## Are you sure?

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

1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

**BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
**

JUDUL:

υ

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

SESI PENGAJIAN: Saya

2006 / 2007

**CHAN CHEE HAN
**

(HURUF BESAR)

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

TERHAD

3

TIDAK TERHAD Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)

(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

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

Tarikh

CATATAN:

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

Tarikh:

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

* ** Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

υ

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

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

Signature

:

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

i

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

CHAN CHEE HAN

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

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER, 2006

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

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

safety factors. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay. Meanwhile. loading values and etc.43%.95%. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. However.11% to 10. However. This study intends to testify the claim. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. specifications to be followed.27% and 9. with the application of partial strength connections. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. These details include the basis and concept of design.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. .06% and moment capacity by up to 6.60% to 17. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. 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. 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 3.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. design methods.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Therefore.

Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. nilai beban. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. Namun begitu.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Justeru. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. .vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan.60% – 17. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3.11% – 10. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. dan sebagainya.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.27% – 9. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Selain itu.43%. cara rekabentuk. Namun begitu. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.95%. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. factor keselamatan.

vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE i ii iii iv v vi vii xii xiii xiv xv THESIS TITLE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES LISTOF NOTATIONS I INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .4 1.2 1.3 1.

4.4.3.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.3.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.3.2.4.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.Rd Moment Capacity.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.3.3.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.1.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.4.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.2 2.1.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.2 Stiffened Web 2.4 Loading 2.3 Shear Capacity.3.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.1 Unstiffened Web 2.5.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2. Vpl.3.2 Serviceability 2.2 BS 5950 2.3.3.1. Pv Moment Capacity.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.2 2.6 Deflection 2.3.2.3.3.1.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.1 2.3.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.1. Mc 2.1.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.4.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.3.2.3.2.2.1 2.4 Actions of EC3 2.5.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.3.1 2.3.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2. Mc.2 2.1.2 2.3.

2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.5. Pc 2.2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2. l 2.6.7.3 Compression Resistance.1. Ry.Rd 2.2 Crippling Resistance.4. Nb.6.1.7.5.1.1 Crushing Resistance.4.1 Effective Length.6.4.Rd 2.1 Introduction 34 .6.1 2.1.5 Deflection 2.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.2 Slenderness.3.2.2 Slenderness.6. Ra. λ 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.Rd 2.3.4. λ 2.5.4. Nc.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.4.1.1 Buckling Length.5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.6.4.2 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 3.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.2.6.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.4.ix 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.3 Buckling Resistance.1.3 Compression Resistance.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2. Rb.4 Buckling Resistance.4.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.Rd 2.Rd 2.5.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.5.2. LE 2.5.7 Conclusion 2.1.4.6.

3 Moment Calculation 3.x 3.5 3.1 Structural Capacity 5.7 3.10 Structural Column Design 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Structural Capacity 4.9.6 3.2 3.8.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.1.1 4.10.2 3.2 4.2 4.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.8.1 Load Combination 3.1.9 Structural Beam Design 3.1 BS 5950 3.9.2 Shear Calculation 3.1 3.1 3.1.10.4.3 3.8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.8.4.

1.2 5.4 Structural Column 82 82 83 84 Deflection Values Economy Recommendation for Future Studies REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A1 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 APPENDIX A2 APPENDIX B1 APPENDIX B2 APPENDIX C1 APPENDIX C2 APPENDIX D .3 5.2 5.xi 5.

4 4.5 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.2 3.2 4.9 4.1 3.7 4.3 4.11 4.1 4.3 3.2 3.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 . TITLE PAGE 2.6 4.10 4.1 2.4 4.8 4.

1(c) Schematic diagram of research methodology Floor plan view of the steel frame building Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame Bending moment of beam for rigid construction Bending moment of beam for semi-rigid construction Bending moment of beam for simple construction 37 38 39 80 80 80 .1(b) 4.3 4.1(a) 4.2 3.1 3. TITLE PAGE 3.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

durability and serviceability design does not differ too much. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. 2001). which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. . Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding. EC3 covers two limit states. and tying the structure together. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor. and with appropriate degrees of reliability. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. it will remain fit for the use for which it is required. eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. EC3 stresses the need for durability. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3. impact or consequences of human errors.1.3. 2.1.7 and their resistance. Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. 2. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered. having due regard to its intended life and its cost. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element.

In time variation classification. e. temperature effects or settlement. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people. This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. Meanwhile. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G). 2. including: deformations or deflections which adversely affect the appearance or effective use of the structure (including the proper functioning of machines or services) or cause damage to finishes or non-structural elements.1.1. e. e. self-weight. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation. or an imposed deformation in indirect action. movable imposed loads. including supports and foundations. fittings.g. e. actions are defined as fixed actions. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure.g.3. e. and accidental loads (A).3.3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. damage to the building or its contents.8 2. which result in different arrangements of actions. explosions or impact from vehicles. wind loads or snow loads. ancillaries and fixed equipment. considered as a rigid body. self-weight of structures. in spatial variation classification.g. which causes discomfort to people. It may require certain consideration. rupture. 2. .2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action.g. imposed loads. for example.1. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. snow loads.g. and vibration. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. and free actions. or which limits its functional effectiveness. wind loads. variable actions (Q).

avoidance of disproportionate collapse.2 BS 5950 2. shear resistance.1 Background of BS 5950 BS 5950 was prepared to supersede BS 5950: Part 1: 1990. members subject to combined axial force and bending moment. flats. etc.9 2. Part 1 covers the code of practice for design of rolled and welded sections. sheeting respectively. Part 2 and 7 deal with specification for materials. local buckling. They are being used in buildings and allied structures not specifically covered by other standards. Part 5 concerns design of cold formed thin gauge sections. Several clauses were technically updated for topics such as sway stability. Part 3 and Part 4 focus mainly on composite design and construction. which was withdrawn. welded sections and cold formed sections. .2.2.2 Scope of BS 5950 Part 1 of BS 5950 provides recommendations for the design of structural steelwork using hot rolled steel sections. but offsetting potential reductions in economy was also one of the reasons. lateral-torsional buckling. hot finished structural hollow sections and cold formed structural hollow sections. BS 5950 comprises of nine parts. Changes were due to structural safety. Part 6 covers design for light gauge profiled steel sheeting. plates. 2. and Part 9 covers the code of practice for stressed skin design. fabrication and erected for rolled. Part 8 comprises of code of practice for fire resistance design.

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

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

3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. It enables plastic moment to take place. Fv. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes. Clause 4. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements. However. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. Alternatively. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached.2.3. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section.2 Shear Capacity. Class 2 is known as compact section. However. Class 4 is known as slender section. When this section is applied. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. given by: Pv = 0.6pyAv . the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Class 1 is known as plastic section.12 Generally. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. 2.

. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web.13 in which Av is the shear area. Clause 4. 2. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.3. Seff is the effective plastic modulus. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment.3 Moment Capacity.3.5. and Zeff is the effective section modulus.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections. 2.2.3. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv. Z is the section modulus.

2.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.3. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.14 2.3.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 . and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1.5. Clause 4.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.

1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.2 states that.3.3.4.4.4.3. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web. or 62ε for a welded section. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2.6Vw. a conservative value Mf for .2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender.4.15 2. but the web is designed for shear only. 2. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.4. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.3. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.1 of BS 5950 states that.3. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section.6Vw.

6Vw. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf. c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.5. 2.or H-section: .for a rolled I.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.or H-section: k=T+r k=T . the web should be designed using Annex H.except at the end of a member: n = 5 . It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.for a welded I.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.5.3.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: . where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.3. . provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).2.

2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web.3. r is the root radius. 2.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. 2. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing.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. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. T is the flange thickness. and t is the web thickness. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. allowing for cope holes for welding.3. pyw is the design strength of the web. .5. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As.netpy in which As. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.

4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. Class 2 is also known as compact section. Clause 5. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. It can also achieve rectangular stress block. 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 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling. However. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. It has limited rotation capacity.3. .1. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. Class 1 is known as plastic section. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first. It is applicable for plastic design.18 2. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. To avoid this.4.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5.

Vsd. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance.1.1. but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength.Rd where Vpl.2 Shear Capacity. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5.5 . Vpl.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Class 4 is known as slender section. Apart from that.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. The member will fail before it reaches design stress. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved. and ε = [235/fy]0. The stress block will be of triangle shape. 2. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. At each crosssection.4.

3 Moment Capacity. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.3. 2. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.Rd.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.4.Rd.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.3. For class 4 cross-sections.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.4.4. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear .Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl.5.3. Mc. as stated in Clause 5.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.Rd.20 2. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.4.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively. when maximum shear force. 2.7 states that. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc.

it is obtained as follows: MV.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange.7. Thus.4. Ry. bending about the major axis.Ed / fyf)2]0.5 .Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0.Rd ≤ Mc.Rd of the web of an I.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl.5 (fyf / fyw)0. 2. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange. For cross-sections with equal flanges. Clause 5. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. However. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV.Rd – 1)2 2.4. Ry. this checking is unnecessary. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force.4. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.5 [1 – (σf.1 Crushing Resistance.3 provides that the design crushing resistance. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.21 force.

4.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra. Rb. Rb.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb. σf.Rd of the web of an I.2 Crippling Resistance.5tw2(Efyw)0.2. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.Rd ≤ 1.4.Rd and Fsd / Ra.4. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.Sd = 0.Rd + Msd / Mc. For member subject to bending moments. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.3 Buckling Resistance.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. Ra.5.5 2.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 . and ss / d < 0. H or U section is given by: Ra.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.4.Rd of the web of an I. 2. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.5 [(tf / tw)0.

For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. 2. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. Therefore. 2.4.1 of EC3.5. This. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.5.5.5 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. 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.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.1 and Table 5. however. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only. 2. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.

1. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.7. angle.5. This concept is not applicable for battened struts. channel. LE The effective length LE of a compression member is determined from the segment length L centre-to-centre of restraints or intersections with restraining members in the relevant plane.24 2. 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. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness.2 Slenderness.5.4. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) .1.3 Compression Resistance.1 Effective Length. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. 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. in accordance of Table 22. T-section struts. 2.5. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. λ = LE / r 2. Pc According to Clause 4.1. and back-to-back struts. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.

1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. Mx is the moment about major axis. My is the moment about minor axis. 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. 2.5. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. .2. 2. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. py is the design steel strength. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.5.5. for class 1 plastic.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.

and Zy the elastic modulus. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. 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 . 2.26 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.2.6.5.6 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. Mb the buckling resistance moment. Pc the compression resistance of column. py the steel design strength.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column. 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.

the value of λ should not exceed 180. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally.Rd of a member is given by: Nc.1.2 Slenderness. the value of λ should not exceed 250.27 2. 2.5 states that. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. Alternatively.6. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .1. 2.1 Buckling Length.Rd According to Clause 5.1. the compression resistance Nc.4. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends. Nc. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L.1.3 Compression Resistance.4. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.6. 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.6.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic. Clause 5. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.5.

Rd . 2 or 3 cross-sections. Nb. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.Rd For compression members.1.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.1.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc.28 Nc.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.5.6.Rd 2. Clause 5. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.4 Buckling Resistance.

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

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

33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.67 + 0. Rd ηM c.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.05 Nc.05 4.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . y . y .Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc. 2.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.5 2.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.0 N b.05 γM1 = 1. 3 Class 4 Nc. Rd .eff Class 1. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.

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

35 3. that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span. V are based on simply-supported condition.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. 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. Sections 3. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed. Calculation of bending moment.8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed. End moments are zero. Therefore.4 to 3. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction.

. Meanwhile. (1995). Microsoft Excel worksheets will show the calculation steps in a clear and fair manner. Furthermore.36 3.3 Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The design of beam and column is calculated with Microsoft Excel software. Several trial and error calculations can be used to cut down on the calculation time needed as well as prevent calculation error. The method of design using BS 5950 will be based on the work example drawn by Heywood (2003). the method of design using EC3 will be based on the work example drawn by Narayanan et. al. The Microsoft Excel software is used for its features that allow continual and repeated calculations using values calculated in every cell of the worksheet. Please refer to Appendices B1 to C2 for the calculation worksheets created for the purpose of the design of structural beam and column of both design codes.

Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 3. Moment. 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 .

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

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

The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. Meanwhile. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. section 6. . Meanwhile. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2.5kN/m2. In this design. For imposed roof load. For precast floor selfweight.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. a uniform load intensity of 1.5kN/m2 is appropriate. Therefore. this value will be adopted. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame.0kN/m2 respectively.4kN/m2 and 3. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs.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. Consequently. 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.2.5 Loadings Section 2. repair and other general purposes. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage.2 (Flat roofs) states that. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. Therefore. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. Therefore. all floors will be of one-way slab. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. 3.

γf should be taken as 1. γF for dead load.35.1. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load.5.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. finishes and fittings.1. partial safety factors. 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. Partial safety factors for loads. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. depending on the interior designer’s intention.4. The . In EC3. γG is given by 1. A general load intensity of 1. Meanwhile. For other floors. γM1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. γM0. for imposed floor load. is given by 1. and 1. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. From Table 2.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively.05. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1.05 as well. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. Meanwhile. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. for normal design situations. 3.4 for dead load. is given by 1.6 for imposed load.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. γQ is given by 1.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. 2 or 3 cross-section.

fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits.4 times total dead load plus 1. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). 3. two (2) types of steel grade will be used.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. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame.1. py is 275N/mm2 for thickness less than or equal to 16mm and 265N/mm2 for thickness larger but less than or equal to 40mm.8. 3.7 Categories In this project. Meanwhile. for Fe 510.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3. 3. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections). In BS 5950. According to BS 5950.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling.6 times total imposed . For steel grade S 275. in the meantime. For steel grade S 355. the load combination will be 1.

For the roof. The next table. the w will be 62.35 times total dead load plus 1.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187.5LL). there is a difference of approximately 4.43 load (1.55 268. the shear.8. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.6LL). This is done by summating the resultant shear . the resultant load combination.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.76kN/m. According to EC3.35DL + 1. will be 48kN/m. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2. w.4DL + 1.1. w. For the roof.5% between the analyses of both codes. For all other floors. Clearly.9kN/m. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.64kN/m. For simple construction.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281.92 From Table 4. the w will be 59.88 6m 137.1 below: Table 3. For all other floors. 3. the load combination will be 1. the resultant load combination. will be 45.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. Table 3.5 times total imposed load (1.7 179.

the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.Ground 288 663.28 Int.84 707.78 2026.64 6m Ext. 275. 216 497.44 force from beam of each floor. 206. 413.94 1488.55 475.92 519. 3.47 744. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st .26 675.5%.39 1013.52 1351. M. 137. 144 331.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int. = Internal column Ext.88 779.76 9m Ext. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.31 Int.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.54 Int. Table 3.3: . where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.84 1039.7 316.52 2123.62 Ext.8.1 950. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.08 Int.98 496. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.76 1559. similar with the beam shear.68 1415.4 633. 432 995.96 992.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction. structural beam moment.76 1061.

3.23 6m 206. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. Regardless of the width of the bay. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. For the moments of the structural columns.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634.45 Table 3. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m).4% to 4. since this is simple construction. in this case. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams. the eccentricity moment.74 605. the higher the load combination of a floor. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. 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).07 From Table 3. Subsequently. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. In this project.6% between the analyses of both codes. initially. Therefore. . D or h is the depth of column section (m). the higher the difference percentage will be. Clearly.55 268. there is a difference of approximately 4.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. Me. However.

98 80.68 These values of eccentricity moments will be useful for the estimation of initial size of a column member during structural design in later stage. Table 3.35DL + 1. Table 3.84 Ext. 32.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam.78 Int.5LL) – 1. However. 30.56 6m Ext.38 9m Ext. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done.0DL.98 86. 30. 3.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.0DL. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state. In simple construction. 20. V can be expressed as V = (1. For EC 3. Next. Roof Other Floors 21. 32.66 53.4 94. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.5.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int.4 84. 21. 20.66 57.6 Int.88 Int.6LL) – 1.4DL + 1. for internal column. V can be expressed as V = (1.6 63. For BS 5950. .6 56.

the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. Flange thickness. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. Plastic modulus. Depth between fillets. d/t = 50. From the section table. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). Sx = M / py = 281. Elastic modulus. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. D = 454.3.6mm. Sx = 1290cm3. B = 152.47 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). From the section table for universal beam.1mm. shear capacity. Depth. b/T = 6.9mm.6mm. d = 407.3mm.92kN and 281.8kg/m. Web thickness.99. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.9.1 BS 5950 In simple construction. Zx = 1120cm3. T = 13. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.88kNm. Width. 3. t = 8.

where Av = tD for a rolled I-section.26mm2 Pv = 0. Shear capacity.26 x 10-3 = 607.3. For web of I-section.57kN > Fv = 187.6 x 275 x 3682.6 x 607.5 is checked. Next.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. flange is Class 1 plastic section. Meanwhile. this section is Class 1 plastic section.0 in this design.5 “Moment capacity.2.57 = 364. Mc = pySx. where neutral axis is at mid-depth. After clause 4. 0. shear buckling resistance should be checked.54kN > Fv Therefore. shear buckling needs not be checked. Since both flange and web are plastic. clause 4.4.6pyAv. it is low shear.0. Actual b/T = 5. Mc” is checked.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. section 4.1 x 454. Pv = 0. For class 1 plastic cross-section. Av = 8. shear capacity is adequate.75. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. Next.48 = 1.0.0.6 = 3682.92kN Therefore.2. Since actually d/t < 70. web is Class 1 plastic section. Therefore. therefore. Therefore. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. which is smaller than 9ε = 9.6Pv = 0. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 . section 4. actual d/t = 50. Actual d/t did not exceed 80.4.

Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354. M = 281. n = 2 + 0. OK.6kNm > Mc.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.3 + 10.02mm Pbw = 98. therefore. section 4.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.49 = 354.34kN > Fv = 187. Mc should be limited to 1.1 + 1.2pyZx.6 x 10.2pyZx = 1. bearing capacity of web. If Fv exceeds Pbw.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.2 + 2 x 13.3 = 51. 1.5.5mm At support. bearing stiffener should be provided.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.02 x 8.6be/k.92kN .2 = 23.75kNm Therefore. be = 0.02mm k=T+r = 13.2mm b1 = t + 1.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange. moment capacity is adequate.

the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. δ. the deflection is satisfactory. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. The section is adequate. w = 15kN/m for floors. In this case. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.50 Therefore. . L = 6. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.67mm >δ Therefore. the bearing capacity at support is adequate. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. However. Generally. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2.5) should be conducted. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. This is done in the form of deflection check.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). Therefore.

The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.9cm3 From the rearranged table.92 x 103 / 275 = 977. Av = 32. d = 360.92kNm. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. Depth between fillets. lateral torsional buckling. Plastic modulus.6mm. shear capacity. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. From the section table for universal beam. Elastic modulus.9.4mm.9cm2. From the section table. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m. Web thickness.6mm.2 EC 3 In simple construction.y = M / py = 268. moment capacity. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Wpl. tw = 7. Wpl.9mm. tf = 10.28kN and 268.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. h = 402. b = 177.y = 1051cm3.y (cm3). Wel. Width.6mm. crippling and buckling. 3. Flange thickness. Therefore. Area of . it is adequate to be used. Shear area. Depth. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. resistance of web to crushing. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.y = 927cm3.

6(a). for “outstand element of compression flange. Therefore.5. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. Iy = 18670cm4.6cm2. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.05 Vpl. Next.4. d/tw = 47.48kN > 179.48 = 298.Rd = (32. limiting d/tw ratio is 66.05) = 497. Actual d/tw = 47.36cm. Second moment of area.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength. The design value of shear force.4 ≤ 66. iLT = 4. flange subject to compression only”. Flange is Class 1 element. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. section 5. neutral axis at mid depth”.Rd = 0. aLT = 131cm.28kN γM0 = 1. tf = 10. VSd = 179.5Vpl. For S275 (Fe 430).5 x 497.2. c/tf = 8.Rd.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked.9mm.2 for Class 1 elements.6 for Class 1 elements. that is Vpl. yield strength.28kN . A = 68.52 section.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. 0. shear resistance is sufficient.1.6.49kN > VSd = 179. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. For “web subject to bending. Web is Class 1 element. From Table 5. fu = 430N/mm2.15 ≤ 9. section classification is a must. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9. Actual c/tf = 8. tf ≤ 40mm.15.28kN Therefore. Based on Table 3.

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. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling. Section 5. Therefore.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively. MSd = 268.Rd = Wpl. low shear.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.8.8 and 56.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.Rd. shear buckling check is not required. The beam is fully restrained. Section 5. For low shear.5.05 = 275.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. Therefore.Ed/fyf)2]0.5 . Ra. Ry.53 Therefore. Rb.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.4 < 63.2 “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.92kNm Mc. section 5. Ry.5. section 5. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. Actual d/tw = 47.5[fyf/fyw]0. the moment capacity is sufficient. For crushing resistance. crippling resistance.Rd.26kNm > MSd Therefore.5.Rd and buckling resistance.

5 x 7.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5 = 405.4kN For crippling resistance. bending moment is zero.5 [(10.8 x 7. Ra. σf.05 = 307.6 = 1731.14 ≤ 0.05 = 204.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.5 = 52.9 (177.Rd = (50 + 52.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.69) x 7.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360. OK.54 At support.5tw2 (Efyw)0.5 [402.5 + 3(7.14)] / 1.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.7mm.62 + 502]0. A = 227.69mm Ry.Rd = 0.9)(0. fyf = 275N/mm2. γM0 = 1.28mm2 .Rd = 0.6)0.6 / 7.6/10.4 = 0.62 (210000 x 275)0.2.05.8kN For buckling resistance.9/7.6)0. sy = 10. ss = 50mm at support. OK γM1 = 1.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0. Rb.Ed = 0.5[h2 + ss2]0.5 [(tf/tw)0.

5 d/t = 2.5 x 360.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.Rd = 204.6 = 118. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.5kN. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120.6 λ√βA = 118. buckling about y-y axis.Rd = 307. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.4 / 7.28kN. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation. This is done in the form of deflection check. (Permanent load) . OK. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value.29).05 = 197. curve (a) is used. fc = 119.1. From Figure 4.28 x 10-3 / 1. which is larger than VSd = 179. Therefore. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. λ = 2.5kN Ra. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4.2) should be conducted.6 From Table 5.8 x 1731. λ√βA = 118. Generally.6kN/m for floors.Rd = 1 x 119.8kN Ry.8N/mm2 Rb.13 (rolled I-section). δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.

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. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.46mm Table 4. . In this case. The section is adequate.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. δlim. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax.14mm > δ2 δlim. However. (Imposed load) L = 6.34mm Therefore. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17. δ. the deflection is satisfactory.

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.

03kNm . therefore. M = 31. the moment will be equally divided.5 x 5000 / 5. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor.5L / ry = 0. Section 4. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. Therefore. for columns in simple construction. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column.08kNm.54kNm. pb = 260.60 Next. λLT = 48.17.5. From frame analysis. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0. the beam reaction.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. Mi = 63. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. R. λLT = 45.7 “Columns in simple structures”.19 x 10 = 48.7. when only nominal moments are applied.

88 x 103 / 275 = 210.52 / 1818. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. apart from section classification.88kNm respectively. Therefore. . it is adequate to be used. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.10. From the section table for universal column.0 Therefore.44 + 31.08kN and 57.96 < 1.54 / 170.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. 3.03 = 0. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.y (cm3). Wpl. 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). The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.y = MSd / fy = 57.5cm3 From the rearranged table.2 EC 3 In simple construction.

For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. Since both flange and web are plastic.9cm2.6cm2.6mm. h = 254mm. Wel.94 (c = 0. b = 254mm. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. d = 200. Av = 25.5.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. Depth.y = 990cm3. tw = 8. Next.1. Therefore. section 5. Depth between fillets.2 and 10. From this table. Width. iy = 11. therefore.5b). Actual c/tf = 8. Wpl.3. Plastic modulus. the classification depends on the mean web stress. Second moment of area. Flange thickness. Shear area. From Table 5. this section is Class 1 section.1cm. σw.6 = 784.2mm < 40mm.94.2mm.86cm. Web thickness. iLT = 6.94 < 9. For web subject to bending and compression. iz = 6. Iy = 11370cm4. fy = 275N/mm2. section 5. tf = 14. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. d/tw = 23. Area of section. A = 92. flange is Class 1 element. with d/tw = 23.2 x 8. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. c/tf = 8.2mm. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). Actual c/tf = 8. aLT = 98.46cm.73N/mm2 Table 5. the web is Class 1.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked.2 respectively.5cm. tf = 14. Beforehand.2.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. .62 From the section table. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. Elastic modulus. from.y = 895cm3.08 x 103 / 200.8.3. Radius of gyration.

allowing for axial force.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax. the section is subject to a low shear.Sd Therefore.Rd = 1.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.Sd / L = 57.1 : MNy. From Table 5. n = NSd / Npl.Rd is such that n < 0.Rd = Mpl.11 Mpl. MNy.Rd = Wpl.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.Rd n ≥ 0.58kN 0.555) .1 Therefore.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.63 Vpl.3kNm MNy. MN.05 = 2433.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.Rd > Vmax.Rd (1 – n) Npl.y.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.5Vpl.05 = 259.Rd = 1.y.27.11 Mpl.y.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.05) = 387.3 x (1 – 0.1 : MNy.Sd = My.1kN n = 1351.08 / 2433.Rd = 1.555 ≥ 0.y.11 x 259.1 = 0.

y.3 Based on Table 5.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.94kNm Therefore.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.0 Ly = 0.y. λy√βA = 38. for buckling about y-y axis.1kNm > MSd = 28.Sd / ηMc. the moment resistance is sufficient. fc = 249.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.64 = 128.3. Lastly.1 x 10 = 38.Rd) ≤ 1.3.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My. buckling curve (b) is used.6. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.7N/mm2 .Rd) + (kyMy. section 5.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.85L = 0.

y. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.Sd / ηMc.65 Nb. .05 = 1 x 249. it is adequate to be used.5 x 28.y. Therefore.Rd) = (1351.Rd) + (kyMy.7 x 92.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.y.95 < 1.0 Therefore.3) + (1. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.94 / 1 x 128.1) = 0.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1. γM1 = 1.08 / 2209.05 = 2209.

Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately. structural capacity is sub-divided into beam and column. Here. deflection.1. based on steel grade S275 and S355.1 Structural Beam UB sections ranging from 305x102x25 to 533x210x122 are being tabulated in ascending form. namely structural capacity. .CHAPTER IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS The results of the structural design of the braced steel frame (beam and column) are tabulated and compiled in the next sections. The results are arranged accordingly. and weight of steel. 4. The results are shown in Table 4. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen. 4.1 for shear capacity and Table 5.2 for moment capacity.

65 420.39 462.1 493.79 2.27 819.91 -19.19 1.61 340.92 588.92 394.7 -0.45 -1.58 308.7 -0.6 1.86 619.79 2.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.77 1146.06 1.69 4.26 888.27 0.74 2.07 942.52 439.5 1102.19 4.66 24.27 14.47 545.99 660.18 8.83 0.81 1024.62 1.23 -9.55 522.29 5.39 1.95 2.56 3.79 12.46 478.16 4.6 1.85 854.05 607.04 % Diff.86 1204.15 343.6 10.93 11.14 18.02 496.87 -0.09 -2.57 13.53 943.74 -0.06 1.5 1.99 15.21 -24.33 577.32 783.44 471.8 800.78 15.75 -13.84 300.55 583.09 773.46 -3.03 4.29 452.37 399.4 0.35 431.11 -1.14 .56 400.97 392.19 387.28 554.26 -8.4 -0.57 680.7 1.15 -16.77 728.2 -2.32 10.87 433.47 596.5 529.5 1.38 542. BS 5950 (kN) 376.86 -0.69 -1.45 623.5 642.94 559.79 398.78 942.65 846.38 20.67 644.13 1091.27 0.88 -18.6 14.79 2.5 1.16 1057.53 356.28 8.77 -3.27 845.31 446.82 2.78 -25.66 704.55 1.59 460.19 1.55 617.33 409.53 564.31 2.55 1.3 683.1 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 291.66 497.16 551.2 1102.96 666.93 334.81 528.4 0.55 3.93 1.41 925.68 1007.78 -20.5 -0.42 820.35 -1.62 515.98 305.21 668.56 15.14 583.81 523.64 0.08 2.85 517.33 862.2 447.74 0.15 3.61 345.37 338.34 44.47 341.77 6.02 698.64 0.65 0.83 938.35 793.21 667.73 -3.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.56 878.25 382.18 358.51 384.27 13. 2.6 405.92 2.89 678.94 2.13 705.09 -2.1 -2.74 594.71 429.36 11.78 456.52 443.58 753.51 1.7 9.15 507.95 404.35 730.64 5.88 876.46 2.28 303.51 -4.91 1011.37 609.55 712.24 0.24 3.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.32 877.72 % Diff.48 759.81 -3.5 -0.51 18.96 6.65 0.82 2.3 14.58 34.39 511.73 -2.66 5.75 437.02 6.84 727.48 517.32 860.85 405.74 393.02 12.21 441.38 811.72 -12.68 6.79 11.17 8.56 -5.15 3.14 784.57 -2.22 2.65 724.2 777.63 12.81 -2.93 1.93 11.85 767.4 -10.83 0.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.47 831.26 2.44 2.98 1134.94 2.99 589.78 541.74 2.21 15.13 19.65 635.09 16.5 461.67 Table 4.09 1012.11 1218.38 1.99 918.11 -2 2.38 1.34 523.81 -3.

For steel grade S275.91 % Diff. meanwhile.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94. Also. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.6 as suggested by BS 5950.05 3.28 148.77 4.59 5. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.58 -9.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7. For steel grade S355.59 4.06 % Diff.43 3.13 8. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.62 182.83 132.05 1099.21 -1.14 8.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.94 -12. This value.03 1440. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950. Therefore.23 168.45 1431.06 1115.86 125.57% to 4.8 8. There are a few explanations to the variations.58 4.57 -4.97 6.49 1295.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.07 .35 -0.6 137.35 217.05 110.13 -0.43 -1.51 1007.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.07 170. however.44 1300.55.43 3.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.76 191. Table 4.07 6.06%.01 -16.3 6.76 4. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0. the difference percentage ranges from -3.3% less than 0.94 162.43 160. the difference percentage ranges from -2.57 206.41 143.78 11. which is approximately 8.81 5.69% to 4. BS 5950 (kNm) 121. 6.59 5.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.06%.98 141.

87 4.53 5.85 5.84 13.93 885.51 1.7 18. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.1 5.26 312.05 11.05 35.81 529.86 4.33 198 232.08 358.49 15.95 566.43 4.85 585.75 431.28 5.33 471.17 7.28 5.92 13.68 560.89 1.95 514.16 5.41 5.08 6.46 5.85 5.5 302. the difference percentage ranges from 0.63 4.43 4.68 0.5 34.29 1.9 619.48 17.55 21.3 4.5 691.14 410.27 14.2 24.4 277.4 264.1 539 619.22 13.47 955.01 4.33 181.86 4.31 19.66 5.55 4.83 5.95 24.7 211.5 14.11 261.52 395.78 487.3 426 479.95 189.17 27.78 15.86 8. meanwhile.5 390.55 4.45 234.2 291.73 19.35 693.06 11.05 232.17 255.67 20.04 1.75 199.25 517.5 5.05 0.41% to 6.07 609.02 18.32 0.14 3.44 4.02 455.58 5.65 244.75 300.83 275.52 434.1 5.06 0.83 1.96 21.42 5.95 385.95 275.5 479.33 192.05 336.72 9.38 8.67 685.98 24.31 4.43%.65 590.53 1.67 425.71 9.37 16.88 10.29 15.95 755.6 300.69 188. .85 11.25 497.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.83 4.08 510.36 2.68 12 13.55 9.75 332.02 315.45 18.26 317.8 1082.55 433.25 5.24 376.23 213.21 287.24 1.01 182.45 976.01 4.11 5.5 44.6 341.24 17.8 799.95 532.79 141.34 404.98 20.45 521.73 2.62 7.9 11.1 285.57 5.85 27.39 682.02 377.5 354.13 246.99 4.35 731.29 202.58% to 6.1 1.75 398.33 221.24 1.63 7.17 24.44 12.35 1104 238.96 10.08 5.94 10.08 252.35 624.49 5.03%.29 2.35 302.25 397.16 9.5 654.6 5.27 1.11 242. the difference percentage ranges from 1.65 749.5 15.77 233.1 244.73 21.69 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 195.65 404.97 14.65 5.32 1.11 5.53 171.41 221.3 695.32 10.17 171.16 5.57 355.3 844.4 838.05 585.75 562.41 19.45 769.1 220.63 4. For steel grade S355.75 484.28 15.66 2.19 370.12 5.13 318.49 5.75 631.5 330 371.48 5.55 429.95 848 184.44 14.55 257.57 5.52 11.25 453.93 740.98 352.53 5. For steel grade S275.9 163.53 549.95 479.65 149.87 4.5 457.61 4.9 900.

EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. This is approximately 5% less than 1. For example.Rd = Wpl.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively.95.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.0 as suggested by BS 5950. Table 4. for a UB section 406x178x54. Therefore. 4.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. For a column web subject to bending and compression.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. There is a variation of approximately 0. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. Meanwhile. Class 2 or Class 3 element. whether it is Class 1. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. are revised.70 There are a few explanations to the variations.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively.85%. .3.1. Besides that. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. 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.

**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

55 From Table 4.07 0.42 0.83 13. the difference percentage ranges from -0.31 2.4 2.56 2.61%. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.1 0.22% to 3.32 0.1.36 8.77 16.7 2.59 2. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.06 0.7 2.43 2. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.93 2.63%. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.75 2. as required by EC3. For example.01 2.27 3.55 23.04 2. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.47 29.77 2.33 4.7 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.79 16. for a floor beam of 9m long.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.33 3.62 5. Meanwhile.52 0.16 11.33 12.08 0.08 0.85 1. However.37 2. .46 2.49 2.22 28.25 0.33 0.05 0.34 1.34 18.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load. Apart from that.46 2.54 2.21 3.73 1.63 19. Different from BS 5950.03 9.38 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.61 3.08 21.56 2.4 0.13 0.06 0.26 18.71 3.01 1.1. section 3.51 21. for a floor beam of 6m long.41 1.16 1.58 0. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.18 1.32 10.78 3.74 4.37 4.83 20. for a section 356x171x57.29 0.56 2.19 2.68 2. Section 3.9 9.25 2.01 0.05 0.51 0.07 1.68 13.12 17.45 14.64 4.1 0.5 above.25 13.26 0.16 9. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.96 1.1 3.26 2. Meanwhile.53 0.8 1.29 0.66 0.07 0.4 2.21 24.85 15.63 2.6 2.77 4. Meanwhile. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.2 3.25 2.66 2.13 8.75 18.25 16.21 2.85 1.84 11.06 0.24 2.35 0.98 21.22% to 3. E. δmax.84 4.04 0.1 0.23 0.71 3.

external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively. To compare the economy of the design. Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .75 4.6 and Table 4.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3. floor beams.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .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 .313 9.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .744 EC3 4.821 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) Summary of the total steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.7 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 .8. is tabulated in Table 4.9.889 9.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. meanwhile.76 Table 4.750 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .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) 7.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. The saving percentage.645 3. Table 4.122 9.821 .

42 15.313 % 1. Regardless of bay width. Meanwhile.750 9.60% to 17. This time.60 17.571 9. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.821 4. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. Semi-continuous .29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4.889 EC3 4. This resulted in higher percentage difference.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 4.77 Table 4. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection.744 3.122 7. Further check on the effect of deflection was done. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection. depending on the steel grade. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design.9.645 9.96%. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span. This is because deeper.96 5. all frame types.

Table 4.0. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.10 shown. the deflection coefficient. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%. which was used in the beam design.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.78 frame is achieved in this condition. β is treated as β = 3. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.5.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . For uniformly distributed loading.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . Please refer to Appendix D for a redesign work after the β value had been revised and the section redesigned to withstand bending moment from analysis process.10 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x151x67 406x140x46 356x127x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.

744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.11.749 % 0. Table 4.42 3.122 9. meanwhile.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) 7.503 7.122 9.889 8.95 BS 5950 4.750 4.645 3.749 Table 4.889 8.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.503 9.645 5.22 9. is tabulated in Table 4.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 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) 7.750 4.12. The saving percentage.211 10.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.11 .

1(b)).80 From Table 4.95%. Therefore. (c) simple construction. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4.0. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. Please refer to Figure 4. . if it is built semi-continuously. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0.12. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4.11% to 10. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1.1(c)). the gap reduces. if rigid connection is introduced. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. However. Eventually. (b) semi-rigid construction. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight.

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

24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. axial compression is much more critical.0m long. γM of 1. it was found that for a same value of λ. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. fc and pc respectively. In comparison. Meanwhile. of both codes.05 as required by EC3 design. fc is smaller than pc. a structural beam will be subject to deflection.2 Structural Column In simple construction. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced.82 calculation required by EC3. 5. From interpolation. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. 5. A reduction in the range of 5.27% to 9. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. Therefore. as compared to the partial safety factor. EC3 design created majority .2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project.0 as suggested by BS 5950. Therefore. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. γM0 of 1.1. compared with BS 5950. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column.

63%. However.744 tons and 3. 6m bay width steel frame. For a 2-bay.821 tons and 4.313 tons for EC3 design.122 tons and 7. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. For a 2-bay. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. 9m bay width steel frame. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. the total deflection was greater. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. 4-storey. and 4. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. Section 4. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.750 tons for BS 5950 design. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. In this study.2. 4-storey.645 tons and 9. and 9.1 of EC3 provided proof to this. Therefore. . The difference ranges from 0. 5. E.22% to 3. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison.889 tons for BS 5950 design.571 tons for EC3 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. I will have to be chosen.

60% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 15. 6m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 17. 4-storey. S275 (Fe 430): 0.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. 4-storey. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. 4-storey. 9m bay width. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950.42% 2-bay. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 7. 4-storey.11% 2-bay. However.0 to 3. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute).22% 5.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. . structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. 6m bay width. S275 (Fe 430): 5.95% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 10. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. 9m bay width. 4-storey. 6m bay width. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. 9m bay width. 9m bay width. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior. S275 (Fe 430): 1.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.96% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 4-storey.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. 6m bay width. 4-storey.42% 2-bay.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

6 + 1. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.6 x 15 = 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. DL Live Load. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. LL = = 4 1.4 x 27.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. LL Floors Dead Load. DL Live Load. DL Live Load.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.4 x 24 + 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.4DL + 1.64 kN/m .5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.0 DATA No.6 2.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1. MAHMOOD 1. of Bay No.6LL Roof w = 1.4 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.

88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame .1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.0 2. MAHMOOD 2. 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.

0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 2.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3. 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.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m .

76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . Roof beams.84 707.68 1415.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. V = 62. Shear.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.52 144 331. MAHMOOD 4. . horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.1 Beam Moment.84 1039. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 kNm 4.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. contributed by beam shear. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.92 kN M = 62.92 519.

MAHMOOD 5.92) 331.68 (187.92) 519.84 [3] [4] 707.84 (187.76 .88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 1415.52 707.92 [2] 519.88 281. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.88 281.92) 288 (187.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.92) 1039.88 281.84 (187.92) 663.88 281.92) 144 [1] 331.92 (187.88 281.

19 28.19 [3] 28.6 [2] 28.19 31.54 28.19 [4] 28.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6LL) .4DL+1.19 28.54 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.19 28.19 31.6 21.1.19 21. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.19 21.0DL Most critical condition .54 31. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.6 31.6 [1] 21.54 28.6 21.6 28.54 28.54 31.19 28.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

35 x 24 + 1. LL = = 1.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. of Bay No. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.0 DATA No. MAHMOOD 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 + 1.76 kN/m .6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.5 x 9 = 45.35 x 27.5 x 15 = 59. LL Floors Dead Load.35DL + 1.6 2.5LL Roof w = 1. DL Live Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. LL = = 4 1.9 kN/m Floors w = 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.35 1. DL Live Load. DL Live Load.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

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

3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 6m 45. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 59.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.76 kN/m .76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.76 kN/m 59.

2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.7 kN M = 45. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . V = 45.55 kNm Floor beams.96 992. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.08 137.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.4 633.1 Beam Moment. contributed by beam shear. .54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.52 1351.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.7 316. V = 59.98 496.76 x 6 / 2 = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.26 675.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.28 kN M = 59. Shear. Roof beams.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268. MAHMOOD 4.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.92 kNm 4. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.

28) 992.92 5.54 .28) 633.55 268.92 268.28) 275.52 (179.98 [2] 496.7) (137.26 (179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.7 [1] 316. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.28) 316.55 206.4 (179.92 268.7 (179.26 [3] [4] 675.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.98 (179.7) 137.54 1351.0 5.2 Shear (kN) (137.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 268.08 675.96 (179.92 268.28) 137. MAHMOOD 5.28) 496.92 268.

3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.66 19.89 26.94 28.5LL) .66 20.66 26.66 26. MAHMOOD 5.89 Moments are calculated from (1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.94 28. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.94 26.89 26.94 26.89 28.89 26.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.89 20.89 26.89 26.1.94 26.89 28.94 26.89 19.89 28.71 28.35DL+1.89 26.71 20.0DL Most critical condition .

100 APPENDIX B1 .

9 149.1 37 37 39 39.3 41.2 74.2 74.1 67.2 28.2 179 238.3 30 31.9 43 45 46 46.3 101 101.1 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 59.3 82 82.2 74.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.1 67.1 82.2 89.1 98.2 109 113 122 125. L = 6.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 25. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) STC.8 25.1 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 = 281.1 40.3 54 54.1 51 52.1 139.8 33.3 92.1 67.1 67.1 48.8 60.1 24.2 28.1 32.

3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.8 454. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. neutral axis at mid-depth.1 13.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = 59.3 2.0m) STC. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.75 50. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 1.9 8.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. subject to pure bending.0 1.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. L = 6.3 407.3 Therefore.6 152.

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 .

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 kNm W pl.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB . L = 6.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.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.0m) STC.y = M / fy = 268. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.6 177. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6.0m) STC.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.4 1051 927 32.6 7. Second moment of area. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 68. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.6 18670 4.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.6 10.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.36 131 8. MAHMOOD 1. Section chosen 1.y = W el. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.15 47.9 Therefore.9 360. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.0 1.

001 γMO = 1.Rd = W pl.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.05 = 275.48 = 298.0m) STC.9 x 100 275 1.92 kNm 0.5 x 497.05 √3 = 497. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.5Vpl.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. it is low shear Mc.2 (b) Web.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.001 / 1.15 <= 9.49 kN VSd 0.4 > 46. L = 6.28 kN V pl.7 3.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.05 = 32.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.26 kNm MSd Mc. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd < Therefore.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .Rd = 0.5Vpl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.48 kN VSd < Vpl.

4 kN = VSd = 179.5 σf.28 kN < Ry.001 / 1.8 < 63.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47. MAHMOOD 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. not susceptible to LTB 6.0m) STC.Rd = (50 + 52.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.Rd = γM1 At support.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).5 Ry. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.69) x 7. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.4 63. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.05 204.6 x 275 x 0.

3 ≤ = 1.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 0.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.Rd = > 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.92 275.4 = γM1 = E= Ra. Rd = 0. MSd Mc.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.2 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd 268.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. h= a= 402.05 205 307. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.26 7.98 <= 1. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.0m) STC.5 ] .5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. Ra. L = 6. MAHMOOD At midspan.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.14 1.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.

8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.4 / 7.8 x 1731.6 2 = 1731.6 l = 0.118) = 119.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement. Rb.5 = 405.05 A = beff x tw = 227. MAHMOOD beff = 0.8 x 7. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.117) / (120 .0m) STC.5 x 360.05 = 197.(118.5 x SQRT(402.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. λ = 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.28 x 0. L = 6.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .6 .5 d/t = 2.001 / 1.75d Rolled I-section.Rd = 1 x 119.118) x (121 .5 kN > At mid span.8 N/mm 2 Rb.6 = 118. buckling about y-y axis. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.

14 mm OK δmax = 11.88 + 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.46 = 18.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.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 . MAHMOOD 8. L = 6.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11. .0m) STC.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.0 1.88 6.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

L = 5.0m) STC.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.3 247. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 988.4 568.8 1228 1589 1485 1953 2482 1875 2298 2964 2680 2417 3457 3436 3977 4689 4245 5101 5818 6994 8229 10009 12078 14247 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 63. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.1 652 802.1 310. 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.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.6 978.1 497.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .

96 5.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.2 160.3 14.8 652 581. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 2. MAHMOOD 1.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7. Gross area.19 75. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore.0m) STC. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .52 kN L= 5 m 1.1 8.2 9.0 DATA Fc = 1415.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 205. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.23 17. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209. L = 5.

44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.8 x 9.0 3.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis . MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.4 4.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.85L = 0. L = 5.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.96 x 10) = 47.52 x 1000 / (160.0m) STC.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.

001 = 1818. Therefore.0m) STC.5.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.(47. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.4 .46) / (48 . L = 5. M= 31.54 kNm . beam reaction. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.239) 2 = 239.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. R From frame analysis sheets. the moment will be equally divided.4 pc 242 239 Therefore.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2. Mi = 63.8 x 100 x 0.46) x (242 . the compressive resistance is adequate 5. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.44 kN Fc < Pc 47. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.9 x 75.

17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .0 4.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.96 1.03 = < 0.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.17 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0 6.0m) STC.(48.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .45) x (233 .250) 2 = 260.54 170.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.78 x 652 x 0.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.03 kNm 1415.52 1818. L = 5.19 x 10) = 48.45) / (50 . MAHMOOD 6.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.001 = 170. 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.44 + 31.5 L/ry = (0.

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 = 57.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 kNm M= W pl. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.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 57.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .

y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.08 kN Msd = 28. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .6 14. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. L = 5.1 6.2 Therefore.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.0 DATA NSd = 1351.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = W el.86 98.2 990 895 11.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14. MAHMOOD 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.2 200. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1. Area of section.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.9 11370 6.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.46 92. Second moment of area.94 23.0m) STC.5 8. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

001 / 1.2 Class 3 = 13. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.05 = 259.1 = 0.001 / 1.3 <= 30.y.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.1 Mpl.1 Class 3 = 38.Rd = 92.3 kNm Mny. L = 5.1 kN n = 1351.94 <= 9.Rd = 0. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.11 Mpl.Rd = Mpl.1 28.1 n ≥ 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.9 (b) Web.Rd Mny. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.Rd(1-n) W pl.8 3.y.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.y.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.05 = 2433.555 >= n < 0.0m) STC.05 Npl.Rd = 1.1 Mny.Rd = > MSd = 128.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd A fy Npl.08 / 2433.

3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. Rd Nb.9 x 100 x 0. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 . y . y .3 0.y. Rd η M c . L = 5.001 / 1. MAHMOOD 4.Rd = 1 x 249.7 x 92.5 NSd Nb.Sd ηMc.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.(38.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .0m) STC.248) 2 = 249. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.38) x (40 .y. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.94 1 x 128.Rd = = 1351.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.1 x 10) = 38.0 N b .3 kN ky = 1.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .5 x 28.y.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.05 = 2209.3 .08 2209.y.7 N/mm Nb.38) / (250 .Rd 1.

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

126 APPENDIX D .

92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977. L = 6.92 kNm W pl.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 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.y = M / fy = 268.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.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 = 268.0m) Rev 1 STC.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. 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.

8 152.9 407.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.99 53.9 Therefore.0 1.59 121 6. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. L = 6. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.y = W el.5 66. Section chosen 1. Second moment of area.6 10.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 1096 950 36. MAHMOOD 1.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.0m) Rev 1 STC.6 21370 3.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.

5 x 551.92 kN VSd < Vpl.0m) Rev 1 STC.001 / 1.001 γMO = 1.15 kN VSd 0.05 = 36.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 > 46.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate . flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6. it is low shear Mc.5Vpl.Rd = W pl.5Vpl.Rd = 0.Rd < Therefore. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.28 kN V pl.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.05 √3 = 551. L = 6.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.2 (b) Web.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.99 <= 9.92 = 331.5 x 100 275 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.05 kNm MSd Mc. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.92 kNm 0.05 = 287.7 3.

68 kN VSd = 179.81) x 7. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.6 63.Rd = (50 + 48. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.05 = 196.5 Ry. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. not susceptible to LTB 6. L = 6.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 5.0m) Rev 1 STC.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.5 σf.Rd = γM1 At support. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.001 / 1.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.28 kN < Ry.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.6 x 275 x 0.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.8 < 63. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.

92 287.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.05 7.Rd = > 0. MAHMOOD At midspan. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.94 <= 1.5 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. h= a= 449.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. MSd Mc.3 ≤ = 1. Rd = 0. L = 6.5 ] .5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.2 0.05 205 299.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.Rd 268.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.0m) Rev 1 STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.12 1.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0. Ra.

130) = 98.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.05 = 179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.88 x 0.6 / 7. Rb.6 2 = 1909.9 N/mm 2 Rb. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.9 kN > At mid span.130) x (103 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x SQRT(449.001 / 1.98) / (135 . L = 6. buckling about y-y axis.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 .0m) Rev 1 STC.5 = 452.1 .05 A = beff x tw = 251.5 x 407.3 x 7.6 mm Buckling resistance of web. MAHMOOD beff = 0.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.75d Rolled I-section. λ = 2.(134.Rd = 1 x 98.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.1 l = 0.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 = 134. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.9 x 1909.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .5 d/t = 2.

0 1.26 3.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.14 mm OK δmax = 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. . L = 6.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17. MAHMOOD 8.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.0 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 .6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.26 + 3.95 = 11. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.0m) Rev 1 STC.

- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- Design Aids EuroCode
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- Design of Steel I-Section (BS5950)
- 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
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Design of Structural Steelwork_0903384590
- From BS5950 to EC3
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- BS 5950 Design Guide
- Steel Design BS5950-1
- Steel Section Capacities BS 5950 Spreadsheet
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- !Multi Storey Steel Building
- EC3extract
- BS 5628 - 1
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridges
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- steel_design
- Designers guide to EC3
- TTT Handout LG Nov2008 Lecture Note on EC3 Design
- BS 5950 Worked Examples
- Design Of Steel Structures
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2

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

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