the interval is shorter in c =1.0 as
well as c =1.2, two more attachment materials
are added between the center and the both edges.
While, in the case of the partial reinforcement,
the attachment is set at the same position and/or
only at the edge. The number of the auxiliary
attachments used in each test is summarized in
Table 2.
Fig. 3 Test set-up

2.3 The Experiment Method

The machine used in conducting this study 1.2
was a 1000kN Structural Loading Equipment
cu=1.09
1.1
(UH-1000kNI), and the outline of the
equipment is shown in Fig. 3. The UH-1000kNI 1.0
can measure buckling bending strength in the
Nmax/Ny

center axial compression. 0.9

A 25mm thick end-plate is welded at both 0.8 c0.80

ends of the angle steel, and the pin type support c1.00
0.7 c1.20
device having knife-edge project is fastened to c0.51
the endplate by bolts, so that the buckling c0.61
0.6
direction is controlled in one way by the 0.0 0.5 1.0 Lr/L'
knife-edge. The fixture of the knife-edge is Non Partial Whole
reinforcement reinforcement reinforcement
adjusted to the centroid of the angle steel before
Reinforcement area
reinforcement. The value of the compression
strength is introduced by the machine, and Fig. 4 Maximum strength vs. Reinforcement area

48
displacement is measured in the axial direction
by displacement meters placed at two points
between the fulcrums. Moreover, strain is
measured on the angle steel and the flat bar
separately. In the case where the number of
auxiliary attachments is even, a strain gage is
placed at the center of the angle steel. However,
in the case of uneven number of auxiliary
attachments, the meter is located at two points
i.e. above and below the center point. Two axis
gauges are placed on the flat bar at the same
points of the angle steel in order to measure the
strain on its axis and at the rectangular
directions. All measurements are done twice
3. Discussion of Experiment Resuits
3.1 Maximum Strength and Failure Type
The results of the experiment are
summarized in Table 3. In this table, strength
increase rate represents the ratio of the
non-reinforcement strength to the
reinforcement strength. Since the decline of the
bending stress was not found when the interval
length was changed in the partial and the
whole reinforcement cases, 500mm interval was
deemed reasonable for this experiment. Fig. 4
shows the relation between the maximum
strength and the reinforcement area, and the
cu in Fig. 4 represents the result of the short

under the same conditions. length column compression test. As can be seen
in Fig. 4, it is determined that the

Table 3 Summary of test results

Average
Direction Maximum Strength
Reinforcement La maximum
of flexural c Lr/L strength increase Failure position
area (mm) strength
buckling (Nmax/Ny) rate
(Nmax/Ny)
Non 0.965
0.951 1.00 Center of specimen
reinforcement 0.937
Partial 0.940
0.80 266.0 0.50 0.968 1.02 Edge of reinforcement
reinforcement 0.997
Whole 1.002
303.5 0.85 1.000 1.05 Edge of reinforcement
reinforcement 0.997
Non 0.808
0.795 1.00 Center of specimen
reinforcement 0.782
0.852
396.0 0.900 1.13
Partial 0.948
0.50 Edge of reinforcement
reinforcement 0.896
Weak 212.5 0.899 1.13
0.901
axial 1.00
1.020
bending 462.5 0.997 1.25
0.975
0.88 Edge of reinforcement
Whole 1.026
231.0 0.983 1.24
reinforcement 0.939
0.998 Near by centered auxiliary
527.5 0.98 1.016 1.28
1.034 attachment
Non 0.668
0.640 1.00 Center of specimen
reinforcement 0.611
Partial 0.756
1.20 292.0 0.50 0.710 1.11 Edge of reinforcement
reinforcement 0.664
Whole 0.957
311.0 0.91 0.967 1.51 Edge of reinforcement
reinforcement 0.977
Non 1.063
1.063 1.00 Center of specimen
reinforcement 1.063
1.068 Near by centered auxiliary
0.51 462.5 1.076 1.01
Whole 1.085 attachment
0.88
reinforcement 1.056 Near by centered auxiliary
Strong 231.0 1.056 0.99
1.056 attachment
axial
Non 1.024
bending 1.033 1.00 Center of specimen
reinforcement 1.041
Partial 1.003
0.61 292.0 0.50 1.043 1.01 Edge of reinforcement
reinforcement 1.082
Whole 0.955 Near by centered auxiliary
311.0 0.91 0.987 0.84
reinforcement 1.020 attachment

58
reinforcement effect is slightly improved when
c is 0.8 in the weak axial bending. However,
significant improvement was observed when c
is 1.0 and 1.2. The maximum strength N/Ny
value is calculated almost 1.0 in all slenderness
ratios of the whole reinforcement, which means
that 1.0 is the value of the yielded axial force of
the angle steel.
The strength increase rate in Table 3 shows
the effect which the reinforcement area (L'/L)
has on the maximum strength. In weak axial
bending, when a generalization slenderness ratio
is small, it is not influenced by L'/L to the
maximum strength. However, when a
generalization slenderness ratio is large, the
maximum strength is greatly influenced by L'/L,
and especially the effect is remarkable at c=1.2.
Figs. 5(a)(d) shows the failure type in case
of the weak axial bending. The maximum
strength is determined by the various failure

1.2
Non reinforcement
1.0 Partial reinforcement
Whole reinforcement
0.8

N/Ny
0.6

0.4
(a) Non reinforcement
0.2

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5
/y

(a) c=0.8
1.2
Non reinforcement
1.0 Partial reinforcement
Whole reinforcement
(b) Partial reinforcement 0.8
N/Ny

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5
/y

(b) c=1.0
1.2
Non reinforcement
(c) Whole reinforcement (Lc=75mm)
1.0 Partial reinforcement
Whole reinforcement
0.8
N/Ny

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5
/y

(d) Whole reinforcement (Lc=10mm) (c) c=1.2

Fig. 5 Failure type Fig.6 N/Ny vs. /y

68
types, and Fig. 5(a) shows the buckling state
occurring at the center part of the angle steel in
non-reinforcement method. Whereas, buckling
occurred near the edge of the flat bar in partial
reinforcement as shown in Fig. 5(b). Figs. 5(c)
(d) shows the failure types in the both whole
reinforcement cases. It is observed that buckling
occurred near the edge of the flat bar in case of
having 75mm without reinforcement interval as
well as in partial reinforcement case as shown in
Fig. 5(c), however, in case of the test object
having 10mm interval, the buckling occurred at
the center portion as shown in Fig. 5(d).
Judging from the relationship between the
reinforcement area and the slenderness ratio,
the point of damaged due to buckling is shorter,
when the maximum strength is greater in the
partial reinforcement case, while as the
slenderness ratio is increased, the results
showed greater reinforcement effect. As for the
whole reinforcement, the 75mm
non-reinforcement is located near the endplates,
so that the occurrence of the buckling is
concentrated in the non-reinforcement area. As
for the results, the maximum strength is almost
the same values in all the slenderness ratios of
acquired, since the flat bar received the weak
axial bending. As for the failure type in partial
reinforcement, buckling occurred at the edge
side as well as the weak axial bending case,
while buckling occurred in the center portion in
the whole reinforcement case, and the outbreak
of the buckling is concentrated at the center in
the case of the no reinforcement.
3.2 Hysteretic Characteristics and Normal
Strain Description
Fig. 6 shows the relationship between N/Ny
and / y in all the slenderness ratios of the
weak axial bending. In this Fig. 6, indicates
shrunk length in long axis direction between
the knife-edges, and y is the yield
displacement calculated by the yield strain y
multiplying the test material length (L)
together. Consequently, the initial stiffness in
both reinforcement cases becomes equal
600
500
400
Load (kN)

300
c =0.8, 1.0 and 1.2. While, buckling occurred in
the center portion without using 10mm Angle
200
Reinforcement
reinforcement interval, the maximum strength (Vertical)
100 Reinforcement
is greatest. The maximum strength is increased (Holizontal)
by 25% in c =1.0 and 50% in c =1.2 in the 0
-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
reinforcement as compared to the Strain (10-6)
non-reinforced cases.
(a) Partial reinforcement
When the main structure of the
telecommunication tower is designed, the axial
600
strength set in consideration of the overturning
moment. The axial strength value is normally 500
designed to more than 10 times the vertical load
400
of the tower itself. As the materials needed for
Load (kN)

the reinforcement are added to the tower, the 300

vertical weight increases only by 1.5 to 2 times,
200 Angle
which is negligible. Therefore, it can be stated Reinforcement
that the reinforcement added to the angle steel (Vertical)
100
Reinforcement
structure is highly effective to neutralize (Holizontal)
0
buckling at the weak axial points. -6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
When the angle steel receives the weak axial Strain (10-6)

bending as shown in the dashed line of Fig. 4, (b) Whole reinforcement

the prominent reinforcement effect was not Fig. 7 Normal strain description

78
condition to the non-reinforcement, and there is
no influence to the initial stiffness by
introducing the reinforcement flat bar. Since
the hysteretic characteristic after buckling
outbreak shows similar tendency, it is
confirmed that the reinforcement flat bar is
working only to protect the angle steel as the
main post from buckling outbreak.
Fig. 7 shows a tendency of vertical strain
values in long axial directions of the main post
and reinforcement flat bar. The strain in the
main post is linearly increased and reaches
around 15002000, while the strain of the
flat bar is about 100200. Since the strain
volume of the reinforcement flat bar starts
increasing after the buckling outbreak of the
angle steel, it is obvious that the reinforcement
is operating only to protect the buckling
bending as well as the tendency of the
hysteretic characteristic.
4. Conclusion
The centrally loaded compression tests were
carried out on the angle steel reinforced by this
new method. The findings from the
experiments are:
1) The main post angle steel of the
telecommunications tower can be
continuously reinforced along its full length
from the base to the required upper level
including a tower cross junction,
2) When reinforcement is applied on the
whole span of the angle steel, the
maximum stress in the weak axial
bending is almost equal to the value of
the weak axial bending.
3) Judging from the data obtained on
hysteretic characteristic, the initial
stiffness and normal strain description,
the axial force is not transferred to the
flat bar from the angle steel, and the
reinforcement flat bars function is only to
intensify the bending property.
4) Since sufficient strength of the angle steel
under test can be achieved, 500mm
interval between the attachments was
determined to be ideal and was used
during this experiment.
5) The total weight of tower becomes almost
double by installing all the reinforcement
materials, but the increasing weight is
negligible since the main structure of the
telecommunication tower is designed in
consideration of the overturning moment
and the value is predominantly greater
than the vertical tower weight. And since
a reinforcement does not transmit axial
force, there is no effect on the foundation
structure by having reinforced the tower
body.
6) Buckling occurs near the edge in case of
using 75mm non-reinforcement interval,
and the buckling break out at the center
point in case of having 10mm
non-reinforcement interval. Therefore,
the location of the local deformation
outbreak can be controlled by reinforcing
the angle steel continuously.
References
1) Hidemasa KOZAWA, Tetsuro ONO,
Kazuto ISHIDA, Takashi MABUCHI,
Yasuo SUGIMOTO, Yasuo OHKOCHI
and Tomohiro ISHIDA : Experiment of
Reinforced Angle Members for Buckling
on Truss Tower, Summaries of Technical
Paper of Annual Meeting, AIJ, C-1,
pp.829-830, 2006.9
2) Makoto SAKURABA, Hiroyuki TAMAI,
Takao TAKAMATSU, Tokuji HAITANI
and Akeo HATTORI : Strength and
Stiffness Evaluation of Multi-interface
Connection used in Seismic retrofitting,
Journal of Constructional Steel, Vol.14,
pp.437-444, 2006.11
3) Takashi MABUCHI, Tetsuro ONO, Yasuo
SUGIMOTO and Akihiro KOJIMA :
Experiment of the Reinforced Angle
Members by Fiber Sheets and Steel Angle
Members for Buckling on Truss Tower,
Summaries of Technical Paper of Annual
Meeting, AIJ, C-1, pp.611-612, 2007.8
4) Broekemeier, Marlon W. and Fisher,
James M. "Evaluation and Modification
of Open-Web Steel Joists and Joist
Girders," NASCC 2007 Proceedings, New
Orleans LA.
88