CAJ | 학술논문

对比了北美规范CSA S136-07和中国规范GB 50018-2002中关于冷弯薄壁型钢C形截面轴压构件的名义轴压强度。首先介绍了北美规范和中国规范计算名义轴压强度的方法，然后针对控制构件名义轴压强度的2个主要参数，即屈曲应力和有效截面面积，对2本规范进行了深入对比，最后对典型C形墙架柱名义轴压强度进行了比较。研究结果表明：2本规范具有相同的屈曲应力，但依据2本规范计算的有效截面面积却不同；一般来说，根据GB 50018-2002计算的翼缘有效宽度远小于根据CSA S136-07计算的结果，然而依据CSA S136-07计算的腹板有效宽度则略小于依据GB 50018-2002计算的结果；2本规范名义轴压强度不同主要由C形截面翼缘和腹板有效宽厚比不同引起；当翼缘的宽厚比不小于17．8时，构件名义轴压强度的不同主要由翼缘有效宽厚比控制，根据GB 50018-2002计算的名义轴压强度小于根据CSA S136-07计算的结果；当翼缘的宽厚比小于17．8时，构件名义轴压强度的不同则主要受腹板有效宽度控制，依据GB 50018-2002计算的名义轴压强度略大于依据CSA S136-07计算的结果。
대비료북미규범CSA S136-07화중국규범GB 50018-2002중관우랭만박벽형강C형절면축압구건적명의축압강도。수선개소료북미규범화중국규범계산명의축압강도적방법，연후침대공제구건명의축압강도적2개주요삼수，즉굴곡응력화유효절면면적，대2본규범진행료심입대비，최후대전형C형장가주명의축압강도진행료비교。연구결과표명：2본규범구유상동적굴곡응력，단의거2본규범계산적유효절면면적각불동；일반래설，근거GB 50018-2002계산적익연유효관도원소우근거CSA S136-07계산적결과，연이의거CSA S136-07계산적복판유효관도칙략소우의거GB 50018-2002계산적결과；2본규범명의축압강도불동주요유C형절면익연화복판유효관후비불동인기；당익연적관후비불소우17．8시，구건명의축압강도적불동주요유익연유효관후비공제，근거GB 50018-2002계산적명의축압강도소우근거CSA S136-07계산적결과；당익연적관후비소우17．8시，구건명의축압강도적불동칙주요수복판유효관도공제，의거GB 50018-2002계산적명의축압강도략대우의거CSA S136-07계산적결과。
Nominal axial compressive strengths of cold-formed steel C-sections evaluated by the North American standard CSA S136-07 and the Chinese standard GB 50018-2002 were investiga-ted .The procedures of evaluating the nominal axial compressive strength associated with both standards were analyzed and compared .The study results show that discrepancies between the two standards are primarily resulted from the difference in evaluating the effective area subjected to local buckling .For the C-section compressive members ,the flange effective width calculated by the Chinese standard is much smaller than that of the North American standard ,w hereas the web effective width evaluated by the North American standard is slightly less than that of the Chinese standard .For typical C-section wall studs ,the difference on the nominal axial strength is primarily influenced by the flange and web width-to-thickness ratios .When the flange width-to-thickness ratio is not less than 17 .8 ,the difference on the nominal axial compressive strength is dominated by the difference of flange effective width between the two standards and the nominal axial compressive strength evaluated by GB 50018-2002 is less than that of CSA S136-07;when the flange width-to-thickness ratio is less than 17 .8 ,the difference on the nominal axial compres-sive strength is then primarily governed by the difference of web effective width between the two standards and the nominal axial compressive strength evaluated by GB 50018-2002 is slightly greater than that of CSA S136-07 .