## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

**BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
**

JUDUL:

υ

COMPARISON BETWEEN BS 5950: PART 1: 2000 & EUROCODE 3 FOR THE DESIGN OF MULTI-STOREY BRACED STEEL FRAME

SESI PENGAJIAN: Saya

2006 / 2007

**CHAN CHEE HAN
**

(HURUF BESAR)

mengaku membenarkan tesis (PSM/ Sarjana/ Doktor Falsafah)* ini disimpan di Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti berikut: 1. 2. 3. 4. Tesis adalah hakmilik Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk tujuan pengajian sahaja. Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran antara institusi pengajian tinggi. **Sila tandakan (3) SULIT (Mengandungi maklumat yang berdarjah keselamatan atau kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di dalam (AKTA RAHSIA RASMI 1972) (Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD yang telah ditentukan oleh organisasi/ badan di mana penyelidikan dijalankan)

TERHAD

3

TIDAK TERHAD Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)

(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

**Alamat Tetap: PETI SURAT 61162, 91021 TAWAU, SABAH.
**

Tarikh

CATATAN:

**PM DR. IR. MAHMOOD MD. TAHIR Nama Penyelia
**

Tarikh:

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

* ** Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

υ

Jika tesis ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak berkuasa/ organisasi berkenaan dengan menyatakan sekali sebab dan tempoh tesis ini perlu dikelaskan sebagai SULIT atau TERHAD. Tesis dimaksudkan sebagai tesis bagi Ijazah Doktor Falsafah dan Sarjana secara penyelidikan, atau disertasi bagi pengajian secara kerja kursus dan penyelidikan, atau Laporan Projek Sarjana Muda (PSM).

“I hereby declare that I have read this project report and in my opinion this project report is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil – Structure).”

Signature

:

Name of Supervisor : P.M. Dr. Ir. Mahmood Md. Tahir Date : 01 NOVEMBER 2006

i

COMPARISON BETWEEN BS 5950: PART 1: 2000 & EUROCODE 3 FOR THE DESIGN OF MULTI-STOREY BRACED STEEL FRAME

CHAN CHEE HAN

A project report submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil – Structure)

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER, 2006

ii I declare that this project report entitled “Comparison Between BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for The Design of Multi-Storey Braced Steel Frame” is the result of my own research except as cited in the references. Signature Name Date : : Chan Chee Han : 01 NOVEMBER 2006 . The report has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree.

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

I am most thankful to my parents and family for their support and encouragement given to me unconditionally in completing this task. Mahmood’s research students. patience and guidance during the duration of my study. Mr. Tan for their helpful guidance in the process of completing this study. I would also like to express my thankful appreciation to Dr. Finally. . Shek and Mr. for his generous advice. Without the contribution of all those mentioned above. Ir. Tahir of the Faculty of Civil Engineering.iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First of all. Mahmood Md. I would like to express my appreciation to my thesis supervisor. Dr. this work would not have been possible. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. PM.

loading values and etc.27% and 9. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay. Therefore. with the application of partial strength connections. However.60% to 17.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. four-storey braced steel frames with spans of 6m and 9m and with steel grade S275 (Fe 460) and S355 (Fe 510) by designed using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. . The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.11% to 10. Meanwhile. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. These details include the basis and concept of design. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI) claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design.43%. specifications to be followed. However. This study intends to testify the claim. safety factors. design methods.95%.

Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. . Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Namun begitu.43%. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.11% – 10. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif.60% – 17. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. factor keselamatan. Namun begitu.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. dan sebagainya. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.95%. cara rekabentuk.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. Selain itu. nilai beban. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.27% – 9. Justeru.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4.

1 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .4 1.2 1.3 1.vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE i ii iii iv v vi vii xii xiii xiv xv THESIS TITLE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES LISTOF NOTATIONS I INTRODUCTION 1.

5.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.6 Deflection 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.2 Serviceability 2.2.3.3.3. Mc.3.1. Mc 2.2 2.2 2.1.2 Stiffened Web 2.2.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.3.1.1.1 2.3 Shear Capacity.2 2.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.3.3.Rd Moment Capacity.4.2.3.3.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.3.4.4 Loading 2.2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.4.3.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .2.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.3.3.3.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.1.5.3.4 Actions of EC3 2.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2. Vpl.1.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.2.1. Pv Moment Capacity.1 2.1 Unstiffened Web 2.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.2 2.3.4.2 BS 5950 2.1 2.3.3.4.

1.6.2 Slenderness.4 Buckling Resistance.Rd 2.1 Introduction 34 . Nc. Nb. Ry.6.7 Conclusion 2.7.Rd 2. Pc 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.4.1.4.1 Crushing Resistance.2.6. λ 2.4.7.1 2.1.2 Slenderness.4.5 Deflection 2.1.Rd 2. Rb.3.6. Ra.4.1 Buckling Length.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.1.Rd 2.6.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.1 Effective Length.4.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.6.6.2.2.5.6.2 Crippling Resistance.4.1.3 Compression Resistance.4.ix 2.1.4. λ 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.2.3.4.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.2 Structural Beam Structural Column 31 32 29 30 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 29 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 III METHODOLOGY 3. l 2.5.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.5.3 Buckling Resistance. LE 2.Rd 2.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.5.5.3 Compression Resistance.5.

1.2 3.3 Moment Calculation 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.10 Structural Column Design 3.2 3.5 3.10.1 Load Combination 3.8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.9.1 BS 5950 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.8.10.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.8.2 Shear Calculation 3.2 4.3 3.x 3.7 3.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.1 3.1 Structural Capacity 5.8.4.9.4.6 3.1.2 4.1 3.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .1 4.

2 5.xi 5.1.3 5.4 Structural Column 82 82 83 84 Deflection Values Economy Recommendation for Future Studies REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A1 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 APPENDIX A2 APPENDIX B1 APPENDIX B2 APPENDIX C1 APPENDIX C2 APPENDIX D .2 5.

6 4.8 4.4 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.7 4.4 4. TITLE PAGE 2.2 3.10 4.2 3.9 4.3 3.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 .5 4.3 4.2 4.1 3.11 4.1 4.1 2.

1 3.2 3.1(b) 4.3 4.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE 3.1(a) 4.1(c) Schematic diagram of research methodology Floor plan view of the steel frame building Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame Bending moment of beam for rigid construction Bending moment of beam for semi-rigid construction Bending moment of beam for simple construction 37 38 39 80 80 80 .

xiv LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX TITLE PAGE A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2 D Frame Analysis Based on BS 5950 Frame Analysis Based on EC3 Structural Beam Design Based on BS 5950 Structural Beam Design Based on EC3 Structural Column Design Based on BS 5950 Structural Column Design Based on EC3 Structural Beam Design Based on EC3 (Revised) 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 .

y.y.xv LIST OF NOTATIONS BS 5950: PART 1: 2000 EUROCODE 3 Axial load Shear force Bending moment Partial safety factor Radius of gyration .Rd Mb.Rd Rb.Rd Vpl.y.y.Rd Mc.Major axis .Rd Mpl.Rd h A Aeff Av .Minor axis Depth between fillets Compressive strength Flexural strength Design strength Slenderness Web crippling resistance Web buckling resistance Web crushing resistance Buckling moment resistance Moment resistance at major axis Shear resistance Depth Section area Effective section area Shear area F Fv M γ NSd VSd MSd γM0 γM1 rx ry d pc pb py λ Pcrip Pw Mbx Mcx Pv D Ag Aeff Av iy iz d fc fb fy λ Ra.Rd Ry.

Major axis .z c/tf d/tw b l tf tw Sx Sy Wpl.y Wpl.z .Minor axis Flange Web Width of section Effective length Flange thickness Web thickness Zx Zy b/T d/t B LE T t Wel.Major axis .Minor axis Elastic modulus .y Wel.xvi Plastic modulus .

1 Introduction Structural design is a process of selecting the material type and conducting indepth calculation of a structure to fulfill its construction requirements. as well as the trading volume and diplomatic ties between these countries. countries or nations that do not publish their own standard codes will adopt a set of readily available code as the national reference.CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1. namely suitability of application of the code set in a country with respect to its culture. It is a process of converting an architectural perspective into a practical and reasonable entity at construction site. Several factors govern the type of code to be adopted. design methods. Meanwhile. These details include the basis and concept of design. safety factors. In present days. . reference to standard code is essential. loading values and etc. In the structural design of steel structures. economic and functional building. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. Structural design should also be an integration of art and science. These codes were a product of constant research and development. and past experiences of experts at respective fields. many countries have published their own standard codes. A standard code serves as a reference document with important guidance. The main purpose of structural design is to produce a safe. specifications to be followed. climate and national preferences.

published by the European Commission. . the move to withdraw BS 5950 and replace with Eurocode 3 will be taking place in the country as soon as all the preparation has completed. It is believed that Eurocode 3 is more comprehensive and better developed compared to national codes. designers. Eurocode 3 has developed in stages. operators and users. Codes of practice provide detailed guidance and recommendations on design of structural elements. contractors and manufacturers of construction products among the European member countries. These preliminary standards of ENV will be revised. were developed. Buckling resistance and shear resistance are two major elements of structural steel design. This was followed by the various parts of a pre-standard code.2 Like most of the other structural Eurocodes. ENV1993 (ENV stands for EuroNorm Vornorm) issued by Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) – the European standardisation committee. Therefore. Therefore. provision for these topics is covered in certain sections of the codes. amended in the light of any comments arising out of its use before being reissued as the EuroNorm standards (EN). The establishment of Eurocode 3 will provide a common understanding regarding the structural steel design between owners. As with other Europeans standards. The earliest documents seeking to harmonize design rules between European countries were the various recommendations published by the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork. ECCS. From these. The study on Eurocode 3 in this project will focus on the subject of moment and shear design. the initial draft Eurocode 3. Standardization of design code for structural steel in Malaysia is primarily based on the practice in Britain. Eurocodes will be used in public procurement specifications and to assess products for ‘CE’ (Conformité Européen) mark.

in its publication of “eurocodesnews” magazine has claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI). Lacking analytical and calculative proof. this can be achieved if the designer is not too greedy in the pursuit of the least steel weight from the strength calculations.2 Background of Project The arrival of Eurocode 3 calls for reconsideration of the approach to design. However. Many designers feel depressed when new codes are introduced (Charles.3 1. namely earlier design over-estimated strength in a few particular circumstances. and new forms of structure evolve and codes are expanded to include them. such as the tables of buckling stresses in existing BS codes. Besides. 2005). The increasing complexity of codes arises due to several reasons. earlier design practice under-estimated strength in various circumstances affecting economy. causing safety issues. for those who pursue economy of material. Finally. Design can be complex. . but it can be simplified for those pursuing speed and clarity. There are new formulae and new complications to master. simple design is possible if the code requirements are presented in an easy-to-use format. simple design is possible if a scope of application is defined to avoid the circumstances and the forms of construction in which strength is over-estimated by simple procedures. even though there seems to be no benefit to the designer for the majority of his regular workload. this project is intended to testify the claim.

4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. hereafter referred to as EC3. Next. . This structure is intended to serve as an office building. hereafter referred to as BS 5950. Comparison to other steel structural design code is made. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple. 1.3 Objectives The objectives of this project are: 1) To compare the difference in the concept of the design using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3. The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. 2 bay braced frames.4 1.

Meanwhile.5 1.5 Report Layout The report will be divided into five main chapters. Results and discussions are presented in Chapter IV. Chapter II presents the literature review that discusses the design procedures and recommendations for steel frame design of the codes EC3 and BS 5950. Chapter III will be a summary of research methodology. conclusions and recommendations are presented in Chapter V. . Chapter I presents an introduction to the study.

or better known as Eurocode. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. Principles should be typed in Roman wordings. while Eurocode 4 covers for composite construction.2 Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1. “Design of Steel Structures: Part 1.1. EC3 stresses the need for durability.1 General rules and rules for buildings” covers the general rules for designing all types of structural steel.1 (EC3) EC3. Eurocode is separated by the use of different construction materials. Principles and application rules are also clearly stated. Eurocode covers concrete construction.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2. It also covers specific rules for building structures. Eurocode 1 covers loading situations. Application rules must be written in italic style. Eurocode 3 covers steel construction. It was intended to smooth the trading activities among the European countries. was initiated by the Commission of European Communities as a standard structural design guide. The use of local application rules are allowed only if they have similar principles as EC3 . 2.1 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) European Code. serviceability and resistance of a structure.CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1.

which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. it will remain fit for the use for which it is required. 2.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. 2. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered. 2001). to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much.1. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries.7 and their resistance. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions.1. . having due regard to its intended life and its cost. impact or consequences of human errors. Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. and tying the structure together.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. and with appropriate degrees of reliability. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element.3. EC3 stresses the need for durability. EC3 covers two limit states.

8 2. and free actions. movable imposed loads. considered as a rigid body.g. or an imposed deformation in indirect action.g. 2. 2. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. e. and vibration. It may require certain consideration. e. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation. in spatial variation classification.1.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse.1. wind loads. fittings. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people. including: deformations or deflections which adversely affect the appearance or effective use of the structure (including the proper functioning of machines or services) or cause damage to finishes or non-structural elements. which result in different arrangements of actions. .3.g. self-weight of structures.1. Meanwhile. rupture. e. variable actions (Q). This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. actions are defined as fixed actions. e. and accidental loads (A). for example.3. wind loads or snow loads. damage to the building or its contents. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. including supports and foundations. temperature effects or settlement. snow loads. In time variation classification. self-weight.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure.g. or which limits its functional effectiveness. explosions or impact from vehicles. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G).g.3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. ancillaries and fixed equipment. imposed loads. which causes discomfort to people. e.

members subject to combined axial force and bending moment. sheeting respectively. 2. Part 3 and Part 4 focus mainly on composite design and construction. Several clauses were technically updated for topics such as sway stability. Part 1 covers the code of practice for design of rolled and welded sections. hot finished structural hollow sections and cold formed structural hollow sections. shear resistance.2. local buckling. Part 5 concerns design of cold formed thin gauge sections.2 Scope of BS 5950 Part 1 of BS 5950 provides recommendations for the design of structural steelwork using hot rolled steel sections. Changes were due to structural safety. Part 6 covers design for light gauge profiled steel sheeting. BS 5950 comprises of nine parts. but offsetting potential reductions in economy was also one of the reasons. etc. fabrication and erected for rolled. and Part 9 covers the code of practice for stressed skin design. which was withdrawn. welded sections and cold formed sections.9 2. Part 8 comprises of code of practice for fire resistance design. Part 2 and 7 deal with specification for materials. . flats.1 Background of BS 5950 BS 5950 was prepared to supersede BS 5950: Part 1: 1990. avoidance of disproportionate collapse.2. lateral-torsional buckling. They are being used in buildings and allied structures not specifically covered by other standards. plates.2 BS 5950 2.

rupture. Generally.3. In the case of combined imposed load and wind load. semi-continuous design.10 2. in checking. They are: strength. inclusive of general yielding. and durability.2 Serviceability Limit States There are several elements to be considered in serviceability limit states – Deflection. stability against overturning and sway sensitivity. in the design for limiting states.2.2. vibration. Generally. The fundamental of the methods are different joints for different methods. The load carrying capacity of each member should be such that the factored loads will not cause failure. and experimental verification. wind induced oscillation. 2. only 80% of the full specified values need to be considered when checking for serviceability.3 Design Concept of BS 5950 There are several methods of design.2. 2.3. In the case of combined horizontal crane loads and wind load.1 Ultimate Limit States Several elements are considered in ultimate limit states. BS 5950 covers two types of states – ultimate limit states and serviceability limit states. buckling and mechanism formation. and brittle fracture. . serviceability loads should be taken as the unfactored specified values. fracture due to fatigue. Meanwhile. namely simple design. the specified loads should be multiplied by the relevant partial factors γf given in Table 2. only the greater effect needs to be considered when checking for serviceability. continuous design.

4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well. The classification of each element of a cross-section subject to compression (due to a bending moment or an axial force) should be based on its width-to-thickness ratio. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling Bearing capacity of web Deflection 2. earth and groundwater loading. imposed and wind loading.11 2. without calculating their local buckling resistance.2. There are dead.3. . The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness. overhead traveling cranes. 2. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. Where necessary.

2 Shear Capacity. However.3. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. Fv.6pyAv . Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. given by: Pv = 0. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. When this section is applied. 2. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. Class 1 is known as plastic section. Class 2 is known as compact section. However. It enables plastic moment to take place.12 Generally. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section. Alternatively.2. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes. Class 4 is known as slender section. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Clause 4.

There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.3 Moment Capacity. . Clause 4. Z is the section modulus.3. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections. 2.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment.3. Seff is the effective plastic modulus.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.3. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.13 in which Av is the shear area.2. and Zeff is the effective section modulus. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.5. 2.

and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1. Clause 4.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.3. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv.3. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.5.14 2.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.2. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.

Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.2 states that.15 2. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε.3.4. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.4.1 of BS 5950 states that. 2. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender.3.4.4.3. or 62ε for a welded section.4.4.3.3. but the web is designed for shear only. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.6Vw.6Vw.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling. a conservative value Mf for .2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0.

5. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.for a welded I.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. . c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.1 states that bearing stiffeners should be provided where the local compressive force Fx applied through a flange by loads or reactions exceeds the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web at the web-to-flange connection.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).6Vw.or H-section: k=T+r k=T .2.or H-section: . where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone. the web should be designed using Annex H.3. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.3. 2.except at the end of a member: n = 5 .for a rolled I.5. It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .

3. and t is the web thickness.5.netpy in which As. r is the root radius. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. 2.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener. T is the flange thickness.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps. allowing for cope holes for welding. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As.3. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. pyw is the design strength of the web. 2. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. .6 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard.

4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. Class 2 is also known as compact section.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. To avoid this. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. It has limited rotation capacity. Class 1 is known as plastic section.1.3.18 2. However. Clause 5. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. It is applicable for plastic design. It can also achieve rectangular stress block. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Bearing capacity of web a) b) c) Crushing resistance Crippling resistance Buckling resistance (v) Deflection 2. .4.

It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance. kγ is the buckling factor for shear.5 . Vpl. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes. Vsd.4.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section.2 Shear Capacity. The stress block will be of triangle shape. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. At each crosssection. 2. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5.1. but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. The member will fail before it reaches design stress. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. and ε = [235/fy]0.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure.Rd where Vpl. Class 4 is known as slender section.1. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. Apart from that.

Rd. For class 4 cross-sections.4.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. 2.4. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear . Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.3.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.Rd.3. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.4.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.4.3 Moment Capacity.Rd. 2. as stated in Clause 5.5.3. when maximum shear force. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV. Mc. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment.20 2. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc.7 states that.

Clause 5. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.5 [1 – (σf.4. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. 2. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place. For cross-sections with equal flanges. However. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.3 provides that the design crushing resistance.Rd ≤ Mc. Ry.Rd – 1)2 2.4.5 . is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange.5 (fyf / fyw)0.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV.Ed / fyf)2]0.21 force. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.4. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force. Ry.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. bending about the major axis. it is obtained as follows: MV.1 Crushing Resistance.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web.Rd of the web of an I.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0.7. Thus. this checking is unnecessary. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange.

σf.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb. For member subject to bending moments. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.5tw2(Efyw)0.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 . H or U section is given by: Ra.2 Crippling Resistance.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.Sd = 0.5 2. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.Rd and Fsd / Ra.3 Buckling Resistance. Rb.2.Rd of the web of an I. Ra.4.4. Rb.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra. and ss / d < 0. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.5.4.4.5 [(tf / tw)0. 2.Rd of the web of an I.Rd + Msd / Mc.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.Rd ≤ 1.

5 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard.4.5. This. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .5. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. 2. 2. however. 2. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.1 of EC3.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam.1 and Table 5. Therefore.5. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. applies only to non-moment sustaining column.2.

5.2 Slenderness. angle. 2. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . column members that carry more than 90% of their reduced plastic moment capacity Mr in the presence of axial force is assumed to be incapable of providing directional restraint.1. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.1. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.5.1. in accordance of Table 22. channel. λ The slenderness λ of a compression member is generally taken as its effective length LE divided by its radius of gyration r about the relevant axis. T-section struts. Pc According to Clause 4. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate.24 2.5.4. and back-to-back struts. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.1 Effective Length.7.3 Compression Resistance. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. λ = LE / r 2. LE The effective length LE of a compression member is determined from the segment length L centre-to-centre of restraints or intersections with restraining members in the relevant plane.

Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. the checking of cross-section capacity is as follows: My Fc M + x + ≤1 Ag p y M cx M cy where Fc is the axial compression.5. 2. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. for class 1 plastic. py is the design steel strength. .2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.2. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.5. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. 2. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. Mx is the moment about major axis. My is the moment about minor axis.5.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24.

Mb the buckling resistance moment. Pc the compression resistance of column.6. py the steel design strength.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.26 2.5. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. and Zy the elastic modulus.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column. 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 The design of steel column according to EC3 is quite similar to the design of steel column according to BS 5950. 2. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis.2.

2. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L.1 Buckling Length.Rd of a member is given by: Nc.3 Compression Resistance.Rd According to Clause 5. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.6.5 states that. the value of λ should not exceed 250.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic. λ The slenderness λ of a compression member is generally taken as its buckling length l divided by its radius of gyration i about the relevant axis.2 Slenderness.4. the compression resistance Nc.6. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section. Alternatively.1.4. Clause 5.1. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only.1. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .5. 2. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends.1. the value of λ should not exceed 180. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally.27 2.6. Nc.

For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.5.4 Buckling Resistance.Rd 2. 2 or 3 cross-sections. Nb. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.6.Rd For compression members. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections.1.Rd .Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.1.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc.28 Nc. Clause 5.

Sd N Sd M z .Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff .29 2. y f yd Wel . for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y .4.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . β = 5n but β ≥ 1. for I and H sections.8. α = 2.Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . M y .2. z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y . Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject . Rd M pl .Sd + + ≤1 N pl . the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. y f yd Weff . Rd for a conservative approximation where.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.1 states that.Rd. z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1. Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression. Rd M pl .Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .Sd N Sd M z . cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment. z .6.Sd + N Sd e Ny M z . 2. Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz . in which n = Nsd / Npl. y . Clause 5.6.

30 only to moment about the relevant axis; and eN is the shift of the relevant centroidal axis when the cross-section is subject to uniform compression.

However, for high shear (VSd ≥ 0.5 Vpl.Rd), Clause 5.4.9 states that the design resistance of the cross-section to combinations of moment and axial force should be calculated using a reduced yield strength of (1 – ρ)fy for the shear area, where ρ = (2VSd / Vpl.Rd – 1)2.

2.6.2.2 Member Buckling Resistance

A column, subject to buckling moment, may buckle about major axis or minor axis or both. All members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.Sd must satisfy the following condition:

k y M y.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1,0 N b. y . Rd ηM c. y . Rd

where Nb.y.Rd is the design buckling resistance for major axis; Mc.y.Rd is the design moment resistance for major-axis bending, ky is the conservative value and taken as 1,5; and η = γM0 / γM1 for Class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections, but 1,0 for Class 4.

2.7

Conclusion

This section summarizes the general steps to be taken when designing a structural member in simple construction.

31 2.7.1 Structural Beam

Table 2.1 shown compares the criteria to be considered when designing a structural beam.

**Table 2.1 : Criteria to be considered in structural beam design
**

BS 5950 Flange subject to compression 9ε 10ε 15ε Web subject to bending (Neutral axis at mid depth) 80ε 100ε 120ε ε = (275 / py)0.5 2.0 Shear Capacity Pv = 0.6pyAv Av = Dt Vpl.Rd = fyAv / (√3 x γM0) γM0 = 1,05 Av from section table 3.0 Moment Capacity Mc = pyS Mc = pyZ Mc = pyZeff Class 1, 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1,05 γM1 = 1,05 4.0 Bearing Capacity Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 3 Semi-compact Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 3 Semi-compact CRITERIA 1.0 Cross-sectional Classification Flange subject to compression 10ε 11ε 15ε Web subject to bending (Neutral axis at mid depth) 72ε 83ε 124ε ε = (235 / fy)0,5 EC3

32

Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw Smaller of Ry.Rd = (ss + sy) tw fyw / γM1 Ra.Rd = 0,5tw2(Efyw)0,5 [(tf/tw)0,5 + 3(tw/tf)(ss/d)]/γM1 Rb.Rd = χβAfyA / γM1 5.0 Shear Buckling Resistance d/t ≤ 70ε Ratio 6.0 Deflection L / 360 Limit (Beam carrying plaster or other brittle finish) N/A Limit (Total deflection) L / 250 L / 350 d/tw ≤ 69ε

2.7.2

Structural Column

Table 2.2 shown compares the criteria to be considered when designing a structural beam.

**Table 2.2 : Criteria to be considered in structural column design
**

BS 5950 Flange subject to compression 9ε 10ε 15ε Web (Combined axial load and bending) 80ε / 1 + r1 100ε / 1 + 1.5r1 Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 3 Semi-compact CRITERIA 1.0 Cross-sectional Classification Flange subject to compression 10ε 11ε 15ε Web (Combined axial load and bending) 396ε / (13α – 1) 456ε / (13α – 1) EC3

Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . Rd .5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0. 3 Class 4 Nc.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.67 + 0.05 Nc. 2.05 γM1 = 1.0 N b.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. y . -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.eff Class 1.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc. Rd ηM c.05 4.5 2.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx. y .0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.

Please refer to Figure 3. . such as shear capacity. analysis on the difference between the results using two codes is done. an understanding on the cross-section classification for BS 5950 is also carried out. Eventually. design and comparison works will follow subsequently. Checking on several elements.CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 3. analyzing the tables provided and the purpose of each clause stated in the code. Next. bearing capacity. comparison of the results will lead to recognizing the difference in design approach for each code. moment capacity. At the same time.1 Introduction As EC3 will eventually replace BS 5950 as the new code of practice.1 for the flowchart of the methodology of this study. buckling capacity and deflection is carried out. it is necessary to study and understand the concept of design methods in EC3 and compare the results with the results of BS 5950 design. Beams and columns are designed for the maximum moment and shear force obtained from computer software analysis. The first step is to study and understand the cross-section classification for steel members as given in EC. Analysis.

the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed. Therefore.8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. M and shear force. V are based on simply-supported condition.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. Calculation of bending moment. As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. End moments are zero. Sections 3.4 to 3.35 3. Please refer to Appendices A1 and A2 for the analysis worksheets created for the purpose of calculating shear force and bending moment values based on the requirements of different safety factors of both codes. . that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span.

(1995). Please refer to Appendices B1 to C2 for the calculation worksheets created for the purpose of the design of structural beam and column of both design codes. the method of design using EC3 will be based on the work example drawn by Narayanan et. Furthermore. al. The method of design using BS 5950 will be based on the work example drawn by Heywood (2003). Meanwhile. Several trial and error calculations can be used to cut down on the calculation time needed as well as prevent calculation error. .36 3. Microsoft Excel worksheets will show the calculation steps in a clear and fair manner. The Microsoft Excel software is used for its features that allow continual and repeated calculations using values calculated in every cell of the worksheet.3 Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The design of beam and column is calculated with Microsoft Excel software.

Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 3.37 Determine Research Objective and Scope Phase 1 Literature Review Determination of building and frame dimension Specify loadings & other specifications Phase 2 Frame analysis using Microsoft Excel (V=wL/2. M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology . Moment.

in total. . Please refer to Figure 3. the storey height will be 4m.2 and Figure 3. a parametric study for the design of multi-storey braced frames is carried out. there will be three (3) numbers of 4-storey frames. 4th storey is roof while the rest will serve as normal floors. 6m 6m 6/9m 6/9m Figure 3.38 3. Each of the frame’s longitudinal length is 6m.4.3 for the illustrations of building plan view and elevation view respectively. whereas for other floors (1st to 2nd. The storey height will be 5m from ground floor to first floor. 2nd to 3rd. the 4-storey frame consists of four (4) bays. The number of storey of the frame is set at four (4).2 : Floor plan view of the steel frame building. 3rd to roof).4 Structural Layout & Specifications 3. Two (2) lengths of bay width will be used in the analysis – 6m and 9m respectively. In plan view.1 Structural Layout In order to make comparisons of the design of braced steel frame between BS 5950-1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. The intermediate frame will be used as the one to be analysed and designed.

3. Meanwhile. all the column-to-column connections are to be rigid. Web cleats will be used as the connection method to create pinned connection. flat roof system will be introduced to cater for some activities on roof top. . All the bays will be serving the same function.4. Top flange of beams are effectively restraint against lateral torsional buckling.39 4m 4m 4m 5m Figure 3. Meanwhile. All the roof bays will be used for general purposes. The main steel frame will consist of solely universal beam (UB) and universal column (UC).2 Specifications The designed steel frame structure is meant for office for general use.3 : Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame. all the beam-to-column connections are assumed to be pinned. As this is a simple construction.

2 (Flat roofs) states that. Meanwhile. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning.3 of Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) states that the characteristic values of imposed floor load and imposed roof load must be obtained from Part 1 and Part 3 of BS 6399 respectively. this value will be adopted. Consequently. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. a uniform load intensity of 1. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. In this design.5kN/m2.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. 3.5 Loadings Section 2. . Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. For precast floor selfweight.5kN/m2 is appropriate. Therefore. all floors will be of one-way slab. For imposed roof load.4kN/m2 and 3. Meanwhile. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. repair and other general purposes. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. Multiplying by 6m (3m apiece from either side of the bay) will result in 9kN/m and 15kN/m of load intensity on roof beam and floor beam respectively. section 6. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel.0kN/m2 respectively. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. Therefore. Therefore. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2.2.

γQ is given by 1. γG is given by 1. For other floors. Meanwhile. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. partial safety factors.1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. 2 or 3 cross-section. for normal design situations. From Table 2.05.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. is given by 1. A general load intensity of 1.4. depending on the interior designer’s intention.6 for imposed load. Meanwhile. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load.4 for dead load.35. Multiplying by 6m (3m apiece from either side of the bay) will result in kN/m and 24kN/m of load intensity on roof beam and floor beam respectively. The . γf should be taken as 1. γM1. is given by 1. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. and 1.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure.05 as well. In EC3. finishes and fittings. γM0.5. for imposed floor load. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. 3.1. γF for dead load. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. Partial safety factors for loads.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively.

Meanwhile.1. py is 275N/mm2 for thickness less than or equal to 16mm and 265N/mm2 for thickness larger but less than or equal to 40mm. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3).8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. For steel grade S 355. According to BS 5950. 3. 3. For steel grade S 275. the load combination will be 1.4 times total dead load plus 1. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. In BS 5950. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section.7 Categories In this project. in the meantime.6 times total imposed . for Fe 510. two (2) types of steel grade will be used.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections). 3.2 “Material properties for hot rolled steel” (C-EC3) limits thickness of flange to less than or equal to 40mm for nominal yield strength fy of 275N/mm2 and larger but less than or equal to 100mm for fy of 255N/mm2.8. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness.

2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.5 times total imposed load (1. For all other floors.76kN/m. The next table. According to EC3. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.35DL + 1.1 below: Table 3.6LL).1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. For the roof. This is done by summating the resultant shear . w.88 6m 137. the shear. there is a difference of approximately 4.43 load (1. will be 48kN/m.9kN/m. w.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206.5% between the analyses of both codes. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2. For simple construction. For the roof.35 times total dead load plus 1.8. Table 3. the resultant load combination. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. the load combination will be 1. the w will be 59.5LL). will be 45.1. the w will be 62. Clearly.4DL + 1. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 3. For all other floors.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame.55 268. the resultant load combination. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.92 From Table 4.64kN/m.7 179.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281.

3.62 Ext.52 2123.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction. M.7 316.92 519.39 1013. structural beam moment.08 Int.98 496. 432 995.84 707.88 779.4 633.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int.78 2026.26 675.76 1061. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.1 950.3: . = Internal column Ext. 216 497.5%.76 1559. similar with the beam shear. 413. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st .76 9m Ext.68 1415.8.28 Int.Ground 288 663. 275. 206.64 6m Ext. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.47 744.54 Int. 144 331.55 475. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.94 1488.44 force from beam of each floor.84 1039. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. Table 3.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. 137.52 1351.96 992. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.31 Int.

55 268.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. since this is simple construction. the higher the difference percentage will be. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. Clearly. the eccentricity moment. Me. the higher the load combination of a floor. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. in this case.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. D or h is the depth of column section (m).45 Table 3. Subsequently.3.74 605. initially. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). BS 5950 results in higher value of moment.23 6m 206. Regardless of the width of the bay. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. there is a difference of approximately 4. However. .07 From Table 3. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. can be determined from the following formula: Me = V (e + D/2) = V (e + h/2) where V is resultant shear of structural beam (kN). Therefore. In this project.4% to 4.6% between the analyses of both codes. For the moments of the structural columns. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams.

V can be expressed as V = (1.98 86.4 94.56 6m Ext.78 Int.0DL. Table 3. .6 63. 30. Table 3.98 80. 20.68 These values of eccentricity moments will be useful for the estimation of initial size of a column member during structural design in later stage.5.88 Int.6 56.6LL) – 1. V can be expressed as V = (1. However.4DL + 1.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.4 84. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state.84 Ext.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done. 32.35DL + 1.6 Int.66 57. 30.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. 3.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.66 53.0DL. For EC 3. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1. Next. Roof Other Floors 21.38 9m Ext. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load. 21. For BS 5950.5LL) – 1. 20. for internal column. 32.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. In simple construction.

ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . Depth. b/T = 6. Width. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. d = 407. Flange thickness. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59. Depth between fillets.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. Elastic modulus. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Plastic modulus. shear capacity. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen.1mm. T = 13.88kNm. From the section table for universal beam. moment capacity and web bearing capacity. Sx = 1290cm3.99.47 The sub-sections next will show one design example which is the floor beam of length 6m and of steel grade S 275 (Fe 430). D = 454. Sx = M / py = 281.1 BS 5950 In simple construction. t = 8. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.6mm. Zx = 1120cm3.9. B = 152.8kg/m.6mm. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3).9mm. d/t = 50. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.3mm.92kN and 281.3. From the section table. Web thickness. 3.

Therefore.57kN > Fv = 187. Since both flange and web are plastic. Actual b/T = 5.6pyAv. Next.6 x 607. Since actually d/t < 70.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. web is Class 1 plastic section. shear capacity is adequate. shear buckling resistance should be checked. Av = 8. For class 1 plastic cross-section. Next. Pv = 0. actual d/t = 50. Shear capacity. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. Mc” is checked.0 in this design. where neutral axis is at mid-depth.0. this section is Class 1 plastic section. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .3 “Shear capacity” is checked.75. it is low shear. section 4. therefore. Therefore.92kN Therefore.57 = 364.48 = 1.6 = 3682.4. flange is Class 1 plastic section. For web of I-section.2. clause 4.2.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. shear buckling needs not be checked.5 is checked.4.6Pv = 0.54kN > Fv Therefore. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section.3. Meanwhile.0. After clause 4. section 4. 0.0.6 x 275 x 3682.5 “Moment capacity. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section.26 x 10-3 = 607. Mc = pySx.26mm2 Pv = 0.1 x 454.

2 + 2 x 13.2pyZx = 1. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10. 1.3 + 10. If Fv exceeds Pbw.92kN .1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.2 = 23. n = 2 + 0.6 x 10.2pyZx.1 + 1. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98. Mc should be limited to 1.02 x 8.5mm At support.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369.34kN > Fv = 187.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.2mm b1 = t + 1.5.02mm k=T+r = 13.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.6kNm > Mc.75kNm Therefore. be = 0. OK.49 = 354.02mm Pbw = 98. moment capacity is adequate. bearing stiffener should be provided. bearing capacity of web. M = 281.6be/k. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange. section 4.3 = 51. therefore.

Generally. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2.67mm >δ Therefore.50 Therefore. L = 6. However. The section is adequate. Therefore. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. the bearing capacity at support is adequate.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish).0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. w = 15kN/m for floors. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. the deflection is satisfactory. This is done in the form of deflection check. .5) should be conducted. In this case. δ.

51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check.y = 927cm3. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. moment capacity. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. b = 177.9. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.y = 1051cm3. Wpl. Av = 32.2 EC 3 In simple construction. Width.92 x 103 / 275 = 977. Flange thickness.9mm.y = M / py = 268. Web thickness. lateral torsional buckling. Wel. Elastic modulus. it is adequate to be used. Wpl. From the section table for universal beam.9cm3 From the rearranged table. Depth between fillets. Therefore. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.y (cm3).6mm. resistance of web to crushing.4mm.6mm. shear capacity. Area of .92kNm.9cm2. tf = 10. From the section table. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. tw = 7. d = 360. h = 402. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. Shear area.28kN and 268. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. crippling and buckling.6mm. Depth. 3. Plastic modulus.

49kN > VSd = 179. From Table 5.Rd = 0. VSd = 179. d/tw = 47. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl.28kN γM0 = 1.4. Next. 0. Iy = 18670cm4. For “web subject to bending. for “outstand element of compression flange. tf ≤ 40mm.4 ≤ 66.48 = 298. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength.15 ≤ 9. section classification is a must. neutral axis at mid depth”.6 for Class 1 elements.36cm. fu = 430N/mm2.2 for Class 1 elements.Rd = (32. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. For S275 (Fe 430).Rd.28kN Therefore. Web is Class 1 element. aLT = 131cm. shear resistance is sufficient. c/tf = 8. Second moment of area. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. A = 68.52 section.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.5Vpl.05 Vpl.2.15. section 5.1. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked. Flange is Class 1 element. Actual d/tw = 47. iLT = 4. Actual c/tf = 8. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. yield strength.6. tf = 10.28kN .9mm. that is Vpl.48kN > 179. The design value of shear force. Based on Table 3.5. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9.6(a).5 x 497.6cm2. flange subject to compression only”. Therefore.05) = 497.

5[fyf/fyw]0.5. the moment capacity is sufficient.5 .5.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. Ry. shear buckling check is not required.2 “Moment resistance of cross-section with low shear” the design value of moment MSd must not exceed the design moment resistance of the cross-section Mc. section 5.5.6 “Resistance of webs to transverse forces” requires transverse stiffeners to be provided in any case that the design value VSd applied through a flange to a web exceeds the smallest of the following – Crushing resistance. MSd = 268. Therefore. section 5. Section 5.8.Rd.53 Therefore.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. Ra. Therefore.92kNm Mc. For low shear.Rd. Rb. The beam is fully restrained. Ry.Rd and buckling resistance. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling.Rd = Wpl. Section 5.05 = 275. low shear.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively. For crushing resistance. crippling resistance.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked. Actual d/tw = 47.26kNm > MSd Therefore.Ed/fyf)2]0.4 < 63.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.8 and 56.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section. sy = tf(bf/tw)0.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.

fyf = 275N/mm2.7mm.2.5 = 52.5 + 3(7.Rd = (50 + 52.5 [(10.5[h2 + ss2]0. OK γM1 = 1.4kN For crippling resistance.62 + 502]0.5 [402.05 = 204.5 [(tf/tw)0. OK.Rd = 0.14 ≤ 0. Ra.05 = 307.5 = 405.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.14)] / 1.6)0.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0. Rb.54 At support. σf.69) x 7.5 x 7.6 = 1731. γM0 = 1. bending moment is zero.05.6 / 7.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.5tw2 (Efyw)0.69mm Ry.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. A = 227. ss = 50mm at support.8kN For buckling resistance.Rd = 0.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.9/7.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.8 x 7.6/10.Ed = 0.28mm2 .6)0.4 = 0.62 (210000 x 275)0.9)(0.9 (177. sy = 10.

λ√βA = 118. which is larger than VSd = 179.1.Rd = 204.6 = 118.Rd = 307. curve (a) is used. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. OK.Rd = 1 x 119.2) should be conducted.5 x 360.29). After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4.5kN. (Permanent load) . fc = 119.6 λ√βA = 118.8kN Ry. the web of the section can resist transverse forces.5 d/t = 2. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. λ = 2. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation. buckling about y-y axis. Therefore. Generally.8N/mm2 Rb.6kN/m for floors. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.05 = 197. From Figure 4. This is done in the form of deflection check.28 x 10-3 / 1.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.28kN.13 (rolled I-section).8 x 1731.4 / 7.6 From Table 5.5kN Ra. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.

δ.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. δlim. The section is adequate. the deflection is satisfactory. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. In this case.34mm Therefore.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax.14mm > δ2 δlim. However. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. . (Imposed load) L = 6. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.46mm Table 4.

57 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. Therefore, it is adequate to be used.

3.10

Structural Column Design

Structural column design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. In simple construction, apart from section classification, two major checks that need to be done is compression and combined axial and bending at ultimate limit state.

The sub-sections next will show one design example which is the internal column “ground floor to 1st floor” (length 5m) of the steel frame with bay width 6m and of steel grade S 275 (Fe 430).

3.10.1 BS 5950

In simple construction, apart from section classification, necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be compression resistance and combined axial force and moment. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1415.52kN and 63.08kNm respectively.

From the section table for universal column, the sections are rearranged in ascending form, first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.

Sx = M / py

58 = 63.08 x 103 / 275 = 229.4cm3

From the rearranged table, UC section 203x203x60 is chosen. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.

From the section table, the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 60kg/m; Depth, D = 209.6mm; Width, B = 205.2mm; Web thickness, t = 9.3mm; Flange thickness, T = 14.2mm; Depth between fillets, d = 160.8mm; Plastic modulus, Sx = 652cm3; Elastic modulus, Zx = 581.1cm3; Radius of gyration, rx = 8.96cm, ry = 5.19cm; Gross area, Ag = 75.8cm2; b/T = 7.23 (b = 0.5B); d/t = 17.3.

T < 16mm, therefore, py = 275N/mm2 ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) = 1.0

Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. Actual b/T = 7.23, which is smaller than 9ε = 9.0. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section (Outstand element of compression flange). Therefore, flange is Class 1 plastic section. Meanwhile, actual d/t = 17.3. For web of I-section under axial compression and bending, the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε / 1 + r1, where r1 is given by r1 = Fc / dtpy. r1 = 1415.52 x 103 / 160.8 x 9.3 x 275 = 3.44 but -1 < r1 ≤ 1, therefore, r1 = 1 Limiting d/t value = 80 x 1 / 1 + 1 = 40

59 > Actual d/t = 17.3 Therefore, the web is Class 1 plastic section. Since both flange and web are plastic, this section is Class 1 plastic section.

Next, based on section 4.7.2 “Slenderness” and section 4.7.3 “Effective lengths”, and from Table 22 (Restrained in direction at one end), the effective length, LE = 0.85L = 0.85 x 5000 = 4250mm. λx = LEx / rx = 4250 / 8.96 x 10 = 47.4

Next, based on section 4.7.4 “Compression resistance”, for class 1 plastic section, compression resistance, Pc = Agpc. pc is the compressive strength determined from Table 24. For buckling about x-x axis, T < 40mm, strut curve (b) is used. λx = 46, pc = 242N/mm2 λx = 48, pc = 239N/mm2 From interpolation, λx = 47.4, pc = 239.9N/mm2 Pc = Agpc = 75.8 x 100 x 239.9 x 10-3 = 1818.44kN > Fc = 1415.52kN Therefore, compressive resistance is adequate.

60 Next. M = 31.54kNm. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. Mi = 63.5 x 5000 / 5. the moment will be equally divided. λLT = 45. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.08kNm. Therefore. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0.5. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. λLT = 48. for columns in simple construction. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0.7. pb = 260. therefore. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column.19 x 10 = 48.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections).03kNm . From frame analysis. R.17. Section 4.7 “Columns in simple structures”. when only nominal moments are applied. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. the beam reaction. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.5L / ry = 0.

From the section table for universal column. Therefore.0 Therefore.44 + 31.88 x 103 / 275 = 210.52 / 1818.54 / 170.y = MSd / fy = 57. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. apart from section classification. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.08kN and 57.5cm3 From the rearranged table. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be cross-section resistance (in the form of moment resistance) and in-plane failure about major axis (which is a combination of axial force and eccentricity moment).88kNm respectively. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate.2 EC 3 In simple construction.y (cm3).10. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.96 < 1. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen. . The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351.03 = 0.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Wpl. it is adequate to be used. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. 3.

the web is Class 1. aLT = 98. section 5.y = 990cm3. flange is Class 1 element.6cm2.73N/mm2 Table 5. Web thickness. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. A = 92.2 respectively. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. iz = 6.2mm. Actual c/tf = 8. therefore. Width.2mm < 40mm.3.5cm.6mm. Iy = 11370cm4. with d/tw = 23. Radius of gyration.62 From the section table.9cm2. Next. Wpl. Wel. tf = 14. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. tf = 14. Depth between fillets. Second moment of area.46cm. fy = 275N/mm2. c/tf = 8. From this table. Area of section.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. this section is Class 1 section.1cm.5.8. Depth. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). Plastic modulus. Av = 25. h = 254mm.86cm. σw.6 = 784.2mm.5b).94. Actual c/tf = 8. Therefore.3. . from. Since both flange and web are plastic. section 5.2. Flange thickness.08 x 103 / 200. Shear area. tw = 8.94 (c = 0.1. d = 200. Elastic modulus.y = 895cm3. For web subject to bending and compression.2 x 8. d/tw = 23.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9.94 < 9. the classification depends on the mean web stress.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. Beforehand.2 and 10. iy = 11. b = 254mm. iLT = 6. From Table 5. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351.

27.11 x 259.Rd n ≥ 0.555 ≥ 0.05) = 387.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.1 Therefore. MN.y.05 = 2433.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax. MNy.y.Sd = My.y.63 Vpl.Rd = 1.Rd (1 – n) Npl.5Vpl.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.11 Mpl. allowing for axial force.58kN 0.05 = 259.Rd = 1.Sd / L = 57.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.Rd = Wpl.555) .6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.Rd = Mpl.1 : MNy.Rd = 1.1 = 0. the section is subject to a low shear.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.08 / 2433.1kN n = 1351.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.3 x (1 – 0. n = NSd / Npl.3kNm MNy.1 : MNy. From Table 5.Rd is such that n < 0.Rd > Vmax.y.11 Mpl.Sd Therefore.

for buckling about y-y axis. the moment resistance is sufficient.1 x 10 = 38.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.0 Ly = 0.3.94kNm Therefore.85L = 0.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.3.y.7N/mm2 .Rd) ≤ 1.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.y.3 Based on Table 5.Sd / ηMc.6. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40. λy√βA = 38.1kNm > MSd = 28. fc = 249. buckling curve (b) is used. Lastly. section 5.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.Rd) + (kyMy.64 = 128.

Rd = βA fc A / γM1.3) + (1.7 x 92. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.Rd) + (kyMy.y.Rd) = (1351.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb. γM1 = 1.0 Therefore.05 = 1 x 249.y.94 / 1 x 128.08 / 2209.95 < 1.Sd / ηMc. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.65 Nb. Therefore. it is adequate to be used.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.y.5 x 28.1) = 0.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1. .05 = 2209.

4. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other. based on steel grade S275 and S355. namely structural capacity.1.CHAPTER IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS The results of the structural design of the braced steel frame (beam and column) are tabulated and compiled in the next sections. 4. .2 for moment capacity.1 for shear capacity and Table 5. structural capacity is sub-divided into beam and column. deflection.1 Structural Beam UB sections ranging from 305x102x25 to 533x210x122 are being tabulated in ascending form. and weight of steel. The results are arranged accordingly. Here. Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately. The results are shown in Table 4.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen.

48 517.09 773.89 678.47 545.5 -0.85 517.56 878.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.21 668.15 3.83 0.79 2.56 3.19 1.28 554.82 2.55 617.81 523.2 777.84 300.37 399.1 493.28 303.86 -0.74 0.91 1011.46 478.56 -5.44 471.83 0.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.74 393.78 -20.15 343.66 24.56 15.21 667.62 515.88 876.87 433.47 341. 2.84 727.79 2.15 507.65 0.09 16.25 382.66 497.45 623.23 -9.53 356.38 1.96 6.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.67 Table 4.2 1102.52 443.32 877.53 564.29 452.17 8.62 1.32 860.02 12.55 712.18 358.81 1024.11 -1.26 2.16 551.93 1.65 846.99 918.13 19.41 925.61 345.99 589.7 -0. BS 5950 (kN) 376.21 15.58 34.61 340.64 5.79 12.83 938.68 1007.33 862.58 308.6 10.78 456.19 4.29 5.69 4.27 0.96 666.38 542.51 384.08 2.77 1146.27 845.13 705.95 404.66 704.16 4.7 -0.37 609.6 405.88 -18.91 -19.26 888.51 -4.64 0.6 1.74 2.39 511.81 -2.8 800.94 2.75 437.81 528.7 1.98 1134.18 8.09 -2.5 529.02 698.37 338.51 18.57 13.24 0.68 6.46 -3.06 1.32 10.58 753.55 3.65 724.4 -0.34 44.45 -1.87 -0.42 820.21 -24.14 18.44 2.4 0.32 783.35 793.92 2.55 1.56 400.1 -2.65 420.78 942.57 -2.55 583.15 -16.13 1091.93 1.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.73 -2.09 -2.3 14.21 441.5 642.66 5.72 -12.39 1.19 387.77 -3.2 -2.5 1.55 522.47 596.27 13.35 730.55 1.5 1.74 -0.51 1.81 -3.5 1.4 -10.14 583.63 12.99 15.47 831.65 635.6 1.11 1218.79 11.74 2.93 11.07 942.95 2.27 819.35 431.11 -2 2.31 2.39 462.79 398.98 305.1 Shear capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kN) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 305x127x48 305x165x40 305x165x46 305x165x54 356x127x33 356x127x39 356x171x45 356x171x51 356x171x57 356x171x67 406x140x39 406x140x46 406x178x54 406x178x60 406x178x67 406x178x74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 291.6 14.35 -1.16 1057.5 461.02 6.31 446.4 0.59 460.5 1102.38 811.02 496.19 1.33 577.52 439.78 15.71 429.27 0.03 4.33 409.04 % Diff.77 728.28 8.5 -0.85 854.77 6.72 % Diff.05 607.34 523.38 20.26 -8.93 334.09 1012.79 2.93 11.86 619.92 394.65 0.75 -13.74 594.69 -1.57 680.48 759.64 0.97 392.14 .78 541.78 -25.81 -3.15 3.92 588.27 14.38 1.94 559.2 447.85 767.67 644.22 2.7 9.86 1204.14 784.06 1.82 2.24 3.36 11.99 660.53 943.85 405.73 -3.46 2.3 683.94 2.

05 1099.41 143.43 3.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950. This value. Table 4.58 4.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.05 3.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.59 4. meanwhile.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995. however.45 1431.57 -4. 6.69% to 4.94 162.13 8.06 1115.28 148. Therefore.62 182.76 191.76 4.77 4.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.86 125.35 -0.13 -0. For steel grade S355.3 6.59 5. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.55.35 217. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.21 -1.07 . Also.91 % Diff.6 137. the difference percentage ranges from -3.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950. the difference percentage ranges from -2.07 6.59 5.51 1007.81 5. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.8 8.43 160.44 1300.23 168.83 132.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7. For steel grade S275.01 -16.43 -1.06%.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.6 as suggested by BS 5950.49 1295.78 11.57% to 4.43 3.98 141.58 -9.94 -12.06%.97 6. BS 5950 (kNm) 121. which is approximately 8.07 170.14 8.57 206.05 110. There are a few explanations to the variations.03 1440.3% less than 0.06 % Diff.

55 433.17 7.55 9.86 4.5 330 371.6 300.8 799.17 27.85 27.67 20.05 585.32 1.14 3.08 510.5 15.29 202.1 539 619. For steel grade S355.33 221.68 0.52 11.4 838.5 302.04 1.75 398.96 21.34 404.1 1.22 13.07 609.65 749.7 211.3 426 479.89 1.35 693.52 434.23 213.35 731.4 277.65 590.81 529.5 457.05 232.61 4.41 221.5 691.78 487.95 514.69 188.93 885.69 305x127x48 305x165x40 305x165x46 305x165x54 356x127x33 356x127x39 356x171x45 356x171x51 356x171x57 356x171x67 406x140x39 406x140x46 406x178x54 406x178x60 406x178x67 406x178x74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 195.8 1082.16 9.75 300.33 198 232. .95 385.58% to 6.96 10.75 431.01 4.33 192.45 18.08 6.5 479.9 900.68 12 13.26 312.75 484.1 244.16 5.05 0.27 14.39 682.35 1104 238.75 332.49 5.84 13.55 429.24 1.53 5.57 355.14 410.4 264.41 19.24 1.35 302.83 4.93 740.03%.2 291.49 5.85 585.48 5.38 8.65 149.05 35.67 425.73 2.36 2.72 9.79 141.9 163.44 12.5 654.63 4.08 358.5 354.02 18.41% to 6.55 257.43 4.55 4.55 4.01 182.66 2.63 7.43 4.3 4.65 5.19 370.37 16.67 685. meanwhile.9 11.21 287.49 15.29 15.6 5. the difference percentage ranges from 1.95 275.68 560.44 4.27 1.48 17.94 10.77 233.25 397.63 4.44 14. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.53 171.02 455.13 246.85 11.83 1.28 5.52 395.6 341.65 404.05 336.86 8.25 517.7 18.57 5.31 19.16 5.95 24.02 377.86 4.83 5.98 352.87 4.73 21.98 20.45 976.06 0.17 171. For steel grade S275.58 5.73 19.53 1.5 34.25 5.01 4.32 10.26 317.11 242.51 1.53 549.05 11.28 15.25 453.75 199.33 471.98 24.42 5.87 4.1 5.02 315.95 848 184.95 566.5 390.45 521.95 479.53 5.47 955.99 4.55 21.43%.83 275.25 497.92 13.85 5.88 10.41 5.5 5.08 252.97 14.29 1.75 562.2 24.35 624.85 5.46 5.11 5.95 189.17 255.1 285.1 220.95 532.13 318.9 619.32 0.5 14.31 4.78 15.28 5.3 844.33 181.95 755.3 695.11 5.57 5.45 769.06 11. the difference percentage ranges from 0.29 2.24 17.62 7.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.11 261.65 244.75 631.24 376.71 9.12 5.5 44.08 5.1 5.66 5.17 24.45 234.

2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.3. Meanwhile. 4.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. whether it is Class 1. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc.85%. There is a variation of approximately 0.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. Table 4.0 as suggested by BS 5950. Besides that. Class 2 or Class 3 element.95.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. Therefore. This is approximately 5% less than 1. for a UB section 406x178x54.1. these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. For example.Rd = Wpl. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. For a column web subject to bending and compression. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. are revised. .

**71 Table 4.3 Compression resistance and percentage difference
**

UC SECTION BS 5950 (kN) 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 203x203x86 254x254x73 254x254x89 254x254x107 254x254x132 254x254x167 305x305x97 305x305x118 305x305x137 305x305x158 305x305x198 305x305x240 305x305x283 1027.63 1403.56 1588.95 1818.44 2199.15 2667.72 2341.45 2878.73 3454.34 4291.41 5419.6 3205.31 3901.39 4553.57 5256.95 6612.78 8028.11 9489.33 EC 3 (kN) 956.1 1323.8 1500 1721.2 2067.3 2508.5 2209.3 2715.9 3269.7 4057.6 5117.3 3025.8 3695.7 4292 4965.7 6242.4 7572.7 8958.9 S275 Difference (kN) 71.53 79.76 88.95 97.24 131.85 159.22 132.15 162.83 184.64 233.81 302.3 179.51 205.69 261.57 291.25 370.38 455.41 530.43 S355 Difference (kN) 117.66 142.41 158.24 170.26 213.57 255.76 209.85 256.99 295.49 375.39 486.02 271.11 310.04 385.76 426.68 530.78 641.15 735.89

% Diff.

BS 5950 (kN) 1259.66 1773.41 2007.94 2298.26 2780.37 3373.46 2982.65 3668.29 4402.89 5474.39 6918.72 4097.01 4987.14 5821.16 6720.88 8455.58 10267.55 12138.99

EC 3 (kN) 1142 1631 1849.7 2128 2566.8 3117.7 2772.8 3411.3 4107.4 5099 6432.7

% Diff.

6.96 5.68 5.6 5.35 6 5.97 5.64 5.66 5.35 5.45 5.58 5.6 5.27 5.74 5.54 5.6 5.67 5.59

9.34 8.03 7.88 7.41 7.68 7.58 7.04 7.01 6.71 6.86 7.02 6.62 6.22 6.63 6.35 6.28 6.24 6.06

3825.9 4677.1 5435.4 6294.2 7924.8 9626.4 11403.1

**Table 4.4 Moment resistance and percentage difference
**

UC SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 203x203x86 254x254x73 254x254x89 254x254x107 69.47 129.03 146.73 167.96 205.13 249.38 277.94 344.27 413.51 EC 3 (kNm) 80.9 130.2 148.5 171.3 209.8 256.4 259.3 320.8 388.7 S275 Difference (kNm) -11.43 -1.17 -1.77 -3.34 -4.67 -7.02 18.64 23.47 24.81 S355 Difference (kNm) -30.81 -7.67 -9.49 -12.6 -16.45 -21.92 14.12 17.68 16.48

% Diff.

BS 5950 (kNm) 73.69 160.33 182.21 208.5 254.35 309.08 348.82 431.88 518.18

EC 3 (kNm) 104.5 168 191.7 221.1 270.8 331 334.7 414.2 501.7

% Diff.

-16.45 -0.91 -1.21 -1.99 -2.28 -2.81 6.71 6.82 6

-41.81 -4.78 -5.21 -6.04 -6.47 -7.09 4.05 4.09 3.18

72

254x254x132 254x254x167 305x305x97 305x305x118 305x305x137 305x305x158 305x305x198 305x305x240 305x305x283 521.91 669.51 438.6 538.83 633.77 738.82 946.51 1168.56 1403.39 490.3 633.3 416.2 511.2 600.5 700.6 900.4 1111.3 1287.4 31.61 36.21 22.4 27.63 33.27 38.22 46.11 57.26 115.99 6.06 5.41 5.11 5.13 5.25 5.17 4.87 4.9 8.26 653.96 838.26 575.44 705.68 828.47 964.08 1231.05 1515.42 1815.14 632.9 817.5 537.2 660 775.3 904.4 1162.4 1434.5 1676 21.06 20.76 38.24 45.68 53.17 59.68 68.65 80.92 139.14 3.22 2.48 6.65 6.47 6.42 6.19 5.58 5.34 7.67

Shear capacity designed by BS 5950 is overall higher than EC3 design by the range of 5.27 – 6.96% and 6.22 – 9.34% for steel grade S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) respectively. This is mainly due to the partial safety factor γM1 of 1,05 imposed by EC3 in the design. Also, the compression strength fc determined from Table 5.14(a) of EC3 is less than the compression strength pc determined from Table 24 of BS 5950.

Meanwhile, as the size of section increases, the difference percentage changes from -16.45% to 8.26% for S275 (Fe 460) and -41.81% to 7.67% for S355 (Fe 510). This means that smaller sizes designed by EC3 have higher moment capacity than BS 5950 design. From the moment capacity formula of BS 5950,

Mb = pbSx

pb depends on equivalent slenderness λLT, which is also dependant on the member length. The bigger the member size, the higher the radius of gyration, ry is. Therefore, pb increases with the increase in member size.

However, moment capacity based on EC3 design,

Mpl.y.Rd = Wpl.y fy / γM0

73 The moment capacity is not dependant on equivalent slenderness. Therefore, when member sizes increase, eventually, the moment capacity based on EC3 is overtaken by BS 5950 design.

4.2

Deflection

Table 4.5 shows the deflection values due to floor imposed load. In BS 5950, this is symbolized as δ while for EC3, this is symbolized as δ2.

**Table 4.5 Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load
**

UB SECTION BS 5950 (δ, mm) 27.56 22.99 19 17.22 15.06 12.89 14.53 12.47 10.55 14.97 12.11 10.2 8.76 7.72 6.33 9.88 7.86 6.6 5.72 5.08 4.52 L = 6.0m EC 3 (δ2, mm) 27.62 22.16 18.54 16.83 14.77 12.68 14.1 12.13 10.31 14.71 11.93 9.98 8.51 7.51 6.17 9.71 7.69 6.46 5.6 4.95 4.39 Difference (mm) -0.06 0.83 0.46 0.39 0.29 0.21 0.43 0.34 0.24 0.26 0.18 0.22 0.25 0.21 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.13 % Diff. -0.22 3.61 2.42 2.26 1.93 1.63 2.96 2.73 2.27 1.74 1.49 2.16 2.85 2.72 2.53 1.72 2.16 2.12 2.1 2.56 2.88 BS 5950 (δ, mm) 139.53 116.41 96.17 87.18 76.23 65.25 73.54 63.14 53.43 75.77 61.28 51.66 44.33 39.07 32.06 50.01 39.81 33.43 28.94 25.72 22.9 L = 9.0m EC 3 (δ2, mm) 139.83 112.19 93.86 85.2 74.79 64.19 71.36 61.42 52.2 74.49 60.42 50.51 43.09 38 31.23 49.17 38.94 32.68 28.33 25.08 22.25 Difference (mm) -0.3 4.22 2.31 1.98 1.44 1.06 2.18 1.72 1.23 1.28 0.86 1.15 1.24 1.07 0.83 0.84 0.87 0.75 0.61 0.64 0.65 % Diff. -0.22 3.63 2.4 2.27 1.89 1.62 2.96 2.72 2.3 1.69 1.4 2.23 2.8 2.74 2.59 1.68 2.19 2.24 2.11 2.49 2.84

305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 305x127x48 305x165x40 305x165x46 305x165x54 356x127x33 356x127x39 356x171x45 356x171x51 356x171x57 356x171x67 406x140x39 406x140x46 406x178x54 406x178x60 406x178x67 406x178x74

25 13.21 2.1 0.07 0.16 1.18 1.24 2.21 24.12 17. for a floor beam of 9m long.22 28. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.52 0.01 0.42 0.31 2.29 0.84 11.04 0.71 3.61 3.08 0.83 20.22% to 3. However.5 above.16 9.77 16. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.75 18.55 From Table 4.1 0. Apart from that.49 2.43 2.23 0.22% to 3.54 2.98 21. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.32 10. the difference percentage ranges from -0.6 2.62 5.08 21.46 2. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.53 0. for a floor beam of 6m long.37 4.84 4.7 2.47 29.29 0.1 0.08 0.46 2. Different from BS 5950. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load. Meanwhile.4 0.05 0.59 2. E.71 3.1. section 3.7 2. .16 11. as required by EC3.41 1.32 0.79 16.07 0.9 9.06 0.37 2.1 3.51 0.25 2.33 0.51 21. Meanwhile.63 2.68 13.35 0.06 0.2 3.19 2.27 3.73 1.75 2.66 0.25 2.13 8.96 1.26 0. Meanwhile.83 13. Section 3.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.38 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.93 2.1.36 8.06 0.77 4.26 2. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.63%. For example.33 4.04 2.33 12.61%.85 1.01 2.56 2.77 2. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.58 0.68 2.05 0. for a section 356x171x57.63 19.55 23.25 0.4 2.56 2.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.7 2.66 2.21 3.78 3.34 1.25 16.34 18. the difference percentage ranges from -0.07 1.45 14.26 18.13 0.33 3.01 1.64 4.8 1.56 2.4 2.85 15.74 4. δmax. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.85 1.03 9.

To compare the economy of the design.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .75 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 and Table 4. external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams. Table 4.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4. floor beams.6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .

744 EC3 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.8 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Types of Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.8. The saving percentage.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.9.645 3. Table 4.122 9.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .76 Table 4. meanwhile.750 4.313 9. is tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .821 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) Summary of the total steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.821 .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.889 9.7 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 356x171x45 To 2nd Storey 2nd .

60% to 17.42 15.9 EC3 design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4. all frame types. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. Semi-continuous . beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3. Meanwhile.9.60 17.96%. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.750 9.571 9. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.122 7. Regardless of bay width. This time. Further check on the effect of deflection was done.77 Table 4. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection.313 % 1. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design.645 9.96 5.744 3.889 EC3 4. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. This is because deeper. depending on the steel grade.821 4. This resulted in higher percentage difference.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4.

Please refer to Appendix D for a redesign work after the β value had been revised and the section redesigned to withstand bending moment from analysis process.10 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x151x67 406x140x46 356x127x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.78 frame is achieved in this condition.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .5.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . β is treated as β = 3. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.0. For uniformly distributed loading. Table 4.10 shown. which was used in the beam design.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . the deflection coefficient. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%.

12.749 Table 4.749 % 0.889 8.645 5. meanwhile.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.503 7.11 .645 3. The saving percentage.211 10.22 9.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.750 4.11.95 BS 5950 4. Table 4.889 8.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.42 3.503 9.122 9. is tabulated in Table 4.122 9.750 4.11 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Types of Frame Bay Width (m) 2Bay 4Storey 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.

it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame.1(b)). However.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection.0.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. Therefore. Eventually.12. if it is built semi-continuously. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. Please refer to Figure 4. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0.95%. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4.11% to 10. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design. (c) simple construction. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4.80 From Table 4. . MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. the gap reduces. if rigid connection is introduced.1(c)). (b) semi-rigid construction.

05 in the moment capacity . a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.1 Structural Capacity 5. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6. Meanwhile. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. Av value also caused the difference.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam.43%. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.1. for the moment capacity of structural beam. γM0 of 1. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter.CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the summary for the study on the comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 for the design of multi-storey braced frame. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4. Apart from that. 5. In review to the research objectives.

γM0 of 1. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. A reduction in the range of 5. In comparison. 5. 5.05 as required by EC3 design. fc is smaller than pc. as compared to the partial safety factor. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. From interpolation. γM of 1.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor.1. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. Meanwhile. it was found that for a same value of λ. compared with BS 5950. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project.27% to 9. fc and pc respectively.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. Therefore. axial compression is much more critical.2 Structural Column In simple construction.0 as suggested by BS 5950. of both codes. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5.0m long. EC3 design created majority . a structural beam will be subject to deflection. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950.82 calculation required by EC3. Therefore. With the inclusion of partial safety factor.

9m bay width steel frame. Section 4. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. . the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. For a 2-bay.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.22% to 3. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. 5.1 of EC3 provided proof to this.744 tons and 3.122 tons and 7. In this study. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. and 4.750 tons for BS 5950 design. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. The difference ranges from 0. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher.571 tons for EC3 design.63%.821 tons and 4. 6m bay width steel frame.2. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison. For a 2-bay. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much.889 tons for BS 5950 design. However. 4-storey.645 tons and 9.313 tons for EC3 design. Therefore. and 9. I will have to be chosen. the total deflection was greater. 4-storey.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. E.

4-storey. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute).95% 2-bay. 4-storey. 9m bay width. 6m bay width.11% 2-bay.42% 2-bay. 9m bay width. 4-storey. 4-storey. 6m bay width. S275 (Fe 430): 0. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. . S275 (Fe 430): 1. S355 (Fe 510): 7. 4-storey. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior. S275 (Fe 430): 5. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. 9m bay width. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 10.0 to 3. 9m bay width.96% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 15. S355 (Fe 510): 17.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. However. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 6m bay width.22% 5. 6m bay width. 4-storey.42% 2-bay.60% 2-bay. 4-storey.

Narayanan R et.85 REFERENCES Charles King (2005).1 General Rules and Rules for Buildings. “Introduction to Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) – with Worked Examples. Paper 2658. (1995). 29-32.” Eurocodenews. “EN 1993 Eurocode 3 – Steel.” London: British Standards Institution. (2001). “EN1993 Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. British Standards Institution (2001).” ICE Journal. Steel Construction Institute (SCI) (2005).” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. “British Standard – Structural Use of Steelwork in Building: Part 1: Code of Practice for Design – Rolled and Welded Sections. 4. al. D. & Lim J B (2003). Issue 3.C. . European Committee for Standardization (1992). “Steel Design Can be Simple Using EC3.” New Steel Construction. Vol 13 No 4. Taylor J. “Steelwork design guide to BS 5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked examples. Heywood M. “Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures: Part 1. November 2005. 24-27.” London: European Committee for Standardization.

86 APPENDIX A1 .

6 + 1.6LL Roof w = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 2. of Bay No. DL Live Load.4 x 24 + 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. LL Floors Dead Load. DL Live Load.0 DATA No.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. DL Live Load. MAHMOOD 1.4 x 27.4 1.4DL + 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. LL = = 4 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.64 kN/m .6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 x 15 = 62.

MAHMOOD 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame .88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.0 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.

0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62. MAHMOOD 2.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.64 kN/m 62.

Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.68 1415.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.88 kNm 4. Roof beams.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.52 144 331. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . .1 Beam Moment.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. MAHMOOD 4. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.84 707. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams. contributed by beam shear.92 519.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.92 kN M = 62. Shear.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663. V = 62.84 1039.

91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.88 281.92) 288 (187.52 707. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.88 281. MAHMOOD 5.84 (187.92) 663.76 .92) 331.92 (187.84 (187.88 281.76 1415.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.92 [2] 519.88 281.92) 1039.92) 519. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92) 144 [1] 331.84 [3] [4] 707.68 (187.88 281.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.54 28.6 [1] 21.19 28.6 21.4DL+1.54 28.19 31.19 21. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 31.19 31.6 21.6 [2] 28.6LL) .19 [4] 28.19 28.54 31.19 [3] 28.19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.54 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.19 28.6 28.19 21.54 31.0DL Most critical condition .19 28.54 28.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

35 x 27. DL Live Load. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. DL Live Load.5 x 9 = 45.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.35 x 24 + 1. MAHMOOD 1.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.35 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. LL Floors Dead Load.0 DATA No.5LL Roof w = 1.6 + 1.5 x 15 = 59. LL = = 4 1.9 kN/m Floors w = 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. DL Live Load. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.6 2. of Bay No.35DL + 1.76 kN/m . LL = = 1.

95 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 2.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 2.

96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.9 kN/m 6m 45.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.76 kN/m 59.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.

9 x 6 / 2 = 137.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.96 992. Roof beams.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. contributed by beam shear.55 kNm Floor beams.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.28 kN M = 59. V = 45.76 x 6 / 2 = 179. V = 59.1 Beam Moment.92 kNm 4. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.08 137.7 kN M = 45.4 633.7 316. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . MAHMOOD 4.98 496.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.26 675. . Shear.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.52 1351.

28) 633.92 268.2 Shear (kN) (137.0 5.98 (179.55 268.92 268.4 (179.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.52 (179.7) (137.55 206.7) 137.28) 496.92 268.92 5.28) 275.08 675.96 (179.92 268. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.28) 137.92 268.7 [1] 316. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.28) 316.7 (179.26 (179.54 1351.54 .98 [2] 496. MAHMOOD 5.28) 992.26 [3] [4] 675.

89 20.89 28.89 26.94 26.89 26.71 20.66 26.89 26.35DL+1.5LL) .1.89 19.89 26.71 28.89 26.89 28.66 26. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.66 20.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.0DL Most critical condition .66 19.94 26.89 Moments are calculated from (1. MAHMOOD 5.94 26.94 28.89 26.94 28.94 26.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.89 28.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

2 74.1 67.2 89.3 92.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.1 67.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .1 98.1 139.2 28.2 28.3 101 101.3 54 54.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 24.1 Sx (cm3) 171 259 234 342 258 306 403 353 314 393 481 543 483 539 724 659 623 614 566 775 888 720 711 896 1100 846 1060 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 59.2 109 113 122 125.0m) STC.1 37 37 39 39. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 82 82.1 67.8 60.2 74.8 25.3 30 31.1 32.3 41.2 179 238.2 74.1 51 52.1 48.8 33.1 Sx (cm3) 1010 1290 1200 1210 1350 1470 1450 1500 1630 1650 1830 1810 2060 2010 2380 2230 2610 2880 2830 3280 3200 3680 4140 4590 5550 7490 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 305x102x25 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x28 254x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 406x140x39 356x127x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 406x140x46 305x165x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 457x152x60 406x178x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x191x67 457x152x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x152x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 281. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 25.9 43 45 46 46. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 67.1 82.1 40. L = 6.9 149.

1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. neutral axis at mid-depth.3 2.0m) STC.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.9 8.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = 59. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 Therefore. MAHMOOD 1.8 454. subject to pure bending. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.6 152.75 50.3 407.0 1. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.1 13.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section .0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.

103

Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI, JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams, L = 6.0m)

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

3.0

SHEAR BUCKLING If d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for rolled section, shear buckling resistance should be checked. d/t = 50.3 < 70ε = 70 Therefore, shear buckling needs not be checked

4.0

SHEAR CAPACITY Fv = 187.92 kN

Pv = 0.6pyAv py = 275 N/mm Av = tD = 8.1 x 454.6 2 = 3682.26 mm

2

Pv = 0.6 x 275 x 3682.26 x 0.001 = 607.57 kN Fv Pv < Therefore, the shear capacity is adequate

5.0

MOMENT CAPACITY M= 281.88 kNm

0.6Pv = 0.6 x 607.57 = 364.542 kN Fv 0.6Pv < Therefore, it is low shear Mc = pySx = 275 x 1290 x 0.001 = 354.75 kNm 1.2pyZ = 1.2 x 275 x 1120 x 0.001 = 369.6 kNm Mc M < < 1.2pyZ Mc OK Moment capacity is adequate

104

Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI, JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams, L = 6.0m)

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

6.0 6.1

WEB BEARING & BUCKLING Bearing Capacity Pbw = (b1 + nk) tpyw r= 10.2 mm (Unstiffened web)

b1 = t + 1.6r + 2T = 8.1 + 1.6 x 10.2 + 2 x 13.3 = 51.02 mm k= T+r = 13.3 + 10.2 = 23.5 mm At the end of a member (support), n = 2 + 0.6be/k = 2 b1 + nk = = = = = < but n ≤ 5 be = 0

51.02 + 2 x 23.5 98.02 mm 98.02 x 8.1 x 275 x 0.001 218.34 kN 187.92 Pbw kN

Pbw

Fv Fv

Bearing capacity at support is ADEQUATE

105

Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI, JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams, L = 6.0m)

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

7.0

**SERVICEABILITY DEFLECTION CHECK Unfactored imposed loads: w= = E= I= δ= 9 15 205 25500
**

4

kN/m kN/m kN/mm cm

4 2

for roofs for floors

L=

6

m

5wL 384EI = 5 x 15 x 6^4 x 10^5 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4.84 mm

Beam condition Carrying plaster or other brittle finish Deflection limit = Span / 360 = 6 x 1000 / 360 = 16.67 mm 4.84mm < 16.67mm

The deflection is satisfactory!

106 APPENDIX B2 .

9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 kNm W pl.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.y = M / fy = 268. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) STC. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . Second moment of area.6 7. Section chosen 1.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.9 Therefore.0 1.6 18670 4. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.15 47.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. L = 6.0m) STC.4 1051 927 32.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.9 68.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y = W el.6 10.6 177.9 360.36 131 8.

7 3.05 = 32.48 = 298.Rd = 0.0m) STC.2 (b) Web.05 √3 = 497.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.92 kNm 0.05 = 275.Rd = W pl.Rd < Therefore.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate . MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange. L = 6.15 <= 9.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.26 kNm MSd Mc.5 x 497.001 γMO = 1.48 kN VSd < Vpl.001 / 1.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5Vpl. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. it is low shear Mc.9 x 100 275 1.5Vpl.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 > 46.49 kN VSd 0.28 kN V pl.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.

0m) STC. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.4 63.28 kN < Ry.5 Ry. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).4 kN = VSd = 179.8 < 63. not susceptible to LTB 6. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.001 / 1.6 x 275 x 0.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.Rd = γM1 At support.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.69) x 7. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.05 204. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. MAHMOOD 5.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.5 σf.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .Rd = (50 + 52.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.

5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. h= a= 402.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.2 0.26 7.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.98 <= 1.92 275. L = 6.3 ≤ = 1.0m) STC.Rd = > 0. MSd Mc. MAHMOOD At midspan.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Rd 268.5 ] .05 205 307.14 1. Ra.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0. Rd = 0.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

8 N/mm 2 Rb.Rd = 1 x 119.6 l = 0.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .7 mm Buckling resistance of web.0m) STC.118) = 119.05 = 197. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.5 d/t = 2. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.28 x 0. λ = 2.75d Rolled I-section.(118. Rb.118) x (121 .5 x 360. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 = 118.8 x 1731.5 x SQRT(402.8 x 7.4 / 7.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD beff = 0.117) / (120 .8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.6 .5 = 405.001 / 1.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. buckling about y-y axis.5 kN > At mid span.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .05 A = beff x tw = 227.6 2 = 1731. L = 6.

0 1.88 + 6. L = 6.46 = 18.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11. .0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.88 6.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .0m) STC.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17. MAHMOOD 8.14 mm OK δmax = 11.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

4 568. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.8 1228 1589 1485 1953 2482 1875 2298 2964 2680 2417 3457 3436 3977 4689 4245 5101 5818 6994 8229 10009 12078 14247 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 63.6 978.4 988. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.1 310.0m) STC.1 652 802. L = 5.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .1 497. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Sx (cm3) 184.3 247.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.52 kN L= 5 m 1.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 9. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0 DATA Fc = 1415.8 652 581. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1. Gross area. MAHMOOD 1.96 5. L = 5.23 17. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 . Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.2 160.3 14.0m) STC.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.3 2.1 8.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore.6 205.19 75.

117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.0 3.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17. L = 5.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis . MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.85L = 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.4 4.8 x 9.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.0m) STC.96 x 10) = 47.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.52 x 1000 / (160.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.

MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 . Mi = 63.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. M= 31.001 = 1818.9 x 75. beam reaction. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.54 kNm .0m) STC. L = 5. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.46) / (48 .9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239. Therefore.4 pc 242 239 Therefore.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2. the compressive resistance is adequate 5.4 .5.(47. the moment will be equally divided.46) x (242 . For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1. R From frame analysis sheets. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.44 kN Fc < Pc 47.8 x 100 x 0.239) 2 = 239.

0 4.52 1818.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.44 + 31.250) 2 = 260.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .5 L/ry = (0.17 .00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.96 1.19 x 10) = 48.45) / (50 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. 7.03 = < 0.54 170.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.78 x 652 x 0.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.(48.03 kNm 1415. MAHMOOD 6. L = 5.0 6.45) x (233 .001 = 170.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

y = M / fy = 57. L = 5.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.y (cm3) 184 248 309 497 567 654 801 990 979 1225 1589 1484 1952 2485 1872 2293 2970 2675 2418 3455 3438 3978 4691 4243 5101 5814 6997 8225 10010 12080 14240 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 57. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Wpl.88 kNm M= W pl.0m) STC.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.

0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 14.94 23.2 200. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.86 98. Second moment of area.46 92. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. L = 5.5 8.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.y = W el. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.9 11370 6.2 Therefore.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.0m) STC.1 6.2 990 895 11.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.0 DATA NSd = 1351. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Area of section.08 kN Msd = 28.

2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.2 Class 3 = 13. L = 5.1 Mny.05 = 259.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.05 = 2433.Rd = 92.Rd = 0.y.Rd(1-n) W pl.11 Mpl.1 28.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.08 / 2433.1 = 0.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.001 / 1.Rd = > MSd = 128.Rd Mny. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.y.555 >= n < 0.05 Npl.001 / 1. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.94 <= 9.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.1 n ≥ 0.0m) STC.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.Rd A fy Npl.1 Mpl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 kN n = 1351.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .3 <= 30.9 (b) Web.Rd = 1.Rd = Mpl.8 3.y. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.1 Class 3 = 38.3 kNm Mny.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

L = 5.(38. MAHMOOD 4.Rd 1.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.Rd = = 1351. y .05 = 2209.001 / 1.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. Rd η M c .y. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .3 kN ky = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. y .3 0.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .3 .Rd = 1 x 249.7 N/mm Nb.0m) STC.08 2209.94 1 x 128.5 NSd Nb.y.248) 2 = 249. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.38) / (250 .9 x 100 x 0.Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .0 N b .Sd ηMc.1 x 10) = 38.y.7 x 92.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.5 x 28.y. Rd Nb.38) x (40 .

Use : 254x254x73 UC OK OK .0 CONCLUSION Cross Section Resistance In-plane Failure About Major Axis Use of the section is adequate. MAHMOOD 5.125 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 5. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0 4.0m) STC.0 3.

126 APPENDIX D .

0m) Rev 1 STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y = M / fy = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.92 kNm W pl.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .

fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . Second moment of area.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.8 152.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.5 66.99 53.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.9 Therefore. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.4 7.6 21370 3. Section chosen 1. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.9 407.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.0 1.59 121 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 1096 950 36.6 10.y = W el. MAHMOOD 1.0m) Rev 1 STC.

7 3.5Vpl.5Vpl. L = 6.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 kNm 0.05 = 287.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.6 > 46.001 γMO = 1. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.05 kNm MSd Mc.99 <= 9.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.5 x 100 275 1.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .15 kN VSd 0.2 (b) Web. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. it is low shear Mc.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.92 kN VSd < Vpl.001 / 1.Rd = 0.28 kN V pl. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.Rd = W pl.5 x 551. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92 = 331.05 = 36.Rd < Therefore.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.05 √3 = 551.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.0m) Rev 1 STC.

81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Rd = (50 + 48.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.0m) Rev 1 STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.001 / 1.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.05 = 196.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.28 kN < Ry. L = 6.5 σf.5 Ry. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.Rd = γM1 At support. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .6 x 275 x 0. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 63.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.68 kN VSd = 179. MAHMOOD 5. not susceptible to LTB 6.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430). ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.81) x 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.8 < 63.

3 ≤ = 1.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. MSd Mc. Ra.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.Rd = > 0.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. MAHMOOD At midspan.2 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 0.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.Rd 268.12 1. L = 6.05 205 299.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. h= a= 449.0m) Rev 1 STC.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.05 7.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.92 287.94 <= 1. Rd = 0.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 ] .

λ = 2.9 x 1909.(134.1 .1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . Rb.130) x (103 .Rd = 1 x 98.001 / 1.6 = 134.6 2 = 1909. buckling about y-y axis.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . VSd = 0 VSd = 179.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD beff = 0.5 x SQRT(449.9 kN > At mid span.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.1 l = 0.75d Rolled I-section.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.9 N/mm 2 Rb.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.5 x 407.05 = 179.98) / (135 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.130) = 98.3 x 7.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.88 x 0.5 d/t = 2.05 A = beff x tw = 251.5 = 452. L = 6.6 / 7.0m) Rev 1 STC.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.14 mm OK δmax = 7.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .95 = 11.0m) Rev 1 STC.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. MAHMOOD 8.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 1. .5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7. L = 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.26 + 3.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.26 3.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.

- From BS5950 to EC3bsitler
- Design of Structural Steelwork_0903384590Gagan Deep Singh
- Eurocode Design Example BookGianni Iotu
- steel_designAdrian Pislaru
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1Tingluhelen
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010Aram Chtchyan
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1lnanescu
- Design Aids EuroCodeprakashcg123
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examplesplienovyras
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel SectionsErmal Bardhi
- BS5950 - Connections Handbookphuongkq832
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structuresemil_tase949
- Design of Base PlateBenjun Balbin
- BS and ECNGUYEN
- Ec2 Bs8110 ComparedSahal444
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridgesalbsteinpor
- Wind loadnandi_gmrt
- TTT Handout LG Nov2008 Lecture Note on EC3 DesignNguyen Tran Hieu
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beamsengineerkranthi4055
- BS 5950 Design GuideChengkc2014
- Pile Foundation Design and Construction Practice in MalaysiaHanizan Abu Bakar
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2amin66932250
- NSC Apr2005 134 Feature06 Steel Design Simple EC3Magdy Bakry
- Ccip Worked Examples Ec2HerrMeier4221
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Mastersfatabass
- EC3 GB_WeldingRancor82
- Steel Section Capacities BS 5950 Spreadsheetihpeter
- EC3extractDenmares Xea
- Design & Detail to BS 8110-1997Brukadah Williams Onwuchekwa
- !Multi Storey Steel BuildingWexkat Kul

- As 4100-1998 Steel StructuresSAI Global - APAC
- Compression Buckling Analysis of Vertical Tail Stiffened PanelsInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development
- Flexural Behaviour of Concrete Encased Cold Formed Steel Channel SectionInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development
- Joseph Schmidinger and Tung-Sol Electric Inc., in No. 15830 v. Marie J. Welsh, James W. Welsh and Welflash, Inc., Oxford Electric Corporation and Its Hudson Lamp Division, Hudson Lamp Co., Inc., Best Mfg. Co., and Its Hudson Lamp Co., Inc., Division, in No. 15831, 383 F.2d 455, 3rd Cir. (1967)Scribd Government Docs
- tmp554A.tmpFrontiers
- Design and Comparison of Steel Roof Truss with Tubular Section (using SP: 38 and IS: 800-2007)International Journal for Scientific Research and Development
- Performance Evolution of Tie Rod in Suspension System of Car Using Finite Element ApproachInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development
- Parametric Study of Dome: A ReviewInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development
- Modeling and Analysis of Telescopic Hydraulic Cylinder for Increase Load CapacityInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development
- Structures for Space OperationsBob Andrepont
- tmpA127Frontiers
- Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Tie rod in Suspension System of Car for a Buckling study using Theoretical and Experimental approachInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development

- Design Guide BC1 2012Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Col 717706Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Reinforced Concrete Design to BS 8110 Simply ExplainedAyingaran Thevathasan
- Column Base Plates Prof Thomas MurrayAyingaran Thevathasan
- Foundation Engineering Handbook, h.y. FangAyingaran Thevathasan
- SSB04 Detailed Design of Portal FramesAyingaran Thevathasan
- Instrumentation & Site Plan 967AAyingaran Thevathasan
- Manual for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Building Structure (Binding)Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Planning-Building-Regulations.pdfAyingaran Thevathasan
- Extended Structural Analysis Design and Drawing ChecklistsAyingaran Thevathasan
- Seismic Analysis & Design of 10 Story RC Building (Equivalent Lateral Force)Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Br Inch HansenAyingaran Thevathasan
- Fu Well 200517Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Approved DocumentAyingaran Thevathasan
- Environmental Statement Vol 3 Appendix E Part 54 of 56_tcm21-162474Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Etabs Concrete DesignAyingaran Thevathasan
- Norfibre PaperAyingaran Thevathasan
- BS5950 Vs EC3Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Approved DocumentAyingaran Thevathasan
- BS5950 Vs EC3Ayingaran Thevathasan
- How to Model and Design High Rise Buildings Using EtabsAyingaran Thevathasan
- Seismic CodeAyingaran Thevathasan
- Analysis and Design of Tall BuildingsAyingaran Thevathasan
- BS 2573-1 1983Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Etabs Concrete DesignAyingaran Thevathasan

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading