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

1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

**BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
**

JUDUL:

υ

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

SESI PENGAJIAN: Saya

2006 / 2007

**CHAN CHEE HAN
**

(HURUF BESAR)

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

TERHAD

3

TIDAK TERHAD Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)

(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

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

Tarikh

CATATAN:

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

Tarikh:

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

* ** Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

υ

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

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

Signature

:

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

i

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

CHAN CHEE HAN

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

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER, 2006

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

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

specifications to be followed.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. loading values and etc.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. safety factors.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. This study intends to testify the claim. with the application of partial strength connections. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0.11% to 10. . The Steel Construction Institute (SCI) claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. However.27% and 9.60% to 17.43%. Therefore. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. four-storey braced steel frames with spans of 6m and 9m and with steel grade S275 (Fe 460) and S355 (Fe 510) by designed using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. Meanwhile. design methods.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. These details include the basis and concept of design.95%. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5.

didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. factor keselamatan.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.27% – 9. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. Namun begitu. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5. Justeru.95%. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. . dan sebagainya. Selain itu.11% – 10. Namun begitu.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. cara rekabentuk. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. nilai beban. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif.60% – 17. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.43%. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4.

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

1 Ultimate Limit States 2.1 2.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.3.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. Mc.1 Unstiffened Web 2.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.1.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.2.3.3.1.Rd Moment Capacity.3. Pv Moment Capacity.2 Serviceability 2.2 2.3.3.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.4 Actions of EC3 2.3.2.2 BS 5950 2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.1.1 2.3.2.2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.2 2.2 2.4.1. Mc 2.2 2.3.3.4.3. Vpl.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.5.1 2.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .1.4.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.1.3.4 Loading 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.3.1.6 Deflection 2.2.4.3.3.2.3.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.4.3.3 Shear Capacity.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.2 Stiffened Web 2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.3.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.5.

2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.3 Compression Resistance.4.3.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.5.6.5.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.6.6.6.1 Crushing Resistance.6.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.3 Compression Resistance.4.1.5. Rb.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 3.5. Nb.Rd 2.4.7.5 Deflection 2.6. λ 2.1 2.7.4.3.4.Rd 2.Rd 2.2 Slenderness.2.4. Ra.1 Buckling Length. Pc 2.1 Introduction 34 .1.5.2.1 Effective Length.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.ix 2.1.1.1.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2. Ry. λ 2.6.5.5.4.Rd 2.7 Conclusion 2. LE 2.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.4.4.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2. l 2.6.4.Rd 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.2.2 Crippling Resistance.3 Buckling Resistance.1.1. Nc.4 Buckling Resistance.2 Slenderness.2.

2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.10.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.1 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.2 Shear Calculation 3.3 Moment Calculation 3.2 3.4.1 BS 5950 3.10.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .6 3.1 3.3 3.8.1.10 Structural Column Design 3.9.9.1 Load Combination 3.x 3.7 3.1.2 4.5 3.1.8.1 4.1 Structural Capacity 5.4.8 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 3.2 4.2 3.8.9 Structural Beam Design 3.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.

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

10 4.3 3.8 4. TITLE PAGE 2.11 4.4 4.2 3.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.5 4.2 4.2 3.3 4.4 4.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 .6 4.9 4.1 2.7 4.1 4.1 3.

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

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 .

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

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

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

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

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

4 1. The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3.4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. 1. hereafter referred to as EC3. 2 bay braced frames. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.3 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. hereafter referred to as BS 5950. The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3. A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out. . This structure is intended to serve as an office building. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple. Next. Comparison to other steel structural design code is made.

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

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

2. impact or consequences of human errors. eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions. having due regard to its intended life and its cost. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. . and with appropriate degrees of reliability. which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state.1.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design. it will remain fit for the use for which it is required. EC3 stresses the need for durability. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element. Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability.7 and their resistance. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries. 2. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered.1. EC3 covers two limit states. 2001).3. and tying the structure together. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding.

variable actions (Q). and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. rupture.g.3.3.g. e. self-weight. 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. in spatial variation classification. including supports and foundations. It may require certain consideration. In time variation classification.1. fittings. e. which causes discomfort to people. ancillaries and fixed equipment. explosions or impact from vehicles. e. imposed loads. damage to the building or its contents. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure. e. self-weight of structures.g. and vibration. snow loads.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action.g. 2. .1.3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. Meanwhile. e. and accidental loads (A). actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G). temperature effects or settlement. movable imposed loads.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation. actions are defined as fixed actions. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people.8 2. wind loads. for example.1. which result in different arrangements of actions. or which limits its functional effectiveness. or an imposed deformation in indirect action. 2. considered as a rigid body. wind loads or snow loads. and free actions.g.

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

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

11 2.2. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well. Where necessary. 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. . without calculating their local buckling resistance. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole.3. imposed and wind loading. There are dead. overhead traveling cranes.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. 2. 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. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness. earth and groundwater loading.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below.

However. Alternatively. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements. Class 2 is known as compact section. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section.3.12 Generally. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. When this section is applied. Class 1 is known as plastic section. given by: Pv = 0. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. Clause 4. It enables plastic moment to take place. Class 4 is known as slender section.2. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. Fv. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes.6pyAv . 2.2 Shear Capacity. However.

Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.3. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.13 in which Av is the shear area. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. and Zeff is the effective section modulus. 2. . Seff is the effective plastic modulus.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.3.2. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.3. 2. Clause 4. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.5.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.3 Moment Capacity. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. Z is the section modulus. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.

3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.3.5. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .2. Clause 4.14 2. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1.3.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections. 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.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv.

2 states that.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.3. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.3.1 of BS 5950 states that. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0. or 62ε for a welded section.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.3.4. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.6Vw. but the web is designed for shear only.4.4.4. 2.6Vw.4. qw = shear buckling strength of the web. a conservative value Mf for .15 2. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2.3. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.3.4.

3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.for a rolled I. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).5.6Vw.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone. where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.3.or H-section: k=T+r k=T .or H-section: .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. 2.for a welded I. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.5.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.3. It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: . the web should be designed using Annex H. . c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.2.except at the end of a member: n = 5 .

pyw is the design strength of the web. 2.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web.6 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.5.3. . r is the root radius.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. allowing for cope holes for welding. and t is the web thickness. 2. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.3. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing.netpy in which As. T is the flange thickness. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.

. 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 2.3. It is applicable for plastic design. Class 2 is also known as compact section. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin.4.1.18 2. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. It has limited rotation capacity. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first. Class 1 is known as plastic section. Clause 5. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. To avoid this. However.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. It can also achieve rectangular stress block.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling.

Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force.4. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. At each crosssection. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. The member will fail before it reaches design stress.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved. 2.5 . Vsd. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes.1. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Apart from that.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure. Vpl.2 Shear Capacity.1. and ε = [235/fy]0. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance. The stress block will be of triangle shape.Rd where Vpl. Class 4 is known as slender section.

4. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.3.20 2. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.3.Rd. Mc.4.4.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively. when maximum shear force. as stated in Clause 5. For class 4 cross-sections. 2.5. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.4. 2. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear .3.Rd.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc.7 states that. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc.Rd.3 Moment Capacity.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment.

Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl.21 force.5 (fyf / fyw)0.Rd – 1)2 2. it is obtained as follows: MV. Ry.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web. bending about the major axis.4.Ed / fyf)2]0.Rd ≤ Mc.4. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.1 Crushing Resistance. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange. Clause 5.3 provides that the design crushing resistance. 2.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV.7.4. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry. Ry. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place. For cross-sections with equal flanges.Rd of the web of an I.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.5 [1 – (σf. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. Thus. this checking is unnecessary.5 . This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0. However.

4.4.Rd of the web of an I. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff. Ra.2 Crippling Resistance.Rd + Msd / Mc. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0. For member subject to bending moments.4.2. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.5 [(tf / tw)0.5.4.5tw2(Efyw)0. Rb.3 Buckling Resistance. Rb.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. 2.Sd = 0.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.Rd Msd ≤ Mc. H or U section is given by: Ra.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.Rd ≤ 1. σf.Rd and Fsd / Ra. and ss / d < 0.5 2.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.Rd of the web of an I.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.

Therefore.5. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.1 and Table 5. 2. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam. 2. This. 2. however. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only. applies only to non-moment sustaining column.2.5.5. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .1 of EC3.5 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.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.4.

4.2 Slenderness.1.5. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . angle. channel. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.5.3 Compression Resistance.24 2. in accordance of Table 22. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.1. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. 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. Pc According to Clause 4.1 Effective Length.1.7. and back-to-back struts. T-section struts. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. 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. 2. λ = LE / r 2. 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.

5.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. 2. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis.5. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. for class 1 plastic. Mx is the moment about major axis.5.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area. the checking of cross-section capacity is as follows: My Fc M + x + ≤1 Ag p y M cx M cy where Fc is the axial compression. My is the moment about minor axis. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. 2. . and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0. py is the design steel strength.

Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis.6. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance . 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.5.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 The design of steel column according to EC3 is quite similar to the design of steel column according to BS 5950. Pc the compression resistance of column. and Zy the elastic modulus.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. 2. Mb the buckling resistance moment. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . py the steel design strength.2.26 2.

3 Compression Resistance. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.2 Slenderness. 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.1.6. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends.1. the compression resistance Nc. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally.5 states that. Alternatively.27 2. Nc.4.6.1. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads.5.1 Buckling Length. the value of λ should not exceed 180. Clause 5. 2. the value of λ should not exceed 250. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .Rd According to Clause 5.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic.Rd of a member is given by: Nc. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only.6.4.1. 2.

4 Buckling Resistance.Rd .28 Nc. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.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.Rd For compression members.6. Clause 5. Nb. 2 or 3 cross-sections.1. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1.5.Rd 2.1.

2.1 states that.Rd.Sd + N Sd e Ny M z . Rd M pl .6. Clause 5. Rd for a conservative approximation where. α = 2. Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz . in which n = Nsd / Npl. for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y . β = 5n but β ≥ 1. cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment.6. y f yd Wel . y f yd Weff . 2.Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. y . z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y .Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff .Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel .Sd N Sd M z .Sd + + ≤1 N pl . for I and H sections. Rd M pl . the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.4.Sd N Sd M z . z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression. z . M y . Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject .8.29 2.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y .

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

-1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.0 N b. Rd .33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. 2.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1. 3 Class 4 Nc.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .05 Nc. Rd ηM c.67 + 0.eff Class 1. y .0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3.05 γM1 = 1.5 2.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.05 4.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0. y .

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

Therefore. 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. . Sections 3. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed.4 to 3.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets. Calculation of bending moment. V are based on simply-supported condition. As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span. End moments are zero.8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed. M and shear force.35 3. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively.

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

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

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

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

0kN/m2 respectively. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3.5kN/m2 is appropriate. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. Therefore. section 6. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. repair and other general purposes.5 Loadings Section 2. 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.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. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. For imposed roof load.4kN/m2 and 3. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. In this design. a uniform load intensity of 1. Therefore. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. For precast floor selfweight. all floors will be of one-way slab. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof.2. . the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. this value will be adopted. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced.5kN/m2. Therefore. 3. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. Meanwhile. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame.2 (Flat roofs) states that. Consequently. Meanwhile.

4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding.4 for dead load. is given by 1. γf should be taken as 1. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure.1. A general load intensity of 1. Meanwhile. Meanwhile. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. depending on the interior designer’s intention. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. γF for dead load.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. From Table 2. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. is given by 1. For other floors.1. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes.35. The . Partial safety factors for loads. finishes and fittings. γM0.05 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.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed.6 for imposed load. for normal design situations. for imposed floor load. In EC3.05. γM1. and 1. 2 or 3 cross-section.4. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. γQ is given by 1. 3. partial safety factors. γG is given by 1.5.

For steel grade S 275.2 “Material properties for hot rolled steel” (C-EC3) limits thickness of flange to less than or equal to 40mm for nominal yield strength fy of 275N/mm2 and larger but less than or equal to 100mm for fy of 255N/mm2. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section.1. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3. For steel grade S 355. 3. for Fe 510. In BS 5950. 3.6 times total imposed . py is 275N/mm2 for thickness less than or equal to 16mm and 265N/mm2 for thickness larger but less than or equal to 40mm. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. in the meantime.8. According to BS 5950.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. 3. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. Meanwhile. the load combination will be 1.4 times total dead load plus 1.7 Categories In this project.

For the roof. 3. the w will be 62.5 times total imposed load (1.4DL + 1. the w will be 59.43 load (1.9kN/m. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.1.88 6m 137. the resultant load combination. there is a difference of approximately 4. the shear.7 179. The next table.64kN/m. the resultant load combination.35DL + 1.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. w.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. the load combination will be 1. will be 48kN/m.55 268. Clearly.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports. Table 3.5% between the analyses of both codes. For the roof. For all other floors. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.1 below: Table 3. w.92 From Table 4.8. According to EC3. For all other floors.5LL). This is done by summating the resultant shear .1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187. For simple construction.76kN/m. will be 45.35 times total dead load plus 1. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.6LL).

432 995.64 6m Ext. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.94 1488. 144 331. = Internal column Ext.44 force from beam of each floor.1 950.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int.96 992.Ground 288 663.31 Int. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st . = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4. 206. 413.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. structural beam moment.28 Int.76 1559.52 1351. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8.8.84 1039.98 496.5%. 137.3: .47 744. Table 3.39 1013. 275.68 1415.08 Int.78 2026. similar with the beam shear. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.4 633.88 779.55 475.62 Ext. M.92 519.7 316. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 216 497.26 675.84 707. 3. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.54 Int.76 1061.76 9m Ext.52 2123. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.

BS 5950 results in higher value of moment. Therefore. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. However.45 Table 3. Me. Clearly. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. the eccentricity moment. Subsequently.23 6m 206. the higher the load combination of a floor.55 268.07 From Table 3.6% between the analyses of both codes.74 605. initially. there is a difference of approximately 4.4% to 4. For the moments of the structural columns. In this project. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m).88 Bay Width 9m 486 634.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. in this case. D or h is the depth of column section (m).92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. the higher the difference percentage will be. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. 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). there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams.3. since this is simple construction. . Regardless of the width of the bay.

38 9m Ext. 30. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.5LL) – 1.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam.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. 21.0DL. 30.6 56. Roof Other Floors 21. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done. In simple construction.5. Table 3. For BS 5950. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state.6LL) – 1.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int.4 94.35DL + 1.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.66 53.6 63.98 80. However.0DL. 20. 32. for internal column.56 6m Ext. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.88 Int. 32. Next. V can be expressed as V = (1.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.4 84. For EC 3. 3.6 Int.84 Ext.66 57. Table 3. . 20. V can be expressed as V = (1.4DL + 1.98 86.78 Int.

Sx = M / py = 281. From the section table for universal beam. shear capacity. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.88kNm. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Depth between fillets.3. T = 13. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). From the section table. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. Sx = 1290cm3. Flange thickness.1mm. Plastic modulus. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.1 BS 5950 In simple construction.9.99.8kg/m. moment capacity and web bearing capacity. b/T = 6. Depth.6mm.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). t = 8. B = 152. d/t = 50. d = 407.92kN and 281.6mm. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. Elastic modulus.9mm. Web thickness.3mm. 3. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. D = 454. Zx = 1120cm3. Width. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.

After clause 4. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 . Pv = 0. shear buckling resistance should be checked. Mc = pySx.3.4.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950.57kN > Fv = 187.0. 0.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80.5 “Moment capacity.75. Actual b/T = 5. For web of I-section.6Pv = 0. actual d/t = 50. section 4. Actual d/t did not exceed 80.2. this section is Class 1 plastic section.48 = 1.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. Therefore. therefore. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section.92kN Therefore.6 = 3682. clause 4.0.5 is checked. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. Meanwhile.6pyAv.2. Since actually d/t < 70. section 4. For class 1 plastic cross-section. it is low shear. Therefore. flange is Class 1 plastic section. which is smaller than 9ε = 9.0.26 x 10-3 = 607.0 in this design. where neutral axis is at mid-depth. Av = 8.6 x 275 x 3682. Since both flange and web are plastic.6 x 607. Next.57 = 364.4. shear capacity is adequate. Next.1 x 454. shear buckling needs not be checked. Mc” is checked. web is Class 1 plastic section. Shear capacity.26mm2 Pv = 0.54kN > Fv Therefore.

02mm k=T+r = 13. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange. section 4. bearing stiffener should be provided.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.34kN > Fv = 187.6be/k. 1.92kN .49 = 354. n = 2 + 0. be = 0.5mm At support.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads. bearing capacity of web. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.2 + 2 x 13.2mm b1 = t + 1. If Fv exceeds Pbw. moment capacity is adequate.2pyZx.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.5.2 = 23.3 + 10.1 + 1.6 x 10.02 x 8.02mm Pbw = 98.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. Mc should be limited to 1. therefore.6kNm > Mc.3 = 51. M = 281.75kNm Therefore. OK.2pyZx = 1.

In this case.50 Therefore. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). The section is adequate. the bearing capacity at support is adequate.67mm >δ Therefore. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. δ.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. L = 6.5) should be conducted. . w = 15kN/m for floors. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. This is done in the form of deflection check. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. However. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. the deflection is satisfactory. Generally. Therefore.

9cm2. tf = 10. 3.92kNm. Wpl. Wel.y = 1051cm3. d = 360.y = M / py = 268. Therefore. it is adequate to be used. crippling and buckling. tw = 7.28kN and 268.9cm3 From the rearranged table. b = 177. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. resistance of web to crushing.4mm. Flange thickness.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m. Shear area.6mm. lateral torsional buckling. moment capacity.6mm. Area of .y (cm3). shear capacity. Wpl.9mm. From the section table for universal beam. Depth between fillets.92 x 103 / 275 = 977. Width.9. h = 402. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Web thickness. Av = 32.6mm. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.y = 927cm3. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179.2 EC 3 In simple construction. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. Plastic modulus. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. Depth. Elastic modulus. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. From the section table.

The design value of shear force. Based on Table 3.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. For S275 (Fe 430).6(a). yield strength.5Vpl.15. aLT = 131cm.5.Rd. tf ≤ 40mm. Actual d/tw = 47.4 ≤ 66. for “outstand element of compression flange.36cm. From Table 5.4. section 5. c/tf = 8.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.1.48 = 298.52 section.Rd = 0.6. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. VSd = 179. that is Vpl.5 x 497. Actual c/tf = 8. 0. tf = 10.28kN . iLT = 4. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. Web is Class 1 element. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength. Next.28kN γM0 = 1. flange subject to compression only”.48kN > 179.2.Rd = (32. d/tw = 47.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked. fu = 430N/mm2.05 Vpl. Iy = 18670cm4. For “web subject to bending. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9.15 ≤ 9. neutral axis at mid depth”. section classification is a must. Therefore.6cm2.28kN Therefore.9mm. Flange is Class 1 element.2 for Class 1 elements. Second moment of area.05) = 497. shear resistance is sufficient. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. A = 68.49kN > VSd = 179.6 for Class 1 elements. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.

6 “Resistance of webs to transverse forces” requires transverse stiffeners to be provided in any case that the design value VSd applied through a flange to a web exceeds the smallest of the following – Crushing resistance.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.Ed/fyf)2]0. Ry.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked. Ry.8 and 56. Section 5. MSd = 268.5[fyf/fyw]0.5.5 . shear buckling check is not required.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.8. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. section 5. section 5. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling.Rd. Therefore.Rd. For crushing resistance.5.26kNm > MSd Therefore. Ra.Rd = Wpl. the moment capacity is sufficient.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.4 < 63.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively. For low shear. low shear. Section 5. Therefore.2 “Moment resistance of cross-section with low shear” the design value of moment MSd must not exceed the design moment resistance of the cross-section Mc.53 Therefore. Rb.5. crippling resistance. Actual d/tw = 47.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. The beam is fully restrained.Rd and buckling resistance.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.92kNm Mc.05 = 275.

62 (210000 x 275)0.Rd = 0.4kN For crippling resistance. Ra.6 / 7.Rd = 0.6)0. OK γM1 = 1. sy = 10. Rb.05 = 204.5 = 405.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.8kN For buckling resistance.6 = 1731.62 + 502]0.05.54 At support.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.7mm. OK.5tw2 (Efyw)0. bending moment is zero.05 = 307.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0. σf.9 (177.5 + 3(7.69) x 7.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227. ss = 50mm at support. γM0 = 1. fyf = 275N/mm2.14 ≤ 0.69mm Ry.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5 x 7.2.5 [(tf/tw)0.28mm2 .9)(0.6/10.8 x 7.14)] / 1.5 [(10.4 = 0. A = 227.5 = 52.9/7.5[h2 + ss2]0.Ed = 0.6)0.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.5 [402.Rd = (50 + 52.

λ√βA = 118. which is larger than VSd = 179. Generally.5 x 360. (Permanent load) .55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.28 x 10-3 / 1.6 From Table 5. the web of the section can resist transverse forces.8 x 1731.5kN.Rd = 1 x 119. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value.Rd = 204. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4. OK.1. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.6 = 118. This is done in the form of deflection check.4 / 7.28kN. buckling about y-y axis.29).4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197. From Figure 4.8kN Ry.8N/mm2 Rb.6 λ√βA = 118. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads. Therefore.5kN Ra.Rd = 307.6kN/m for floors. fc = 119.5 d/t = 2. λ = 2.13 (rolled I-section). curve (a) is used. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.05 = 197.2) should be conducted. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.

The section is adequate.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. (Imposed load) L = 6. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. the deflection is satisfactory. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.46mm Table 4. δ.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.14mm > δ2 δlim.34mm Therefore. However.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. δlim. . the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. In this case.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.

For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1.03kNm . R.5 x 5000 / 5.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. λLT = 45.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170.08kNm.54kNm.5. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column. the moment will be equally divided. M = 31. for columns in simple construction. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50.19 x 10 = 48.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. Section 4. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation. pb = 260.7 “Columns in simple structures”.5L / ry = 0. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0.60 Next. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.17. From frame analysis. Therefore. the beam reaction. therefore. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0. when only nominal moments are applied.7. Mi = 63. λLT = 48.

5cm3 From the rearranged table. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. 3. Therefore. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be cross-section resistance (in the form of moment resistance) and in-plane failure about major axis (which is a combination of axial force and eccentricity moment).2 EC 3 In simple construction.88 x 103 / 275 = 210.y = MSd / fy = 57.88kNm respectively. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.0 Therefore.52 / 1818. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.10.96 < 1. Wpl. . the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate.y (cm3). From the section table for universal column.08kN and 57.03 = 0.44 + 31. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.54 / 170. apart from section classification. it is adequate to be used.

iLT = 6. d/tw = 23. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. from.8. Second moment of area. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m.46cm.2 and 10.6cm2. tf = 14.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. Flange thickness. From this table. Therefore.1. From Table 5. this section is Class 1 section. Next.94 < 9.y = 895cm3. Wel. fy = 275N/mm2. iy = 11. therefore. aLT = 98. Iy = 11370cm4. Radius of gyration.2 respectively.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. flange is Class 1 element. h = 254mm. d = 200. the classification depends on the mean web stress.9cm2. A = 92. Area of section. Beforehand. Av = 25.08 x 103 / 200. Elastic modulus.86cm.73N/mm2 Table 5. c/tf = 8.2mm.94 (c = 0. Web thickness. section 5. Plastic modulus. Actual c/tf = 8. b = 254mm.94.3.2 x 8. Actual c/tf = 8. σw. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. Depth. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5.5cm.2mm < 40mm. tf = 14. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only).1cm. Since both flange and web are plastic.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements.3.5. For web subject to bending and compression.2mm.6mm.y = 990cm3. Width. section 5. Depth between fillets. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2.62 From the section table. with d/tw = 23. .2.6 = 784. iz = 6.5b). the web is Class 1. Wpl. tw = 8. Shear area.

6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.Rd n ≥ 0.1 : MNy.1 = 0.Rd = 1.3kNm MNy.05 = 259.63 Vpl.Rd = 1. allowing for axial force.Rd > Vmax.58kN 0.Rd is such that n < 0.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.y.y.y.11 Mpl.1 : MNy.Sd Therefore.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.Rd (1 – n) Mpl. From Table 5.1kN n = 1351.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.5Vpl.Sd / L = 57.11 Mpl.11 x 259. MN.Rd (1 – n) Npl.05) = 387.555) .Rd = Wpl. MNy.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.08 / 2433.Rd = Mpl.Rd Reduced design plastic moment. the section is subject to a low shear.y. n = NSd / Npl.1 Therefore.Rd = 1.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.05 = 2433.27.555 ≥ 0.Sd = My.3 x (1 – 0.

Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.6.94kNm Therefore.1kNm > MSd = 28.Rd) ≤ 1.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.Sd / ηMc. for buckling about y-y axis.85L = 0. fc = 249. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.64 = 128.y.Rd) + (kyMy. Lastly. λy√βA = 38.0 Ly = 0.3 Based on Table 5.y.3.1 x 10 = 38.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.3. buckling curve (b) is used. section 5. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.7N/mm2 . the moment resistance is sufficient.

7 x 92.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.05 = 2209. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient. it is adequate to be used.94 / 1 x 128.Rd) + (kyMy. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.05 = 1 x 249.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.Rd) = (1351.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.08 / 2209.3) + (1.5 x 28. Therefore.0 Therefore. γM1 = 1.95 < 1.y.1) = 0.y.Sd / ηMc. .65 Nb.y.

1.1 Structural Beam UB sections ranging from 305x102x25 to 533x210x122 are being tabulated in ascending form. and weight of steel.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. structural capacity is sub-divided into beam and column. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other. 4. namely structural capacity. 4.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen. Here. deflection. based on steel grade S275 and S355.1 for shear capacity and Table 5. . The results are shown in Table 4. Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately. The results are arranged accordingly.2 for moment capacity.

21 15.05 607.47 545.47 831.74 2.1 -2.19 387.4 0.67 Table 4.02 6.5 1102.02 698.98 305.11 -2 2.29 5.5 1.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.55 583.58 34.94 2.45 623.55 1.39 462.21 667.77 -3.53 564.6 1.41 925.87 -0.66 5.44 471.63 12.66 497.2 1102.85 517.7 -0.24 3.65 0.98 1134.64 0.6 10.19 1.74 393.56 400.35 -1.19 4.06 1.78 541.79 2.47 341.09 1012.77 1146.45 -1.3 14.28 554.5 529.7 9.86 619.74 594.1 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 291.57 680.68 6.17 8.73 -3.34 44.11 -1.06 1.84 300.55 712.46 -3.16 551.79 2. 2.14 583.16 4.09 773.55 617.35 431.58 753.92 2.35 730.4 -0.92 394.57 13.27 819.15 507.5 461.08 2.56 878.09 16.32 877.94 559.7 1.74 0.87 433.27 13.03 4.55 522.14 18.33 577.69 4.38 542.53 943.56 15.13 19.88 876.13 705.93 11.51 384.38 20.4 0.65 846.85 405.65 635.26 2.33 409.74 2.65 420.79 398.99 918.99 589.72 % Diff.52 439.64 5.58 308.56 3.53 356.3 683.33 862.07 942.31 2.69 -1.09 -2.39 1.85 854.55 1.37 338.91 -19.13 1091.83 0.38 811.78 942.65 0.11 1218.32 783.81 1024.27 14.32 10.66 704.83 0.92 588.61 345.38 1.26 -8.65 724.46 478.78 456.14 784.15 343.1 493.79 12.71 429.48 517.66 24.44 2. BS 5950 (kN) 376.88 -18.83 938.37 609.29 452.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.79 11.5 1.21 668.32 860.78 -25.23 -9.6 1.81 523.68 1007.75 -13.78 -20.57 -2.04 % Diff.5 -0.09 -2.61 340.67 644.79 2.86 -0.21 441.46 2.62 1.78 15.38 1.6 405.15 -16.93 11.18 8.22 2.91 1011.14 .52 443.93 1.51 -4.37 399.18 358.47 596.96 666.89 678.55 3.26 888.72 -12.16 1057.27 845.77 728.99 15.28 303.85 767.95 404.73 -2.28 8.36 11.93 334.82 2.21 -24.34 523.95 2.93 1.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.02 12.02 496.5 -0.94 2.59 460.6 14.8 800.77 6.81 528.2 777.86 1204.27 0.62 515.75 437.81 -3.84 727.82 2.7 -0.25 382.15 3.96 6.97 392.24 0.42 820.35 793.19 1.2 -2.15 3.4 -10.27 0.39 511.56 -5.51 18.99 660.2 447.31 446.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.81 -3.51 1.48 759.5 1.64 0.74 -0.81 -2.5 642.

This value.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94. For steel grade S275.05 1099.86 125. meanwhile. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950. which is approximately 8.57 206.81 5.43 3.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.43 160. 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. For steel grade S355.06 % Diff. Also.05 3.03 1440.45 1431.6 137. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.57 -4.13 -0.05 110. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.59 4.78 11.06%.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.8 8.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.01 -16.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.21 -1. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.58 -9. Therefore.44 1300.94 -12.43 -1. 6.3 6.07 6. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.23 168. however.59 5.62 182.35 217.97 6.06 1115.07 .98 141.3% less than 0.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.69% to 4. Table 4.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.91 % Diff. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.58 4. There are a few explanations to the variations.59 5.94 162.76 191.83 132.43 3.13 8.06%.55.28 148.49 1295.07 170.14 8.41 143.76 4.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995. the difference percentage ranges from -2.51 1007.6 as suggested by BS 5950. the difference percentage ranges from -3.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.57% to 4.35 -0.77 4.

95 848 184.27 1.39 682.47 955.05 336. For steel grade S275.83 4.48 5.27 14.55 433.5 330 371.5 14.95 532.26 312.2 24.03%.05 585.1 5. the difference percentage ranges from 1.34 404.75 398.72 9.81 529.55 4.98 352.41 19.1 539 619.24 17.95 189.46 5.17 171.36 2.65 244.52 395.67 685.4 264.11 5.35 302.08 510.93 740.5 34.78 15.5 390.16 5.17 24.11 261.05 35.8 799.29 2.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950. For steel grade S355.06 0.25 5.73 2.5 691.5 302.85 585.69 188.13 246.2 291.45 521.1 1.55 4.25 517.89 1.1 244.57 5.33 181.9 163.06 11.33 192.33 221.49 5.12 5.58% to 6.5 457.28 15.52 434.14 3.24 376.65 404.26 317.4 838.31 4.35 1104 238.16 5.5 654.75 562.02 315.08 358.05 0.66 2.32 1.41 221.08 5.85 27.94 10.93 885.52 11.75 631.95 566.65 749.87 4.86 4.08 252.44 4.55 257.49 15.71 9.11 5.37 16.53 5.5 5.77 233.5 44.24 1.24 1.68 560.3 695.87 4.83 1.96 10.44 12. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.22 13.43%.55 429.3 844.85 5.67 425.69 305x127x48 305x165x40 305x165x46 305x165x54 356x127x33 356x127x39 356x171x45 356x171x51 356x171x57 356x171x67 406x140x39 406x140x46 406x178x54 406x178x60 406x178x67 406x178x74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 195.65 5.17 255.95 24.85 11.08 6.97 14.75 199.9 619.29 1.86 8.84 13.61 4.88 10.45 976.5 15.1 220.98 20.01 4.43 4.95 479.44 14.31 19. the difference percentage ranges from 0.25 397.95 275.17 27.79 141.4 277.68 12 13.35 693.63 7.75 484.6 300.35 624.95 514.65 590.11 242.32 0.25 497.9 900.33 198 232.75 431.23 213.55 21.02 455.35 731.78 487.95 755.62 7.01 4.85 5.29 15.53 5.14 410.05 232.92 13.66 5.75 332.42 5.05 11.6 341.21 287.83 275.3 4.1 5.16 9.38 8.96 21.5 479.67 20.95 385.63 4.57 5.6 5.43 4.73 21.53 1.9 11.1 285.28 5.49 5.02 377.45 769. .32 10.19 370.29 202.51 1.53 549.33 471. meanwhile.58 5.01 182.65 149.55 9.41 5.73 19.07 609.8 1082.13 318.98 24.7 18.68 0.25 453.28 5.83 5.02 18.99 4.48 17.86 4.57 355.45 234.17 7.41% to 6.04 1.53 171.3 426 479.5 354.75 300.7 211.63 4.45 18.

4. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table.95. whether it is Class 1. There is a variation of approximately 0.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column.3. Meanwhile.1.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. For a column web subject to bending and compression.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. Table 4.85%. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. . are revised. Therefore. Class 2 or Class 3 element. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. Besides that.Rd = Wpl. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. for a UB section 406x178x54.0 as suggested by BS 5950. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. For example. these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. This is approximately 5% less than 1.

**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

Meanwhile.4 0.06 0. Different from BS 5950.46 2.55 From Table 4.71 3.42 0. section 3.03 9.83 20.23 0.26 0. Meanwhile.38 2.77 2.19 2.98 21.56 2.66 2.25 2.04 0.9 9. .26 2.77 4.25 2. Section 3.7 2.84 11.37 4.29 0. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.96 1. For example.22% to 3.8 1. the difference percentage ranges from -0.79 16.01 2.53 0.07 1.45 14.55 23.43 2.21 24.32 10.58 0.33 3.68 2.16 11. δmax.61%.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.84 4.33 12.78 3. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.77 16.85 15. E.27 3.4 2.08 0.25 0.22 28. Apart from that.37 2.46 2.1.06 0.35 0.68 13.01 0. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.41 1.85 1.04 2.7 2.08 0. as required by EC3.29 0.33 0.21 3.71 3.07 0.05 0.75 2.25 16.56 2.66 0. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.31 2. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.62 5.2 3.47 29.5 above.1 0.85 1. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.83 13.34 1.7 2.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.1.63 19.07 0.18 1.26 18.59 2.51 21.34 18. for a section 356x171x57.08 21. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.63 2.74 4. for a floor beam of 9m long.33 4.49 2.54 2.22% to 3.16 1. However.56 2.93 2.06 0.61 3.32 0.4 2.16 9.24 2.51 0.05 0.25 13.21 2.1 3.1 0. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes. for a floor beam of 6m long.73 1.13 0. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.12 17. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.1 0. the difference percentage ranges from -0.52 0.01 1.64 4.13 8.63%. Meanwhile.36 8.6 2.75 18.

To compare the economy of the design.75 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . floor beams.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge. external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 and Table 4. Table 4.6 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) .750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.

76 Table 4.821 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) Summary of the total steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.313 9.645 3.821 .122 9.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.7 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 356x171x45 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.889 9.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9. is tabulated in Table 4. Table 4.750 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. meanwhile.8 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Types of Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.9.744 EC3 4. The saving percentage.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .8.

The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span. Regardless of bay width. all frame types. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.645 9.96 5. This time. Semi-continuous .889 EC3 4. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.821 4. Further check on the effect of deflection was done.42 15.9 EC3 design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.571 9.60% to 17.313 % 1. depending on the steel grade.60 17. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design. This resulted in higher percentage difference.96%. This is because deeper.77 Table 4.744 3. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. Meanwhile.750 9.9.122 7.

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 . For uniformly distributed loading. the deflection coefficient.0.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.78 frame is achieved in this condition. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4. Table 4. which was used in the beam design.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . 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 = 5.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force. β is treated as β = 3.10 shown.5.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.

122 9.503 9.22 9.11.889 8. The saving percentage.503 7.749 Table 4.889 8.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.122 9. meanwhile.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.11 .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) 7.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4. Table 4.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.211 10. is tabulated in Table 4.749 % 0.750 4.42 3.645 3.645 5.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.750 4.12.95 BS 5950 4.

11% to 10. if it is built semi-continuously. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. Please refer to Figure 4.80 From Table 4. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. (b) semi-rigid construction. Therefore. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. Eventually. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. (c) simple construction.95%. if rigid connection is introduced. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. However.12.1(c)).1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight.0. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. the gap reduces. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. .1(b)). as the connection stiffness becomes higher.

Apart from that. In review to the research objectives.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes.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. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. 5. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. γM0 of 1. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4. Av value also caused the difference.43%. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.1 Structural Capacity 5. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter. for the moment capacity of structural beam. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.05 in the moment capacity . Meanwhile.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam.1.

This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. Therefore. of both codes. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. 5. as compared to the partial safety factor. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. A reduction in the range of 5. γM of 1.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. Meanwhile. From interpolation.27% to 9. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. compared with BS 5950. EC3 design created majority . only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. 5.0 as suggested by BS 5950. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. fc and pc respectively.05 as required by EC3 design. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength.0m long. axial compression is much more critical. Therefore. γM0 of 1.1.2 Structural Column In simple construction. it was found that for a same value of λ.82 calculation required by EC3. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. fc is smaller than pc. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. In comparison.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load.

645 tons and 9.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison.122 tons and 7.1 of EC3 provided proof to this. 5.571 tons for EC3 design. 4-storey. I will have to be chosen. . the total deflection was greater.821 tons and 4. 9m bay width steel frame. 6m bay width steel frame.313 tons for EC3 design. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.750 tons for BS 5950 design. and 9. The difference ranges from 0.2. Therefore. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. For a 2-bay. E. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4.889 tons for BS 5950 design. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. 4-storey. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much.744 tons and 3. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. For a 2-bay. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. However.22% to 3. and 4. In this study. Section 4. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2.63%.

The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.0 to 3. 4-storey. 4-storey.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 1.95% 2-bay. 4-storey. S275 (Fe 430): 5. S275 (Fe 430): 5. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design.60% 2-bay. 6m bay width.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. S275 (Fe 430): 0. 9m bay width.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. 6m bay width. 6m bay width.96% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 10. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. 4-storey. However. 6m bay width. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. . 4-storey. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior. 9m bay width. 9m bay width. 4-storey.11% 2-bay. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 7. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 17. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute).42% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 15.22% 5.42% 2-bay. 9m bay width.

D.” New Steel Construction.” Eurocodenews. (1995). “EN1993 Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. “Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures: Part 1.85 REFERENCES Charles King (2005). “EN 1993 Eurocode 3 – Steel.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. “Introduction to Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) – with Worked Examples.” Berkshire: Steel Construction Institute. Steel Construction Institute (SCI) (2005). Taylor J. “British Standard – Structural Use of Steelwork in Building: Part 1: Code of Practice for Design – Rolled and Welded Sections. November 2005. Heywood M. Paper 2658. “Steelwork design guide to BS 5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked examples.C. (2001). & Lim J B (2003).” ICE Journal. 29-32. “Steel Design Can be Simple Using EC3. European Committee for Standardization (1992). Narayanan R et.” London: British Standards Institution. Issue 3.1 General Rules and Rules for Buildings. al. 24-27. British Standards Institution (2001). . 4. Vol 13 No 4.” London: European Committee for Standardization.

86 APPENDIX A1 .

4 x 27. DL Live Load. LL = = 4 1.6LL Roof w = 1.4 x 24 + 1. DL Live Load.6 2.64 kN/m . MAHMOOD 1.6 x 15 = 62.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.4DL + 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1. LL Floors Dead Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.6 + 1. of Bay No. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. DL Live Load.0 DATA No.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 1.

2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 2.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 2.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m .3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62. MAHMOOD 2.64 kN/m 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.

Roof beams. Shear. .52 144 331. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. MAHMOOD 4.92 kN M = 62.64 x 6 / 2 = 187.88 kNm 4.84 1039. 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. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. 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. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .92 519. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 Beam Moment.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281. V = 62.68 1415.84 707.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.

88 281.84 (187. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 5.92) 144 [1] 331.52 707.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.92 (187. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.84 (187.92) 1039.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.88 281.76 .88 281.92) 331.92) 519.68 (187.92 [2] 519.88 281.92) 288 (187.88 281.84 [3] [4] 707.92) 663.76 1415.

19 31.54 28.6 28.6 [2] 28.19 21.6 21.19 28.54 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.54 28.6LL) .0DL Most critical condition .19 21.19 28.6 21. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.54 28.6 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.19 31.19 28.19 [3] 28.1.19 31.6 [1] 21.4DL+1.19 [4] 28.54 31.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.19 28.54 31.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.5 x 15 = 59.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.5 x 9 = 45.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 DATA No.35 x 27.76 kN/m . LL = = 1.5LL Roof w = 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. LL Floors Dead Load. MAHMOOD 1. LL = = 4 1. DL Live Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. DL Live Load.35DL + 1.6 + 1.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.9 kN/m Floors w = 1. DL Live Load. of Bay No.35 1.35 x 24 + 1.6 2.

MAHMOOD 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.95 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 2.

9 kN/m 6m 45.76 kN/m 59.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.76 kN/m . 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 3.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.76 kN/m 59.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206. contributed by beam shear. MAHMOOD 4. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. V = 45.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268. Shear. V = 59. .96 992.55 kNm Floor beams.1 Beam Moment.7 kN M = 45. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.28 kN M = 59.26 675.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.08 137.9 x 6 / 2 = 137. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.4 633. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. Roof beams.98 496.7 316.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.92 kNm 4.52 1351.

92 5.52 (179.92 268.7) 137.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.28) 992.08 675.98 [2] 496.92 268.4 (179.54 .7 (179.28) 275.98 (179.28) 137.92 268.7) (137.0 5. MAHMOOD 5.55 268.54 1351.28) 316.2 Shear (kN) (137.92 268.92 268.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.28) 496.26 [3] [4] 675.96 (179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.26 (179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.55 206.28) 633.7 [1] 316.

94 26.94 28.66 19.66 26.71 20.66 20. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.89 26.89 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.94 28.94 26.89 28.1.71 28.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.94 26.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 5.89 28.89 26.5LL) .35DL+1.66 26.89 26.89 26.0DL Most critical condition .89 Moments are calculated from (1.89 26.89 19.89 28.89 20.94 26.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

9 149.3 82 82.1 67.3 54 54.0m) STC. L = 6.2 28.2 28.1 24.2 109 113 122 125.1 139.1 98.8 60.3 101 101.2 179 238.3 92.1 82. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.1 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 59.2 74.2 74.8 25.1 67.9 43 45 46 46.1 51 52.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 67.2 89.1 37 37 39 39.3 41.1 40.1 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 32.3 30 31. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 48.1 67.1 25.2 74.8 33.

75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. subject to pure bending. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.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 = 59.0 1. L = 6.3 2.9 8.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.6 152.3 407.1 13. MAHMOOD 1.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . neutral axis at mid-depth. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.3 Therefore.75 50. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange.0m) STC.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 .

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.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.y = M / fy = 268. L = 6.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .92 kNm W pl.0m) STC.

4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.15 47.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.y = W el.6 18670 4.9 360.9 Therefore. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) STC.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 1051 927 32.0 1. MAHMOOD 1. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 177.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.36 131 8.6 7.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. Second moment of area.6 10. Section chosen 1.9 68.

5Vpl. it is low shear Mc.48 kN VSd < Vpl.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. L = 6.001 γMO = 1.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.05 = 275.92 kNm 0.15 <= 9.5 x 497. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd = W pl.0m) STC.26 kNm MSd Mc.28 kN V pl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.4 > 46.Rd = 0.5Vpl.9 x 100 275 1. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.49 kN VSd 0.Rd < Therefore.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.05 √3 = 497.2 (b) Web.05 = 32.7 3.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .48 = 298. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.001 / 1.

110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.05 204.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.69) x 7.001 / 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.Rd = γM1 At support.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430). tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 σf.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.5 Ry.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. not susceptible to LTB 6.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.6 x 275 x 0. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.4 63. L = 6.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.4 kN = VSd = 179.0m) STC.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.Rd = (50 + 52.28 kN < Ry.8 < 63. MAHMOOD 5.

0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 0.3 ≤ = 1.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. L = 6.05 205 307. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.26 7.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. h= a= 402.14 1.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 0.92 275.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. MSd Mc.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . Rd = 0.98 <= 1. MAHMOOD At midspan.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.Rd = > 0.5 ] . Ra. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.Rd 268.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.

28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .6 = 118.6 .118) = 119.001 / 1. VSd = 0 VSd = 179. λ = 2.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.5 kN > At mid span.0m) STC.5 x 360.28 x 0.Rd = 1 x 119.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 . Rb.6 l = 0.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. buckling about y-y axis.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.4 / 7.5 d/t = 2.8 x 1731.05 A = beff x tw = 227. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 2 = 1731.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.5 x SQRT(402.5 = 405. L = 6.75d Rolled I-section. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.(118.117) / (120 . MAHMOOD beff = 0.05 = 197. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.8 x 7.118) x (121 .8 N/mm 2 Rb.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.46 = 18.0m) STC. .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 .34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. L = 6.88 6.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.14 mm OK δmax = 11.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 8.88 + 6.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0 1.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

6 978.1 497. 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) 184.4 568.8 1228 1589 1485 1953 2482 1875 2298 2964 2680 2417 3457 3436 3977 4689 4245 5101 5818 6994 8229 10009 12078 14247 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 63. L = 5.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.0m) STC.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .3 247.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.1 652 802. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.4 988.1 310.

MAHMOOD 1.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 652 581.1 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .2 9.0 DATA Fc = 1415. L = 5.0m) STC.6 205. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.96 5.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.2 160.3 2.3 14.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.19 75. Gross area.52 kN L= 5 m 1.23 17. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.

96 x 10) = 47.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.0m) STC. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis .52 x 1000 / (160.85L = 0.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.4 4.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.8 x 9.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. L = 5.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.0 3.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.

54 kNm . the compressive resistance is adequate 5. R From frame analysis sheets.9 x 75.46) x (242 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.44 kN Fc < Pc 47.5. Therefore.(47.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 . the moment will be equally divided. M= 31. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.8 x 100 x 0. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .239) 2 = 239.001 = 1818.4 pc 242 239 Therefore. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.46) / (48 .08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. beam reaction. Mi = 63. L = 5.

17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 . 7.45) x (233 .52 1818.44 + 31. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. L = 5.03 = < 0.19 x 10) = 48.17 .96 1.45) / (50 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.78 x 652 x 0.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260. MAHMOOD 6.5 L/ry = (0.001 = 170.0 4.54 170.0 6.(48.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.250) 2 = 260.03 kNm 1415.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

L = 5.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.y = M / fy = 57. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Wpl.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 57.88 kNm M= W pl.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.

MAHMOOD 1.6 14.2 Therefore.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 8.86 98.y = W el.2 990 895 11. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.0 DATA NSd = 1351.9 11370 6.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.1 6.94 23.08 kN Msd = 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. Area of section.2 200.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. L = 5. Second moment of area.0m) STC.46 92.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8.

08 / 2433. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.Rd Mny.y. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd = 92.1 Mpl.1 Mny.y.9 (b) Web.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.555 >= n < 0.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.94 <= 9. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.Rd = Mpl.3 kNm Mny.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.1 = 0.Rd = > MSd = 128.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.Rd(1-n) W pl. L = 5.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.1 n ≥ 0.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.11 Mpl.y. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.001 / 1.05 = 259.Rd A fy Npl.1 kN n = 1351.001 / 1.1 28.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd = 0.8 3.3 <= 30.Rd = 1.05 Npl.0m) STC.05 = 2433.2 Class 3 = 13.1 Class 3 = 38.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.

1 x 10) = 38.3 kN ky = 1.(38.38) x (40 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.7 x 92. y .248) 2 = 249.7 N/mm Nb.3 .001 / 1.y.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd = 1 x 249.5 NSd Nb.0m) STC.Rd = = 1351.y. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .3 0.y. L = 5.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.05 = 2209. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .38) / (250 .1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.08 2209.5 x 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. Rd Nb.0 N b .y. Rd η M c .Sd ηMc.9 x 100 x 0. MAHMOOD 4.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. y .94 1 x 128.Rd 1.

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

126 APPENDIX D .

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.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. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = M / fy = 268.0m) Rev 1 STC.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB . L = 6.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.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.

0 1. Section chosen 1.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.59 121 6. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 1. L = 6. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .6 10.0m) Rev 1 STC.6 1096 950 36.9 407.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 66. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.9 Therefore.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. Second moment of area.6 21370 3.8 152.99 53. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = W el.4 7.

05 kNm MSd Mc.92 kNm 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.Rd = 0.Rd < Therefore.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.6 > 46.92 = 331.05 = 36. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd = W pl.05 √3 = 551.15 kN VSd 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.5Vpl.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0. L = 6.5Vpl.7 3.5 x 100 275 1.5 x 551.05 = 287.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.001 γMO = 1.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate . it is low shear Mc.001 / 1.2 (b) Web.28 kN V pl.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) Rev 1 STC.92 kN VSd < Vpl.99 <= 9.

L = 6.5 σf.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) Rev 1 STC.05 = 196.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = (50 + 48.001 / 1.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.81) x 7.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.68 kN VSd = 179. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.8 < 63.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.6 x 275 x 0.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .6 63.28 kN < Ry. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430). MAHMOOD 5. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.Rd = γM1 At support.5 Ry. not susceptible to LTB 6.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.

5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MSd Mc. Rd = 0.0m) Rev 1 STC.Rd = > 0.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407.05 205 299.12 1. MAHMOOD At midspan.5 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 ] .05 7. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.2 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. Ra. L = 6.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. h= a= 449.92 287.Rd 268.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .3 ≤ = 1.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.94 <= 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.

05 A = beff x tw = 251. MAHMOOD beff = 0. L = 6. Rb.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.9 N/mm 2 Rb.9 x 1909.6 2 = 1909.88 x 0. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.(134.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.Rd = 1 x 98.130) x (103 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) Rev 1 STC.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.1 l = 0.6 = 134. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 = 452.001 / 1. buckling about y-y axis.5 d/t = 2.6 / 7.05 = 179.75d Rolled I-section.5 x 407.130) = 98.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.9 kN > At mid span.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.1 .5 x SQRT(449.3 x 7.98) / (135 .28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . λ = 2.

26 + 3.14 mm OK δmax = 7.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. .26 3. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0 1.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 8.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .95 = 11. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) Rev 1 STC. L = 6.

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

BS5950-Vs-EC3

BS5950-Vs-EC3

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