Premium
Berichtigung: Frames with unique global and local imperfection in the shape of the elastic buckling mode. Part 1. Stahlbau 82 (2013), H. 8, S. 609–617, Part 2. Stahlbau 83 (2013), H. 9, S. 684–694.
Author(s) -
Chladný E.,
Štujberová M.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
stahlbau
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.268
H-Index - 19
eISSN - 1437-1049
pISSN - 0038-9145
DOI - 10.1002/stab.201490008
Subject(s) - buckling , table (database) , section (typography) , mathematics , structural engineering , cross section (physics) , column (typography) , geometry , combinatorics , physics , engineering , computer science , quantum mechanics , data mining , operating system , connection (principal bundle)
Comments a) Comment to Table 1 in Stahlbau 2013/8 Formulae in Table 1 may be used for following purposes:1. Determination of the position for the critical cross‐section m2. Calculation of η init,m (x), η init,m,m and M II hinit,m (x)3. Elastic verification of the buckling resistance 4. Plastic verification of the buckling resistanceaa) For the elastic verification of the buckling resistance:Use all the formulae with elastic cross‐section characteristics for purposes 1, 2, 3.ab) For the plastic verification of the buckling resistance:For purposes 1and 2 use all the formulae with elastic cross‐section characteristicsFor purpose 4 use the formula (15) with M Rd (x) = M pl,Rd (x) b) Comment to Table 4 and Table 6 Due to the error in 5.1.1.2 b) and c) shown in the table above the values of N II hint and of M II hint in the table 4 are 1,133‐times greater than the correct ones. But the difference in utilisation for frame columns shown in the column [5.2.2(3) b + 5.3.2(11)] in the table 6 is due to small contribution of imperfections effect negligible and conclusions in 6 are not INFluenced by this.Wir bitten um Entschuldigung und Beachtung. Die Redaktion