See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/37455628

Plate buckling of glass panels

Conference Paper · April 2005

Source: OAI

CITATIONS READS

11 386

2 authors:

Andreas Luible Michel Crisinel

Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
49 PUBLICATIONS   245 CITATIONS    140 PUBLICATIONS   360 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Thermal Load in Insulated Glass Units View project

KTI-Projekt Gebäudehülle - Ein Entscheidungs- und Beurteilungsinstrument zur Erstellung nachhaltiger Fassaden mehrgeschossiger
Gebäude View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andreas Luible on 20 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Plate Buckling of Glass Panels
Dr. sc. techn. Andreas Luible, Schmidlin Ltd. Facade Technology
Steinackerstrasse 69, 4147 Aesch/Basel, Switzerland
Michel Crisinel, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne EPFL
Steel Structures Laboratory ICOM, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
Keywords
1=stability 2=plate buckling
Abstract
This paper describes investigations
conducted at the Steel Structures
Laboratory ICOM of EPFL on the stability
of load carrying glass elements. The
plate buckling behaviour of single layer
and laminated safety glass is studied
by means of plate buckling tests,
analytical and numerical models. It is
shown that glass panels have a large
post critical load carrying capacity. The
initial fracture occurs always on the
glass surface under tensile strength.
A design method with buckling
curves using a slenderness ratio based
on effective tensile strength seems
applicable for the design of glass panels.
As a result of numerical simulations,
recommendations for the future
development of plate buckling curves
for glass elements under compression
are given.
Introduction
In modern steel glass facades there
is a growing trend to maximize the
transparency of buildings by reducing
the size of structural elements such as
steel frames and aluminum mullions.
Another possibility might be to extend
the use of glass to load carrying
elements such as beams, columns and
panels. Glass is a material that is able
to resist very high compression stresses
but due to their high slenderness, these
elements tend to fail due to instability.
Existing design methods for steel, such
as buckling curves, cannot be directly
transferred to glass. Experimental
and theoretical investigations of the
fundamental stability problems (column
buckling, lateral torsional buckling, plate
buckling) of single layer and laminated
glass elements have been conducted at
the Steel Structures Laboratory ICOM,
EPFL [1]. The objectives of this research
were to investigate the load carrying
behaviour and to study possible design
methods for stability-critical glass
elements. The main results concerning
column buckling and lateral torsional
buckling are published in [2] [3] [4]. The
objective of this paper is to present the
results concerning plate buckling are
presented.
GLASS PROCESSING DAYS 2005 - www.gpd.fi
3=structural use of glass 4=glass panel
Stability
Stability problems can be divided into
two categories (Figure 1). The first
includes perfect members that are
subjected to an increasing load, where
instability occurs suddenly when a
critical load is reached (bifurcation
buckling). The second and more realistic
category covers imperfect members with
an initial deformation (w0 or v0), where
an increasing load leads to deformations
already under very small loads until the
strength of the material or a maximum
deformation is exceeded. The critical
buckling load represents an upper
strength limit for column buckling and
lateral torsional buckling. For plates,
loads higher than the critical buckling
load can be applied due to post
buckling behaviour.
Existing design concepts (i.e. for
steel structures) can not be directly
transferred to glass. Production
tolerances (i.e. thickness) or the
initial deformation of glass elements
is different from steel members for
example. The ultimate breaking stress
of glass is not a material property, but
depends on the embedded compressive
surface stress due to the tempering
process, the degree of damage of the
glass surface and the load duration. The
embedded compressive surface stress
varies near glass edges, boreholes and
corners. In laminated safety glass the
Poly-Vinyl-Butyral interlayer (PVB) acts as
Figure 1
Elementary stability problems.
a shear connection and has an influence
on the load carrying behaviour.
Plate buckling
When a plate simply supported along
its edges is subjected to compression
or shear forces in its middle plane
the stability phenomenon of plate
buckling can occur. The typical load
carrying behaviour is a deformation w
perpendicular to the middle plane that
comes along with a distortion of the
cross section of the plate (Figure 1).
The main difference compared to other
stability problems is, that the critical
buckling load Ncr,P is not necessarily the
ultimate load of the plate. The buckled
element may sustain greater loads
than the critical buckling load due to
additional membrane stresses in the
plate. This phenomenon is called the
post buckling behaviour or post-critical
buckling.
Plate buckling models for glass
Safety Glass in Buildings
The critical buckling load of a single
layer glass may be calculated with
analytical models based on linear
elastic bending theory [5]. However,
due to post-critical buckling behaviour,
the critical buckling load Nx,cr,P is not a
criterion for the ultimate strength and
thus most of these analytical models are
not suitable for design.
1

To study the load carrying behaviour
of a buckled glass plate in a more
realistic manner (including post-critical
buckling) a numerical model based on
the Finite Element Method (FEM) with
shell elements was created [1].
The critical buckling load Nx,cr,P,VSG of a
rectangular laminated safety glass plate
with two glass layers (Figure 3) may be
determined using linear elastic sandwich
theory [6].
with
(eq.3)
(eq.4)
(eq.5)
(eq.6)
Safety Glass in Buildings
where:
z1, z2 = distance between the centre
of gravity of the total cross section to
the centre of gravity of the glass layer
(Figure 2)
ti = thickness of the corresponding glass
layer
Nx = pressure force per unit length
(Nx = σx t)
D = plate stiffness applied to a unit
width b
Figure 2
Laminated safety glass with two glass layers.
For the investigations of the plate
buckling behaviour a FEM model (Figure
3) was developed instead since analytical
models are not suitable to describe the
load carrying behaviour of a laminated
safety glass. The cross section in this
model consisted of shell elements for
2 GLASS PROCESSING DAYS 2005 - www.gpd.fi
(eq.1)
(eq.2)
the glass layers and volume elements for
the PVB interlayer. For geometries with
symmetrical deformation of the plate
only one fourth was modelled with the
corresponding boundary conditions in
the symmetric axis.
Figure 3
FEM model for plate buckling.
Figure 4
Corner detail of the FEM model.
Volume elements and shell elements
were connected together using the
same nodes. The special shell elements
were defined with an offset of t/2of
from the centre of gravity of the
glass layer. The load introduction and
boundary conditions were applied by
means of additional nodes, which were
coupled with the element nodes (Figure
4).
Experimental investigation
The test setup corresponds to a square
plate with four hinged edges. The load
introduction in both horizontal glass
edges was achieved with aluminium
supports that allow a free rotation of
the edge and include a reinforced PTFE
interlayer to reduce friction. Between
the glass edge and the rotating supports
made of high strength aluminium alloy
additional aluminium sheets made of a
soft aluminium alloy were inserted to
avoid stress concentration on the glass
edge.
The vertical glass edges were supported
with neoprene profiles (Figure 5).
A total of 9 plate buckling tests
on single layered glass and 6 tests on
laminated safety glass were carried
out. The dimension of the tested glass
elements was 1000x1000 mm with
a thickness of 6 mm, 8 mm, 10 mm,
6/1.52/6 mm, 8/1.52/8 mm. All tests
were carried out with heat strengthened
glass.
Figure 5
Test setup.
The load carrying behaviour of the
tested glass plates demonstrated the
typical plate buckling behaviour with
a load capacity higher than the critical
buckling load, Ncr,P. (Figure 6).
The stiffness of the tested plates
corresponds well with the model where
the load is introduced by a constant
edge displacement, du (Figure 6
model a)). Due to plastification of the
aluminium interlayer on the glass edge,
however the measured deformation, w,
in the centre of the plate is higher than
in the model. This plastic deformation
appeared mainly in the region close
to the corner of the plate where the
compressive stress on the glass edge is
higher than in the middle. Below the
critical buckling load the curves differ
more than in the post buckling region
where they are almost identical. One
reason for this behaviour is that the
influence of the initial deformation of
the glass plates is less important for
loads higher than the critical buckling
load.
Figure 7
Broken glass element with initial breakage.
The glass breakage occurred
similar to an explosion. Due to the
high energy stored in the glass plate
before breakage, the breakage pattern
was almost as fine as it is typical for
a toughened glass. In all tests with
laminated glass both glass layers broke
at the same time. The glass panels had
no residual strength after breakage. In
all tests the initial breakage occurred on
the glass surface under tensile stress and
in a region close to the glass corners
(Figure 7). This is due to the maximum
Figure 8
Maximum principle stress on the glass surface.
GLASS PROCESSING DAYS 2005 - www.gpd.fi
Figure 6
Test results for 8mm
heat strengthened
glass.
principle tensile stress which is moving
as a function of the applied load in the
corners of the buckled glass plate as it
can be seen in the numerical simulation
(Figure 8) [1].
The study of the load carrying
behaviour on the FEM model
demonstrated that the dispersion of the
glass thickness, the assumed boundary
conditions, the tensile strength of the
glass surface and the initial deformation
have the most significant influence on
the buckling strength. For loads lower
than the critical buckling load the initial
deformation as well has an influence,
on the buckling strength.
Simulations with different initial
deformations (applied as a multiple of
the eigenform (EF1, EF2)) showed, that
the shape of the buckled glass plate
may have an influence on the buckling
resistance (Figure 9) as well since the
maximum tensile stress determines
the buckling strength and not the
stiffness of the plate. This important
criterion has to be taken into account
for glass when for example, the initial
Figure 9
Influence of the buckling shape on the load carrying behaviour: a) load N as a function of wmax, b)
load N as a function of σ1,max.
deformation does not correspond to the
first eigenform (EF1) or when a so called
“snap through” of the plate may occur
[1].
Tests on laminated safety glass
elements demonstrated the influence
of the PVB interlayer on the buckling
strength. The comparison with the
simulations confirmed that a composite
action can be activated, but the shear
modulus of the PVB has to be relatively
high to create a noticeable increase
in buckling strength. Even for short
time loading and low temperatures
the influence is not as high as it is for
column buckling or lateral torsional
buckling. Therefore the assumption of
Safety Glass in Buildings
a monolithic behaviour of a laminated
safety glass in buckling overestimates
the real buckling resistance. The shear
stiffness of the PVB interlayer has to
be taken into account. In all tests with
laminated safety glass both glass layers
broke at the same time. Due to the high
stored energy, the breakage pattern
of heat strengthened glasses was
almost as fine as it normally appears for
toughened glass.
3
 Synthesis for design
Investigations of possible design
methods for buckling of glass panels
showed that it is important to know the
distribution of the maximum principle
stress on the glass surface. Existing
analytical plate buckling models are
not precise enough to describe the
stress distribution due to the non linear
behaviour. A more suitable approach
may be by means of a FEM calculations
presented in [1].
In practice, glass panels are usually
supported by soft interlayer materials,
hence the assumption of restrained
edges as it is often assumed in models
developed for steel plates (Figure 7
curve a) overestimates the real buckling
strength. A conservative simplification
for design of glass panels are non
constrained vertical edges (y-direction)
and a load application by a constant
compressive force on the horizontal
glass edge (Figure 7 curve b)). In order
to take into account the elasticity of
the interlayer material on the buckling
behaviour additional spring elements
might be introduced on the borders of
the glass panel.
For applied loads lower than the
critical buckling load the buckling
resistance depend on the initial
deformation. A reasonable assumption
for the initial deformation has to
be made. Studies of the initial out
of straightness of glass panels [1]
demonstrated that non-tempered
annealed flat glass has a very low initial
deformation (< 1/2500) while heat-
strengthened and fully toughened glass
can have a sinusoidal initial deformation
up to 1/300 of the edge length L.
Safety Glass in Buildings
The dispersion of the glass thickness
has to be taken into account for design.
Measurements [1] on more than 200
specimens showed that the thickness
of flat glass panels differs from the
nominal value. Glass manufacturers try
to save material in making the most use
of the thickness tolerances specified by
codes. The real glass thickness is often
less than the nominal value, therefore
reducing the moment of inertia of the
cross section and, thus the buckling
strength. For design the nominal glass
thickness may be reduced to 97.61%.
Buckling curves
FEM calculations are very fastidious in
practice; therefore the possibility of
developing design aids (e.g. buckling
curves) was studied. A typical buckling
curve gives a reduction factor which
indicates the buckling resistance of the
plate as a function of the slenderness
ratio that characterizes the risk of the
plate to buckle. The slenderness ratio
(eq.7)
and the reduction factor for plate
buckling of glass panels
4 GLASS PROCESSING DAYS 2005 - www.gpd.fi
View publication stats
Figure 10
Typical simulation result of
reduction factors.
(eq.8)
are both based on the maximum tensile
strength σp,t.
Reduction factors for different
types of loading, glass geometries,
initial deformations w0 and boundary
conditions were generated with
FEM models and plotted in buckling
diagrams (e.g.Figure 10). The generated
reduction factors were compared to
buckling curves of the Swiss design
codes for steel structures [7].
These simulation results are a first
step towards a future definition of plate
buckling curves for glass panels. The
main results are:
• It is possible to define plate buckling
curves for glass panels based on the
tensile strength.
• In contrast to steel reduction factors
ρ > 1 are possible because the edge
compressive stress σP can exceed the
nominal value of the maximum tensile
strength σp,t.
• For a slenderness ratio > 1.5 the
curves are independent of the initial
deformation.
• For a slenderness ratio < 1.5 the
initial deformation w0 has an influence
on the buckling strength and therefore
the curves have to be defined as a
function of the initial deformation.
• The buckling curves for glass are
below existing design curves in steel
construction [7] due to the different
boundary conditions for glass. Buckling
curves for steel are therefore not
suitable for glass.
Conclusions
The use of glass panels as compressed
load carrying elements offers new
possibilities for modern façade
engineering and the structural use
of glass. Due their high slenderness
load carrying glass elements must be
designed against stability failure. It was
shown in the studies of this research
work that the main influences on the
buckling resistance of a load carrying
glass element are the dispersion of the
glass thickness, the initial deformation,
the tensile resistance of the glass surface
and the composite action due to the
PVB interlayer in laminated safety
glass. One of the main differences as
compared with other materials is that
the tensile strength limits the buckling
strength.
It was shown that buckled glass
plates may have a strong post
buckling behaviour and additional
load carrying capacity due to this
behaviour. A suitable design method
for plate buckling of glass elements is
a numerical calculation (FEM) of the
buckling behaviour and the maximum
tensile stress distribution on the glass
surface. To simplify the design process
buckling curves are more suitable. These
curves may be based on the simulated
reduction factors in this research work.
Acknowledgement
The research work presented in this
paper was primarily conducted with
the support of the Swiss National
Science Foundation (SNF) and the
industry partners Glas Trösch (Bützberg,
Switzerland) and Verre Industriels SA
(Moutier, Switzerland).
References
[1] Luible, A., Stabilität von Tragelementen aus
Glas, Thèse EPFL 3014, Ecole polytechnique
fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) (free download :
http://icom.epfl.ch/publications/pubinfo.
php?pubid=499), Lausanne, 2004.
[2] Luible, A., Crisinel, M., Buckling Strength of
Glass Elements in Compression, Structural
Engineering International, Vol. 14, No. 2,
IABSE, Mai 2004.
[3] Luible, A., Crisinel, M., Stability of Load
Carrying Elements of Glass, Final report of the
COST action C13, Bruxelles, 2005.
[4] Luible, A., Crisinel, M., Stability of Load
Carrying Elements of Glass, Proceedings of the
Conference Eurosteel 2005, 4th European
Conference on Steel Structures, 8-10 June
2005, Maastricht, Netherlands, June 2005.
[5] Hirt, M. A., Bez, R., Stahlbau: Grundbegriffe
und Bemessungsverfahren, Ernst & Sohn,
Berlin, 1998.
[6] Zenkert, D., The Handbook of Sandwich
Construction, Engineering Materials Advisory
Service Ltd., United Kingdom, 1997.
[7] SIA 263: Stahlbau, Schweizerischer Ingenieur-
und Architektenverein, Zürich, 2003.