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 .

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

43%.27% and 9. . structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. with the application of partial strength connections. loading values and etc. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. 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. This study intends to testify the claim. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. safety factors. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. specifications to be followed.11% to 10. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.60% to 17. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. However. Therefore.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. design methods. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI) claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. These details include the basis and concept of design. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. Meanwhile.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However.95%.

Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. Namun begitu. cara rekabentuk.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. factor keselamatan. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). . Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.60% – 17. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti. Namun begitu.43%.95%. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. Selain itu.11% – 10. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. nilai beban. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.27% – 9. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Justeru.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. dan sebagainya. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.

2 1.4 1.3 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .1 1.vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE i ii iii iv v vi vii xii xiii xiv xv THESIS TITLE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES LISTOF NOTATIONS I INTRODUCTION 1.

5.4.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.1.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.3.1 Unstiffened Web 2. Mc.2.3.3.1 2.3.3.2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2. Vpl.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.4.1 2.3.1.3.3.3. Pv Moment Capacity. Mc 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.2.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.2 2.4 Loading 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.3.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.3.4.1.1.3.2 2.3.2 2.3.2 2.4.3.5.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.4 Actions of EC3 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.Rd Moment Capacity.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.1.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.1.1 2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.3.3.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.2 BS 5950 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 Stiffened Web 2.2 Serviceability 2.6 Deflection 2.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.2.1.3 Shear Capacity.3.2.

6.5.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.4.4. Nb.5 Deflection 2.Rd 2.5.2. Pc 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2. Rb.Rd 2.3 Compression Resistance. Ra.4.3 Compression Resistance.6.6.1.4.1.4. l 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.7.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5.2 Slenderness. Nc.5.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.4.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2. LE 2.3. λ 2.5.2 Structural Beam Structural Column 31 32 29 30 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 29 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 III METHODOLOGY 3.1.4 Buckling Resistance.Rd 2.6.1.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.3 Buckling Resistance.Rd 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.6.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.6.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.1.4.5. λ 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.2.1.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 2.4.6.5.2 Crippling Resistance.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.2 Slenderness.4.1 Effective Length.2.1 Buckling Length.4.Rd 2. Ry.2.1 Introduction 34 .ix 2.7.6.7 Conclusion 2.1 Crushing Resistance.1.

3 3.1 3.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.1.x 3.4.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Load Combination 3.2 3.10 Structural Column Design 3.10.9.4.2 4.1 Structural Capacity 5.5 3.1 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 3.6 3.7 3.10.2 Shear Calculation 3.2 3.2 4.1 Structural Capacity 4.8.9.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.1.3 Moment Calculation 3.1 BS 5950 3.1.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.8.1 4.8.

1.2 5.2 5.4 Structural Column 82 82 83 84 Deflection Values Economy Recommendation for Future Studies REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A1 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 APPENDIX A2 APPENDIX B1 APPENDIX B2 APPENDIX C1 APPENDIX C2 APPENDIX D .xi 5.3 5.

2 3.4 4.10 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.1 2.11 4.2 4.4 4.1 4.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 . TITLE PAGE 2.8 4.7 4.3 4.2 3.5 4.1 3.6 4.9 4.3 3.

xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.3 4. TITLE PAGE 3.1(b) 4.2 3.1(c) Schematic diagram of research methodology Floor plan view of the steel frame building Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame Bending moment of beam for rigid construction Bending moment of beam for semi-rigid construction Bending moment of beam for simple construction 37 38 39 80 80 80 .1 3.1(a) 4.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

actions are defined as fixed actions. 2. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. e.8 2.3. In time variation classification. or which limits its functional effectiveness. . variable actions (Q).3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. movable imposed loads. e. self-weight. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people.g. 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. e.g.g. This failure may be caused by excessive deformation.1. and accidental loads (A). considered as a rigid body. Meanwhile. which result in different arrangements of actions. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. self-weight of structures. and vibration. imposed loads. damage to the building or its contents. and free actions. including supports and foundations. e. explosions or impact from vehicles. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G).g. wind loads.1.3. in spatial variation classification. or an imposed deformation in indirect action. rupture. for example. ancillaries and fixed equipment. wind loads or snow loads.g. It may require certain consideration. snow loads.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse. e. 2. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure. fittings. which causes discomfort to people.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action. temperature effects or settlement.

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

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

imposed and wind loading.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness.11 2. without calculating their local buckling resistance.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure.3.2. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole. Where necessary.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well. 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. There are dead. earth and groundwater loading. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling Bearing capacity of web Deflection 2. 2. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. . overhead traveling cranes.

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

moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.13 in which Av is the shear area. Clause 4. 2.3.3.3. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. Seff is the effective plastic modulus.2. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus. 2. Z is the section modulus. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.5. . and Zeff is the effective section modulus.3 Moment Capacity. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.

and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 . in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.14 2.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. Clause 4.2.3.3. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.5.

4.15 2. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0. 2.3.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.1 of BS 5950 states that.4.3.2 states that. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2. 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. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender.3.6Vw. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance. but the web is designed for shear only. or 62ε for a welded section.3.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling. qw = shear buckling strength of the web. a conservative value Mf for .1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.3.6Vw. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section.4.4.4.

1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.3. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a). It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.3.for a welded 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.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.or H-section: .5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0. .or H-section: k=T+r k=T . the web should be designed using Annex H.5. where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: . with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.6Vw.for a rolled I.except at the end of a member: n = 5 . 2.5.2.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.

5. pyw is the design strength of the web. and t is the web thickness. allowing for cope holes for welding.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web.netpy in which As. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. . Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950. T is the flange thickness. 2.6 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. r is the root radius. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. 2.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As.3. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps.3.

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

It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. and ε = [235/fy]0.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure. 2. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Vpl. but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes.Rd where Vpl. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5.1. At each crosssection. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force. The member will fail before it reaches design stress.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section.1. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. Apart from that. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved. Class 4 is known as slender section. Vsd. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl.5 .2 Shear Capacity.4. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. The stress block will be of triangle shape.

2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.5. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear . For class 4 cross-sections. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.7 states that.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment. as stated in Clause 5.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.3.Rd. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.3. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.3 Moment Capacity. 2.4.4.Rd.3. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl. Mc. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.4. when maximum shear force.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.4.Rd.20 2. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc. 2.

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

Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 . H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.5tw2(Efyw)0.4. 2. σf. H or U section is given by: Ra. For member subject to bending moments.4. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.4.Rd + Msd / Mc.Rd and Fsd / Ra. Rb.3 Buckling Resistance.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.5 [(tf / tw)0. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively. Ra.Sd = 0.2.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.5 2.5.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.Rd ≤ 1.Rd of the web of an I.2 Crippling Resistance.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra. Rb.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.4.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra. and ss / d < 0.Rd of the web of an I.

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.4.2. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. 2.5. 2.1 of EC3. Therefore.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. however.1 and Table 5.5. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. applies only to non-moment sustaining column. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .5 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.5. This. 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. angle.1 Effective Length. in accordance of Table 22.5. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) .1. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.4. 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.5. and back-to-back struts. 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. T-section struts.24 2. λ = LE / r 2. Pc According to Clause 4. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.2 Slenderness.1.3 Compression Resistance.5.7. channel.1. 2. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.

My is the moment about minor axis. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. .1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. for class 1 plastic. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.5. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis.5. the checking of cross-section capacity is as follows: My Fc M + x + ≤1 Ag p y M cx M cy where Fc is the axial compression. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.5. Mx is the moment about major axis. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. py is the design steel strength. 2. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. 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 24.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. 2.2. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis.

the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. Mb the buckling resistance moment. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. and Zy the elastic modulus. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 The design of steel column according to EC3 is quite similar to the design of steel column according to BS 5950. 2.26 2. Pc the compression resistance of column. py the steel design strength. 2.2.5.6.

Alternatively. Clause 5. the value of λ should not exceed 180.3 Compression Resistance.5. Nc.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic.4.1.1 Buckling Length.Rd of a member is given by: Nc.6.1.6.2 Slenderness. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3. the value of λ should not exceed 250.5 states that. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section. 2.27 2. λ The slenderness λ of a compression member is generally taken as its buckling length l divided by its radius of gyration i about the relevant axis.1. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally.1. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L. 2.6. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) . λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. the compression resistance Nc.Rd According to Clause 5.4.

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

y f yd Wel . Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y .Sd + N Sd e Ny M z .2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. β = 5n but β ≥ 1.8. α = 2. Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz .6.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. in which n = Nsd / Npl.Rd.29 2. Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject . Clause 5.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression.6.Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff .2. 2. Rd for a conservative approximation where. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment. Rd M pl . M y .1 states that. y f yd Weff .Sd + + ≤1 N pl . y .4.Sd N Sd M z . for I and H sections.Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel .Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny . z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y . z .Sd N Sd M z . Rd M pl . for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y . z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1.

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

0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.0 N b.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0. 3 Class 4 Nc. 2. Rd ηM c.05 γM1 = 1.05 Nc. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .05 4.eff Class 1. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3. y .Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.67 + 0.5 2.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1. Rd .33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y. y .

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

As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. Calculation of bending moment. End moments are zero. Therefore. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets.4 to 3.35 3. M and shear force. that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span. 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. .8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. V are based on simply-supported condition. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed. Sections 3.

Microsoft Excel worksheets will show the calculation steps in a clear and fair manner. 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. al. 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. Meanwhile. Furthermore. The Microsoft Excel software is used for its features that allow continual and repeated calculations using values calculated in every cell of the worksheet. (1995).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.36 3. .

Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 3.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology . 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.

.4 Structural Layout & Specifications 3. the storey height will be 4m. 4th storey is roof while the rest will serve as normal floors. The intermediate frame will be used as the one to be analysed and designed. Each of the frame’s longitudinal length is 6m. The number of storey of the frame is set at four (4).1 Structural Layout In order to make comparisons of the design of braced steel frame between BS 5950-1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. in total. the 4-storey frame consists of four (4) bays.3 for the illustrations of building plan view and elevation view respectively. The storey height will be 5m from ground floor to first floor. 3rd to roof). there will be three (3) numbers of 4-storey frames. whereas for other floors (1st to 2nd.4.2 : Floor plan view of the steel frame building. Two (2) lengths of bay width will be used in the analysis – 6m and 9m respectively.2 and Figure 3.38 3. 6m 6m 6/9m 6/9m Figure 3. In plan view. a parametric study for the design of multi-storey braced frames is carried out. 2nd to 3rd. Please refer to Figure 3.

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

Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. .2. this value will be adopted. In this design. For imposed roof load.5kN/m2.4kN/m2 and 3. Consequently. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. all floors will be of one-way slab. For precast floor selfweight. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. Meanwhile. Therefore. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. Therefore. repair and other general purposes.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. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel.0kN/m2 respectively. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. Meanwhile. Therefore. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. a uniform load intensity of 1. 3. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. section 6.5 Loadings Section 2.2 (Flat roofs) states that.5kN/m2 is appropriate.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. 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.

the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight.05. is given by 1. For other floors. 3.35. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. γM0.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. for normal design situations. γQ is given by 1. A general load intensity of 1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. depending on the interior designer’s intention. γf should be taken as 1. γG is given by 1.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. for imposed floor load. Partial safety factors for loads.6 for imposed load. From Table 2. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads.1.4.05 as well. 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. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. Meanwhile. γF for dead load.1. In EC3. The . partial safety factors. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load. is given by 1. γM1. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. Meanwhile.4 for dead load.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. finishes and fittings. and 1.5. 2 or 3 cross-section. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1.6 Factor of Safety Section 2.

1. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. in the meantime. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).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. 3. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. 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. For steel grade S 355. 3.6 times total imposed . Meanwhile. For steel grade S 275. the load combination will be 1.8. 3.4 times total dead load plus 1.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame.7 Categories In this project. for Fe 510. According to BS 5950. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3).42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. In BS 5950.

For all other floors.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. w. According to EC3.55 268.7 179. For all other floors. will be 45.35 times total dead load plus 1. Clearly. the load combination will be 1. the w will be 62. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. the shear. the resultant load combination.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.5LL).76kN/m.88 6m 137.35DL + 1. the resultant load combination.64kN/m.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame. For the roof.8. For the roof.1 below: Table 3.4DL + 1.92 From Table 4. there is a difference of approximately 4. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear.43 load (1. Table 3. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.1. The next table. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 3. will be 48kN/m. the w will be 59. For simple construction.5 times total imposed load (1. This is done by summating the resultant shear . V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187.5% between the analyses of both codes. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.6LL).9kN/m. w.

54 Int. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.78 2026. 3. structural beam moment.76 1559. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.84 707. 137.4 633.39 1013.62 Ext.5%. = Internal column Ext. Table 3.52 1351. similar with the beam shear. 216 497.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction.7 316. 206.96 992.94 1488. 432 995.28 Int. M.88 779.Ground 288 663.55 475. 144 331.44 force from beam of each floor.31 Int.92 519.98 496.52 2123.84 1039.47 744. 413.08 Int.8.76 9m Ext.26 675.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int.1 950.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.64 6m Ext.68 1415.3: .76 1061. 275. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st .

74 605. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm.4% to 4. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. the depth of the column has not been decided yet.3. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. Subsequently. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.55 268.6% between the analyses of both codes. the higher the difference percentage will be. 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). in this case. the eccentricity moment. For the moments of the structural columns. In this project. D or h is the depth of column section (m). initially. since this is simple construction.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. However.07 From Table 3. Therefore.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. there is a difference of approximately 4.45 Table 3.23 6m 206.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. Regardless of the width of the bay. Clearly. . the higher the load combination of a floor. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment. Me.

. for internal column.66 57. 21. V can be expressed as V = (1. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done.6 63.38 9m Ext.4 94. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load. 32.88 Int. 30.56 6m Ext.68 These values of eccentricity moments will be useful for the estimation of initial size of a column member during structural design in later stage.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.5LL) – 1. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state. For BS 5950. Roof Other Floors 21.98 86.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation. 3.5.84 Ext.6 Int.66 53.4 84.4DL + 1.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity. 32. Table 3.0DL. 20.78 Int. Next.0DL.6LL) – 1. Table 3.6 56. V can be expressed as V = (1.98 80. 20.35DL + 1. In simple construction.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. 30. However.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1. For EC 3.

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). first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). Flange thickness. D = 454. B = 152. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. t = 8.6mm. Plastic modulus. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59.1mm.1 BS 5950 In simple construction.88kNm. 3. Sx = 1290cm3. Depth. b/T = 6. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.99. From the section table.3.92kN and 281. d = 407. d/t = 50. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. Zx = 1120cm3. Sx = M / py = 281. From the section table for universal beam.6mm.8kg/m. Elastic modulus. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187. T = 13. Web thickness. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Depth between fillets. shear capacity.9mm. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) .9.3mm. Width.

For class 1 plastic cross-section.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. therefore. flange is Class 1 plastic section.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. shear buckling needs not be checked. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. Mc” is checked.0 in this design.5 is checked. Next.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950.54kN > Fv Therefore.6 = 3682.0.2. shear buckling resistance should be checked.57 = 364. it is low shear. Mc = pySx. Next.57kN > Fv = 187.4. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. After clause 4.4.3. Since actually d/t < 70. clause 4. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 . Therefore.6 x 275 x 3682. Actual b/T = 5.26 x 10-3 = 607. shear capacity is adequate.75.5 “Moment capacity.6 x 607.1 x 454. Therefore. section 4. Shear capacity. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. Meanwhile. For web of I-section. Pv = 0. Since both flange and web are plastic. Av = 8.6pyAv.92kN Therefore.26mm2 Pv = 0. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. where neutral axis is at mid-depth. this section is Class 1 plastic section.2.6Pv = 0. 0.0. actual d/t = 50.48 = 1. section 4.0. web is Class 1 plastic section.

2pyZx.2 = 23.5mm At support.6 x 10.92kN .6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.02mm k=T+r = 13.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads.3 + 10.5.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.34kN > Fv = 187.75kNm Therefore.3 = 51. n = 2 + 0. bearing capacity of web. bearing stiffener should be provided. M = 281.2pyZx = 1. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange. therefore.2 + 2 x 13.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369.6be/k. moment capacity is adequate. 1.2mm b1 = t + 1.1 + 1.49 = 354.02mm Pbw = 98. be = 0. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10. section 4. OK.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.6kNm > Mc.02 x 8. If Fv exceeds Pbw. Mc should be limited to 1.

Therefore. L = 6. w = 15kN/m for floors.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). However. .67mm >δ Therefore.50 Therefore. In this case. the bearing capacity at support is adequate. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. This is done in the form of deflection check. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.5) should be conducted. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. δ. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. The section is adequate. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. Generally. the deflection is satisfactory. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection.

Wpl. Therefore. Depth between fillets. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.28kN and 268.2 EC 3 In simple construction. Wel.6mm.9cm3 From the rearranged table. Wpl. crippling and buckling. b = 177. shear capacity. 3. Area of . resistance of web to crushing. Shear area. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. Av = 32. tf = 10.9. h = 402.92 x 103 / 275 = 977.4mm. d = 360. moment capacity. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. Width. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. it is adequate to be used.92kNm. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.6mm. From the section table. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. lateral torsional buckling. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. Web thickness. Flange thickness. Elastic modulus. Depth. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = 927cm3. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.y = M / py = 268.y (cm3).9cm2.6mm.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. Plastic modulus.y = 1051cm3.9mm. From the section table for universal beam. tw = 7.

15 ≤ 9. section 5. yield strength. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9. tf ≤ 40mm. Actual d/tw = 47. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. neutral axis at mid depth”. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states. iLT = 4.5Vpl. 0. For S275 (Fe 430).28kN .48kN > 179.2 for Class 1 elements. From Table 5. Actual c/tf = 8. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. c/tf = 8. flange subject to compression only”.4. section classification is a must.28kN Therefore.Rd = 0.9mm. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength.5 x 497.36cm.6 for Class 1 elements. Flange is Class 1 element.05) = 497.49kN > VSd = 179. Second moment of area. For “web subject to bending.6(a). UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. Based on Table 3.15. The design value of shear force. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0.48 = 298.6cm2. Web is Class 1 element. Iy = 18670cm4. for “outstand element of compression flange. shear resistance is sufficient.05 Vpl.1. that is Vpl.2. Next. fu = 430N/mm2. d/tw = 47.4 ≤ 66. Therefore.52 section.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1. A = 68. tf = 10.28kN γM0 = 1. VSd = 179.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked.Rd.5.6. aLT = 131cm.Rd = (32.

crippling resistance.Ed/fyf)2]0.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63. section 5. The beam is fully restrained. Ry. Ra. Ry.26kNm > MSd Therefore.8 and 56.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively.Rd. MSd = 268.5.5 .5.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.Rd. Therefore.8. the moment capacity is sufficient.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. low shear.5[fyf/fyw]0. section 5.5.Rd = Wpl.5 [1 – (γM0 σf.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.4 < 63.05 = 275. sy = tf(bf/tw)0.92kNm Mc. shear buckling check is not required. Section 5.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support. For low shear. For crushing resistance.53 Therefore. Section 5. Therefore.Rd and buckling resistance. Actual d/tw = 47. Rb.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked.

9/7.Rd = 0. A = 227.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.8kN For buckling resistance.05 = 307.28mm2 .5[h2 + ss2]0.6 / 7.5tw2 (Efyw)0.05. sy = 10.5 = 52. Ra.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. OK.14 ≤ 0. ss = 50mm at support.5 [(tf/tw)0.62 + 502]0. bending moment is zero.6/10.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.4kN For crippling resistance.62 (210000 x 275)0.69mm Ry.8 x 7.54 At support.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.69) x 7.5 [402. γM0 = 1.Rd = 0.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0. Rb.14)] / 1.Rd = (50 + 52.5 = 405.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.7mm.2.9)(0.4 = 0. fyf = 275N/mm2.6)0. OK γM1 = 1.5 x 7.9 (177.6)0.05 = 204. σf.5 [(10.Ed = 0.5 + 3(7.6 = 1731.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.

05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.13 (rolled I-section).28kN. curve (a) is used.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.4 / 7.Rd = 1 x 119.Rd = 307.Rd = 204.8N/mm2 Rb. From Figure 4.6 From Table 5. fc = 119. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. (Permanent load) . the serviceability limit state check (Section 4. λ√βA = 118.8 x 1731. This is done in the form of deflection check. λ = 2. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.29). Therefore.1.5 d/t = 2.8kN Ry. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.28 x 10-3 / 1. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.5 x 360.6 = 118.5kN Ra.6kN/m for floors.05 = 197.2) should be conducted.6 λ√βA = 118. OK. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. which is larger than VSd = 179. buckling about y-y axis. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. Generally.5kN.

2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. δ. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. δlim. (Imposed load) L = 6.34mm Therefore. In this case. The section is adequate.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. However.14mm > δ2 δlim. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27.46mm Table 4. the deflection is satisfactory. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. .88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11.

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.

Mi = 63. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation. From frame analysis. pb = 260.54kNm. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0.19 x 10 = 48. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. therefore.7.5 x 5000 / 5. Section 4. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column. for columns in simple construction.7 “Columns in simple structures”. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0.5L / ry = 0. R. Therefore.60 Next.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. λLT = 45. λLT = 48. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. when only nominal moments are applied.17. the beam reaction.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections).08kNm.03kNm .5. M = 31. the moment will be equally divided.

88 x 103 / 275 = 210. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.5cm3 From the rearranged table. it is adequate to be used. 3. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.44 + 31. 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). UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.2 EC 3 In simple construction.y (cm3). first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.0 Therefore.96 < 1. From the section table for universal column.10. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.y = MSd / fy = 57. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.52 / 1818.08kN and 57. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. apart from section classification.03 = 0. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351.88kNm respectively. Wpl. Therefore.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. .54 / 170.

Next. Actual c/tf = 8. c/tf = 8.2mm. σw.2mm. tf = 14. Area of section.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. from. iz = 6. Wpl.62 From the section table. From this table.2mm < 40mm. Depth. Since both flange and web are plastic. A = 92.1. Actual c/tf = 8.5cm.3.73N/mm2 Table 5. Second moment of area.6 = 784.2 and 10. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. Plastic modulus.3. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. Av = 25. Iy = 11370cm4. the classification depends on the mean web stress.y = 895cm3. tf = 14. .1cm.94 (c = 0. iy = 11.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2.86cm.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. flange is Class 1 element. therefore. tw = 8. Shear area.6mm.5b). the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. iLT = 6. Elastic modulus. h = 254mm. Therefore. fy = 275N/mm2.46cm. the web is Class 1. d = 200.5. section 5.9cm2. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. For web subject to bending and compression.2 respectively. with d/tw = 23. section 5. b = 254mm.2 x 8.2. Width. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). d/tw = 23.08 x 103 / 200. From Table 5.94.y = 990cm3. Radius of gyration. Depth between fillets. this section is Class 1 section. Flange thickness. Beforehand.8. Web thickness. aLT = 98.94 < 9. Wel.6cm2.

05 = 259.08 / 2433.Sd / L = 57.y.Sd = My.11 Mpl.y.11 Mpl.27.Rd is such that n < 0.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd (1 – n) Npl. From Table 5.1 : MNy. the section is subject to a low shear. n = NSd / Npl.1kN n = 1351.63 Vpl. MNy.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.y.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.555 ≥ 0.Rd = Mpl.3kNm MNy.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.05) = 387. MN.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.y.555) .1 : MNy. allowing for axial force.Rd n ≥ 0.Sd Therefore.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.58kN 0.05 = 2433.Rd = 1.Rd = Wpl.11 x 259.Rd > Vmax.3 x (1 – 0.Rd = 1.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.5Vpl.Rd = 1.1 = 0.1 Therefore.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.

3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38.3.1 x 10 = 38. the moment resistance is sufficient.6.3.94kNm Therefore. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.64 = 128. fc = 249.Rd) ≤ 1.85L = 0.y. section 5.1kNm > MSd = 28.y. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My. buckling curve (b) is used. for buckling about y-y axis. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.3 Based on Table 5. Lastly.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.Sd / ηMc.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.7N/mm2 .Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb. λy√βA = 38.Rd) + (kyMy.0 Ly = 0.

.y.5 x 28.7 x 92. Therefore. it is adequate to be used.08 / 2209.05 = 2209.95 < 1.Rd) + (kyMy. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.y.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.Sd / ηMc.3) + (1.05 = 1 x 249.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.y. γM1 = 1.65 Nb.1) = 0.Rd) = (1351.0 Therefore.94 / 1 x 128.

Here.1. namely structural capacity. The results are arranged accordingly.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. 4.2 for moment capacity.1 Structural Beam UB sections ranging from 305x102x25 to 533x210x122 are being tabulated in ascending form. Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately. and weight of steel. 4.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other. . based on steel grade S275 and S355. The results are shown in Table 4. deflection.1 for shear capacity and Table 5. structural capacity is sub-divided into beam and column.

31 446.35 793.99 918.56 15.21 668.14 583.89 678.2 447.27 819.55 3.74 2.93 11.65 420.85 517.09 16.38 811.2 777.11 -1.5 642.91 -19.93 11.41 925.67 644.55 712.45 -1.91 1011.67 Table 4.21 -24.72 -12.13 705.1 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 291.78 942.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.81 -3.92 394.77 6.53 356.6 1.53 564.15 3.27 14.81 -3.1 493.42 820.15 507.16 1057.32 10.94 2.51 18.57 -2.5 529.6 10.04 % Diff.79 11.86 1204.16 4.6 14.32 877.82 2.09 -2.78 -20.99 15.78 456.72 % Diff.61 340.78 -25.39 511.18 358.57 680.3 14.73 -3.99 589.05 607.56 878.88 -18.74 -0.25 382.84 727.81 1024.29 452.47 341.38 20.02 496.22 2.24 3.66 704.74 2.44 471.84 300.64 0.5 -0.55 1.11 1218.62 1.29 5.15 -16.47 545.35 730.5 -0.19 387.55 617.68 1007.09 773.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.32 783.45 623.77 728.85 405.7 -0.57 13.35 431.39 462.75 -13.6 405.27 0.93 1.66 5.61 345.4 0.5 1.65 635.21 441.98 305.59 460.28 554.46 2.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.64 0.74 393.58 308.27 0.63 12.8 800.64 5.02 698.21 15.2 1102.51 -4.81 528.71 429.34 44.37 338.62 515.02 6.69 -1.85 854.86 -0.3 683.27 845.13 1091.35 -1.26 -8.06 1.95 2.03 4.7 -0.69 4.96 6.56 400.34 523.73 -2.08 2.98 1134.13 19.7 9.65 0.48 759.56 -5.79 2.26 888.92 588.65 846.65 0.94 559.86 619.14 18.96 666.77 -3.74 0.06 1.4 -0.55 522.65 724.58 34.51 1.97 392.55 1.55 583.85 767.37 609.16 551.19 4. 2.79 12.4 -10.23 -9.78 541.09 -2.19 1.83 0.47 596.27 13.53 943.14 784.74 594.09 1012.94 2.38 542.31 2.44 2.93 1.11 -2 2.47 831.1 -2.28 8.79 2.39 1.33 409.79 398.02 12.46 478.36 11.83 938.68 6.37 399.75 437.2 -2.5 1.52 439. BS 5950 (kN) 376.93 334.48 517.7 1.82 2.79 2.26 2.5 461.66 24.52 443.28 303.5 1102.77 1146.46 -3.38 1.19 1.78 15.58 753.38 1.88 876.21 667.5 1.24 0.18 8.15 343.32 860.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.87 -0.6 1.81 -2.87 433.83 0.56 3.17 8.33 577.92 2.66 497.81 523.95 404.15 3.4 0.14 .33 862.51 384.99 660.07 942.

07 .35 217.76 191.97 6.83 132.51 1007. Also.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6. This value.69% to 4.07 170. the difference percentage ranges from -2. the difference percentage ranges from -3.03 1440.49 1295. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0. however.13 -0.43 3. Table 4.06 % Diff. For steel grade S275.01 -16.3% less than 0.23 168. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.94 162.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94. meanwhile.05 110. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.59 5.59 5.86 125.43 160.57% to 4.07 6.58 -9.57 -4.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950. Therefore.57 206. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.62 182.45 1431.21 -1.05 1099.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl. which is approximately 8.14 8.06%.35 -0.6 137.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table. For steel grade S355.98 141.94 -12.3 6.06 1115.44 1300.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.43 3.55.58 4.6 as suggested by BS 5950.41 143.91 % Diff. 6.78 11.13 8.76 4.06%.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.59 4.05 3.28 148.77 4. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950. There are a few explanations to the variations. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.8 8.81 5.43 -1.

11 261.86 4.84 13.24 376.32 10.1 285.02 377.55 4.92 13.23 213.05 585.7 18.13 318.44 4.27 14.13 246.3 844.11 5.67 20.25 453.43 4.11 242.71 9.22 13.17 24.57 5.29 1.52 434.51 1.98 352.2 24.87 4.86 8.85 585.33 221.78 15.33 181.96 10.65 749.26 312.63 4.89 1.36 2.4 277.5 302.01 4.19 370.31 19.68 12 13.42 5.45 976.1 220.83 4.75 484.01 4.5 34.08 252.79 141.33 198 232.25 497.45 18.63 4.65 244.41 221.1 5.29 15.9 163.27 1. For steel grade S355.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.35 624.38 8.08 6.68 0.95 24.31 4.3 426 479.61 4.49 5.67 685.4 838.28 15. meanwhile.3 4.75 199.4 264.75 398.77 233.41 19.43%.53 171.16 5.12 5.6 341.55 9.5 479.53 5.26 317.25 5.28 5.98 24.69 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 195.01 182.49 15.35 693.1 244.83 5.17 171.03%.55 257.35 731.8 1082.39 682.85 27.44 12.37 16.24 1.95 189.62 7.5 354.57 355.43 4.98 20.65 404. the difference percentage ranges from 1.35 1104 238.24 17.14 410.7 211. For steel grade S275.5 457.96 21.53 5.93 885.35 302.34 404.66 2.95 848 184.55 21.63 7.85 11.17 7.05 35.07 609.83 275.75 332.11 5.05 11.5 330 371.9 11.06 0.49 5.5 5.97 14.21 287.88 10.17 27.06 11.8 799.02 18.2 291.1 539 619.33 471.68 560.95 275.33 192.5 654.85 5.55 429.52 395.9 900.48 5.04 1.24 1.41 5.55 433.53 549.45 769.75 300. the difference percentage ranges from 0.65 149.28 5.78 487.73 21.95 385.75 562.08 510.58% to 6.69 188.44 14.73 19.52 11.14 3.32 0.65 590.25 517.5 14.16 9.73 2.6 300.75 631.46 5.3 695.95 479.48 17.85 5.87 4.57 5.83 1.86 4.93 740.58 5.16 5.02 455.5 15.95 532.41% to 6.47 955.95 514.53 1.05 336.9 619.08 5.99 4.05 0. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.25 397.72 9.1 1.55 4.94 10.5 691.08 358.45 521.45 234.5 44.17 255. .67 425.1 5.29 2.75 431.95 566.29 202.05 232.95 755.02 315.32 1.6 5.5 390.66 5.65 5.81 529.

y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. for a UB section 406x178x54. are revised. . sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5.Rd = Wpl.85%. these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950. whether it is Class 1. Therefore. This is approximately 5% less than 1. For example.3.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web.0 as suggested by BS 5950. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. There is a variation of approximately 0.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. For a column web subject to bending and compression. Besides that. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl.70 There are a few explanations to the variations.1. Class 2 or Class 3 element. 4.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance. Table 4. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. Meanwhile.95.

**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

53 0.33 3. E.56 2.74 4.68 13. Meanwhile.64 4.62 5.07 0.51 0.63 2.52 0.61 3.85 15. for a floor beam of 9m long.1.06 0.07 0.9 9.84 4.7 2.63%.31 2.68 2.36 8.21 3. the difference percentage ranges from -0.59 2.34 18. Meanwhile. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.73 1.33 12.5 above.22% to 3.7 2. δmax.45 14.04 0.66 2.13 0.63 19.22 28.32 0.78 3.06 0.1 3.1 0.93 2.01 2.05 0.71 3.13 8.26 2.51 21.77 16.25 2.25 2.08 21.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection. as required by EC3. Apart from that.38 2.01 1.27 3.58 0.26 18.07 1.84 11.16 9.04 2.22% to 3. the difference percentage ranges from -0.96 1.43 2.34 1.29 0. Meanwhile.47 29.12 17. . However. section 3.29 0.77 4.55 23.61%. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.4 0.4 2.37 4.25 0.08 0. Different from BS 5950.33 4.03 9.54 2.01 0.25 16.46 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.06 0.55 From Table 4.33 0.71 3.42 0.16 1.83 13.1 0.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.1. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.46 2.4 2. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.05 0. for a section 356x171x57. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.19 2.08 0.7 2.75 18.75 2.83 20. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.26 0.56 2.85 1.79 16.6 2.18 1. for a floor beam of 6m long.16 11.49 2.2 3.56 2.85 1.1 0.37 2.21 2. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.21 24.41 1. Section 3.66 0.77 2. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.98 21.23 0.24 2. For example.35 0.25 13.8 1.32 10.

external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .75 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7. floor beams.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams. Table 4. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 and Table 4.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively. To compare the economy of the design. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .

821 .571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.122 9. meanwhile.744 EC3 4.8 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Types of Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . Table 4.645 3.76 Table 4. is tabulated in Table 4.313 9.7 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 356x171x45 To 2nd Storey 2nd .821 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 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.750 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9. The saving percentage.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.889 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .8.9.

571 9. depending on the steel grade.9 EC3 design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4. Regardless of bay width.821 4. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.744 3.889 EC3 4.645 9.60 17.96%.750 9.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design.122 7. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. This resulted in higher percentage difference.42 15.313 % 1. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. Semi-continuous .77 Table 4. Meanwhile. 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. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.96 5.60% to 17. This is because deeper. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span. all frame types. This time.9.

For uniformly distributed loading. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .5. Table 4.0.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.10 shown. the deflection coefficient.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .78 frame is achieved in this condition.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 . 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. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5. β is treated as β = 3. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. which was used in the beam design. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.

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) 7.95 BS 5950 4.211 10.750 4.42 3.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.503 9. The saving percentage.11.12.122 9.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.11 .22 9.749 % 0.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.503 7.889 8.749 Table 4. meanwhile.645 5.889 8.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.122 9. Table 4.645 3.750 4. is tabulated in Table 4.11 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Types of Frame Bay Width (m) 2Bay 4Storey 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.

80 From Table 4. .11% to 10. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment.95%. (b) semi-rigid construction. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design.12.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction.0.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. if it is built semi-continuously. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. the gap reduces. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0.1(c)).1(b)). The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. Therefore. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. if rigid connection is introduced. Eventually. However. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. Please refer to Figure 4. (c) simple construction. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1.

calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.1. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.05 in the moment capacity . 5.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. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter. Av value also caused the difference.43%.1 Structural Capacity 5.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. γM0 of 1. 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. Apart from that.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. In review to the research objectives. Meanwhile. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.

The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. it was found that for a same value of λ.82 calculation required by EC3.2 Structural Column In simple construction. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor.1. γM of 1. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. as compared to the partial safety factor. A reduction in the range of 5. Meanwhile. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. 5. For the same value of unfactored imposed load.0m long. compared with BS 5950. EC3 design created majority . γM0 of 1.05 as required by EC3 design. In comparison. Therefore.0 as suggested by BS 5950. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. fc is smaller than pc. Therefore. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. of both codes. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project.27% to 9. fc and pc respectively. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. axial compression is much more critical.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. From interpolation.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. 5.

taking into account deflection due to permanent loads.744 tons and 3.821 tons and 4. and 9. For a 2-bay. In this study. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. 4-storey. 6m bay width steel frame. . The difference ranges from 0. the total deflection was greater. 5.63%. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. For a 2-bay.571 tons for EC3 design. Therefore.22% to 3. I will have to be chosen. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. 4-storey. Section 4. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. E.122 tons and 7. 9m bay width steel frame. However.750 tons for BS 5950 design.645 tons and 9.889 tons for BS 5950 design.1 of EC3 provided proof to this.2. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. and 4.313 tons for EC3 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9.

The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. 9m bay width. 4-storey. 4-storey. 6m bay width. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 10. 9m bay width. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior.22% 5. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design.42% 2-bay. 6m bay width. However. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 7.0 to 3.42% 2-bay. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. S275 (Fe 430): 0. S275 (Fe 430): 1.95% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 17. 9m bay width. 4-storey. .60% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 4-storey. 4-storey.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. 4-storey. 6m bay width. 6m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 15. 4-storey.11% 2-bay.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. S275 (Fe 430): 5.96% 2-bay. 9m bay width.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

64 kN/m .6 + 1.4 x 24 + 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. DL Live Load.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.0 DATA No. MAHMOOD 1.4DL + 1.6 x 15 = 62. of Bay No. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. DL Live Load.6 2. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.6LL Roof w = 1. LL = = 4 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. DL Live Load.4 x 27. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. LL Floors Dead Load.4 1.

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

3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.64 kN/m .64 kN/m 62. MAHMOOD 2.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.

90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Shear.92 519. .1 Beam Moment.84 707.84 1039.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.68 1415.52 144 331. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663. MAHMOOD 4. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .92 kN M = 62.88 kNm 4. Roof beams. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. V = 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. contributed by beam shear.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

88 281.68 (187.84 [3] [4] 707. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 281.84 (187.92) 288 (187.88 281.84 (187.52 707.92) 1039.76 .91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 [2] 519.88 281. MAHMOOD 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.92) 519.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.92) 144 [1] 331.76 1415.92 (187.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.92) 663.88 281.92) 331.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 31.19 28.19 31.6 [2] 28.1.54 28.6 21.19 [4] 28.6 [1] 21.19 31.19 28.19 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.6 21.19 31. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.4DL+1.0DL Most critical condition .6LL) .54 28.19 [3] 28.54 28.54 31.19 21.54 28.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 31.6 28.19 Moments are calculated from (1.19 21.19 28.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

DL Live Load.0 DATA No.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 2. DL Live Load. LL = = 1.9 kN/m Floors w = 1. DL Live Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 x 15 = 59. LL = = 4 1. MAHMOOD 1.35 1.6 + 1.5LL Roof w = 1. LL Floors Dead Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.5 x 9 = 45.35 x 27. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.76 kN/m .6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. of Bay No. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.35 x 24 + 1.35DL + 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.

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

76 kN/m 59.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 kN/m 59.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m .76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 6m 45.

Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.55 kNm Floor beams.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.98 496.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.28 kN M = 59. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. Roof beams.52 1351. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. V = 45. Shear. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.26 675.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.92 kNm 4. MAHMOOD 4. contributed by beam shear.4 633.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.96 992.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. . Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . V = 59.7 kN M = 45.7 316.08 137.1 Beam Moment.

28) 633.92 268.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.7 [1] 316.54 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.55 268.96 (179.55 206. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.4 (179.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.54 1351.26 (179.28) 137. MAHMOOD 5.92 268.92 5.26 [3] [4] 675.92 268.7) (137.08 675.52 (179.92 268.28) 316.92 268.28) 275.2 Shear (kN) (137.98 (179.28) 992.28) 496.7) 137.0 5.7 (179.98 [2] 496.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.94 26.5LL) .94 28.1.0DL Most critical condition .89 26.94 28.66 19.89 19.66 26.89 28.71 28.35DL+1.89 26.94 26.89 26. MAHMOOD 5.71 20.66 20.89 26.66 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.94 26.94 26.89 20.89 28.89 26.89 Moments are calculated from (1.89 28.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.89 26.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

1 98.3 54 54.1 67.3 101 101.2 89.1 37 37 39 39.2 179 238.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.1 139.2 28.3 41.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .2 28.3 92.2 109 113 122 125.1 48. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 67.2 74.1 24.1 32.0m) STC.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 59.9 149.1 67.1 40.1 51 52.8 33.1 82.1 25.3 82 82.8 60. L = 6.8 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 67.2 74.2 74.9 43 45 46 46. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 30 31.

subject to pure bending.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section .3 2.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange. MAHMOOD 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.75 50. L = 6.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13. neutral axis at mid-depth.3 407.9 8.0m) STC.3 Therefore. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5.1 13. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.6 152.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = 59.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.8 454.

103

Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI, JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams, L = 6.0m)

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

3.0

SHEAR BUCKLING If d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for rolled section, shear buckling resistance should be checked. d/t = 50.3 < 70ε = 70 Therefore, shear buckling needs not be checked

4.0

SHEAR CAPACITY Fv = 187.92 kN

Pv = 0.6pyAv py = 275 N/mm Av = tD = 8.1 x 454.6 2 = 3682.26 mm

2

Pv = 0.6 x 275 x 3682.26 x 0.001 = 607.57 kN Fv Pv < Therefore, the shear capacity is adequate

5.0

MOMENT CAPACITY M= 281.88 kNm

0.6Pv = 0.6 x 607.57 = 364.542 kN Fv 0.6Pv < Therefore, it is low shear Mc = pySx = 275 x 1290 x 0.001 = 354.75 kNm 1.2pyZ = 1.2 x 275 x 1120 x 0.001 = 369.6 kNm Mc M < < 1.2pyZ Mc OK Moment capacity is adequate

104

Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI, JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams, L = 6.0m)

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

6.0 6.1

WEB BEARING & BUCKLING Bearing Capacity Pbw = (b1 + nk) tpyw r= 10.2 mm (Unstiffened web)

b1 = t + 1.6r + 2T = 8.1 + 1.6 x 10.2 + 2 x 13.3 = 51.02 mm k= T+r = 13.3 + 10.2 = 23.5 mm At the end of a member (support), n = 2 + 0.6be/k = 2 b1 + nk = = = = = < but n ≤ 5 be = 0

51.02 + 2 x 23.5 98.02 mm 98.02 x 8.1 x 275 x 0.001 218.34 kN 187.92 Pbw kN

Pbw

Fv Fv

Bearing capacity at support is ADEQUATE

105

Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI, JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams, L = 6.0m)

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

7.0

**SERVICEABILITY DEFLECTION CHECK Unfactored imposed loads: w= = E= I= δ= 9 15 205 25500
**

4

kN/m kN/m kN/mm cm

4 2

for roofs for floors

L=

6

m

5wL 384EI = 5 x 15 x 6^4 x 10^5 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4.84 mm

Beam condition Carrying plaster or other brittle finish Deflection limit = Span / 360 = 6 x 1000 / 360 = 16.67 mm 4.84mm < 16.67mm

The deflection is satisfactory!

106 APPENDIX B2 .

92 kNm W pl.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. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6.y = M / fy = 268.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 = 268.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .0m) STC.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. 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.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

9 68.0 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Section chosen 1.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.6 177.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.6 7.y = W el. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.15 47. Second moment of area.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0m) STC.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.36 131 8. L = 6. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.9 360.6 10.4 1051 927 32. MAHMOOD 1. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.6 18670 4.9 Therefore.

05 √3 = 497.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.7 3.92 kNm 0.48 = 298.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.5Vpl.9 x 100 275 1. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.2 (b) Web. L = 6.4 > 46.Rd = 0. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.48 kN VSd < Vpl.001 γMO = 1.Rd = W pl.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.001 / 1.5 x 497.5Vpl. it is low shear Mc.05 = 32.Rd < Therefore.26 kNm MSd Mc.49 kN VSd 0.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.0m) STC.05 = 275.28 kN V pl.15 <= 9.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.

ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 σf.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .69) x 7. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD 5. L = 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. not susceptible to LTB 6.4 kN = VSd = 179.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.Rd = γM1 At support.6 x 275 x 0. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.0m) STC.28 kN < Ry.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .05 204.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.Rd = (50 + 52.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 63.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.5 Ry.8 < 63. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.001 / 1.

5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360. Rd = 0.3 ≤ = 1.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.Rd 268.14 1.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.98 <= 1. MSd Mc.2 0. h= a= 402. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. L = 6.4 = γM1 = E= Ra. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.92 275.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. MAHMOOD At midspan.26 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = > 0.5 0.0m) STC.5 ] .5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. Ra.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.05 205 307.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.

Rb. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.5 x SQRT(402.118) = 119.4 / 7.6 l = 0.5 d/t = 2. MAHMOOD beff = 0.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.118) x (121 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.75d Rolled I-section.8 N/mm 2 Rb.8 x 1731.5 kN > At mid span.6 = 118.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.8 x 7.(118.001 / 1. L = 6.05 = 197.7 mm Buckling resistance of web. buckling about y-y axis.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.05 A = beff x tw = 227.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .0m) STC.6 .28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .117) / (120 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.28 x 0.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.5 x 360.5 = 405. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.6 2 = 1731.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.Rd = 1 x 119. λ = 2.

88 + 6.0 1.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.0m) STC.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. L = 6.46 = 18. MAHMOOD 8. .46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.14 mm OK δmax = 11.88 6.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.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 .δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

4 988.0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Sx (cm3) 184.3 247.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229. L = 5.6 978.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .1 310.8 1228 1589 1485 1953 2482 1875 2298 2964 2680 2417 3457 3436 3977 4689 4245 5101 5818 6994 8229 10009 12078 14247 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 63.1 652 802.4 568.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.1 497.

116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0 DATA Fc = 1415. Gross area.23 17.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. MAHMOOD 1.8 652 581.2 9.52 kN L= 5 m 1.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.19 75. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.3 2. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.1 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .3 14.2 160.6 205.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.96 5.0m) STC. L = 5.

0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.0m) STC.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.8 x 9. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis .3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.4 4.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I. L = 5.52 x 1000 / (160. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.96 x 10) = 47. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0 3.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.85L = 0.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.8 x 100 x 0.46) x (242 . MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .54 kNm . R From frame analysis sheets.(47.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.9 x 75.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 . in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.46) / (48 . beam reaction. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.239) 2 = 239. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. the compressive resistance is adequate 5. M= 31. L = 5. Mi = 63.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.44 kN Fc < Pc 47. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.0m) STC.001 = 1818. the moment will be equally divided.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.4 pc 242 239 Therefore. Therefore.5.

250) 2 = 260.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .17 .0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.5 L/ry = (0.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260. MAHMOOD 6. 7.52 1818.0m) STC.96 1.0 4.54 170.78 x 652 x 0.0 6.03 kNm 1415. L = 5.45) / (50 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .001 = 170.19 x 10) = 48.03 = < 0.44 + 31. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.45) x (233 .119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.(48.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

88 kNm M= W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. 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.0m) STC.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.y = M / fy = 57. L = 5.y (cm3) 184 248 309 497 567 654 801 990 979 1225 1589 1484 1952 2485 1872 2293 2970 2675 2418 3455 3438 3978 4691 4243 5101 5814 6997 8225 10010 12080 14240 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 57.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .

2 990 895 11.9 11370 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.0 DATA NSd = 1351.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.2 200. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.y = W el. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . MAHMOOD 1.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.1 6.08 kN Msd = 28.0m) STC.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Area of section.6 14. Second moment of area.5 8.2 Therefore. L = 5.94 23. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.86 98.46 92.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.94 <= 9.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.y.555 >= n < 0.Rd = 1.Rd Mny.y.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 3.1 kN n = 1351. L = 5.001 / 1.05 Npl.3 <= 30.1 n ≥ 0.Rd = 0.1 = 0.1 Mpl.2 Class 3 = 13.y.9 (b) Web.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.0m) STC.11 Mpl.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance . subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.Rd = Mpl.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.Rd(1-n) W pl.1 Mny.3 kNm Mny.Rd = 92.1 Class 3 = 38.05 = 2433.001 / 1.Rd A fy Npl.1 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.05 = 259.Rd = > MSd = 128.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.08 / 2433.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.

y.0 N b .Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0. Rd Nb.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .7 N/mm Nb. y . sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .y.3 kN ky = 1.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.001 / 1.5 NSd Nb. MAHMOOD 4.(38.1 x 10) = 38.3 . L = 5. Rd η M c .85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11. y . Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .y.y.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.248) 2 = 249.94 1 x 128.Rd = = 1351.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .Rd 1.08 2209.05 = 2209.38) x (40 .9 x 100 x 0.Sd ηMc.5 x 28.3 0.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.Rd = 1 x 249.0m) STC.7 x 92.38) / (250 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

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

126 APPENDIX D .

y = M / fy = 268. L = 6.0m) Rev 1 STC.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. 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 = 268.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .92 kNm W pl. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.

y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.5 66. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.0 1. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.4 7.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 1096 950 36.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Second moment of area. Section chosen 1.6 10.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.9 407. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. L = 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 1.y = W el.6 21370 3.99 53.59 121 6.8 152.0m) Rev 1 STC.9 Therefore.

05 kNm MSd Mc. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.6 > 46.92 kNm 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.5 x 551.7 3. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6. L = 6.5Vpl.Rd = 0.99 <= 9.001 / 1.28 kN V pl.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.5Vpl.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.001 γMO = 1.0m) Rev 1 STC.Rd = W pl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 = 36.92 = 331.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.92 kN VSd < Vpl.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.05 √3 = 551.Rd < Therefore.5 x 100 275 1.05 = 287. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.15 kN VSd 0.2 (b) Web.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. it is low shear Mc.

5 Ry. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 = 196.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 63.6 x 275 x 0.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430). tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53. not susceptible to LTB 6.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .0m) Rev 1 STC. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.5 σf.8 < 63. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.001 / 1.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.28 kN < Ry.Rd = (50 + 48.Rd = γM1 At support.68 kN VSd = 179.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48. L = 6.81) x 7.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. MAHMOOD 5. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.

2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. Ra.5 ] .5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.05 205 299.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. L = 6.05 7.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.Rd = > 0.12 1.3 ≤ = 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.Rd 268. MSd Mc.2 0.94 <= 1.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407. Rd = 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. h= a= 449. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.92 287.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0m) Rev 1 STC. MAHMOOD At midspan.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.

9 kN > At mid span.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.6 2 = 1909. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134. MAHMOOD beff = 0.130) x (103 .98) / (135 . buckling about y-y axis.05 A = beff x tw = 251.9 N/mm 2 Rb.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.6 = 134.5 = 452.(134.1 l = 0.130) = 98.6 / 7.6 mm Buckling resistance of web. λ = 2.9 x 1909.5 d/t = 2.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 x 407.1 .3 x 7.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . L = 6.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.05 = 179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.001 / 1.Rd = 1 x 98. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x SQRT(449. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.0m) Rev 1 STC.75d Rolled I-section.88 x 0.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1. Rb.

0m) Rev 1 STC. MAHMOOD 8.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.14 mm OK δmax = 7.26 3.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1. .95 = 11.26 + 3.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7. L = 6.

BS5950-Vs-EC3

BS5950-Vs-EC3

Are you sure?

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

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

Get the full title to continue

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

scribd