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

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

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. The report has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree. Signature Name Date : : Chan Chee Han : 01 NOVEMBER 2006 .

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

loading values and etc. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design.43%.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. Therefore.v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. design methods. 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 3.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. . Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.27% and 9.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. These details include the basis and concept of design.95%. However. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. specifications to be followed. 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. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. This study intends to testify the claim. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. However. safety factors. Meanwhile.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. with the application of partial strength connections.60% to 17.11% to 10. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay.

34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti. cara rekabentuk. 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. Namun begitu.11% – 10. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Selain itu. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.43%. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. factor keselamatan. dan sebagainya.27% – 9. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting.95%. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Namun begitu.06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli.60% – 17. Justeru. nilai beban.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. .

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

3.3 Shear Capacity.4.6 Deflection 2.3.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.4.5.3.3.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.Rd Moment Capacity.3.3.3.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.1.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.2 BS 5950 2.3.2.1 2.3.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.2 2. Mc.3.1.3.3.3.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.3.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.1.2.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2. Vpl.3.4.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2. Mc 2.1.2.1 Unstiffened Web 2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.3.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 . Pv Moment Capacity.2 Stiffened Web 2.1.4.4.2.1.3.3.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.3.2 Serviceability 2.5.2.2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.4 Actions of EC3 2.2 2.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.1.4 Loading 2.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.

6.6.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.4.5. Rb.3.1 Effective Length.6.1 Crushing Resistance.2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.5.Rd 2.5 Deflection 2.Rd 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.6.5. Ry. Nb.4.3 Compression Resistance.2 Structural Beam Structural Column 31 32 29 30 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 29 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 III METHODOLOGY 3.7 Conclusion 2.2.5.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.4 Buckling Resistance.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.4.3.2 Slenderness.4.4.2.1.Rd 2. λ 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.6.6.7.5.ix 2.6.3 Buckling Resistance.2 Slenderness.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.1.5.2 Crippling Resistance.4. Pc 2. Nc.7.1.1.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.6.1 2.3 Compression Resistance.4. LE 2.4.1 Introduction 34 .Rd 2. Ra.4. λ 2. l 2.Rd 2.4.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.1.1.1 Buckling Length.2.

3 Moment Calculation 3.1 4.2 3.6 3.8.4.3 3.2 4.2 3.1.4.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.9.9.x 3.1 BS 5950 3.1 3.1.1 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 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.2 4.10 Structural Column Design 3.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.1 Structural Capacity 5.7 3.9 Structural Beam Design 3.10.1.8.1 3.5 3.1 Load Combination 3.10.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.8.2 Shear Calculation 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.

4 Structural Column 82 82 83 84 Deflection Values Economy Recommendation for Future Studies REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A1 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 APPENDIX A2 APPENDIX B1 APPENDIX B2 APPENDIX C1 APPENDIX C2 APPENDIX D .2 5.xi 5.1.2 5.3 5.

7 4.1 2.4 4.4 4.3 3.11 4.9 4.8 4.2 3.2 4.6 4. TITLE PAGE 2.10 4.3 4.5 4.2 3.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 .xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.1 4.1 3.

1(b) 4.2 3. TITLE PAGE 3.1 3.xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO.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 .3 4.1(a) 4.

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

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

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

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

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

namely earlier design over-estimated strength in a few particular circumstances. earlier design practice under-estimated strength in various circumstances affecting economy. but it can be simplified for those pursuing speed and clarity. 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. Finally. Design can be complex.2 Background of Project The arrival of Eurocode 3 calls for reconsideration of the approach to design. The increasing complexity of codes arises due to several reasons. 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 a scope of application is defined to avoid the circumstances and the forms of construction in which strength is over-estimated by simple procedures. Many designers feel depressed when new codes are introduced (Charles. There are new formulae and new complications to master. this project is intended to testify the claim. 2005). and new forms of structure evolve and codes are expanded to include them. for those who pursue economy of material. . 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. Besides. Lacking analytical and calculative proof. simple design is possible if the code requirements are presented in an easy-to-use format. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI). However. causing safety issues.3 1.

The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.4 1. 2 bay braced frames. This structure is intended to serve as an office building. .4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. hereafter referred to as BS 5950. The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values. Comparison to other steel structural design code is made.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. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple. A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out. Next. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. hereafter referred to as EC3. 1.

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. conclusions and recommendations are presented in Chapter V. Chapter III will be a summary of research methodology. Meanwhile.5 1.5 Report Layout The report will be divided into five main chapters. Results and discussions are presented in Chapter IV.

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

serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. and with appropriate degrees of reliability. EC3 stresses the need for durability. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries. having due regard to its intended life and its cost. selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the accidental removal of an individual element. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions. impact or consequences of human errors. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design.7 and their resistance. selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered.1. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. 2. EC3 covers two limit states. 2. 2001).3. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3. . eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design.1.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. and tying the structure together. it will remain fit for the use for which it is required. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much.

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

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

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

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.3. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. Where necessary.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. without calculating their local buckling resistance. earth and groundwater loading. .1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness.11 2. imposed and wind loading. There are dead. 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. overhead traveling cranes. 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. 2.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure.

Clause 4.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv.2 Shear Capacity. given by: Pv = 0. 2. Class 4 is known as slender section.6pyAv . the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section. Fv. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. Class 1 is known as plastic section. However.12 Generally. Class 2 is known as compact section. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. It enables plastic moment to take place.3. Alternatively.2. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. When this section is applied. However. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment.

There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. . Clause 4. 2. Seff is the effective plastic modulus.3.2 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.3. Z is the section modulus. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.13 in which Av is the shear area.3. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.2. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.5. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. 2. and Zeff is the effective section modulus.3 Moment Capacity.

3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.3. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf.14 2. Clause 4. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .2.5. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv.3.

15 2. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0.3. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2.4.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.6Vw.4. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.6Vw.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section.4.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.4. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender. 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. or 62ε for a welded section. a conservative value Mf for .3. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.1 of BS 5950 states that. but the web is designed for shear only.3. 2.3. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.4.4.2 states that.3.

or H-section: k=T+r k=T . where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.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.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .5.6Vw.3. 2.except at the end of a member: n = 5 .3.for a rolled I.5. c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0. the web should be designed using Annex H. It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.2.for a welded I.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.or H-section: . .

Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. r is the root radius.3. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps.netpy in which As. pyw is the design strength of the web.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web. and t is the web thickness. T is the flange thickness. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. . allowing for cope holes for welding. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener.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. 2.5. 2.3.

Clause 5. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin. . Class 1 is known as plastic section.18 2.4. It can also achieve rectangular stress block.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. It is applicable for plastic design. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. However. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Bearing capacity of web a) b) c) Crushing resistance Crippling resistance Buckling resistance (v) Deflection 2. It has limited rotation capacity.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling. Class 2 is also known as compact section.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis.1. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first.3. To avoid this. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage.

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

2. For class 4 cross-sections.3.4.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.Rd.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc.4. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc. when maximum shear force.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.Rd. Mc. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment.5. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5. 2.20 2.7 states that. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.Rd. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear .4.3. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.4.3. as stated in Clause 5. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc.3 Moment Capacity.

crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.21 force. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.7.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web.4. it is obtained as follows: MV.Rd of the web of an I. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place.3 provides that the design crushing resistance. Thus.5 . accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV.4.Ed / fyf)2]0.1 Crushing Resistance.5 (fyf / fyw)0. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force. Ry.4.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange.Rd ≤ Mc. For cross-sections with equal flanges. Ry. 2. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0. However. this checking is unnecessary. bending about the major axis.Rd – 1)2 2.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl. Clause 5.5 [1 – (σf.

For member subject to bending moments. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.5 [(tf / tw)0.4. Ra.4. H or U section is given by: Ra.5.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.2 Crippling Resistance.Sd = 0.Rd of the web of an I.5tw2(Efyw)0.Rd of the web of an I.Rd + Msd / Mc.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.2.4.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 . H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.5 2.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange. 2.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.4. Rb.Rd and Fsd / Ra.Rd ≤ 1. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0. Rb. σf.3 Buckling Resistance. and ss / d < 0.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.

the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .5.5 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard.4. Therefore. This. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. applies only to non-moment sustaining column.1 and Table 5.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.2.1 of EC3. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads. however. 2. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only.5. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4.5. 2.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. 2.

the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.1 Effective Length.5. in accordance of Table 22. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane.1.1.7. λ = LE / r 2. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. 2. directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . and back-to-back struts. LE The effective length LE of a compression member is determined from the segment length L centre-to-centre of restraints or intersections with restraining members in the relevant plane. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate.3 Compression Resistance.4.2 Slenderness. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.24 2. angle.5. 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.5. Pc According to Clause 4. column members that carry more than 90% of their reduced plastic moment capacity Mr in the presence of axial force is assumed to be incapable of providing directional restraint.1. channel. T-section struts.

2.5. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section. for class 1 plastic. My is the moment about minor axis. Mx is the moment about major axis. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0. .5. pc the compressive strength obtained from Table 23 and Table 24. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. the checking of cross-section capacity is as follows: My Fc M + x + ≤1 Ag p y M cx M cy where Fc is the axial compression. py is the design steel strength. 2. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.25 Pc = Aeff pcs (for class 4 slender cross-section) where Aeff is the effective cross-sectional area.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. 2.5. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.

Pc the compression resistance of column.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction. py the steel design strength.2. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .26 2.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 The design of steel column according to EC3 is quite similar to the design of steel column according to BS 5950. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. 2. 2. and Zy the elastic modulus.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.6. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. Mb the buckling resistance moment.5. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.

27 2.5. the compression resistance Nc. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) .5 states that.4.1.4. λ The slenderness λ of a compression member is generally taken as its buckling length l divided by its radius of gyration i about the relevant axis.6.6. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only.3 Compression Resistance. 2.1 Buckling Length. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.6. the value of λ should not exceed 180. the value of λ should not exceed 250.1.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally. Nc.Rd of a member is given by: Nc. Alternatively.1. Clause 5. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads.Rd According to Clause 5. 2. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends.1. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L.2 Slenderness.

28 Nc. χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.1. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc.5. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members.4 Buckling Resistance. 2 or 3 cross-sections.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.Rd 2. Nb.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.Rd For compression members.6. Clause 5.1.Rd .

Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y . for I and H sections. y f yd Wel . Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz .Sd N Sd M z .1 Cross-section Capacity Generally. z .Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .Sd + + ≤1 N pl .Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression.29 2. Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject .4.Sd N Sd M z .1 states that.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.2.6. M y . α = 2. Rd M pl . y .8.6. β = 5n but β ≥ 1. 2. in which n = Nsd / Npl. z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1. for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y . y f yd Weff . Rd M pl . cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment. Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y .Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z .Sd + N Sd e Ny M z . Rd for a conservative approximation where.Rd. Clause 5.

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 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y. y .33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw. Rd .05 γM1 = 1. y .eff Class 1.05 4. Rd ηM c.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 . 2.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0. 3 Class 4 Nc.0 N b.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.5 2.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.67 + 0.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.05 Nc.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.

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

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

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

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 3.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology .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.

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

flat roof system will be introduced to cater for some activities on roof top.4.39 4m 4m 4m 5m Figure 3. All the bays will be serving the same function. 3. As this is a simple construction. Meanwhile. .3 : Elevation view of the intermediate steel frame. all the beam-to-column connections are assumed to be pinned. The main steel frame will consist of solely universal beam (UB) and universal column (UC). Meanwhile. Web cleats will be used as the connection method to create pinned connection. Top flange of beams are effectively restraint against lateral torsional buckling. All the roof bays will be used for general purposes. all the column-to-column connections are to be rigid.2 Specifications The designed steel frame structure is meant for office for general use.

3. section 6. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. For imposed roof load.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project.3 of Concise Eurocode 3 (C-EC3) states that the characteristic values of imposed floor load and imposed roof load must be obtained from Part 1 and Part 3 of BS 6399 respectively. all floors will be of one-way slab. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors.4kN/m2 and 3. . the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. Therefore. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. Therefore. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. For precast floor selfweight. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame.2 (Flat roofs) states that. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. Consequently.5 Loadings Section 2. Therefore. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design.5kN/m2. repair and other general purposes. Meanwhile. Meanwhile. this value will be adopted. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced.5kN/m2 is appropriate. a uniform load intensity of 1.2. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. In this design. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. 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.0kN/m2 respectively.

From Table 2.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. and 1. γM1. The .1. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight.1.35. γf should be taken as 1. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. for imposed floor load. For other floors. partial safety factors. is given by 1. γG is given by 1. 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.4 for dead load. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. is given by 1. In EC3. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. γQ is given by 1. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. finishes and fittings. for normal design situations.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. γM0. Partial safety factors for loads. Meanwhile. depending on the interior designer’s intention.05.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed.5.6 for imposed load.4.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads. γF for dead load.05 as well. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. A general load intensity of 1. 3. 2 or 3 cross-section. Meanwhile.

fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). 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.7 Categories In this project. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections).1. for Fe 510. 3. Meanwhile. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. According to BS 5950. the load combination will be 1.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling.2 “Material properties for hot rolled steel” (C-EC3) limits thickness of flange to less than or equal to 40mm for nominal yield strength fy of 275N/mm2 and larger but less than or equal to 100mm for fy of 255N/mm2.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. In BS 5950. 3. 3. in the meantime. 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. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section.4 times total dead load plus 1.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.6 times total imposed .8. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. For steel grade S 275.

V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.92 From Table 4.76kN/m. the load combination will be 1.5 times total imposed load (1. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.6LL).1 below: Table 3.35 times total dead load plus 1.43 load (1.35DL + 1. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.1. According to EC3.4DL + 1. will be 48kN/m. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. For the roof. Clearly. 3.5% between the analyses of both codes. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. For all other floors.55 268.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports. the w will be 62. For all other floors. the resultant load combination.88 6m 137. will be 45.64kN/m.9kN/m.8. For the roof. w. the w will be 59.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame. there is a difference of approximately 4.7 179.5LL). This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. the shear. Table 3. w.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187. The next table. For simple construction. This is done by summating the resultant shear . the resultant load combination.

76 1061.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. structural beam moment. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction. 3.8.54 Int.64 6m Ext.47 744.1 950.62 Ext. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.92 519. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.84 1039. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.52 2123. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed. 144 331.98 496. Table 3.78 2026.39 1013.52 1351.5%.55 475.7 316.31 Int.88 779. = Internal column Ext. 275.96 992. similar with the beam shear.68 1415. 413.Ground 288 663.4 633. M.08 Int. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st .76 1559. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8. 206.28 Int.44 force from beam of each floor.3: .2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams. 216 497. 137. 432 995.26 675.94 1488.76 9m Ext.84 707.

Clearly. initially. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment.74 605. since this is simple construction. the depth of the column has not been decided yet.45 Table 3. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464.6% between the analyses of both codes.4% to 4. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well. . This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. in this case. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. Subsequently. However.3.07 From Table 3. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. In this project. Regardless of the width of the bay. D or h is the depth of column section (m). Therefore. the higher the difference percentage will be. can be determined from the following formula: Me = V (e + D/2) = V (e + h/2) where V is resultant shear of structural beam (kN). For the moments of the structural columns. there is a difference of approximately 4.55 268. Me. the eccentricity moment. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m).3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. the higher the load combination of a floor.23 6m 206. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams.

88 Int.6 56.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity. for internal column. Table 3.6 63.5.6LL) – 1. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state.98 80. 20. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done.0DL.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.98 86.0DL.38 9m Ext.4 84. For EC 3.68 These values of eccentricity moments will be useful for the estimation of initial size of a column member during structural design in later stage. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.66 57.84 Ext. 30. 32.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.4 94.78 Int.4DL + 1.35DL + 1. V can be expressed as V = (1. For BS 5950.56 6m Ext. Roof Other Floors 21. Table 3. . 21. 30. 32.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation. In simple construction. 3.66 53.6 Int. Next. V can be expressed as V = (1.5LL) – 1.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. However. 20.

first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). 3. From the section table. Width. 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. Depth.3mm. T = 13. Sx = M / py = 281. t = 8. d/t = 50. Elastic modulus.92kN and 281.1 BS 5950 In simple construction. B = 152.1mm.99. Flange thickness. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.9mm. shear capacity.88kNm. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.6mm. From the section table for universal beam. D = 454. d = 407. b/T = 6. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . Zx = 1120cm3. Web thickness. moment capacity and web bearing capacity. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table.8kg/m.6mm.47 The sub-sections next will show one design example which is the floor beam of length 6m and of steel grade S 275 (Fe 430). UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. Depth between fillets.9. Sx = 1290cm3. Plastic modulus.3.

0. clause 4.4.26mm2 Pv = 0. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. Therefore.48 = 1.0. shear buckling resistance should be checked. actual d/t = 50.57kN > Fv = 187.0 in this design.75. After clause 4.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950.3.54kN > Fv Therefore. Next. 0. shear capacity is adequate. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. For web of I-section. shear buckling needs not be checked.57 = 364. Since both flange and web are plastic. Mc” is checked. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .0. Mc = pySx. this section is Class 1 plastic section. Next. Meanwhile. For class 1 plastic cross-section.26 x 10-3 = 607.5 “Moment capacity. Av = 8.5 is checked. Therefore. section 4.4. Pv = 0.6 = 3682. it is low shear. Since actually d/t < 70.6 x 607.2. flange is Class 1 plastic section. section 4. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. therefore.6pyAv.6Pv = 0. Shear capacity.6 x 275 x 3682.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. where neutral axis is at mid-depth. web is Class 1 plastic section. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section.2.92kN Therefore.1 x 454. Actual b/T = 5.

therefore.3 = 51. bearing stiffener should be provided. n = 2 + 0.2pyZx.2mm b1 = t + 1.6be/k.02 x 8.34kN > Fv = 187.1 + 1.02mm k=T+r = 13.3 + 10.6 x 10. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.2 = 23.02mm Pbw = 98. OK.2 + 2 x 13. moment capacity is adequate.49 = 354.92kN .5. bearing capacity of web.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218.5mm At support. If Fv exceeds Pbw.2pyZx = 1. 1.75kNm Therefore. be = 0.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads. section 4. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.6kNm > Mc.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. Mc should be limited to 1. M = 281.

Generally. the deflection is satisfactory. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16. In this case.67mm >δ Therefore. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. . This is done in the form of deflection check. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. Therefore. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value.50 Therefore. w = 15kN/m for floors. the bearing capacity at support is adequate. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). L = 6. the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. However. The section is adequate. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.5) should be conducted. δ.

Depth. tf = 10. Area of . The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Wpl. Elastic modulus. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. tw = 7. Shear area. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. d = 360.28kN and 268. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = M / py = 268.y = 927cm3.9cm3 From the rearranged table. Flange thickness.6mm. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.6mm. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen.9. crippling and buckling.9cm2. h = 402. moment capacity.92kNm.y (cm3). Therefore. From the section table. Wpl. Width.2 EC 3 In simple construction. b = 177. resistance of web to crushing.92 x 103 / 275 = 977.y = 1051cm3. From the section table for universal beam.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. Wel. Web thickness. shear capacity. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. lateral torsional buckling. 3. Depth between fillets. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.6mm. Av = 32.4mm. it is adequate to be used. Plastic modulus.9mm.

0.6cm2. section 5. fu = 430N/mm2.6(a).6 for Class 1 elements.05) = 497. that is Vpl.52 section.36cm.5. neutral axis at mid depth”. aLT = 131cm. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl.05 Vpl. c/tf = 8. Flange is Class 1 element. Next.Rd. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength. iLT = 4.9mm. A = 68.48kN > 179. Second moment of area.1. For S275 (Fe 430). Iy = 18670cm4.Rd = (32.5Vpl.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. Web is Class 1 element.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.2. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. Actual d/tw = 47.28kN . flange subject to compression only”. From Table 5. VSd = 179.6. tf ≤ 40mm. d/tw = 47. yield strength. The design value of shear force. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked. Based on Table 3. tf = 10. Therefore.5 x 497. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states. for “outstand element of compression flange.2 for Class 1 elements. shear resistance is sufficient.49kN > VSd = 179.15 ≤ 9.28kN γM0 = 1.Rd = 0.4.4 ≤ 66.15. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9. Actual c/tf = 8. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. For “web subject to bending.48 = 298.28kN Therefore. section classification is a must.

8.5.26kNm > MSd Therefore.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.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. crippling resistance.8 and 56. low shear.5.53 Therefore.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. Rb.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked.Rd = Wpl. section 5. For crushing resistance. Ra.5 .92kNm Mc. sy = tf(bf/tw)0.Ed/fyf)2]0. Section 5. Section 5.2 “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. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling. Actual d/tw = 47.5[fyf/fyw]0.5.05 = 275.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.Rd. Ry. Ry.Rd.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63. shear buckling check is not required. For low shear. MSd = 268. Therefore. section 5.Rd and buckling resistance. The beam is fully restrained.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. the moment capacity is sufficient. Therefore.4 < 63.

05.28mm2 .5tw2 (Efyw)0.Rd = 0. OK γM1 = 1.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. γM0 = 1.5 + 3(7. OK.5[h2 + ss2]0.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227. bending moment is zero.62 + 502]0.05 = 307.8 x 7.9 (177.Rd = 0.5 [(10.5 [(tf/tw)0.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.62 (210000 x 275)0.Rd = (50 + 52. sy = 10.6 = 1731.05 = 204.14)] / 1.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.6 / 7.6)0.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.69) x 7. ss = 50mm at support.5 = 52.9)(0.9/7.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.54 At support. A = 227.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.69mm Ry.4kN For crippling resistance. σf.8kN For buckling resistance.5 x 7.4 = 0. Ra.6)0. Rb.6/10.7mm.14 ≤ 0.5 [402.Ed = 0.5 = 405.2. fyf = 275N/mm2.

deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.Rd = 1 x 119. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27.28kN. This is done in the form of deflection check. which is larger than VSd = 179.5 x 360. From Figure 4. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. fc = 119.Rd = 307.1. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation. the web of the section can resist transverse forces.Rd = 204. (Permanent load) .8 x 1731.29).4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5. buckling about y-y axis.6kN/m for floors.5kN.05 = 197. λ = 2.8kN Ry. Therefore.6 From Table 5. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.2) should be conducted.13 (rolled I-section). λ√βA = 118. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. OK.5kN Ra.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.6 = 118.4 / 7. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4.5 d/t = 2.28 x 10-3 / 1.6 λ√βA = 118. curve (a) is used. Generally.8N/mm2 Rb.

1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”. δlim.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. (Imposed load) L = 6. However.46mm Table 4. The section is adequate. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. In this case. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. δ. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11.34mm Therefore.14mm > δ2 δlim. the deflection is satisfactory. .

57 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. Therefore, it is adequate to be used.

3.10

Structural Column Design

Structural column design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. In simple construction, apart from section classification, two major checks that need to be done is compression and combined axial and bending at ultimate limit state.

The sub-sections next will show one design example which is the internal column “ground floor to 1st floor” (length 5m) of the steel frame with bay width 6m and of steel grade S 275 (Fe 430).

3.10.1 BS 5950

In simple construction, apart from section classification, necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be compression resistance and combined axial force and moment. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1415.52kN and 63.08kNm respectively.

From the section table for universal column, the sections are rearranged in ascending form, first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.

Sx = M / py

58 = 63.08 x 103 / 275 = 229.4cm3

From the rearranged table, UC section 203x203x60 is chosen. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.

From the section table, the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 60kg/m; Depth, D = 209.6mm; Width, B = 205.2mm; Web thickness, t = 9.3mm; Flange thickness, T = 14.2mm; Depth between fillets, d = 160.8mm; Plastic modulus, Sx = 652cm3; Elastic modulus, Zx = 581.1cm3; Radius of gyration, rx = 8.96cm, ry = 5.19cm; Gross area, Ag = 75.8cm2; b/T = 7.23 (b = 0.5B); d/t = 17.3.

T < 16mm, therefore, py = 275N/mm2 ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) = 1.0

Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. Actual b/T = 7.23, which is smaller than 9ε = 9.0. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section (Outstand element of compression flange). Therefore, flange is Class 1 plastic section. Meanwhile, actual d/t = 17.3. For web of I-section under axial compression and bending, the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε / 1 + r1, where r1 is given by r1 = Fc / dtpy. r1 = 1415.52 x 103 / 160.8 x 9.3 x 275 = 3.44 but -1 < r1 ≤ 1, therefore, r1 = 1 Limiting d/t value = 80 x 1 / 1 + 1 = 40

59 > Actual d/t = 17.3 Therefore, the web is Class 1 plastic section. Since both flange and web are plastic, this section is Class 1 plastic section.

Next, based on section 4.7.2 “Slenderness” and section 4.7.3 “Effective lengths”, and from Table 22 (Restrained in direction at one end), the effective length, LE = 0.85L = 0.85 x 5000 = 4250mm. λx = LEx / rx = 4250 / 8.96 x 10 = 47.4

Next, based on section 4.7.4 “Compression resistance”, for class 1 plastic section, compression resistance, Pc = Agpc. pc is the compressive strength determined from Table 24. For buckling about x-x axis, T < 40mm, strut curve (b) is used. λx = 46, pc = 242N/mm2 λx = 48, pc = 239N/mm2 From interpolation, λx = 47.4, pc = 239.9N/mm2 Pc = Agpc = 75.8 x 100 x 239.9 x 10-3 = 1818.44kN > Fc = 1415.52kN Therefore, compressive resistance is adequate.

R.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. the beam reaction. when only nominal moments are applied. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor.7 “Columns in simple structures”.08kNm.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0. Mi = 63. Section 4.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). From frame analysis.54kNm.5L / ry = 0.5. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0. therefore. M = 31.7. λLT = 45. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. for columns in simple construction. pb = 260.19 x 10 = 48. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.60 Next. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. λLT = 48. Therefore. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column.5 x 5000 / 5.03kNm . the moment will be equally divided.17.

2 EC 3 In simple construction.54 / 170.10. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.88kNm respectively. .52 / 1818. From the section table for universal column. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. apart from section classification. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.03 = 0. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.0 Therefore.44 + 31. Wpl.y (cm3).96 < 1. 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).61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check. it is adequate to be used. Therefore.08kN and 57.y = MSd / fy = 57. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.5cm3 From the rearranged table.88 x 103 / 275 = 210. 3.

46cm. b = 254mm. Actual c/tf = 8. Flange thickness. From this table. iz = 6.5b).3. tf = 14. Area of section.2mm.2 respectively. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. Therefore.6mm.3.08 x 103 / 200.5cm. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. fy = 275N/mm2.86cm. the classification depends on the mean web stress. this section is Class 1 section. Beforehand. Depth. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. therefore.2 and 10.94. .6cm2. Av = 25. Since both flange and web are plastic.8. iy = 11. section 5. h = 254mm. flange is Class 1 element. Width. Actual c/tf = 8.62 From the section table. Next.1cm.6 = 784. Shear area.9cm2. the web is Class 1. Web thickness. σw. tw = 8.2.y = 990cm3.5. Elastic modulus. From Table 5.2mm. For web subject to bending and compression.2 x 8. d/tw = 23. iLT = 6.73N/mm2 Table 5. Wpl. Wel. Radius of gyration. d = 200.94 < 9. aLT = 98. with d/tw = 23. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. Iy = 11370cm4. section 5. from.1.94 (c = 0.y = 895cm3.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. c/tf = 8. Plastic modulus. A = 92. Depth between fillets.2mm < 40mm.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections. Second moment of area. tf = 14. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only).

y.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.Rd n ≥ 0. From Table 5.11 Mpl.05 = 259.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.08 / 2433.5Vpl.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.63 Vpl.1 : MNy.05) = 387.Rd = 1.y.3kNm MNy.Rd = 1. n = NSd / Npl.05 = 2433.1kN n = 1351.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1. the section is subject to a low shear.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.Rd = Mpl.27.Rd is such that n < 0.Rd > Vmax.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.3 x (1 – 0.Rd = Wpl.Rd = 1.1 = 0. MN.11 Mpl.1 : MNy.555 ≥ 0.1 Therefore.y.Rd (1 – n) Npl.11 x 259.555) . allowing for axial force. MNy.Sd / L = 57.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.Sd Therefore.Sd = My.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.y.58kN 0.

Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb. buckling curve (b) is used. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.1 x 10 = 38.Rd) + (kyMy.94kNm Therefore.3.0 Ly = 0.y. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My.85L = 0.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11. λy√βA = 38.Rd) ≤ 1. section 5. fc = 249.3 Based on Table 5.y. for buckling about y-y axis.Sd / ηMc. Lastly.3.1kNm > MSd = 28. the moment resistance is sufficient.6.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.7N/mm2 .3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.64 = 128.

y.Rd) + (kyMy.95 < 1.1) = 0.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.7 x 92.5 x 28. .y. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.65 Nb.08 / 2209.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.05 = 1 x 249.y.3) + (1. it is adequate to be used.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.Sd / ηMc.0 Therefore. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.94 / 1 x 128. Therefore. γM1 = 1.Rd) = (1351.05 = 2209.

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

58 753.51 384.93 11.32 783.15 3.55 712.37 338.13 705.82 2.7 9.7 -0.45 -1.51 18.69 -1.86 -0.78 -25.5 461.4 -10.25 382.29 452.19 1.55 3.2 1102.38 1.99 918.68 6.67 644.48 517.67 Table 4.59 460.94 559.66 24.32 860.83 0.19 1.02 496.96 6.14 .55 617.31 446.87 -0.06 1.26 2.09 16.6 14.77 -3.11 -2 2.55 1.13 19.74 2.1 -2.81 -3.38 811.94 2.09 -2.15 -16.09 773.93 1.56 3.39 462.72 % Diff.58 308.2 777.93 1.16 551.99 589.35 431.35 -1.84 727.62 515.1 493.79 2.18 8.81 528.84 300.35 793.15 507.57 -2.02 698.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.73 -2.47 831.65 0.66 5.4 -0.78 -20.09 1012.51 1.47 545.74 594.33 409.98 305.03 4.95 404.21 441.04 % Diff.16 4.83 0.5 1.65 420.63 12.92 588.27 845.4 0.05 607.79 2.94 2.15 3.5 -0.87 433.65 635.7 -0.53 356.46 478.32 877.15 343.81 1024.55 1.52 439.65 724.65 846.34 44.27 14.66 497.6 1.78 456.22 2.74 2.86 1204.31 2.21 667.11 1218.5 642.65 0.38 20.32 10.56 878.02 6.57 13.55 522.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.88 -18.78 15.74 0.47 596.38 1.44 2.81 523.33 862.72 -12.28 554.5 1102. BS 5950 (kN) 376.3 683.09 -2.48 759.57 680.52 443.39 1.3 14.58 34.5 -0.81 -3.6 10.78 942.29 5.53 564.34 523.64 0.18 358.53 943.02 12.99 660.73 -3.97 392.92 394.77 728.06 1.62 1.08 2.86 619.27 0.85 854.39 511.37 399.45 623.14 583.56 -5.75 437.78 541.93 334.13 1091.89 678.21 668.38 542.61 340.68 1007.26 -8.91 -19.91 1011.46 -3.5 529.2 -2.75 -13.23 -9.98 1134.27 0.79 2.21 15.7 1.28 303. 2.77 1146.83 938.82 2.07 942.21 -24.33 577.27 819.64 5.55 583.85 517.64 0.61 345.19 387.85 405.51 -4.5 1.16 1057.36 11.6 405.71 429.14 18.42 820.37 609.79 11.66 704.4 0.99 15.74 393.92 2.79 12.56 400.88 876.85 767.11 -1.44 471.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.14 784.5 1.81 -2.24 0.26 888.8 800.74 -0.17 8.95 2.69 4.47 341.56 15.35 730.19 4.46 2.41 925.27 13.79 398.6 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 291.2 447.28 8.77 6.24 3.93 11.96 666.

57 -4.06%. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.3% less than 0.59 4.78 11.43 -1. BS 5950 (kNm) 121.83 132.44 1300.6 137.01 -16.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.41 143. Table 4.57% to 4.06%.59 5.62 182.05 1099.49 1295.35 -0.97 6.05 110.43 3.81 5.51 1007. meanwhile.58 -9. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.55. 6.03 1440.98 141.76 191.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.43 160.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.3 6. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106. There are a few explanations to the variations.94 162. Also.13 8. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.07 .21 -1.91 % Diff.69% to 4.07 170.07 6. This value.86 125.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.58 4. the difference percentage ranges from -3. the difference percentage ranges from -2.14 8. Therefore.28 148.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.43 3.94 -12.6 as suggested by BS 5950.57 206. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.59 5. which is approximately 8. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.35 217. For steel grade S275. For steel grade S355.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.77 4.76 4.8 8.05 3. however.13 -0.45 1431.23 168.06 1115.06 % Diff.

41 221.44 12.3 844.35 1104 238.66 5.45 769.31 19. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.55 257.11 261.5 457.85 11.53 1.4 838.01 4.07 609.92 13.58 5.16 9.68 0.86 4.95 479.89 1.3 426 479.5 691.33 198 232.95 275. .17 255.25 497.02 377.39 682.86 8.43%.53 549.4 264.5 5.95 566. the difference percentage ranges from 1.29 2.08 510.13 246.67 20.11 5.84 13.36 2.72 9.96 21.11 5.35 731.83 4.73 2.95 189.66 2.44 14.83 5.25 453.42 5.1 285.65 5.85 585.75 332.78 15.06 11.45 234.8 799.5 330 371.87 4.71 9.33 181.75 484.08 5.05 35.45 521.83 1.24 1.45 18.57 5.65 149.6 300.69 188.35 624.5 390.01 4.16 5.47 955.83 275.9 900.05 0.1 1.24 376.06 0.13 318.25 517.75 398.44 4.05 232.29 1.33 221.24 17.69 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 195.38 8.75 431.79 141. the difference percentage ranges from 0.43 4.7 18.19 370.96 10.48 17.57 355.63 4.2 291. For steel grade S275.55 433.41 19.16 5.52 434. For steel grade S355.27 14.95 24.25 5.95 385.08 252. meanwhile.1 5.32 0.85 5.05 585.75 631.26 312.65 244.97 14.08 358.5 15.63 4.5 479.9 11.53 5.33 471.75 199.4 277.98 20.93 885.17 171.52 11.9 619.53 5.98 352.35 693.03%.5 302.21 287.73 19.28 15.5 34.49 5.95 755.27 1.55 9.12 5.46 5.48 5.9 163.95 514.57 5.93 740.32 1.43 4.95 848 184.05 336.1 220.41% to 6.05 11.04 1.94 10.24 1.98 24.53 171.73 21.75 562.25 397.3 4.01 182.2 24.37 16.78 487.99 4.61 4.5 654.14 410.33 192.32 10.5 354.6 5.49 5.51 1.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.67 685.65 404.86 4.95 532.29 202.28 5.41 5.7 211.65 590.55 4.55 4.29 15.35 302.58% to 6.8 1082.02 455.02 315.65 749.31 4.17 24.52 395.1 244.68 560.81 529.6 341.17 27.3 695.5 14.14 3.17 7.87 4.02 18.55 21.1 5.77 233.55 429.62 7.11 242.85 5.49 15.67 425.22 13.5 44.26 317.88 10.08 6.23 213.1 539 619.45 976.85 27.75 300.63 7.68 12 13.34 404.28 5.

Therefore. are revised.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.3.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. Besides that.95. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. Table 4.Rd = Wpl. these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.1.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. whether it is Class 1. For a column web subject to bending and compression.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl. This is approximately 5% less than 1.85%. 4. for a UB section 406x178x54. Meanwhile. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. For example.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. There is a variation of approximately 0. . 1 / γM0 ≈ 0. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc.0 as suggested by BS 5950. Class 2 or Class 3 element.

**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

63 19.03 9.26 18.54 2.55 From Table 4.51 21.96 1.63%. as required by EC3.25 2.16 11.07 0.5 above.32 10.53 0.73 1.78 3.64 4.56 2.23 0.84 11.2 3.08 21.66 2.75 2.21 2.27 3.71 3.55 23.9 9.45 14.16 1.1.1. Different from BS 5950.63 2.07 0.01 0. for a section 356x171x57.05 0. E. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.25 0.26 2. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.36 8. Section 3.38 2. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.33 12.25 16.1 0.34 18.47 29.4 0.18 1.43 2.24 2.7 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.7 2.52 0.22 28.21 24.4 2. for a floor beam of 9m long.1 0.84 4.98 21.51 0.13 0. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.79 16.29 0.01 1. δmax.56 2.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2. Meanwhile. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.06 0.05 0.62 5.33 3.21 3.6 2.46 2.08 0.71 3. .68 2. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.77 16.1 3.49 2.07 1.04 0. the difference percentage ranges from -0.31 2.83 20.34 1. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.56 2.06 0.01 2.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.85 1. for a floor beam of 6m long.12 17. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.66 0.33 4.37 4.41 1.04 2.13 8.4 2.46 2.37 2.1 0.85 1. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.42 0.83 13.08 0. For example. section 3.25 2.33 0.77 4.8 1.19 2.32 0. However.7 2.74 4.26 0.68 13.58 0.35 0. Meanwhile.77 2.22% to 3. the difference percentage ranges from -0.22% to 3. Meanwhile.29 0.75 18.06 0.59 2.61%. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.93 2.25 13.61 3. Apart from that.16 9.85 15.

7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3. Table 4.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4. external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 and Table 4.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4. To compare the economy of the design. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.75 4. floor beams.

122 9. is tabulated in Table 4.744 EC3 4.9. Table 4.889 9.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4. meanwhile.8.750 4. The saving percentage.821 .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .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 .313 9.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.821 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) Summary of the total steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .76 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) 7.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .645 3.

Further check on the effect of deflection was done. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4.9 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 time.42 15. Regardless of bay width. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1.96 5.889 EC3 4.645 9. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. Semi-continuous .96%.750 9. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.60 17. This is because deeper. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.122 7.744 3. depending on the steel grade.9.313 % 1. This resulted in higher percentage difference.571 9. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. all frame types.821 4.60% to 17. Meanwhile.77 Table 4.

645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. β is treated as β = 3.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.5. 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. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . which was used in the beam design. For uniformly distributed loading.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. Table 4. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.10 shown.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.0.78 frame is achieved in this condition. the deflection coefficient.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 .

22 9. is tabulated in Table 4. The saving percentage.12.889 8.750 4.11 .122 9.749 % 0.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.503 9. meanwhile.645 5.11 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) 7.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.42 3.503 7.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.645 3.11.122 9.95 BS 5950 4.750 4.889 8. Table 4.749 Table 4.211 10.12 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.

The moment capacity will be the deciding factor. (b) semi-rigid construction. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. if rigid connection is introduced.1(c)). Therefore. 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. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. (c) simple construction. Please refer to Figure 4. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. . the gap reduces. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. However. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1.11% to 10.0. Eventually. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight.1(b)). if it is built semi-continuously.12. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4.80 From Table 4.95%. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4.

This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.05 in the moment capacity .CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the summary for the study on the comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 for the design of multi-storey braced frame.1.1 Structural Capacity 5. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed. 5.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. In review to the research objectives. Av value also caused the difference. Meanwhile. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. Apart from that. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. γM0 of 1. for the moment capacity of structural beam. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter.43%.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam.

0m long. Meanwhile. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design.2 Structural Column In simple construction. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. it was found that for a same value of λ. EC3 design created majority . it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam.05 as required by EC3 design. axial compression is much more critical.27% to 9. compared with BS 5950. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. of both codes. fc is smaller than pc.0 as suggested by BS 5950.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. Therefore. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. 5.1. From interpolation. In comparison. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. fc and pc respectively. A reduction in the range of 5.82 calculation required by EC3.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. as compared to the partial safety factor. 5. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. γM0 of 1. Therefore. For the same value of unfactored imposed load. γM of 1.

744 tons and 3. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. 9m bay width steel frame.645 tons and 9. . 4-storey.63%. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.22% to 3. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.821 tons and 4. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4. and 4. For a 2-bay. Section 4. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much.122 tons and 7.2.889 tons for BS 5950 design. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher. 4-storey. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison. 5. The difference ranges from 0.1 of EC3 provided proof to this. and 9. For a 2-bay. 6m bay width steel frame.313 tons for EC3 design. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. I will have to be chosen. E.571 tons for EC3 design. the total deflection was greater. In this study. Therefore. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. However.750 tons for BS 5950 design.

. 9m bay width. 6m bay width. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950. S275 (Fe 430): 5. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. 4-storey.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies.11% 2-bay. 6m bay width.96% 2-bay. However. 9m bay width. S275 (Fe 430): 0. 9m bay width. 9m bay width. S275 (Fe 430): 1. 4-storey.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.42% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 17. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute).5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 7. 6m bay width.60% 2-bay. 4-storey. 4-storey.42% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 15.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. 4-storey. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 10. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. 4-storey. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior.22% 5.0 to 3. 6m bay width. 4-storey.95% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 5.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

4 x 24 + 1.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. of Bay No. MAHMOOD 1.0 DATA No.6 2. LL = = 4 1.6LL Roof w = 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.4DL + 1. LL Floors Dead Load.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1.4 x 27.6 x 15 = 62.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. DL Live Load. DL Live Load.6 + 1. DL Live Load. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.64 kN/m . LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.4 1.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.0 2.88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame .

64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3. MAHMOOD 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.64 kN/m .89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.

MAHMOOD 4.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. Shear.68 1415.84 707. .52 144 331. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.88 kNm 4. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams.1 Beam Moment. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . contributed by beam shear.92 519.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.92 kN M = 62.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.84 1039. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. V = 62. Roof beams.

92) 1039.68 (187.52 707.92 (187.76 . MAHMOOD 5.92) 331.84 (187.92) 663.88 281.76 1415.88 281. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92) 144 [1] 331.92) 288 (187.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.84 (187.84 [3] [4] 707.92) 519.88 281.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.88 281.88 281.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 [2] 519. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.

54 28.54 28.19 28.6 28.19 31.19 28. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 21.0DL Most critical condition .19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.19 [4] 28.19 31.54 31.6 31.19 28.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.54 28.1.54 31.6 21.6LL) .19 28.19 21.54 28.19 [3] 28. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.19 21.6 [1] 21.6 [2] 28.4DL+1.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.9 kN/m Floors w = 1.5 x 9 = 45.35 x 24 + 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.6 2.0 DATA No.35DL + 1. LL = = 1. DL Live Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. DL Live Load. MAHMOOD 1.5LL Roof w = 1.35 x 27. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 x 15 = 59.6 + 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. DL Live Load. LL Floors Dead Load.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.35 1.76 kN/m .5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. LL = = 4 1.

MAHMOOD 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.95 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame .1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2.0 2.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m 59.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.9 kN/m 6m 45.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m .76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.

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.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.7 316. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .55 kNm Floor beams. Roof beams. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. .2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.96 992. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. V = 45.26 675. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. contributed by beam shear. Shear. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.08 137.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.52 1351.28 kN M = 59.92 kNm 4.1 Beam Moment.4 633.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.98 496. MAHMOOD 4. V = 59.

96 (179. MAHMOOD 5.7 (179.54 .7) 137.55 268.26 [3] [4] 675.08 675.54 1351.7 [1] 316.92 268.4 (179.92 268.55 206.28) 496.28) 992. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.92 268.52 (179.7) (137.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 5.28) 316.98 [2] 496.92 268.26 (179.92 268.92 5.2 Shear (kN) (137.98 (179.28) 137.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.28) 633.28) 275.

66 20.94 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.89 28.94 26. MAHMOOD 5.66 19.89 26.94 28.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.89 26.94 26.94 28.89 20.89 Moments are calculated from (1.66 26.35DL+1.89 26.71 28.89 28.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5LL) .94 26.89 26.71 20.89 26.89 26.0DL Most critical condition .89 28. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.66 26.1.89 19.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

1 48.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.8 25.1 98.2 28.1 82.2 28.1 67.1 32.2 74. L = 6.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .2 89.1 37 37 39 39.1 67.1 51 52.9 149.8 33. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.2 179 238.1 67. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 25.1 67.1 Sx (cm3) 171 259 234 342 258 306 403 353 314 393 481 543 483 539 724 659 623 614 566 775 888 720 711 896 1100 846 1060 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 59.3 82 82.3 30 31.8 60.3 101 101.0m) STC.2 109 113 122 125.2 74.1 40.2 74.3 54 54.3 41.1 24.9 43 45 46 46.3 92.1 139.1 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 = 281.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

6 152.3 Therefore. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange.75 50. MAHMOOD 1.3 2.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . subject to pure bending.1 13. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.0m) STC.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. L = 6.2 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 = 59.9 8. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.8 454. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 407.0 1.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5. neutral axis at mid-depth.

103

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

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

3.0

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

4.0

SHEAR CAPACITY Fv = 187.92 kN

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

2

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

5.0

MOMENT CAPACITY M= 281.88 kNm

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

104

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

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

6.0 6.1

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

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

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

Pbw

Fv Fv

Bearing capacity at support is ADEQUATE

105

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

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

7.0

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

4

kN/m kN/m kN/mm cm

4 2

for roofs for floors

L=

6

m

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

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

The deflection is satisfactory!

106 APPENDIX B2 .

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.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.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. L = 6. 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 x 10^3 / 275 = 977. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = M / fy = 268.0m) STC.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

6 7.0 1. L = 6.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.9 68. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .15 47. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.36 131 8.6 10.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section. Second moment of area. MAHMOOD 1.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.y = W el.9 360.9 Therefore.0m) STC.4 1051 927 32.6 18670 4. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.6 177. Section chosen 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.

05 √3 = 497. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .0m) STC. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.92 kNm 0.5 x 497.5Vpl.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0.Rd < Therefore. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.7 3. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.15 <= 9. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.5Vpl.Rd = 0.49 kN VSd 0.05 = 32.001 γMO = 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.48 = 298.Rd = W pl.28 kN V pl.05 = 275.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.26 kNm MSd Mc.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. L = 6.4 > 46. it is low shear Mc.48 kN VSd < Vpl.001 / 1.2 (b) Web.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.9 x 100 275 1.

5 σf. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.Rd = (50 + 52.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.05 204.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. L = 6. MAHMOOD 5. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. not susceptible to LTB 6.001 / 1.8 < 63. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0m) STC.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .Rd = γM1 At support.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.28 kN < Ry.4 kN = VSd = 179.4 63.69) x 7.5 Ry.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.6 x 275 x 0.

5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.92 275.05 205 307. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.26 7. h= a= 402.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.Rd 268.0m) STC.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.2 0. MAHMOOD At midspan. Rd = 0. MSd Mc.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.14 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 0.5 ] . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.3 ≤ = 1.98 <= 1.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. Ra.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.Rd = > 0.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. L = 6.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.

0m) STC.5 d/t = 2.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.6 l = 0. buckling about y-y axis. λ = 2.6 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.5 = 405.5 x SQRT(402.118) = 119. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 = 197. L = 6.8 x 7.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227. Rb.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.5 x 360.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .8 x 1731.8 N/mm 2 Rb. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.6 2 = 1731.001 / 1.6 = 118. MAHMOOD beff = 0.5 kN > At mid span.05 A = beff x tw = 227. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.117) / (120 .28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .(118.75d Rolled I-section.Rd = 1 x 119.28 x 0.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.118) x (121 .112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 / 7.

14 mm OK δmax = 11.46 = 18.88 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.88 + 6. MAHMOOD 8. .0 1.0m) STC. L = 6.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

6 978. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.3 247.1 310. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 652 802.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.4 988.1 497.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. 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. L = 5.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .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 63.4 568.

Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.2 9.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. MAHMOOD 1. 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. Gross area.0 DATA Fc = 1415.3 14.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.0m) STC.2 160.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore.6 205. L = 5.23 17.1 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .19 75.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.8 652 581.52 kN L= 5 m 1.3 2. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.96 5. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

0 3.96 x 10) = 47. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.8 x 9.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.0m) STC.85L = 0.8 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+1.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 4. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.52 x 1000 / (160.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. Mi = 63.239) 2 = 239.4 pc 242 239 Therefore.0m) STC.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 . the moment will be equally divided. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .8 x 100 x 0. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.46) / (48 .46) x (242 . the compressive resistance is adequate 5.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239.54 kNm .(47. Therefore. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1. R From frame analysis sheets. beam reaction. L = 5.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.9 x 75. M= 31.5.001 = 1818. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.44 kN Fc < Pc 47.

78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.(48. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.250) 2 = 260.0 6.96 1. MAHMOOD 6.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0m) STC.44 + 31.54 170.45) x (233 .03 = < 0.0 4.001 = 170.5 L/ry = (0.45) / (50 .78 x 652 x 0.19 x 10) = 48.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.03 kNm 1415.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK . 7.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate.17 . L = 5.52 1818.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .y = M / fy = 57. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Wpl.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 kNm M= W pl.y (cm3) 184 248 309 497 567 654 801 990 979 1225 1589 1484 1952 2485 1872 2293 2970 2675 2418 3455 3438 3978 4691 4243 5101 5814 6997 8225 10010 12080 14240 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 57.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.

2 Therefore.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 200. Area of section.2 990 895 11.0 DATA NSd = 1351. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.9 11370 6.94 23.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8. L = 5.5 8. Second moment of area.1 6. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.6 14.08 kN Msd = 28.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.86 98. MAHMOOD 1.46 92.y = W el. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

05 Npl.3 <= 30.y.8 3.05 = 259.3 kNm Mny.001 / 1.Rd = 92.y.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 kN n = 1351.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.11 Mpl.08 / 2433. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.Rd = > MSd = 128. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.9 (b) Web.Rd(1-n) W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. L = 5.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.y.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.1 = 0.1 n ≥ 0.Rd = 1.Rd = 0.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.05 = 2433.94 <= 9.1 28.Rd A fy Npl.2 Class 3 = 13.1 Class 3 = 38.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.Rd Mny.1 Mpl.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.1 Mny. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.Rd = Mpl.0m) STC.555 >= n < 0.001 / 1.

Rd 1.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore. y . sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .y.1 x 10) = 38. Rd η M c .Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.94 1 x 128.Sd ηMc.(38.05 = 2209. L = 5. y .5 NSd Nb.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11.3 0.38) x (40 .y.7 x 92.y. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.3 kN ky = 1.0m) STC.001 / 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.38) / (250 .9 x 100 x 0. MAHMOOD 4.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.0 N b .3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38.7 N/mm Nb.248) 2 = 249.y.Rd = = 1351.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .08 2209.5 x 28.Rd = 1 x 249.3 . Rd Nb.

0 CONCLUSION Cross Section Resistance In-plane Failure About Major Axis Use of the section is adequate. L = 5.0 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Use : 254x254x73 UC OK OK . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. MAHMOOD 5.0 3.125 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0m) STC.

126 APPENDIX D .

92 kNm W pl.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.y = M / fy = 268. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) Rev 1 STC.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB . 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.

cm 4 cm cm cm 2.0m) Rev 1 STC.y = W el. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.4 7. Section chosen 1. Second moment of area.8 152. MAHMOOD 1.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 21370 3. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.99 53.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.5 66.0 1.6 10.6 1096 950 36.9 407.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.59 121 6.9 Therefore. L = 6. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.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 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.

Rd = W pl.7 3.05 = 287. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6.001 γMO = 1.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.15 kN VSd 0.5Vpl.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.92 kN VSd < Vpl.92 kNm 0. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.5Vpl.92 = 331. it is low shear Mc.0m) Rev 1 STC.001 / 1.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.2 (b) Web.Rd = 0.Rd < Therefore. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.6 > 46.05 kNm MSd Mc.99 <= 9.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.05 = 36.5 x 551.28 kN V pl.5 x 100 275 1.05 √3 = 551.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 x 275 x 0.5 Ry.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48. not susceptible to LTB 6. L = 6.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.28 kN < Ry.8 < 63.Rd = (50 + 48. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.68 kN VSd = 179.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.001 / 1.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.81) x 7.5 σf. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.Rd = γM1 At support.0m) Rev 1 STC. MAHMOOD 5.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 63.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.05 = 196.

MAHMOOD At midspan.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 0.3 ≤ = 1. Rd = 0.Rd 268.5 ] .5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Rd = > 0.05 7.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MSd Mc.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.2 0.92 287. h= a= 449. Ra. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.0m) Rev 1 STC. L = 6.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.12 1.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.94 <= 1.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.05 205 299.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.

132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. buckling about y-y axis.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.75d Rolled I-section.3 x 7.130) = 98.Rd = 1 x 98.9 kN > At mid span. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.0m) Rev 1 STC.9 N/mm 2 Rb.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 . L = 6.05 A = beff x tw = 251. λ = 2.05 = 179. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.5 x SQRT(449.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0. VSd = 0 VSd = 179. MAHMOOD beff = 0.6 2 = 1909.6 = 134. Rb.88 x 0.5 x 407.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 d/t = 2.1 .130) x (103 .6 / 7.1 l = 0.001 / 1.5 = 452.9 x 1909.98) / (135 .(134.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 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 .6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. L = 6. .0 1.14 mm OK δmax = 7.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.26 + 3.0m) Rev 1 STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.95 = 11.26 3.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. 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

BS5950-Vs-EC3

BS5950-Vs-EC3

- Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Tie rod in Suspension System of Car for a Buckling study using Theoretical and Experimental approachby International Journal for Scientific Research and Development

- BS and EC
- Zhang Et Al 2013 NED
- Members in Compression
- 20_ftp_RE.pdf
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Tie rod in Suspension System of Car for a Buckling study using Theoretical and Experimental approach
- Steel Design BS5950
- ICE - complex finalrep.pdf
- Elastic Stability
- Eigen Load
- Beam Desgin Sheet
- 32_Seismic Force Modification Factors
- TRANSVERSE LOADING. TransverTRANSVERSE LOADING.se Loading
- 7
- Steel Cold Formed Sections
- grinda secundara
- Lifting Beams
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- 1.ACI 318 Code Comparison With IS456-2000(1)
- Ec2 Bs8110 Compared
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- On the Seismic Behaviour and Design of Liquid Storage Tanks
- Design Capacity of Beam
- Recovered_PDF_29.pdf
- 2009 Solution
- Science (7)
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Beam Splice
- 15344_1 (1)
- Tanks_Hosseinzadeh_Naghdali_Seismic_Vulnerability_Assessment_of_Steel_Storage_Tanks_in_Iranian_Oil_Refineries.pdf

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