Advertisement

International Journal of Steel Structures

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 699–718 | Cite as

FEM and Experimental Study on Mechanical Property of Integrated Container Building

  • Yang Zuo
  • Xiaoxiong Zha
Article

Abstract

Recently, a growing number of the containers have been used in the building structures, therefore, the full size container stiffness have been studied under the longitudinal load, including the 20 ft container, 40 ft container and the 20 ft combined container. Firstly, the full size container experiment has been studied, and then, the load–displacement curve and load-stress curve have been got. Secondly, based on the nonlinear finite element software of Abaqus, the container model has been established and analyzed. By comparing with the load–displacement curves and load-stress values of experiment, the finite element model has been verified. Finally, based on the verified finite element model, the parametric analysis of the corrugated sheeting size, corrugated sheeting cross section, elasticity modulus of top side beam, and every sheeting action for container stiffness has been given, and the design advice of single and combined container has been given. The research results have made feasible in design and construction of container buildings and provided some references to corresponding specification preparation.

Keywords

Container building Container stiffness Combined container Container corner fitting lock Diaphragm 

List of symbols

E, μ, σs, σb

Elastic modulus, poisson’s ratio, yielding strength, and ultimate strength of the container material respectively

SJ1.6, SJ2, SJ3, SJ4.5, SJ6, SJ12

Thickness of the side wall-1.6 mm, side wall-2 mm, top side beam, bottom side beam, corner column, and u-steel of the container respectively

20C, 40C, 20CC

Stiffness experimental item of a single 20 ft container, a single 40 ft container, and a combined 20 ft container respectively

F

Unilateral longitudinal concentrated load which applied to one of the front top corner fittings of the container

Fmax, m

Maximum value and load series of the F respectively

LE1, LE2

First and second load end of the front top corner fittings of the container respectively

NLE1, NLE2

First and second non-load end of the rear top corner fittings of the container respectively

ε, ε45°, ε90°

Experimental strain value of the direction of 0°, 45°, and 90° respectively

σMises

Experimental Mises stress value

F, E

Finite element analysis and experimental study of the container respectively

Error (FE)

Error between the F and E

h, n, t

Height, number of the wave bands, and section thickness of the corrugated sheeting of the side-wall respectively

e, d, bB, φ

Horizontal projection length, vertical projection length of the side plate, half length of the bottom plate, and angle between the side plate and its horizontal projection of a wave band of the corrugated sheeting of the side-wall respectively

SW, FW, R

Side-wall, front-wall, and roof of the container respectively

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research described in this paper was financially supported by the “CECS 334: 2013 Technical specification for modular freight container building”, and “DBJ/T 15-112-2016 Technical specification for container type houses”.

References

  1. Børvik, T., Burbach, A., Langberg, H., & Langseth, M. (2008a). On the ballistic and blast load response of a 20 ft ISO container protected with aluminium panels filled with a local mass-phase II: Validation of protective system. Engineering Structures, 30(6), 1621–1631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Børvik, T., Hanssen, A. G., Dey, S., Langberg, H., & Langseth, M. (2008b). On the ballistic and blast load response of a 20 ft ISO container protected with aluminium panels filled with a local mass-phase I: Design of protective system. Engineering Structures, 30(6), 1605–1620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brunn, B., Nitschke, A., & Bederke, C. (2017). Container connection for the new indian antarctic research station-a new type of connection for complex container buildings. Stahlbau, 86(1), 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CECS 334: 2013. (2013). Technical specification for modular freight container building. Beijing: Harbin Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  5. Dassault Systems Simulia Corp. (2014a). ABAQUS analysis user’s manual. Providence: Dassault Systems Simulia Corp.Google Scholar
  6. Dassault Systems Simulia Corp. (2014b). ABAQUS/CAE user’s manual. Providence: Dassault Systems Simulia Corp.Google Scholar
  7. Dassault Systems Simulia Corp. (2014c). ABAQUS example problems manual. Providence: Dassault Systems Simulia Corp.Google Scholar
  8. Dassault Systems Simulia Corp. (2014d). ABAQUS keywords reference manual. Providence: Dassault Systems Simulia Corp.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, J. M., & Bryan, E. R. (1982). Manual of stressed skin diaphragm design. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. DBJ/T 15-112-2016. (2016). Technical specification for container type houses. Guangzhou: Harbin Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  11. Dörries, C., & Zahradnik, S. (2016). Container and modular buildings: Construction and design manual. Berlin: DOM Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Eccs N95. (1995). European recommendations for the application of metal sheeting acting as a diaphragm-stressed skin design. Geneva: Eccs.Google Scholar
  13. Galindo, M. (2010). Contemporary prefab houses. Salenstein: Braun Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Garrido, L. D. (2011). Sustainable architecture: Containers. Philadelphia: Trans-Atlantic Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Giriunas, K. A. (2012). Evaluation, modeling, and analysis of shipping container building structures. M.S. Thesis, The Ohio State University, Ohio.Google Scholar
  16. Giriunas, K. A., Sezen, H., & Dupaix, R. B. (2012). Evaluation, modeling, and analysis of shipping container building structures. Engineering Structures, 43(5), 48–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harrison, B. F. (2003). Blast resistant modular buildings for the petroleum and chemical processing industries. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 104(1), 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hart, A. (2016). Modern container architecture. Mulgrave: Images Publishing Dist Ac.Google Scholar
  19. Isik, E., & Ozdemir, M. (2017). Performance based assessment of steel frame structures by different material models. International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(3), 1021–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. ISO 1161: 1984. (1984). Series 1 freight containers-corner fittings-specification. ISO/TC 104, Geneva.Google Scholar
  21. ISO 1496-1: 2013. (2013). Series 1 freight containers-specification and testing-part 1: General cargo containers for general purposes. ISO/TC 104, Geneva.Google Scholar
  22. ISO 6346:1995. (1995). Freight containers-coding, identification and marking. ISO/TC 104, Geneva.Google Scholar
  23. ISO 830: 1999. (1999). Freight containers-vocabulary. ISO/TC 104, Geneva.Google Scholar
  24. ISO 668: 2013. (2013). Series 1 freight containers-classification, dimensions and ratings. ISO/TC 104, Geneva.Google Scholar
  25. ISO 6892-1: 2016. (2016). Metallic materials-tensile testing-part 1: Method of test at room temperature. ISO/TC 164, Geneva.Google Scholar
  26. ISO/TR 15070: 1996. (1996). Series 1 freight containers-rationale for structural test criteria. ISO/TC 104, Geneva.Google Scholar
  27. Kirkayak, L., Vinicius, A. D. S., & Suzuki, K. (2011). On the vibrational characteristics of a two-tier scaled container stack. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 16(3), 354–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kotnik, J. (2013). New container architecture: Design and sustainability. New York: Links International.Google Scholar
  29. Kramer, S. (2014). The Box-architectural solutions with containers. Salenstein: Braun Publishing.Google Scholar
  30. Levinson, M. (2016). The box: How the shipping container made the world smaller and the world economy bigger. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martinez, P., & Minguet, A. (2017). Container & prefab homes: Eco-friendly architecture. Barcelona: Monsa.Google Scholar
  32. Minguet, J. M. (2013). Sustainable architecture: Containers 2. Barcelona: Monsa.Google Scholar
  33. Mullens, M. A. (2011). Factory design for modular homebuilding. New York: Constructability Press.Google Scholar
  34. Qin, Y., Lu, J. Y., Huang, L. C. X., & Cao, S. (2017). Flexural behavior of anchor horizontal boundary element in steel plate shear wall. International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(3), 1073–1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sinha, S. C., Prakash, V., & Ravikumar, P. B. (1989). Modeling and simulation of cargo containers. Computers & Structures, 33(4), 1065–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Slawik, H., Bergmann, J., Buchmeier, M., & Tinney, S. (2010). Container Atlas: A practical guide to container architecture. Berlin: Gestalten.Google Scholar
  37. Smith, J. D. (2005). Shipping containers as building component. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Brighton, Brighton.Google Scholar
  38. Smith, R. E. (2011). Prefab architecture: A guide to modular design and construction. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  39. Vinicius, A. D. S. (2011). Study on the dynamic response of container stacks using non-linear finite element analysis. Ph.D. Dissertation. Tokyo: The University of Tokyo.Google Scholar
  40. Vinicius, A. D. S., Kirkayak, L., & Suzuki, K. (2012). Experimental and numerical analysis of container stack dynamics using a scaled model test. Ocean Engineering, 39(4), 24–42.Google Scholar
  41. Vinicius, A. D. S., Levent, K., & Ikumu, W. (2013). Experimental and numerical analysis of container multiple stacks dynamics using a scaled model. Ocean Engineering, 74(4), 218–232.Google Scholar
  42. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2014a). Study on the optimal design of the members of container building with building materials I: Side board optimization. Advanced Materials Research, 859(12), 270–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2014b). Study on the optimal design of the members of container building with building materials II: Joint and corner column optimization. Advanced Materials Research, 859(12), 266–269.Google Scholar
  44. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2014c). Study on theory and finite element analysis of longitudinal stiffness of multi-body container building. Progress in Steel Building Structures, 36(4), 24–28.Google Scholar
  45. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2015). Analysis of mechanical properties of container structure under earthquake action. Journal of South China University of Technology (Natural Science Edition), 43(7), 92–99.Google Scholar
  46. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2016a). Theoretical and experimental studies on in-plane stiffness of integrated container structure. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 8(3), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2016b). Theoretical and experimental studies on in-plane stiffness of container structure with holes. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 8(6), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zha, X. X., & Zuo, Y. (2016c). Finite element study of container structure under normal and high temperature. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2016(2016), 1–15.Google Scholar
  49. Zuo, Y. (2016). Theoretical simulated and experimental research on resistant lateral stiffness of container structure. Ph.D. Dissertation, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin.Google Scholar
  50. Zuo, Y., & Zha, X. X. (2015). Analysis of longitudinal stiffness of container building structure with holes. Journal of Tianjin University, 2(2), 167–176.Google Scholar
  51. Zuo, Y., & Zha, X. X. (2017). FEM and experimental study on mechanical property of container building with holes. International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(1), 175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Steel Construction 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Building 12G304, Department of Civil EngineeringDongguan University of TechnologyDongguan CityChina
  2. 2.Building E304, School of Civil and Environment EngineeringHarbin Institute of Technology (Shenzhen)Shenzhen CityChina

Personalised recommendations