Comparative Design Analysis of Stainless-Steel Hollow Sections

dc.contributor.authorRosenberg, Andrew
dc.contributor.departmentChalmers tekniska högskola / Institutionen för arkitektur och samhällsbyggnadsteknik (ACE)sv
dc.contributor.departmentChalmers tekniska högskola / Institutionen för arkitektur och samhällsbyggnadsteknik (ACE)en
dc.contributor.examinerAmani, Mozhdeh
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-16T07:29:34Z
dc.date.issued2026
dc.date.submitted
dc.description.abstractStainless steel hollow structural sections (HSS) are becoming increasingly popular in modern construction due to their favourable design properties. However, differences among international design standards can lead to variations in predicted member capacities and structural efficiency. A comparative analysis of different design approaches for stainless steel hollow sections based on four major structural standards: AISC 370-21, ASCE 8-22, Eurocode 1993-1-4, and the second-generation Eurocode (EN 1993-1-4:2025), was conducted to focus on how each standard addresses the determination of the bending resistance, global slenderness, and local slenderness, considering austenitic, ferritic, and duplex stainless-steel grades. A literature review of the different design standards and baseline information about stainless steel and its applications in structural engineering was first conducted and then a design tool for a parametrized study was implemented. Different design methods include the effective width method and direct strength method found in ASCE 8-22, effective width method from AISC 370-21 and Eurocode 1993 1-4, and the continuous strength method in both AISC 370-21 and Eurocode 1993 1-4 generation 2. Bending resistance calculations carried out across numerous sections of varying, height, width, thickness, and steel grades were compared to the slenderness of each section and the change in bending resistance for increasing slenderness is emphasized. Strength enhancements due to cold worked stainless steel was investigated and noted to play an important role in strength determinations when comparing standards. ASCE and AISC design codes become much more comparable with these strength enhancements factored in. The continuous strength method and direct strength method are dependent on global slenderness and does not work for all size sections. The comparison highlights the importance of knowing which method and standard is most applicable to a given situation. Overall methods found in AISC 370-21 showed higher resistances than ASCE 8-22 but similar in results and methodology to both generations of EN1993 1-4.
dc.identifier.coursecodeACEX30
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12380/312606
dc.language.isoeng
dc.setspec.uppsokTechnology
dc.subjectStainless Steel, Hollow sections, Comparative analysis, Bending resistance, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Institute of Steel Construction, Eurocode
dc.titleComparative Design Analysis of Stainless-Steel Hollow Sections
dc.type.degreeExamensarbete för masterexamensv
dc.type.degreeMaster's Thesisen
dc.type.uppsokH
local.programmeStructural engineering and building technology (MPSEB), MSc

Ladda ner

Original bundle

Visar 1 - 1 av 1
Hämtar...
Bild (thumbnail)
Namn:
Comparative Design Analysis of Stainless-Steel Hollow Sections - Andrew Rosenberg
Size:
9.13 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Visar 1 - 1 av 1
Hämtar...
Bild (thumbnail)
Namn:
license.txt
Size:
2.35 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: