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

1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

**BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
**

JUDUL:

υ

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

SESI PENGAJIAN: Saya

2006 / 2007

**CHAN CHEE HAN
**

(HURUF BESAR)

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

TERHAD

3

TIDAK TERHAD Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)

(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

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

Tarikh

CATATAN:

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

Tarikh:

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

* ** Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

: 01 NOVEMBER 2006

υ

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

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

Signature

:

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

i

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

CHAN CHEE HAN

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

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER, 2006

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

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. with the application of partial strength connections. design methods.43%. 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 3.95%. loading values and etc. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. specifications to be followed. Therefore. However. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.11% to 10. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI) claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.60% to 17. Meanwhile. safety factors.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. This study intends to testify the claim. . Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. However. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1. These details include the basis and concept of design.27% and 9. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0.06% and moment capacity by up to 6.

63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Selain itu. Namun begitu. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. dan sebagainya.43%. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1.95%.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000.27% – 9. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini. nilai beban. spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti.11% – 10. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. .06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6. Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Namun begitu. cara rekabentuk.60% – 17.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. Justeru. factor keselamatan.

vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE i ii iii iv v vi vii xii xiii xiv xv THESIS TITLE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES LISTOF NOTATIONS I INTRODUCTION 1.4 1.3 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .1 1.2 1.

3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.3.2 Stiffened Web 2.2.2.1.3.3.2. Vpl.1.3.5.2 BS 5950 2.3.1.3.2 2.4.1 Unstiffened Web 2.4.1.2 2.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.3.2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.3.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.3.3.3. Pv Moment Capacity.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.1.3 Serviceability Limit State 2. Mc 2.3.6 Deflection 2.4.3.5.4 Actions of EC3 2.4 Loading 2.1 2.3.3.1 2.Rd Moment Capacity.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.2 Serviceability 2.4.1 2.2.1.3 Shear Capacity.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.1.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.2 2.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.Rd 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 .3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.3. Mc.2.3.2 2.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.

6.4.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.2 Structural Beam Structural Column 31 32 29 30 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 29 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 III METHODOLOGY 3.4.4.4.6. Ry.2 Crippling Resistance.5.1.6.6.2.2 Slenderness.4.3.7.1 2.1 Effective Length. Pc 2. λ 2.1.Rd 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.3 Buckling Resistance.1.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.4.6.ix 2.4.4.1 Crushing Resistance.5 Deflection 2.2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 Buckling Length.3 Compression Resistance.5.7.7 Conclusion 2.4.6.2.6.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.1. Nb.1.5.5.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.5.Rd 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2. Nc.1. l 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.3.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2. λ 2. LE 2.2. Ra.Rd 2.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.1. Rb.2 Slenderness.Rd 2.6.3 Compression Resistance.Rd 2.5.4.1 Introduction 34 .2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.5.4 Buckling Resistance.

3 Moment Calculation 3.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .1 4.x 3.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.5 3.1 3.1.4.2 3.1.2 Shear Calculation 3.2 4.1 3.7 3.10.9 Structural Beam Design 3.8.1 BS 5950 3.6 3.8 Structural Layout Specifications 38 38 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 44 46 47 51 57 57 61 35 36 Loadings Factor of Safety Categories Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.10.1 Structural Capacity 5.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.3 3.4.9.1 Load Combination 3.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.8.2 3.1 Structural Capacity 4.8.2 4.9.1.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.10 Structural Column Design 3.

xi 5.1.4 Structural Column 82 82 83 84 Deflection Values Economy Recommendation for Future Studies REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A1 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 APPENDIX A2 APPENDIX B1 APPENDIX B2 APPENDIX C1 APPENDIX C2 APPENDIX D .3 5.2 5.2 5.

TITLE PAGE 2.7 4.10 4.1 2.4 4.4 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.3 3.8 4.5 4.1 4.6 4.3 4.2 3.2 4.11 4.12 Criteria to be considered in structural beam design Criteria to be considered in structural column design Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) Shear capacity of structural beam Moment capacity of structural beam Compression resistance and percentage difference Moment resistance and percentage difference Deflection of floor beams due to imposed load Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 (Semi-continuous) Total steel weight of the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) 31 32 43 44 45 67 68 71 71 73 75 76 76 77 78 79 79 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) 46 .9 4.1 3.2 3.

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

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

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

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

climate and national preferences. In the structural design of steel structures. as well as the trading volume and diplomatic ties between these countries. economic and functional building. Meanwhile. 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. specifications to be followed. and past experiences of experts at respective fields. The main purpose of structural design is to produce a safe.CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1. many countries have published their own standard codes.1 Introduction Structural design is a process of selecting the material type and conducting indepth calculation of a structure to fulfill its construction requirements. loading values and etc. reference to standard code is essential. In present days. . These codes were a product of constant research and development. Several factors govern the type of code to be adopted. 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. safety factors. design methods. It is a process of converting an architectural perspective into a practical and reasonable entity at construction site. A standard code serves as a reference document with important guidance. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design.

As with other Europeans standards. The study on Eurocode 3 in this project will focus on the subject of moment and shear design. the initial draft Eurocode 3.2 Like most of the other structural Eurocodes. The establishment of Eurocode 3 will provide a common understanding regarding the structural steel design between owners. From these. These preliminary standards of ENV will be revised. Eurocodes will be used in public procurement specifications and to assess products for ‘CE’ (Conformité Européen) mark. . It is believed that Eurocode 3 is more comprehensive and better developed compared to national codes. Eurocode 3 has developed in stages. Codes of practice provide detailed guidance and recommendations on design of structural elements. The earliest documents seeking to harmonize design rules between European countries were the various recommendations published by the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork. were developed. Therefore. Buckling resistance and shear resistance are two major elements of structural steel design. provision for these topics is covered in certain sections of the codes. ENV1993 (ENV stands for EuroNorm Vornorm) issued by Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) – the European standardisation committee. ECCS. amended in the light of any comments arising out of its use before being reissued as the EuroNorm standards (EN). operators and users. contractors and manufacturers of construction products among the European member countries. 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. Standardization of design code for structural steel in Malaysia is primarily based on the practice in Britain. designers. Therefore. This was followed by the various parts of a pre-standard code. published by the European Commission.

3 1. namely earlier design over-estimated strength in a few particular circumstances. Finally. Besides. Lacking analytical and calculative proof. The increasing complexity of codes arises due to several reasons. earlier design practice under-estimated strength in various circumstances affecting economy. this can be achieved if the designer is not too greedy in the pursuit of the least steel weight from the strength calculations. simple design is possible if the code requirements are presented in an easy-to-use format. . 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. Many designers feel depressed when new codes are introduced (Charles. Design can be complex. causing safety issues. and new forms of structure evolve and codes are expanded to include them. such as the tables of buckling stresses in existing BS codes. There are new formulae and new complications to master. 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 5950.2 Background of Project The arrival of Eurocode 3 calls for reconsideration of the approach to design. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI). for those who pursue economy of material. 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. this project is intended to testify the claim. However. 2005).

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

5 Report Layout The report will be divided into five main chapters. . Results and discussions are presented in Chapter IV. Meanwhile. Chapter I presents an introduction to the study. Chapter III will be a summary of research methodology.5 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. conclusions and recommendations are presented in Chapter V.

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

which are ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. 2. to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. impact or consequences of human errors. Potential damage should be limited or avoided by appropriate choice of one or more of the following criteria: Avoiding.7 and their resistance.1. and with appropriate degrees of reliability. Partial safety factor is applied to loadings and design for durability. It also covers other construction aspects only if they are necessary for design.3.1 Application Rules of EC3 A structure should be designed and constructed in such a way that: with acceptable probability. 2. EC3 stresses the need for durability. serviceability and resistance of structure (Taylor.3 Design Concept of EC3 All designs are based on limit state design. durability and serviceability design does not differ too much. it will sustain all actions and other influences likely to occur during execution and use and have adequate durability in relation to maintenance costs. 2001). it will remain fit for the use for which it is required. and tying the structure together. 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. Safety factor values are recommended in EC3. It should also be designed in such a way that it will not be damaged by events like explosions. eliminating or reducing the hazards which the structure is to sustain. Every European country using EC3 has different loading and material standard to accommodate safety limit that is set by respective countries. . selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered. EC3 covers two limit states.1.

8 2. rupture. for example. Actions are classified by variation in time and by their spatial variation.3.4 Actions of EC3 An action (F) is a force (load) applied to the structure in direct action.3 Serviceability Limit State Serviceability limit states correspond to states beyond which specified service criteria are no longer met. self-weight of structures. e. 2. e. ancillaries and fixed equipment. wind loads or snow loads. or loss of stability of the structure or any part of it. e. or with other forms of structural failure which may endanger the safety of people.g.2 Ultimate Limit State Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse. which result in different arrangements of actions. 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. considered as a rigid body. including supports and foundations.g. .3.g. In time variation classification. and vibration. or an imposed deformation in indirect action. and free actions.g.1. Partial or whole of structure will suffer from failure. and accidental loads (A). explosions or impact from vehicles. imposed loads. variable actions (Q). in spatial variation classification. damage to the building or its contents. e. which causes discomfort to people. or which limits its functional effectiveness.1. 2.1. Meanwhile. fittings. temperature effects or settlement. snow loads. It may require certain consideration. movable imposed loads. actions can be grouped into permanent actions (G). actions are defined as fixed actions. and loss of equilibrium of the structure or any part of it. e.g. This failure may be caused by excessive deformation. self-weight. wind loads.

shear resistance.2. members subject to combined axial force and bending moment. Changes were due to structural safety. avoidance of disproportionate collapse. They are being used in buildings and allied structures not specifically covered by other standards. sheeting respectively.2 Scope of BS 5950 Part 1 of BS 5950 provides recommendations for the design of structural steelwork using hot rolled steel sections. welded sections and cold formed sections. BS 5950 comprises of nine parts. Part 8 comprises of code of practice for fire resistance design. and Part 9 covers the code of practice for stressed skin design.2 BS 5950 2. 2.2. but offsetting potential reductions in economy was also one of the reasons. etc.1 Background of BS 5950 BS 5950 was prepared to supersede BS 5950: Part 1: 1990. fabrication and erected for rolled. flats. hot finished structural hollow sections and cold formed structural hollow sections. Part 1 covers the code of practice for design of rolled and welded sections. Part 3 and Part 4 focus mainly on composite design and construction. Part 5 concerns design of cold formed thin gauge sections. . Part 2 and 7 deal with specification for materials. local buckling. Several clauses were technically updated for topics such as sway stability. Part 6 covers design for light gauge profiled steel sheeting. which was withdrawn. plates. lateral-torsional buckling.9 2.

Meanwhile. 2. The load carrying capacity of each member should be such that the factored loads will not cause failure. They are: strength.3 Design Concept of BS 5950 There are several methods of design. Generally. serviceability loads should be taken as the unfactored specified values. stability against overturning and sway sensitivity.3.10 2. In the case of combined horizontal crane loads and wind load. and durability. . continuous design. Generally. in checking. only the greater effect needs to be considered when checking for serviceability. BS 5950 covers two types of states – ultimate limit states and serviceability limit states. in the design for limiting states.2.3. namely simple design. the specified loads should be multiplied by the relevant partial factors γf given in Table 2. only 80% of the full specified values need to be considered when checking for serviceability. In the case of combined imposed load and wind load. wind induced oscillation. and brittle fracture.2. semi-continuous design. vibration.2. inclusive of general yielding. 2.1 Ultimate Limit States Several elements are considered in ultimate limit states. fracture due to fatigue. rupture. and experimental verification.2 Serviceability Limit States There are several elements to be considered in serviceability limit states – Deflection. buckling and mechanism formation. The fundamental of the methods are different joints for different methods.

The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention.11 2. 2. The classification of each element of a cross-section subject to compression (due to a bending moment or an axial force) should be based on its width-to-thickness ratio. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. 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 2.4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. earth and groundwater loading. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well.2.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. imposed and wind loading. There are dead.3. overhead traveling cranes. . Where necessary. without calculating their local buckling resistance.

Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure.3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. When this section is applied. 2.3. Class 1 is known as plastic section. given by: Pv = 0. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes. However. Class 2 is known as compact section. Alternatively. the complete cross-section should be classified according to the highest (least favourable) class of its compression elements. Cross-sections at this category should be given explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling.2 Shear Capacity. However.2.6pyAv .12 Generally. It enables plastic moment to take place. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. Fv. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Clause 4. Class 4 is known as slender section.

2.5. and Zeff is the effective section modulus. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections.13 in which Av is the shear area. Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv. Clause 4.3. 2. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.3. Seff is the effective plastic modulus.3.3 Moment Capacity.2. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. . Z is the section modulus.

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. and Mc = py(Zeff – ρSv/1. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.3. Clause 4.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.2. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.5) for class 4 slender cross-sections in which Sv is obtained from the following: - For sections with unequal flanges: Sv = S – Sf.2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.14 2.5.3.3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .

1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. but the web is designed for shear only.3.4. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0.3.4. 2.1 of BS 5950 states that. or 62ε for a welded section.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.3. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.6Vw. a conservative value Mf for . obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0.4.2 states that. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web.4.3. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender.6Vw.4.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.4. qw = shear buckling strength of the web.3.15 2.

provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).or H-section: k=T+r k=T .except at the end of a member: n = 5 .3. 2. c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.or H-section: . It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.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.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2. the web should be designed using Annex H.3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b). where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.for a welded I.5.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf.6Vw.5.3.at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0. .2.for a rolled I.

r is the root radius. . 2.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing.netpy in which As. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950. T is the flange thickness.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. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps. pyw is the design strength of the web. and t is the web thickness.5. allowing for cope holes for welding. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.3.3. 2.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths.

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

but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance.4. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. Class 4 is known as slender section. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance.1. Vsd. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Vpl. 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.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved. and ε = [235/fy]0.1.Rd where Vpl. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. At each crosssection. fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force. The stress block will be of triangle shape.5 . Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength. The member will fail before it reaches design stress.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area.2 Shear Capacity. Apart from that. 2.

Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.5.Rd.4. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area. For class 4 cross-sections.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc. as stated in Clause 5. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear .3. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.Rd. Mc.4.3.4.4.7 states that. when maximum shear force.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors.Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.3 Moment Capacity.3. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc. 2.20 2. 2. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.Rd.

3 provides that the design crushing resistance.7. bending about the major axis.5 (fyf / fyw)0. 2. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.4. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member. Clause 5.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. Ry.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place.Rd ≤ Mc.Ed / fyf)2]0. However. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange.5 [1 – (σf.Rd – 1)2 2. For cross-sections with equal flanges.5 . Thus.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV.21 force. it is obtained as follows: MV. Ry. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry.1 Crushing Resistance.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl.Rd of the web of an I. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.4. this checking is unnecessary. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.4. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0.

2. Ra.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.4. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra.4. σf.Sd = 0.Rd + Msd / Mc. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0. For member subject to bending moments. Rb.Rd of the web of an I.Rd of the web of an I. 2.2 Crippling Resistance.5 [(tf / tw)0.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .3 Buckling Resistance.5. H or U section is given by: Ra.5tw2(Efyw)0.5 2.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.4. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb. and ss / d < 0.Rd ≤ 1.Rd and Fsd / Ra. Rb. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.4.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf.

5 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. applies only to non-moment sustaining column. 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. 2. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.5.5.2. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.5.4. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .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. however. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.1 of EC3. Therefore. This.1 and Table 5. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4. 2.23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5.

1.3 Compression Resistance. 2.5.1. LE The effective length LE of a compression member is determined from the segment length L centre-to-centre of restraints or intersections with restraining members in the relevant plane.5.1 Effective Length. in accordance of Table 22. 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.1.2 Slenderness.7. λ = LE / r 2. channel.5. This concept is not applicable for battened struts. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design.24 2. angle. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic. T-section struts.4. and back-to-back struts. Pc According to Clause 4. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. 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.

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

and Zy the elastic modulus.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.6.26 2. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance .5.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. Pc the compression resistance of column. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. py the steel design strength. 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. Mb the buckling resistance moment.2. 2.

3 Compression Resistance.Rd of a member is given by: Nc. the compression resistance Nc. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only.2 Slenderness.6.1.6.4. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally. 2.1 Buckling Length. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) . the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L.5. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.1. 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. l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends. the value of λ should not exceed 250.6. Alternatively. Clause 5.Rd According to Clause 5. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. 2.4.1.27 2. Nc.5 states that.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic.1. the value of λ should not exceed 180.

χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling. 2 or 3 cross-sections. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections.Rd 2. Nb.Rd For compression members.6.4 Buckling Resistance.28 Nc.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc. Clause 5.1.5.Rd = Aeff fy / γM1 (for class 4 slender cross-section) The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nc.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1.1. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.Rd .

Rd M pl .Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . y .Sd N Sd M z .Rd. in which n = Nsd / Npl.Sd N Sd M z .1 states that. z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1.Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff . y f yd Wel .2. y f yd Weff .4.29 2.Sd + + ≤1 N pl . Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject .2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.Sd + N Sd e Ny M z . β = 5n but β ≥ 1.6. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.6. z . for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y . M y . Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz . α = 2. Rd for a conservative approximation where. cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment. for I and H sections. Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y . Rd M pl .8. Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression.Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny . Clause 5. 2.Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y .1 Cross-section Capacity Generally.

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

3 Class 4 Nc.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0.05 4.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc. y .Sd N Sd + ≤ 1.5 2.0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .05 Nc.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1.0 N b.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3. y .0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1. Rd ηM c. 2.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0. Rd .eff Class 1.67 + 0.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.05 γM1 = 1.

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

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

Please refer to Appendices B1 to C2 for the calculation worksheets created for the purpose of the design of structural beam and column of both design codes. The Microsoft Excel software is used for its features that allow continual and repeated calculations using values calculated in every cell of the worksheet. Furthermore. (1995). Microsoft Excel worksheets will show the calculation steps in a clear and fair manner. al.36 3. Meanwhile. Several trial and error calculations can be used to cut down on the calculation time needed as well as prevent calculation error. the method of design using EC3 will be based on the work example drawn by Narayanan et.3 Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The design of beam and column is calculated with Microsoft Excel software. The method of design using BS 5950 will be based on the work example drawn by Heywood (2003). .

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. Moment. M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology . Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 3.

.2 : Floor plan view of the steel frame building. in total. Please refer to Figure 3. the 4-storey frame consists of four (4) bays. 6m 6m 6/9m 6/9m Figure 3. Each of the frame’s longitudinal length is 6m.4 Structural Layout & Specifications 3.1 Structural Layout In order to make comparisons of the design of braced steel frame between BS 5950-1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. the storey height will be 4m. The storey height will be 5m from ground floor to first floor. 2nd to 3rd. 3rd to roof).4. Two (2) lengths of bay width will be used in the analysis – 6m and 9m respectively.2 and Figure 3. The intermediate frame will be used as the one to be analysed and designed. In plan view. a parametric study for the design of multi-storey braced frames is carried out.38 3. 4th storey is roof while the rest will serve as normal floors. there will be three (3) numbers of 4-storey frames. whereas for other floors (1st to 2nd.3 for the illustrations of building plan view and elevation view respectively. The number of storey of the frame is set at four (4).

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

for a flat roof with access available for cleaning.2 (Flat roofs) states that.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. 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. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage. repair and other general purposes. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. Consequently. In this design. For imposed roof load.5kN/m2 is appropriate. all floors will be of one-way slab. Therefore.2. this value will be adopted.0kN/m2 respectively. 3. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof.5 Loadings Section 2.4kN/m2 and 3. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. . 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. a uniform load intensity of 1.5kN/m2. Therefore. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. Meanwhile. For precast floor selfweight. Therefore. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. section 6. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. Meanwhile.

From Table 2. partial safety factors. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight.35. Meanwhile. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads.05. γG is given by 1.1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1.05 as well.4 for dead load. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. is given by 1. depending on the interior designer’s intention. and 1.5.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively.6 for imposed load. Meanwhile. for imposed floor load.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. γM1. 2 or 3 cross-section. A general load intensity of 1.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. finishes and fittings.4. γf should be taken as 1.1.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. is given by 1. 3.2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that. γF for dead load. γQ is given by 1. The . 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. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. γM0. for normal design situations. Partial safety factors for loads. In EC3. For other floors.

the load combination will be 1.2 “Material properties for hot rolled steel” (C-EC3) limits thickness of flange to less than or equal to 40mm for nominal yield strength fy of 275N/mm2 and larger but less than or equal to 100mm for fy of 255N/mm2. 3. in the meantime. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member.1. 3. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits.4 times total dead load plus 1. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3). which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section. 3. py is 275N/mm2 for thickness less than or equal to 16mm and 265N/mm2 for thickness larger but less than or equal to 40mm. for Fe 510.8.7 Categories In this project.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections). two (2) types of steel grade will be used. According to BS 5950. In BS 5950.6 times total imposed . py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness. Meanwhile.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. For steel grade S 355. For steel grade S 275.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame.

the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.76kN/m. 3.88 6m 137.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187. w. For all other floors.4DL + 1.35 times total dead load plus 1. will be 48kN/m. For the roof. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.55 268. the w will be 59.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports. This is done by summating the resultant shear .5% between the analyses of both codes. the resultant load combination.5LL). BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. For all other floors. According to EC3.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame.1. Table 3. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.5 times total imposed load (1.9kN/m.8. will be 45.92 From Table 4. the resultant load combination. there is a difference of approximately 4. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.43 load (1. Clearly. For the roof.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206.1 below: Table 3.7 179.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. the w will be 62. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width. The next table. For simple construction. w.6LL). the load combination will be 1.64kN/m. the shear.35DL + 1.

432 995. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.84 1039.4 633. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3. 275. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula.96 992. = Internal column Ext.78 2026.5%.44 force from beam of each floor. 413. 144 331. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st .2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int.3: .76 9m Ext. 216 497.26 675.94 1488. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.8.88 779.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction. M.52 1351. structural beam moment.31 Int.39 1013.28 Int.47 744.62 Ext.84 707.Ground 288 663. Table 3. 3. 137.54 Int. 206. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8.98 496.1 950.7 316.08 Int.52 2123.55 475. similar with the beam shear.68 1415. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.76 1061.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.76 1559. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.64 6m Ext.92 519.

the higher the load combination of a floor. Therefore. the higher the difference percentage will be. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well.45 Table 3. .07 From Table 3.74 605.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281. However. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams. Me.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. In this project. Regardless of the width of the bay. Subsequently. the eccentricity moment.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). For the moments of the structural columns. the depth of the column has not been decided yet. D or h is the depth of column section (m). in this case. the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm.4% to 4.6% between the analyses of both codes.3. since this is simple construction. there is a difference of approximately 4.55 268. initially.23 6m 206. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. Clearly. 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).

Table 3.6 63. Roof Other Floors 21.6 56.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam. For EC 3. 20.35DL + 1.0DL.88 Int. For BS 5950.38 9m Ext. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.66 53.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int.84 Ext. 32. 20.6 Int.4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity. Next.56 6m Ext. 21.66 57.4DL + 1.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext. 32. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done.78 Int. However.98 86. for internal column.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. In simple construction. Table 3. V can be expressed as V = (1.98 80.6LL) – 1. 30.5LL) – 1. 3. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state. .4 84.4 94.0DL. 30.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.5. V can be expressed as V = (1.

the sections are rearranged in ascending form.3. Flange thickness. B = 152.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. d/t = 50.92kN and 281. b/T = 6. T = 13.1 BS 5950 In simple construction.6mm. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. d = 407. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.9mm. Sx = M / py = 281. t = 8. moment capacity and web bearing capacity.88kNm. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) .8kg/m. Plastic modulus.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). Depth. Sx = 1290cm3. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Width. Web thickness.3mm. Zx = 1120cm3.6mm. Depth between fillets.1mm. From the section table. From the section table for universal beam.9. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187.99. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. 3. D = 454. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3). Elastic modulus. shear capacity.

5 “Moment capacity.57kN > Fv = 187.0. Therefore.6 = 3682. Shear capacity. where neutral axis is at mid-depth. Mc = pySx. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .75.4. section 4. shear capacity is adequate.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. 0. section 4.2.0 in this design.0. Therefore. flange is Class 1 plastic section.4.57 = 364.26 x 10-3 = 607. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. shear buckling needs not be checked.54kN > Fv Therefore.92kN Therefore.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section.6Pv = 0. actual d/t = 50.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. Next. Meanwhile.2.6 x 607.5 is checked. After clause 4.26mm2 Pv = 0.3. therefore. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. Since both flange and web are plastic. For class 1 plastic cross-section.1 x 454. Actual b/T = 5. Since actually d/t < 70.6pyAv.0. Av = 8. web is Class 1 plastic section. clause 4. For web of I-section. Mc” is checked. this section is Class 1 plastic section. Next. it is low shear.6 x 275 x 3682. Pv = 0.48 = 1. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section. shear buckling resistance should be checked.

2pyZx = 1. therefore.6kNm > Mc.02mm Pbw = 98.2pyZx.92kN . Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.49 = 354. Mc should be limited to 1.5.6be/k.3 + 10.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354. M = 281.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.02mm k=T+r = 13.5mm At support.2mm b1 = t + 1. section 4.6 x 10.3 = 51. If Fv exceeds Pbw.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. 1. moment capacity is adequate. bearing stiffener should be provided.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218. n = 2 + 0.2 + 2 x 13.75kNm Therefore.02 x 8.2 = 23. OK.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98. be = 0.34kN > Fv = 187. bearing capacity of web.1 + 1.

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

Flange thickness. moment capacity. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.9cm3 From the rearranged table. d = 360. Depth. Therefore.6mm.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Wpl. lateral torsional buckling. resistance of web to crushing. From the section table. From the section table for universal beam. Shear area.2 EC 3 In simple construction. Av = 32. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. Elastic modulus. it is adequate to be used. 3.6mm. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.y = M / py = 268. Wpl. Width. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.y (cm3).6mm. tw = 7.9mm. tf = 10. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.92 x 103 / 275 = 977. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. Web thickness.28kN and 268.y = 1051cm3.9.92kNm. crippling and buckling.4mm. Wel. b = 177. h = 402.9cm2. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. Area of . necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. Plastic modulus. Depth between fillets.y = 927cm3. shear capacity.

Therefore.9mm.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked.4. Next.6(a). fu = 430N/mm2.5Vpl.15 ≤ 9.6 for Class 1 elements.Rd = 0.15. d/tw = 47. tf = 10. aLT = 131cm. Web is Class 1 element.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0.6cm2. Based on Table 3.52 section.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1. iLT = 4. shear resistance is sufficient.49kN > VSd = 179. For S275 (Fe 430). For “web subject to bending.48 = 298.5 x 497. Actual d/tw = 47.05) = 497. flange subject to compression only”.4 ≤ 66. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. neutral axis at mid depth”. A = 68.36cm. Actual c/tf = 8. From Table 5.48kN > 179. that is Vpl. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength. section classification is a must. yield strength.05 Vpl. c/tf = 8.Rd = (32. The design value of shear force.2 for Class 1 elements. Flange is Class 1 element. tf ≤ 40mm. for “outstand element of compression flange. VSd = 179.5. 0. Second moment of area.28kN Therefore.Rd. Iy = 18670cm4. section 5.28kN .6. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations.2.28kN γM0 = 1. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section.1.

not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling. Ry. section 5.4 < 63. Section 5.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively.5.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1. crippling resistance. sy = tf(bf/tw)0. Therefore.5 .26kNm > MSd Therefore. low shear. Section 5.5.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. Rb.Rd and buckling resistance.92kNm Mc. the moment capacity is sufficient. MSd = 268.6 “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. Ry. For low shear.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked.Rd = Wpl. For crushing resistance. Ra.5. Actual d/tw = 47.8 and 56. The beam is fully restrained.05 = 275.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.5[fyf/fyw]0.Rd.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section. Therefore. section 5.Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support.Rd. shear buckling check is not required.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.8.Ed/fyf)2]0.53 Therefore.

69) x 7.5 [(tf/tw)0.Rd = 0.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.5tw2 (Efyw)0.2.4 = 0. σf.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360. Rb.5 x 7.14)] / 1.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227. Ra.5 [(10.4kN For crippling resistance. sy = 10.05 = 204. bending moment is zero.5 + a + ss/2 = 0.28mm2 .6 / 7.5[h2 + ss2]0.5 [402.7mm.6)0.62 + 502]0.6 = 1731.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.5 + 3(7.9 (177. fyf = 275N/mm2.Ed = 0.9/7.05. γM0 = 1.5 = 52.8kN For buckling resistance.05 = 307.Rd = 0.14 ≤ 0.6)0.8 x 7.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.69mm Ry.54 At support.5 = 405.9)(0. A = 227. OK. ss = 50mm at support.6/10.62 (210000 x 275)0. OK γM1 = 1.Rd = (50 + 52.

4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.6 = 118. Generally. curve (a) is used. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4.5kN.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.8 x 1731.5 d/t = 2.8kN Ry.6 λ√βA = 118.28 x 10-3 / 1. This is done in the form of deflection check. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.4 / 7.Rd = 307. OK.Rd = 1 x 119.13 (rolled I-section).6kN/m for floors.1. λ = 2. which is larger than VSd = 179.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.2) should be conducted.Rd = 204. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads.6 From Table 5. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. From Figure 4. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation.8N/mm2 Rb.5 x 360. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120. fc = 119. (Permanent load) . λ√βA = 118. Therefore.29).28kN. buckling about y-y axis.5kN Ra.05 = 197.

0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17. δlim. (Imposed load) L = 6. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. In this case.34mm Therefore. However. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27.56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors. The section is adequate. .88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6.46mm Table 4. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length.1 (Recommended limiting values for vertical deflections) suggests that for “floors and roofs supporting plaster or other brittle finish or non-flexible partitions”.6 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 11. the deflection is satisfactory.14mm > δ2 δlim. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. δ.

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.

the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0.5 x 5000 / 5.5L / ry = 0.7 “Columns in simple structures”. Mi = 63. From frame analysis. λLT = 45. R. Section 4. when only nominal moments are applied.5. Therefore. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0.17.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. for columns in simple construction.08kNm. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.60 Next. the moment will be equally divided. M = 31.54kNm. the beam reaction. λLT = 48.19 x 10 = 48. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. pb = 260. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor.03kNm .7.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections). pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. therefore.

3. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. .96 < 1. From the section table for universal column.08kN and 57. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.03 = 0.y (cm3). it is adequate to be used. Wpl.44 + 31. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be cross-section resistance (in the form of moment resistance) and in-plane failure about major axis (which is a combination of axial force and eccentricity moment). UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.2 EC 3 In simple construction.10.y = MSd / fy = 57. apart from section classification. Therefore. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.52 / 1818.88 x 103 / 275 = 210. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design.0 Therefore.54 / 170.5cm3 From the rearranged table. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.88kNm respectively.

fy = 275N/mm2. Elastic modulus.2 x 8. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). Actual c/tf = 8. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351.6 = 784. Shear area.46cm. h = 254mm.y = 895cm3.3. therefore.2 and 10. tf = 14. Web thickness. tw = 8.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. iLT = 6. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5. Plastic modulus.2. Depth.94 (c = 0.73N/mm2 Table 5. σw. Actual c/tf = 8. iy = 11. aLT = 98.6mm. .8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections.8. Width. Radius of gyration. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9. Wel. From this table.62 From the section table. A = 92. Iy = 11370cm4. tf = 14.08 x 103 / 200.2mm. Next.86cm. b = 254mm. For web subject to bending and compression. Flange thickness. with d/tw = 23.94 < 9. Beforehand. the web is Class 1.y = 990cm3. Av = 25. Since both flange and web are plastic.2 respectively. d/tw = 23. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. iz = 6. Depth between fillets. Wpl.1cm. Second moment of area. Therefore. from. the classification depends on the mean web stress.3.5. this section is Class 1 section. section 5. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2.9cm2.6cm2.2mm < 40mm.2mm.5cm.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. c/tf = 8. d = 200. From Table 5.94. Area of section.5b). flange is Class 1 element.1. section 5.

27.Rd = Wpl. n = NSd / Npl.1kN n = 1351.y.Rd = 1.63 Vpl.1 = 0.11 Mpl.555 ≥ 0.Rd is such that n < 0.Rd (1 – n) Npl.11 Mpl.5Vpl.Sd = My.555) .y.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.3kNm MNy.y.y.11 x 259.Rd = Mpl.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1. MNy.1 : MNy.1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.1 : MNy. From Table 5.05 = 2433. the section is subject to a low shear.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.Rd n ≥ 0.3 x (1 – 0.Rd (1 – n) Mpl.Sd / L = 57.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92.05 = 259.Rd = 1.Rd > Vmax.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.05) = 387. allowing for axial force.58kN 0. MN.Sd Therefore.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.08 / 2433.1 Therefore.Rd = 1.

13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”. section 5. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.64 = 128. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38. Lastly.85L = 0.0 Ly = 0.Sd / ηMc.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11.1 x 10 = 38.7N/mm2 .Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.y.y. buckling curve (b) is used.2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My. the moment resistance is sufficient.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38.3 Based on Table 5.3.3. λy√βA = 38.94kNm Therefore. for buckling about y-y axis.Rd) ≤ 1.6.Rd) + (kyMy. fc = 249.1kNm > MSd = 28.

it is adequate to be used.1) = 0. Therefore. γM1 = 1.y.Rd) = (1351.94 / 1 x 128.95 < 1.y.y.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.05 = 2209.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb.7 x 92.3) + (1.5 x 28.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.Rd) + (kyMy.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.05 = 1 x 249.Sd / ηMc. . the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.08 / 2209.0 Therefore.65 Nb. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.

and weight of steel.1. structural capacity is sub-divided into beam and column. . Shear capacity and moment capacity of each section are being calculated separately. 4.1 Structural Beam UB sections ranging from 305x102x25 to 533x210x122 are being tabulated in ascending form. deflection.1 for shear capacity and Table 5.1 Structural Capacity Structural capacity deals with shear and moment resistance of a particular section chosen. The results are arranged accordingly. based on steel grade S275 and S355. The results are shown in Table 4. namely structural capacity.CHAPTER IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS The results of the structural design of the braced steel frame (beam and column) are tabulated and compiled in the next sections.2 for moment capacity. 4. The results based on BS 5950 and EC3 calculation are compiled together to show the difference between each other. Here.

84 300.14 18.83 938.38 811.47 341.25 382.46 2.11 -1.55 3.93 1.84 727.56 400.38 1.09 16.27 13.5 461.64 0.55 1.2 1102.62 1.81 -3.15 3.69 4.74 2.93 1.5 1.96 666.5 1102.88 -18.78 15.6 1.82 2.21 15.02 698.09 773.35 793.28 554.1 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 291.32 877.86 619.77 1146.66 497.37 609.55 1.13 19.16 4.18 8.46 -3.06 1.94 559.88 876.34 523.99 660.41 925.56 3.4 0.27 0.6 14.65 0.24 0.78 541.28 303.29 452.55 583.13 1091.27 845.59 460.2 777.32 10.35 -1.11 -2 2.16 551.85 517.55 522.61 340.5 -0.91 1011.94 2.72 -12.45 623.26 -8.78 942.99 918.74 2.87 -0.73 -3.21 441.78 -25.29 5.35 431.93 11.35 730.27 819.39 511.86 1204.38 542.5 529.02 12.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.92 588.79 12.7 1.81 523.15 3.45 -1.97 392.05 607.19 1.77 728.53 564.81 1024.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.19 387.81 -2.17 8.64 0.55 712.34 44.58 308.3 14.85 854.15 343.7 9.09 1012.32 860.22 2.14 .19 4.74 0.73 -2.53 356.77 -3.02 6.68 1007.21 667.79 2.57 -2.82 2.23 -9.44 2.83 0.61 345.65 846.52 439.77 6.21 -24.31 2.09 -2.46 478.5 642.2 -2.99 589.56 15.5 1.58 753.85 405.4 -10.81 -3.21 668.51 -4.86 -0.7 -0.75 -13.6 1.74 594.32 783.04 % Diff.53 943.52 443.14 583.75 437.93 334.67 Table 4.56 878.74 -0.1 -2.64 5.78 -20.3 683.65 635.4 -0.39 462.14 784.62 515.66 24.79 2.47 831.15 -16.92 394.42 820.95 2.13 705.78 456.68 6.5 -0.83 0.99 15.65 724.08 2.79 398.66 704.74 393.69 -1.51 1.57 680.48 517.7 -0.36 11.2 447.51 384.19 1.37 399.38 1.47 596.8 800.06 1.63 12.57 13.16 1057.95 404.98 1134.81 528.58 34.24 3.1 493.94 2.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.85 767.92 2.26 2.98 305.03 4.71 429.48 759.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.4 0.44 471.87 433.5 1.89 678.79 11.96 6.15 507.28 8.91 -19.6 405.65 420.26 888.37 338.09 -2.31 446.72 % Diff.79 2.02 496.65 0.38 20.11 1218.07 942.33 862.47 545.33 577.18 358.55 617.27 0.66 5.51 18.33 409.27 14.67 644.39 1.6 10. 2. BS 5950 (kN) 376.56 -5.93 11.

Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.28 148.94 162.07 170.21 -1.78 11.35 -0.51 1007.58 -9.59 5.23 168. however.06%.06 1115.76 4.49 1295. For steel grade S275.3% less than 0. This value.58 4.05 110.43 -1.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.83 132.03 1440.98 141.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.06%.57 206.07 .2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.8 8.06 % Diff.43 3. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.45 1431. 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 5.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.86 125.07 6.57 -4.14 8.81 5.6 as suggested by BS 5950.77 4.35 217.05 1099.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.91 % Diff.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.43 3.94 -12.6 137.43 160. Table 4. 6.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.76 191. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.97 6. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.13 8.44 1300.55. the difference percentage ranges from -3.41 143.57% to 4.13 -0.3 6. BS 5950 (kNm) 121. Therefore.69% to 4. the difference percentage ranges from -2. There are a few explanations to the variations. which is approximately 8. Also.59 4.05 3.62 182.01 -16. meanwhile. For steel grade S355.

5 654.5 479.75 300.11 5.66 5.5 44.55 257.1 285.39 682.1 5.68 12 13.86 4.17 171.08 358.27 14.33 181.55 433.33 221.33 198 232.52 11.35 624.35 1104 238.75 484.44 14.75 431.7 211.1 1.55 4.16 5.4 277.95 566.01 182.9 163.17 255.5 390.13 246.25 5.34 404.67 685.11 261.53 1.2 291.07 609.9 900.5 457.14 410.52 434.2 24.1 244.87 4.57 5.08 510. For steel grade S275.87 4.28 5.75 398.75 631.32 1.65 244.75 199.43 4.05 232.43 4.17 24.8 1082. the difference percentage ranges from 1.05 336.05 35.63 4.35 693.78 487.45 18.63 4.6 300.46 5.41 19.36 2.73 19.5 15.98 352.89 1.88 10.97 14.77 233.44 4.78 15.75 562.42 5.23 213.38 8.31 19.08 5.4 264.06 0.96 21.35 731.37 16. meanwhile.93 740.51 1.86 8.85 5.65 590.05 0.01 4.26 312.83 5.65 749.73 2.25 453.05 585.98 24.3 844.1 539 619.5 302.53 5.5 691.9 619.67 425.95 385.7 18.9 11.45 976.24 17.58% to 6.16 5.24 376.16 9.24 1.65 404.22 13.45 769.08 6.48 5.02 315.55 4.43%.81 529.03%.19 370.08 252.31 4.12 5.14 3.65 149.99 4.5 330 371.28 5.71 9.21 287.68 560.05 11.65 5.28 15.01 4.72 9.11 5.85 5.33 471.25 517.32 0. .52 395.26 317.1 220.27 1.57 5.66 2.58 5.83 275.49 5.93 885.69 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 195.32 10.33 192.6 341. the difference percentage ranges from 0.13 318.02 455.4 838.48 17.95 24.17 7.02 18.95 479.17 27.62 7.25 497.63 7.25 397. For steel grade S355.61 4.8 799.53 549.95 755.45 521.1 5.67 20.92 13.53 171.73 21.95 189.69 188.11 242.95 275.86 4.41 221.02 377.3 426 479.3 695.98 20.94 10.85 11.5 354.3 4.5 5.06 11.29 15. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.41 5.83 4.41% to 6.5 34.44 12.95 514.45 234.95 532.96 10.5 14.85 27.49 5.24 1.55 429.35 302.68 0.04 1.6 5.83 1.75 332.95 848 184.47 955.55 9.29 202.84 13.79 141.49 15.85 585.57 355.53 5.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.55 21.29 1.29 2.

4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4.3. Class 2 or Class 3 element. Therefore.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. This is approximately 5% less than 1. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. are revised. 4. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. Meanwhile. For a column web subject to bending and compression.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0.95. Table 4.70 There are a few explanations to the variations.0 as suggested by BS 5950. whether it is Class 1. For example. Besides that.Rd = Wpl. There is a variation of approximately 0.1. . sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl.85%.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. 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. for a UB section 406x178x54.

**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

77 2.16 1.33 12. Different from BS 5950.45 14.2 3.98 21.1. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.4 0.52 0. .07 0.12 17.78 3.84 4.71 3.51 0. section 3. δmax.7 2.06 0.68 2. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table.04 2.49 2. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.63 2.66 2.19 2. Apart from that.77 4.05 0.01 0. for a floor beam of 6m long.37 4.36 8.23 0.22% to 3.83 13.73 1.54 2. Meanwhile.07 1.59 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.79 16.22% to 3.26 18.31 2.75 2.21 2.5 above.29 0.06 0. Meanwhile. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.03 9.08 0.33 0.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.29 0.06 0. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.13 0.16 9.25 2.75 18. as required by EC3. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.56 2.25 13.46 2. For example.01 2.93 2.83 20. However.34 18.26 2.61 3.21 24.77 16.7 2. the difference percentage ranges from -0.56 2.33 4.33 3.25 2.84 11.74 4.22 28.62 5.6 2.24 2.32 0.63%. Section 3.25 0. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value. E.43 2. for a floor beam of 9m long.85 15.58 0.27 3.85 1.35 0.71 3.1 0.7 2.05 0.1 3.08 21.47 29.08 0.34 1.9 9.66 0.53 0.61%.07 0.55 From Table 4.4 2.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.26 0.55 23.21 3.4 2.64 4. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.63 19.04 0. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.25 16.85 1.37 2.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.68 13.1 0.32 10.42 0.41 1.18 1.38 2.16 11.1 0.01 1. Meanwhile. for a section 356x171x57. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table.1.46 2.56 2.13 8.96 1.51 21.8 1.

122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4. To compare the economy of the design.6 and Table 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 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . Table 4.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.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 . floor beams.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.75 4.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.

313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.645 3.122 9. is tabulated in Table 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.9.8 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) 7.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .889 9. meanwhile.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.76 Table 4.744 EC3 4.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 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 .750 4.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.313 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .8. Table 4.821 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) Summary of the total steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.821 .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9. The saving percentage.

96 5.9. Semi-continuous .750 9.60% to 17.9 EC3 design Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4. This is because deeper. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection.42 15.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design.821 4. all frame types.77 Table 4.96%.571 9. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. Meanwhile.744 3.889 EC3 4. Further check on the effect of deflection was done. depending on the steel grade. This resulted in higher percentage difference. This time. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.60 17. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection.313 % 1. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3.122 7. Regardless of bay width.645 9.

where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .78 frame is achieved in this condition.749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .0. Table 4. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4. For uniformly distributed loading. 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 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8.5.10 shown. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. which was used in the beam design.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9. β is treated as β = 3.10 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 . the deflection coefficient.503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4. Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .

503 9.889 8.750 4.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4. meanwhile.11.750 4.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.211 10.122 9.95 BS 5950 4.11 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Types of Frame Bay Width (m) 2Bay 4Storey 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7. is tabulated in Table 4.11 .122 9.645 3. Table 4.749 % 0. The saving percentage.749 Table 4.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.22 9.503 7.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.12.889 8.42 3.645 5.

Eventually. Therefore. The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. the gap reduces. However. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment. . The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection.1(b)). the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. (c) simple construction.12. if it is built semi-continuously.0. (b) semi-rigid construction.1(c)). Please refer to Figure 4.11% to 10.80 From Table 4. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame. if rigid connection is introduced.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor.95%. as the connection stiffness becomes higher.

calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.1 Structural Capacity 5. In review to the research objectives. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter.CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the summary for the study on the comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 for the design of multi-storey braced frame. Av value also caused the difference.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes.05 in the moment capacity . Apart from that. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.43%. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam.1. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. 5. γM0 of 1. Meanwhile. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor. for the moment capacity of structural beam.

1. fc is smaller than pc.0 as suggested by BS 5950.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. 5. In comparison. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. With the inclusion of partial safety factor. γM of 1. of both codes. compared with BS 5950. Therefore. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950.82 calculation required by EC3. fc and pc respectively. as compared to the partial safety factor. A reduction in the range of 5.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load.05 as required by EC3 design. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. it was found that for a same value of λ. From interpolation.0m long. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. axial compression is much more critical. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5.27% to 9. 5. γM0 of 1. EC3 design created majority . For the same value of unfactored imposed load. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column.2 Structural Column In simple construction. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. Therefore. Meanwhile.

313 tons for EC3 design. the total deflection was greater. The difference ranges from 0. However. . BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2.122 tons and 7.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame.63%.889 tons for BS 5950 design. In this study. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value.645 tons and 9. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. 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. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. Therefore. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design.22% to 3. 6m bay width steel frame. Section 4. 4-storey. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. and 9.2. 4-storey. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.1 of EC3 provided proof to this. For a 2-bay. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. E. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4.750 tons for BS 5950 design.821 tons and 4. and 4. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher.744 tons and 3. 5.571 tons for EC3 design. For a 2-bay. I will have to be chosen.

structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. 4-storey.96% 2-bay. 4-storey.22% 5. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. S355 (Fe 510): 15. 6m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 7. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.42% 2-bay. 9m bay width.42% 2-bay. 6m bay width. 9m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 17. 4-storey. 4-storey.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 1.0 to 3.95% 2-bay. 9m bay width.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. . However. 4-storey. S355 (Fe 510): 10.11% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 0. 6m bay width. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior. 4-storey. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). 6m bay width.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. 4-storey. 4-storey. S275 (Fe 430): 5.60% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 9m bay width.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

6LL Roof w = 1.6 x 15 = 62.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. LL Floors Dead Load.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. DL Live Load. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.4 x 24 + 1.4 1.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1. MAHMOOD 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.6 2.64 kN/m . LL = = 4 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 + 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4. of Bay No.0 DATA No. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. DL Live Load.4 x 27. DL Live Load. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.4DL + 1.

1 FRAME LAYOUT Selected Intermediate Frame 6m 6m 6m 6m 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. MAHMOOD 2.88 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 2.2 Precast Slab Panel Load Transfer to Intermediate Frame . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.64 kN/m . MAHMOOD 2.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.

horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. V = 62.84 707.1 Beam Moment. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.92 519. MAHMOOD 4.88 kNm 4. Shear. .Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281. Roof beams. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.92 kN M = 62. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. contributed by beam shear. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 x 6 / 2 = 187.52 144 331.68 1415.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663.84 1039.

88 281.92 (187.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.88 281.84 [3] [4] 707.84 (187. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92) 288 (187.88 281.76 1415.92) 144 [1] 331.92) 519.52 707.92) 331. MAHMOOD 5.92) 663.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.88 281.84 (187.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.76 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.88 281.68 (187.92 [2] 519.92) 1039.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.54 31. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.19 31.6LL) .19 31.19 Moments are calculated from (1.6 [2] 28.6 21.19 21.19 28.4DL+1.19 21.54 28.19 28.19 28.54 28. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 [1] 21.19 28.54 31.6 31.1.19 [4] 28.54 28.92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 28.6 21.19 [3] 28.19 31.0DL Most critical condition .6 28.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

DL Live Load. DL Live Load.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.76 kN/m . LL Floors Dead Load. LL = = 1. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5LL Roof w = 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.6 + 1.0 DATA No.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.5 x 15 = 59. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load. LL = = 4 1.6 2. DL Live Load.35 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.35 x 24 + 1.35 x 27. of Bay No. MAHMOOD 1.5 x 9 = 45.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.9 kN/m Floors w = 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.35DL + 1.

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

MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45.76 kN/m 59. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.76 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 59.9 kN/m 6m 45.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m .

08 137.1 Beam Moment. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. V = 59. Shear. MAHMOOD 4.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.26 675.4 633. V = 45.52 1351. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other. .7 316.98 496.76 x 6 / 2 = 179.9 x 6 / 2 = 137. contributed by beam shear.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.28 kN M = 59.55 kNm Floor beams. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column . Roof beams.7 kN M = 45.96 992.92 kNm 4.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.

28) 992.0 5. MAHMOOD 5.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.26 (179.98 (179.08 675.96 (179.92 268. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.7) 137. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.92 268.54 1351.92 268.55 268.28) 137.26 [3] [4] 675.92 5.7 [1] 316.28) 633.28) 316.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.54 .4 (179.52 (179.7) (137.2 Shear (kN) (137.92 268.98 [2] 496.55 206.28) 275.28) 496.92 268.7 (179.

94 26.66 20.89 28.89 19.94 28.35DL+1.89 26.89 28.89 26.89 26.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.1.66 26.89 28.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.89 26.0DL Most critical condition . MAHMOOD 5.94 28.71 28.89 26.89 Moments are calculated from (1.66 19.5LL) .94 26.89 20.94 26.71 20.66 26.94 26.89 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

1 67.2 74.1 48.8 60.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.2 28.1 82.2 74.1 25.1 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 59.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 109 113 122 125.9 43 45 46 46.1 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 = 281.3 54 54.1 67.2 28.1 51 52.9 149. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.3 30 31.2 89.8 33.1 139.3 92.3 82 82.1 40. L = 6.1 67.1 24. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .1 67.2 74.3 101 101.2 179 238.8 25.1 37 37 39 39.3 41.1 98.1 32.

3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section .0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical. MAHMOOD 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. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 8.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1. subject to pure bending. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.3 2.3 407.6 152.1 13.0 1.75 50.3 Therefore.0m) STC.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 454. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5.2 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.

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 .

0m) STC.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = M / fy = 268.92 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. 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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. L = 6.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.

The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .36 131 8.y = W el.9 Therefore.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.6 18670 4.9 68. MAHMOOD 1.6 10. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.15 47. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. L = 6.4 1051 927 32.6 7.6 177.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. Second moment of area.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 360.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. Section chosen 1.0 1.

001 γMO = 1.26 kNm MSd Mc.05 = 32.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. it is low shear Mc.Rd = W pl.48 kN VSd < Vpl.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.Rd = 0.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate . subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.0m) STC.5 x 497. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5Vpl. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 √3 = 497.Rd < Therefore.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.5Vpl.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.15 <= 9.49 kN VSd 0.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0. L = 6.05 = 275. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.9 x 100 275 1.7 3.92 kNm 0.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.4 > 46.2 (b) Web.48 = 298.28 kN V pl.001 / 1.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. not susceptible to LTB 6. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47. MAHMOOD 5.69) x 7.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).5 Ry.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd = (50 + 52.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 < 63.4 kN = VSd = 179.4 63.05 204.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.6 x 275 x 0. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. L = 6.5 σf. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.Rd = γM1 At support.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.28 kN < Ry.001 / 1.0m) STC.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.

6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.05 205 307.5 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.4 = γM1 = E= Ra. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Rd = 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. h= a= 402.92 275. Ra.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.Rd 268.0m) STC.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.2 0.26 7. MSd Mc. MAHMOOD At midspan. L = 6.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd = > 0.98 <= 1.14 1.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.5 ] . Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.3 ≤ = 1.

(118.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .05 A = beff x tw = 227.5 = 405.5 x SQRT(402.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.117) / (120 .6 l = 0. Rb. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.8 N/mm 2 Rb.5 kN > At mid span.118) x (121 . L = 6.Rd = 1 x 119.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118.4 / 7.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.001 / 1.118) = 119.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement. MAHMOOD beff = 0.28 x 0.75d Rolled I-section. buckling about y-y axis.8 x 1731.5 d/t = 2.0m) STC.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.6 2 = 1731.8 x 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 x 360. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.6 = 118. λ = 2.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .6 .05 = 197.

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 .46 = 18.88 6.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1. . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0m) STC.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.14 mm OK δmax = 11.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.88 + 6.0 1.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11.113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. L = 6. MAHMOOD 8.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

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) 184.1 652 802.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.3 247.6 978.1 497. L = 5.4 568.1 310. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.8 1228 1589 1485 1953 2482 1875 2298 2964 2680 2417 3457 3436 3977 4689 4245 5101 5818 6994 8229 10009 12078 14247 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 63.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63.0m) STC.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .4 988. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

3 2. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.19 75.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.0m) STC.0 DATA Fc = 1415.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.2 9.23 17.2 160. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.8 652 581.3 14. Gross area.1 8.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14. L = 5.6 205. MAHMOOD 1. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.96 5.52 kN L= 5 m 1.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.8 x 9.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis .0m) STC.4 4. L = 5.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.96 x 10) = 47.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.85L = 0. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis.0 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.52 x 1000 / (160.3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.

5.46) x (242 . the moment will be equally divided. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Therefore.44 kN Fc < Pc 47. R From frame analysis sheets.4 .0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction.0m) STC. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. the compressive resistance is adequate 5.8 x 100 x 0.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2.9 x 75.001 = 1818.54 kNm .9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239. L = 5. beam reaction. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.(47. M= 31.4 pc 242 239 Therefore. Mi = 63.46) / (48 .239) 2 = 239. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.

19 x 10) = 48.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.03 kNm 1415.(48.45) / (50 .52 1818.001 = 170.96 1. L = 5.00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. MAHMOOD 6.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .54 170.78 x 652 x 0.0 4.44 + 31.78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260.0m) STC.5 L/ry = (0.17 .17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.03 = < 0.45) x (233 . 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 6.250) 2 = 260.

120 APPENDIX C2 .

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.y (cm3) 184 248 309 497 567 654 801 990 979 1225 1589 1484 1952 2485 1872 2293 2970 2675 2418 3455 3438 3978 4691 4243 5101 5814 6997 8225 10010 12080 14240 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 57.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .y = M / fy = 57.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.88 kNm M= W pl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Wpl.121 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. L = 5.0m) STC.

fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .2 Therefore.9 11370 6. L = 5.94 kNm L= 5 m 1.0 DATA NSd = 1351. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.86 98.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14. Area of section.46 92. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.1 6.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y = W el.94 23.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.08 kN Msd = 28.2 200.5 8.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.2 990 895 11.6 14.3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. MAHMOOD 1. Second moment of area.

Rd = 92.05 = 2433. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.Rd = 1.1 = 0.11 Mpl.Rd = Mpl. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.08 / 2433.2 Class 3 = 13.05 = 259.1 kN n = 1351.001 / 1.3 kNm Mny.001 / 1.Rd(1-n) W pl.1 Mpl.0m) STC.Rd = 0.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.Rd A fy Npl.9 (b) Web.94 <= 9.Rd Mny.1 n ≥ 0. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.Rd = γMO γMO = 1. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.05 Npl.1 Mny.1 28.y.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35. L = 5.Rd = > MSd = 128.8 3.9 x 100 x 275 x 0.1 Class 3 = 38. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.y.555 >= n < 0.3 <= 30.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .y.

124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.001 / 1.38) / (250 .9 x 100 x 0.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11. Rd η M c .y.y.0 N b .y.Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0.1 x 10) = 38.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore.38) x (40 . sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis .7 x 92.Rd = 1 x 249. y .3 . MAHMOOD 4.08 2209.05 = 2209.5 NSd Nb.3 kN ky = 1. L = 5.Rd = = 1351.94 1 x 128.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.y.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.248) 2 = 249.0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .Rd 1.3 0.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38. y .5 x 28.Sd ηMc. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.(38.3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 . Rd Nb.7 N/mm Nb.95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.

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

126 APPENDIX D .

MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB .y = M / fy = 268. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0m) Rev 1 STC.92 kNm W pl.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.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.

MAHMOOD 1.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.8 152.6 1096 950 36. L = 6.99 53. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10.6 10.5 66. Second moment of area. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. Section chosen 1. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.0 1.4 7.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 21370 3.y = W el.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.59 121 6. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .9 407.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.0m) Rev 1 STC.9 Therefore.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.

Rd < Therefore.05 = 287.15 kN VSd 0.92 kNm 0.y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.6 > 46.99 <= 9.2 (b) Web.0m) Rev 1 STC.05 = 36. L = 6.92 = 331.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.001 / 1.05 kNm MSd Mc.05 √3 = 551. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.28 kN V pl.5Vpl. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.92 kN VSd < Vpl.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.5Vpl.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .Rd = W pl.5 x 100 275 1. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.Rd = 0.5 x 551.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4. it is low shear Mc.001 γMO = 1.7 3.

Rd = (50 + 48.6 x 275 x 0.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support. not susceptible to LTB 6.6 63.Rd = γM1 At support. L = 6.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.001 / 1. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.28 kN < Ry. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. MAHMOOD 5.8 < 63.68 kN VSd = 179. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5 Ry.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance . shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.05 = 196.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 σf. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .81) x 7.0m) Rev 1 STC.

Rd = 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. L = 6.Rd = > 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.2 0.92 287.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.94 <= 1.05 7.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support.3 ≤ = 1.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407. MSd Mc. h= a= 449.0m) Rev 1 STC.Rd 268.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5 ] .28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. MAHMOOD At midspan.05 205 299.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0. Ra.12 1.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 0.

6 mm Buckling resistance of web.05 = 179.98) / (135 . Rb.1 .3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.9 x 1909.5 x 407.9 kN > At mid span.3 x 7.001 / 1.130) = 98. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.75d Rolled I-section.6 / 7.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.5 x SQRT(449.1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 .05 A = beff x tw = 251.5 = 452.Rd = 1 x 98.1 l = 0.5 d/t = 2.6 = 134. buckling about y-y axis.0m) Rev 1 STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.88 x 0. λ = 2. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134. L = 6.9 N/mm 2 Rb. MAHMOOD beff = 0.(134.6 2 = 1909.130) x (103 .

95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.95 = 11. L = 6.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.14 mm OK δmax = 7.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.0 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 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.26 + 3.26 3.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.0 1.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. .6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1. MAHMOOD 8.0m) Rev 1 STC.

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

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulBS5950-Vs-EC3

BS5950-Vs-EC3

- BS and EC
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- Ec2 Bs8110 Compared
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- THE BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES TO EC3 (4th EDITION)
- Design Aids EuroCode
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Design of Base Plate
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- steel_design
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- DESIGN_OF_STRUCTURAL_CONNECTIONS_TO _EUROCODE_3
- Design of Base Plate for BS5950
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- Precast Concrete Structures - Hubert Bachmann
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridges
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- BSI EC3 Design of Steel Structures
- Designers' Guide to Eurocode 8 Design of Bridges for Earthquake Resistance (Designers' Guides to the Eurocodes)
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- Designers guide to EC3
- Designers' Guide to en 1998
- How to design to eurocode 2.pdf
- Wind Loads on Buildings Part-01 (BS6399)
- Eurocode 3 Design of Steel Structures 1[1].2
- Cp3 Chapter v Part 2 for Wind Load
- Eurocode
- BS5950 Vs EC3

Are you sure?

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

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

Get the full title to continue

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

scribd