Research Papers

Postyield Cyclic Buckling Criteria for Aluminum Shear Panels

[+] Author and Article Information
Sachin Jain

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, Indiajainsachin11@gmail.com

Durgesh C. Rai1

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, Indiadcrai@iitk.ac.in

Dipti R. Sahoo

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, Indiadiptirs@iitk.ac.in


Corresponding author.

J. Appl. Mech 75(2), 021015 (Feb 26, 2008) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2793135 History: Received December 14, 2006; Revised July 30, 2007; Published February 26, 2008

Aluminum shear panels can dissipate significant amount of energy through hysteresis provided strength deterioration due to buckling is avoided. A detailed experimental study of the inelastic behavior of the full-scale models of shear panels of 6063-O and 1100-O alloys of aluminum is conducted under slow cyclic loading of increasing displacement levels. The geometric parameters that determine buckling of the shear panels, such as web depth-to-thickness ratio, aspect ratio of panels, and number of panels, were varied among the specimens. Test results were used to predict the onset of buckling with proportionality factor f in Gerard’s formulation of inelastic buckling. Moreover, a logarithmic relationship between buckling stress and slenderness ratio of the panel was observed to predict experimental data closely. These relations can be further used to determine the geometry of shear panels, which will limit the inelastic web buckling at design shear strains.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Details of parameters used in Gerard’s buckling criterion: (a) shear deformation of shear panel and (b) definition of secant shear modulus Gs and inelastic shear strain γ¯b

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Stress-strain curves of unannealed and annealed aluminum alloys used in this study

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Details of test specimens: (a) two-paneled specimen (b) three-paneled specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Test setup with locations of LVDTs and strain gauges

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Displacement (or strain) history

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Hysteretic response and buckled configurations of test specimens with varied number of panels, type of alloy, and web width-to-thickness ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

State of test specimens before and after the testing: (a) two paneled specimen and (b) three-paneled specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Experimental relationship between Gs∕G and η

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Log-log plot between slenderness ratio and inelastic shear buckling stress

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of shear buckling stress curves

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Buckling matrix of aluminum shear panels up to 15% strain




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In