## 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

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. Signature Name Date : : Chan Chee Han : 01 NOVEMBER 2006 .

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

design methods.11% to 10. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. . safety factors.60% to 17. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. specifications to be followed. These details include the basis and concept of design. loading values and etc. with the application of partial strength connections. 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. However. 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. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. Therefore. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column.06% and moment capacity by up to 6.27% and 9. Meanwhile.95%. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3.43%.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay. This study intends to testify the claim. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design.

06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting.60% – 17. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. Namun begitu. factor keselamatan. Selain itu.43%.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. dan sebagainya. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. . tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti.95%. cara rekabentuk.11% – 10. nilai beban.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Justeru. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan.27% – 9.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Namun begitu. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.

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 1.2 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .4 1.1 1.3 1.

1 2.6 Deflection 2.2 Stiffened Web 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.3.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.3.4.2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.3.2. Pv Moment Capacity.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .3.2.2 2.1 2.3. Vpl.4.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.2 2.3.4 Actions of EC3 2.4.4.2.3.3.3.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.2 2.2.1.1.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.2 2.3.3.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.3.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.3.5.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.1 2.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.2 Serviceability 2. Mc.3.1 Unstiffened Web 2.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.Rd Moment Capacity.2 BS 5950 2.1.3.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.2.3.1.1.4 Loading 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.1.5.1.3 Shear Capacity.4. Mc 2.

5. Ra.Rd 2.5.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2. λ 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.6.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.Rd 2.4.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.2.3 Compression Resistance. Ry.Rd 2.5.2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2. Nc.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.3.5.5.3 Buckling Resistance.Rd 2. λ 2.6.ix 2.7.4.4.4.6.1.7.6.Rd 2.4.1.1.1.1. l 2.2 Slenderness.1 Effective Length.1 Introduction 34 .2 Crippling 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 3.3.7 Conclusion 2.1.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.6.1 2.2.1 Crushing Resistance.1 Buckling Length.1 Cross-section Capacity 2. Pc 2.4.5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.5 Deflection 2.4.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2. Rb.4.6.4.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.3 Compression Resistance.2.2 Slenderness.1.6.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.4. Nb.5.4 Buckling Resistance.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.6. LE 2.

8.9.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.1 BS 5950 3.8.2 4.1 3.4.2 3.3 Moment Calculation 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.2 Shear Calculation 3.1.1 4.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .1.2 3.1 3.3 3.10.10.5 3.8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1 Load Combination 3.8.2 4.10 Structural Column Design 3.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Structural Capacity 5.7 3.x 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.1.1 Structural Capacity 4.6 3.9.4.

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 .3 5.2 5.2 5.1.xi 5.

1 3.11 4. TITLE PAGE 2.5 4.8 4.1 4.2 3.3 4.4 4.2 3.7 4.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 .6 4.1 2.2 4.10 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.4 4.9 4.3 3.

1(a) 4.1 3.3 4. TITLE PAGE 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 .2 3.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.1(b) 4.

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

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

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

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

Eurocode 3 has developed in stages. These preliminary standards of ENV will be revised. Therefore. operators and users. As with other Europeans standards. ECCS. Codes of practice provide detailed guidance and recommendations on design of structural elements. designers. The establishment of Eurocode 3 will provide a common understanding regarding the structural steel design between owners. The earliest documents seeking to harmonize design rules between European countries were the various recommendations published by the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork. Standardization of design code for structural steel in Malaysia is primarily based on the practice in Britain. contractors and manufacturers of construction products among the European member countries. Buckling resistance and shear resistance are two major elements of structural steel design. the initial draft Eurocode 3.2 Like most of the other structural Eurocodes. . It is believed that Eurocode 3 is more comprehensive and better developed compared to national codes. ENV1993 (ENV stands for EuroNorm Vornorm) issued by Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) – the European standardisation committee. This was followed by the various parts of a pre-standard code. amended in the light of any comments arising out of its use before being reissued as the EuroNorm standards (EN). Therefore. were developed. provision for these topics is covered in certain sections of the codes. 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. From these. Eurocodes will be used in public procurement specifications and to assess products for ‘CE’ (Conformité Européen) mark. published by the European Commission. The study on Eurocode 3 in this project will focus on the subject of moment and shear design.

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

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

Meanwhile. Chapter II presents the literature review that discusses the design procedures and recommendations for steel frame design of the codes EC3 and BS 5950.5 1. Results and discussions are presented in Chapter IV. .5 Report Layout The report will be divided into five main chapters. conclusions and recommendations are presented in Chapter V. Chapter III will be a summary of research methodology. Chapter I presents an introduction to the study.

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

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

This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. temperature effects or settlement. rupture.g.g. It may require certain consideration. 2. or an imposed deformation in indirect action. wind loads. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation. 2.3. 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. . movable imposed loads. in spatial variation classification.1. self-weight.1. e.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action. self-weight of structures. e.3. actions are defined as fixed actions. and vibration.3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people.g. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. ancillaries and fixed equipment. or which limits its functional effectiveness. considered as a rigid body. for example. snow loads. and free actions. In time variation classification. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G). Meanwhile. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure. including supports and foundations.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse. e. and accidental loads (A). e. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. imposed loads.1. explosions or impact from vehicles. damage to the building or its contents. fittings. variable actions (Q).8 2. e.g.g. wind loads or snow loads. which result in different arrangements of actions. which causes discomfort to people.

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

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

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.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. Where necessary. without calculating their local buckling resistance.2. overhead traveling cranes. earth and groundwater loading.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. There are dead.3. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole. 2.11 2. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness. .3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well. imposed and wind loading.

Clause 4. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. 2.3. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. It enables plastic moment to take place. given by: Pv = 0. However. Alternatively.12 Generally. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section. When this section is applied. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes.2 Shear Capacity. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. Fv.2. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Class 1 is known as plastic section.6pyAv . Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. However. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements. Class 4 is known as slender section. Class 2 is known as compact section. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure.

py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web.2. Clause 4. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.3. Seff is the effective plastic modulus. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. 2. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus. 2.3. . moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.5. and Zeff is the effective section modulus. Z is the section modulus.3. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.13 in which Av is the shear area.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.3 Moment Capacity.

2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.3. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.3. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1. Clause 4. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .2.5.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1.14 2.

4.3. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender.1 of BS 5950 states that.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.3. but the web is designed for shear only. 2.1 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. a conservative value Mf for .6Vw. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0.4.2 states that.3.4.4. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.15 2.3. or 62ε for a welded section. qw = shear buckling strength of the web. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε.6Vw.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. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section.

6Vw.1 states that bearing stiffeners should be provided where the local compressive force Fx applied through a flange by loads or reactions exceeds the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web at the web-to-flange connection.except at the end of a member: n = 5 .2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. . with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.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 + 0.5.for a welded I.3.for a rolled I.or H-section: k=T+r k=T .or H-section: . c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0. the web should be designed using Annex H. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4. 2.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).3. It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.5. where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.

netpy in which As. r is the root radius. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. T is the flange thickness. and t is the web thickness. pyw is the design strength of the web. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. allowing for cope holes for welding. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.5. . 2. 2.6 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.3.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web.3.

Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Bearing capacity of web a) b) c) Crushing resistance Crippling resistance Buckling resistance (v) Deflection 2. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes.1. However.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. Clause 5. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. To avoid this.3.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling. . It has limited rotation capacity.4.18 2. It is applicable for plastic design. Class 2 is also known as compact section. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. It can also achieve rectangular stress block. 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.

5 . but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. The stress block will be of triangle shape. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. Apart from that. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. 2. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl.Rd where Vpl. Vpl. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web.1. Vsd. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. At each crosssection.2 Shear Capacity. Class 4 is known as slender section. and ε = [235/fy]0. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. The member will fail before it reaches design stress. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes.4.1. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure.

20 2.3.3 Moment Capacity.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.4. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.7 states that.4. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is. 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.4.3. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc. For class 4 cross-sections.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.Rd.Rd. Mc.3.5.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.4. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.Rd. as stated in Clause 5. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear . when maximum shear force.

crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV. However. Thus.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web.5 (fyf / fyw)0. Clause 5. it is obtained as follows: MV. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force. bending about the major axis. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member. For cross-sections with equal flanges.1 Crushing Resistance. 2. Ry.Rd of the web of an I.3 provides that the design crushing resistance.7. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. this checking is unnecessary.Ed / fyf)2]0.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange.4.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry.Rd – 1)2 2.Rd ≤ Mc.5 .5 [1 – (σf. Ry. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange.21 force.4.4.

5tw2(Efyw)0. and ss / d < 0. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.Rd ≤ 1.4.Rd Msd ≤ Mc. Rb.Sd = 0. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively. Ra. 2.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing. For member subject to bending moments.4.4.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.Rd of the web of an I. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf.5 [(tf / tw)0. σf.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.Rd and Fsd / Ra.4.2.5.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.5 2.2 Crippling Resistance.Rd + Msd / Mc.3 Buckling Resistance. H or U section is given by: Ra. Rb.Rd of the web of an I.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 . obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.

For a structural steel column subject to compression load only.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. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance . applies only to non-moment sustaining column.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. This. 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.5.1 of EC3.5. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.5.4.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5. 2. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.1 and Table 5. Therefore.2. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. 2. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. however.

Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. in accordance of Table 22. Pc According to Clause 4. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design.4. T-section struts. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.5.7. 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. angle.5.1.1 Effective Length.1. 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.3 Compression Resistance. and back-to-back struts. λ = LE / r 2. channel. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) .1. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness.5.2 Slenderness. 2. 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. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.

Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0.5. My is the moment about minor axis. for class 1 plastic. . pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. Mx is the moment about major axis.5. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis.5.2.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. 2. 2. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. 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. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. py is the design steel strength.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally.

2.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column. Pc the compression resistance of column. 2. py the steel design strength. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. and Zy the elastic modulus. Mb the buckling resistance moment. 2.6.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance . the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .26 2.6 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. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only.5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.

1.6. 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.1.4.3 Compression Resistance.Rd According to Clause 5. Nc. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends.1.5 states that. the value of λ should not exceed 180. Clause 5.27 2. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.1. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally.4. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.5.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. 2. 2.Rd of a member is given by: Nc.2 Slenderness. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L. the value of λ should not exceed 250.1 Buckling Length. Alternatively.6.6. the compression resistance Nc. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .

χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.1.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1.Rd 2. 2 or 3 cross-sections.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members.6. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb. Nb. Clause 5.28 Nc.Rd .1. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.5.Rd For compression members.4 Buckling Resistance.

z .Sd N Sd M z . y f yd Weff .4.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.Sd + + ≤1 N pl . z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1.2.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. y . the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Rd for a conservative approximation where. Rd M pl . Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y .29 2.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . M y . for I and H sections. Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression.1 states that. z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y .6. in which n = Nsd / Npl. Rd M pl .Sd N Sd M z . α = 2.8.6. for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y .Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff .Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .Rd. Clause 5. β = 5n but β ≥ 1. Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject . 2. cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment. y f yd Wel .Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz .Sd + N Sd e Ny M z .

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

eff Class 1. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. Rd .0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.5 2. 2.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.05 Nc.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3. 3 Class 4 Nc.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.05 4.05 γM1 = 1.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.0 N b. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0. y .Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0. Rd ηM c.67 + 0.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc. y .

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

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

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

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.37 Determine Research Objective and Scope Phase 1 Literature Review Determination of building and frame dimension Specify loadings & other specifications Phase 2 Frame analysis using Microsoft Excel (V=wL/2.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology . Moment.

the storey height will be 4m. 3rd to roof).2 : Floor plan view of the steel frame building.38 3.1 Structural Layout In order to make comparisons of the design of braced steel frame between BS 5950-1: 2000 and Eurocode 3.4 Structural Layout & Specifications 3. a parametric study for the design of multi-storey braced frames is carried out. 4th storey is roof while the rest will serve as normal floors. 6m 6m 6/9m 6/9m Figure 3. Two (2) lengths of bay width will be used in the analysis – 6m and 9m respectively. The number of storey of the frame is set at four (4). . In plan view. in total. Each of the frame’s longitudinal length is 6m. Please refer to Figure 3.2 and Figure 3. there will be three (3) numbers of 4-storey frames. The storey height will be 5m from ground floor to first floor. the 4-storey frame consists of four (4) bays.3 for the illustrations of building plan view and elevation view respectively. 2nd to 3rd. whereas for other floors (1st to 2nd. The intermediate frame will be used as the one to be analysed and designed.4.

39 4m 4m 4m 5m Figure 3. all the column-to-column connections are to be rigid.2 Specifications The designed steel frame structure is meant for office for general use. 3.4. All the roof bays will be used for general purposes. As this is a simple construction. All the bays will be serving the same function.3 : Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame. Top flange of beams are effectively restraint against lateral torsional buckling. flat roof system will be introduced to cater for some activities on roof top. 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. . Meanwhile. Meanwhile.

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. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors.2 (Flat roofs) states that.4kN/m2 and 3. Consequently. . wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. Therefore. 3.5kN/m2.5 Loadings Section 2. section 6. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced.0kN/m2 respectively. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. Therefore.3 of Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) states that the characteristic values of imposed floor load and imposed roof load must be obtained from Part 1 and Part 3 of BS 6399 respectively. Meanwhile. For imposed roof load.5kN/m2 is appropriate. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. In this design. a uniform load intensity of 1. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. this value will be adopted. Meanwhile. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. Therefore. repair and other general purposes. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3.2.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. all floors will be of one-way slab. For precast floor selfweight. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2.

in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. For other floors. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. 3. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1.1. and 1. for normal design situations. A general load intensity of 1.5. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. depending on the interior designer’s intention. γG is given by 1. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. γf should be taken as 1.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. γM1. is given by 1.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. Partial safety factors for loads. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load.1.4. Meanwhile. 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. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. is given by 1.05.6 for imposed load. finishes and fittings.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. Meanwhile.05 as well.35. The . γF for dead load.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. 2 or 3 cross-section.4 for dead load. partial safety factors. for imposed floor load. In EC3. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. γM0. From Table 2.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. γQ is given by 1.

py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. According to BS 5950.6 times total imposed . 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.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame.1. 3. For steel grade S 275. for Fe 510.4 times total dead load plus 1. Meanwhile. 3. the load combination will be 1. 3. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section. In BS 5950.8. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). two (2) types of steel grade will be used. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. For steel grade S 355. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling.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/mm2.7 Categories In this project. in the meantime.

28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear.8.9kN/m. 3. This is done by summating the resultant shear . where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.55 268. will be 48kN/m. According to EC3. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.1 below: Table 3.43 load (1. the shear. Clearly.7 179.76kN/m. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. the resultant load combination.4DL + 1.35 times total dead load plus 1.1.5LL).1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187. The next table. w. the resultant load combination.6LL). will be 45. there is a difference of approximately 4.35DL + 1. For all other floors.5 times total imposed load (1.92 From Table 4. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.5% between the analyses of both codes. the w will be 62.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. the w will be 59. For all other floors. Table 3. For the roof. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2. For simple construction.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame.88 6m 137. For the roof.64kN/m. the load combination will be 1. w.

1 950. similar with the beam shear. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.68 1415.44 force from beam of each floor. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 144 331. = Internal column Ext. 206.52 1351.88 779. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st . = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.28 Int.Ground 288 663.76 1061. 432 995.26 675.76 9m Ext.8. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.64 6m Ext.52 2123.7 316. 275.76 1559. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed. M.84 1039.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction.47 744.3: .54 Int.94 1488. 413.4 633.98 496.62 Ext.96 992. structural beam moment.78 2026. 3.31 Int. 137.84 707. Table 3.39 1013.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. 216 497.92 519. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8.5%.08 Int.55 475.

there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. there is a difference of approximately 4. the eccentricity moment.07 From Table 3. Therefore.3. Regardless of the width of the bay. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. the higher the load combination of a floor.4% to 4. Me. in this case. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. initially. In this project.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634.6% between the analyses of both codes. D or h is the depth of column section (m). Since this is only preliminary analysis as well.23 6m 206. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment.55 268. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. the higher the difference percentage will be. Clearly. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. .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).92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). Subsequently. However. since this is simple construction. For the moments of the structural columns.74 605. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams.

The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1. 21.4 94.4DL + 1.6 Int. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load. Next.88 Int.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. Table 3. for internal column. . In simple construction. For BS 5950. 32.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. 20. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state. For EC 3. 30.78 Int. Table 3.4 84.5LL) – 1.0DL. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done.98 86. 30.38 9m Ext. Roof Other Floors 21.6LL) – 1.6 56.98 80. 3. 20.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation. However.5.56 6m Ext.35DL + 1.6 63.0DL.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. V can be expressed as V = (1.84 Ext.66 57. V can be expressed as V = (1. 32.66 53.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.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.

ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) .1mm. T = 13. t = 8. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.3.8kg/m. D = 454.3mm.9mm. B = 152. Depth.1 BS 5950 In simple construction. From the section table for universal beam. Web thickness. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59. Depth between fillets. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3).6mm.9. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. shear capacity. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Sx = M / py = 281. 3.6mm. d = 407. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187. Width. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. From the section table. Flange thickness. Zx = 1120cm3. Plastic modulus. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.88kNm.99. b/T = 6. Sx = 1290cm3.47 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).88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. Elastic modulus. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. d/t = 50.92kN and 281.

actual d/t = 50. Mc = pySx.1 x 454.57 = 364.6pyAv.6 x 607. Therefore.0. shear capacity is adequate. 0. Therefore. After clause 4.2.75. Actual d/t did not exceed 80.26 x 10-3 = 607. Av = 8.3. Next.2.54kN > Fv Therefore. this section is Class 1 plastic section.5 “Moment capacity. Shear capacity. where neutral axis is at mid-depth.6Pv = 0. For class 1 plastic cross-section.6 x 275 x 3682. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. shear buckling resistance should be checked. Pv = 0. it is low shear.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. shear buckling needs not be checked.5 is checked.48 = 1. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 . clause 4. Meanwhile. which is smaller than 9ε = 9.26mm2 Pv = 0. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section.4. flange is Class 1 plastic section. Mc” is checked. For web of I-section.92kN Therefore. Since actually d/t < 70.0. Actual b/T = 5.6 = 3682. section 4. Next.4. Since both flange and web are plastic.57kN > Fv = 187. therefore.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. section 4. web is Class 1 plastic section.0 in this design.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950.0.

92kN .6 x 10.2pyZx = 1.5.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354. M = 281. If Fv exceeds Pbw.2pyZx.2mm b1 = t + 1. moment capacity is adequate. therefore.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.02 x 8.34kN > Fv = 187.1 + 1.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.5mm At support.02mm k=T+r = 13. section 4.2 = 23. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10. Mc should be limited to 1.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.2 + 2 x 13. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.02mm Pbw = 98.3 + 10. be = 0.49 = 354.3 = 51.6kNm > Mc. OK.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8. 1.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. bearing stiffener should be provided. n = 2 + 0.75kNm Therefore.6be/k. bearing capacity of web.

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

y = 927cm3.2 EC 3 In simple construction. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.6mm.9. b = 177. Av = 32. d = 360.92 x 103 / 275 = 977.9cm2. Area of . 3. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.92kNm. it is adequate to be used. Wel. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. lateral torsional buckling. Elastic modulus.28kN and 268. tw = 7. Plastic modulus. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Therefore. Depth.4mm.6mm.6mm.y = M / py = 268. Wpl.y = 1051cm3.9mm. Depth between fillets. Shear area. Flange thickness. Width. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.9cm3 From the rearranged table. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Web thickness. Wpl. h = 402. tf = 10. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.y (cm3). The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. From the section table. crippling and buckling. resistance of web to crushing. 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. shear capacity. moment capacity.

6cm2.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked.5 x 497.48kN > 179. section 5.4 ≤ 66. From Table 5. Therefore. Actual c/tf = 8.Rd. Next. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. tf ≤ 40mm. fu = 430N/mm2.9mm. Actual d/tw = 47.52 section.2 for Class 1 elements.49kN > VSd = 179.1.28kN Therefore. yield strength. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl.6 for Class 1 elements. Iy = 18670cm4. The design value of shear force.48 = 298. d/tw = 47. for “outstand element of compression flange.Rd = 0. neutral axis at mid depth”.Rd = (32.15.28kN . shear resistance is sufficient.15 ≤ 9. tf = 10. Web is Class 1 element. that is Vpl. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. aLT = 131cm. VSd = 179. iLT = 4. For S275 (Fe 430). Flange is Class 1 element. Based on Table 3. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9.6(a). flange subject to compression only”. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. section classification is a must.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0.36cm.5Vpl.4. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength. A = 68. For “web subject to bending.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.05) = 497.2. Second moment of area.05 Vpl. 0.28kN γM0 = 1.5. c/tf = 8.6. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.

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. Therefore.5[fyf/fyw]0. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling. Section 5. shear buckling check is not required.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd = Wpl.8 and 56.5 .5. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. Ry.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively. the moment capacity is sufficient. low shear. section 5.Rd and buckling resistance. section 5.53 Therefore. The beam is fully restrained.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked.05 = 275. Ra.Rd. Ry.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support. Therefore.92kNm Mc.4 < 63.26kNm > MSd 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. Rb.5.8.5 [1 – (γM0 σf.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.Ed/fyf)2]0.5. For low shear.Rd. crippling resistance. Section 5. Actual d/tw = 47.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section. MSd = 268. For crushing resistance.

9)(0.05.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5[h2 + ss2]0.8kN For buckling resistance.5tw2 (Efyw)0.62 + 502]0.6/10.5 [(10.6 = 1731.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227. sy = 10.5 [402.28mm2 .5 x 7.Rd = 0.14)] / 1. A = 227.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.Ed = 0.05 = 204.4 = 0.Rd = (50 + 52.6)0. bending moment is zero.69) x 7.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0. Rb. Ra. OK.4kN For crippling resistance. ss = 50mm at support.5 [(tf/tw)0.6)0.2.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0. fyf = 275N/mm2.8 x 7.69mm Ry.5 = 52.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.Rd = 0. OK γM1 = 1.5 + 3(7.6 / 7.9 (177.54 At support.5 = 405. γM0 = 1.7mm. σf.05 = 307.62 (210000 x 275)0.14 ≤ 0.9/7.

8kN Ry. curve (a) is used.5kN Ra.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197. Generally. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.29). fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1. λ = 2. This is done in the form of deflection check.05 = 197. which is larger than VSd = 179.2) should be conducted. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value.Rd = 1 x 119. fc = 119.5 x 360.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.Rd = 204. (Permanent load) .8 x 1731.8N/mm2 Rb. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.13 (rolled I-section).6 λ√βA = 118. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. OK.6 = 118.4 / 7.5kN. buckling about y-y axis.28 x 10-3 / 1.6kN/m for floors. From Figure 4. Therefore.1.5 d/t = 2. the web of the section can resist transverse forces.28kN. λ√βA = 118. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.6 From Table 5.Rd = 307.

In this case.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. the deflection is satisfactory.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. However.14mm > δ2 δlim. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. δ.46mm Table 4. The section is adequate.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. δlim. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17. .34mm Therefore. (Imposed load) L = 6.

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.

is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). From frame analysis. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. M = 31. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. Mi = 63.03kNm . λLT = 45. λLT = 48. Section 4.19 x 10 = 48. for columns in simple construction. R. pb = 260. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0.5L / ry = 0. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1.54kNm.17. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0. Therefore.7.5 x 5000 / 5.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. the beam reaction. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation. therefore. when only nominal moments are applied.60 Next.08kNm. the moment will be equally divided.7 “Columns in simple structures”.5.

apart from section classification. .96 < 1.5cm3 From the rearranged table.03 = 0. Wpl. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. 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). 3.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate.y = MSd / fy = 57. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.88kNm respectively.10.y (cm3). Therefore.54 / 170.52 / 1818. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen. it is adequate to be used.2 EC 3 In simple construction. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.08kN and 57. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.88 x 103 / 275 = 210. From the section table for universal column. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351.44 + 31. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.0 Therefore.

6cm2. section 5. Next.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. h = 254mm. iz = 6.6mm. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. Therefore.94 < 9. the web is Class 1. Plastic modulus.5b).3. flange is Class 1 element. Depth between fillets.2 x 8. For web subject to bending and compression. Elastic modulus. Actual c/tf = 8.3.2mm. section 5.6 = 784. aLT = 98.2. the classification depends on the mean web stress.y = 990cm3. tw = 8. Av = 25.8.5cm. therefore. σw.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. tf = 14.62 From the section table. Radius of gyration. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. Flange thickness. fy = 275N/mm2. Second moment of area. b = 254mm.46cm.2mm. Depth. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9.9cm2. From this table. this section is Class 1 section. A = 92.73N/mm2 Table 5. Since both flange and web are plastic. Area of section. d/tw = 23.1cm.2mm < 40mm.08 x 103 / 200. c/tf = 8. Iy = 11370cm4. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. From Table 5.y = 895cm3. Width. Wel.94 (c = 0.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351.2 and 10.5.2 respectively. Beforehand. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). tf = 14. with d/tw = 23. iLT = 6. Shear area. Actual c/tf = 8. Web thickness. .1. Wpl.94.86cm. from. iy = 11. d = 200.

Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.05 = 259.y. n = NSd / Npl.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.27.y.11 Mpl.Rd (1 – n) Mpl. allowing for axial force.63 Vpl.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.3 x (1 – 0.11 Mpl.Rd = 1.Rd = Mpl.05) = 387.y.1 = 0.5Vpl. MN.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.Sd Therefore.Rd = 1.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.1 : MNy.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.11 x 259.555 ≥ 0.08 / 2433.Rd is such that n < 0.58kN 0.555) .y.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.Rd n ≥ 0.Sd / L = 57.Sd = My.1 : MNy. From Table 5.Rd > Vmax.Rd = 1. MNy.3kNm MNy.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.05 = 2433.1 Therefore.Rd = Wpl. the section is subject to a low shear.1kN n = 1351.Rd (1 – n) Npl.

1kNm > MSd = 28.Sd / ηMc.94kNm Therefore.7N/mm2 .1 x 10 = 38. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.6.Rd) ≤ 1. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.85L = 0.64 = 128. λy√βA = 38. Lastly.3 Based on Table 5.y. fc = 249.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.Rd) + (kyMy.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11. buckling curve (b) is used. for buckling about y-y axis. section 5.0 Ly = 0. the moment resistance is sufficient.3.y.3.

95 < 1.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.y.7 x 92. Therefore.05 = 1 x 249. it is adequate to be used.Rd) = (1351.5 x 28.Sd / ηMc.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.94 / 1 x 128.y.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1. . γM1 = 1.0 Therefore.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.y.65 Nb.1) = 0.05 = 2209.Rd) + (kyMy.3) + (1. 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.08 / 2209.

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. namely structural capacity. The results are shown in Table 4. and weight of steel. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other. Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen. .1 for shear capacity and Table 5. 4. 4.1. Here.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.2 for moment capacity. The results are arranged accordingly. based on steel grade S275 and S355.

74 594.02 698.15 3.38 1.78 456.66 24.56 400.22 2.14 18.13 19.62 515.93 11.21 441.67 Table 4.57 -2.92 2.55 1.27 819.51 -4.24 0.21 667.02 12.81 528.94 2.5 1102.51 384.5 461.69 4.93 1.11 1218.81 -3.47 341.87 433.79 12.19 387.89 678.19 1.37 609.3 683.51 18.38 1.7 -0.78 15.05 607.06 1.85 854.64 0.5 1.44 2.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.35 -1.92 394.14 583.37 399.21 15.74 2.19 1.29 452.47 596.1 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 291.61 340.3 14.7 -0.77 728.56 878.96 666.58 308.19 4.74 2.55 712.18 8.99 589.26 -8.2 777.14 .69 -1.35 431.6 14.98 1134.79 2.82 2.51 1.17 8.91 -19.26 888.15 -16.81 523.78 -20.7 1.65 0.46 2.57 13.99 15.42 820.21 668.65 635.31 446.52 443.85 767.98 305.35 793.79 11.4 0.5 529.55 583.75 437.56 3.08 2.4 -0.33 409.56 15.04 % Diff.86 1204.74 -0.06 1.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.78 -25.83 938.74 0.47 831.09 -2.39 462.39 1.5 642.7 9.2 1102.72 -12.65 846.4 0.36 11.28 554.78 541.62 1. BS 5950 (kN) 376.38 20.4 -10.68 1007.55 522.93 11.02 496.48 517.57 680.77 1146.79 2.94 2.07 942.44 471.81 1024.47 545.46 478.02 6.5 1.25 382.2 -2.27 0.81 -2.91 1011.82 2.65 0.31 2.6 1.11 -2 2.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.32 783.97 392.65 420.13 1091.84 300.92 588.75 -13.32 10.39 511.16 1057.26 2.29 5.16 551.34 44.95 404.86 -0.35 730.33 862.5 1.6 405.78 942.81 -3.6 10.72 % Diff.15 3.71 429.87 -0.27 13.28 303.84 727.1 493.5 -0.38 811.61 345.27 0.16 4.09 16.93 1.5 -0.09 1012.45 623.21 -24.15 343.53 943.41 925.56 -5.88 -18.65 724.93 334.68 6.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.45 -1.34 523.1 -2.64 0.38 542.8 800.6 1.63 12.32 877.15 507.23 -9.85 405.37 338.03 4.94 559.09 773.58 34.46 -3.66 497.09 -2.74 393.73 -2.55 1.79 2.11 -1.77 6.32 860.58 753.88 876.64 5.53 564.59 460.86 619.27 845.55 3.2 447.55 617.66 5.79 398.66 704.83 0.85 517.18 358.13 705.73 -3. 2.99 660.67 644.48 759.52 439.96 6.53 356.99 918.33 577.28 8.95 2.77 -3.27 14.24 3.83 0.14 784.

59 4.8 8.62 182.51 1007.05 3.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.91 % Diff.35 217. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.03 1440.57 206. Also. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.78 11. For steel grade S355.06%.86 125.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7. which is approximately 8.06 % Diff.98 141.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.43 -1.83 132. meanwhile.59 5.6 137.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.76 191.05 110.43 160.94 162. There are a few explanations to the variations. For steel grade S275.44 1300.6 as suggested by BS 5950. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.55.58 4.06 1115. Therefore.07 6. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.49 1295.14 8.59 5.01 -16.35 -0.43 3.43 3.41 143.06%.13 -0.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.05 1099.58 -9. the difference percentage ranges from -3. 6.76 4.3% less than 0. however.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.3 6.97 6.81 5. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.77 4.57% to 4. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.28 148.23 168. Table 4.21 -1. This value.13 8.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.57 -4.07 . the difference percentage ranges from -2. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.07 170.69% to 4.45 1431.94 -12.

55 257.46 5.3 695.3 4.95 755.3 844.63 7.73 2.05 0.5 14. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.65 149.55 21. .73 19.07 609.57 5.38 8.35 1104 238.14 3.75 631.45 234.55 429.11 261.83 1.49 5.35 731.73 21.75 431. the difference percentage ranges from 1.81 529.45 521.49 5.27 1.65 5.55 9.17 27.6 5.31 4.86 4.95 566.02 377.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.33 192.86 8.95 24.41 19.93 885.17 171.1 5.95 479.26 317.33 221.16 9.69 188.13 246.95 514.5 654.06 0.68 12 13.77 233.35 693.58% to 6.14 410.24 1.98 352.44 14.3 426 479.62 7.22 13.45 18.52 11.55 4.28 5.02 455.68 560.75 300.11 5.42 5.06 11.5 691.52 434.32 0.48 5.67 425.5 479.72 9.78 15.34 404.11 5.63 4.37 16.26 312.96 21.58 5.5 302.63 4.08 358.08 252.02 18.83 275.5 44.69 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 195.7 18.29 15.29 2.92 13.5 330 371.24 17.41 221. For steel grade S355.75 398.85 11.33 181.75 562.01 4.1 5.04 1.11 242.29 1.85 27.31 19.99 4.5 15.43%.32 10. For steel grade S275.41% to 6.05 585.5 5.53 171.5 354.9 11.65 404.17 24.24 376.05 11.16 5.96 10.43 4.88 10.29 202.9 163.53 1.2 291.36 2.1 220.25 517.08 510.01 182.65 244.85 585.55 4.1 1.4 838.39 682.2 24.86 4.95 532.98 24.21 287.53 5.7 211.12 5. the difference percentage ranges from 0.4 277.61 4.87 4.45 976.94 10.01 4. meanwhile.71 9.95 385.79 141.57 355.8 1082.65 590.28 15.41 5.44 4.65 749.53 549.25 497.66 2.89 1.95 189.5 390.16 5.33 198 232.25 397.97 14.6 341.08 6.9 900.8 799.84 13.08 5.43 4.17 255.28 5.5 457.51 1.5 34.32 1.23 213.44 12.1 244.1 539 619.48 17.02 315.78 487.6 300.67 685.68 0.87 4.49 15.83 5.95 275.95 848 184.93 740.35 624.05 336.9 619.47 955.52 395.33 471.25 5.75 199.25 453.03%.55 433.05 35.19 370.67 20.24 1.83 4.75 332.17 7.85 5.4 264.98 20.75 484.57 5.85 5.1 285.66 5.05 232.13 318.35 302.27 14.53 5.45 769.

95.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. for a UB section 406x178x54.85%. 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. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. There is a variation of approximately 0. Besides that. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. are revised. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. whether it is Class 1. This is approximately 5% less than 1.Rd = Wpl. For example. For a column web subject to bending and compression.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. Therefore.3.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. Meanwhile.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance. 4.1. Class 2 or Class 3 element. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation.0 as suggested by BS 5950. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. . EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. Table 4.

**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

1 0.29 0. Meanwhile. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.77 16.1 0. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.6 2.33 3.51 21.37 2.68 13.33 4.16 9.05 0.1.12 17.26 0.61%.08 21.66 2.85 1.03 9.46 2.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.62 5.25 0. for a floor beam of 9m long.75 2. However.25 16. section 3.26 2.9 9. δmax.13 0.13 8. E.5 above.66 0.63 19.71 3.06 0.1.21 2.22% to 3.33 0.4 2.77 4.16 1.61 3.16 11.4 2.1 3.84 11.73 1.58 0.56 2.51 0. the difference percentage ranges from -0.83 13.04 2.47 29. Meanwhile.08 0. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.32 10.93 2.7 2.22% to 3.8 1.4 0.79 16.05 0.24 2.78 3.77 2.22 28.19 2.21 3. Apart from that.83 20.59 2.33 12.63%.85 1.01 1.26 18.68 2. for a floor beam of 6m long.42 0. for a section 356x171x57.21 24.1 0.25 2.01 0. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.34 1.84 4.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.25 13.85 15.08 0.07 0.54 2.32 0.46 2.52 0. the difference percentage ranges from -0. Meanwhile.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.07 1.29 0.04 0.74 4.98 21.25 2.64 4.34 18.23 0. as required by EC3.01 2.55 From Table 4.31 2. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.06 0.27 3.56 2. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.45 14. Section 3.71 3.7 2.49 2.2 3.55 23.06 0.36 8.53 0.96 1.75 18.41 1. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table. Different from BS 5950. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value. For example.43 2.07 0.38 2.63 2.37 4. . It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.7 2.18 1.56 2.35 0.

4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively. Table 4.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge. To compare the economy of the design. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.75 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.6 and Table 4. floor beams.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4.

meanwhile.645 3.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .744 EC3 4. Table 4.9.313 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 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) 7.8.7 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 .76 Table 4.122 9.821 .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 4.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.889 9.750 4. The saving percentage.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9. is tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.

the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. Meanwhile.889 EC3 4.9. This resulted in higher percentage difference.60 17.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4.42 15.750 9. Further check on the effect of deflection was done.9 EC3 design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.571 9. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. This is because deeper.313 % 1.96%. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span. Regardless of bay width.744 3. all frame types.122 7. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section.77 Table 4. depending on the steel grade.60% to 17. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design. This time. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection.821 4.96 5. Semi-continuous . unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection.645 9.

4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. which was used in the beam design.5.0.10 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x151x67 406x140x46 356x127x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd . Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . the deflection coefficient.10 shown. 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. β is treated as β = 3.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8. For uniformly distributed loading. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.78 frame is achieved in this condition. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .

Table 4. meanwhile.889 8.750 4.11.503 7. The saving percentage.211 10.645 5.750 4.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.749 Table 4. is tabulated in Table 4.122 9.12.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.11 .503 9.11 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) 7.22 9.122 9.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.749 % 0.889 8.645 3.95 BS 5950 4.42 3.

However. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. (b) semi-rigid construction. if it is built semi-continuously.12. Therefore.1(b)).0. .11% to 10. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. Please refer to Figure 4.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. (c) simple construction. the gap reduces. if rigid connection is introduced. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4.1(c)).80 From Table 4. Eventually. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design.95%. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame.

calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4. 5.43%. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter. γM0 of 1. Meanwhile. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.1 Structural Capacity 5.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. Apart from that.05 in the moment capacity . for the moment capacity of structural beam.1. Av value also caused the difference. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. In review to the research objectives. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the summary for the study on the comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 for the design of multi-storey braced frame. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.

γM of 1. In comparison. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. as compared to the partial safety factor.27% to 9. 5. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. compared with BS 5950.1. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. it was found that for a same value of λ. From interpolation. EC3 design created majority . For the same value of unfactored imposed load. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. axial compression is much more critical. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. Therefore.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load.82 calculation required by EC3. γM0 of 1. of both codes. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. fc is smaller than pc. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. Meanwhile. fc and pc respectively.05 as required by EC3 design. Therefore. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design.2 Structural Column In simple construction. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam.0m long. A reduction in the range of 5.0 as suggested by BS 5950. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. 5.

. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. 6m bay width steel frame. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. 5. The difference ranges from 0.22% to 3. However.571 tons for EC3 design. Section 4.645 tons and 9.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. 4-storey. and 4. E. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. the total deflection was greater. For a 2-bay.2.63%. I will have to be chosen.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. For a 2-bay.889 tons for BS 5950 design. 9m bay width steel frame. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.750 tons for BS 5950 design.744 tons and 3. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. In this study.821 tons and 4.313 tons for EC3 design. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.122 tons and 7. Therefore. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison.1 of EC3 provided proof to this. 4-storey. and 9. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950.

S275 (Fe 430): 5. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. . 6m bay width. 4-storey.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. S355 (Fe 510): 7.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.11% 2-bay. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior. 9m bay width. 9m bay width. 4-storey. 4-storey.96% 2-bay.60% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 1. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design.42% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 17.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. 9m bay width.42% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 15.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. S275 (Fe 430): 0. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). 6m bay width. 6m bay width. 6m bay width. 4-storey.22% 5. S355 (Fe 510): 10.95% 2-bay. 4-storey. 4-storey.0 to 3. However. 9m bay width. 4-storey. 4-storey. S275 (Fe 430): 5. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.6 2. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.6LL Roof w = 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.4 x 24 + 1. LL = = 4 1.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1.4 x 27.6 + 1. DL Live Load. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1.6 x 15 = 62. MAHMOOD 1.4 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. DL Live Load.64 kN/m . LL Floors Dead Load.0 DATA No.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. DL Live Load. of Bay No. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.4DL + 1.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.

0 2. MAHMOOD 2.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

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

MAHMOOD 4. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.92 kN M = 62.64 x 6 / 2 = 187.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams. .76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.92 519.88 kNm 4. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. contributed by beam shear.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.1 Beam Moment. Roof beams.68 1415. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.84 1039. Shear. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.52 144 331.84 707. V = 62.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.92) 288 (187.92) 519.84 (187.88 281.92 [2] 519.84 [3] [4] 707.76 1415.92) 1039.52 707.92) 331.92 (187.84 (187.88 281.76 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 281. MAHMOOD 5.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.92) 663.68 (187.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.92) 144 [1] 331.88 281.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 281.

54 31.6 31.6 21.19 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.19 [3] 28.6LL) .19 28.19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.54 28. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.19 31.6 21.6 [1] 21.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0DL Most critical condition .6 [2] 28.54 31.4DL+1.19 [4] 28.6 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.19 31.54 28.19 21.1.19 28.54 28.19 21.19 28.54 28.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

DL Live Load. LL Floors Dead Load. LL = = 4 1.5LL Roof w = 1. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.5 x 9 = 45. DL Live Load.35DL + 1.35 x 24 + 1.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.35 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.5 x 15 = 59. LL = = 1.35 x 27.6 + 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.76 kN/m .94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. of Bay No. DL Live Load.9 kN/m Floors w = 1.0 DATA No.6 2.

2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.0 2.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2. MAHMOOD 2.95 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

76 kN/m 59.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m .9 kN/m 59.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 kN/m 59. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.76 kN/m 59.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.9 kN/m 6m 45.

97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. V = 59. V = 45. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. Shear.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.96 992.08 137.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.28 kN M = 59.1 Beam Moment.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. MAHMOOD 4.52 1351.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275. contributed by beam shear.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.7 kN M = 45. .26 675. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.92 kNm 4.98 496. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . Roof beams.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.4 633.7 316.55 kNm Floor beams. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

92 268.7 [1] 316.92 268.55 268.08 675.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 1351.92 268.96 (179. MAHMOOD 5.28) 137. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 (179.28) 496.26 (179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.0 5.7) 137.7) (137.54 .28) 316.98 (179.26 [3] [4] 675.7 (179.92 268.52 (179.98 [2] 496.55 206.2 Shear (kN) (137.28) 633.92 5.92 268.28) 992.28) 275.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.

1.35DL+1.94 26.89 20. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.89 26.89 Moments are calculated from (1.5LL) .94 26.94 26.71 20.89 26.94 28.71 28.89 28.66 26.89 26.66 19.66 26.94 28.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.94 26.89 28.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.89 26.89 26.0DL Most critical condition .89 28.89 26.66 20.89 19. MAHMOOD 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

9 149.2 109 113 122 125.3 41.2 89.3 30 31.2 179 238.3 82 82.1 67.3 101 101.1 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 59.0m) STC.3 54 54.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.2 28.1 40.1 32.8 33.8 25.1 67. L = 6.1 37 37 39 39.1 98.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .1 25.2 74.1 82.1 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 = 281.8 60.2 28.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 48.1 139.2 74.1 24.1 67.3 92. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 51 52. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 43 45 46 46.2 74. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 67.

8 454. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.75 50.3 2. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5. subject to pure bending.9 8.3 Therefore.0 1. L = 6. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. neutral axis at mid-depth.6 152.2 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. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.3 407. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.1 13.0m) STC. MAHMOOD 1.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section .102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

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 .

92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.0m) STC.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.92 kNm W pl.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268. 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.y = M / fy = 268.

4 1051 927 32.36 131 8. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.y = W el.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 177.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.0m) STC. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.9 Therefore. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . L = 6.9 360.9 68.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.6 7.6 10.15 47. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. Section chosen 1. Second moment of area. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section. MAHMOOD 1.6 18670 4.0 1.

0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.Rd < Therefore.15 <= 9.28 kN V pl.48 = 298. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) STC.92 kNm 0.001 / 1.26 kNm MSd Mc.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd = 0.05 = 32.Rd = W pl. it is low shear Mc. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.7 3.05 √3 = 497.49 kN VSd 0.4 > 46.2 (b) Web.001 γMO = 1.05 = 275.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.5 x 497.9 x 100 275 1.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.48 kN VSd < Vpl.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.5Vpl.5Vpl. L = 6.

110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . not susceptible to LTB 6.001 / 1.6 x 275 x 0.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 Ry.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430). ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.8 < 63. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.Rd = γM1 At support.5 σf.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. L = 6.0m) STC.Rd = (50 + 52. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD 5.05 204.4 kN = VSd = 179. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.4 63.69) x 7. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.28 kN < Ry.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.

5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.Rd 268.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . MAHMOOD At midspan.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.14 1.26 7.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. MSd Mc.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. h= a= 402. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. L = 6.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0m) STC.3 ≤ = 1.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 0. Ra.92 275.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.Rd = > 0. Rd = 0.98 <= 1.5 ] .2 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 205 307.

8 x 1731.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227. L = 6.Rd = 1 x 119.75d Rolled I-section.6 .5 = 405.6 = 118. MAHMOOD beff = 0.5 x 360.8 x 7.6 l = 0.(118.05 = 197.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.117) / (120 .28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .4 / 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.001 / 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.5 kN > At mid span. buckling about y-y axis.118) = 119. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.5 d/t = 2. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.5 x SQRT(402.118) x (121 . Rb.05 A = beff x tw = 227.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.28 x 0.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. λ = 2.8 N/mm 2 Rb.0m) STC.6 2 = 1731.

.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 = 6.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.14 mm OK δmax = 11. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.0 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.88 6.88 + 6.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. MAHMOOD 8.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0m) STC.46 = 18.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.6 978. L = 5.0m) STC.4 568.3 247.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.1 652 802.4 988.1 497.1 310. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC . MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Sx (cm3) 184.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.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.

The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.3 14. L = 5.23 17. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.2 9.8 652 581.0 DATA Fc = 1415. MAHMOOD 1.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 160.19 75. Gross area.96 5.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .1 8.52 kN L= 5 m 1.3 2.0m) STC.6 205.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.

0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.85L = 0.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.96 x 10) = 47. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.8 x 9.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.4 4.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis .0 3.0m) STC.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0. L = 5.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.52 x 1000 / (160. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.4 .8 x 100 x 0. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. the moment will be equally divided. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.(47.44 kN Fc < Pc 47.4 pc 242 239 Therefore.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5. M= 31. L = 5.46) x (242 .239) 2 = 239. Mi = 63. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. Therefore.54 kNm . MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.001 = 1818.46) / (48 .9 x 75. the compressive resistance is adequate 5.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239. beam reaction. R From frame analysis sheets.

78 x 652 x 0.0m) STC.96 1.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.17 .119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 5.250) 2 = 260.(48.0 4.03 = < 0.001 = 170.45) x (233 .03 kNm 1415.0 6. MAHMOOD 6.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.19 x 10) = 48.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .45) / (50 .52 1818.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.5 L/ry = (0.44 + 31. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. 7.54 170.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

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.y = M / fy = 57.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. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 kNm M= W pl.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

2 200. Second moment of area. L = 5.9 11370 6.46 92.94 kNm L= 5 m 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .6 14.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.0m) STC. MAHMOOD 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.5 8.1 6.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.86 98.2 Therefore. Area of section. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.94 23.2 990 895 11.0 DATA NSd = 1351. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.08 kN Msd = 28.y = W el.

1 n ≥ 0.1 = 0.Rd = Mpl.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.94 <= 9. L = 5.Rd = 0.y.Rd = > MSd = 128. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.555 >= n < 0.05 = 2433.y. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.1 Class 3 = 38.1 28.Rd = 92.Rd(1-n) W pl.08 / 2433.Rd Mny.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd = γMO γMO = 1. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.001 / 1.2 Class 3 = 13.1 Mny.1 Mpl.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.05 = 259.Rd = 1.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.9 (b) Web.3 kNm Mny.0m) STC.001 / 1.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.Rd A fy Npl.y.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.11 Mpl. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.8 3.05 Npl.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .3 <= 30.1 kN n = 1351.

7 x 92. y .38) x (40 .y. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.9 x 100 x 0.Rd = = 1351.3 kN ky = 1.3 .248) 2 = 249.Rd 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.38) / (250 .y. MAHMOOD 4.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .3 0.001 / 1.y. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .0m) STC.Rd = 1 x 249.94 1 x 128.5 NSd Nb.(38. L = 5.0 N b .08 2209.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy. Rd η M c .85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.5 x 28.1 x 10) = 38.y.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0. Rd Nb.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Sd ηMc.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore. y .05 = 2209.7 N/mm Nb.

0 CONCLUSION Cross Section Resistance In-plane Failure About Major Axis Use of the section is adequate. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.125 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. Use : 254x254x73 UC OK OK . MAHMOOD 5.0 3.0 4. L = 5.

126 APPENDIX D .

y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.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. L = 6.y = M / fy = 268. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) Rev 1 STC.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .92 kNm W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = W el.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.0 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.59 121 6.99 53.6 21370 3.0m) Rev 1 STC. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . Second moment of area.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Section chosen 1.8 152.9 Therefore. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.5 66.9 407. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.4 7.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. L = 6.6 1096 950 36. MAHMOOD 1.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.6 10.

Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6.5Vpl. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.001 γMO = 1.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.92 kNm 0.92 = 331.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.5Vpl.92 kN VSd < Vpl.05 √3 = 551.2 (b) Web.5 x 551.001 / 1.05 = 36.28 kN V pl.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .Rd < Therefore.5 x 100 275 1.7 3. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 > 46.Rd = W pl.05 kNm MSd Mc.99 <= 9.Rd = 0.05 = 287.0m) Rev 1 STC.15 kN VSd 0. it is low shear Mc. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.5 σf.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .05 = 196. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. MAHMOOD 5.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.001 / 1.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7. not susceptible to LTB 6. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. L = 6.28 kN < Ry.Rd = (50 + 48. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.81) x 7.8 < 63.0m) Rev 1 STC.6 63.5 Ry.6 x 275 x 0.68 kN VSd = 179.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd = γM1 At support.

131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Ra. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. Rd = 0.Rd = > 0.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407. L = 6.5 ] .5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.12 1.6 = γM1 = E= Ra. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 0.94 <= 1.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.Rd 268. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. MSd Mc. h= a= 449.05 205 299.05 7.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.3 ≤ = 1.0m) Rev 1 STC. MAHMOOD At midspan.92 287.

88 x 0.130) = 98.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.98) / (135 . use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.(134.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Rb.1 .5 d/t = 2.9 N/mm 2 Rb.001 / 1. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.Rd = 1 x 98.3 x 7. L = 6.0m) Rev 1 STC.6 2 = 1909.9 x 1909.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .6 = 134.05 = 179.1 l = 0.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.5 x SQRT(449.6 mm Buckling resistance of web. λ = 2.75d Rolled I-section.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.5 x 407.5 = 452.130) x (103 . 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. buckling about y-y axis. MAHMOOD beff = 0.9 kN > At mid span.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.6 / 7.05 A = beff x tw = 251.

26 3.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.95 = 11.0 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.26 + 3. MAHMOOD 8.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. .0m) Rev 1 STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.14 mm OK δmax = 7. L = 6.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

- Design Aids EuroCode
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- The Behaviour and Design of Steel Structures to BS5950
- BS and EC
- Ec2 Bs8110 Compared
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- Design of Steel I-Section (BS5950)
- EC3extract
- steel_design
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Design of Structural Steelwork_0903384590
- From BS5950 to EC3
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- NSC Apr2005 134 Feature06 Steel Design Simple EC3
- Design of Base Plate
- BS 5628 - 1
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- !Multi Storey Steel Building
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- How to design to eurocode 2.pdf
- TTT Handout LG Nov2008 Lecture Note on EC3 Design
- Designers guide to EC3
- Design of Steel Beam EC3
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- steel-ec3 (1)
- BS 5950 Design Guide

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

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Loading