Implications of Design Standard Requirements and Assumptions for Local Buckling Capacity Calculation of Pultruded GFRP Members
Source abstract
Abstract
First-generation structural design standards for pultruded glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) materials are now available in North America and Europe. The orthotropic nature of pultruded GFRP (pGFRP) makes it susceptible to local buckling, and variation in available material properties adds uncertainty to the calculation of buckling limit states. Additionally, the method of analysis selected by the designer impacts the reliability of the final pGFRP design. In this paper, it is shown that depending on the combinations of these factors, pGFRP design may be very conservative, resulting in inefficient use of material, or may mask expected in situ structural behavior, resulting in undesirable design outcomes. A multiparameter study of cross-section-dominated stability—flange local buckling (FLB) and web local buckling (WLB)—of pultruded GFRP members is presented. In the context of North American and European design standards, two approaches to calculating the local buckling of cross sections assuming either no rotational restraint from adjacent plates (SS) or elastic rotational restraint from adjacent plates (WS) were carried out. Single-web W-, I,- and C-shapes and double-web box sections were considered, each having a significant range of individual plate slenderness. Additionally, the effects of varying material properties were captured by varying transverse (ET/EL) and shear (GLT/EL) modular ratios. It is shown that the ratio of FLB to WLB critical stress calculated using SS assumptions—already a minimum requirement for design—can be used to differentiate behavior and to assist in defining the means by which local buckling limit states can be mitigated. This paper highlights some of the shortcomings of the first versions of design standards for pGFRP. Pultruded GFRP behavior is very sensitive to cross-sectional shape, and reliability calculations—whether material resistance factors or partial factors—need to be reconsidered to include the effects of cross-sectional shape. The predictions of this parametric study were applied to a data set of experimentally obtained local buckling results to make an assessment of the reliability of extant design provisions.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Composite Structure Analysis and Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Univ. of Pittsburgh
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. AISC (American Institute of Steel Construction). 2022. Specification for structural steel buildings. ANSI/AISC 360-22. Chicago: AISC.
2. AISI (American Iron and Steel Institute. 2020. North America specifications for the design of cold-formed steel structural members. AISI S100-16. Washington, DC: AISI.
3. ASCE. 2010. Pre-standard for load & resistance factor design (LRFD) of pultruded fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) structures. Reston, VA: ASCE.
4. ASCE. 2023. Load and resistance factor design (LRFD) for pultruded fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) structures. ASCE 74-23. Reston, VA: ASCE.
5. 10.1177/07316844960150030410.1177/073168449601500304 ↗
6. Bank, L. C., and J. Yin. 1996. “Buckling of orthotropic plates with free and rotationally restrained unloaded edges.” Thin-Walled Struct. 24: 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-8231(95)00036-4.10.1016/0263-8231(95)00036-4 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.10.05710.1016/j.compositesb.2013.10.057 ↗
8. Cardoso, D., K. A. Harries, and E. Batista. 2015. “Compressive local buckling of pultruded GFRP I-sections: Development and numerical/experimental evaluation of an explicit equation.” ASCE J. Composites Constr. 19 (2), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000501.
9. CEN (European Committee for Standardization). 2022. Design of fibre polymer composite structures. CEN/TS 19101:2022. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
10. Correia, J. R., F. A. Branco, N. M. F. Silva, D. Camotim, and N. Silvestre. 2011. “First-order, buckling and post-buckling behaviour of GFRP pultruded beams. Part 1: Experimental study.” Comput. Struct. 89 (21): 2052–2064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.07.005.10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.07.005 ↗
11. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:4(449)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:4(449) ↗
12. Harries, K. A. 2024. “Analysis of ASCE 74 design equations for local flange and web buckling of pultruded GFRP sections.” J. Compos. Constr. 29 (1). https://doi.org/10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4892.10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4892 ↗
13. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2023. Fibre-reinforced plastic composites—Full-section compressive test for pultruded profiles. ISO 23930:2023. Geneva: ISO.
14. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:11(1503)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2003)129:11(1503) ↗
15. Lazzari, J. A., J. R. Correia, and N. Silvestre. 2026. “Local buckling, post-buckling and failure of pultruded GFRP I-section columns with narrow and wide flanges.” Compos. Struct. 381: 120069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2026.120069.10.1016/j.compstruct.2026.120069 ↗
16. Lekhnitskii, S. G. 1968. Anisotropic plates. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.
17. Liu, T., D. Cardoso, J. Vieira, and K. A. Harries. 2017. “Convenient and inexpensive test methods for pultruded GFRP composite material.” In Proc., Advanced Composites in Construction. Sheffield, UK: Bridge Design & Engineering.
18. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.01.10110.1016/j.compstruct.2018.01.101 ↗
19. Liu, T.-Q., J. Vieira, and K. A. Harries. 2020a. “Predicting flange local buckling capacity of pultruded GFRP I-sections subject to flexure.” J. Compos. Constr. 24 (4). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001032.
20. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.11184310.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111843 ↗
21. Liu, T.-Q., S. Zhen, Z. Wang, P. Feng, K. A. Harries, Y. Luo, K. Tang, and Y. Gong. 2025. “Effect of non-uniform roving-matrix-CSM architecture on the flange-web interface behavior of pultruded GFRP composite members.” Composites, Part B 35: 112684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2025.112684.10.1016/j.compositesb.2025.112684 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.11868710.1016/j.engstruct.2024.118687 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.strusafe.2013.10.00610.1016/j.strusafe.2013.10.006 ↗
24. 10.1016/S0263-8231(00)00023-910.1016/S0263-8231(00)00023-9 ↗
25. Pirchio, D., J. A. Althouse, T. A. Madlem, M. D. Denavit, F. J. De Caso y Basalo, J. P. Busel, Y. C. Kurama, and K. Q. Walsh. 2024. “Assessment of resistance factors for LRFD of steel bolted connections in pultruded FRP frames.” J. Compos. Constr. 28: 0402400. https://doi.org/10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4104.10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4104 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.04.02210.1016/j.compositesa.2005.04.022 ↗
27. Vieira, E., J. Vieira, and D. Cardoso. 2018. “Local buckling of pultruded GFRP I-sections subject to bending.” In Proc., 4th Brazilian Conf. on Composite Materials. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Pontifical Catholic University.
28. Yoon S. J. 1993. “Local buckling of pultruded I-shape columns.” Ph.D. thesis School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology.
29. 10.1016/S0263-8223(98)00038-510.1016/S0263-8223(98)00038-5 ↗