## Are you sure?

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

1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

**BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
**

JUDUL:

υ

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

SESI PENGAJIAN: Saya

2006 / 2007

**CHAN CHEE HAN
**

(HURUF BESAR)

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

TERHAD

3

TIDAK TERHAD Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)

(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

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

Tarikh

CATATAN:

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

Tarikh:

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

* ** Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

υ

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

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

Signature

:

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

i

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

CHAN CHEE HAN

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

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER, 2006

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

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

four-storey braced steel frames with spans of 6m and 9m and with steel grade S275 (Fe 460) and S355 (Fe 510) by designed using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay.43%. safety factors. Therefore.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. design methods. 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: 2000.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.60% to 17. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design.27% and 9.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures.95%. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. loading values and etc. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. Meanwhile. However. specifications to be followed. However. 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. with the application of partial strength connections. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column.11% to 10. This study intends to testify the claim.

didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. Selain itu.60% – 17.43%.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. cara rekabentuk.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.11% – 10. . Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. Namun begitu. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. Justeru. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.27% – 9. Namun begitu. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. dan sebagainya. factor keselamatan. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6.95%. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). nilai beban.

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 1.1 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .3 1.2 1.

3.2 2.1.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.1.3.2 Stiffened Web 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.3.2.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.2.3.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.5.2 2.Rd Moment Capacity.2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.3.3.2 Serviceability 2.3.4.4 Loading 2.2. Mc 2.3.1 Unstiffened Web 2.1 2.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.2.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.1.2 BS 5950 2.4.3.3 Shear Capacity.2 2.5.4.1.1 2.2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.2 2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.3. Pv Moment Capacity.1 2. Mc.6 Deflection 2. Vpl.3.3.1.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 .4.3.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.4.1.3.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.3.3.4 Actions of EC3 2.3.3.1.3.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.

4 Buckling Resistance.7.1.Rd 2.1 Effective Length. Rb.3.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.4. Ry.3 Compression Resistance.6.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.Rd 2.2.4.ix 2.2.6.5.5. LE 2.4.1.4.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.5.2.4. Pc 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2. Nc. Nb.2 Crippling Resistance. λ 2.3.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.1 Buckling Length. Ra.5.2 Slenderness.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.2 Slenderness.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.6.4.5.4.4.1.3 Compression Resistance.5.6.6.6.1.6.Rd 2.6.1.Rd 2.1.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5 Deflection 2.1 Introduction 34 .7.4.1 2.7 Conclusion 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.5. l 2.1.2.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.Rd 2.1 Crushing Resistance.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 3.4.3 Buckling Resistance. λ 2.

3 Moment Calculation 3.8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.8.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.5 3.1 3.1.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Structural Capacity 5.2 4.x 3.4.2 Shear Calculation 3.1.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.8.2 4.9.1.7 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.2 3.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .1 4.2 3.9.8.3 3.1 Load Combination 3.10 Structural Column Design 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.1 BS 5950 3.6 3.10.1 3.10.4.

1.xi 5.3 5.2 5.2 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 .

7 4.2 3.4 4.10 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 .5 4.1 3.6 4.1 2.2 4.3 3. TITLE PAGE 2.9 4.1 4.3 4.11 4.8 4.2 3.4 4.

1(a) 4.1(b) 4.3 4.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.2 3. TITLE PAGE 3.1 3.1(c) Schematic diagram of research methodology Floor plan view of the steel frame building Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame Bending moment of beam for rigid construction Bending moment of beam for semi-rigid construction Bending moment of beam for simple construction 37 38 39 80 80 80 .

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

Rd Mb.y.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.y.Rd Rb.Major axis .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 Ry.Rd Vpl.Rd Mc.Rd h A Aeff Av .Rd Mpl.

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 .y Wpl.y Wel.z c/tf d/tw b l tf tw Sx Sy Wpl.Major axis .Major axis .xvi Plastic modulus .Minor axis Elastic modulus .

In present days.1 Introduction Structural design is a process of selecting the material type and conducting indepth calculation of a structure to fulfill its construction requirements. as well as the trading volume and diplomatic ties between these countries. and past experiences of experts at respective fields. Structural design should also be an integration of art and science. climate and national preferences. many countries have published their own standard codes. These details include the basis and concept of design. A standard code serves as a reference document with important guidance. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. specifications to be followed.CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1. The main purpose of structural design is to produce a safe. 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. safety factors. loading values and etc. reference to standard code is essential. . Several factors govern the type of code to be adopted. Meanwhile. In the structural design of steel structures. economic and functional building. These codes were a product of constant research and development. namely suitability of application of the code set in a country with respect to its culture. design methods.

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

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

The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3. hereafter referred to as EC3. Next. hereafter referred to as BS 5950. The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3.3 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. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple.4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. . A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out. Comparison to other steel structural design code is made. This structure is intended to serve as an office building. 2 bay braced frames. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. 1.4 1.

Chapter III will be a summary of research methodology.5 Report Layout The report will be divided into five main chapters. . Meanwhile.5 1. conclusions and recommendations are presented in Chapter V. Chapter I presents an introduction to the study. Results and discussions are presented in Chapter IV. Chapter II presents the literature review that discusses the design procedures and recommendations for steel frame design of the codes EC3 and BS 5950.

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

Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. and tying the structure together. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much. 2. 2.1. EC3 stresses the need for durability. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding.3. . eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor. which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. and with appropriate degrees of reliability. 2001). having due regard to its intended life and its cost. EC3 covers two limit states.7 and their resistance. it will remain fit for the use for which it is required.1. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered. impact or consequences of human errors. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3.

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

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

2. Meanwhile. only the greater effect needs to be considered when checking for serviceability. Generally. . and experimental verification.3. buckling and mechanism formation. only 80% of the full specified values need to be considered when checking for serviceability.2.1 Ultimate Limit States Several elements are considered in ultimate limit states.3 Design Concept of BS 5950 There are several methods of design.2 Serviceability Limit States There are several elements to be considered in serviceability limit states – Deflection. wind induced oscillation.3. in checking. Generally. 2. In the case of combined horizontal crane loads and wind load. and durability. serviceability loads should be taken as the unfactored specified values. vibration. in the design for limiting states.2. The load carrying capacity of each member should be such that the factored loads will not cause failure. stability against overturning and sway sensitivity.2. The fundamental of the methods are different joints for different methods. continuous design. semi-continuous design. They are: strength. In the case of combined imposed load and wind load. rupture. fracture due to fatigue. inclusive of general yielding.10 2. the specified loads should be multiplied by the relevant partial factors γf given in Table 2. and brittle fracture. BS 5950 covers two types of states – ultimate limit states and serviceability limit states. namely simple design.

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.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. 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. Where necessary. without calculating their local buckling resistance. imposed and wind loading. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well.11 2. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. There are dead. earth and groundwater loading. .3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. 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.2.3. 2. overhead traveling cranes.

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

Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections. 2. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. Z is the section modulus. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. Clause 4.13 in which Av is the shear area. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. and Zeff is the effective section modulus. Seff is the effective plastic modulus.3. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified. 2.3.3 Moment Capacity. . BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.5. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.3.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.2.

2. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.3.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 . - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.14 2.3.5.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1. Clause 4.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv.

it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.4.3. 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 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.15 2. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.4. but the web is designed for shear only.6Vw.6Vw.4.3.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0.4. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. 2. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section. a conservative value Mf for .3. or 62ε for a welded section. 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 ≤ 0.2 states that. qw = shear buckling strength of the web. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.4.3.1 of BS 5950 states that.4.

c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.3. It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.3.6Vw.or H-section: k=T+r k=T . with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.for a rolled I.except at the end of a member: n = 5 .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.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0. 2.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: . the web should be designed using Annex H.2.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b). where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange. .or H-section: . provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.for a welded I.5.5.

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.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps. 2. r is the root radius. T is the flange thickness. 2. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths.3. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.5.netpy in which As. allowing for cope holes for welding. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. and t is the web thickness.3.6 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. . Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. pyw is the design strength of the web.

the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. It is applicable for plastic design. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. It can also achieve rectangular stress block. It has limited rotation capacity.1.18 2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. Clause 5.3. To avoid this.4. Class 2 is also known as compact section. . 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. Class 1 is known as plastic section.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. However.

kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. 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. The member will fail before it reaches design stress.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. Class 4 is known as slender section. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. and ε = [235/fy]0.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure. 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.1. The stress block will be of triangle shape. Vsd.5 . the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. At each crosssection.Rd where Vpl. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5. Vpl. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved.2 Shear Capacity. 2.4. Apart from that.1. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance.

4.3 Moment Capacity.3.5.20 2.4. when maximum shear force.4.Rd.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.3. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl. 2. 2. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl. as stated in Clause 5. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors. For class 4 cross-sections.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.4.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.7 states that.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.3. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear . low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.Rd. Mc.Rd.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.

However.4.Ed / fyf)2]0.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web.7. this checking is unnecessary.5 (fyf / fyw)0.1 Crushing Resistance. 2. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.Rd ≤ Mc. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry. Thus.Rd of the web of an I.3 provides that the design crushing resistance. Ry. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.5 [1 – (σf.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.4. it is obtained as follows: MV.Rd – 1)2 2.5 .4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. Ry. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.21 force. Clause 5. For cross-sections with equal flanges. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange. bending about the major axis.4.

Sd = 0. σf.4.Rd of the web of an I. Rb. For member subject to bending moments.3 Buckling Resistance.2 Crippling Resistance.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange. and ss / d < 0.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.5 2. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.5tw2(Efyw)0.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.5 [(tf / tw)0.Rd ≤ 1.4.Rd and Fsd / Ra.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .4. 2.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.Rd + Msd / Mc. Rb. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.Rd of the web of an I.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.4.2. Ra. H or U section is given by: Ra. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.5.

checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only. 2.1 of EC3. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .5. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. 2. 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.2. Therefore. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4.1 and Table 5.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.4.5. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.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. applies only to non-moment sustaining column.5. This. however.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. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.

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. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. channel.1.5. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . Pc According to Clause 4. λ = LE / r 2. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.3 Compression Resistance. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. 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. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate.5. 2.5.2 Slenderness. This concept is not applicable for battened struts. in accordance of Table 22.7. and back-to-back struts.1.4. T-section struts. angle.1. 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.24 2.

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

Pc the compression resistance of column. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction. Mb the buckling resistance moment. 2. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.6. and Zy the elastic modulus. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. 2.2. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 The design of steel column according to EC3 is quite similar to the design of steel column according to BS 5950.26 2.5. py the steel design strength.

Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic.6.5 states that. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads.5. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.3 Compression Resistance. Clause 5. Nc.1. the value of λ should not exceed 180. the value of λ should not exceed 250. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .27 2.1.2 Slenderness.1 Buckling Length.Rd According to Clause 5. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section. 2.1. Alternatively. 2.6.1.6.4. 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. 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.4. the compression resistance Nc.Rd of a member is given by: Nc.

Rd .1.Rd 2.4 Buckling Resistance.6. 2 or 3 cross-sections. Nb.1. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.5. Clause 5.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc.28 Nc.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.Rd For compression members. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.

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

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

05 Nc. Rd .33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0. 3 Class 4 Nc. y .Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.5 2.05 4.0 N b.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.67 + 0.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0. Rd ηM c.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . y .Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3. 2.05 γM1 = 1.eff Class 1.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.

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

Please refer to Appendices A1 and A2 for the analysis worksheets created for the purpose of calculating shear force and bending moment values based on the requirements of different safety factors of both codes. that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets.8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. . As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. Calculation of bending moment. M and shear force. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed. Therefore. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed. Sections 3. V are based on simply-supported condition.4 to 3. End moments are zero.35 3.

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

1: Schematic diagram of research methodology .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. Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 3. M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear. Moment.

4 Structural Layout & Specifications 3. . Please refer to Figure 3.4. 2nd to 3rd. The intermediate frame will be used as the one to be analysed and designed. the 4-storey frame consists of four (4) bays. The storey height will be 5m from ground floor to first floor. The number of storey of the frame is set at four (4). Two (2) lengths of bay width will be used in the analysis – 6m and 9m respectively. 6m 6m 6/9m 6/9m Figure 3. in total.2 and Figure 3. a parametric study for the design of multi-storey braced frames is carried out.38 3.3 for the illustrations of building plan view and elevation view respectively. 4th storey is roof while the rest will serve as normal floors. 3rd to roof). whereas for other floors (1st to 2nd. In plan view.2 : Floor plan view of the steel frame building.1 Structural Layout In order to make comparisons of the design of braced steel frame between BS 5950-1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. the storey height will be 4m. there will be three (3) numbers of 4-storey frames. Each of the frame’s longitudinal length is 6m.

All the roof bays will be used for general purposes. 3. Meanwhile. all the beam-to-column connections are assumed to be pinned. . The main steel frame will consist of solely universal beam (UB) and universal column (UC). Web cleats will be used as the connection method to create pinned connection.39 4m 4m 4m 5m Figure 3.3 : Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame.4. All the bays will be serving the same function. As this is a simple construction. flat roof system will be introduced to cater for some activities on roof top.2 Specifications The designed steel frame structure is meant for office for general use. Meanwhile. all the column-to-column connections are to be rigid. Top flange of beams are effectively restraint against lateral torsional buckling.

2 (Flat roofs) states that. 3. Consequently. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. Meanwhile. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. . This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. For precast floor selfweight. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. Therefore. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. 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. this value will be adopted.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. In this design. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. Therefore.2. a uniform load intensity of 1.5kN/m2. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project.5 Loadings Section 2. 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. repair and other general purposes.5kN/m2 is appropriate. For imposed roof load. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. section 6. all floors will be of one-way slab. Therefore.0kN/m2 respectively. Meanwhile.4kN/m2 and 3.

35. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. finishes and fittings.4 for dead load.1. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. γG is given by 1. Partial safety factors for loads. γQ is given by 1.6 for imposed load. is given by 1. Meanwhile. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. In EC3.05 as well. depending on the interior designer’s intention. for normal design situations. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load.6 Factor of Safety Section 2.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that.1. For other floors. From Table 2. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1.4. The . 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. Meanwhile. 2 or 3 cross-section. γF for dead load. γf should be taken as 1. A general load intensity of 1. 3. and 1. for imposed floor load.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively.5. γM1. partial safety factors. γM0.05. is given by 1.

For steel grade S 355. 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 Fe 510. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness.4 times total dead load plus 1. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member. According to BS 5950. the load combination will be 1. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. in the meantime. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). 3. For steel grade S 275.2 “Material properties for hot rolled steel” (C-EC3) limits thickness of flange to less than or equal to 40mm for nominal yield strength fy of 275N/mm2 and larger but less than or equal to 100mm for fy of 255N/mm2.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.8. 3. In BS 5950.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).1.7 Categories In this project. 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.6 times total imposed . Meanwhile. 3.

3.92 From Table 4. According to EC3. For the roof. the shear. will be 48kN/m.4DL + 1. the resultant load combination. there is a difference of approximately 4. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.5 times total imposed load (1. the w will be 62. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.5% between the analyses of both codes.55 268. the load combination will be 1. the resultant load combination. For the roof.35DL + 1. For all other floors. w.9kN/m.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187.1 below: Table 3.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame.76kN/m.6LL). the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.5LL).64kN/m. Table 3.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206.8. For simple construction. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. Clearly. will be 45.43 load (1. w. The next table. For all other floors.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. This is done by summating the resultant shear .35 times total dead load plus 1.88 6m 137. the w will be 59.1.7 179.

similar with the beam shear. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.4 633.76 9m Ext.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int.76 1559.84 1039.7 316.94 1488.64 6m Ext.62 Ext.68 1415.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. 3.1 950.76 1061. Table 3.26 675. M.5%. 275.55 475.31 Int. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.98 496. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 206. structural beam moment.52 1351. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st . 216 497.28 Int.Ground 288 663. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.8. 432 995.84 707.88 779.52 2123. 137. 144 331. = Internal column Ext.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction.96 992.3: .44 force from beam of each floor.54 Int. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8.92 519.78 2026.47 744. 413. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.39 1013.08 Int.

the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm.6% between the analyses of both codes. Me. initially.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. the higher the difference percentage will be. In this project. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams.45 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).3. the eccentricity moment. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. there is a difference of approximately 4. the depth of the column has not been decided yet.23 6m 206.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281.74 605. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. D or h is the depth of column section (m). there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. the higher the load combination of a floor. For the moments of the structural columns.4% to 4. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment.55 268. However. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). in this case. . Therefore.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464.07 From Table 3. since this is simple construction. Subsequently. Regardless of the width of the bay. Clearly.

3. 30. Table 3. for internal column.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.6 63.4 84.56 6m Ext.6 Int. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state.66 57.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.66 53.0DL.88 Int. Roof Other Floors 21.38 9m Ext. V can be expressed as V = (1. 20. V can be expressed as V = (1.35DL + 1.78 Int. Next.5.6LL) – 1.0DL. 30.98 86. 32.5LL) – 1. 32. 20. For EC 3.84 Ext. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.4 94.6 56.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done. 21. In simple construction.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.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. For BS 5950. However.4DL + 1.98 80. . Table 3. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.

T = 13. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.6mm. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.47 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). Width. Sx = 1290cm3.8kg/m. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. B = 152. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59.88kNm. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. 3. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. Sx = M / py = 281. Web thickness. shear capacity. Depth between fillets.1 BS 5950 In simple construction.9mm. Elastic modulus.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. b/T = 6. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) .99.9. D = 454. Flange thickness.1mm.92kN and 281. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. From the section table.6mm. Depth. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). moment capacity and web bearing capacity.3mm. Plastic modulus. t = 8. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. From the section table for universal beam. d/t = 50. d = 407.3. Zx = 1120cm3.

0. Therefore.26mm2 Pv = 0. After clause 4. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .2.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950.57 = 364. Next. shear capacity is adequate. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. web is Class 1 plastic section.6Pv = 0.0 in this design.92kN Therefore. Since actually d/t < 70.6 = 3682.4.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. where neutral axis is at mid-depth. Mc” is checked.1 x 454. Av = 8. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. this section is Class 1 plastic section. therefore.75. Actual b/T = 5.0.6 x 607. For web of I-section. Since both flange and web are plastic. shear buckling needs not be checked. it is low shear.6 x 275 x 3682. Next. Shear capacity.2.48 = 1. Therefore. section 4. Pv = 0. clause 4. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. actual d/t = 50.5 “Moment capacity. flange is Class 1 plastic section. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80.3.4.3 “Shear capacity” is checked.0. Mc = pySx. 0.5 is checked.54kN > Fv Therefore. section 4.6pyAv. Meanwhile. shear buckling resistance should be checked. For class 1 plastic cross-section.26 x 10-3 = 607.57kN > Fv = 187.

88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.92kN .3 = 51.75kNm Therefore. M = 281.2 + 2 x 13. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.2pyZx = 1.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.34kN > Fv = 187.5.49 = 354. Mc should be limited to 1.02mm k=T+r = 13.2 = 23.2pyZx.1 + 1. bearing stiffener should be provided.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange.3 + 10. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.5mm At support.6be/k.2mm b1 = t + 1.6kNm > Mc. OK.6 x 10. be = 0. section 4.02mm Pbw = 98.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. 1. If Fv exceeds Pbw. bearing capacity of web. therefore.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked. n = 2 + 0. moment capacity is adequate.02 x 8.

After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. w = 15kN/m for floors.50 Therefore. δ. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. The section is adequate. This is done in the form of deflection check. the bearing capacity at support is adequate.67mm >δ Therefore. In this case. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. However. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. Therefore. the deflection is satisfactory.5) should be conducted. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). . is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. Generally. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. L = 6.

Depth. Av = 32. Depth between fillets.6mm. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check.y = 927cm3.2 EC 3 In simple construction.92 x 103 / 275 = 977. d = 360.4mm. it is adequate to be used. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. shear capacity. resistance of web to crushing.9cm2.9mm. crippling and buckling. 3. Therefore.y = M / py = 268.6mm. tf = 10. From the section table for universal beam. moment capacity. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. Wpl.9cm3 From the rearranged table. Plastic modulus. Wel. h = 402. Web thickness. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Shear area. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. b = 177.y (cm3). Width.y = 1051cm3. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.28kN and 268. Area of .92kNm. tw = 7. Wpl. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. lateral torsional buckling.9. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. From the section table. Flange thickness.6mm. Elastic modulus.

UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section.28kN γM0 = 1.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked. Actual d/tw = 47. fu = 430N/mm2.05 Vpl. limiting d/tw ratio is 66.6 for Class 1 elements. yield strength. For S275 (Fe 430).2 for Class 1 elements.15.28kN Therefore.6cm2. flange subject to compression only”. Flange is Class 1 element.Rd = (32.15 ≤ 9. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. For “web subject to bending.9mm. Therefore.05) = 497. section 5. iLT = 4.36cm.28kN . VSd = 179. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength. d/tw = 47.2. The design value of shear force. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9.5 x 497.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0.48kN > 179.52 section. Actual c/tf = 8. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations.48 = 298.4.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1. aLT = 131cm.6.Rd. tf ≤ 40mm. tf = 10. that is Vpl. Second moment of area. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.Rd = 0. Web is Class 1 element.6(a). A = 68. for “outstand element of compression flange. neutral axis at mid depth”. shear resistance is sufficient. section classification is a must. 0.4 ≤ 66. Next. From Table 5. c/tf = 8. Iy = 18670cm4.5Vpl.5. Based on Table 3.49kN > VSd = 179.1.

For crushing resistance. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. Therefore. shear buckling check is not required.8.Ed/fyf)2]0.5. crippling resistance. Ry.5 . not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling.5 [1 – (γM0 σf.Rd.Rd. Ra.92kNm Mc.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked. Section 5. Rb.05 = 275.4 < 63. For low shear. Actual d/tw = 47.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.26kNm > MSd Therefore. Ry. section 5.5. Section 5.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd = Wpl. the moment capacity is sufficient. MSd = 268.5. Therefore.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.Rd and buckling resistance. The beam is fully restrained. section 5.8 and 56.53 Therefore.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.5[fyf/fyw]0.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.6 “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. low shear.

6)0.05 = 307.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.Rd = 0.05 = 204.62 (210000 x 275)0.6 = 1731. OK. Rb.4kN For crippling resistance.7mm.Ed = 0.14 ≤ 0.28mm2 .9 (177. bending moment is zero.8 x 7.6/10.5tw2 (Efyw)0.6 / 7. γM0 = 1.8kN For buckling resistance.4 = 0.14)] / 1.54 At support.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra. sy = 10.9/7.9)(0.5 [(10. Ra.69mm Ry. σf. A = 227.5 = 52.5 + a + ss/2 = 0. ss = 50mm at support.5 = 405.2.05.Rd = (50 + 52.69) x 7.6)0.5 [(tf/tw)0.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.5 [402. OK γM1 = 1.62 + 502]0.5[h2 + ss2]0.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.5 x 7.5 + 3(7.Rd = 0. fyf = 275N/mm2.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.

4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.2) should be conducted. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4. which is larger than VSd = 179.28kN.5kN Ra.1.8kN Ry. fc = 119. OK.5kN.6 = 118. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.Rd = 1 x 119. λ√βA = 118. curve (a) is used.Rd = 204.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.5 x 360.8 x 1731. Therefore. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.8N/mm2 Rb.6 From Table 5.Rd = 307.5 d/t = 2. λ = 2. (Permanent load) . the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.05 = 197. This is done in the form of deflection check.13 (rolled I-section).4 / 7.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120.28 x 10-3 / 1. From Figure 4.6kN/m for floors.29). Generally. buckling about y-y axis.6 λ√βA = 118.

46mm Table 4. In this case. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. the deflection is satisfactory. . the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. δ. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27. However. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18.14mm > δ2 δlim.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. δlim.34mm Therefore.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. (Imposed load) L = 6. The section is adequate. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.

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.

My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50.7. Section 4.19 x 10 = 48. Mi = 63. therefore. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1.03kNm . From frame analysis.5 x 5000 / 5. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. M = 31.54kNm. Therefore. λLT = 45.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. pb = 260.08kNm. λLT = 48. for columns in simple construction.17. R.5L / ry = 0. when only nominal moments are applied.7 “Columns in simple structures”.5. the beam reaction. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0.60 Next. the moment will be equally divided. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.

The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. 3. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. it is adequate to be used.y = MSd / fy = 57. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. .0 Therefore.88 x 103 / 275 = 210. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.88kNm respectively.5cm3 From the rearranged table. From the section table for universal column. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. Therefore.10. 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).2 EC 3 In simple construction.44 + 31.08kN and 57.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415.96 < 1. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. apart from section classification.y (cm3). UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.52 / 1818.03 = 0.54 / 170. Wpl. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.

2 and 10. A = 92.2. b = 254mm.1cm.5cm.3.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. section 5. Second moment of area.8. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. c/tf = 8.86cm. section 5.2 respectively.5.9cm2.3.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. tw = 8.2 x 8. h = 254mm.08 x 103 / 200. tf = 14. iy = 11. From Table 5.5b). Area of section. From this table. tf = 14. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). Wel. therefore. d/tw = 23. iz = 6.y = 895cm3. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. d = 200.6cm2. For web subject to bending and compression. Radius of gyration. this section is Class 1 section.1.y = 990cm3. Actual c/tf = 8. Therefore. the web is Class 1. Web thickness. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5.94. iLT = 6.6mm. the classification depends on the mean web stress. σw. Width. Beforehand. .73N/mm2 Table 5.62 From the section table. Depth between fillets. aLT = 98.94 < 9. Elastic modulus. from. Since both flange and web are plastic. Av = 25.46cm. fy = 275N/mm2. flange is Class 1 element.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked.6 = 784.94 (c = 0. Actual c/tf = 8.2mm < 40mm. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. Iy = 11370cm4.2mm. Plastic modulus. Next. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. Wpl. Flange thickness. with d/tw = 23. Depth.2mm. Shear area.

11 Mpl. MNy.3 x (1 – 0.1kN n = 1351.05 = 259.Rd = 1.Rd > Vmax.y.Rd (1 – n) Npl.3kNm MNy.555 ≥ 0. n = NSd / Npl. allowing for axial force.1 Therefore.555) .58kN 0. From Table 5.63 Vpl.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.08 / 2433.11 Mpl.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.Sd Therefore.y.Rd is such that n < 0.05 = 2433.Rd = Mpl.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11. MN.Rd n ≥ 0.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.05) = 387.y.1 = 0.Rd = 1.y.Sd = My.Rd = 1. the section is subject to a low shear.5Vpl.1 : MNy.11 x 259.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.27.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.Sd / L = 57.Rd = Wpl.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.1 : MNy.

3 Based on Table 5.64 = 128.1 x 10 = 38.85L = 0.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.y.94kNm Therefore.y.0 Ly = 0.Sd / ηMc. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38. the moment resistance is sufficient.7N/mm2 . λy√βA = 38. Lastly. section 5.Rd) + (kyMy.Rd) ≤ 1.1kNm > MSd = 28. fc = 249. buckling curve (b) is used.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.3.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.3.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb. for buckling about y-y axis.6.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38.

Rd) = (1351.Rd) + (kyMy.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.0 Therefore.3) + (1.5 x 28.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.95 < 1.y.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1. γM1 = 1.7 x 92. .65 Nb.y.94 / 1 x 128.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.08 / 2209.y. Therefore.1) = 0.Sd / ηMc. it is adequate to be used. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.05 = 2209.05 = 1 x 249.

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

44 2.16 551.15 343.33 862.36 11.55 617.83 0.92 2.57 -2.13 19.65 0.57 680.15 507.47 545.23 -9.09 16.48 759.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.18 8.11 -2 2.6 14.14 583.26 2.29 452.5 1.45 -1.21 441.19 1.56 3.93 1.24 3.98 305.38 1.78 -20.11 -1.19 387.5 1102.72 % Diff.27 819.19 4.58 308.56 15.96 666.41 925.34 523.1 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 291.47 596.78 541.7 -0.46 -3.82 2.77 1146.09 -2.8 800.21 -24.38 811.74 -0.93 11.09 -2.4 0.7 1.52 443.55 712.93 334.33 577.99 660.85 854.94 559.65 846.1 493.4 0.5 529.14 784.88 -18.6 1.79 12.7 9.2 447.98 1134.27 0.66 24.16 4.62 515.46 2.38 542.73 -3.81 -3.34 44.51 18.55 583.37 338.55 3.35 -1.77 6.28 8.83 0.59 460.5 1.84 727.75 437.28 303.21 668.27 0.1 -2.27 13.79 2.58 753.5 -0.78 942.74 0.74 2.66 704.55 1.95 404.92 394.51 -4.16 1057.79 11.65 724.32 860.86 619.64 0.63 12.35 431.86 -0.79 2.56 878.02 6.06 1.77 728.53 943.4 -0.65 635.67 644.88 876.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.72 -12.68 6.42 820.39 462.38 1.66 497.2 -2.27 14.51 1.91 -19.61 340.79 398.85 767.35 730.53 356.99 589.62 1.5 461.75 -13.44 471.22 2.21 667.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.56 -5.82 2.5 -0.39 1.6 405.7 -0.18 358.83 938.47 341.31 2.51 384.65 0.93 1.19 1.03 4.85 405.4 -10.68 1007.04 % Diff.37 399.87 -0.02 698.32 783.32 10.15 3.15 -16.78 456.69 -1.27 845.15 3.31 446.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.14 .93 11.56 400.32 877.85 517.91 1011.53 564.78 -25.2 777.28 554.47 831.06 1.81 523.96 6.02 12.3 14.94 2.29 5.99 918.81 528.99 15.14 18.65 420.77 -3.45 623. BS 5950 (kN) 376.38 20.89 678.55 522.73 -2.84 300.48 517.3 683.58 34.26 888.08 2.09 1012.05 607.94 2.33 409.25 382.09 773.46 478.21 15.57 13.07 942.81 -3.81 1024.67 Table 4.6 10.64 0.24 0. 2.78 15.52 439.5 1.92 588.74 2.13 1091.79 2.97 392.81 -2.39 511.02 496.13 705.26 -8.74 393.35 793.74 594.66 5.69 4.87 433.86 1204.6 1.37 609.95 2.71 429.55 1.17 8.64 5.11 1218.5 642.2 1102.61 345.

55. Table 4. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.57 -4.58 4.3% less than 0.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94. Therefore.91 % Diff.06%. the difference percentage ranges from -2.76 4. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.69% to 4. however. This value.57% to 4. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.06%. There are a few explanations to the variations.77 4. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.49 1295.78 11.07 .59 4.59 5.45 1431.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.62 182.43 -1.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113. Also.07 170.6 as suggested by BS 5950.57 206. the difference percentage ranges from -3. which is approximately 8.05 1099.43 160.35 -0.3 6. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.8 8.58 -9.28 148.13 8. For steel grade S355.94 162.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.86 125.03 1440.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.06 1115.07 6.23 168.98 141.43 3.41 143.94 -12.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.05 110.43 3.44 1300.59 5.14 8.97 6.35 217.6 137. 6. meanwhile.81 5.76 191.13 -0.51 1007.83 132.01 -16.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.06 % Diff. For steel grade S275.05 3.21 -1.

For steel grade S275.86 4.43 4.53 5.5 14.35 693.6 341.85 585. the difference percentage ranges from 0.66 5.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.47 955.55 4.24 1.83 1.16 5.79 141.1 244.52 11.69 188.33 181.28 5. meanwhile.07 609.24 1.05 0.49 5.48 5.57 5.45 234.29 15.8 799.55 21.75 398.75 484.29 202.02 377.55 9.63 7.55 429.44 4.31 19.04 1.69 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 195.95 189.4 277.55 4.13 318.65 149.62 7.33 471.25 453.19 370.7 18.11 242.17 27.3 695.44 12.5 354.55 257.73 21.8 1082.23 213.08 5.5 457.89 1.72 9.24 376.02 455.7 211. the difference percentage ranges from 1.2 291.65 590.96 21.87 4.35 731.5 44.1 1.22 13.78 15.29 1.65 749.1 5.06 11.83 275.57 355.95 24.75 199.98 352.3 4.97 14.53 549.73 19.5 15.21 287.9 11.96 10.27 14.5 5.83 5.17 7.2 24.02 18.44 14.02 315.5 34.98 24.3 426 479.85 11.75 431.85 5.75 332.65 5.87 4.28 15.1 285.5 479.52 434.33 198 232.05 232.66 2.08 510.39 682.68 560.35 624.98 20. .05 11.53 171.1 5.85 27.53 1.05 585.86 8.9 900.52 395.65 244.5 691.41 221.25 5.42 5.05 35.92 13. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.48 17.67 20.95 514.35 1104 238.73 2.68 12 13.58% to 6.16 9.4 264.63 4.6 5.11 5.57 5.41% to 6.75 300.01 4.45 18.14 410.83 4.25 397.08 358.93 885.71 9.24 17.84 13.49 5.5 654.6 300.27 1.5 390.05 336.94 10.41 19.95 566.65 404.9 163.55 433.95 532.01 182.1 539 619.78 487.75 631.32 0.43 4.33 192.88 10.45 521.9 619.45 769.49 15.63 4.25 497.17 24.33 221.28 5.86 4.3 844.93 740.4 838.31 4.67 685.06 0.46 5.17 171.43%.26 312.37 16.29 2.95 479.58 5.34 404.13 246.75 562.16 5.26 317. For steel grade S355.77 233.32 10.08 252.32 1.95 275.1 220.03%.14 3.81 529.11 5.95 385.01 4.95 755.35 302.11 261.99 4.38 8.51 1.25 517.17 255.68 0.12 5.5 302.45 976.08 6.5 330 371.85 5.95 848 184.67 425.36 2.53 5.61 4.41 5.

For example. are revised.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. Table 4.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. for a UB section 406x178x54. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. Class 2 or Class 3 element.95.3. Therefore.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.85%. . The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. This is approximately 5% less than 1. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. Besides that.1. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. For a column web subject to bending and compression. whether it is Class 1.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. Meanwhile.70 There are a few explanations to the variations.Rd = Wpl. 4.0 as suggested by BS 5950. There is a variation of approximately 0.

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

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

% Diff.

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

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

% Diff.

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

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

3825.9 4677.1 5435.4 6294.2 7924.8 9626.4 11403.1

**Table 4.4 Moment resistance and percentage difference
**

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

% Diff.

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

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

% Diff.

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

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

72

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

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

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

Mb = pbSx

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

However, moment capacity based on EC3 design,

Mpl.y.Rd = Wpl.y fy / γM0

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

4.2

Deflection

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

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

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

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

29 0.84 11.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.34 18. However.1.61%.83 13.24 2.16 1. for a section 356x171x57.93 2.63 19.21 24.68 2.35 0.32 10.38 2.74 4.13 8.6 2.01 1.83 20. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.33 3.33 4. Meanwhile. Meanwhile.25 2.01 0. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.5 above. for a floor beam of 9m long. For example.79 16.71 3.46 2. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table. .64 4.43 2.37 2. section 3. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.1 0.19 2.07 0.68 13. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.85 15.42 0.4 0. δmax.66 2.26 2.47 29.16 9.12 17.1.75 2.62 5.08 21.55 From Table 4.77 16.27 3.53 0.07 0.61 3.26 18.73 1.4 2.96 1.75 18.01 2.58 0.08 0.63%.25 2.7 2.4 2.51 0.26 0.98 21.63 2.31 2.85 1.56 2. E.85 1.7 2.25 16.55 23.18 1.04 0. for a floor beam of 6m long.1 0.06 0.05 0.33 0.06 0.37 4.34 1. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.49 2.29 0.66 0.56 2.7 2. Meanwhile.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.1 0.25 0.9 9.59 2.22 28.23 0.77 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.13 0.45 14. the difference percentage ranges from -0. Different from BS 5950.07 1.05 0.03 9. Section 3. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.84 4.32 0.16 11.1 3. as required by EC3.21 2.33 12. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.71 3.36 8.08 0.04 2.52 0.41 1.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.46 2.21 3.2 3.51 21.8 1.22% to 3.06 0.25 13.56 2.22% to 3.78 3.77 4.54 2. Apart from that.

4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.75 4.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 and Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4. To compare the economy of the design.6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . Table 4. floor beams.

313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. meanwhile.8.821 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 4.7 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 .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .122 9.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. is tabulated in Table 4.744 EC3 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.8 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Types of Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.9.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .750 4. The saving percentage.313 9. Table 4.76 Table 4.821 .645 3.889 9.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.

42 15. Semi-continuous .122 7. all frame types. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.60% to 17. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade.645 9. This resulted in higher percentage difference. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection.96 5.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4. depending on the steel grade. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design. Meanwhile.889 EC3 4.77 Table 4. Further check on the effect of deflection was done. Regardless of bay width. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.9.821 4.60 17.313 % 1. This is because deeper.750 9.744 3. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection.571 9. This time.96%. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.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.

0. For uniformly distributed loading.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. the deflection coefficient. Please refer to Appendix D for a redesign work after the β value had been revised and the section redesigned to withstand bending moment from analysis process.10 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x151x67 406x140x46 356x127x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . which was used in the beam design. β is treated as β = 3.10 shown.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force. Table 4. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%.78 frame is achieved in this condition.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .5.

11.503 9. The saving percentage. is tabulated in Table 4.11 .645 5.95 BS 5950 4.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.750 4.503 7.645 3.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.211 10.750 4.749 Table 4.12.889 8.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4. Table 4.11 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Types of Frame Bay Width (m) 2Bay 4Storey 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7. meanwhile.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.749 % 0.42 3.122 9.889 8.122 9.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.22 9.

11% to 10. Please refer to Figure 4. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame.0. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1.95%. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4.1(b)). (b) semi-rigid construction. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated.80 From Table 4. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design. if rigid connection is introduced. the gap reduces. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight.1(c)). However. Therefore.12.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. .1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. Eventually. (c) simple construction. if it is built semi-continuously.

1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6. Meanwhile. for the moment capacity of structural beam. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. 5. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4.1. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.05 in the moment capacity . In review to the research objectives. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter. γM0 of 1. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.1 Structural Capacity 5. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. Apart from that. Av value also caused the difference.43%.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.

Therefore.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength.0 as suggested by BS 5950. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project.1.82 calculation required by EC3. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. as compared to the partial safety factor. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. fc is smaller than pc. it was found that for a same value of λ. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. fc and pc respectively. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. of both codes. γM of 1. From interpolation. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. compared with BS 5950. In comparison. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. γM0 of 1. Meanwhile. 5.05 as required by EC3 design.0m long. 5. Therefore.2 Structural Column In simple construction.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. A reduction in the range of 5.27% to 9. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. axial compression is much more critical. EC3 design created majority .

313 tons for EC3 design. 5. . thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. 6m bay width steel frame. I will have to be chosen.744 tons and 3.889 tons for BS 5950 design. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9.821 tons and 4.571 tons for EC3 design. Therefore. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. the total deflection was greater. and 9.750 tons for BS 5950 design. 4-storey.645 tons and 9. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design.63%. 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. The difference ranges from 0. However. 4-storey. E.22% to 3. and 4. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. For a 2-bay. In this study.122 tons and 7. 9m bay width steel frame.2. Section 4. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.1 of EC3 provided proof to this.

6m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 17. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. 6m bay width. S275 (Fe 430): 1.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. 4-storey. 9m bay width. 9m bay width.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. 4-storey.22% 5.96% 2-bay.42% 2-bay. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design.0 to 3. 9m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 15.42% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 0. 4-storey. . However. 4-storey.95% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 5.11% 2-bay.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. 4-storey. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950. 6m bay width. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. 4-storey. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). S275 (Fe 430): 5. 4-storey. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 10. 9m bay width. 6m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 7.60% 2-bay.

Paper 2658. & Lim J B (2003).” ICE Journal. Vol 13 No 4. “Introduction to Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) – with Worked Examples. November 2005. “Steel Design Can be Simple Using EC3. “EN1993 Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Issue 3. Narayanan R et. “British Standard – Structural Use of Steelwork in Building: Part 1: Code of Practice for Design – Rolled and Welded Sections.1 General Rules and Rules for Buildings. “Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures: Part 1.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. British Standards Institution (2001). Steel Construction Institute (SCI) (2005).” London: British Standards Institution.” London: European Committee for Standardization. .” Eurocodenews. D. (2001). (1995). Heywood M.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. 29-32.85 REFERENCES Charles King (2005).” New Steel Construction. “EN 1993 Eurocode 3 – Steel. “Steelwork design guide to BS 5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked examples. al. 24-27. Taylor J.C. European Committee for Standardization (1992). 4.

86 APPENDIX A1 .

MAHMOOD 1.4 1. DL Live Load.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1.4DL + 1. of Bay No.6 2.4 x 27.6 x 15 = 62. DL Live Load.4 x 24 + 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 DATA No. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m .5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 + 1.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. LL = = 4 1. LL Floors Dead Load. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. DL Live Load. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1.6LL Roof w = 1.

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

MAHMOOD 2.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.64 kN/m 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m .64 kN/m 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62.

52 144 331.92 kN M = 62.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Roof beams.1 Beam Moment.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.92 519. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams. MAHMOOD 4.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.84 707.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.88 kNm 4. V = 62.68 1415. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .84 1039. Shear.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. contributed by beam shear. . horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.

84 [3] [4] 707.84 (187.84 (187.92) 1039.92) 288 (187.76 .88 281. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92) 519.76 1415.92) 663.88 281. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.88 281.92 (187.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.92) 331.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.68 (187.92) 144 [1] 331.92 [2] 519. MAHMOOD 5.88 281.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.88 281.52 707.

6 [2] 28.19 28.54 28.19 31. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.54 31.19 21.4DL+1.6 [1] 21.19 [4] 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.6LL) .92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 31.19 21.6 21.54 28.19 28.54 28.19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.6 28.19 31. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.19 28.54 28.0DL Most critical condition .19 28.6 21.19 [3] 28.6 31.1.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

9 kN/m Floors w = 1.5 x 15 = 59.35DL + 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. LL = = 4 1. DL Live Load.0 DATA No.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. of Bay No.76 kN/m . of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.35 x 24 + 1. DL Live Load.6 + 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.35 1.6 2.5 x 9 = 45. DL Live Load. LL = = 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.5LL Roof w = 1.35 x 27. MAHMOOD 1.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. LL Floors Dead Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 2.0 2.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame .95 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.

0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m .96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 6m 45. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.

2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . V = 45.1 Beam Moment.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. V = 59.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.98 496.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.28 kN M = 59. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.08 137.4 633. .9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.7 316.92 kNm 4. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. MAHMOOD 4. contributed by beam shear.26 675.55 kNm Floor beams.52 1351. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.7 kN M = 45.96 992.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Roof beams. Shear.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.

26 (179.54 1351.28) 316.98 (179.96 (179.28) 275. MAHMOOD 5.7) (137.55 268.92 268. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.7 (179.26 [3] [4] 675.08 675.28) 137.92 268.92 268.92 5.28) 992.28) 496.52 (179.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 (179.28) 633.92 268.7) 137.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.92 268.98 [2] 496.0 5.7 [1] 316.54 .2 Shear (kN) (137.55 206.

89 28.66 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.89 Moments are calculated from (1.94 26.89 26. MAHMOOD 5.94 28.66 26. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.66 20.89 19.89 28.94 26.89 26.89 26.89 20.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0DL Most critical condition .94 26.66 19.71 28.89 26.94 28.5LL) .1.89 26.94 26.89 26.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.35DL+1.71 20.89 28.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

9 43 45 46 46.1 139.8 25.1 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 82.1 67.1 32.1 67.2 89.3 82 82. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 28.1 25.2 28.1 67.8 33.2 74.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.2 74.1 48.2 74.1 40. L = 6.8 60.1 51 52.2 179 238.3 92.9 149.3 30 31. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 67.3 41.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.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 = 281.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .0m) STC.1 37 37 39 39.2 109 113 122 125.3 54 54. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 98.1 24.3 101 101.

0m) STC.3 Therefore.0 1. subject to pure bending.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13. neutral axis at mid-depth.3 407.2 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 = 59.6 152. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange.8 454.3 2.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.1 13. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.75 50.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . MAHMOOD 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. L = 6.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.9 8.

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 .

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.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.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .y = M / fy = 268. L = 6.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977. 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.0m) STC.

9 68.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y = W el. MAHMOOD 1.6 177.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.6 10. L = 6.15 47.0 1.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Second moment of area.9 Therefore. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.6 7.36 131 8.6 18670 4.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. Section chosen 1. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.9 360.0m) STC.4 1051 927 32.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .

7 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.05 √3 = 497.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.28 kN V pl.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.4 > 46.001 / 1.05 = 275. L = 6.0m) STC.15 <= 9.001 γMO = 1.48 kN VSd < Vpl. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.2 (b) Web. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.5Vpl.9 x 100 275 1.Rd = W pl.48 = 298. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.Rd < Therefore.49 kN VSd 0.5Vpl.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.Rd = 0.05 = 32.5 x 497. it is low shear Mc.92 kNm 0.26 kNm MSd Mc.

L = 6.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.4 63.8 < 63. not susceptible to LTB 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 Ry.001 / 1. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.28 kN < Ry. MAHMOOD 5. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.0m) STC.Rd = (50 + 52.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.Rd = γM1 At support.05 204.5 σf.6 x 275 x 0.4 kN = VSd = 179.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.69) x 7.

5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.2 0. Ra. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.3 ≤ = 1.Rd 268.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.14 1.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.98 <= 1.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.92 275.0m) STC.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.5 0.4 = γM1 = E= Ra. MAHMOOD At midspan.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.Rd = > 0.5 ] . Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 205 307.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179. MSd Mc. Rd = 0.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0. h= a= 402.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .26 7.

(118.4 / 7.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.28 x 0.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. buckling about y-y axis. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.118) x (121 .6 = 118.8 x 7.6 2 = 1731.8 x 1731.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 . λ = 2.75d Rolled I-section.5 x SQRT(402.001 / 1. MAHMOOD beff = 0.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.0m) STC. Rb.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.05 A = beff x tw = 227.5 x 360. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.118) = 119.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .5 kN > At mid span. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = 1 x 119.5 d/t = 2.8 N/mm 2 Rb.6 .117) / (120 .8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.6 l = 0.5 = 405. L = 6.05 = 197.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.

L = 6.88 6. MAHMOOD 8.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0m) STC.46 = 18. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. .34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.0 1.88 + 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.14 mm OK δmax = 11.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .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.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 497.3 247.1 652 802. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.4 988. 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) 184.0m) STC. L = 5.1 310. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 568.8 1228 1589 1485 1953 2482 1875 2298 2964 2680 2417 3457 3436 3977 4689 4245 5101 5818 6994 8229 10009 12078 14247 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 63.6 978.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.

8 652 581.96 5.19 75. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.3 14.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.6 205.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.2 9. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .2 160.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.0 DATA Fc = 1415. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. Gross area. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.0m) STC.1 8.23 17.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.52 kN L= 5 m 1.3 2. MAHMOOD 1. L = 5.

3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.4 4.96 x 10) = 47.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.52 x 1000 / (160.0m) STC.85L = 0.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.0 3.8 x 9. L = 5. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.

the compressive resistance is adequate 5.46) / (48 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.46) x (242 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) STC. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.5.001 = 1818. beam reaction. Therefore.54 kNm .8 x 100 x 0.4 .(47.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2. M= 31. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.4 pc 242 239 Therefore. Mi = 63. R From frame analysis sheets.9 x 75.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction. L = 5. the moment will be equally divided.44 kN Fc < Pc 47. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .239) 2 = 239.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.

52 1818.17 .44 + 31.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate. 7.0 6.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 170.45) x (233 . MAHMOOD 6.45) / (50 .03 = < 0.5 L/ry = (0.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK . L = 5.03 kNm 1415. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.250) 2 = 260.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.96 1.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.78 x 652 x 0.19 x 10) = 48.(48.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.0 4.001 = 170.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC . MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Wpl. L = 5.y = M / fy = 57. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.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 57.0m) STC.

9 11370 6.94 kNm L= 5 m 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) STC. L = 5.86 98.08 kN Msd = 28.5 8.2 990 895 11.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.2 200.46 92.2 Therefore.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y = W el.94 23. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0 DATA NSd = 1351.6 14. MAHMOOD 1. Second moment of area. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .1 6. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2. Area of section.

L = 5.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.1 28.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.001 / 1.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.0m) STC.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.Rd Mny.3 <= 30.1 kN n = 1351.Rd = 1. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.1 n ≥ 0.2 Class 3 = 13.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.555 >= n < 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 = 0.Rd = > MSd = 128.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.1 Class 3 = 38.3 kNm Mny.08 / 2433.05 = 259.11 Mpl.8 3.y.y.Rd A fy Npl.Rd(1-n) W pl.94 <= 9.001 / 1.9 (b) Web.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.Rd = 92.05 Npl.1 Mny.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.05 = 2433.y.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.Rd = 0. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.Rd = Mpl. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.1 Mpl.

Rd = = 1351.05 = 2209. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.001 / 1.38) x (40 .248) 2 = 249.0m) STC.38) / (250 .3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. L = 5.Sd ηMc.Rd = 1 x 249.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.3 kN ky = 1. MAHMOOD 4.5 x 28.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.y.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .5 NSd Nb.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 . y .y.Rd 1.3 0. Rd η M c . y .y. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .y.08 2209.7 x 92.94 1 x 128.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.7 N/mm Nb.0 N b .9 x 100 x 0. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis . Rd Nb.1 x 10) = 38.3 .(38. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

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

126 APPENDIX D .

L = 6. 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.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) Rev 1 STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = M / fy = 268.92 kNm W pl.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

Second moment of area.8 152. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. L = 6.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.y = W el.4 7.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.59 121 6.0 1. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .6 10.0m) Rev 1 STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Section chosen 1.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 1096 950 36.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.9 Therefore.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. MAHMOOD 1.9 407.5 66.6 21370 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.99 53.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.

28 kN V pl.99 <= 9.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x 551.05 = 287.Rd < Therefore.05 = 36.2 (b) Web.5 x 100 275 1.92 kN VSd < Vpl.15 kN VSd 0.05 kNm MSd Mc.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.Rd = 0. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.001 γMO = 1.001 / 1. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.7 3. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.05 √3 = 551. L = 6.0m) Rev 1 STC.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .92 = 331.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.92 kNm 0. it is low shear Mc.Rd = W pl.6 > 46.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.5Vpl.5Vpl.

0m) Rev 1 STC.68 kN VSd = 179.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).05 = 196.81) x 7.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. not susceptible to LTB 6.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 σf.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.28 kN < Ry.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1. MAHMOOD 5.6 x 275 x 0.8 < 63. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.6 63. L = 6.5 Ry.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd = γM1 At support. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.001 / 1.Rd = (50 + 48. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.

5 ] .28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.3 ≤ = 1. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. h= a= 449.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.0m) Rev 1 STC.05 7.5 0.05 205 299.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.Rd 268.94 <= 1.Rd = > 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. L = 6.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.12 1.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0. Ra. MAHMOOD At midspan. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MSd Mc.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.92 287.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.2 0.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407. Rd = 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.

L = 6.5 x SQRT(449. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 = 134. MAHMOOD beff = 0.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.05 A = beff x tw = 251.1 .9 kN > At mid span.5 x 407.130) x (103 .5 d/t = 2. λ = 2.05 = 179.6 2 = 1909. Rb.001 / 1.5 = 452.Rd = 1 x 98. buckling about y-y axis.6 / 7. 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.130) = 98.9 N/mm 2 Rb.1 l = 0.88 x 0.75d Rolled I-section.9 x 1909. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 x 7.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .0m) Rev 1 STC.98) / (135 .8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.(134.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.

.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.95 = 11. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.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 . L = 6.6 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.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.0 1.0m) Rev 1 STC.14 mm OK δmax = 7. MAHMOOD 8.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.26 3.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.26 + 3.

- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- From BS5950 to EC3
- Design of Structural Steelwork_0903384590
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- steel_design
- Design of Steel I-Section (BS5950)
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- BS and EC
- Ec2 Bs8110 Compared
- THE BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES TO EC3 (4th EDITION)
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- Design Aids EuroCode
- BS 5950 Worked Examples
- BS 5950 Design Guide
- Cp3 Chapter v Part 2 for Wind Load
- steel-ec3 (1)
- CP3
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridges
- TTT Handout LG Nov2008 Lecture Note on EC3 Design
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- !Multi Storey Steel Building
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- Design of Base Plate
- Overview of Eurocode 3
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- EuroCode_4

- Compression Buckling Analysis of Vertical Tail Stiffened Panels
- Flexural Behaviour of Concrete Encased Cold Formed Steel Channel Section
- Joseph Schmidinger and Tung-Sol Electric Inc., in No. 15830 v. Marie J. Welsh, James W. Welsh and Welflash, Inc., Oxford Electric Corporation and Its Hudson Lamp Division, Hudson Lamp Co., Inc., Best Mfg. Co., and Its Hudson Lamp Co., Inc., Division, in No. 15831, 383 F.2d 455, 3rd Cir. (1967)
- As 4100-1998 Steel Structures
- tmp554A.tmp
- Design and Comparison of Steel Roof Truss with Tubular Section (using SP
- Structures for Space Operations
- Performance Evolution of Tie Rod in Suspension System of Car Using Finite Element Approach
- Parametric Study of Dome
- Modeling and Analysis of Telescopic Hydraulic Cylinder for Increase Load Capacity
- tmpA127
- Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Tie rod in Suspension System of Car for a Buckling study using Theoretical and Experimental approach

- Column Base Plates Prof Thomas Murray
- Structural Sections BS4
- Foundation Engineering Handbook, h.y. Fang
- Design Guide BC1 2012
- Col 717706
- Manual for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Building Structure (Binding)
- Extended Structural Analysis Design and Drawing Checklists
- Planning-Building-Regulations.pdf
- Br Inch Hansen
- Fu Well 200517
- The Behavior and Design of Steel Structures to EC3
- beam-shear-design.ppt
- HOUS06 Precast Housing Structures (1)
- Instrumentation & Site Plan 967A
- SSB04 Detailed Design of Portal Frames
- Etabs Concrete Design
- Norfibre Paper
- CV6315 Tunnel Lecture 1
- Approved Document
- Approved Document
- Reinforced Concrete Design to BS 8110 Simply Explained
- Environmental Statement Vol 3 Appendix E Part 54 of 56_tcm21-162474
- BS 2573-1 1983
- Seismic Analysis & Design of 10 Story RC Building (Equivalent Lateral Force)
- Etabs Concrete Design
- How to Model and Design High Rise Buildings Using Etabs
- BS5950 Vs EC3
- Seismic Code
- Lecture 4 - Jack-In Pile
- Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading