PSZ 19:16 (Pind.

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

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.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.

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. These details include the basis and concept of design. specifications to be followed.27% and 9. .34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design.95%. 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: 2000.11% to 10. This study intends to testify the claim.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. safety factors. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. with the application of partial strength connections.43%.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. loading values and etc. Meanwhile.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay. However. Therefore. 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. However.60% to 17. design methods.

60% – 17. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti. Namun begitu. factor keselamatan.27% – 9. dan sebagainya.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. Justeru.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. cara rekabentuk.95%. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli. Namun begitu. . 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510).34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4.43%.11% – 10. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. Selain itu. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. nilai beban. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.

2 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .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.

1 2.2.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.3.3 Shear Capacity.2 2.1.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.1 2.Rd Moment Capacity.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.3.3.2 2. Mc 2.3.3.3.4 Actions of EC3 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.4.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.3.2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.1.4 Loading 2.1. Pv Moment Capacity.3.2 Stiffened Web 2.4.1.5.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.2 BS 5950 2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.4.2 2.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.3.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.3 Serviceability Limit State 2. Mc.3.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.3.2.2.3.2 2. Vpl.1.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.3.1.4.3.2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.2 Serviceability 2.1 2.3.1.6 Deflection 2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.4.1 Unstiffened Web 2.2.3.3.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.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 .5.

4 Buckling Resistance.1.1 Buckling Length.1 Crushing Resistance.2. λ 2. Nc.4.6.5. Nb.4.7.Rd 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.2 Slenderness.6.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.5.3 Compression Resistance.Rd 2. Pc 2.2 Crippling Resistance.4.6. Rb.6.5.7 Conclusion 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.4.4.1.6.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.2.1.3.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.4.1.3 Buckling Resistance.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2. l 2.1. Ra.Rd 2.3 Compression Resistance.1.2. Ry.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.Rd 2.6.3.1 Effective Length.4.1 2.5.5.2 Slenderness.1.ix 2.5.6. LE 2.5 Deflection 2. λ 2.6.1 Introduction 34 .2.Rd 2.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.4.4.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.7.4.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.

2 Shear Calculation 3.9.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.3 3.1 3.1.8.4.2 4.4.1 Structural Capacity 5.1 Structural Capacity 4.3 Moment Calculation 3.5 3.1.1 BS 5950 3.1.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .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 3.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.2 3.10.2 4.x 3.7 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.10 Structural Column Design 3.9.1 4.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.10.2 3.8.1 Load Combination 3.6 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.8.1 3.

3 5.1.xi 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 5.2 5.

1 2.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.6 4.2 4.4 4.8 4.11 4.2 3.1 3.4 4.5 4.7 4.10 4. TITLE PAGE 2.3 4.3 3.9 4.1 4.12 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 .2 3.

TITLE PAGE 3.3 4.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.1(b) 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 .1 3.2 3.1(a) 4.

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 .

Rd Mb.y.y.Rd Rb.Rd h A Aeff Av .y.Major axis .Rd Mc.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.xv LIST OF NOTATIONS BS 5950: PART 1: 2000 EUROCODE 3 Axial load Shear force Bending moment Partial safety factor Radius of gyration .Rd Ry.y.Rd Vpl.Rd Mpl.

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

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

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

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

This structure is intended to serve as an office building. The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3.4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out.4 1. . Comparison to other steel structural design code is made. 1. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. hereafter referred to as EC3. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple.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. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. Next. hereafter referred to as BS 5950. The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3. 2 bay braced frames.

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

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

Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor. .1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause.3. EC3 covers two limit states. 2. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding. 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. it will remain fit for the use for which it is required. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3. and tying the structure together. 2001). and with appropriate degrees of reliability.1.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries. which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered. impact or consequences of human errors.7 and their resistance. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element. having due regard to its intended life and its cost.1. EC3 stresses the need for durability.

temperature effects or settlement. wind loads.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation. . Meanwhile. in spatial variation classification.1. 2. rupture. e. or which limits its functional effectiveness.1.g. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. e. e. imposed loads. which result in different arrangements of actions. and free actions. This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. self-weight of structures. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. fittings. actions are defined as fixed actions. movable imposed loads.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse. snow loads. e.3.8 2. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure. In time variation classification. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G).3.g. damage to the building or its contents.1. or an imposed deformation in indirect action.g. It may require certain consideration. self-weight. wind loads or snow loads. explosions or impact from vehicles. ancillaries and fixed equipment. variable actions (Q).3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. and accidental loads (A).g. considered as a rigid body. e. including supports and foundations. and vibration. 2. 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. for example.g. which causes discomfort to people.

Several clauses were technically updated for topics such as sway stability. and Part 9 covers the code of practice for stressed skin design. fabrication and erected for rolled. shear resistance. Part 6 covers design for light gauge profiled steel sheeting. welded sections and cold formed sections. . local buckling. Part 5 concerns design of cold formed thin gauge sections. members subject to combined axial force and bending moment. 2.1 Background of BS 5950 BS 5950 was prepared to supersede BS 5950: Part 1: 1990. hot finished structural hollow sections and cold formed structural hollow sections. avoidance of disproportionate collapse.2 BS 5950 2.2 Scope of BS 5950 Part 1 of BS 5950 provides recommendations for the design of structural steelwork using hot rolled steel sections. Part 8 comprises of code of practice for fire resistance design. flats.2. Part 3 and Part 4 focus mainly on composite design and construction. lateral-torsional buckling. etc. but offsetting potential reductions in economy was also one of the reasons. Part 1 covers the code of practice for design of rolled and welded sections. They are being used in buildings and allied structures not specifically covered by other standards. Changes were due to structural safety. which was withdrawn. plates. Part 2 and 7 deal with specification for materials.9 2. sheeting respectively. BS 5950 comprises of nine parts.2.

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

The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness. .3. 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. 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. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. earth and groundwater loading. without calculating their local buckling resistance. imposed and wind loading.2. 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. Where necessary. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. overhead traveling cranes.11 2. There are dead.

Class 2 is known as compact section. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. However. Alternatively. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength.12 Generally. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements. Class 1 is known as plastic section. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes. Class 4 is known as slender section. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. However. When this section is applied.6pyAv . Clause 4. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force.2 Shear Capacity. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. It enables plastic moment to take place. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment.2. given by: Pv = 0.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section. Fv. 2.3. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender.

py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.5.13 in which Av is the shear area. .2.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. Seff is the effective plastic modulus. Clause 4.3 Moment Capacity.3. 2.3. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections. Z is the section modulus. 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. and Zeff is the effective section modulus. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.3.

3.2.3. Clause 4.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.5. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.14 2.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1.

obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0. 2. but the web is designed for shear only.4. or 62ε for a welded section. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section.4.4.3.6Vw. 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. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.15 2. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2.3.4.6Vw.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.3. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.2 states that. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.3. a conservative value Mf for .1 of BS 5950 states that.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.4. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.

2.1 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.for a welded I.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .3.5.5.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.for a rolled I. . It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.3.or H-section: . where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.or H-section: k=T+r k=T .5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf. the web should be designed using Annex H.2. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).except at the end of a member: n = 5 . c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.6Vw.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.

2.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. allowing for cope holes for welding.3. and t is the web thickness.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. T is the flange thickness. .5. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. 2. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. r is the root radius. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.3.6 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. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. pyw is the design strength of the web.netpy in which As. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps.

Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis.1. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. Clause 5. To avoid this. However. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first. Class 2 is also known as compact section.3. Class 1 is known as plastic section. It can also achieve rectangular stress block.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling.4.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. This section can develop plastic moment resistance.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. . It has limited rotation capacity. It is applicable for plastic design.18 2. 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. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin.

but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Vpl.1. At each crosssection.Rd where Vpl.5 . the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. Class 4 is known as slender section.4. Apart from that.2 Shear Capacity. The member will fail before it reaches design stress. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force. Vsd. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. The stress block will be of triangle shape.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure.1.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. and ε = [235/fy]0. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes. 2. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area.

as stated in Clause 5. when maximum shear force.20 2. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc.3 Moment Capacity. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.3.Rd.4.4.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear . Mc.Rd.Rd. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.3. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.7 states that.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.5.4. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. 2. For class 4 cross-sections.4.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.3. 2. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.

Rd of the web of an I. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web.4.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange. However. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force.Ed / fyf)2]0.4. this checking is unnecessary.Rd ≤ Mc.7.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV. it is obtained as follows: MV. Thus. Ry. Ry. Clause 5.5 .4. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.3 provides that the design crushing resistance. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.1 Crushing Resistance.Rd – 1)2 2. bending about the major axis. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place. 2.5 (fyf / fyw)0. For cross-sections with equal flanges.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0.5 [1 – (σf.21 force.

Rd ≤ 1. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.5.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra. H or U section is given by: Ra. 2.4. Rb.Rd + Msd / Mc. σf.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.5tw2(Efyw)0.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .2 Crippling Resistance. Rb.4. For member subject to bending moments.5 [(tf / tw)0.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.Rd of the web of an I.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.Rd of the web of an I.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.3 Buckling Resistance.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra. Ra.2.Rd and Fsd / Ra. and ss / d < 0.Sd = 0.4.5 2.4.

1 of EC3. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance . For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. however. applies only to non-moment sustaining column.5.5 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. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.4.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam. Therefore. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.5. This. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. 2.2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.1 and Table 5. 2. 2.5.

Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. 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.24 2. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane. 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 Effective Length. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic. Pc According to Clause 4. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.1.5. λ = LE / r 2.2 Slenderness. 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. in accordance of Table 22. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. angle. and back-to-back struts.3 Compression Resistance. T-section struts. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . 2.1.1.5.5. channel.4.7.

and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. py is the design steel strength. 2.5. .2. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. 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. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally.5. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. for class 1 plastic. Mx is the moment about major axis.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. My is the moment about minor axis. 2.5. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.

Pc the compression resistance of column. Mb the buckling resistance moment. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.6.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.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. and Zy the elastic modulus.5. 2. py the steel design strength. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .26 2. 2. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.

1. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally. the value of λ should not exceed 180.1 Buckling Length.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic.1. Nc. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads.1. Alternatively.5.Rd of a member is given by: Nc. 2.5 states that.Rd According to Clause 5.27 2. the compression resistance Nc. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L.6. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends.4. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) . the value of λ should not exceed 250.1. 2. Clause 5. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.4.6.2 Slenderness. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.6.3 Compression Resistance. 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.

5. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections.6.Rd 2.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. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode. Nb.28 Nc.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members.1.Rd .Rd For compression members. Clause 5.1. 2 or 3 cross-sections.4 Buckling Resistance. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.

1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. y f yd Weff .4.Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . for I and H sections.6.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . y f yd Wel .Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff .Rd. Clause 5. β = 5n but β ≥ 1. y . z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1. cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment. Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject . the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Rd M pl . α = 2. z .29 2. M y . in which n = Nsd / Npl.Sd N Sd M z . for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y .8. 2.2.Sd + N Sd e Ny M z .Sd + + ≤1 N pl . Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz .2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.Sd N Sd M z . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression.1 states that. Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y . Rd M pl . Rd for a conservative approximation where.Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .6. z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y .

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

67 + 0.0 N b.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . Rd ηM c.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0. 2.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0. y .0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc. y .5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.05 4.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1. 3 Class 4 Nc.05 γM1 = 1.05 Nc.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.eff Class 1.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. Rd .Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.5 2. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.

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

As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. End moments are zero.35 3. that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span. V are based on simply-supported condition.4 to 3. Calculation of bending moment. .8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. Sections 3. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. 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. M and shear force. Therefore. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed.

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

Moment. M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear. 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/2.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology .

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

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

.4kN/m2 and 3. Therefore. 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. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. Therefore. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. this value will be adopted. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. repair and other general purposes.0kN/m2 respectively. Consequently.2.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project.5kN/m2. a uniform load intensity of 1. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. all floors will be of one-way slab.5kN/m2 is appropriate. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. 3. section 6. For precast floor selfweight. Meanwhile. Meanwhile. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. Therefore. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design.5 Loadings Section 2. For imposed roof load. In this design. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2.3 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 used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage.2 (Flat roofs) states that. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs.

1.05 as well. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. is given by 1.4.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed.5. and 1.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. A general load intensity of 1. The . for imposed floor load. From Table 2. Partial safety factors for loads. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. for normal design situations. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. 3. 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.1. γG is given by 1. partial safety factors.6 for imposed load. depending on the interior designer’s intention.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. finishes and fittings.05. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure.35. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load. γM0. γf should be taken as 1. γF for dead load. is given by 1. γM1. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. In EC3.4 for dead load. γQ is given by 1. 2 or 3 cross-section.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. For other floors. Meanwhile. Meanwhile.

3. For steel grade S 355.7 Categories In this project. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).4 times total dead load plus 1.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. 3. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section. in the meantime.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. for Fe 510.6 times total imposed . For steel grade S 275. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3).8. the load combination will be 1. Meanwhile. According to BS 5950. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. 3. 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.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. In BS 5950. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member.

2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.64kN/m. the w will be 59.1 below: Table 3. For all other floors. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.55 268.92 From Table 4. the resultant load combination. For the roof. w. there is a difference of approximately 4.35 times total dead load plus 1. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. The next table.8.43 load (1. According to EC3. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. For the roof. For simple construction.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.5% between the analyses of both codes. w. For all other floors. Table 3.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187. This is done by summating the resultant shear .1. the w will be 62. will be 48kN/m.5LL).5 times total imposed load (1. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. the shear. Clearly.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281.9kN/m. will be 45.76kN/m.7 179.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.4DL + 1. the resultant load combination.88 6m 137. the load combination will be 1.35DL + 1.6LL). 3.

since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed. similar with the beam shear.8. = Internal column Ext. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.31 Int. 206.96 992.26 675. 216 497. structural beam moment.55 475. 137.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction.76 9m Ext.3: .54 Int. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.76 1559.68 1415.5%.98 496.Ground 288 663.4 633. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.94 1488.47 744.78 2026.62 Ext.44 force from beam of each floor.7 316.28 Int. 432 995.88 779.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int. 275. M.39 1013. 3. Table 3.76 1061.1 950.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st . the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.84 707. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.92 519.84 1039.08 Int. 144 331.52 2123.52 1351. 413.64 6m Ext.

the higher the difference percentage will be.3. Me. 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). the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm.07 From Table 3. the higher the load combination of a floor.23 6m 206.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. initially. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment. For the moments of the structural columns.4% to 4. . there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. since this is simple construction. Clearly.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281.74 605.55 268. the eccentricity moment. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm.45 Table 3. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. Regardless of the width of the bay. Subsequently. there is a difference of approximately 4. in this case. In this project.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). D or h is the depth of column section (m). This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. However. Therefore.6% between the analyses of both codes. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams.

Roof Other Floors 21.88 Int.0DL.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.6 63. 32. Table 3. However.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. 20.6LL) – 1.6 56.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. V can be expressed as V = (1.4 94.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.0DL.5LL) – 1. 3.98 86. 32. .46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.4DL + 1.35DL + 1.38 9m Ext. 21.6 Int. for internal column.66 53. 30. In simple construction. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state. For EC 3. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.4 84. 20.98 80.78 Int.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. Next.66 57. Table 3.84 Ext. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done. 30. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.56 6m Ext. V can be expressed as V = (1. For BS 5950.5.

This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.1mm. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.88kNm. From the section table. t = 8.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Width. Web thickness. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59. D = 454. T = 13.6mm. Depth between fillets. 3.99.6mm. d = 407. Sx = M / py = 281. Flange thickness. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.3mm.3.92kN and 281. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.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). shear capacity. Elastic modulus. Sx = 1290cm3. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.9. Depth. Plastic modulus. B = 152. Zx = 1120cm3. d/t = 50. b/T = 6. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . UB section 457x152x60 is chosen.1 BS 5950 In simple construction. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.9mm.8kg/m. From the section table for universal beam.

Mc” is checked. shear buckling resistance should be checked. Actual b/T = 5. Shear capacity. For class 1 plastic cross-section. actual d/t = 50. For web of I-section. Since both flange and web are plastic. section 4. Next.75.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. After clause 4.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. flange is Class 1 plastic section. it is low shear. where neutral axis is at mid-depth.0 in this design.54kN > Fv Therefore. Since actually d/t < 70. shear buckling needs not be checked. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .1 x 454. Therefore. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. Pv = 0. web is Class 1 plastic section.6 x 275 x 3682. section 4.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. Mc = pySx.3.4. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80.92kN Therefore. 0. shear capacity is adequate. this section is Class 1 plastic section. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. Actual d/t did not exceed 80.6Pv = 0.0. Av = 8. Therefore.6 x 607. Next.0.26 x 10-3 = 607.57 = 364.5 “Moment capacity.26mm2 Pv = 0.4.0. therefore.57kN > Fv = 187.6pyAv. Meanwhile. clause 4.2.2.48 = 1.6 = 3682.5 is checked.

bearing capacity of web. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.6 x 10.1 + 1.2pyZx = 1.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.2 = 23.3 = 51.3 + 10.2pyZx.75kNm Therefore.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.92kN .02mm Pbw = 98. Mc should be limited to 1. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.2 + 2 x 13.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218. section 4. be = 0. therefore. bearing stiffener should be provided.6be/k. If Fv exceeds Pbw.49 = 354. M = 281. n = 2 + 0.5mm At support.02mm k=T+r = 13.6kNm > Mc.5. OK. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange.34kN > Fv = 187.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.2mm b1 = t + 1.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.02 x 8. moment capacity is adequate. 1.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369.

This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. w = 15kN/m for floors. In this case.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. The section is adequate. L = 6.5) should be conducted. This is done in the form of deflection check. Therefore. the deflection is satisfactory. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. . the bearing capacity at support is adequate. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.67mm >δ Therefore. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. Generally. However.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). δ.50 Therefore.

The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. crippling and buckling.2 EC 3 In simple construction. it is adequate to be used. b = 177. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. resistance of web to crushing. Wpl. h = 402.y = 1051cm3. moment capacity.9mm. Width.6mm. Elastic modulus. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.28kN and 268.9. Therefore. From the section table for universal beam. Wel.6mm.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. Web thickness.9cm2. tw = 7. Depth. Plastic modulus.92kNm. From the section table. shear capacity. lateral torsional buckling. Shear area. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.y (cm3). Depth between fillets. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.9cm3 From the rearranged table. tf = 10.y = 927cm3. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. Area of . Wpl.6mm.y = M / py = 268. Av = 32. 3. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. Flange thickness.92 x 103 / 275 = 977.4mm. d = 360.

Rd = (32. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.Rd.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked. aLT = 131cm. From Table 5.6(a).4. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength.28kN . fu = 430N/mm2.5Vpl. For S275 (Fe 430).9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1. Web is Class 1 element. c/tf = 8. yield strength. neutral axis at mid depth”. For “web subject to bending. section 5. Actual c/tf = 8.6. section classification is a must. Second moment of area. Iy = 18670cm4.2.5.5 x 497. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9.9mm.48 = 298. for “outstand element of compression flange.05 Vpl. Based on Table 3. iLT = 4. d/tw = 47. shear resistance is sufficient.28kN Therefore.05) = 497.6cm2. flange subject to compression only”. Flange is Class 1 element. limiting d/tw ratio is 66.28kN γM0 = 1.48kN > 179.Rd = 0.36cm.15. VSd = 179. Therefore. Next.15 ≤ 9. The design value of shear force.52 section.4 ≤ 66. tf ≤ 40mm.2 for Class 1 elements.1.6 for Class 1 elements.49kN > VSd = 179. 0.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. Actual d/tw = 47. tf = 10. A = 68. that is Vpl.

The beam is fully restrained.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.Rd and buckling resistance.Rd. Section 5.Ed/fyf)2]0.2 “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.8 and 56. For crushing resistance.26kNm > MSd Therefore. crippling resistance.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.53 Therefore. Section 5.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support. Actual d/tw = 47.8.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked. section 5. shear buckling check is not required. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling. For low shear.Rd = Wpl. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. low shear.92kNm Mc.5. MSd = 268.5.Rd.05 = 275.5. Therefore. Ra.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. the moment capacity is sufficient. section 5. Ry.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63. Therefore. Rb.5[fyf/fyw]0.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.4 < 63. Ry.5 .

5 [(10. sy = 10.62 + 502]0.5 = 52.05.14 ≤ 0.5 x 7.9/7.7mm.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. σf.14)] / 1.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.5 [(tf/tw)0. Rb.5 = 405.5[h2 + ss2]0.6)0. bending moment is zero.54 At support.6 / 7.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360. OK γM1 = 1. γM0 = 1.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.05 = 307.8 x 7. OK.5 [402.2.05 = 204.9 (177.9)(0.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra. ss = 50mm at support.5tw2 (Efyw)0.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.69) x 7.8kN For buckling resistance.6 = 1731.5 + 3(7.6)0.Rd = 0.Rd = (50 + 52.62 (210000 x 275)0.28mm2 . Ra.Ed = 0.4 = 0.4kN For crippling resistance.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.69mm Ry.6/10.Rd = 0. fyf = 275N/mm2. A = 227.

the serviceability limit state check (Section 4.28 x 10-3 / 1.28kN. λ√βA = 118. curve (a) is used.8kN Ry. OK.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. Therefore. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.05 = 197.5 d/t = 2.5 x 360. This is done in the form of deflection check. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.2) should be conducted.8 x 1731. Generally. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.4 / 7.6 λ√βA = 118.Rd = 204. which is larger than VSd = 179.13 (rolled I-section).8N/mm2 Rb. (Permanent load) . After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.6 = 118.29).55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.Rd = 1 x 119.Rd = 307. λ = 2.1. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120.5kN.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.5kN Ra.6kN/m for floors. buckling about y-y axis.6 From Table 5. From Figure 4. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. fc = 119.

In this case.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”.46mm Table 4.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.34mm Therefore. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27. δlim.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. . the deflection is satisfactory. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. (Imposed load) L = 6. The section is adequate.14mm > δ2 δlim. δ. However. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.

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.

pb = 260. for columns in simple construction.5. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column.17.7. therefore. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. Section 4.03kNm . λLT = 45.60 Next.5 x 5000 / 5. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. Therefore.54kNm. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. R. the moment will be equally divided. the beam reaction. when only nominal moments are applied. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0. Mi = 63.7 “Columns in simple structures”. λLT = 48. From frame analysis. M = 31.5L / ry = 0.08kNm.19 x 10 = 48.

first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. it is adequate to be used. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.y = MSd / fy = 57. Wpl. apart from section classification.08kN and 57. From the section table for universal column.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. 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). Therefore. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.88kNm respectively. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate.54 / 170.5cm3 From the rearranged table.2 EC 3 In simple construction.0 Therefore. 3.10.52 / 1818. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.44 + 31.88 x 103 / 275 = 210. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.96 < 1. .03 = 0.y (cm3).

fy = 275N/mm2. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. Therefore. the web is Class 1. aLT = 98. For web subject to bending and compression.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. section 5. d = 200.6cm2. Av = 25.5. section 5. Depth. h = 254mm.3.y = 895cm3. Radius of gyration. Shear area.73N/mm2 Table 5.2mm. with d/tw = 23. therefore.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2.5cm.8.94 < 9.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections.94.86cm. iz = 6.08 x 103 / 200.2 respectively. Iy = 11370cm4.94 (c = 0.2mm < 40mm. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. flange is Class 1 element.46cm.6mm.1cm. the classification depends on the mean web stress. Plastic modulus. A = 92. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. this section is Class 1 section. Wpl.2. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. Actual c/tf = 8. Wel. iLT = 6. c/tf = 8. Since both flange and web are plastic.2mm.2 and 10. tw = 8. From Table 5.y = 990cm3. from.62 From the section table. Elastic modulus. . Actual c/tf = 8. Next.5b). Web thickness. Flange thickness. Second moment of area. Depth between fillets. σw.1. tf = 14. d/tw = 23. Area of section. Beforehand.9cm2. tf = 14. b = 254mm. iy = 11. Width.2 x 8.3. From this table.6 = 784. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only).

88 x 103 / 5000 = 11. the section is subject to a low shear.y. allowing for axial force. From Table 5.58kN 0.11 Mpl.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5Vpl.y.555 ≥ 0.y.11 x 259.3 x (1 – 0.05) = 387.y.555) .05 = 2433. n = NSd / Npl.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.27.1 : MNy.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.Rd n ≥ 0.Rd is such that n < 0.Sd Therefore.3kNm MNy.Rd Reduced design plastic moment. MN.Rd = 1.Rd = Wpl.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.Sd = My.1 : MNy.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.63 Vpl.1kN n = 1351.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.05 = 259.1 Therefore.08 / 2433.11 Mpl.Rd > Vmax.Rd = Mpl.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.Sd / L = 57.1 = 0.Rd (1 – n) Npl.Rd = 1.Rd = 1. MNy.

0 Ly = 0.y.7N/mm2 .3. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb. λy√βA = 38.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.1 x 10 = 38. buckling curve (b) is used. the moment resistance is sufficient.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.3. for buckling about y-y axis.Sd / ηMc.Rd) ≤ 1. Lastly.Rd) + (kyMy. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation. section 5. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.1kNm > MSd = 28.85L = 0.94kNm Therefore.6.64 = 128.3 Based on Table 5.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38.y. fc = 249.

y. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.95 < 1.05 = 2209. it is adequate to be used.05 = 1 x 249.Rd) = (1351. Therefore.5 x 28. γM1 = 1.1) = 0.0 Therefore.y.08 / 2209.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.Rd) + (kyMy.94 / 1 x 128.3) + (1.y.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.65 Nb.Sd / ηMc. .3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.7 x 92.

The results are shown in Table 4. The results are arranged accordingly. 4. namely structural capacity. structural capacity is sub-divided into beam and column.1 Structural Beam UB sections ranging from 305x102x25 to 533x210x122 are being tabulated in ascending form.1.2 for moment capacity. based on steel grade S275 and S355.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. Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen. deflection. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other.1 for shear capacity and Table 5. and weight of steel. Here. 4. .

18 8.39 462.79 2.92 394.77 728.96 6.27 819.63 12.48 517.38 1.32 860.85 854.5 1.6 1.47 341.38 542.64 0.94 2.35 -1.45 -1.62 1.84 727.37 609.67 Table 4.7 1.44 2.86 -0.15 507.94 2.78 456.33 862.83 938.1 -2.96 666.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.37 338.15 -16. BS 5950 (kN) 376.19 4.74 0.46 478.83 0.13 19.23 -9.21 668.38 1.11 -1.19 1.7 9.65 724.74 2.39 511.21 441.47 831.16 4.55 1.2 447.7 -0.28 554.53 943.1 493.09 1012.3 14.6 14.55 617.26 888.81 528.79 2.98 305.6 1.35 730.58 308.55 1.61 340.57 -2.53 564.26 -8.22 2.32 10.51 384.99 918.5 529.27 0.1 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 291.77 -3.78 942.6 405.81 523.02 6.65 846.45 623.92 588.97 392.31 2.52 439.15 3.83 0.32 877.47 596.65 420.04 % Diff.65 635.78 15.4 -10.21 15.93 1.17 8.24 3.27 14.53 356.8 800.58 34.27 0.4 -0.71 429.11 1218.86 619.5 1.74 594.25 382.74 -0.55 712.27 13.02 12.2 777.16 1057.91 -19.65 0.79 11. 2.62 515.19 1.06 1.39 1.64 5.93 11.5 -0.38 811.77 1146.31 446.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.65 0.47 545.55 522.68 1007.09 -2.79 2.99 15.29 5.6 10.13 1091.37 399.5 461.93 334.88 -18.14 784.51 1.21 -24.99 660.56 15.08 2.56 -5.91 1011.73 -3.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.05 607.59 460.09 16.14 18.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.3 683.78 -25.56 3.85 405.2 1102.58 753.95 2.86 1204.82 2.94 559.19 387.74 2.57 13.81 -3.11 -2 2.81 -3.72 % Diff.55 3.87 433.18 358.98 1134.09 773.28 8.7 -0.35 431.4 0.5 1102.4 0.03 4.88 876.28 303.27 845.09 -2.78 -20.81 -2.74 393.34 523.77 6.2 -2.36 11.33 409.66 5.41 925.82 2.51 18.75 437.64 0.42 820.66 704.21 667.13 705.85 517.32 783.24 0.34 44.57 680.93 1.02 496.48 759.68 6.89 678.5 642.78 541.51 -4.92 2.93 11.79 12.95 404.15 3.15 343.66 24.44 471.55 583.5 -0.85 767.84 300.61 345.79 398.81 1024.29 452.38 20.5 1.67 644.69 -1.72 -12.07 942.56 400.52 443.75 -13.02 698.46 2.46 -3.35 793.14 583.69 4.14 .26 2.56 878.87 -0.06 1.16 551.73 -2.99 589.33 577.66 497.

05 3. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.58 -9.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950. which is approximately 8.8 8.3 6. This value.07 6.35 -0.05 1099.81 5.3% less than 0. For steel grade S275.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.77 4.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.59 4.76 4.59 5.21 -1. For steel grade S355.44 1300. meanwhile.35 217.05 110.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995. BS 5950 (kNm) 121. the difference percentage ranges from -3.94 162.49 1295.01 -16.13 -0. however.57 -4.07 170.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.06 1115.76 191.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.91 % Diff.83 132.6 as suggested by BS 5950.41 143.58 4.07 . Therefore. 6.57 206. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.69% to 4. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.98 141.59 5.62 182.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl. There are a few explanations to the variations. 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. the difference percentage ranges from -2.55.86 125. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.43 -1. Table 4.28 148.43 3.97 6.13 8.43 3. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.06 % Diff.51 1007.43 160.06%.45 1431.06%.78 11.6 137.23 168.94 -12.03 1440.14 8. Also.57% to 4.

44 4.11 5.14 410.52 11.85 5.1 220.2 291.46 5.95 848 184.5 15.35 731.67 685.08 6.95 514.23 213.67 20.17 255.02 455.7 211.28 5.06 11.5 330 371.95 275.73 21.63 7.52 434.97 14.35 302.65 404.1 539 619.05 232.47 955.95 755.43 4.16 9.5 479.05 336.69 188.01 4.95 24.45 976.02 18.57 5.85 5.53 1.58% to 6.75 484.94 10.43%.53 5.65 749.17 27.1 244.83 1.68 12 13.14 3.25 453.29 202.4 838.98 20.83 4.24 1.28 15.45 769.87 4.02 315.62 7.65 5. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.13 246.13 318.5 457.49 5.3 695.68 560. the difference percentage ranges from 1.36 2.45 521.33 181.5 654.24 376.26 312.26 317.65 590.55 257.33 471.44 14.72 9.3 4.4 277.08 510.71 9.41 221.1 285.78 15.95 532.1 5.98 24.11 5.58 5.49 15.8 799.75 332.33 198 232.33 221.41 5.9 900.99 4.55 21.53 171.32 0.41 19.55 9.51 1.25 397.01 4.95 566. meanwhile.5 14.38 8.07 609.37 16.04 1.17 171.96 10.98 352. For steel grade S275.27 1.53 5.5 691.01 182.08 252.66 5.05 585. .78 487.2 24.28 5.95 189.25 5.16 5.85 585.9 11.33 192.42 5.5 302.55 429.86 8.73 19.03%.12 5.53 549.73 2.93 885.89 1.32 1.96 21.48 17.44 12.66 2.45 234.05 35.55 433.16 5.83 275.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.95 479.57 5.75 398.35 624.92 13.17 24.83 5.21 287.57 355.85 11.3 844.11 242.61 4.43 4.4 264.65 244.41% to 6.6 341.86 4.5 44.3 426 479.77 233.5 34.22 13.79 141.08 5.75 431. the difference percentage ranges from 0.1 1.63 4.67 425.5 390. For steel grade S355.27 14.52 395.9 619.1 5.75 199.29 2.34 404.75 300.55 4.11 261.88 10.35 1104 238.29 1.08 358.6 5.6 300.63 4.05 11.5 354.9 163.31 4.17 7.93 740.45 18.84 13.87 4.32 10.24 1.06 0.95 385.31 19.81 529.39 682.7 18.35 693.8 1082.65 149.29 15.24 17.55 4.02 377.5 5.19 370.25 517.85 27.69 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 195.49 5.48 5.75 562.86 4.05 0.68 0.75 631.25 497.

A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. For example. Meanwhile.85%. For a column web subject to bending and compression. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. Class 2 or Class 3 element.Rd = Wpl. This is approximately 5% less than 1. for a UB section 406x178x54.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column.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. Table 4.1. Therefore. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. Besides that. . whether it is Class 1.70 There are a few explanations to the variations.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. are revised.95. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. 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. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web.0 as suggested by BS 5950. 4.3. There is a variation of approximately 0.

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

33 3. E.63 2.8 1.1 0. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.34 1.16 9.23 0.06 0.21 2.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.33 0. For example. as required by EC3.01 1.29 0.27 3.36 8.1 0.68 2.1.25 2.85 1.62 5.1.35 0.83 20. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.66 0.25 0. Apart from that.73 1.13 0.58 0.07 1.71 3.49 2. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.33 12.7 2.47 29.08 0. Meanwhile.77 2. Different from BS 5950.07 0.93 2.21 24.42 0.32 10. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.5 above.63%. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.24 2.45 14.6 2.01 2.68 13. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.13 8. for a floor beam of 9m long.16 1.75 18.56 2.41 1.7 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.37 4.71 3.61%.46 2.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.54 2.05 0.84 4.4 2.98 21.37 2.25 13.25 16.25 2.55 23.32 0.61 3.84 11. However.1 0.56 2.1 3. section 3.33 4.78 3.05 0. .7 2.9 9.22 28.08 0.38 2.52 0.03 9.85 1.29 0.22% to 3.22% to 3.12 17.51 21.55 From Table 4.26 18.06 0. Meanwhile. the difference percentage ranges from -0.77 4.59 2.34 18.2 3.75 2.83 13. Section 3.01 0. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.21 3.74 4.06 0. for a section 356x171x57.4 2.08 21.53 0. Meanwhile.26 2.04 0.16 11.96 1.51 0.43 2.19 2.31 2.64 4.07 0. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.56 2.77 16.79 16.46 2.66 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.85 15.4 0.18 1. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table. for a floor beam of 6m long.26 0.63 19. δmax.04 2.

Table 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.6 and Table 4.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams. To compare the economy of the design.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 .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . floor beams.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4.75 4.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.

Table 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.821 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 4.8 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) 7.122 9.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.313 9.76 Table 4.7 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 .821 .645 3.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .750 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. is tabulated in Table 4.8. meanwhile.744 EC3 4.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.889 9. The saving percentage.9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.

BS 5950 design allowed lighter section.122 7.77 Table 4. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.313 % 1. Semi-continuous .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 4.571 9.9.821 4. Meanwhile.60 17.96%.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4.744 3.96 5.750 9.42 15. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection. Further check on the effect of deflection was done. This time. Regardless of bay width. all frame types.60% to 17. This is because deeper. depending on the steel grade. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.645 9. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.889 EC3 4. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design. This resulted in higher percentage difference.

211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .5. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. 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. For uniformly distributed loading.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 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. which was used in the beam design.0.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .10 shown. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%. Table 4.78 frame is achieved in this condition.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. β is treated as β = 3. the deflection coefficient.

79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.503 7.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.749 Table 4.749 % 0.122 9.12 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) 7.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.11.645 3. Table 4.42 3. meanwhile.889 8.11 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) 7.645 5.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4. is tabulated in Table 4.122 9.22 9.211 10. The saving percentage.11 .750 4.889 8.750 4.95 BS 5950 4.503 9.12.

1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced.1(c)).95%.12. 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. (c) simple construction. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1.1(b)). The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0.80 From Table 4. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. (b) semi-rigid construction. However. if it is built semi-continuously. Please refer to Figure 4. Therefore. the gap reduces.11% to 10. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. . Eventually.0. if rigid connection is introduced. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4.

5. γM0 of 1. Av value also caused the difference. for the moment capacity of structural beam. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam. Meanwhile. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.43%. Apart from that.1. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.05 in the moment capacity . In review to the research objectives.1 Structural Capacity 5. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4.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.

In comparison.0m long. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength.82 calculation required by EC3. From interpolation. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced.27% to 9. as compared to the partial safety factor. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. fc and pc respectively. Therefore.0 as suggested by BS 5950.1. γM0 of 1. compared with BS 5950. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. EC3 design created majority . it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. it was found that for a same value of λ. Therefore. Meanwhile.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3.05 as required by EC3 design. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. A reduction in the range of 5.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. of both codes. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. fc is smaller than pc. 5. γM of 1. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. axial compression is much more critical. 5.2 Structural Column In simple construction. a structural beam will be subject to deflection.

Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. Section 4.645 tons and 9.750 tons for BS 5950 design. 9m bay width steel frame. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.744 tons and 3. and 4.22% to 3.1 of EC3 provided proof to this.122 tons and 7. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9.571 tons for EC3 design. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. For a 2-bay. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. 6m bay width steel frame.313 tons for EC3 design. 5.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. and 9. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison.889 tons for BS 5950 design. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. 4-storey. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. I will have to be chosen. However. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. the total deflection was greater.2. Therefore.821 tons and 4. . 4-storey. The difference ranges from 0. E. For a 2-bay.63%. In this study.

S355 (Fe 510): 10. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. S275 (Fe 430): 1.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies.95% 2-bay. 6m bay width. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 17. S275 (Fe 430): 5.0 to 3. However.42% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 0.22% 5. 9m bay width. 4-storey.42% 2-bay.60% 2-bay. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. S355 (Fe 510): 7. 9m bay width. . since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. 4-storey. 4-storey. 4-storey. 4-storey. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950. 4-storey. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 9m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 15.11% 2-bay.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design.96% 2-bay. 9m bay width. 6m bay width. 4-storey. 6m bay width. 6m bay width. 4-storey.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

6 x 15 = 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. LL = = 4 1.6 2.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.4 x 24 + 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load. DL Live Load.6 + 1. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1. of Bay No. LL Floors Dead Load.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m .6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1.6LL Roof w = 1. DL Live Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.4 x 27.4 1. DL Live Load.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.0 DATA No.4DL + 1.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame .0 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 2.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.64 kN/m 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62. MAHMOOD 2.64 kN/m .64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.

64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.92 kN M = 62.68 1415.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.84 707. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.84 1039. Roof beams. MAHMOOD 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. V = 62. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams.64 x 6 / 2 = 187.52 144 331. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.88 kNm 4.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. Shear.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. contributed by beam shear.1 Beam Moment. .92 519.

92) 331.76 .88 281.76 1415.88 281. MAHMOOD 5.84 [3] [4] 707.68 (187.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 281.52 707.88 281.88 281.92) 288 (187.92 [2] 519. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.92) 519.92) 663.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.84 (187.92) 144 [1] 331.92 (187.92) 1039.84 (187.

6 [1] 21.19 21.19 Moments are calculated from (1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.19 31.54 28.6 21.19 21.4DL+1.19 31.19 28.19 28.19 [3] 28.19 [4] 28.19 28.19 28.0DL Most critical condition .54 28.6 31.6 28.1.54 28.19 31.6 21.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 [2] 28.54 28.54 31.54 31.6LL) .

93 APPENDIX A2 .

35DL + 1. MAHMOOD 1.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.35 x 27.0 DATA No.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. DL Live Load. LL = = 1.5 x 9 = 45.35 x 24 + 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 kN/m .5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. LL Floors Dead Load. LL = = 4 1. of Bay No. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.5 x 15 = 59.6 + 1.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5LL Roof w = 1.6 2. DL Live Load.9 kN/m Floors w = 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. DL Live Load. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.35 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.

2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . MAHMOOD 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 2.95 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.

9 kN/m 6m 45.76 kN/m 59. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m .9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.

1 Beam Moment.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.28 kN M = 59. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.96 992.98 496. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206. MAHMOOD 4.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .92 kNm 4.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.52 1351. Shear.9 x 6 / 2 = 137. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.26 675.55 kNm Floor beams. . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 633. V = 59.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275. V = 45.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.7 kN M = 45.08 137. Roof beams. contributed by beam shear.7 316.

55 268.08 675.98 [2] 496.52 (179.28) 275.96 (179.4 (179.28) 633.26 (179.54 .7) (137.26 [3] [4] 675. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.92 268.55 206.54 1351.92 268.92 268.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.98 (179.7 (179.92 268.92 268.2 Shear (kN) (137.28) 992.28) 316. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 5.28) 137. MAHMOOD 5.7) 137.28) 496.7 [1] 316.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 5.

3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.94 26.94 26.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.94 26. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.66 19.89 26.89 26.0DL Most critical condition .66 26.5LL) .89 28.89 Moments are calculated from (1.89 28.94 28.71 20.89 19.89 20.89 26.71 28.89 26.66 26.94 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 5.66 20.89 26.35DL+1.89 28.89 26.94 26.1.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

8 60.1 82.2 89.1 37 37 39 39.2 74.2 74.1 67.2 109 113 122 125. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 51 52. L = 6.1 32.1 67.2 28.3 92.1 67.1 25.1 139.1 48.0m) STC.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.1 67.2 74.3 30 31.1 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 = 281.3 101 101.2 28.9 149.3 82 82.2 179 238.1 98.3 41.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 24.8 33.1 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 59.3 54 54. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .1 40.8 25.9 43 45 46 46.

9 8.2 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 = 59.3 407. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.1 13.3 2.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5.0 1.75 50. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange. L = 6.3 Therefore. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13. neutral axis at mid-depth.6 152. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 454.0m) STC.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. subject to pure bending.

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 .

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 = 268.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .0m) STC. L = 6.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.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 kNm W pl. 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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.

L = 6. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.0m) STC.y = W el.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.15 47.36 131 8. Second moment of area.6 10.0 1. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. Section chosen 1.9 360.4 1051 927 32.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 18670 4.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.6 177.6 7.9 68.9 Therefore. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.

109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.05 = 275. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd = W pl.0m) STC.92 kNm 0.28 kN V pl. it is low shear Mc.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.48 = 298. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.Rd < Therefore.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.26 kNm MSd Mc.2 (b) Web. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.001 γMO = 1.9 x 100 275 1. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .5 x 497.05 √3 = 497.Rd = 0.7 3.4 > 46.001 / 1.48 kN VSd < Vpl.5Vpl.49 kN VSd 0.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.5Vpl.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.05 = 32.15 <= 9.

69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Rd = γM1 At support. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52. MAHMOOD 5.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 Ry.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.001 / 1.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).5 σf.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.05 204. L = 6.28 kN < Ry. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.69) x 7.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.6 x 275 x 0.4 kN = VSd = 179. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.8 < 63.Rd = (50 + 52.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.0m) STC. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.4 63. not susceptible to LTB 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

Rd = 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.98 <= 1.26 7.3 ≤ = 1.0m) STC. L = 6.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. MAHMOOD At midspan.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.05 205 307. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 0.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.Rd = > 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MSd Mc. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.5 ] .14 1.2 0.Rd 268.92 275.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. Ra.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. h= a= 402.

8 N/mm 2 Rb.28 x 0. buckling about y-y axis.6 = 118.6 l = 0. Rb. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.001 / 1.118) x (121 .7 mm Buckling resistance of web. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1. L = 6.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0. λ = 2.Rd = 1 x 119.75d Rolled I-section.4 / 7.118) = 119.5 d/t = 2.5 x 360.6 2 = 1731.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.8 x 1731.(118.0m) STC.8 x 7.05 A = beff x tw = 227.05 = 197.6 .5 = 405. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.5 x SQRT(402.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.5 kN > At mid span.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . MAHMOOD beff = 0.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .117) / (120 .

0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. MAHMOOD 8.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.0 1.0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.46 = 18.88 + 6.88 6. L = 6. .34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.14 mm OK δmax = 11.0 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 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.1 652 802.6 978.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.4 568.1 310.3 247. 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 63.1 497.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC . 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) 184.4 988. L = 5.0m) STC.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 1.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.3 14. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .3 2.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.8 652 581.1 8.2 160. L = 5. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.6 205.0m) STC.23 17.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7. Gross area.96 5.2 9. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.19 75.52 kN L= 5 m 1.0 DATA Fc = 1415.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.

Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.0m) STC.8 x 9.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis . L = 5.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.96 x 10) = 47.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.85L = 0.52 x 1000 / (160.0 3.4 4.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.

46) / (48 . R From frame analysis sheets. the moment will be equally divided.0m) STC.8 x 100 x 0. Therefore.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. the compressive resistance is adequate 5. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.44 kN Fc < Pc 47. beam reaction.46) x (242 .0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.(47.5. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.001 = 1818. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.4 pc 242 239 Therefore. L = 5.9 x 75.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.4 .54 kNm .239) 2 = 239. M= 31. Mi = 63.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.96 1. MAHMOOD 6.19 x 10) = 48.45) x (233 .00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.44 + 31.17 .5 L/ry = (0.45) / (50 .03 kNm 1415.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .0 4.001 = 170.52 1818. L = 5.54 170.78 x 652 x 0.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.250) 2 = 260.03 = < 0.(48. 7.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .0m) STC.0 6.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

y = M / fy = 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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. L = 5.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 57.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.0m) STC.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 kNm M= W pl.

L = 5.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.08 kN Msd = 28.9 11370 6.86 98. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .2 990 895 11.2 200.y = W el.6 14.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.0 DATA NSd = 1351.5 8. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.46 92.94 23.0m) STC.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.94 kNm L= 5 m 1. MAHMOOD 1.2 Therefore. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. Second moment of area.1 6. Area of section.

2 Class 3 = 13.1 Class 3 = 38.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.001 / 1.11 Mpl.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 kNm Mny.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.555 >= n < 0.y.05 = 259.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = γMO γMO = 1. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.Rd Mny.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.1 kN n = 1351.Rd = > MSd = 128. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .9 (b) Web.Rd = Mpl.08 / 2433.05 = 2433.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.y.94 <= 9.1 Mpl.1 n ≥ 0.001 / 1.1 = 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.Rd = 0.Rd A fy Npl.1 28.Rd(1-n) W pl.0m) STC.3 <= 30.Rd = 1.8 3.05 Npl. L = 5.Rd = 92. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.y.1 Mny.

3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .38) / (250 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.(38.001 / 1. y . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.y.3 .3 0. Rd η M c .1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore. L = 5.Rd = = 1351.Rd = 1 x 249.y.y.0 N b .y. MAHMOOD 4.94 1 x 128.05 = 2209.1 x 10) = 38. Rd Nb. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .08 2209. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 . y .3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38.5 NSd Nb.Sd ηMc.Rd 1.248) 2 = 249.Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.3 kN ky = 1.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.5 x 28.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.7 N/mm Nb.7 x 92.9 x 100 x 0.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.38) x (40 .

125 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 5. Use : 254x254x73 UC OK OK . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. MAHMOOD 5.0m) STC.0 4.0 CONCLUSION Cross Section Resistance In-plane Failure About Major Axis Use of the section is adequate. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 3.

126 APPENDIX D .

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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92 kNm W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) Rev 1 STC. L = 6.y = M / fy = 268.127 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.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 = 977.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .

L = 6.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449. MAHMOOD 1.9 Therefore.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.9 407. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.0 1. Section chosen 1.6 21370 3.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.6 1096 950 36. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Second moment of area.y = W el. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) Rev 1 STC.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.6 10.99 53.5 66.59 121 6. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .4 7.8 152.

05 = 36.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.92 = 331.2 (b) Web.05 kNm MSd Mc.28 kN V pl.7 3. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6. L = 6.05 = 287.92 kNm 0.Rd = W pl.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.05 √3 = 551. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .Rd < Therefore.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 > 46.5Vpl.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.92 kN VSd < Vpl.001 / 1.5 x 551.0m) Rev 1 STC.5 x 100 275 1.001 γMO = 1.99 <= 9.Rd = 0. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange. it is low shear Mc.5Vpl.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.15 kN VSd 0.

Rd = γM1 At support.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .8 < 63.0m) Rev 1 STC. L = 6. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.05 = 196.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.81) x 7.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).68 kN VSd = 179.28 kN < Ry. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. not susceptible to LTB 6.5 σf.001 / 1.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48. MAHMOOD 5.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.6 63.Rd = (50 + 48. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 Ry.6 x 275 x 0.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.

MAHMOOD At midspan.92 287.3 ≤ = 1.05 7.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MSd Mc.0m) Rev 1 STC. Ra. L = 6.2 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.12 1.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407.05 205 299.94 <= 1.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. Rd = 0.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. h= a= 449.5 ] .5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 0.Rd = > 0.Rd 268.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.6 = γM1 = E= Ra. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 .5 d/t = 2. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.5 x SQRT(449.75d Rolled I-section.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 x 7.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement. λ = 2.6 / 7.98) / (135 .Rd = 1 x 98.05 = 179.(134.1 l = 0.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x 407.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251. MAHMOOD beff = 0.9 kN > At mid span.6 2 = 1909.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .9 N/mm 2 Rb.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.130) x (103 .001 / 1.0m) Rev 1 STC. Rb.88 x 0.130) = 98. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.05 A = beff x tw = 251.5 = 452. buckling about y-y axis.6 = 134. L = 6.1 .9 x 1909. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.

0m) Rev 1 STC. L = 6.14 mm OK δmax = 7. . MAHMOOD 8.0 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 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.95 = 11.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.26 + 3.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.26 3.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful