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

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

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

Therefore. safety factors. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.95%.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. design methods.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design.60% to 17. . Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. These details include the basis and concept of design. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. loading values and etc. 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. specifications to be followed. However.11% to 10. with the application of partial strength connections. However. Meanwhile. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. 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. This study intends to testify the claim. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay.27% and 9. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.43%.

Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. factor keselamatan. nilai beban.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. Namun begitu. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. cara rekabentuk.95%.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510).96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Justeru. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. Selain itu. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.43%. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. dan sebagainya. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. Namun begitu.60% – 17. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. . didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan.11% – 10.27% – 9.

2 1.4 1.1 1.3 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .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.

3.1.3.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.1.3 Shear Capacity.Rd Moment Capacity.3.2 Stiffened Web 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.1.1.1 2.5. Pv Moment Capacity.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3. Mc 2.3.3.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.2 2.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.4.1 Unstiffened Web 2. Mc.3.1 2. Vpl.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.4.3.2.2 BS 5950 2.2.3.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.2 Serviceability 2.2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.1.4 Actions of EC3 2.3.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .3.2 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.2.1.6 Deflection 2.4 Loading 2.4.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.2 2.4.5.2.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.1 2.1.3.3.3.4.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.3.3.2 2.2.3.3.

1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1.5 Deflection 2.2 Slenderness.ix 2.5.7. LE 2.6. l 2.4.4.5.5.Rd 2.1.1.1 Buckling Length.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Introduction 34 .1 Cross-section Capacity 2.3.2 Crippling Resistance.6. λ 2.4.2.4.4. Nc.3 Buckling Resistance.6. λ 2.2.3 Compression Resistance.2.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.4 Buckling Resistance.5.2 Slenderness.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.7 Conclusion 2.Rd 2.1.2.5. Pc 2.1.Rd 2.5.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.6.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.4. Nb.3 Compression Resistance.6.5.Rd 2.2 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. Ra.4.1.6.1.Rd 2.6. Rb.1 2.6.1 Effective Length.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.3.1 Crushing Resistance.4.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.7.4. Ry.4.

4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.1 3.1 4.10.2 3.1 Structural Capacity 5.3 Moment Calculation 3.8.1 BS 5950 3.5 3.6 3.9.1.4.3 3.1.1.8.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.8.10.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.10 Structural Column Design 3.2 3.2 4.2 Shear Calculation 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.9.2 4.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Load Combination 3.x 3.1 3.4.7 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.9 Structural Beam Design 3.

1.2 5.xi 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 .2 5.3 5.

6 4.9 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 .1 4.10 4.1 2.3 3.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.2 4.8 4.5 4. TITLE PAGE 2.2 3.7 4.4 4.2 3.1 3.11 4.3 4.

1 3.2 3.3 4.1(c) Schematic diagram of research methodology Floor plan view of the steel frame building Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame Bending moment of beam for rigid construction Bending moment of beam for semi-rigid construction Bending moment of beam for simple construction 37 38 39 80 80 80 .1(b) 4.1(a) 4. TITLE PAGE 3.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comparison to other steel structural design code is made. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. 1. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. hereafter referred to as BS 5950.4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. This structure is intended to serve as an office building. hereafter referred to as EC3. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple. A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out. Next. The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3.3 Objectives The objectives of this project are: 1) To compare the difference in the concept of the design using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. .4 1. The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3. 2 bay braced frames.

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

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

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

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

fabrication and erected for rolled. local buckling. plates. hot finished structural hollow sections and cold formed structural hollow sections. etc.2 BS 5950 2. lateral-torsional buckling.2.1 Background of BS 5950 BS 5950 was prepared to supersede BS 5950: Part 1: 1990. and Part 9 covers the code of practice for stressed skin design. BS 5950 comprises of nine parts. Part 3 and Part 4 focus mainly on composite design and construction. 2. flats. Part 6 covers design for light gauge profiled steel sheeting. Part 2 and 7 deal with specification for materials. welded sections and cold formed sections. Part 1 covers the code of practice for design of rolled and welded sections. Part 8 comprises of code of practice for fire resistance design. sheeting respectively. Changes were due to structural safety. avoidance of disproportionate collapse. Part 5 concerns design of cold formed thin gauge sections. Several clauses were technically updated for topics such as sway stability. They are being used in buildings and allied structures not specifically covered by other standards.2. which was withdrawn.9 2. shear resistance. . but offsetting potential reductions in economy was also one of the reasons.2 Scope of BS 5950 Part 1 of BS 5950 provides recommendations for the design of structural steelwork using hot rolled steel sections. members subject to combined axial force and bending moment.

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

overhead traveling cranes. 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.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. imposed and wind loading. without calculating their local buckling resistance. .3. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. There are dead. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling Bearing capacity of web Deflection 2. 2. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well.2. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole. earth and groundwater loading.11 2.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below.

It enables plastic moment to take place. Class 4 is known as slender section. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. 2.6pyAv . When this section is applied. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv.12 Generally.2 Shear Capacity. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. Clause 4. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section.3. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. Class 2 is known as compact section. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. Class 1 is known as plastic section. Alternatively. However. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. However. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes. Fv. given by: Pv = 0.2. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure.

Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.2. 2. . 2.3.5.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.13 in which Av is the shear area. Z is the section modulus.3 Moment Capacity.3. Clause 4. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.3. 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. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. and Zeff is the effective section modulus.

- Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.5.14 2.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.2. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1. 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. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv.3. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.3. Clause 4.

4. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2. a conservative value Mf for .2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.6Vw.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.4.3.4. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender. or 62ε for a welded section. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.6Vw.3. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0.2 states that.4.3. but the web is designed for shear only.3. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance. 2. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0.4.3. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε.1 of BS 5950 states that.4.15 2. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.

at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.or H-section: . It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which. . c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.2.1 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. where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.3.3.for a welded I.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b). 2.except at the end of a member: n = 5 .1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.6Vw.or H-section: k=T+r k=T .for a rolled I.5.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).5. the web should be designed using Annex H.

T is the flange thickness. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web. allowing for cope holes for welding. .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.5. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps.3. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. 2.netpy in which As.3.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. r is the root radius. 2. pyw is the design strength of the web. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. and t is the web thickness. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.

However. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. To avoid this. Class 2 is also known as compact section.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below.1. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Bearing capacity of web a) b) c) Crushing resistance Crippling resistance Buckling resistance (v) Deflection 2. . Class 1 is known as plastic section. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes.18 2. Clause 5. It is applicable for plastic design. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first. 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.4.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5.3. It has limited rotation capacity.

It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance.2 Shear Capacity.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. Vsd. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance.Rd where Vpl. At each crosssection. Vpl.1. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength.1. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. Class 4 is known as slender section. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. and ε = [235/fy]0.5 . The stress block will be of triangle shape.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure.4. 2. The member will fail before it reaches design stress. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force. Apart from that.

2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.4. as stated in Clause 5. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.4. 2.3. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl.7 states that. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear . Mc.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.20 2.4.3. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.Rd.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively. when maximum shear force. For class 4 cross-sections.Rd.3. 2.5.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.4.Rd.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.3 Moment Capacity.

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

Rd and Fsd / Ra.4.4. H or U section is given by: Ra.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb. Rb.Rd of the web of an I. 2.2 Crippling Resistance.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.Sd = 0.5 [(tf / tw)0. σf.5tw2(Efyw)0.Rd of the web of an I.2.Rd ≤ 1. For member subject to bending moments.5 2. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .Rd Msd ≤ Mc. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.5. Ra.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra. and ss / d < 0.3 Buckling Resistance.Rd + Msd / Mc.4.4. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0. Rb.

5. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance . Therefore.1 and Table 5.5. 2.4. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. however. 2.5 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.2. 2. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.5.1 of EC3. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. This. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. applies only to non-moment sustaining column.

1 Effective Length. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) .3 Compression Resistance.1. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. λ = LE / r 2.7. 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. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.5. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. λ The slenderness λ of a compression member is generally taken as its effective length LE divided by its radius of gyration r about the relevant axis. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. 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.4. channel. This concept is not applicable for battened struts. and back-to-back struts. T-section struts.24 2. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.2 Slenderness. 2.1. Pc According to Clause 4.1. angle.5. in accordance of Table 22.

1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. Ag is the gross 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. 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. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. for class 1 plastic. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. My is the moment about minor axis. Mx is the moment about major axis.5.5.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.2.5. . in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. 2.

2. Mb the buckling resistance moment. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction.6.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 The design of steel column according to EC3 is quite similar to the design of steel column according to BS 5950.2.5. 2. and Zy the elastic modulus.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. Pc the compression resistance of column. py the steel design strength.26 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .

the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3.1.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic.1 Buckling Length.3 Compression Resistance. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) . the compression resistance Nc.1. 2.5. Nc. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L. the value of λ should not exceed 250.6.6.Rd According to Clause 5.2 Slenderness.4. Alternatively.Rd of a member is given by: Nc.1.27 2. Clause 5. the value of λ should not exceed 180.6.4. 2.1. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads.5 states that. 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.

Rd . and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections. Nb.Rd For compression members. Clause 5. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1.6.5.1.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc.Rd 2.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc. 2 or 3 cross-sections.28 Nc.4 Buckling Resistance. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members.1.

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

30 only to moment about the relevant axis; and eN is the shift of the relevant centroidal axis when the cross-section is subject to uniform compression.

However, for high shear (VSd ≥ 0.5 Vpl.Rd), Clause 5.4.9 states that the design resistance of the cross-section to combinations of moment and axial force should be calculated using a reduced yield strength of (1 – ρ)fy for the shear area, where ρ = (2VSd / Vpl.Rd – 1)2.

2.6.2.2 Member Buckling Resistance

A column, subject to buckling moment, may buckle about major axis or minor axis or both. All members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.Sd must satisfy the following condition:

k y M y.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1,0 N b. y . Rd ηM c. y . Rd

where Nb.y.Rd is the design buckling resistance for major axis; Mc.y.Rd is the design moment resistance for major-axis bending, ky is the conservative value and taken as 1,5; and η = γM0 / γM1 for Class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections, but 1,0 for Class 4.

2.7

Conclusion

This section summarizes the general steps to be taken when designing a structural member in simple construction.

31 2.7.1 Structural Beam

Table 2.1 shown compares the criteria to be considered when designing a structural beam.

**Table 2.1 : Criteria to be considered in structural beam design
**

BS 5950 Flange subject to compression 9ε 10ε 15ε Web subject to bending (Neutral axis at mid depth) 80ε 100ε 120ε ε = (275 / py)0.5 2.0 Shear Capacity Pv = 0.6pyAv Av = Dt Vpl.Rd = fyAv / (√3 x γM0) γM0 = 1,05 Av from section table 3.0 Moment Capacity Mc = pyS Mc = pyZ Mc = pyZeff Class 1, 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1,05 γM1 = 1,05 4.0 Bearing Capacity Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 3 Semi-compact Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 3 Semi-compact CRITERIA 1.0 Cross-sectional Classification Flange subject to compression 10ε 11ε 15ε Web subject to bending (Neutral axis at mid depth) 72ε 83ε 124ε ε = (235 / fy)0,5 EC3

32

Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw Smaller of Ry.Rd = (ss + sy) tw fyw / γM1 Ra.Rd = 0,5tw2(Efyw)0,5 [(tf/tw)0,5 + 3(tw/tf)(ss/d)]/γM1 Rb.Rd = χβAfyA / γM1 5.0 Shear Buckling Resistance d/t ≤ 70ε Ratio 6.0 Deflection L / 360 Limit (Beam carrying plaster or other brittle finish) N/A Limit (Total deflection) L / 250 L / 350 d/tw ≤ 69ε

2.7.2

Structural Column

Table 2.2 shown compares the criteria to be considered when designing a structural beam.

**Table 2.2 : Criteria to be considered in structural column design
**

BS 5950 Flange subject to compression 9ε 10ε 15ε Web (Combined axial load and bending) 80ε / 1 + r1 100ε / 1 + 1.5r1 Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 1 Plastic Class 2 Compact Class 3 Semi-compact CRITERIA 1.0 Cross-sectional Classification Flange subject to compression 10ε 11ε 15ε Web (Combined axial load and bending) 396ε / (13α – 1) 456ε / (13α – 1) EC3

0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx. y .5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1. y .Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3. 3 Class 4 Nc.05 Nc. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.05 γM1 = 1.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.05 4.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.0 N b.67 + 0.5 2. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc. Rd .33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. Rd ηM c. 2.eff Class 1.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.

Please refer to Figure 3. Beams and columns are designed for the maximum moment and shear force obtained from computer software analysis.CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction As EC3 will eventually replace BS 5950 as the new code of practice. buckling capacity and deflection is carried out. an understanding on the cross-section classification for BS 5950 is also carried out. analysis on the difference between the results using two codes is done. The first step is to study and understand the cross-section classification for steel members as given in EC. such as shear capacity. comparison of the results will lead to recognizing the difference in design approach for each code. Eventually. At the same time. moment capacity. Next. bearing capacity. it is necessary to study and understand the concept of design methods in EC3 and compare the results with the results of BS 5950 design. analyzing the tables provided and the purpose of each clause stated in the code. design and comparison works will follow subsequently. . Analysis. Checking on several elements.1 for the flowchart of the methodology of this study.

4 to 3.8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. . Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. Therefore. M and shear force. End moments are zero. Sections 3. Calculation of bending moment. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed. Please refer to Appendices A1 and A2 for the analysis worksheets created for the purpose of calculating shear force and bending moment values based on the requirements of different safety factors of both codes. that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span.35 3. As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets. V are based on simply-supported condition. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column.

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

M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear. Moment. Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 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/2.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology .

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

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

3.2.0kN/m2 respectively. 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. section 6.5 Loadings Section 2.5kN/m2 is appropriate. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. all floors will be of one-way slab.2 (Flat roofs) states that. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. Therefore.3 of Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) states that the characteristic values of imposed floor load and imposed roof load must be obtained from Part 1 and Part 3 of BS 6399 respectively. For precast floor selfweight. Meanwhile. repair and other general purposes.5kN/m2. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3.4kN/m2 and 3. this value will be adopted. a uniform load intensity of 1. In this design. Consequently. . wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. Therefore. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. For imposed roof load. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. Meanwhile.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. Therefore. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2.

γG is given by 1.5.1.6 for imposed load. and 1. The . 3. for normal design situations. γF for dead load. is given by 1. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load. From Table 2.35. partial safety factors.1. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. Partial safety factors for loads. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. finishes and fittings. γM0.4. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. In EC3. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. Meanwhile. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. γQ is given by 1. for imposed floor load. For other floors. depending on the interior designer’s intention. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. 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.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed.6 Factor of Safety Section 2.05. A general load intensity of 1. γM1.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. γf should be taken as 1. Meanwhile. is given by 1. 2 or 3 cross-section. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively.4 for dead load.05 as well.

3. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member. For steel grade S 355. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. for Fe 510.7 Categories In this project. According to BS 5950.1. py is 275N/mm2 for thickness less than or equal to 16mm and 265N/mm2 for thickness larger but less than or equal to 40mm.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling.4 times total dead load plus 1. the load combination will be 1. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. In BS 5950. Meanwhile. 3. two (2) types of steel grade will be used.6 times total imposed . 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. in the meantime. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).8. 3.2 “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/mm2.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. For steel grade S 275.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.

35DL + 1. the resultant load combination. This is done by summating the resultant shear . For simple construction. will be 48kN/m. w.1 below: Table 3. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.76kN/m.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187.6LL). will be 45. For the roof. the shear.8.64kN/m.1.55 268.7 179. 3.4DL + 1. the w will be 59.5 times total imposed load (1. the resultant load combination. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.5LL).5% between the analyses of both codes. w. For all other floors.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. According to EC3. Clearly.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.92 From Table 4. For all other floors.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. the load combination will be 1. there is a difference of approximately 4.88 6m 137. Table 3. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear.43 load (1. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.35 times total dead load plus 1. The next table.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame. the w will be 62.9kN/m. For the roof.

5%.84 1039.96 992.55 475.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int. 144 331.76 9m Ext.92 519.88 779.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.47 744.1 950. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed. 137.98 496.3: .26 675. M.08 Int. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.54 Int. 275. similar with the beam shear.8.78 2026.Ground 288 663.62 Ext.31 Int.84 707.94 1488. 206.7 316.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st . 432 995. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8.76 1061.68 1415.52 1351.64 6m Ext. structural beam moment.28 Int. 413. = Internal column Ext.76 1559.44 force from beam of each floor.39 1013.4 633. 3.52 2123. Table 3. 216 497. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.

there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams. there is a difference of approximately 4.74 605. since this is simple construction.07 From Table 3.55 268. in this case. the eccentricity moment. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. D or h is the depth of column section (m).3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. . In this project. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m).45 Table 3. the higher the difference percentage will be.4% to 4.3. can be determined from the following formula: Me = V (e + D/2) = V (e + h/2) where V is resultant shear of structural beam (kN). This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.23 6m 206. Me. Clearly. the higher the load combination of a floor. However. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. For the moments of the structural columns. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464.6% between the analyses of both codes. Subsequently. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. initially. Therefore. Regardless of the width of the bay.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634.

V can be expressed as V = (1.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.5LL) – 1. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load. Roof Other Floors 21.66 57. 30. V can be expressed as V = (1.6LL) – 1.66 53. 30. . 32.4 84. 21.6 56.35DL + 1. Next.56 6m Ext.98 86.78 Int.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity.4DL + 1.38 9m Ext. Table 3. for internal column.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.6 Int. For BS 5950.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. 20. 20.6 63. 32. 3. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.0DL. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state.4 94.88 Int.98 80.0DL. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done. Table 3.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. However. In simple construction.84 Ext.5. For EC 3.

47 The sub-sections next will show one design example which is the floor beam of length 6m and of steel grade S 275 (Fe 430).3mm. 3. From the section table for universal beam. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.6mm. D = 454.3. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Depth.1mm. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. Flange thickness. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. d/t = 50. From the section table. B = 152. Zx = 1120cm3. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. Web thickness.88kNm. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.9mm. t = 8. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3).99. d = 407. Width.8kg/m. Plastic modulus.1 BS 5950 In simple construction. Elastic modulus.92kN and 281. T = 13. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Sx = 1290cm3. Sx = M / py = 281. Depth between fillets. b/T = 6. shear capacity.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59.6mm.9.

the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. Pv = 0. For class 1 plastic cross-section.6pyAv. Since actually d/t < 70.6 = 3682.2. Meanwhile.0 in this design. web is Class 1 plastic section. therefore. shear buckling needs not be checked. where neutral axis is at mid-depth.3. section 4.5 is checked. Since both flange and web are plastic. For web of I-section.26mm2 Pv = 0. which is smaller than 9ε = 9.57kN > Fv = 187. Actual b/T = 5. shear buckling resistance should be checked.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. Next. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. flange is Class 1 plastic section.57 = 364. shear capacity is adequate.0.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section.26 x 10-3 = 607.2.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. 0.4.6Pv = 0. Next.54kN > Fv Therefore.48 = 1. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .6 x 607. Shear capacity. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. it is low shear. Mc = pySx. actual d/t = 50.5 “Moment capacity.75.4.1 x 454. Therefore. section 4. Therefore.0.6 x 275 x 3682. clause 4.0. Mc” is checked. Av = 8. After clause 4.92kN Therefore. this section is Class 1 plastic section.

n = 2 + 0. 1. moment capacity is adequate.6 x 10. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange. If Fv exceeds Pbw.3 = 51.2pyZx = 1.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.6be/k. bearing stiffener should be provided.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.34kN > Fv = 187. therefore. section 4.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369.75kNm Therefore.5mm At support. Mc should be limited to 1.3 + 10.5.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads. M = 281.49 = 354.92kN .1 + 1.2pyZx.02mm k=T+r = 13.02mm Pbw = 98.2mm b1 = t + 1. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.02 x 8. bearing capacity of web.2 = 23.2 + 2 x 13.6kNm > Mc. be = 0. OK.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.

the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. In this case.5) should be conducted. Therefore. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.50 Therefore. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. the deflection is satisfactory. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. However. w = 15kN/m for floors. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). The section is adequate. This is done in the form of deflection check. L = 6.67mm >δ Therefore. the bearing capacity at support is adequate.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. δ. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. . This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. Generally. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16.

shear capacity.92kNm.y = 1051cm3. tw = 7. Plastic modulus. From the section table for universal beam. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.2 EC 3 In simple construction. Depth between fillets. h = 402. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.6mm. resistance of web to crushing. 3. Therefore. Flange thickness.28kN and 268. Depth.4mm. Wpl. d = 360. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. Elastic modulus. it is adequate to be used. Area of . The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. Wpl. tf = 10.y (cm3). Av = 32. Wel. lateral torsional buckling. b = 177. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. Web thickness. crippling and buckling. moment capacity.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check.92 x 103 / 275 = 977.6mm.y = M / py = 268. From the section table. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen.9.6mm. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Shear area.9cm2.9cm3 From the rearranged table. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.9mm. Width.y = 927cm3.

6 for Class 1 elements.36cm.5 x 497. shear resistance is sufficient. 0.2 for Class 1 elements.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.5. for “outstand element of compression flange.28kN Therefore. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9. flange subject to compression only”. Actual c/tf = 8.6.15 ≤ 9. iLT = 4. neutral axis at mid depth”. Actual d/tw = 47. Second moment of area.52 section.05) = 497. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. For S275 (Fe 430).Rd. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked. Based on Table 3. yield strength. tf = 10. that is Vpl.6(a).28kN γM0 = 1.2.48kN > 179. From Table 5.9mm. Flange is Class 1 element.Rd = (32.05 Vpl. Web is Class 1 element. VSd = 179.4 ≤ 66.15. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. Iy = 18670cm4. A = 68. tf ≤ 40mm. Next.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. d/tw = 47.4. section 5. For “web subject to bending.6cm2.49kN > VSd = 179. section classification is a must.5Vpl.Rd = 0. Therefore. fu = 430N/mm2. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. The design value of shear force.1. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section. c/tf = 8. aLT = 131cm.28kN .48 = 298.

shear buckling check is not required.Rd and buckling resistance.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support. For low shear. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling. Ry.8. Rb. Section 5. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. section 5. Actual d/tw = 47.5[fyf/fyw]0. Section 5.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5. Ry.05 = 275.5.5 .Rd = Wpl. MSd = 268.92kNm Mc. Therefore. low shear.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.4 < 63.5 [1 – (γM0 σf.Rd.26kNm > MSd Therefore.Rd. section 5.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked. Therefore. Ra.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.53 Therefore.Ed/fyf)2]0. crippling resistance. the moment capacity is sufficient.8 and 56.2 “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.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively. For crushing resistance. The beam is fully restrained.5.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.

A = 227.5 [402. sy = 10.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. fyf = 275N/mm2.8 x 7. ss = 50mm at support.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.Rd = 0.6)0.5[h2 + ss2]0.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.5 = 405.28mm2 .9)(0.4kN For crippling resistance.54 At support.05.6/10.14)] / 1.5 [(tf/tw)0.9 (177. bending moment is zero.2.5tw2 (Efyw)0.Rd = (50 + 52.62 (210000 x 275)0.4 = 0.5 + 3(7. OK γM1 = 1.05 = 307.62 + 502]0.7mm.5 x 7.69) x 7.6 = 1731. OK. Rb.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.6 / 7.Ed = 0.5 [(10.6)0.5 = 52.8kN For buckling resistance.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.14 ≤ 0. Ra.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.Rd = 0.05 = 204. σf.69mm Ry.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.9/7. γM0 = 1.

Rd = 307.6 From Table 5.5kN.4 / 7.2) should be conducted. curve (a) is used.6 λ√βA = 118. fc = 119. Generally. This is done in the form of deflection check. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.6 = 118.8kN Ry.5kN Ra. (Permanent load) .28 x 10-3 / 1.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197. λ√βA = 118.8N/mm2 Rb.28kN.29).8 x 1731. From Figure 4. which is larger than VSd = 179.Rd = 1 x 119.5 x 360.5 d/t = 2.05 = 197.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.13 (rolled I-section).Rd = 204. OK.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. λ = 2. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. buckling about y-y axis.6kN/m for floors. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.1. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation. Therefore.

6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. The section is adequate. δlim. (Imposed load) L = 6. δ.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.46mm Table 4. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. the deflection is satisfactory. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27. In this case.34mm Therefore. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6. . However. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.14mm > δ2 δlim.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18.

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.

λLT = 48. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor. Therefore. the beam reaction.5L / ry = 0.7 “Columns in simple structures”. when only nominal moments are applied.5. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.60 Next. for columns in simple construction.7.5 x 5000 / 5.19 x 10 = 48. From frame analysis.17. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column. Section 4. M = 31.08kNm. pb = 260. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. Mi = 63. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0. therefore.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260.54kNm. λLT = 45.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. the moment will be equally divided.03kNm . R.

first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. apart from section classification. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.10. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen. From the section table for universal column. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.88kNm respectively.88 x 103 / 275 = 210.08kN and 57. it is adequate to be used.0 Therefore. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. 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).y = MSd / fy = 57. . Wpl.96 < 1. Therefore.5cm3 From the rearranged table. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351.2 EC 3 In simple construction. 3. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.03 = 0.y (cm3).52 / 1818.54 / 170.44 + 31.

Radius of gyration.94 (c = 0. Shear area. from. tf = 14.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections.46cm.5cm.8. From this table. h = 254mm. Plastic modulus. d = 200. fy = 275N/mm2.08 x 103 / 200. Iy = 11370cm4. σw.2 and 10. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351. Second moment of area. therefore.3. Next.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. c/tf = 8.62 From the section table.3. section 5. the web is Class 1.2mm < 40mm. flange is Class 1 element.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. From Table 5.5. iz = 6. Area of section. Wel. the classification depends on the mean web stress. tw = 8. Since both flange and web are plastic. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only).2 x 8. with d/tw = 23.1cm. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. iLT = 6.2mm.1. Wpl. tf = 14. this section is Class 1 section.2mm.6 = 784.y = 895cm3.86cm. For web subject to bending and compression.6mm. iy = 11. section 5.2. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9.2 respectively. Width. Actual c/tf = 8.94 < 9. Depth.73N/mm2 Table 5. Elastic modulus. Flange thickness. b = 254mm. Depth between fillets. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5.9cm2. aLT = 98. . A = 92. Therefore.6cm2. d/tw = 23.94. Av = 25. Web thickness. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. Actual c/tf = 8.5b). Beforehand.y = 990cm3.

Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.Rd = Mpl.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.05 = 2433.1 Therefore.Rd Reduced design plastic moment. the section is subject to a low shear.3 x (1 – 0. allowing for axial force.58kN 0.Rd = 1.05) = 387.1 : MNy.5Vpl. MN.Rd = 1.Sd = My.3kNm MNy.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.08 / 2433.63 Vpl. n = NSd / Npl.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.Sd / L = 57.Rd = Wpl.Rd is such that n < 0.y.05 = 259.555 ≥ 0.Rd = 1.11 x 259.Rd n ≥ 0.Rd (1 – n) Npl. MNy.555) .Sd Therefore.27.1 = 0.11 Mpl. From Table 5.1kN n = 1351.y.11 Mpl.y.1 : MNy.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd > Vmax.y.

6.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.7N/mm2 .3.0 Ly = 0.1 x 10 = 38.Rd) + (kyMy.94kNm Therefore. fc = 249.64 = 128. the moment resistance is sufficient.y.3.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38. λy√βA = 38.1kNm > MSd = 28. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38. Lastly. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.85L = 0. section 5. for buckling about y-y axis.3 Based on Table 5.Sd / ηMc.Rd) ≤ 1. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation. buckling curve (b) is used.y.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.

. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.y.05 = 2209.Rd) = (1351.65 Nb.y.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.95 < 1. Therefore.7 x 92.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.05 = 1 x 249.1) = 0.94 / 1 x 128.3) + (1.0 Therefore. it is adequate to be used.08 / 2209. γM1 = 1.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.y.Rd) + (kyMy.5 x 28.Sd / ηMc.

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

97 392.19 387.78 -25.66 24.26 2.84 300.18 358.83 0.21 15.34 523.66 704.47 545.75 437.03 4.74 -0.79 398.35 431.37 609.19 1.4 0.28 303.02 12.14 .28 554.47 341.47 831.33 409.83 938.08 2.37 399.81 1024.99 589.96 6.2 447.91 -19.46 2.02 698.15 -16.55 583.13 705.51 18.5 -0.15 3.5 -0.16 551.63 12.58 34.32 783.64 0.77 -3.93 11.02 496.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.65 0.13 19.86 619.78 456.37 338.21 668.18 8.74 2.26 888.56 3.82 2.4 -10.55 522.25 382.28 8.31 446. 2.85 767.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.81 -3.61 345.98 1134.72 % Diff.5 1.15 343.11 -2 2.92 588. BS 5950 (kN) 376.48 517.24 3.5 1.7 9.45 -1.27 845.6 405.23 -9.21 -24.67 Table 4.27 0.59 460.92 2.21 441.32 10.86 -0.53 356.09 1012.33 862.38 811.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.78 -20.5 461.95 404.64 5.89 678.74 0.64 0.2 -2.39 462.07 942.29 5.32 860.56 -5.91 1011.66 497.61 340.2 1102.38 20.55 712.65 846.51 1.65 635.7 -0.77 6.27 14.39 1.36 11.73 -2.14 583.57 13.68 6.65 0.47 596.72 -12.15 507.5 642.1 493.58 753.11 -1.51 -4.39 511.35 730.79 2.46 478.26 -8.69 -1.35 793.44 2.99 15.52 443.93 11.09 16.74 393.77 728.94 2.53 943.88 -18.02 6.31 2.81 -3.99 918.13 1091.52 439.4 -0.93 1.79 12.21 667.53 564.7 1.35 -1.51 384.38 542.6 1.8 800.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.45 623.1 -2.58 308.78 541.55 1.73 -3.95 2.57 -2.42 820.79 2.78 15.74 2.66 5.5 1102.5 1.34 44.98 305.79 2.11 1218.96 666.79 11.81 528.48 759.6 10.16 1057.6 14.65 420.83 0.09 773.14 784.27 819.74 594.67 644.81 -2.44 471.84 727.2 777.14 18.38 1.16 4.88 876.4 0.87 -0.33 577.29 452.56 878.27 13.85 854.94 559.68 1007.81 523.62 1.1 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 291.22 2.19 1.77 1146.5 529.55 3.32 877.87 433.09 -2.85 517.41 925.56 400.99 660.62 515.93 1.93 334.92 394.46 -3.05 607.56 15.27 0.69 4.19 4.24 0.06 1.15 3.09 -2.3 14.86 1204.3 683.6 1.04 % Diff.06 1.82 2.78 942.7 -0.55 617.65 724.55 1.17 8.94 2.57 680.38 1.75 -13.85 405.71 429.

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. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.03 1440.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950. the difference percentage ranges from -2.3% less than 0.05 110.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.06 % Diff.57% to 4. This value.6 as suggested by BS 5950.91 % Diff.06%.13 -0.69% to 4.07 170.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.07 6.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.94 162.06%.14 8.6 137.35 -0.43 -1.01 -16. Also. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.28 148. For steel grade S275.23 168.35 217.3 6.77 4. 6.59 5. Therefore.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.83 132.21 -1. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.81 5. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0. For steel grade S355.62 182. There are a few explanations to the variations.58 -9.43 160.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.51 1007.49 1295.05 3.98 141.41 143. the difference percentage ranges from -3.76 191. which is approximately 8.43 3. meanwhile.13 8.94 -12.06 1115. Table 4.78 11.07 .76 4.05 1099.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.97 6.55.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.59 5.8 8.43 3. however.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.45 1431.58 4.86 125.57 -4.57 206.44 1300.59 4. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.

11 5.78 15.4 264.63 4.33 221.41% to 6.07 609.32 1.78 487.55 4.86 4.95 24.85 11.67 685.08 6.52 434.13 318.36 2.83 5.21 287.35 693.03%.29 202.85 5.95 532.65 244.2 291.92 13.93 740.46 5.5 457.44 14.77 233.3 695.11 242.73 2.57 5.83 4.05 0.31 4.13 246.84 13.29 15.3 4.75 631.61 4.14 3.26 312.01 182.81 529.8 1082.32 10.5 691.14 410.52 11.3 844.6 341.69 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 195.86 4.35 624.7 211.75 484.25 453.95 848 184.5 354.85 585.67 425.33 198 232.97 14.9 619.33 181.55 9.37 16. the difference percentage ranges from 0.08 5.19 370.42 5.47 955.98 20.83 275.11 261.05 35.55 21.41 19.24 376.86 8.02 315.33 192.39 682.65 404.41 5.7 18.62 7.08 510.1 285.02 377.45 976.53 171.27 1.49 5.95 566.55 257.25 5.27 14.57 355.24 1.26 317.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.44 12.65 749.02 455.25 397.9 11.16 5.95 189. the difference percentage ranges from 1.53 5.75 332.17 27.05 585.88 10.24 1.02 18.43%.5 390.55 4.95 755.85 27.95 385.06 0.5 34.63 4.28 5.38 8.79 141.35 1104 238.95 514.1 5.57 5.93 885.17 7.29 1.4 838.68 0.83 1.16 9.28 15.69 188.48 5.71 9.55 429. For steel grade S355.75 431.1 220.01 4.11 5.66 5.53 549.55 433.9 900.52 395.65 149.87 4.43 4.5 654.17 255.45 234.35 302.1 5.04 1.6 300.95 479.3 426 479.5 302.98 24.05 336.63 7.23 213.5 5.65 5.29 2.89 1.44 4.8 799.65 590.66 2.41 221.87 4.06 11. .35 731.05 232.53 1.58 5.5 44.75 562.22 13.1 1.68 560.28 5.9 163.05 11. For steel grade S275.99 4.75 300.96 10.48 17.33 471.73 21.5 15.17 171.08 252.12 5.45 18.45 521.5 14.34 404.53 5.43 4.85 5.72 9.58% to 6.95 275.01 4.75 199.6 5.94 10.45 769. meanwhile.16 5.67 20.75 398.49 5.2 24.5 330 371.24 17.25 497.17 24.08 358.49 15.96 21.5 479.1 539 619.73 19. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.32 0.25 517.68 12 13.51 1.1 244.4 277.98 352.31 19.

4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. There is a variation of approximately 0.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. For a column web subject to bending and compression.95. For example. whether it is Class 1. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5.3.1. Besides that.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. are revised. Class 2 or Class 3 element.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. Therefore.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. Meanwhile. Table 4. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. .0 as suggested by BS 5950. for a UB section 406x178x54. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.85%.Rd = Wpl. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. This is approximately 5% less than 1. 4.

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

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

% Diff.

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

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

% Diff.

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

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

3825.9 4677.1 5435.4 6294.2 7924.8 9626.4 11403.1

**Table 4.4 Moment resistance and percentage difference
**

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

% Diff.

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

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

% Diff.

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

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

72

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

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

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

Mb = pbSx

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

However, moment capacity based on EC3 design,

Mpl.y.Rd = Wpl.y fy / γM0

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

4.2

Deflection

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

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

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

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

33 3.22% to 3.9 9.46 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.13 8.1 0.07 0.54 2.25 0.38 2.59 2.01 1.25 16.68 2.16 11.77 2. for a section 356x171x57.68 13. Section 3.18 1. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.8 1.4 2.37 2.1.2 3. For example.35 0.85 15.08 0.71 3.7 2.26 2. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.66 0.27 3.84 4.51 21.45 14.32 10.1. for a floor beam of 9m long.77 16.75 2.42 0. section 3.58 0.37 4.19 2.53 0.13 0.36 8.46 2.34 18.22% to 3. for a floor beam of 6m long.7 2.93 2. Meanwhile.25 2.63 19.04 2.08 0.1 0.29 0.1 0.77 4.56 2.33 12.73 1.78 3. .22 28.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.66 2.6 2.06 0.61%. δmax.56 2. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.51 0. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.63 2.24 2. However.5 above.26 0.79 16. Meanwhile.16 9. Different from BS 5950.08 21.1 3.34 1.26 18.52 0.71 3.4 0. Apart from that. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.33 4.01 0.55 23.16 1.07 1. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.96 1.84 11.07 0.23 0.85 1.25 13. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.03 9.7 2.31 2.62 5.05 0.06 0. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.05 0.55 From Table 4.47 29. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.12 17.83 13.63%.49 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.61 3.04 0.21 3.32 0.43 2.29 0.56 2.21 2.83 20.25 2.41 1.21 24.74 4.64 4.98 21.33 0. as required by EC3. Meanwhile.85 1.4 2. E.01 2.06 0.75 18. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.

122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.6 and Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams. Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size. To compare the economy of the design.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . floor beams.75 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.

750 4.9.8.889 9. meanwhile.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.821 . Table 4.744 EC3 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.122 9. is tabulated in Table 4.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .313 9.821 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 4.8 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. The saving percentage.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .76 Table 4.7 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 356x171x45 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .645 3.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.

This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design.60 17.750 9. Semi-continuous .96 5.42 15.821 4.313 % 1. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section.96%.9. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.77 Table 4.744 3.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4. depending on the steel grade. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection. 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”.645 9. Meanwhile. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.60% to 17.9 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. This resulted in higher percentage difference. This is because deeper.122 7.571 9. Further check on the effect of deflection was done.889 EC3 4. This time. Regardless of bay width. all frame types.

645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.10 shown. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. which was used in the beam design. the deflection coefficient. Please refer to Appendix D for a redesign work after the β value had been revised and the section redesigned to withstand bending moment from analysis process.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . β is treated as β = 3. Table 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.0. For uniformly distributed loading.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.10 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 .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%.5.

122 9.749 % 0.750 4.11 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Types of Frame Bay Width (m) 2Bay 4Storey 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.22 9.11.750 4.889 8. The saving percentage. meanwhile.889 8.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.749 Table 4.211 10.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.95 BS 5950 4.42 3.11 .503 9.122 9.645 3. is tabulated in Table 4. Table 4.12.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.645 5.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.503 7.

The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor.1(c)). the gap reduces. (c) simple construction.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection.11% to 10. if rigid connection is introduced. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. Therefore. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. (b) semi-rigid construction. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. if it is built semi-continuously. Eventually. However. Please refer to Figure 4.12.95%.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction.80 From Table 4. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design.1(b)). .0. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment.

In review to the research objectives.1 Structural Capacity 5. γM0 of 1. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4. Meanwhile. Apart from that.43%. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.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. Av value also caused the difference. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter. 5. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor.05 in the moment capacity .1.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. for the moment capacity of structural beam.

of both codes. Therefore. Meanwhile.1.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3.0 as suggested by BS 5950.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. axial compression is much more critical. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. compared with BS 5950. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. From interpolation. EC3 design created majority . as compared to the partial safety factor.0m long.82 calculation required by EC3. fc is smaller than pc. A reduction in the range of 5. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design.27% to 9.05 as required by EC3 design. fc and pc respectively. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. γM of 1. 5. 5.2 Structural Column In simple construction. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. Therefore. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. γM0 of 1. it was found that for a same value of λ. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. In comparison. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam.

thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4.1 of EC3 provided proof to this. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9.2. However.645 tons and 9.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.22% to 3.571 tons for EC3 design. 4-storey. For a 2-bay.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame.821 tons and 4. For a 2-bay. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. the total deflection was greater. 9m bay width steel frame. Section 4.122 tons and 7. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. In this study. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. and 4.63%.313 tons for EC3 design. 5. and 9. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. . compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design.889 tons for BS 5950 design.750 tons for BS 5950 design. 4-storey. E. 6m bay width steel frame. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity. The difference ranges from 0. I will have to be chosen.744 tons and 3. Therefore.

This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior.42% 2-bay. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). S275 (Fe 430): 0.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 9m bay width.95% 2-bay. 4-storey. .0 to 3. 6m bay width.60% 2-bay. However. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 10.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. 6m bay width. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5.96% 2-bay. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950. 6m bay width. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 7. 4-storey.11% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 5.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. 6m bay width.22% 5. 4-storey. 4-storey. 9m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 17. 4-storey. 9m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 15. 4-storey. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 1.42% 2-bay.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. 9m bay width.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.6LL Roof w = 1. MAHMOOD 1.4DL + 1. DL Live Load.4 x 27.6 2. DL Live Load.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1.64 kN/m . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. of Bay No.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. DL Live Load.4 x 24 + 1. LL Floors Dead Load.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.4 1.0 DATA No.6 x 15 = 62. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.6 + 1. LL = = 4 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.

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

64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 2.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. Shear.88 kNm 4.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. MAHMOOD 4.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .68 1415.84 707. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.84 1039.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. V = 62.92 519.92 kN M = 62.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.1 Beam Moment.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. .0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. Roof beams. contributed by beam shear.52 144 331.

92) 331.76 1415.92) 1039.84 [3] [4] 707.88 281.92) 144 [1] 331.88 281.68 (187.84 (187.84 (187.88 281.92) 663.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 281.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.92) 519.76 .88 281. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.52 707. MAHMOOD 5.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.92 (187.92) 288 (187.92 [2] 519.

6 21.19 21.19 31.6LL) .19 [4] 28.19 21.1.54 31.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0DL Most critical condition .6 [1] 21. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4DL+1.6 [2] 28.19 [3] 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.19 28.54 28.54 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.19 31.54 28.6 31.54 31.6 28.19 28.54 28.19 28.19 28.6 21.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

35 x 24 + 1.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. DL Live Load.6 + 1.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.35 1. MAHMOOD 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.0 DATA No.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.35DL + 1. DL Live Load.5 x 9 = 45.76 kN/m . LL = = 4 1. of Bay No. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.5LL Roof w = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x 15 = 59.6 2.35 x 27.9 kN/m Floors w = 1. DL Live Load. LL = = 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. LL Floors Dead Load.

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

3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.76 kN/m 59. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m .76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.9 kN/m 6m 45.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.

horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.7 316. .26 675.76 x 6 / 2 = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. Roof beams. MAHMOOD 4.96 992.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. V = 45.28 kN M = 59.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.4 633.52 1351.55 kNm Floor beams. V = 59. contributed by beam shear.98 496.1 Beam Moment. Shear.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.08 137.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.92 kNm 4.7 kN M = 45.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.

92 268.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Shear (kN) (137.28) 275.92 268.7) (137.26 [3] [4] 675.92 268.28) 633.0 5.28) 137.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.55 268.92 268.98 [2] 496.26 (179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 5.55 206.4 (179.92 5.7) 137.52 (179.28) 316.54 1351.54 .98 (179.92 268.08 675.96 (179.7 [1] 316.28) 992.7 (179.28) 496.

66 26.89 28.66 19.94 26.89 Moments are calculated from (1.94 26.66 26.94 26.89 26.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.89 26.89 28.94 28.71 28.89 26. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.89 28.0DL Most critical condition .89 26.94 28.89 26.1.89 20.5LL) .71 20.89 19.35DL+1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.89 26.94 26.66 20. MAHMOOD 5.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

0m) STC.1 67.2 28.2 109 113 122 125.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .1 67.1 67.9 43 45 46 46. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.8 33.1 25.1 139.1 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 32.1 67.8 60.2 89. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 24.2 74.1 40.3 54 54.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.2 74.3 30 31.2 74. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.2 28.1 Sx (cm3) 171 259 234 342 258 306 403 353 314 393 481 543 483 539 724 659 623 614 566 775 888 720 711 896 1100 846 1060 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 59.1 48.1 82.3 101 101.1 98. L = 6.2 179 238.9 149.8 25.1 37 37 39 39.3 82 82.1 51 52.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 41.3 92.

0 1.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. subject to pure bending. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.3 2.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.3 407. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5.0m) STC.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13. neutral axis at mid-depth.6 152. L = 6.9 8.1 13. MAHMOOD 1.2 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. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.3 Therefore. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange.8 454.75 50.

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 .

y = M / fy = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 kNm W pl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .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. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.0m) STC.

Second moment of area.y = W el. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.9 360.9 68. Section chosen 1. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.0m) STC.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.6 18670 4.4 1051 927 32.9 Therefore.6 7. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.36 131 8.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 177.6 10.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.15 47.0 1.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4 > 46. it is low shear Mc. L = 6.Rd = W pl.48 = 298.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.5Vpl. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd < Therefore.9 x 100 275 1.001 γMO = 1.0m) STC.28 kN V pl.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .7 3.05 = 275.001 / 1.05 √3 = 497. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.15 <= 9.48 kN VSd < Vpl.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5Vpl.92 kNm 0.26 kNm MSd Mc.05 = 32. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.2 (b) Web.Rd = 0.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.5 x 497.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.49 kN VSd 0.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.

Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.6 x 275 x 0. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. L = 6.Rd = γM1 At support.001 / 1.4 63.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.5 Ry.4 kN = VSd = 179. not susceptible to LTB 6.69) x 7. MAHMOOD 5.05 204. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.0m) STC.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 < 63. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.28 kN < Ry. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.5 σf.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430). UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.Rd = (50 + 52.

8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.3 ≤ = 1. Ra.Rd = > 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.0m) STC. L = 6.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.2 0.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.14 1. h= a= 402.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.5 0.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 ] . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. MSd Mc.05 205 307.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.26 7. Rd = 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. MAHMOOD At midspan.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.92 275. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.Rd 268.98 <= 1.

8 x 1731.5 x 360.75d Rolled I-section.Rd = 1 x 119. MAHMOOD beff = 0.8 x 7.28 x 0.05 A = beff x tw = 227. Rb. λ = 2.8 N/mm 2 Rb.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.5 kN > At mid span.6 2 = 1731. buckling about y-y axis.6 = 118.6 .6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .4 / 7.5 = 405. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.5 x SQRT(402.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 d/t = 2.001 / 1.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.117) / (120 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.118) x (121 .0m) STC. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.(118.118) = 119.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . L = 6.6 l = 0.05 = 197.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.

MAHMOOD 8.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.0m) STC.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.88 6. .δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.88 + 6.14 mm OK δmax = 11.46 = 18.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.1 310.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 978.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Sx (cm3) 184. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.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 63.4 988.1 652 802.4 568.3 247.1 497.0m) STC. L = 5.

py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .0m) STC.52 kN L= 5 m 1. MAHMOOD 1.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209. Gross area. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 9.6 205.1 8.23 17.2 160.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.19 75.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 652 581.3 2.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.96 5.3 14. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.0 DATA Fc = 1415. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.

44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.4 4.52 x 1000 / (160.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis .5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.8 x 9.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.96 x 10) = 47.85L = 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.0m) STC.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8. L = 5.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.0 3.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.

Mi = 63. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.(47.239) 2 = 239.46) / (48 .08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.8 x 100 x 0.9 x 75.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.46) x (242 .4 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Therefore.0m) STC. R From frame analysis sheets. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .4 pc 242 239 Therefore. L = 5. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.001 = 1818.54 kNm . the moment will be equally divided.5. beam reaction. the compressive resistance is adequate 5. 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. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1. M= 31.

78 x 652 x 0.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 . L = 5.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.45) / (50 .0 4.001 = 170.96 1.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.0m) STC.5 L/ry = (0. MAHMOOD 6.19 x 10) = 48.17 .03 = < 0.250) 2 = 260.54 170.52 1818.45) x (233 .(48.0 6.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.44 + 31. 7.03 kNm 1415.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) STC.88 kNm M= W pl.y = M / fy = 57.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210. 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. L = 5.

2 990 895 11.94 23.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 14.0m) STC. Second moment of area. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8. MAHMOOD 1.86 98.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.y = W el.2 Therefore.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. Area of section.5 8.08 kN Msd = 28. L = 5.2 200.1 6.9 11370 6.0 DATA NSd = 1351.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.46 92.

L = 5.8 3.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.001 / 1.Rd = Mpl.11 Mpl.9 (b) Web.94 <= 9.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.Rd = 92.3 kNm Mny.1 kN n = 1351.y.Rd = > MSd = 128.Rd(1-n) W pl.08 / 2433. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.05 = 259. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.555 >= n < 0.1 28.1 = 0.1 Mny.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.y.Rd = 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.1 Mpl. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.Rd A fy Npl.Rd Mny.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.0m) STC.001 / 1.3 <= 30.y.2 Class 3 = 13.1 Class 3 = 38.1 n ≥ 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 Npl.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.05 = 2433.Rd = 1.

Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.7 x 92.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.94 1 x 128.Rd = 1 x 249.(38.1 x 10) = 38.5 NSd Nb.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.001 / 1. y .3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. y .05 = 2209.248) 2 = 249.3 kN ky = 1.38) / (250 .Sd ηMc.0 N b .7 N/mm Nb. MAHMOOD 4.3 0.y.9 x 100 x 0.y.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. Rd Nb.y.3 .08 2209.0m) STC.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y . Rd η M c . Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 . sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .38) x (40 . L = 5.Rd 1.Rd = = 1351.5 x 28.y. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.

0 4.0 3.0 CONCLUSION Cross Section Resistance In-plane Failure About Major Axis Use of the section is adequate. Use : 254x254x73 UC OK OK .0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 5. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.125 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

126 APPENDIX D .

MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.92 kNm W pl.0m) Rev 1 STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. L = 6.y = M / fy = 268.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .

6 21370 3.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. MAHMOOD 1. Section chosen 1. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.6 1096 950 36.8 152. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 10.9 407.5 66. L = 6.0 1.59 121 6. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.0m) Rev 1 STC.y = W el. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. Second moment of area.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.9 Therefore.99 53.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5Vpl.15 kN VSd 0.0m) Rev 1 STC.05 √3 = 551.05 kNm MSd Mc.92 = 331.2 (b) Web.5 x 100 275 1.28 kN V pl.92 kNm 0.5 x 551.Rd = 0. it is low shear Mc.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 6.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.99 <= 9.7 3.05 = 287.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 = 36.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd = W pl. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd < Therefore.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.5Vpl. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.001 / 1. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.001 γMO = 1.6 > 46.92 kN VSd < Vpl.

not susceptible to LTB 6.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd = (50 + 48. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.Rd = γM1 At support.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.28 kN < Ry. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.5 σf.0m) Rev 1 STC.5 Ry. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.05 = 196.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.8 < 63.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . MAHMOOD 5.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.81) x 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.68 kN VSd = 179.6 x 275 x 0.6 63.001 / 1.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53. L = 6.

2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.3 ≤ = 1.94 <= 1.05 7. MAHMOOD At midspan.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7. h= a= 449.12 1.5 ] .16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.Rd = > 0.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. L = 6. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd 268.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0m) Rev 1 STC. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.92 287.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407.5 0.05 205 299. Ra.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .6 = γM1 = E= Ra.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MSd Mc. Rd = 0.

130) = 98.5 x 407.(134.001 / 1.9 kN > At mid span.6 = 134.130) x (103 .5 d/t = 2.9 N/mm 2 Rb. buckling about y-y axis.98) / (135 . use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134. MAHMOOD beff = 0.0m) Rev 1 STC.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.Rd = 1 x 98.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.75d Rolled I-section. λ = 2.9 x 1909.05 A = beff x tw = 251.5 = 452. L = 6. Rb.3 x 7.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.6 / 7. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.6 2 = 1909.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .1 .88 x 0.5 x SQRT(449.1 l = 0.05 = 179.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

0 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.26 3.95 = 11.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. .26 + 3.0m) Rev 1 STC.14 mm OK δmax = 7.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 . L = 6.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3. MAHMOOD 8.

- 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

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulBS5950-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
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- THE BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES TO EC3 (4th EDITION)
- Design Aids EuroCode
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Design of Base Plate
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- steel_design
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- DESIGN_OF_STRUCTURAL_CONNECTIONS_TO _EUROCODE_3
- Design of Base Plate for BS5950
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- Precast Concrete Structures - Hubert Bachmann
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridges
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- BSI EC3 Design of Steel Structures
- Designers' Guide to Eurocode 8 Design of Bridges for Earthquake Resistance (Designers' Guides to the Eurocodes)
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- 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
- Cp3 Chapter v Part 2 for Wind Load
- Eurocode
- 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