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

1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

**BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
**

JUDUL:

υ

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

SESI PENGAJIAN: Saya

2006 / 2007

**CHAN CHEE HAN
**

(HURUF BESAR)

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

TERHAD

3

TIDAK TERHAD Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)

(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

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

Tarikh

CATATAN:

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

Tarikh:

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

* ** Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

υ

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

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

Signature

:

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

i

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

CHAN CHEE HAN

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

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER, 2006

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

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. specifications to be followed. However. This study intends to testify the claim. Therefore. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. loading values and etc.27% and 9. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design.60% to 17. .06% and moment capacity by up to 6.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. However. 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. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design.43%. with the application of partial strength connections.95%. These details include the basis and concept of design. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.11% to 10. safety factors. Meanwhile.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. 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. design methods.

didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. .27% – 9. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Namun begitu. dan sebagainya. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. Selain itu.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti.95%. Justeru.11% – 10. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. factor keselamatan. Namun begitu. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. cara rekabentuk. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6.60% – 17. nilai beban.43%.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.

3 1.2 1.1 1.vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE i ii iii iv v vi vii xii xiii xiv xv THESIS TITLE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES LISTOF NOTATIONS I INTRODUCTION 1.4 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .

1 Ultimate Limit States 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.1 2.1.1.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2. Vpl.2 2.3.2 2.Rd Moment Capacity.5.3.2 2.3.2 BS 5950 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.3.3.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.4.3.1.2.3.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.6 Deflection 2.2 Stiffened Web 2.3.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.1.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.3. Pv Moment Capacity.4 Loading 2.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .2.1 2.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.3.1.2.3 Shear Capacity.4.3.2 Serviceability 2.4 Actions of EC3 2. Mc 2.2 2.3.1.2 Ultimate Limit State 2. Mc.1.4.3.5.1 2.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.1 Unstiffened Web 2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.2.4.3.3.2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.4.3.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.

6.Rd 2.1.7.1.2.3 Buckling Resistance. LE 2.4.1.3 Compression Resistance.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2. λ 2.ix 2.5.4.5.6.3.5.2 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 3.4.1.4 Buckling Resistance.7. Rb.6.6.3 Compression Resistance.5.4.1.6.1 Crushing Resistance.6.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Buckling Length. λ 2.1 Effective Length.6.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.Rd 2.1.5.Rd 2.3. Pc 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2. Ry. l 2.2 Slenderness.2.Rd 2. Ra.5.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.4.2 Slenderness.7 Conclusion 2.2 Crippling Resistance.6.4.4.1 Introduction 34 .1.5.1 2.Rd 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.4. Nc.2.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.2.4.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5 Deflection 2. Nb.4.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.

8.1 BS 5950 3.8.10 Structural Column Design 3.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .1.1 3.5 3.2 Shear Calculation 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.x 3.2 3.10.1 Load Combination 3.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.4.1.8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.9.1.2 3.1 3.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.3 3.1 4.7 3.2 4.10.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.2 4.6 3.8.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.3 Moment Calculation 3.9.1 Structural Capacity 5.4.

2 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 .xi 5.2 5.1.3 5.

2 3. TITLE PAGE 2.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.3 3.1 4.6 4.9 4.10 4.2 3.7 4.1 3.8 4.1 2.5 4.4 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 .4 4.3 4.11 4.2 4.

2 3.1 3.1(b) 4.3 4.1(a) 4.1(c) Schematic diagram of research methodology Floor plan view of the steel frame building Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame Bending moment of beam for rigid construction Bending moment of beam for semi-rigid construction Bending moment of beam for simple construction 37 38 39 80 80 80 . TITLE PAGE 3.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Results and discussions are presented in Chapter IV. Chapter III will be a summary of research methodology. conclusions and recommendations are presented in Chapter V. Chapter I presents an introduction to the study. Meanwhile. .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.

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

it will remain fit for the use for which it is required.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design.3. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. . 2. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3.1.7 and their resistance. impact or consequences of human errors. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions. which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor. EC3 stresses the need for durability.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability.1. and with appropriate degrees of reliability. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries. 2. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. EC3 covers two limit states. and tying the structure together. having due regard to its intended life and its cost. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element. Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding. 2001).

movable imposed loads. and vibration. damage to the building or its contents. Meanwhile.1.g. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure. in spatial variation classification.3. e. explosions or impact from vehicles. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it.1.g. imposed loads. snow loads. wind loads or snow loads.g. e. It may require certain consideration.3.1.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action. self-weight.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation.g. 2. considered as a rigid body. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G). variable actions (Q). e. or an imposed deformation in indirect action. ancillaries and fixed equipment. This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. and accidental loads (A). and free actions. 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. e. actions are defined as fixed actions.8 2. including supports and foundations. which causes discomfort to people.3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. temperature effects or settlement. . wind loads. self-weight of structures. which result in different arrangements of actions. e. In time variation classification. for example. or which limits its functional effectiveness.g. rupture. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. fittings. 2.

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

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

imposed and wind loading. earth and groundwater loading. There are dead.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. without calculating their local buckling resistance. 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.2. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well.11 2. 2. overhead traveling cranes. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. Where necessary. . 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 2.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. 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. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness.3.

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

Clause 4. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv. 2. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified. and Zeff is the effective section modulus.3 Moment Capacity.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. Z is the section modulus.3.13 in which Av is the shear area. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. 2. . BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.3.2. Seff is the effective plastic modulus. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment.3.5. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.

Clause 4.14 2. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.5. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.3.2.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv.3.

4. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.1 of BS 5950 states that.4. or 62ε for a welded section. but the web is designed for shear only.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.3. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε.3. a conservative value Mf for .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 2.4.4. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section. 2.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.2 states that. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.6Vw. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.6Vw.3. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.4.4.3.

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 .6Vw.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 rolled I. 2.5. where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.or H-section: k=T+r k=T .5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .3.2.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b). It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which. the web should be designed using Annex H. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf. .or H-section: .for a welded I. c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.5.3.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.

2.5. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. pyw is the design strength of the web.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web. 2. . and t is the web thickness. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. allowing for cope holes for welding. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. T is the flange thickness.3.3. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length.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.netpy in which As. r is the root radius.

Class 2 is also known as compact section.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. It is applicable for plastic design.4.3.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling. Clause 5. It has limited rotation capacity. . Beam sections are classified into 4 classes.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. Class 1 is known as plastic section. However. 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. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. To avoid this. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. It can also achieve rectangular stress block.18 2.1. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first.

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

4.Rd.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.3.3.Rd. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl. 2. 2.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area. For class 4 cross-sections. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.5.Rd.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. when maximum shear force. Mc.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc.3 Moment Capacity.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear .4.4. as stated in Clause 5.20 2.4. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc.7 states that. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl.3.

H or U section should be obtained from: Ry. it is obtained as follows: MV.Ed / fyf)2]0.4.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl.Rd – 1)2 2.Rd ≤ Mc.4.5 [1 – (σf. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0. this checking is unnecessary. For cross-sections with equal flanges. Clause 5.4. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.21 force.3 provides that the design crushing resistance. 2. Thus.5 (fyf / fyw)0.7.1 Crushing Resistance. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place.5 .Rd of the web of an I. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. However. bending about the major axis.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. Ry. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member. Ry.

Rb. Rb.Rd and Fsd / Ra.2 Crippling Resistance. and ss / d < 0. σf.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.Rd of the web of an I.5.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .2. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. 2.Sd = 0. H or U section is given by: Ra.4.4.5 2.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.3 Buckling Resistance.4.Rd + Msd / Mc.Rd ≤ 1.5 [(tf / tw)0.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.Rd Msd ≤ Mc. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.Rd of the web of an I.5tw2(Efyw)0.4. Ra. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff. For member subject to bending moments.

2.5 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.5.2. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.4. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. applies only to non-moment sustaining column. 2.5.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4.1 of EC3. Therefore. however. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.5. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance . This. 2.1 and Table 5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.

depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.7. 2. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design.24 2. T-section struts. Pc According to Clause 4.5. and back-to-back struts. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness.4.3 Compression Resistance. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . angle. channel.5. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.2 Slenderness. 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.1 Effective Length.1. in accordance of Table 22. λ = LE / r 2.1.5. 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. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate.1. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic. 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.

Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis.2. My is the moment about minor axis.5. 2. 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.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. py is the design steel strength.5. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. . the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. Mx is the moment about major axis. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0.5. 2.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. for class 1 plastic.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections.

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 5950.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.26 2. 2.5. and Zy the elastic modulus.2. py the steel design strength.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. 2.6. Pc the compression resistance of column. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance . the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . Mb the buckling resistance moment.

class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .6. the value of λ should not exceed 180.4.5.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic. 2. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. the value of λ should not exceed 250. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only.2 Slenderness. 2. 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.4.1.5 states that. the compression resistance Nc. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally.6.1 Buckling Length.1. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L.1.3 Compression Resistance.Rd of a member is given by: Nc. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.1. Nc. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.6. Clause 5. Alternatively.27 2.Rd According to Clause 5.

For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members.6.5. Clause 5. Nb.1.Rd 2.1.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1.28 Nc. 2 or 3 cross-sections.Rd . and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections.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 relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.Rd For compression members. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.4 Buckling Resistance.

Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y .Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .Sd N Sd M z .2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.Sd + + ≤1 N pl . z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y . z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1.29 2.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally.4.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z .1 states that. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. z .Sd N Sd M z . Rd for a conservative approximation where. Rd M pl . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression. β = 5n but β ≥ 1. in which n = Nsd / Npl. y . M y . Clause 5. for I and H sections. Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz .6.Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff . y f yd Weff . α = 2. Rd M pl . 2.Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject . cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment.Rd. for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y . y f yd Wel .8.Sd + N Sd e Ny M z .6.2.

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

2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.05 Nc. Rd . Rd ηM c.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1. y .05 γM1 = 1.eff Class 1. 3 Class 4 Nc. y .Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.67 + 0.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .0 N b.05 4.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.5 2.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1. 2.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.

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

4 to 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.35 3. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. Sections 3. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed. As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction.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.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets. Therefore. M and shear force. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed. 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. Calculation of bending moment. . End moments are zero.

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

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 . Moment. M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear.

4. the storey height will be 4m. a parametric study for the design of multi-storey braced frames is carried out. the 4-storey frame consists of four (4) bays. there will be three (3) numbers of 4-storey frames. 2nd to 3rd.2 and Figure 3. Each of the frame’s longitudinal length is 6m. Please refer to Figure 3.38 3.2 : Floor plan view of the steel frame building. In plan view. in total.1 Structural Layout In order to make comparisons of the design of braced steel frame between BS 5950-1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. Two (2) lengths of bay width will be used in the analysis – 6m and 9m respectively.3 for the illustrations of building plan view and elevation view respectively. The storey height will be 5m from ground floor to first floor. The intermediate frame will be used as the one to be analysed and designed.4 Structural Layout & Specifications 3. whereas for other floors (1st to 2nd. 6m 6m 6/9m 6/9m Figure 3. 3rd to roof). 4th storey is roof while the rest will serve as normal floors. The number of storey of the frame is set at four (4). .

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

Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. 3.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. Meanwhile. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. a uniform load intensity of 1. all floors will be of one-way slab. In this design. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel.0kN/m2 respectively.2. Therefore. Consequently. For imposed roof load. 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.5kN/m2 is appropriate.4kN/m2 and 3.5 Loadings Section 2. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. Therefore. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. this value will be adopted. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. Meanwhile. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project.2 (Flat roofs) states that. .5kN/m2. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. For precast floor selfweight. repair and other general purposes. Therefore.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. section 6.

is given by 1. 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. A general load intensity of 1.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. Meanwhile. depending on the interior designer’s intention. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. Meanwhile. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. In EC3.5. is given by 1. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed.05 as well.35. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. for normal design situations. γF for dead load.1.05. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. and 1.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. The . for imposed floor load. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3.4.4 for dead load.1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. Partial safety factors for loads. γG is given by 1.6 for imposed load. finishes and fittings. γM0. γM1. γQ is given by 1. 2 or 3 cross-section. γf should be taken as 1.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. From Table 2. partial safety factors. For other floors. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed.

py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections). Meanwhile.4 times total dead load plus 1.6 times total imposed .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. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member.8.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. 3. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. For steel grade S 355. In BS 5950. for Fe 510. 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.7 Categories In this project. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. According to BS 5950. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. 3.1. in the meantime. 3. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). For steel grade S 275. the load combination will be 1.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.

the resultant load combination.1 below: Table 3.43 load (1.35 times total dead load plus 1. According to EC3. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2. The next table. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.55 268. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.5LL). the w will be 59.64kN/m. there is a difference of approximately 4.1.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. will be 48kN/m. the resultant load combination. For simple construction. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. Clearly. the w will be 62. the shear. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. For the roof.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame.92 From Table 4. w.88 6m 137.7 179. w. For all other floors.9kN/m.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 . Table 3.6LL). For all other floors. 3.5 times total imposed load (1.8. For the roof.76kN/m.4DL + 1.5% between the analyses of both codes. will be 45. the load combination will be 1.35DL + 1.

137.94 1488. 275. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st .52 1351.78 2026.3: . where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.44 force from beam of each floor.31 Int.84 707. 144 331. 432 995.62 Ext. similar with the beam shear.1 950.68 1415.28 Int.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int.39 1013.47 744. structural beam moment.4 633. 216 497.Ground 288 663. Table 3.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction. 206.92 519. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.64 6m Ext. = Internal column Ext.96 992.08 Int.5%.84 1039.88 779.26 675. 3.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.7 316. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed. M.76 1061. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 413.54 Int. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.52 2123.76 1559.76 9m Ext. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8.98 496.8.55 475.

there is a difference of approximately 4. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment.6% between the analyses of both codes. Me. . Therefore. in this case. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm.07 From Table 3. 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). However. the eccentricity moment.4% to 4.45 Table 3. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams.3. the higher the load combination of a floor.55 268. Clearly. Subsequently.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). Regardless of the width of the bay.74 605. D or h is the depth of column section (m).88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. initially. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. For the moments of the structural columns. since this is simple construction. In this project. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. the higher the difference percentage will be.23 6m 206.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well.

66 57. 20.6LL) – 1.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. 21. However. In simple construction. Next. Table 3.5. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.6 56. Table 3. 30. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.0DL. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state.6 63. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done.88 Int. .08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.4 84.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam.6 Int.0DL.38 9m Ext.35DL + 1. 32. Roof Other Floors 21.84 Ext.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. 32. For BS 5950. V can be expressed as V = (1. V can be expressed as V = (1.4 94.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation. 20. 30. for internal column.56 6m Ext.5LL) – 1. 3.98 86.4DL + 1.98 80. For EC 3.78 Int.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.66 53.

D = 454.3mm. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187. Width.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).9mm. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59.9.99. d = 407. T = 13. t = 8. B = 152.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. 3.92kN and 281. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.8kg/m.6mm. Elastic modulus. Flange thickness. Depth. Plastic modulus. b/T = 6. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.6mm. Sx = 1290cm3. Sx = M / py = 281. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3).1 BS 5950 In simple construction. From the section table for universal beam. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. Web thickness. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.88kNm.3. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . Zx = 1120cm3. From the section table. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.1mm. Depth between fillets. shear capacity. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. d/t = 50.

therefore.48 = 1. 0.26mm2 Pv = 0. Mc” is checked. Mc = pySx. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. it is low shear.54kN > Fv Therefore. Since both flange and web are plastic. section 4.4. actual d/t = 50.26 x 10-3 = 607.0. For class 1 plastic cross-section. Pv = 0.6 x 275 x 3682. shear buckling resistance should be checked. where neutral axis is at mid-depth.1 x 454.3. clause 4.75. For web of I-section.0. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. this section is Class 1 plastic section.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. Therefore.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. Since actually d/t < 70.92kN Therefore.5 “Moment capacity.6 = 3682. After clause 4.5 is checked.6pyAv. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 . This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section.0.4. section 4.2. Therefore.0 in this design.57 = 364. Next. Next.6 x 607. Actual b/T = 5.2. shear buckling needs not be checked. Shear capacity. flange is Class 1 plastic section.6Pv = 0. Meanwhile.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. Av = 8. shear capacity is adequate. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80.57kN > Fv = 187. web is Class 1 plastic section.

6be/k.34kN > Fv = 187. section 4.2mm b1 = t + 1. n = 2 + 0.6kNm > Mc.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.92kN . bearing stiffener should be provided.5mm At support.2pyZx = 1.2 = 23. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.1 + 1.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. If Fv exceeds Pbw.3 + 10. M = 281.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.75kNm Therefore. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.2pyZx.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.02 x 8.02mm k=T+r = 13. bearing capacity of web. therefore.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.6 x 10. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354. Mc should be limited to 1.02mm Pbw = 98.49 = 354. OK. 1. be = 0.3 = 51.5.2 + 2 x 13. moment capacity is adequate.

the deflection is satisfactory. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. Generally. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. The section is adequate. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. w = 15kN/m for floors. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. L = 6. Therefore. However. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection.50 Therefore. This is done in the form of deflection check. δ.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish).0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.5) should be conducted. the bearing capacity at support is adequate.67mm >δ Therefore. . In this case.

shear capacity.y = 1051cm3. tw = 7.92kNm.y (cm3).9cm3 From the rearranged table. Therefore. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. b = 177. Area of . From the section table for universal beam. Width. resistance of web to crushing.4mm. it is adequate to be used.9. tf = 10. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. moment capacity.9mm.6mm. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179.2 EC 3 In simple construction. Wpl.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. Web thickness.92 x 103 / 275 = 977. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. Plastic modulus. Depth between fillets. Depth. Shear area. d = 360.6mm. h = 402.y = M / py = 268. Flange thickness. Wpl.28kN and 268.9cm2. From the section table. crippling and buckling. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. Wel. lateral torsional buckling. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. Av = 32.y = 927cm3.6mm. 3. Elastic modulus.

fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength.28kN .5 x 497. Flange is Class 1 element. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states. Iy = 18670cm4.15.6.15 ≤ 9.Rd.6cm2. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. Based on Table 3. that is Vpl. Second moment of area. Actual c/tf = 8.9mm.05) = 497. shear resistance is sufficient.48 = 298.28kN γM0 = 1. Next.52 section. Therefore. for “outstand element of compression flange. section classification is a must.5Vpl. For “web subject to bending.Rd = 0. A = 68. aLT = 131cm.Rd = (32.6 for Class 1 elements.05 Vpl. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked.5.36cm. For S275 (Fe 430).2 for Class 1 elements. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9. d/tw = 47. tf ≤ 40mm.4. limiting d/tw ratio is 66.49kN > VSd = 179. VSd = 179. From Table 5.28kN Therefore. 0. c/tf = 8. neutral axis at mid depth”.2. Actual d/tw = 47.48kN > 179. iLT = 4. tf = 10.1. yield strength.6(a). flange subject to compression only”.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. Web is Class 1 element. section 5. fu = 430N/mm2. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. The design value of shear force.4 ≤ 66.

05 = 275.5. Ra. crippling resistance. section 5. Rb. Section 5.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.Rd.8. Ry.4 < 63. Actual d/tw = 47. For crushing resistance.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.53 Therefore.8 and 56.26kNm > MSd Therefore. shear buckling check is not required.Rd and buckling resistance. Therefore. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. the moment capacity is sufficient.5 . The beam is fully restrained.Ed/fyf)2]0.92kNm Mc.Rd = Wpl.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.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. low shear.5. For low shear.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked.5.Rd. Section 5. section 5. Ry. Therefore.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively. MSd = 268.5[fyf/fyw]0. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.

Ra.5[h2 + ss2]0. A = 227. σf.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.5 [(tf/tw)0. sy = 10.6)0. γM0 = 1.2.Rd = 0.5 x 7.Ed = 0.05 = 307.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.5 = 405.62 (210000 x 275)0.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.6 / 7. OK.5 = 52.54 At support.8 x 7.05.6 = 1731.05 = 204.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.62 + 502]0. ss = 50mm at support.14 ≤ 0.69mm Ry.8kN For buckling resistance.7mm.5tw2 (Efyw)0.Rd = (50 + 52.5 [402. bending moment is zero. OK γM1 = 1.5 [(10.9 (177.6/10. Rb.14)] / 1.69) x 7.9)(0.4 = 0.28mm2 .Rd = 0.6)0.5 + 3(7.4kN For crippling resistance. fyf = 275N/mm2.9/7.

Generally. which is larger than VSd = 179.6 = 118. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. buckling about y-y axis.6 λ√βA = 118.5 d/t = 2.28 x 10-3 / 1.05 = 197.Rd = 1 x 119. λ = 2.1.5 x 360. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27. OK. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1. fc = 119.5kN. λ√βA = 118.8N/mm2 Rb.8kN Ry. Therefore. curve (a) is used.28kN.8 x 1731. (Permanent load) .5kN Ra.2) should be conducted.29). the web of the section can resist transverse forces.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.13 (rolled I-section).Rd = 204.4 / 7. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.Rd = 307.6 From Table 5. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4.6kN/m for floors. From Figure 4. This is done in the form of deflection check.

56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. However. (Imposed load) L = 6. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. The section is adequate. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27. δlim. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17. .14mm > δ2 δlim. δ.46mm Table 4.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. the deflection is satisfactory. In this case.34mm Therefore.

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.

Therefore. when only nominal moments are applied.5L / ry = 0.7. M = 31. pb = 260. R.08kNm.60 Next.5.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.5 x 5000 / 5.17. therefore. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column.19 x 10 = 48. λLT = 45. Mi = 63. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. the moment will be equally divided.03kNm . Section 4. the beam reaction.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. λLT = 48.7 “Columns in simple structures”.54kNm. for columns in simple construction. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0. From frame analysis.

apart from section classification. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Wpl.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351.03 = 0. Therefore. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. 3. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. . first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.2 EC 3 In simple construction. 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). it is adequate to be used. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.88kNm respectively. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.y = MSd / fy = 57.5cm3 From the rearranged table.10. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.88 x 103 / 275 = 210.44 + 31.96 < 1. From the section table for universal column.y (cm3).54 / 170.52 / 1818.08kN and 57.0 Therefore.

Depth between fillets. σw.08 x 103 / 200.2mm.2 and 10. section 5. aLT = 98. c/tf = 8.9cm2.6 = 784.3. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. Next. Radius of gyration.46cm. iLT = 6.5b). Depth. d = 200. A = 92. Web thickness. with d/tw = 23.2mm < 40mm.2 x 8.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked.y = 895cm3. fy = 275N/mm2.1cm. Shear area.94 (c = 0.1. From this table. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. .86cm. the web is Class 1.8.6cm2. tf = 14. from. tw = 8.73N/mm2 Table 5.62 From the section table. therefore. Plastic modulus. Area of section.2mm. From Table 5. Actual c/tf = 8.94 < 9. Wpl.94. b = 254mm.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements.2 respectively. Actual c/tf = 8. Therefore. Iy = 11370cm4. Flange thickness. Beforehand. h = 254mm.3. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only).8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. flange is Class 1 element. d/tw = 23. this section is Class 1 section.y = 990cm3. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2.5. Width. section 5. Wel. Since both flange and web are plastic. Elastic modulus. the classification depends on the mean web stress. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. iz = 6. iy = 11. tf = 14.6mm.5cm.2. Av = 25. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. For web subject to bending and compression. Second moment of area.

58kN 0.1 Therefore.3 x (1 – 0.555 ≥ 0.Rd = 1.11 Mpl.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1. MNy.y.1 : MNy.11 x 259.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.y. MN.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.1 : MNy.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11. the section is subject to a low shear.y.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.08 / 2433.Sd Therefore.Rd n ≥ 0.3kNm MNy.Sd = My.Rd > Vmax.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.5Vpl.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25. n = NSd / Npl.Sd / L = 57.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.05 = 2433.Rd = 1.05 = 259.05) = 387.Rd is such that n < 0. From Table 5.Rd = 1.y.11 Mpl.1 = 0.555) .1kN n = 1351.Rd = Wpl.Rd (1 – n) Npl.63 Vpl.27. allowing for axial force.Rd = Mpl.

Rd) + (kyMy.3. section 5.y. fc = 249.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.7N/mm2 .3.y.Sd / ηMc.3 Based on Table 5. buckling curve (b) is used. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation. the moment resistance is sufficient.94kNm Therefore.6.Rd) ≤ 1. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40. Lastly. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.64 = 128.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.1 x 10 = 38.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38. λy√βA = 38.0 Ly = 0.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.85L = 0. for buckling about y-y axis.1kNm > MSd = 28.

This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.7 x 92. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.1) = 0.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.05 = 2209.y.08 / 2209.65 Nb. it is adequate to be used.94 / 1 x 128.95 < 1.Sd / ηMc. .Rd) = (1351.3) + (1.y.y.5 x 28. Therefore. γM1 = 1.0 Therefore.Rd) + (kyMy.05 = 1 x 249.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.

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

94 2.29 5.32 783.94 2.2 -2.2 447.61 345.87 -0.5 461.99 589.16 551.79 2.74 2.5 1102.78 942.88 -18.26 888.42 820.21 -24.92 588.04 % Diff.72 % Diff.4 -10.55 3.74 0.19 1.15 3.3 683.68 6.61 340.55 617.83 938.52 443.5 1.82 2.72 -12.14 18.86 -0.11 -2 2.51 384.21 667.71 429.27 0.15 343.27 13.15 -16.99 15.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.27 845.53 356.35 -1.79 11.59 460.83 0.2 777.37 609.1 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. 2.29 452.85 405.4 -0.2 1102.09 16.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.6 1.34 44.79 12.35 730.73 -3.35 431.82 2.74 393.47 596.1 493.78 456.58 308.14 784.32 877.39 511.75 -13.09 773.99 918.79 2.28 303.4 0.38 811.19 387.83 0.08 2.84 727.7 1.95 404.78 -25.53 564.44 2.85 517.93 11.07 942.1 -2.66 24.3 14.74 -0.21 668.33 862.77 1146.32 10.5 1.57 680.14 .69 -1.64 5.5 529.48 759.05 607.56 3.38 542.55 712.96 666.14 583.96 6.74 2.85 854.65 0.78 -20.4 0.65 635.24 3.09 -2.94 559.47 341.65 724.39 1.37 338.11 -1.5 642.19 1.15 507.92 2.75 437.98 305.35 793.6 405.21 441.6 10.92 394.38 1.6 14.46 478.13 19.57 13.78 15.41 925.13 705.56 15.44 471.81 528.55 1.97 392.66 704.88 876.31 446.23 -9.24 0.7 9.98 1134.56 878. BS 5950 (kN) 376.7 -0.52 439.62 1.64 0.45 623.95 2.67 Table 4.77 728.09 1012.38 20.81 -3.15 3.13 1091.79 398.26 -8.5 -0.74 594.57 -2.58 34.85 767.99 660.79 2.02 12.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.19 4.93 1.27 0.39 462.55 1.81 1024.27 14.81 -2.68 1007.84 300.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.87 433.28 554.02 496.22 2.67 644.03 4.56 -5.93 11.06 1.38 1.73 -2.02 698.51 -4.5 -0.8 800.81 -3.77 6.26 2.66 5.6 1.81 523.06 1.65 420.48 517.25 382.64 0.27 819.11 1218.7 -0.69 4.21 15.65 0.36 11.28 8.55 522.47 545.51 1.45 -1.53 943.91 1011.89 678.18 358.63 12.51 18.09 -2.47 831.86 619.33 577.86 1204.37 399.65 846.55 583.46 2.78 541.5 1.62 515.18 8.31 2.16 4.93 334.66 497.93 1.02 6.58 753.34 523.16 1057.56 400.91 -19.77 -3.33 409.17 8.32 860.46 -3.

1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.07 .14 8.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.57 206.06%.21 -1.59 5.57% to 4.76 191.43 -1.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.94 -12.43 160. the difference percentage ranges from -3.01 -16.45 1431.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995. Therefore. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.86 125. meanwhile. which is approximately 8.62 182.03 1440.51 1007.91 % Diff.57 -4.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.58 4. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.58 -9. This value.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.07 6.6 137.3 6.8 8.76 4. 6. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.07 170.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.69% to 4.81 5. For steel grade S355.3% less than 0.78 11.35 217.41 143.77 4.55. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.28 148.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106. however.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.13 8.49 1295. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.97 6. the difference percentage ranges from -2.83 132. Table 4.44 1300.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.06 1115.59 5.05 1099.94 162.35 -0.43 3.98 141. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.59 4. There are a few explanations to the variations.06%.05 110.05 3.43 3.06 % Diff. Also.13 -0.23 168. For steel grade S275.6 as suggested by BS 5950.

17 7.93 885.28 5.75 631.35 302.1 1.99 4.44 12.53 1.19 370.13 318.75 484.31 4.24 17.7 211.28 15.1 5.71 9.33 471. For steel grade S355.05 11.5 654.04 1.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.87 4.67 425.5 5.31 19.14 410. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.78 487.1 5.32 1.02 315.4 277.53 5.45 976.11 5.57 5.67 20.11 242.51 1.39 682.95 566.66 2.8 799.95 189.16 9. meanwhile.73 19.98 352.28 5.85 585.88 10.16 5.11 5.3 695.95 514.75 300.68 560. the difference percentage ranges from 1.75 398.29 202.66 5.5 34.6 300.89 1.24 1.44 14.68 12 13.24 376.8 1082.53 171.45 769.65 404.83 1.17 171.1 244.52 395.86 4.5 15.2 291.55 4.65 590.02 377.98 24.96 10.83 5.95 385.63 4.9 11.37 16.41 221.01 4.5 302.38 8.43%.9 163.41% to 6.65 749.4 264.17 255.65 244.5 44.5 691.52 11.44 4.11 261.33 198 232.08 6.95 24.25 497.33 181.55 4.62 7.32 0.73 21.41 19.55 429.96 21.42 5.55 257.49 5.07 609.35 731.2 24.78 15.01 182.85 11.95 479.95 275.95 755.01 4.08 358.33 221.3 426 479.85 5.9 619.55 9.22 13.29 1.63 7.35 624.72 9.67 685.08 510.46 5.33 192.25 517.17 27.25 5.06 11.49 15.21 287.14 3.25 397.55 21.79 141.48 5.4 838.83 275.52 434.97 14.86 4.16 5.95 532.25 453.1 220.45 234.75 562.5 330 371.35 1104 238.53 549.49 5.75 332.26 312.24 1. For steel grade S275.29 2.75 199.86 8.17 24.73 2.58 5.05 232. .5 457.55 433.02 455.08 252.45 521.65 149.05 336.45 18.47 955.27 1.87 4.93 740.26 317.58% to 6.75 431.65 5.5 390.29 15.69 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 195.13 246.1 539 619.84 13.05 585.9 900.43 4.36 2.53 5.5 479.77 233.95 848 184.81 529.06 0.12 5.85 27.94 10.57 5.57 355.61 4.08 5.63 4.1 285.48 17.6 5.68 0.98 20.23 213.02 18.69 188.6 341.92 13.83 4.03%.3 4.43 4.41 5.05 35. the difference percentage ranges from 0.05 0.27 14.5 354.85 5.35 693.32 10.3 844.34 404.5 14.7 18.

Table 4.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web.Rd = Wpl. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. whether it is Class 1. Class 2 or Class 3 element. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. This is approximately 5% less than 1. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column.0 as suggested by BS 5950.85%. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively.1. Meanwhile. 4. for a UB section 406x178x54.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. are revised. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. Therefore. 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. There is a variation of approximately 0.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance. Besides that.3. . For a column web subject to bending and compression. For example.95.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation.

**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

83 13.16 1.13 0. for a section 356x171x57. Different from BS 5950.21 3.33 12.77 16.41 1.7 2. For example.71 3.01 0.43 2.25 2.07 0.12 17.84 4.64 4.34 1.53 0.66 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.96 1. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.83 20. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.34 18.68 2.4 2.08 21. Meanwhile.2 3.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.51 0. the difference percentage ranges from -0. Meanwhile.79 16.6 2.63%.68 13.06 0. as required by EC3.25 13.13 8.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.9 9.74 4.32 10.85 1.66 0.85 15.85 1. However.71 3.25 16.55 From Table 4. for a floor beam of 9m long.62 5.46 2.1 0.29 0.1. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.54 2.06 0.16 11.1 0.63 2. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.07 0.04 0. section 3.75 18.24 2.21 2.98 21.05 0.29 0.4 0.36 8.18 1.33 3.31 2.26 18.59 2.27 3.73 1.61%.26 2.06 0.77 2.51 21.4 2.1. E. for a floor beam of 6m long.22% to 3.21 24.75 2.37 2.22 28.46 2.1 3.8 1.22% to 3.35 0.08 0.42 0.32 0.05 0.78 3.7 2.56 2. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.45 14. δmax.25 2. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.04 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.33 4.49 2.19 2.84 11.01 1.61 3.5 above.1 0.03 9. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.07 1.08 0.25 0.93 2.47 29. .58 0.56 2.16 9. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.56 2.01 2.26 0.63 19. Meanwhile.23 0. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.7 2. Section 3.38 2.55 23.52 0.37 4.33 0.77 4. Apart from that.

4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4. floor beams.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . To compare the economy of the design. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.6 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 . external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3. Table 4.6 and Table 4.75 4.

The saving percentage.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 4.889 9.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.8.744 EC3 4.9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .122 9.313 9.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.76 Table 4.750 4.645 3.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 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. Table 4. is tabulated in Table 4.821 . meanwhile.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 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 .

29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4.821 4.744 3.42 15.9 EC3 design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4. Regardless of bay width.571 9. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1.96%.889 EC3 4.77 Table 4.60 17. This time. Further check on the effect of deflection was done. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.645 9.313 % 1. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection. depending on the steel grade. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. Semi-continuous . beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.60% to 17. This is because deeper. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.122 7. Meanwhile.9.96 5. This resulted in higher percentage difference.750 9. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. all frame types.

10 shown. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.5. which was used in the beam design. β is treated as β = 3.78 frame is achieved in this condition. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction. 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.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.749 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 To 2nd Storey 2nd . For uniformly distributed loading.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.0.10 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 . Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%. the deflection coefficient.

744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.12 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) 7.11. meanwhile.122 9.749 % 0.22 9.503 9.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.122 9. Table 4.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.645 5.503 7. The saving percentage.889 8.645 3.11 .211 10.11 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) 7.95 BS 5950 4.749 Table 4.750 4.750 4. is tabulated in Table 4.12.42 3.889 8.

Eventually. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. (b) semi-rigid construction. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. . (c) simple construction. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. if rigid connection is introduced. Therefore.1(b)).95%. the gap reduces. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. Please refer to Figure 4. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0.1(c)). if it is built semi-continuously. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated.11% to 10. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. However.0.80 From Table 4.12.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design.

Apart from that.05 in the moment capacity . a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the summary for the study on the comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 for the design of multi-storey braced frame. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6. γM0 of 1. Meanwhile. 5. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4.43%.1 Structural Capacity 5. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. for the moment capacity of structural beam. In review to the research objectives.1. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor. Av value also caused the difference.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam.

only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made.82 calculation required by EC3. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design.1. it was found that for a same value of λ. as compared to the partial safety factor. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. fc is smaller than pc. fc and pc respectively. axial compression is much more critical. A reduction in the range of 5. From interpolation.0 as suggested by BS 5950.0m long. Therefore.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. of both codes.2 Structural Column In simple construction. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. In comparison.27% to 9. 5. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. Therefore. 5.05 as required by EC3 design. EC3 design created majority . a structural beam will be subject to deflection. compared with BS 5950. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. γM0 of 1. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. Meanwhile. γM of 1.

83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design.63%.744 tons and 3. 4-storey. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. . compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design.750 tons for BS 5950 design. Section 4. In this study.2. I will have to be chosen. and 4. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame.645 tons and 9.889 tons for BS 5950 design.821 tons and 4.1 of EC3 provided proof to this.22% to 3. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison. the total deflection was greater. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. For a 2-bay. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. 5. The difference ranges from 0. However. For a 2-bay. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. Therefore. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. and 9. 4-storey. 9m bay width steel frame. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value.571 tons for EC3 design.313 tons for EC3 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. 6m bay width steel frame. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.122 tons and 7. E.

11% 2-bay. 9m bay width. 9m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 10.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. 6m bay width. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.96% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 7. S275 (Fe 430): 5. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior. 6m 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. 4-storey. However. S355 (Fe 510): 17. 6m bay width. 9m bay width. 9m bay width. 4-storey. 6m bay width.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design.95% 2-bay. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950.60% 2-bay. .0 to 3. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design.22% 5.42% 2-bay.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. 4-storey. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. 4-storey. 4-storey.42% 2-bay. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 15. S275 (Fe 430): 1. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 4-storey. S275 (Fe 430): 0. 4-storey.

Taylor J. Narayanan R et.” New Steel Construction.1 General Rules and Rules for Buildings. Steel Construction Institute (SCI) (2005). “Steel Design Can be Simple Using EC3.” London: British Standards Institution. 4.85 REFERENCES Charles King (2005). 24-27. “British Standard – Structural Use of Steelwork in Building: Part 1: Code of Practice for Design – Rolled and Welded Sections. (2001). & Lim J B (2003). al. “EN1993 Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. (1995). Issue 3. Heywood M.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. 29-32.” London: European Committee for Standardization. “Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures: Part 1.C.” ICE Journal.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. “Introduction to Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) – with Worked Examples. “Steelwork design guide to BS 5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked examples. November 2005. Paper 2658. D. . “EN 1993 Eurocode 3 – Steel. British Standards Institution (2001). Vol 13 No 4.” Eurocodenews. European Committee for Standardization (1992).

86 APPENDIX A1 .

DL Live Load.4 x 27.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. MAHMOOD 1.6 2.64 kN/m .87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 + 1.6LL Roof w = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.4 x 24 + 1. of Bay No.0 DATA No.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. LL = = 4 1.6 x 15 = 62.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. LL Floors Dead Load.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.4DL + 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.4 1. DL Live Load. DL Live Load.

88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 2. MAHMOOD 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.

64 kN/m 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.64 kN/m 62.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.64 kN/m .64 kN/m 62. MAHMOOD 2.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.

90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. contributed by beam shear.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams.52 144 331.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.64 x 6 / 2 = 187.84 707.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Roof beams. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281. .84 1039.88 kNm 4.1 Beam Moment. Shear. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. MAHMOOD 4. V = 62.68 1415.92 519.92 kN M = 62.

84 [3] [4] 707.92 [2] 519.92) 331.76 .52 707. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 281.92 (187.92) 1039.92) 144 [1] 331. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.76 1415.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.68 (187.88 281.84 (187.84 (187.92) 288 (187.88 281.92) 519.88 281. MAHMOOD 5.88 281.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.92) 663.

54 28.1.6 21.19 28.19 Moments are calculated from (1.19 [3] 28.54 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.6 28.19 31.19 28.6 [1] 21.19 21.19 [4] 28.19 28.19 31.54 31.6LL) .4DL+1.6 [2] 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.54 28.6 21.54 28.6 31.19 21.54 31.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0DL Most critical condition .19 31. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.19 28.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

5 x 15 = 59. of Bay No. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.5 x 9 = 45.76 kN/m . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.6 2. LL Floors Dead Load.35 1.35DL + 1. DL Live Load. LL = = 1.0 DATA No. MAHMOOD 1.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. DL Live Load. DL Live Load.35 x 27.9 kN/m Floors w = 1.35 x 24 + 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 + 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.5LL Roof w = 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. LL = = 4 1.

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

76 kN/m 59.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 6m 45.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m .3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.

28 kN M = 59.92 kNm 4.9 x 6 / 2 = 137. V = 59.96 992. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.08 137. Roof beams.7 kN M = 45. MAHMOOD 4.55 kNm Floor beams. .2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.1 Beam Moment.52 1351.4 633.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. contributed by beam shear. Shear. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.26 675.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. V = 45.7 316.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.98 496.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.

28) 633. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.96 (179.54 .92 268.26 [3] [4] 675.0 5.92 268.92 268.28) 992.7) 137.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.7) (137.28) 316. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.28) 137.98 [2] 496.52 (179.92 268.28) 496. MAHMOOD 5.92 268.08 675.7 [1] 316.92 5.26 (179.7 (179.2 Shear (kN) (137.28) 275.98 (179.55 268.54 1351.55 206.4 (179.

0DL Most critical condition .89 26.89 28.94 26.35DL+1.94 28.89 28. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.89 20.94 28.89 19.66 20.94 26.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.71 28.71 20.94 26.66 26.66 26. MAHMOOD 5.89 28.89 Moments are calculated from (1.89 26.94 26.89 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.66 19.89 26.89 26.1.89 26.5LL) .

100 APPENDIX B1 .

3 82 82.3 30 31.1 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 59.1 37 37 39 39.2 179 238. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 67.2 89.8 25.2 28.1 24.9 149.1 51 52.1 25.2 28.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 40.3 92.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .3 54 54.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.3 41.2 74.1 139.0m) STC.1 67.2 74.8 33. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 32.2 74.9 43 45 46 46.2 109 113 122 125.1 67.1 48.8 60.1 67.3 101 101.1 82.1 98. L = 6.1 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. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.

102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.1 13. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 1.0m) STC. subject to pure bending. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.2 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 Therefore.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.0 1.8 454. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. L = 6.9 8.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical.75 50.3 2. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.6 152.3 407. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. neutral axis at mid-depth.

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. L = 6.0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 kNm W pl.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y = M / fy = 268. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

36 131 8. Section chosen 1.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.15 47.4 1051 927 32. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Second moment of area.9 360.9 68.6 7.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.6 18670 4.0 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. L = 6.6 177. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.0m) STC.6 10. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.9 Therefore. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD 1.y = W el. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.

2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.05 = 32. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.26 kNm MSd Mc.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.001 γMO = 1. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .7 3. it is low shear Mc. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.5Vpl.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.5Vpl.92 kNm 0.48 = 298.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. L = 6.0m) STC.4 > 46. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.15 <= 9.48 kN VSd < Vpl.05 = 275.5 x 497.49 kN VSd 0.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 (b) Web.9 x 100 275 1.05 √3 = 497.28 kN V pl.001 / 1.Rd = 0.Rd = W pl.Rd < Therefore.

5 Ry.69) x 7. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.001 / 1.Rd = (50 + 52. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.0m) STC.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 σf.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).8 < 63. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .6 x 275 x 0.4 63. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.4 kN = VSd = 179.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. L = 6.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.28 kN < Ry.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.05 204. not susceptible to LTB 6.Rd = γM1 At support.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 5.

5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.98 <= 1.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.5 0.Rd 268.2 0. MAHMOOD At midspan.26 7.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. h= a= 402.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 ] .05 205 307. Rd = 0.3 ≤ = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.14 1.Rd = > 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. Ra. L = 6.92 275.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179. MSd Mc.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.

(118.6 2 = 1731.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.5 = 405. buckling about y-y axis.5 x SQRT(402. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) STC. λ = 2.4 / 7.5 d/t = 2.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.05 = 197. L = 6.6 = 118.Rd = 1 x 119.28 x 0.5 kN > At mid span.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.6 .75d Rolled I-section.05 A = beff x tw = 227.8 x 1731.5 x 360.8 N/mm 2 Rb.8 x 7.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 . use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.117) / (120 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.118) x (121 .001 / 1. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD beff = 0.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.6 l = 0. Rb.118) = 119.

46 = 18.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.88 6.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .0 1.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.14 mm OK δmax = 11.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.0m) STC.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.88 + 6. MAHMOOD 8.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

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. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Sx (cm3) 184.3 247.1 497.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 310. L = 5.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.4 568.4 988. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.6 978.1 652 802.0m) STC.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .

0m) STC. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209. Gross area.2 160.6 205.1 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 DATA Fc = 1415.23 17. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore.52 kN L= 5 m 1.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.2 9.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. L = 5. MAHMOOD 1. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.3 14.19 75.8 652 581.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.96 5.3 2.

1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis. L = 5. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.0 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.8 x 9.4 4.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.0m) STC.52 x 1000 / (160.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis .3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.96 x 10) = 47.85L = 0.

Mi = 63.0m) STC. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. the moment will be equally divided.5.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.9 x 75. Therefore. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.4 pc 242 239 Therefore.(47.4 .08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. the compressive resistance is adequate 5.54 kNm .001 = 1818. L = 5. M= 31. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column. R From frame analysis sheets.239) 2 = 239. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 x 100 x 0.46) x (242 .44 kN Fc < Pc 47. beam reaction.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.46) / (48 . MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .

0 6.52 1818.5 L/ry = (0. MAHMOOD 6.96 1.44 + 31.0 4.0m) STC.250) 2 = 260.54 170.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 . 7.45) x (233 .0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK . L = 5.17 .119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.(48.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.78 x 652 x 0.19 x 10) = 48.03 = < 0.001 = 170.03 kNm 1415.45) / (50 .78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

88 kNm M= W pl.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.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. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC. L = 5.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.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .

0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Second moment of area.6 14.y = W el. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. L = 5. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1. Area of section.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.2 200.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.2 990 895 11.86 98. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.94 23. MAHMOOD 1. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.2 Therefore.0 DATA NSd = 1351.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.08 kN Msd = 28.46 92.1 6.9 11370 6.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

05 = 259.1 Mny.1 Class 3 = 38.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.3 kNm Mny.y.Rd = 92.1 n ≥ 0.Rd Mny. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .Rd = 0.555 >= n < 0.9 (b) Web.0m) STC. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.05 Npl.Rd = 1.Rd = > MSd = 128.Rd = Mpl. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.Rd A fy Npl.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.11 Mpl.05 = 2433.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.94 <= 9.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.y. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.001 / 1.3 <= 30.1 28. L = 5.1 = 0.08 / 2433.Rd(1-n) W pl. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.y. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.8 3.1 kN n = 1351.1 Mpl.2 Class 3 = 13.001 / 1.

Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.05 = 2209. MAHMOOD 4.9 x 100 x 0. L = 5.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .y.5 x 28.7 x 92.3 0.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .0m) STC. y .38) x (40 .5 NSd Nb.(38.08 2209.Rd 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.y.001 / 1.y. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Rd η M c . y .85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.248) 2 = 249.Rd = 1 x 249.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.3 .94 1 x 128.Rd = = 1351.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.Sd ηMc.3 kN ky = 1.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.38) / (250 .1 x 10) = 38.y. Rd Nb.7 N/mm Nb.0 N b . sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .

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

126 APPENDIX D .

0m) Rev 1 STC.92 kNm W pl.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = M / fy = 268.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Section chosen 1.6 1096 950 36. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 66.99 53.6 21370 3. L = 6.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.4 7.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.9 Therefore. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.0m) Rev 1 STC. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.59 121 6. MAHMOOD 1.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.6 10.0 1.8 152.y = W el. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 407. Second moment of area.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.

5 x 100 275 1.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.2 (b) Web.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53. it is low shear Mc.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.15 kN VSd 0.92 kN VSd < Vpl.05 √3 = 551.Rd < Therefore.0m) Rev 1 STC.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4. L = 6.05 kNm MSd Mc.001 / 1. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.7 3.92 = 331.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.05 = 36.6 > 46.5Vpl.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.Rd = 0.92 kNm 0. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.28 kN V pl.5Vpl.05 = 287.5 x 551. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.Rd = W pl. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.99 <= 9.001 γMO = 1.

ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.05 = 196.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.6 63.001 / 1.5 Ry.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.0m) Rev 1 STC. not susceptible to LTB 6.28 kN < Ry. MAHMOOD 5.6 x 275 x 0.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.81) x 7.8 < 63. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.Rd = γM1 At support.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd = (50 + 48. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.5 σf.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).68 kN VSd = 179. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.

5 0.5 ] .2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.Rd = > 0.94 <= 1.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.05 205 299.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407. Rd = 0. Ra.3 ≤ = 1.0m) Rev 1 STC. MSd Mc.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.2 0.Rd 268.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.12 1.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.92 287.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179. MAHMOOD At midspan.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. h= a= 449.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.05 7.

Rd = 1 x 98.3 x 7.5 d/t = 2. L = 6.(134.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.9 kN > At mid span. λ = 2.88 x 0.6 2 = 1909. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.9 N/mm 2 Rb.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.1 .75d Rolled I-section.6 = 134.05 = 179. MAHMOOD beff = 0.98) / (135 .5 = 452. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x SQRT(449.0m) Rev 1 STC.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 .6 mm Buckling resistance of web.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.1 l = 0.9 x 1909. Rb. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.6 / 7. buckling about y-y axis.001 / 1.130) = 98.05 A = beff x tw = 251.130) x (103 .5 x 407.

0m) Rev 1 STC.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6. .δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. 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 .26 + 3.0 1.14 mm OK δmax = 7.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.26 3.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.95 = 11.

- 13060
- ښاغلو والدينو
- Part 1
- -alamthal8-نسخة
- Death List Internetversion Dari
- Death List Internetversion Original Dari
- Translation Death List Internetversion English
- تذکرت الاولیا
- Cal Dot Construction Manual Cmaug2009withbookmarks
- 2765733 Notice Reports and Guidance Documents Availability Etc New Bridge Construction and Bridge Rehabilitation Projects Construction Materials Used A
- Compendium-of-en-1993-1-1
- Ch-5-Manual-Methods-of-Plastic-Analysis
- A1-Structural-Detailing-in-Steel
- 29A-W Zulkifli-Shear Resistance of Axially Loaded Reinforced Concrete Sections
- CIDB-The-Building-and-Construction-Materials-Sector-Challenges-and-Opportunities
- Blue-Book-2011
- Handbook-of-Business-Contracts
- The Ecology of Building Materials
- The Structural Design of Tall Buildings
- Thhe Engineering of Vision From Consructivism to Computers - By Lev Manovich
- World’s Greatest Architect -- MAKING, MEANING, AND NETWORK CULTURE -- WILLIAM J. MITCHELL
- Ground Floor Presented to Architecture Students
- آمار ریاضي
- ترسیم ګراف

BS5950-Vs-EC3

BS5950-Vs-EC3

- BS and EC
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- Ec2 Bs8110 Compared
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- THE BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES TO EC3 (4th EDITION)
- Design Aids EuroCode
- Design of Base Plate for BS5950
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Design of Base Plate
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- steel_design
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- DESIGN_OF_STRUCTURAL_CONNECTIONS_TO _EUROCODE_3
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- Precast Concrete Structures - Hubert Bachmann
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridges
- Steel Section Capacities BS 5950 Spreadsheet
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- Designers' Guide to Eurocode 8 Design of Bridges for Earthquake Resistance (Designers' Guides to the Eurocodes)
- BSI EC3 Design of Steel Structures
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- BS 5950-Part1(1990)
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- Designers guide to EC3
- Designers' Guide to en 1998
- How to design to eurocode 2.pdf
- Wind Loads on Buildings Part-01 (BS6399)
- Eurocode 3 Design of Steel Structures 1[1].2
- BS5950 Vs EC3

Are you sure?

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

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd