## Are you sure?

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

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. Signature Name Date : : Chan Chee Han : 01 NOVEMBER 2006 .

iii To my beloved parents and siblings .

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

v ABSTRACT Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. However. the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0. This study intends to testify the claim. . However.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay.60% to 17. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3. four-storey braced steel frames with spans of 6m and 9m and with steel grade S275 (Fe 460) and S355 (Fe 510) by designed using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. Meanwhile. loading values and etc. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4. specifications to be followed.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. These details include the basis and concept of design. structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5.06% and moment capacity by up to 6. safety factors. Therefore.11% to 10. with the application of partial strength connections. design methods. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.95%.43%. serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. 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: 2000.27% and 9.

06% dan keupayaan momen rasuk sebanyak 6.95%.11% – 10. . spesifikasi yang perlu diikuti.96% lebih banyak daripada kerangka yang direkabentuk oleh BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Institut Pembinaan Keluli (SCI) berpendapat bahawa rekabentuk struktur keluli menggunakan Eurocode 3 adalah 6 – 8% lebih menjimatkan daripada menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Kertas ini menunjukkan perbandingan keputusan kajian ke atas satu siri kerangka besi terembat 2 bay.34% kurang daripada rekabentuk menggunakan BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. nilai beban.27% – 9. cara rekabentuk. tiang keluli yang direkebentuk oleh Eurocode 3 mempunyai keupayaan mampatan 5. rujukan kepada kod piawai adalah penting. Selain itu. Eurocode 3 menghasilkan kerangka keluli dirembat yang menggunakan berat besi 1. Butiran-butiran ini mengandungi asas dan konsep rekabentuk. Namun begitu. Namun begitu. penggunaan sambungan kekuatan separa telah berjaya mengurangkan lingkungan berat besi kepada 0. Rekebentuk menggunakan Eurocode 3 telah mengurangkan keupayaan ricih rasuk sehingga 4. Kertas kerja komputer ditulis untuk merekabentuk rasuk dan tiang keluli.vi ABSTRAK Dalam rekabentuk struktur keluli. dan sebagainya. Kajian ini bertujuan menguji pendapat ini.43%. factor keselamatan.63% berbanding BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Eurocode 3 juga mengurangkan nilai pesongan yang disebabkan oleh beban kenaan tanpa faktor sehingga 3. 4 tingkat yang terdiri daripada rentang rasuk 6m dan 9m serta gred keluli S275 (Fe 430) dan S355 (Fe 510). Kandungan dalam kod piawai secara amnya mengandungi butiran rekabentuk yang komprehensif. didapati bahawa keadaan had kebolehkhidmatan mengawal rekabentuk Eurocode 3 disebabkan beban mati tanpa faktor yang perlu diambilkira dalam pemeriksaan pesongan.60% – 17. Justeru.

2 1.5 Introduction Background of Project Objectives Scope of Project Report Layout 1 3 4 4 5 .3 1.4 1.vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE i ii iii iv v vi vii xii xiii xiv xv THESIS TITLE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES LISTOF NOTATIONS I INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.

3 Shear Capacity.4.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.3.3 Background of BS 5950 Scope of BS 5950 Design Concept of BS 5950 2.3. Mc.3.Rd Moment Capacity.1 Cross-sectional Classification 2.1 2.2.2 2.3.2.1 Application Rules of EC3 2.3 Background of Eurocode 3 (EC3) Scope of Eurocode 3: Part 1.4 Actions of EC3 2.2 BS 5950 2.1 (EC3) Design Concept of EC3 2.4.2 Serviceability 2.3.3.3.2 Stiffened Web 2.3.3.1 Unstiffened Web 2.3 Cross-sectional Classification Shear Capacity.2. Pv Moment Capacity.4 Loading 2.3.2 2.1.2 Ultimate Limit State 2.2 2.1.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.3 Serviceability Limit State 2.1.1 Eurocode 3 (EC3) 2.1 Ultimate Limit States 2. Vpl.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.3.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling 2.3.6 Deflection 2.3.2 2.5.4. Mc 2.3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 2.2.4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 2.1.1.3.2.1.2.5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.1 2.1 2.5.4.1.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 .3.3.3.viii II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.3.4.3.

1 Effective Length.6.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity 2.4.6.ix 2.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2.4.2 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. Ry.4.2.1. Ra.7.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 2.4.3.5.3 Compression Resistance.6.3 Buckling Resistance.4. λ 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force 2.2.Rd 2.5. Nb.1.4 Buckling Resistance.7 Conclusion 2.1.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.5.6.4.Rd 2.1.4.2 Member Buckling Resistance 2. λ 2.2 High Shear Moment Capacity 2.5.2 Slenderness.4. LE 2.2 Slenderness.Rd 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 Cross-section Capacity 2.1 Buckling Length.1. l 2.6. Nc.5.4.6. Rb.1 Introduction 34 . Pc 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force 2.5.1.5 Deflection 2.Rd 2.2.5.2 Crippling Resistance.2.1 Crushing Resistance.6 Design of Steel Column According to EC3 2.7.6.1 2.1.4.3.3 Compression Resistance.Rd 2.6.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces 2.

3 Moment Calculation 3.4.2 3.1 Structural Beam 81 81 .10 Structural Column Design 3.2 EC 3 IV RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Structural Capacity 4.2 Shear Calculation 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 3.1 3.x 3.8.2 BS 5950 EC 3 3.9.9 Structural Beam Design 3.3 Structural Beam Structural Column 66 66 70 73 75 Deflection Economy of Design V CONCLUSIONS 5.6 3.8.4.4 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Beam and Column Design with Microsoft Excel Worksheets Structural Layout & Specifications 3.5 3.8.1.1 4.3 3.1 Structural Capacity 5.1 Load Combination 3.7 3.1.1 BS 5950 3.2 4.2 4.10.10.1 3.9.1.2 3.

2 5.4 Structural Column 82 82 83 84 Deflection Values Economy Recommendation for Future Studies REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A1 86 93 100 106 114 120 126 APPENDIX A2 APPENDIX B1 APPENDIX B2 APPENDIX C1 APPENDIX C2 APPENDIX D .1.xi 5.2 5.3 5.

8 4.5 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 .2 3.7 4.1 2.4 4.xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO.11 4.2 4.1 4. TITLE PAGE 2.1 3.9 4.4 4.6 4.2 3.3 3.3 4.10 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 3.3 4.2 3.1(b) 4.1(a) 4.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 .

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

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

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

The study on Eurocode 3 in this project will focus on the subject of moment and shear design. the initial draft Eurocode 3. As with other Europeans standards. From these. ECCS. The establishment of Eurocode 3 will provide a common understanding regarding the structural steel design between owners. This was followed by the various parts of a pre-standard code. Codes of practice provide detailed guidance and recommendations on design of structural elements. contractors and manufacturers of construction products among the European member countries. Standardization of design code for structural steel in Malaysia is primarily based on the practice in Britain. Therefore.2 Like most of the other structural Eurocodes. provision for these topics is covered in certain sections of the codes. These preliminary standards of ENV will be revised. designers. Therefore. operators and users. amended in the light of any comments arising out of its use before being reissued as the EuroNorm standards (EN). the move to withdraw BS 5950 and replace with Eurocode 3 will be taking place in the country as soon as all the preparation has completed. It is believed that Eurocode 3 is more comprehensive and better developed compared to national codes. were developed. . ENV1993 (ENV stands for EuroNorm Vornorm) issued by Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) – the European standardisation committee. published by the European Commission. Buckling resistance and shear resistance are two major elements of structural steel design. The earliest documents seeking to harmonize design rules between European countries were the various recommendations published by the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork. Eurocodes will be used in public procurement specifications and to assess products for ‘CE’ (Conformité Européen) mark. Eurocode 3 has developed in stages.

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

A study on the basis and design concept of EC3 will be carried out. All the beam-column connections are to be assumed simple. The multi-storey steel frame will be first analyzed by using Microsoft Excel worksheets to obtain the shear and moment values.4 Scope of Project The project focuses mainly on the moment and shear design on structural steel members of a series four-storey. 1. hereafter referred to as BS 5950. This structure is intended to serve as an office building. Comparison to other steel structural design code is made. design spreadsheets will be created to calculate and design the structural members. The comparison will be made between the EC3 with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. Next. hereafter referred to as EC3. . The standard code used here will be Eurocode 3.3 Objectives The objectives of this project are: 1) To compare the difference in the concept of the design using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3.4 1. 2 bay braced frames. 2) To study on the effect of changing the steel grade from S275 to S355 in Eurocode 3. 3) To compare the economy aspect between the designs of both BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 Design of Steel Beam According to BS 5950 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. .4 Loading BS 5950 had identified and classified several loads that act on the structure. There are dead. overhead traveling cranes. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling Bearing capacity of web Deflection 2. imposed and wind loading.3. Where necessary. without calculating their local buckling resistance. The elements of a cross-section are generally of constant thickness.2.1 Cross-sectional Classification Cross-sections should be classified to determine whether local buckling influences their capacity. Loading conditions during erection should be given particular attention. All relevant loads should be separately considered and combined realistically as to compromise the most critical effects on the elements and the structure as a whole. earth and groundwater loading. 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. the settlement of supports should be taken into account as well. 2.11 2.

3 of BS 5950 states the shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv. 2. It is cross-section with plastic hinge rotation capacity. Class 3 is known as semi-compact section. Sections that do not meet the limits for class 3 semi-compact sections should be classified as class 4 slender. Clause 4. Pv The web of a section will sustain the shear in a structure. Shear capacity is normally checked at section part that sustains the maximum shear force. It enables plastic moment to take place.2.12 Generally. Alternatively. Class 2 is known as compact section.3. 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. However. Class 4 is known as slender section. However. Fv. given by: Pv = 0.2 Shear Capacity. local buckling will bar any rotation at constant moment. Class 1 is known as plastic section. the plastic moment capacity cannot be reached. a crosssection may be classified with its compression flange and its web in different classes.6pyAv . Class 1 section is used for plastic design as the plastic hinge rotation capacity enables moment redistribution within the structure. the stress at the extreme compression fiber can reach design strength. When this section is applied.

Mc At sectional parts that suffer from maximum moment. py is the design strength of steel and it depends on the thickness of the web. 2. and Mc = pyZeff for class 4 slender cross-sections where S is the plastic modulus.3. There are two situations to be verified in the checking of moment capacity – low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.3 Moment Capacity. . Clause 4. 2.2 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = pyS for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections.13 in which Av is the shear area. BS 5950 provides various formulas for different type of sections.3. Z is the section modulus. Seff is the effective plastic modulus.2. Mc = pyZ or alternatively Mc = pySeff for class 3 semi-compact sections. moment capacity of the section needs to be verified.3. and Zeff is the effective section modulus.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv does not exceed 60% of the shear capacity Pv.5.

2pyZ for class 1 plastic or class 2 compact cross-sections. in which Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section excluding the shear area Av.3.2 High Shear Moment Capacity This situation occurs when the maximum shear force Fv exceeds 60% of the shear capacity Pv. - Otherwise: Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av.14 2. Mc = py(Z – ρSv/1.5. and ρ is given by ρ = [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2 .3 of BS 5950 states that: Mc = py(S – ρSv) < 1.3. and Mc = py(Zeff – 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.2. Clause 4.5) or alternatively Mc = py(Seff – ρSv) for class 3 semi-compact sections.

6Vw.2 Web Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.1 of BS 5950 states that.4 Moment Capacity of Web against Shear Buckling 2.4.3.4.4. 2.15 2. or 62ε for a welded section. it should be assumed to be susceptible to shear buckling.3. Vw = dtqw where d = depth of the web. where Vw is the simple shear buckling resistance.3. if the web depth-to-thickness ratio d/t > 70ε for a rolled section. The moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined taking account of the interaction of shear and moment using the following methods: a) Low shear Provided that the applied shear Fv ≤ 0.4. but the web is designed for shear only.3.1 Web not Susceptible to Shear Buckling Clause 4.2 states that.4. if the web depth-to-thickness d/t ≤ 62ε.4.6Vw. obtained from Table 21 BS 5950 t = web thickness b) High shear – “flanges only” method If the applied shear Fv > 0.3. provided that the flanges are not class 4 slender. a conservative value Mf for . qw = shear buckling strength of the web. it should be assumed not to be susceptible to shear buckling and the moment capacity of the cross-section should be determined using 2.

3. .or H-section: k=T+r k=T .5 Bearing Capacity of Web 2.2. provided that the applied moment does not exceed the “low-shear” moment capacity given in a).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.5.6be/k but n ≤ 5 and k is obtained as follows: .at the end of a member: n = 2 + 0.for a welded I.16 the moment capacity may be obtained by assuming that the moment is resisted by the flanges alone.except at the end of a member: n = 5 . the web should be designed using Annex H.3. with each flange subject to a uniform stress not exceeding pyf. 2. c) High shear – General method If the applied shear Fv > 0.5. where pyf is the design strength of the compression flange.1 Unstiffened Web Clause 4.6Vw.for a rolled I. It is given by: Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw in which.or H-section: .3 for the applied shear combined with any additional moment beyond the “flanges-only” moment capacity Mf given by b).

r is the root radius.3. The capacity Ps of the stiffener should be obtained from: Ps = As. T is the flange thickness. and t is the web thickness. 2.3. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 8 of BS 5950.2 Stiffened Web Bearing stiffeners should be designed for the applied force Fx minus the bearing capacity Pbw of the unstiffened web.5.6 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.17 where b1 is the stiff bearing length. 2.net is the net cross-sectional area of the stiffener. the smaller value should be used to calculate both the web capacity Pbw and the stiffener capacity Ps. be is the distance to the nearer end of the member from the end of the stiff bearing. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load. pyw is the design strength of the web. .netpy in which As. allowing for cope holes for welding. If the web and the stiffener have different design strengths.

4 Design of Steel Beam According to EC3 The design of simply supported steel beam covers all the elements stated below. Beam sections are classified into 4 classes. .3. This section can develop plastic moment resistance. It has limited rotation capacity.1 Cross-sectional Classification A beam section should firstly be classified to determine whether the chosen section will possibly suffer from initial local buckling.4. This limit allows the formation of a plastic hinge with the rotation capacity required for plastic analysis. However. Clause 5. plastic hinge is disallowed because local buckling will occur first. the beam will buckle during pre-mature stage.3 of EC3 provided limits on the outstand-to-thickness (c/tf) for flange and depth-tothickness (d/tw) in Table 5. It is applicable for plastic design. To avoid this.1.18 2. It can also achieve rectangular stress block. Class 1 is known as plastic section. Class 2 is also known as compact section. Sectional size chosen should satisfy the criteria as stated below: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Cross-sectional classification Shear capacity Moment capacity (Low shear or High shear) Bearing capacity of web a) b) c) Crushing resistance Crippling resistance Buckling resistance (v) Deflection 2. When the flange of the beam is relatively too thin.

fy is the steel yield strength and γMO is partial safety factor as stated in Clause 5.Rd = Av (fy / √3) / γMO Av is the shear area. Vsd.19 Class 3 is also known as semi-compact section. Apart from that. Shear capacity will normally be checked at section that takes the maximum shear force. At each crosssection. but local buckling is liable to prevent development of the plastic moment resistance.2 Shear Capacity.4. It is necessary to make explicit allowances for the effects of local buckling when determining their moment resistance or compression resistance. Shear buckling resistance should be verified when for an unstiffened web. the ratios of c/tf and d/tw will be the highest among all four classes. The stress block will be of triangle shape. The member will fail before it reaches design stress. the ratio of d/tw > 69ε or d/tw > 30ε √kγ for a stiffened web. Vpl. Class 4 is known as slender section.Rd where Vpl. kγ is the buckling factor for shear. Calculated stress in the extreme compression fibre of the steel member can reach its yield strength.Rd The web of a section will sustain shear from the structure. and ε = [235/fy]0. the inequality should be satisfied: Vsd ≤ Vpl. 2.1.1. Pre-mature buckling will occur before yield strength is achieved.5 .

4.5. Mc.Rd. There are two situations to verify when checking moment capacity – that is.3 Moment Capacity.Rd.4. the reduced design plastic resistance moment allowing for the shear .Rd Moment capacity should be verified at sections sustaining maximum moment.20 2. For class 4 cross-sections. 2. γMO and γM1 are partial safety factors. the design moment resistance of a cross-section Mc. 2. the design moment resistance of a cross-section should be reduced to MV.1 Low Shear Moment Capacity When maximum shear force. Vsd is equal or less than the design resistance Vpl. when maximum shear force.4.Rd = Weff fy / γM1 where Wpl and Wel the plastic modulus and elastic modulus respectively.4. low shear moment capacity and high shear moment capacity.Rd may be determined as follows: Class 1 or 2 cross-sections: Mc.3. Vsd exceeds 50% of the design resistance Vpl.Rd = Wpl fy / γMO Class 3 cross-sections: Mc.3.Rd = Wel fy / γMO Class 4 cross-sections: Mc.7 states that. as stated in Clause 5.3. Weff is the elastic modulus at effective shear area.2 High Shear Moment Capacity Clause 5.Rd.

21 force. crippling of the web in the form of localized buckling and crushing of the web close to the flange.Rd Situation becomes critical when a point load is applied to the web. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange.Rd ≤ Mc. 2.4.Rd = (Wpl – ρAv2/4tw) fy / γMO but MV.5 .Rd – 1)2 2. This checking is intended to prevent the web from buckling under excessive compressive force. checking should be done at section subject to maximum shear force.5 (fyf / fyw)0.5 [1 – (σf.1 Crushing Resistance.7. is governed by one of the three modes of failure – Crushing of the web close to the flange. Ry.4. Thus. this checking is unnecessary.3 provides that the design crushing resistance.4.4 Resistance of Web to Transverse Forces The resistance of an unstiffened web to transverse forces applied through a flange. H or U section should be obtained from: Ry. bending about the major axis. For cross-sections with equal flanges. Clause 5.Rd = (ss + sγ) tw fγw / γM1 in which sγ is given by sγ = 2tf (bf / tw)0. Ry.Ed / fyf)2]0. However.Rd where ρ = (2Vsd / Vpl.Rd of the web of an I. it is obtained as follows: MV. accompanied by plastic deformation of the flange. if shear force acts directly at web without acting through flange in the first place. and buckling of the web over most of the depth of the member.

5.5 + 3(tw / tf)(ss / d)] / γM1 where ss is the length of stiff bearing. H or U section is given by: Ra.Ed is the longitudinal stress in the flange.4. σf. 2.3 Buckling Resistance.Rd The design crippling resistance Ra.2 Crippling Resistance.2. fyf and fyw are yield strength of steel at flange and web respectively.Rd The design buckling resistance Rb.4.4.Rd ≤ 1.Rd and Fsd / Ra. the following criteria should be satisfied: Fsd ≤ Ra. For member subject to bending moments. and ss / d < 0. H or U section should be obtained by considering the web as a virtual compression member with an effective beff. obtained from beff = [h2 + ss2]0.Rd Msd ≤ Mc.4.Rd + Msd / Mc.22 but bf should not be taken as more than 25tf. Rb. Ra.5 2.5 [(tf / tw)0.Rd of the web of an I.Rd of the web of an I.Rd = (χ βA fy A) / γM1 .Sd = 0.5tw2(Efyw)0. Rb.

23 where βA = 1 and buckling curve c is used at Table 5. This. Column is a compressive member and it generally supports compressive point loads.4.5. however.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam. 2. the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) Effective length Slenderness Compression resistance .5.5 Deflection Deflection checking should be conducted to ensure that the actual deflection of the structure does not exceed the limit as allowed in the standard. Therefore. checking is normally conducted for capacity of steel column to compression only.5. 2.1 of EC3.5 Design of Steel Column According to BS 5950 The design of structural steel column is relatively easier than the design of structural steel beam. Suggested limits for calculated deflections are given in Table 4.1 and Table 5.2. applies only to non-moment sustaining column. 2. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only. Actual deflection is a deflection caused by unfactored live load.

24 2. LE The effective length LE of a compression member is determined from the segment length L centre-to-centre of restraints or intersections with restraining members in the relevant plane. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross-sections) . directional restraint is based on connection stiffness and member stiffness. and back-to-back struts.5.7.2 Slenderness. T-section struts.1 Effective Length.5. Depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plate.3 Compression Resistance. channel. depending on the conditions of restraint in the relevant plane. For continuous columns in multi-storey buildings of simple design. 2. 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. the compression resistance Pc of a member is given by: Pc = Ag pc (for class 1 plastic.1. 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. λ = LE / r 2. This concept is not applicable for battened struts.5. in accordance of Table 22. angle. Pc According to Clause 4.1.4.

for class 1 plastic. and Mcy is the moment capacity about minor axis. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. . My is the moment about minor axis.5.5. the checking of cross-section capacity is as follows: My Fc M + x + ≤1 Ag p y M cx M cy where Fc is the axial compression. 2. 2.25 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. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact cross sections. py is the design steel strength. and pcs is the value of pc from Table 23 and Table 24 for a reduced slenderness of λ(Aeff/Ag)0. in which λ is based on the radius of gyration r of the gross cross-section.5. Mx is the moment about major axis. Ag is the gross cross-sectional area. the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked. Mcx is the moment capacity about major axis.1 Cross-section Capacity Generally.2.2 Column Subject to Combined Moment and Compression Force For a column subject to combined moment and compression force.

the following criteria should be checked: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Buckling length Slenderness Compression resistance Buckling resistance . Mx the maximum end moment on x-axis. 2.1 Column Subject to Compression Force Cross-sectional classification of structural steel column is identical as of the classification of structural steel beam.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. and Zy the elastic modulus.5.0 Pc M bs p y Z y where F is the axial force in column.2. 2. Mb the buckling resistance moment.2 Member Buckling Resistance In simple construction. py the steel design strength. Pc the compression resistance of column.6. For a structural steel column subject to compression load only.26 2. the following stability check needs to be satisfied: My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .

1.Rd According to Clause 5. determined using the properties of the gross cross-section.1.1. Alternatively.4. the compression resistance Nc.2 Slenderness. Nc.Rd of a member is given by: Nc. provided that both ends of a column are effectively held in position laterally. Clause 5.1 Buckling Length.6. the value of λ should not exceed 250.4.6.27 2. 2.3 Compression Resistance.Rd = A fy / γM0 (for class 1 plastic. λ=l/i For column resisting loads other than wind loads. whereas for column resisting self-weight and wind loads only.5 states that.1.6. class 2 compact and class 3 semi-compact crosssections) . l The buckling length l of a compression member is dependant on the restraint condition at both ends. 2. the buckling length l may be conservatively be taken as equal to its system length L. the value of λ should not exceed 180. the buckling length l may be determined using informative of Annex E provided in EC3. 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.5.

χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode.Rd 2.5.1 states that the design buckling resistance of a compression member should be taken as: Nc.Rd For compression members. Clause 5. Nb.4 Buckling Resistance.Rd .6.1. For hot rolled steel members with the types of cross-section commonly used for compression members.1.Rd = χ βA A fy / γM1 where βA = 1 for Class 1.28 Nc.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. the relevant buckling mode is generally “flexural” buckling. 2 or 3 cross-sections. and Aeff / A for Class 4 cross-sections. The design value of the compressive force NSd at each cross-section shall satisfy the following condition: NSd ≤ Nb.

Sd ⎤ ⎡ M z . Rd ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ α β for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections M y .2. Rd ⎥ ⎣ M Nz .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 .6. z f yd for Class 3 cross-sections M y . Rd for a conservative approximation where.Sd ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ ≤1 ⎢ M Ny .4.Sd + + ≤1 N pl . α = 2. for bi-axial bending the following approximate criterion may be used: ⎡ M y . Rd M pl . z .29 2.1 states that. 2. z f yd for Class 4 cross-sections where fyd = fy/γM1.Rd. Clause 5. M y .8. Rd M pl . the crosssection capacity and the member buckling resistance need to be checked.6. β = 5n but β ≥ 1. y .Sd N Sd M z . cross-section capacity depends on the types of cross-section and applied moment.Sd + + ≤1 Af yd Wel . Aeff is the effective area of the cross-section when subject to uniform compression. for I and H sections. y f yd Wel . in which n = Nsd / Npl.Sd + N Sd e Nz N Sd + + ≤1 Aeff f yd Weff . y f yd Weff . Weff is the effective section modulus of the cross-section when subject .1 Cross-section Capacity Generally.Sd N Sd M z .

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

05 4.33 120ε / 1 + 2r2 r1 = Fc / dtpyw.Rd = Afy / γM0 γM0 = 1. Rd .05 γM1 = 1.0 Moment Resistance Mb = pbSx Mb = pbZx Mb = pbZx. -1 < r1 ≤ 1 r2 = Fc / Agpyw ε = (275 / py) 0.0 Pc M bs p y Z y k y M y.eff Class 1.5(1 + γM0σw / fy) σw = NSd / dtw ε = (235 / fy)0.5 2.33ψ) ψ = 2γM0σa / fy – 1 σa = NSd / A α = 0. y .0 Stability Check My F Mx + + ≤ 1 .5 Class 3 Semi-compact 42ε / (0.Rd = Wefffy / γM1 γM0 = 1.Sd N Sd + ≤ 1. 2 Class 3 Class 4 Mc. 3 Class 4 Nc.0 N b. 2.Rd = Aefffy / γM1 3. Rd ηM c. y .05 Nc.0 Compression Resistance Pc = Agpc Pc = Aeffpcs Class 1.67 + 0.Rd = Welfy / γM0 Mc.Rd = Wplfy / γM0 Mc.

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

that is M = wL2 / 8 V = wL / 2 where w is the uniform distributed load and L the beam span. M and shear force.2 Structural Analysis with Microsoft Excel Worksheets The structural analysis of the building frame will be carried out by using Microsoft Excel worksheets.4 to 3.35 3. only beam shear forces will be transferred to the structural column. As the scope of this study is limited at simple construction. V are based on simply-supported condition. Different factors of safety with reference to BS 5950 and EC3 are defined respectively. Therefore. Simple construction allows the connection of beam-to-column to be pinned jointed. Please refer to Appendices A1 and A2 for the analysis worksheets created for the purpose of calculating shear force and bending moment values based on the requirements of different safety factors of both codes. . Sections 3. Calculation of bending moment. the use of advanced structural analysis software is not needed.8 discuss in detail all the specifications and necessary data for the analysis of the multi-storey braced frame. End moments are zero.

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

Combined) Pass Comparison between BS 5950 and EC3 Phase 3 END Figure 3.1: Schematic diagram of research methodology . Moment. M=wL2/8) Design worksheet development using Microsoft Excel Beams and columns design Fail Checking (Shear.37 Determine Research Objective and Scope Phase 1 Literature Review Determination of building and frame dimension Specify loadings & other specifications Phase 2 Frame analysis using Microsoft Excel (V=wL/2.

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

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

Table 8 (Offices occupancy class) states that the intensity of distributed load of offices for general use will be 2. For precast floor selfweight. repair and other general purposes. section 6. This value will be used as this frame model is meant for a general office usage.5 Loadings Section 2.3 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. Meanwhile. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. Therefore. all floors will be of one-way slab.40 Precast concrete flooring system will be introduced to this project. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. 125mm think floor panel will be used for other floors. 3.0kN/m2 respectively. precast solid floor panel of 100mm thick was selected for flat roof. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. Consequently. Multiplying the thickness of the slabs. each bay will contribute half of the load intensity to the intermediate frame. . In this design.2 (Flat roofs) states that. Meanwhile.2. this value will be adopted. for a flat roof with access available for cleaning. 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. a uniform load intensity of 1.4kN/m2 and 3. Weight of concrete is given by 24kN/m3. all the values of imposed loads of both BS 5950 and EC3 design will be based on BS 6399. For imposed roof load. the intensity of slab selfweight will be 2.5kN/m2. Therefore. The type of precast flooring system to be used will be solid precast floor panel. Therefore.5kN/m2 is appropriate.

2 “Buildings without cranes” of BS 5950 states that.0kN/m2 for finishes (superimposed dead load) on all floors will be assumed. Partial safety factors for loads. From Table 2. partial safety factors. and 1. γM0.35. permanent actions G include dead loads such as self-weight of structure. The . finishes and fittings. a selection of floor carpets and ceramic tiles will be used. The factor γM0 is used where the failure mode is plasticity or yielding. is given by 1.41 The finishes on the flat roof will be waterproofing membrane and decorative screed. the principal combination of loads that should be taken into account will be load combination 1 – Dead load and imposed gravity loads.1. γM1. Combining the superimposed dead load with selfweight. Meanwhile.6 for imposed load. in the design of buildings not subject to loads from cranes. In EC3.5. A general load intensity of 1. the total dead load intensity for roof and floor slabs are 3. variable actions Q include live loads such as imposed load.4kN/m2 and 4kN/m2 respectively. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 4 cross-section.1. Partial safety factor for resistance of Class 1. Meanwhile. is given by 1. γQ is given by 1.4 for dead load.05 as well. γf should be taken as 1.05. γF for dead load.6 Factor of Safety Section 2. for normal design situations. 3. γG is given by 1. for imposed floor load. depending on the interior designer’s intention.4. 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. 2 or 3 cross-section. For other floors.

Meanwhile. For steel grade S 275.8 Structural Analysis of Braced Frame 3.1 Load Combination This section describes the structural analysis of the steel frame. design strength py is decided by the thickness of the thickest element of the cross-section (for rolled sections). According to BS 5950. 3. namely S 275 (or Fe 430 as identified in EC3) and S 355 (or Fe 510 as identified in EC3).6 times total imposed . For steel grade S 355. fy is 355N/mm2 and 335N/mm2 respectively for the same thickness limits. 3. 3. in the meantime.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. which governs the resistance of a Class 4 (slender) cross-section. py is 275N/mm2 for thickness less than or equal to 16mm and 265N/mm2 for thickness larger but less than or equal to 40mm. py is 355N/mm2 and 345N/mm2 respectively for the same limits of thickness.1. in order to justify the effect of design strength of a steel member on the strength of a steel member.8. two (2) types of steel grade will be used. for Fe 510.4 times total dead load plus 1.42 factor γM1 is used where the failure mode is buckling – including local buckling. the load combination will be 1. In BS 5950.7 Categories In this project.

will be 48kN/m. For all other floors.8.2 will present the accumulating axial loads acting on the structural columns of the steel frame.43 load (1. For simple construction. BS 5950 results in higher value of shear. w.88 6m 137.1.5LL).76kN/m. the w will be 59. will be 45. the resultant load combination. For the roof.5% between the analyses of both codes. According to EC3.1 below: Table 3. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors.9kN/m. Clearly.7 179. For the roof. This is done by summating the resultant shear .5 times total imposed load (1. the w will be 62.6LL). For all other floors.28 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 206. Table 3. The next table.92 Bay Width 9m 216 281. w. the shear. the load combination will be 1.64kN/m. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.2 Shear Calculation This steel frame is pinned jointed at all beam-to-column supports.55 268. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. the resultant load combination. there is a difference of approximately 4.1 Resulting shear values of structural beams (kN) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 144 187.4DL + 1. the resulting shear values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.35 times total dead load plus 1.92 From Table 4.35DL + 1. 3. V at end connections is given by V = wl/2.

28 Int. = Internal column Ext. 137. 413.1 950. 206.84 707. where w is the resultant load combination and l is the bay width.64 6m Ext.76 1559.31 Int.08 Int. the resulting moment values of both bay widths and codes of design can be summarized in Table 3.52 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.54 Int.44 force from beam of each floor.8. 432 995.55 475.52 2123.84 1039. can be calculated by using the formula M=wl2/8. similar with the beam shear.98 496.76 1061.3 Moment Calculation For simple construction.4 633.92 519. 144 331.88 779.78 2026.52 1351.96 992.26 675.2 Accumulating axial load on structural columns (kN) BS 5950 Floor Int. = External column The accumulating axial loads based on the two codes vary approximately 4.7 316.47 744. Inputting the resultant load combinations into the formula. M. Table 3. 216 497.3: . 3. since all the beam-to-column connections are pinned jointed.94 1488.68 1415.39 1013.5%. Roof – 3rd 3rd – 2nd 2nd – 1st 1st . 275. structural beam moment. Internal columns will sustain axial load two times higher than external columns of same floor level as they are connected to two beams.62 Ext.76 9m Ext.Ground 288 663.

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). since this is simple construction. Since this is only preliminary analysis as well.74 605.88 Bay Width 9m 486 634. This is solely due to the difference in partial safety factors. initially.3. D or h is the depth of column section (m). Clearly. the depth (D for BS 5950 and h for EC 3) of a structural column is assumed to be 400mm. Regardless of the width of the bay. In this project. in this case. the eccentricity moment.45 Table 3. Me.4% to 4. e is the eccentricity of resultant shear from the face of column (m). the eccentricity of the resultant shear from the face of the structural column will be 100mm. there will be a moment due to eccentricity of the resultant shear from the beams. the higher the difference percentage will be. the higher the load combination of a floor. there will be no end moments being transferred from the structural beams. Subsequently.3 Resulting moment values of structural beams (kNm) BS 5950 Location 6m Roof Other Floors 216 281.55 268. For the moments of the structural columns.92 EC 3 Bay Width 9m 464. Therefore. However.07 From Table 3.6% between the analyses of both codes. the depth of the column has not been decided yet.23 6m 206. BS 5950 results in higher value of moment. there is a difference of approximately 4. .

6 63.0DL.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.66 53.98 80. However.4 Resulting moment due to eccentricity of structural columns (kNm) BS 5950 Floor Int.9 Structural Beam Design Structural beam design deals with all the relevant checking necessary in the design of a selected structural beam.4 84. 32. 3.6 56. Roof Other Floors 21. 20. V can be expressed as V = (1.46 V for external column can be easily obtained from shear calculation.6LL) – 1. Table 3. .4 below summarizes the moment values due to eccentricity. 20. 21.56 6m Ext.66 57. 32.4DL + 1.4 94. For EC 3. For BS 5950. V can be expressed as V = (1. 30.0DL.84 Ext. In simple construction. two major checks that need to be done is shear and moment resistance at ultimate limit state. The moments for floor columns will be evenly distributed as the ratio of EI1/L1 and EI2/L2 is less than 1.98 86.78 Int. for internal column.35DL + 1. Next. 30.6 Int.88 Int.5LL) – 1.38 9m Ext. serviceability check in the form of deflection check will need to be done. Table 3. V should be obtained by deducting the factored combination of floor dead (DL) and imposed load (LL) with unfactored floor dead load.08 EC 3 9m 6m Ext.5.

9. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 59.1 BS 5950 In simple construction.9mm. Depth between fillets. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. 3. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. Sx = 1290cm3.3mm. ε = √(275/py) = √(275/275) . shear capacity. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling.88 x 103 / 275 = 1025cm3 From the rearranged table. B = 152. Sx = M / py = 281. From the section table. d = 407. Depth. t = 8. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. T = 13.8kg/m. Plastic modulus. Flange thickness. moment capacity and web bearing capacity. Zx = 1120cm3.1mm. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. From the section table for universal beam. d/t = 50.6mm.88kNm.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). The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 187. Elastic modulus. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Sx (cm3).6mm. Width.99. Web thickness.92kN and 281. UB section 457x152x60 is chosen.3. b/T = 6. D = 454.

4. web is Class 1 plastic section. Mc” is checked. the limiting value for Class 1 plastic section is 80ε = 80. 0.3 “Shear capacity” is checked. this section is Class 1 plastic section. Meanwhile. Actual b/T = 5.54kN > Fv Therefore.5 “Moment capacity.6 x 275 x 3682. Av = 8.57kN > Fv = 187.48 = 1. therefore. Shear capacity. Actual d/t did not exceed 80. actual d/t = 50.0. Therefore. Since both flange and web are plastic. it is low shear. Next.0.6 = 3682. Mc = 275 x 1290 x 10-3 .2. shear buckling needs not be checked. where Av = tD for a rolled I-section. flange is Class 1 plastic section. For class 1 plastic cross-section.0 Sectional classification is based on Table 11 of BS 5950. shear capacity is adequate.6Pv = 0.4. where neutral axis is at mid-depth.6pyAv.75.0 in this design.6 x 607.3. Pv = 0.5 is checked. This is the limit for Class 1 plastic section.57 = 364.2. After clause 4.26mm2 Pv = 0. For web of I-section. clause 4. section 4.1 x 454. shear buckling resistance should be checked. which is smaller than 9ε = 9. section 4.26 x 10-3 = 607.0. Next. Therefore. Mc = pySx.92kN Therefore.5 states that if the d/t ratio exceeds 70ε for a rolled section. Since actually d/t < 70.

moment capacity is adequate.6kNm > Mc. 1.2 + 2 x 13.3 = 51. M = 281.5.2mm b1 = t + 1.1 x 275 x 10-3 = 218. bearing stiffener should be provided. section 4.2pyZx = 1.75kNm To avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads. Mc should be limited to 1. To prevent crushing of the web due to forces applied through a flange.2 “Bearing capacity of web” is checked.92kN .02mm k=T+r = 13.75kNm Therefore. If Fv exceeds Pbw. bearing capacity of web.6r + 2T (Figure 13) = 8.6be/k.1 + 1. be = 0.02mm Pbw = 98.2 x 275 x 1120 x 10-3 = 369. Pbw = (b1 + nk)tpyw r = 10.2 = 23.2pyZx. OK.49 = 354.34kN > Fv = 187. n = 2 b1 + nk = 98.5mm At support.02 x 8. therefore. n = 2 + 0.6 x 10.3 + 10.88kNm from analysis < Mc = 354.

the deflection is satisfactory. However. . the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. This is done in the form of deflection check. Therefore.5) should be conducted.67mm >δ Therefore. L = 6. only unfactored imposed load shall be used to calculate the deflection. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. Generally.0m E = 205kN/mm2 I = 25500cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection.84mm Table 8 (Suggested limits for calculated deflections) suggests that for “beams carrying plaster or other brittle finish). the serviceability limit state check (Section 2. δ. w = 15kN/m for floors. the vertical deflection limit should be L/360. δlim = 6000 / 360 = 16.50 Therefore. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 205 x 25500 = 4. The section is adequate. the bearing capacity at support is adequate. In this case. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done.

9.4mm. From the section table. Flange thickness. Wpl.6mm. Shear area. tf = 10.y (cm3). From the section table for universal beam. Therefore. the sections are rearranged in ascending form. Width. resistance of web to crushing. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity. Area of . necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be shear buckling. Web thickness. the properties of the UB chosen are as follows: Mass = 54kg/m.28kN and 268.y = M / py = 268. UB section 406x178x54 is chosen. h = 402. lateral torsional buckling. The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. 3. Depth.2 EC 3 In simple construction.51 This section satisfied all the required criteria in both ultimate and serviceability limit state check.9cm3 From the rearranged table.y = 927cm3. shear capacity.92 x 103 / 275 = 977.6mm. crippling and buckling. The shear and moment value for this particular floor beam is 179. first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl. Wel. Av = 32. The moment will then be divided by the design strength py to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. tw = 7. d = 360.92kNm.y = 1051cm3. Depth between fillets. it is adequate to be used. Wpl.9mm. Plastic modulus. moment capacity. b = 177.9cm2. Elastic modulus.6mm.

section classification is a must. Actual d/tw = 47.28kN γM0 = 1. d/tw = 47. flange subject to compression only”. fy = 275N/mm2 and ultimate tensile strength.1. VSd from analysis at each cross-section should not exceed the design plastic shear resistance Vpl.9 x 100 x 275) / (√3 x 1.15. Based on Table 3.6cm2. iLT = 4.48kN > 179. section 5.28kN Therefore. Actual c/tf = 8.5. fu = 430N/mm2. Second moment of area. For “web subject to bending. UB section 406x178x54 is Class 1 section.9mm.15 ≤ 9.05 Vpl. These values must be adopted as characteristic values in calculations. The design value of shear force.28kN .05) = 497.52 section. aLT = 131cm. From Table 5. yield strength. A = 68.2 for Class 1 elements.49kN > VSd = 179.Rd = (32. tf = 10. 0. Iy = 18670cm4.36cm. Before checks are done for ultimate limit states.48 = 298.4 ≤ 66.5Vpl. limiting d/tw ratio is 66. for “outstand element of compression flange.2.1 “Shear resistance of cross-section” of beam is checked.4. that is Vpl.Rd. tf ≤ 40mm. Next. Flange is Class 1 element. VSd = 179. Therefore. Web is Class 1 element.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0. neutral axis at mid depth”. For S275 (Fe 430). shear resistance is sufficient.6 for Class 1 elements.Rd = 0.5 x 497.6. c/tf = 8. limiting c/tf ratio (c is half of b) is 9.6(a).

6 “Resistance of webs to transverse forces” requires transverse stiffeners to be provided in any case that the design value VSd applied through a flange to a web exceeds the smallest of the following – Crushing resistance. crippling resistance. Therefore. For low shear. Ra. Actual d/tw = 47.Ed/fyf)2]0. section 5.2 “Moment resistance of cross-section with low shear” the design value of moment MSd must not exceed the design moment resistance of the cross-section Mc.8 and 56. low shear. Therefore. Section 5.Rd = 1051 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd. shear buckling check is not required. For crushing resistance.Rd. Ry.53 Therefore. section 5. Section 5.5 .Rd = (ss + sy) twfyw / γM1 where at support. Rb.05 = 275. not susceptible to lateral torsional buckling.5. MSd = 268.6 “Shear buckling” requires that webs must have transverse stiffeners at the supports if d/tw is greater than 63.1 for steel grade Fe 430 and Fe 510 respectively.8. The beam is fully restrained.5 “Lateral-torsional buckling” needs not be checked. the moment capacity is sufficient.5.y fy / γM0 for Class 1 or Class 2 cross-section.26kNm > MSd Therefore.Rd and buckling resistance.92kNm Mc.Rd = Wpl. sy = tf(bf/tw)0.5.4 < 63.5[fyf/fyw]0.5 [1 – (γM0 σf. Ry.

4 = 0.2.5tw2 (Efyw)0.Rd = 0.9)(0.62 (210000 x 275)0.14)] / 1.5 [(10.05.6)0.05 = 307.5 + 0 + 50/2 = 227.4kN For crippling resistance.5 + 3(tw/tf) (ss/d)] / γM1 ss/d = 50 / 360.5[h2 + ss2]0.9 (177.6 / 7.9/7.05 = 204.05 E = 210kN/mm2 Ra.Ed = 0. Rb.14 ≤ 0. OK γM1 = 1.5 x 7.7mm.6 = 1731.5 + 3(7.69) x 7.5 [402.28mm2 .6)0.54 At support.69mm Ry. OK.5 = 52. sy = 10.62 + 502]0. fyf = 275N/mm2.5 = 405. A = 227.Rd = (50 + 52.5 + a + ss/2 = 0. Ra.5 [(tf/tw)0. ss = 50mm at support.6 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.8 x 7. γM0 = 1.8mm beff should be less than [h2 + ss2]0.Rd = 0.Rd = βA fc A / γM1 A = beff x tw beff = 0.6/10. bending moment is zero.8kN For buckling resistance. σf.

Rd = 204. λ = 2. (Permanent load) . deflection should take into account deflection due to both permanent loads and imposed loads. From Figure 4.5 x 360.5kN Ra. the web of the section can resist transverse forces. curve (a) is used. which is larger than VSd = 179. fc = 119.8kN Ry.13 (rolled I-section). Therefore. λ√βA = 118. the serviceability limit state check (Section 4. This is done in the form of deflection check. the serviceability load should be taken as the unfactored specified value.2) should be conducted.6 = 118.Rd = 1 x 119. buckling about y-y axis.5kN.Rd = 307.8 x 1731. After necessary ultimate limit state checks have been done. fc = 121N/mm2 λ√βA = 120.28 x 10-3 / 1.8N/mm2 Rb.55 βA = 1 γM1 = 1.05 = 197.4kN Minimum of the 3 values are 197.4 / 7.6 From Table 5.6 λ√βA = 118.6kN/m for floors.29). Generally.5 d/t = 2.1. δmax = δ1 + δ2 – δ0 (hogging δ0 = 0 at unloaded state) w1 = 27. fc = 117N/mm2 By interpolation. OK.05 For ends restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement (Table 5.28kN.

56 w2 = 15kN/m for floors.88mm δ2 = 5 x 15 x 64 x 105 / 384 x 210 x 18670 = 6. it should also satisfy all the required criteria in the ultimate limit state check. max = 6000 / 250 = 24mm > δ1 + δ2 = 18.46mm Table 4. is given by δ = 5wL4 / 384EI δ1 = 5 x 27. the vertical deflection limit should be L/350 for δ2 and L/250 for δmax. the deflection is satisfactory. δlim. This calculation is repeated for different sections to determine the suitable section which has the minimal mass per length. 2 = 6000 / 350 = 17.14mm > δ2 δlim. δ. . In this case.34mm Therefore.0m E = 210kN/mm2 Iy = 18670cm4 The formula for calculating exact deflection. The section is adequate. However. (Imposed load) L = 6.1 (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.

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.

5L / ry = 0. in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length.5. Mi = 63. the column should satisfy the relationship (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) + (My / pyZy) ≤ 1 My = 0. is assumed to be acting 100mm from the face of the column. For EI / L1st-2nd : EI / Lground-1st < 1. Therefore. pb = 250N/mm2 λLT = 50. for columns in simple construction. pb = 233N/mm2 From interpolation.60 Next.7 “Columns in simple structures”. pb = 260.54kNm. λLT = 48.7. My / pyZy = 0 Equivalent slenderness λLT of column is given by λLT = 0. R.19 x 10 = 48.78N/mm2 Mb = pbSx = 260. From frame analysis. the beam reaction. therefore.17. Section 4. The moment is distributed between the column lengths above and below 1st floor.78 x 652 x 10-3 = 170. M = 31. the moment will be equally divided.17 From Table 16 (Bending strength pb for rolled sections).08kNm.03kNm . λLT = 45. when only nominal moments are applied.5 x 5000 / 5.

first the mass (kg/m) and then the plastic modulus Wpl.y (cm3). The size will then be checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.96 < 1. necessary checks for ultimate limit state will be cross-section resistance (in the form of moment resistance) and in-plane failure about major axis (which is a combination of axial force and eccentricity moment).03 = 0. This is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.88 x 103 / 275 = 210. Therefore.52 / 1818.0 Therefore. Wpl. The moment will then be divided by the design strength fy to obtain an estimated minimum plastic modulus value necessary in the design. UC section 254x254x73 is chosen.10.54 / 170.61 (Fc / Pc) + (Mx / Mbs) = 1415. From the section table for universal column. the combined resistance against axial force and eccentricity moment is adequate.2 EC 3 In simple construction. apart from section classification.5cm3 From the rearranged table. .08kN and 57. The axial force and eccentricity moment value for this particular internal column are 1351. 3. This section satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.44 + 31. it is adequate to be used.y = MSd / fy = 57.88kNm respectively. the sections are rearranged in ascending form.

Av = 25. Web thickness. Second moment of area.1cm.46cm. tf = 14. with d/tw = 23. From this table.8. From Table 5. Wel. Depth between fillets. fu = 430N/mm2 Sectional classification is based on Table 5.6cm2. Wpl. σw. Plastic modulus.08 x 103 / 200. Therefore. Actual c/tf = 8.y = 990cm3. Radius of gyration.5b). flange is Class 1 element.y = 895cm3.6 = 784. Width. Next.6 “Axially loaded members with moments” will be checked. the web is Class 1.5. c/tf = 8.2mm. this section is Class 1 section. For symmetric I-section of Class 1 or 2. from.94 (c = 0. therefore. tf = 14.3.2 respectively. section 5.2mm < 40mm.2 and 10. for outstand element of compression flange (flange subject to compression only). b = 254mm. For web subject to bending and compression.6mm. Depth. Elastic modulus. the classification depends on the mean web stress.2mm.94.8 gives the limiting values of stress σw for Class 1 and 2 cross-sections.6(a) of C-EC3 for Class 1 elements. fy = 275N/mm2. d/tw = 23. Iy = 11370cm4. the limiting values of c/tf for Class 1 and 2 are 9.9cm2.5cm. Actual c/tf = 8.1. A = 92. tw = 8. Area of section. aLT = 98. section 5. Shear area. d = 200. Since both flange and web are plastic.2 x 8. .2. the properties of the UC chosen are as follows: Mass = 73kg/m. Flange thickness.73N/mm2 Table 5. Beforehand. iz = 6. iy = 11. σw = NSd / dtw = 1351.94 < 9.3. h = 254mm. iLT = 6.62 From the section table.86cm.

1kN Maximum applied shear load (at top of column) is Vmax.y.Rd > Vmax. From Table 5.1 : MNy.y.88 x 103 / 5000 = 11.6 x 102 x 275) x 10-3 / (√3 x 1.Rd is such that n < 0. the section is subject to a low shear.1 : MNy.y.1kN n = 1351.y.1 = 0.3kNm MNy.Rd = 1.Rd = Mpl.Rd = Wpl.Rd = A fy / γM0 = 92. allowing for axial force.Sd / L = 57.05) = 387.63 Vpl.Sd = My.58kN 0.1 Therefore.555 ≥ 0.Rd (1 – n) Mpl. n = NSd / Npl.Rd = 1.27.11 x 259.Rd n ≥ 0.05 = 2433.Sd Therefore.Rd = 1.08 / 2433.555) . MN.3 x (1 – 0.Rd (1 – n) Npl.y fy / γM0 = 990 x 10-3 x 275 / 1.Rd Reduced design plastic moment.11 Mpl.5Vpl.11 Mpl.9 x 102 x 275 x 10-3 / 1.Rd = Av(fy / √3) / γM0 = (25.05 = 259. MNy.

2 “Axial compression and major axis bending” states that all members subject to axial compression NSd and major axis moment My. fc = 249.y. section 5.94kNm Therefore.Rd) + (kyMy.Sd must satisfy the expression (NSd / Nb.3 tf ≤ 40mm λy√βA = 38.Rd) ≤ 1.64 = 128.y.13 “Selection of buckling curve for fc”.85L = 0.6. buckling curve (b) is used.3 Based on Table 5. λy√βA = 38.3. the moment resistance is sufficient.1kNm > MSd = 28.0 Ly = 0. Lastly.1 x 10 = 38.Sd / ηMc. for buckling about y-y axis. βA = 1 λy√βA = 38. fc = 248N/mm2 From interpolation.3.85 x 5000 = 4250mm Slenderness ratio λy = Ly / iy = 4250 / 11. fc = 250N/mm2 λy√βA = 40.7N/mm2 .

.0 Therefore.05 = 1 x 249.Rd) = (1351. Therefore.Rd = βA fc A / γM1.y.9 x 102 x 10-3 / 1.y. the resistance against in-plane failure against major axis is sufficient.3) + (1.94 / 1 x 128.Rd) + (kyMy.5 x 28.65 Nb.7 x 92.y.08 / 2209.95 < 1.5 (Conservative value) η = γM0 / γM1 =1 (NSd / Nb. This section 254x254x73 UC satisfied all the required criteria in ultimate limit state check.Sd / ηMc. γM1 = 1. it is adequate to be used.1) = 0.05 = 2209.3kN ky = interaction factor about yy axis = 1.

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

89 678.52 439.95 2.81 523.77 6.81 528.26 2.55 583.64 0.5 S355 Difference (kN) 9.02 6.82 2.85 767.19 1.1 -2.32 EC 3 (kN) 366.56 S275 Difference (kN) 7.65 724.44 2.94 2.72 -12.88 876.18 358.2 1102.77 1146.21 15.51 -4.99 589.87 -0.7 1.28 8.13 19.46 -3.35 -1.3 683.52 443.88 -18.56 400.08 2.74 0.11 1218.84 727.29 452.98 305.61 340.78 -25.11 -1.14 583.32 860.44 471.79 11.65 846.99 918.06 1.57 -2.79 2.74 -0.19 387.53 356.73 -3.82 2.34 44.93 11.2 -2.35 431.02 496.55 617.38 811.84 300.83 0.78 541.78 15.05 607.95 404.37 399.02 698.5 461.74 393.86 619.47 831.58 308.6 14.77 728.33 577.75 437.09 -2.78 456.55 1.15 3.78 -20.2 777.28 554.55 3.16 4.51 18.81 -2.66 24.66 5.35 793.48 517.3 14.93 1.86 -0.64 0.7 9.56 878.5 1.19 1.47 341.63 12.17 8.6 10.14 784.06 1.26 -8. 2.23 -9.31 446.45 623.83 938.14 18.42 820.38 1.15 507.15 -16.81 -3.67 Table 4.5 1102.78 942.5 1.68 6.94 2.74 2.8 800.51 384.32 10.02 12.19 4.36 11.37 338.73 -2.21 668.68 1007.37 609.09 1012.96 6.96 666.25 382.93 11.21 -24.4 0.41 925.91 1011.67 644.57 13.4 -10.16 1057.77 -3.65 635.55 1.56 15.47 545.5 -0.53 943.29 5.92 2.93 334.27 13.35 730.27 0.2 447.74 594.56 3.48 759.39 511.66 497.09 773.55 522.85 405.39 1.22 2.32 783.61 345.92 394.5 642.28 303.11 -2 2.46 478.06 EC 3 (kN) 284.09 -2.24 3.14 .51 1.79 12.45 -1.15 343.62 1.04 % Diff.5 1.64 5.33 409. BS 5950 (kN) 376.81 -3.79 2.1 493.99 660.38 542.33 862.03 4.58 753.1 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 291.13 705.4 0.65 0.7 -0.07 942.5 -0.74 2.72 % Diff.98 1134.81 1024.6 1.7 -0.86 1204.85 517.85 854.87 433.91 -19.38 20.21 667.93 1.53 564.27 0.83 0.92 588.65 0.47 596.24 0.13 1091.71 429.79 2.5 529.34 523.59 460.27 819.15 3.27 845.62 515.55 712.99 15.09 16.6 1.21 441.57 680.18 8.16 551.26 888.31 2.75 -13.38 1.97 392.39 462.32 877.4 -0.65 420.58 34.66 704.6 405.69 -1.79 398.69 4.94 559.27 14.46 2.56 -5.

13 -0. 1 / (γM0 x √3) ≈ 0.07 6.43 3.98 141.94 -12.01 -16.77 4.13 8.97 EC 3 (kNm) 113. meanwhile.6 py Av Av = Dt Vpl.91 % Diff.06 % Diff.Rd = (Av x fy) / (γM0 x √3) … (EC3) … (BS 5950) Av is obtained from section table.6 137.83 132. For steel grade S275.05 3.8 8. Therefore.44 1300.07 170.45 1431.3% less than 0.57 -4.2 Moment capacity of structural beam UB SECTION BS 5950 (kNm) 305x102x25 305x102x28 305x102x33 305x127x37 305x127x42 94.76 4.62 182. Also.35 -0.35 217.51 1007. Table 4.68 533x210x109 533x210x122 995.06%. BS 5950 (kNm) 121. 6. varies with Av = Dt as suggested by BS 5950.97 6. This value. however. these facts explain the reason why shear capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.86 125.57% to 4.58 -9.43 160.3 6.23 168.58 4.81 5.94 162.55. Most of the values given are lesser than Dt value.59 5.28 148.06%.69% to 4. For steel grade S355.64 The difference is based on deduction of shear capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.07 . There are a few explanations to the variations.57 206. The shear capacity of a structural beam is given by Pv = 0.43 -1.06 1115.85 EC 3 (kNm) 88 106.59 5.76 191. which is approximately 8.59 4.78 11.6 as suggested by BS 5950. Negative value indicates that the shear capacity calculated from EC3 is higher than that from BS 5950.21 -1.56 S355 Difference (kNm) 7.29 S275 Difference (kNm) 6.49 1295. the difference percentage ranges from -2. the difference percentage ranges from -3.41 143.05 110.14 8.03 1440.05 1099.43 3.

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 195.89 1.73 21.71 9.52 11.83 4.38 8.28 5.45 976.25 397.45 18.29 15.73 19.66 5.4 264.05 232.08 358.55 4.83 5.58% to 6.43 4.13 318.93 740.57 5.84 13.33 198 232.11 5.5 14.06 0.6 300.5 654.17 255.49 5.08 510.63 4.75 484.3 844. Positive value indicates that the moment capacity calculated from EC3 is lower than that from BS 5950.01 4.67 425.02 315.05 11.53 5.03%.75 431.68 560.75 332.92 13.96 21.12 5.95 514.08 5.3 426 479.23 213.1 5.57 5.5 691.9 619.06 11.17 24.24 17.05 0.9 163.41 19.85 27.43%.67 20.24 1.7 211.1 220.55 9.7 18.17 27.01 182.55 433.27 14.02 455.5 354.1 5.5 390.45 521.5 302.75 398.96 10. the difference percentage ranges from 0.72 9.49 15.2 24.02 377.29 2.85 5.75 631.93 885.47 955.86 8.17 7.5 34.35 624.9 900.44 4.91 The difference is based on deduction of moment capacity of EC3 from BS 5950.65 244.75 300.55 429.35 302.05 336.86 4.5 15.88 10.95 755.43 4.52 434.25 517.37 16. For steel grade S275.99 4.48 17.26 317.14 3.35 693.32 0.67 685.13 246.95 479.75 199.57 355. .39 682.65 749.07 609.58 5.29 1.1 285.42 5.25 5.41 5.85 585.04 1.41 221.08 252.53 5. the difference percentage ranges from 1.29 202.77 233.98 24.01 4.81 529.44 14.45 769.25 497.62 7.2 291.35 1104 238.35 731.5 5.16 9.95 189.52 395.79 141.1 539 619.24 1.3 695.48 5.16 5.85 11.51 1.61 4.55 4.63 4.08 6.95 24.95 566.31 19.16 5.9 11. For steel grade S355.32 1.05 585.3 4.68 12 13.8 1082.65 149.28 15.24 376.02 18.45 234.22 13.36 2.78 15.11 5.73 2.17 171.26 312.75 562.27 1.11 261.33 221.83 275.34 404.25 453.55 257.6 341.85 5.94 10.28 5.66 2.1 1.83 1.65 590.53 171.33 471.78 487.95 532.5 44.4 838.53 1.95 275.86 4.05 35.5 330 371.5 457.65 404.19 370.33 181.69 188.98 20.5 479.65 5.98 352.97 14.4 277.95 385.46 5.1 244.6 5.32 10.55 21.87 4.49 5.11 242.33 192.87 4.44 12.8 799.21 287.95 848 184.68 0.63 7.41% to 6.53 549.31 4.14 410. meanwhile.

Table 4.y) are 1060cm3 and 1051cm3 respectively. sectional classification tables – Table 11 and Table 5. Meanwhile.0 as suggested by BS 5950.95.3.2 Structural Column In determining the structural capacity of a column. This is approximately 5% less than 1. EC3 provides better guidelines to classify a section web. The moment capacity of a structural beam is given by Mc = py Sx Mc. are revised. BS 5950 only provides a clearer guideline to the classification of Class 3 semi-compact section. plastic modulus based on BS 5950 (Sx) and EC3 (Wpl.Rd = Wpl. Besides that. 1 / γM0 ≈ 0.85%.70 There are a few explanations to the variations. for a UB section 406x178x54. Therefore. There is a variation of approximately 0. For a column web subject to bending and compression. 4.1 of BS 5950 and EC3 respectively.y fy / γM0 … (BS 5950) … (EC3) From EC3 equation. For example. . these facts explain the reason why moment capacity of most of the sections designed by EC3 is lower than the one designed by BS 5950.3 shows the result and percentage difference of compression resistance while Table 4. A study is conducted to determine independently compression and bending moment capacity of structural column with actual length of 5m. whether it is Class 1.1. Class 2 or Class 3 element.4 shows the result and percentage difference of moment resistance. there are some variations between plastic modulus specified by BS 5950 section table and EC3 section table.

**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

56 2.64 4.25 16.37 2.43 2.1 0. subject to 15kN/m of unfactored imposed floor load.16 11.41 1.61 3.04 0. Meanwhile.05 0. EC3 requires deflection due to permanent dead load to be included in the final design.01 0.59 2.25 13. Section 3.71 3.51 0.19 2.66 0.26 18.77 4.26 0.01 2.63 2.25 2.75 18.85 15.68 2.34 1.36 8.77 16.1 0.49 2.5 above.4 “Design values of material coefficients” of C-EC3 states that E = 210kN/mm2.13 0.98 21.22% to 3.4 2.33 3. Different from BS 5950.45 14.84 11.96 1.79 16.56 2.7 2. there is also slight difference between second moment of area in both codes.21 3.08 0.42 0.23 0.29 0.71 3.74 457x152x52 457x152x60 457x152x67 457x152x74 457x152x82 457x191x67 457x191x74 457x191x82 457x191x89 457x191x98 533x210x82 533x210x92 533x210x101 533x210x109 533x210x122 5.85 1.1 0.85 1.31 2.66 2.33 12. for a section 356x171x57. .83 20.32 10.68 13.32 0.84 4.46 2.2 3.4 0. for a floor beam of 9m long.1. Ix = 16000cm4 from BS 5950 section table. section 3. For example.07 1. The minor differences had created differences between the deflection values.55 23.29 0.6 2. Meanwhile.55 From Table 4. the difference percentage ranges from -0. the major difference between the deflection designs of these two codes is the total deflection.7 2.21 24.4 2.62 5.12 17.52 0. for a floor beam of 6m long.83 13.13 8.25 2.34 18.06 0.54 2.04 2. Apart from that.37 4.26 2.61%.21 2.1.58 0. as required by EC3.18 1.07 0.63%.33 4.35 0.07 0.7 2.06 0.08 21. E.03 9.1 3.47 29.05 0.25 0.9 9.27 3.08 0.53 0.3 “Other properties” of BS 5950 states that E = 205kN/mm2.77 2.22 28.63 19. Iy = 16060cm4 from EC3 section table. the difference percentage ranges from -0.38 2.73 1.8 1.22% to 3.01 1.16 9.24 2. However.33 0.74 4. The first explanation for this difference is the modulus of elasticity value.56 2. This is basically same as the range of beam length 6m.46 2. Meanwhile.16 1.06 0.51 21.93 2.78 3. δmax. It also indicates that deflection value calculated from BS 5950 is normally higher than that from EC3.75 2.

4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x52 203x203x86 9.750 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x152x60 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd . floor beams.744 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) .4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 Weight of steel frame designed by BS 5950 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 1 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 2 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 3 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 4 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x82 457x191x67 406x140x46 406x140x39 To 2nd Storey 2nd .6 and Table 4. the results of the design (size of structural members) are tabulated in Table 4.7 for BS 5950 and EC3 design respectively.122 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x60 4. To compare the economy of the design.3 Economy of Design After all the roof beams.75 4. the weight of steel will be used as a gauge.4th Storey 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 7.889 152x152x23 152x152x37 152x152x37 203x203x52 3.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . Table 4. external columns and internal columns have been designed for the most optimum size.

9. meanwhile.571 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .821 Roof Section Designation Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) Summary of the total steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4.571 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . is tabulated in Table 4.889 9.821 . The saving percentage.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4.8 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design Types of Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.744 EC3 4.313 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.76 Table 4.8.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 9.122 9.7 Weight of steel frame designed by EC3 Model No Frame Type Universal Beams Floor S275 5 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 6 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) S355 7 2 Bay 4 Storey (6m span) 8 2 Bay 4 Storey (9m span) 533x210x92 533x210x82 406x178x54 356x171x45 To 2nd Storey 2nd .313 9.750 4.645 3. Table 4.

The percentage of saving offered by BS 5950 design ranges from 1.9 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. larger hot-rolled section is required to provide adequate moment capacity and also stiffness against deflection. This is because deeper.60 17.571 9.821 4.96 5. Regardless of bay width.889 EC3 4.60% to 17. This time. all frame types.313 % 1. unaffected by the effect of imposed load deflection.9. beam spans and steel grade designed by using BS 5950 offer weight savings as compared with EC3. Meanwhile.750 9.42 15. the connections of beam-to-column were assumed to be “partial strength connection”.645 9.96%. the percentage savings by using BS 5950 are higher than EC3 for S355 steel grade with respect to S275 steel grade. depending on the steel grade.29 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) As shown in Table 4. Semi-continuous .744 3. The percentage savings for braced steel frame with 9m span is higher than that one with 6m span.77 Table 4. This resulted in higher percentage difference. BS 5950 design allowed lighter section. This is because overall deflection was considered in EC3 design. Further check on the effect of deflection was done.122 7.

749 Roof Section Designation (Semi-continous) Universal Columns External Internal Total Steel Weight (tonne) . β is treated as β = 3. The renewed beam sections are tabulated in Table 4.645 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 254x254x73 4. the deflection value is given as: δ = βwL4 / 384EI For a span with connections having a partial strength less than 45%. For uniformly distributed loading. the deflection coefficient.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x60 203x203x60 254x254x89 8. This is different from pinned joint in simple construction. where zero “support” stiffness corresponds to a value of β = 5. Table 4.4th Storey 203x203x46 203x203x71 203x203x71 254x254x107 9.10 shown.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd . which was used in the beam design.4th Storey To 2nd Storey 2nd .211 533x210x92 533x210x82 457x178x52 406x140x46 To 2nd Storey 2nd .503 152x152x30 203x203x46 203x203x46 203x203x71 4.0. 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.78 frame is achieved in this condition.5.10 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 . Columns remained the same as there was no change in the value of eccentricity moment and axial force.

meanwhile.749 % 0. is tabulated in Table 4.750 4.95 BS 5950 4.12 Percentage difference of steel weight (ton) between BS 5950 design and EC3 design (Revised) Frame 2Bay 4Storey Bay Width (m) 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.889 8.503 7.11.12.42 3.749 Table 4.122 9. The saving percentage.645 3.11 Total steel weight for the multi-storey braced frame design (Revised) Types of Frame Bay Width (m) 2Bay 4Storey 6 Steel Grade S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 2Bay 4Storey 9 S275 (Fe 430) S355 (Fe 510) 7.79 Summary of the total revised steel weight for the multi-storey braced steel frame design is tabulated in Table 4. Table 4.889 8.503 9.645 5.122 9.211 Total Steel Weight (ton) BS 5950 4.744 Total Steel Weight (ton) EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.750 4.22 9.11 .211 10.744 EC3 (Semi-Cont) 4.

Therefore. (c) simple construction. The moment capacity will be the deciding factor.1(a) for the illustration of rigid connection. it can be seen that there is an obvious reduction of steel weight required for the braced steel frame.1 Bending moment of beam for: (a) rigid construction. wL2/8 MR wL2/8 MR wL2/8 (a) Design moment.0. .12. MD = wL /8 – MR 2 (b) (c) Figure 4. However.11% to 10.1(b)). The greater difference for steel grade S355 indicated that deflection still plays a deciding role in EC3 design. if rigid connection is introduced. if it is built semi-continuously.95%. the sagging moment at mid span became less than that of simple construction (Figure 4.80 From Table 4. as the connection stiffness becomes higher. Please refer to Figure 4. Eventually. The ability of partial strength connection had enabled moment at mid span to be partially transferred to the supports (Figure 4. with deflection coefficient set as β = 1. the gap reduces. The effect of dead load on the deflection of beam had been gradually reduced. Even though EC3 design still consumed higher steel weight. the percentage of difference had been significantly reduced to the range of 0. the effect of deflection on the design will be eliminated. (b) semi-rigid construction.1(c)).

5. In review to the research objectives.06% with regard to BS 5950 due to the variance between constant values of the shear capacity formula specified by both codes. Suggestions of further research work are also included in this chapter. Meanwhile. calculation based on EC3 had reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 4.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. Apart from that. The application of different steel grade did not contribute greater percentage of difference between the shear capacities calculated by both codes. for the moment capacity of structural beam.1. γM0 of 1.05 in the moment capacity . Av value also caused the difference. This is mainly due to the application of partial safety factor. calculation based on EC3 had effectively reduced a member’s shear capacity of up to 6.1 Structural Beam For the shear capacity of a structural beam. a summary on the results of the objectives is categorically discussed.1 Structural Capacity 5. the difference between the approaches to obtain shear area.43%.

This is due to the implication of partial safety factor. compared with BS 5950. it was found that for a same value of λ.05 as required by EC3 design. as compared to the partial safety factor.2 Deflection Values When subject to an unfactored imposed load. 5.0 as suggested by BS 5950. fc is smaller than pc. EC3 design created majority .0m long. The steel frame is assumed to be laterally braced. Therefore.27% to 9. there is also a deviation in between the compressive strength. In comparison. Meanwhile.24% of column compressive resistance was achieved when designing by EC3. From interpolation.2 Structural Column In simple construction. of both codes. With the inclusion of partial safety factor.82 calculation required by EC3. γM0 of 1.1. A reduction in the range of 5. 5. Therefore. Only gravitational loads will be considered in this project. axial compression is much more critical. only moments due to eccentricity will be transferred to structural column. only compressive resistance comparison of structural column was made. This comparison is based on a structural column of 5. The design of structural beam proposed by EC3 is concluded to be safer than that by BS 5950. wind load (horizontal load) will not be considered in the design. it is obvious that EC3 stresses on the safety of a structural beam. γM of 1. a structural beam will be subject to deflection. fc and pc respectively. For the same value of unfactored imposed load.

1 of EC3 provided proof to this. However.22% to 3.122 tons and 7. Higher E means the elasticity of a member is higher.645 tons and 9. The difference ranges from 0. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 4.821 tons and 4. and 9. Section 4. thus can sustain higher load without deforming too much. compared with the section chosen for BS 5950 design. the consumption of steel for S275 (Fe 430) and S355 (Fe 510) is 9. the total deflection was greater.750 tons for BS 5950 design. Cross-section with higher second moment of area value.571 tons for EC3 design. BS 5950 specifies 205kN/mm2 while EC3 specifies 210kN/mm2. and 4.3 Economy Economy aspect in this study focused on the minimum steel weight that is needed in the construction of the braced steel frame. it was found that EC3 design produced braced steel frames that require higher steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950. The main reason for the deviation is the difference in the specification of modulus of elasticity.83 lower deflection values with respect to BS 5950 design.889 tons for BS 5950 design. For a 2-bay. 6m bay width steel frame. For a 2-bay. I will have to be chosen.63%. E.744 tons and 3.2. 9m bay width steel frame. In this study.313 tons for EC3 design. taking into account deflection due to permanent loads. 4-storey. 5. 4-storey. serviceability limit states check governs the design of EC3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. The total steel weight of structural beams and columns was accumulated for comparison. Therefore. .

4-storey. 9m bay width. 6m bay width. However. S355 (Fe 510): 17.95% 2-bay.84 The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay. since the results of the third objective contradicted with the background of the study (claim by Steel Construction Institute). 9m bay width.5 had successfully reduced the percentage of difference between the steel weights designed by both codes.22% 5. it is suggested that an unbraced steel frame design is conducted to study the behavior.11% 2-bay. 4-storey. 4-storey.29% Further study was extended for the application of partial strength connection for beam-to-column connections in EC3 design. 6m bay width. The percentages of differences are as follow: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2-bay.4 Recommendation for Future Studies For future studies. S355 (Fe 510): 10. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 9m bay width.60% 2-bay. S355 (Fe 510): 15.96% 2-bay. S275 (Fe 430): 1. The reduction in deflection coefficient from 5. . S275 (Fe 430): 0. This study showed that steel weight did not contribute to cost saving of EC3 design. 6m bay width. S355 (Fe 510): 7. S275 (Fe 430): 5. 4-storey. 4-storey. 9m bay width.0 to 3. 4-storey.42% 2-bay. 6m bay width. 4-storey.42% 2-bay. it is recommended that further studies to be conducted to focus on the economy aspect of EC3 with respect to BS 5950. structural design and economic aspect based on both of the design codes. 4-storey.

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

86 APPENDIX A1 .

6LL Roof w = 1.4 x 24 + 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.6 + 1.6 x 9 = 48 kN/m Floors w = 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27. DL Live Load.87 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 x 15 = 62. DL Live Load. LL Floors Dead Load.4 x 27.4 1. LL LOAD FACTORS Dead Load.64 kN/m . of Bay No.4DL + 1.6 2.6 15 kN/m kN/m = = 1. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width. DL Live Load.0 DATA No. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. LL = = 4 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.6 FACTORED LOAD w = 1.

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

64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m 62.64 kN/m . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.89 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.64 kN/m 62. MAHMOOD 2.64 kN/m 62.0 LOAD LAYOUT 48 kN/m 6m 48 kN/m 62.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.

68 1415.76 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment.52 144 331.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.64 x 6 / 2 = 187. MAHMOOD 4.90 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4.84 707.92 kN M = 62. V = 62.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 288 663. Roof beams.92 519. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column.84 1039. V = 48 x 6 / 2 = 144 kN M = 48 x 6^2 / 8 = 216 kNm Floor beams. Shear. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .64 x 6^2 / 8 = 281.88 kNm 4.1 Beam Moment. . contributed by beam shear.0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced.

92) 663. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.84 (187.92) 1039.92) 331.76 .88 281.88 281.88 281.68 (187.84 [3] [4] 707.91 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.92 (187. MAHMOOD 5.92) 288 (187.92) 144 [1] 331.92 [2] 519.0 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 216 216 281.88 Shear (kN) (144) (144) 144 (187.84 (187.92) 519.52 707.88 281.88 281.76 1415. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

92 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.19 31.19 [3] 28.19 31.1.6LL) .6 21.54 31.54 28.19 28.54 28.54 28. MAHMOOD Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 21.54 28.19 28.19 28.6 31. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 [2] 28.19 21.19 31.6 [1] 21. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1001 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Frame Analysis STC.19 Moments are calculated from (1.4DL+1.19 [4] 28.6 28.54 31.19 21.0DL Most critical condition .6 21.19 28.

93 APPENDIX A2 .

5LL Roof w = 1.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 27.6 15 kN/m kN/m LOAD FACTORS Dead Load. l Storey Height = = = = = = 2 4 6 6 5 4 m m m (First Floor) m (Other Floors) LOADING Roof Dead Load. LL = = 1.94 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.5 kN/m @ 2 kN/m @ 2 24 9 kN/m kN/m = = 4.5 x 9 = 45.5 FACTORED LOAD w = 1. of Bay No.76 kN/m . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC. of Storey Frame Longitudinal Length Bay Width.5 x 15 = 59.35 x 27.6 2. LL Floors Dead Load.9 kN/m Floors w = 1.35 1.6 + 1.35 x 24 + 1. DL Live Load. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. LL = = 4 1. DL Live Load.0 DATA No. MAHMOOD 1.35DL + 1. DL Live Load.

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

76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m .76 kN/m 59. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.96 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.9 kN/m 59.0 LOAD LAYOUT 45. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 kN/m 6m 45. MAHMOOD 2.76 kN/m 59.76 kN/m 59.3 Cut Section of Intermediate Frame 4m [4] 4m [3] 4m [2] [1] 5m 6m 3.

0 LOAD CALCULATION Frame bracing Laterally braced. V = 45. .1 Beam Moment.7 kN M = 45.96 992.4 633. contributed by beam shear.2 Column Shear Column Shear (kN) Internal External 275.76 x 6 / 2 = 179. Roof beams. Shear. Eccentricity = 100 mm from face of column. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.28 kN M = 59. V = 59.08 137.98 496.92 kNm 4.9 x 6 / 2 = 137.9 x 6^2 / 8 = 206.76 x 6^2 / 8 = 268.7 316. horizontal load is not taken into account Beam restraint Top flange effectively restrained against lateral torsional buckling 4. Universal column of depth 200 mm Internal column .54 M = wl / 8 V = wl / 2 2 [4] [3] [2] [1] Moment External column will be subjected to eccentricity moment. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.52 1351.55 kNm Floor beams.26 675. MAHMOOD 4.97 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Moments from left and right will cancel out each other.

28) 275.7 (179.54 .7 [1] 316.28) 316.92 268.55 206.96 (179.52 (179.92 268.98 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.7) 137.92 268.28) 992.28) 496. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY Moment (kNm) 206.92 268.08 675.92 268.2 Shear (kN) (137.26 [3] [4] 675.55 268.0 5.26 (179.4 (179.98 [2] 496.92 5.98 (179. MAHMOOD 5.28) 633.7) (137.28) 137.54 1351. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.

89 28.5LL) .66 19.89 26. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1002 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (Eurocode 3) Frame Analysis STC.94 28.94 26. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.71 28.3 Column moment due to eccentricity (kNm) 20.94 26.89 26.89 Moments are calculated from (1.94 28. MAHMOOD 5.94 26.89 28.35DL+1.94 26.71 20.99 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.89 20.66 20.89 26.89 26.89 26.1.66 26.66 26.0DL Most critical condition .89 26.89 28.89 19.

100 APPENDIX B1 .

1 82.1 51 52.1 67.1 24.1 Sx (cm3) 171 259 234 342 258 306 403 353 314 393 481 543 483 539 724 659 623 614 566 775 888 720 711 896 1100 846 1060 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 59.1 139.9 43 45 46 46.2 74.101 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.8 60.1 98.1 48.1 32.9 149.1 40.1 67. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.3 41.1 67.1 25.88 kNm Sx = M / fy = 281. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23.3 92. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.2 28.1 Sx (cm3) 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 = 281.8 33.1 37 37 39 39.2 179 238.2 74.2 89.3 82 82.2 109 113 122 125.3 54 54.3 30 31.3 101 101. L = 6.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 1025 cm Try UB 457x152x60 .2 28.0m) STC.8 25.2 74.1 67.

subject to pure bending.1 13.75 50. Limiting d/t = 80ε = 80 Actual d/t = 50.75 = < 9 9 Flange is plastic Class 1 Section is symmetrical.3 < 80 Web is plastic Class 1 Section is : Class 1 plastic section . Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 5. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.3 Therefore. py = = mm 275 S275 < N/mm 2 16mm ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 Outstand element of compression flange. neutral axis at mid-depth.3 2.2 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. Section chosen = 457x152x60 UB 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 13.102 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 1290 1120 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm 3 b/T = d/t = 5.1 DATA Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.9 8.0 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1003 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 152.0m) STC. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.8 454. L = 6.3 407.

103

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

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

3.0

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

4.0

SHEAR CAPACITY Fv = 187.92 kN

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

2

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

5.0

MOMENT CAPACITY M= 281.88 kNm

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

104

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

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

6.0 6.1

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

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

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

Pbw

Fv Fv

Bearing capacity at support is ADEQUATE

105

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

STC, UTM

Made by Checked by

CCH DR. MAHMOOD

7.0

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

4

kN/m kN/m kN/mm cm

4 2

for roofs for floors

L=

6

m

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

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

The deflection is satisfactory!

106 APPENDIX B2 .

y (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. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.92 kNm W pl.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.9 cm3 Try 406x178x54 UB .0m) STC. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.107 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y = M / fy = 268.

6 10. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .y = W el. Second moment of area.4 1051 927 32.0 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. = 406x178x54 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.108 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.9 360.36 131 8. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.9 68.9 Therefore.15 47.4 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section.0m) STC.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 54 402.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area. MAHMOOD 1. L = 6. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. cm 4 cm cm cm 2.6 18670 4. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.6 177. Section chosen 1.6 7.

0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268.5 x 497.y fy / γMO = 1051 x 275 x 0. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.26 kNm MSd Mc.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.001 γMO = 1. it is low shear Mc.5Vpl. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 47.49 kN VSd 0.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4.05 = 275. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.05 √3 = 497.Rd = 0.28 kN V pl.0m) STC.7 3.92 kNm 0.5Vpl.2 (b) Web.7 Web is Class 2 element 406x178x54 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.4 > 46.9 x 100 275 1. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.15 <= 9. L = 6.001 / 1.48 = 298.109 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.Rd = W pl.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.Rd < Therefore.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.05 = 32.48 kN VSd < Vpl.

tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry.001 / 1.Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).8 < 63.5 σf.4 kN = VSd = 179. MAHMOOD 5.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .69) x 7. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 47.69 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .28 kN < Ry. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 52.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.05 204.Rd = γM1 At support.5 Ry.0m) STC.110 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. not susceptible to LTB 6.Rd = (50 + 52. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0.4 63. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan.6 x 275 x 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0. L = 6.0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.

26 7.Rd = > 0.111 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.2 0.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.05 205 307. Ra.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . L = 6.5 0.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. MAHMOOD At midspan.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.98 <= 1. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. Rd = 0.92 275.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.6 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.4 = γM1 = E= Ra.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 360. h= a= 402.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MSd Mc.3 ≤ = 1.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.Rd 268.8 VSd = kN/mm kN 179.14 1.5 ] .0m) STC.

75d Rolled I-section. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.6 fc 121 117 fc = 121 .5 = 405.Rd = 1 x 119.5 x SQRT(402.112 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. λ = 2.8 x 7.6 2 = 1731. buckling about y-y axis. L = 6.8 N/mm 2 Rb. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.05 = 197. MAHMOOD beff = 0.118) x (121 .5 kN > At mid span. Rb.Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.8 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.8 x 1731.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .117) / (120 .6 = 118.6 .5 x 360.(118.4 / 7.001 / 1.118) = 119.05 A = beff x tw = 227. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 118 120 118. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.6^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 227.28 x 0.5 d/t = 2.6 l = 0.0m) STC.7 mm Buckling resistance of web.28 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.

113 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27. L = 6.88 6.34 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory.0 1. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. .14 mm OK δmax = 11.46 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.46 = 18.0m) STC.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 . MAHMOOD 8.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 18670 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 11. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.88 + 6.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.

114 APPENDIX C1 .

1 497.08 kNm M= Sx = M / fy = 63. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.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 63.115 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.08 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 229.4 cm Try 203x203x60 UC .6 978. L = 5.4 568. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Mass (kg/m) 23 30 37 46 52 60 71 73 86 89 97 107 118 129 132 137 153 158 167 177 198 202 235 240 283 287 340 393 467 551 634 Sx (cm3) 184.3 247.1 652 802.1 310.4 988.

0 DATA Fc = 1415. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.116 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.23 17. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.2 9. L = 5.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel T= 14.52 kN L= 5 m 1.8 652 581. py = 275 ε = √ (275/py) = SQRT(275/275) = 1 .96 5.8 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 2 3 b/T = d/t = 7.2 160. Section chosen = 203x203x60 UC 1.3 14.0m) STC. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.1 8.6 205.2 = mm S275 < < < N/mm 2 16mm 40mm 63mm Therefore. MAHMOOD 1.19 75. Local buckling ratios: Flange Web = D= B= t= T= d= Sx = Zx = rx = ry = Ag = 60 209. Gross area.3 2.

3 80ε 1+r1 100ε 1+1.8 x 9.5r1 = 40 All ≥ 40ε < Section is : = 40 Web is plastic Class 1 Class 1 plastic section 3.4 4.52 kN Pc = pcAg py = Ag = 275 75.0 3. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column.44 r1 = 1 Actual d/t = < 17. "Restrained in direction at one end" LEX = 0.3 x 275) -1 < r1 ≤ 1 = 3. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.52 x 1000 / (160.8 N/mm cm 2 2 Buckling about x-x axis . L = 5.0m) STC.96 x 10) = 47. MAHMOOD Outstand element of compression flange.1 SLENDERNESS Effective Length About the x-x axis. Limiting b/T = 9ε Actual b/T = 7.117 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.or H-section under axial compression and bending ("generally" case) r1 = Fc dtpy = 1415.85L = 0.23 < < = < 10ε = 15ε = 9 9 10 15 Flange is plastic Class 1 Web of I.0 COMPRESSION RESISTANCE Fc = 1415.85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm λx = LEX / rx = 4250 / (8.

5. the moment will be equally divided. beam reaction.239) 2 = 239.118 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.46) / (48 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.9 N/mm Pc = pcAg = 239. Mi = 63.08 kNm 100 mm Moments are distributed between the column lengths above and below level 2. L = 5. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. R From frame analysis sheets.44 kN Fc < Pc 47. For EI/L1 : EI/L2 < 1.54 kNm .9 x 75.4 . in proportion to the bending stiffness of each length. Therefore. MAHMOOD Use strut curve (b) λx = λ 46 48 Interpolation: pcx = 242 .(47.46) x (242 .4 pc 242 239 Therefore. R is assumed to act 100mm off the face of the column.8 x 100 x 0.001 = 1818. the compressive resistance is adequate 5.0m) STC.0 NOMINAL MOMENT DUE TO ECCENTRICITY For columns in simple construction. M= 31.

00 The combined resistance against axial force and moment is adequate. MAHMOOD 6. L = 5.03 kNm 1415.45) / (50 .119 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.001 = 170.19 x 10) = 48.5 x 5 x 1000) / (5.0 COMBINED AXIAL FORCE AND MOMENT CHECK The column should satisfy the relationship My Fc Mx + + ≤1 Pc M bs pyZ y λLT = 0.17 .(48.78 x 652 x 0.0m) STC. 7.250) 2 = 260.45) x (233 .03 = < 0.0 4.52 1818.96 1.5 L/ry = (0.44 + 31.54 170.0 6.0 CONCLUSION Compression Resistance = Combined Axial Force and Moment Check = Use of the section is adequate Use : 203x203x60 UC OK OK .78 N/mm Mb = pbSx = 260. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1005 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (BS 5950-1 : 2000) Column Design (Internal Column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.17 py = λLT 45 50 275 pb 250 233 N/mm 2 pb = 250 .

120 APPENDIX C2 .

y = M / fy = 57.0m) STC.88 kNm M= W pl. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. 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. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y (cm3) 184 248 309 497 567 654 801 990 979 1225 1589 1484 1952 2485 1872 2293 2970 2675 2418 3455 3438 3978 4691 4243 5101 5814 6997 8225 10010 12080 14240 Section 152x152x23 152x152x30 152x152x37 203x203x46 203x203x52 203x203x60 203x203x71 254x254x73 203x203x86 254x254x89 305x305x97 254x254x107 305x305x118 356x368x129 254x254x132 305x305x137 356x368x153 305x305x158 254x254x167 356x368x177 305x305x198 356x368x202 356x406x235 305x305x240 305x305x283 356x406x287 356x406x340 356x406x393 356x406x467 356x406x551 356x406x634 57.88 x 10^3 / 275 3 = 210.5 cm Try 254x254x73 UC .

3 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm cm cm 4 cm cm cm 2 3 2.1 6. Area of section. MAHMOOD 1. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.2 Therefore. = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects.08 kN Msd = 28.y = iy = iz = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 73 254 254 8. Second moment of area.94 kNm L= 5 m 1. Section chosen = 254x254x73 UC 1.2 990 895 11.2 200.46 92.0 DATA NSd = 1351. L = 5.6 14.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Radius of gyration.122 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.86 98.94 23. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 .5 8.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel tf = 14.y = W el.9 11370 6.1 Trial Section Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.

MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.3 <= 30.Rd = > MSd = 128.11 Mpl.123 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.y.Rd = 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 8.y fy γMO = 990 x 275 x 0.Rd = 92.5 Limit d/tw Class 2 = 35.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.05 Npl.Rd Mny. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.1 = 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.Rd = γMO γMO = 1.Rd = 1.0m) STC.555 >= n < 0.05 = 2433.1 kN n = 1351.2 Class 3 = 13. subject to bending and compression : Classify web as subject to compression and bending d/tw = 23.001 / 1.05 = 259.08 / 2433.1 Mny.9 (b) Web.Rd = Mpl.8 3.1 Mpl. it is Class 1 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 30.94 kNm kNm Sufficient moment resistance .1 Class 3 = 38.9 x 100 x 275 x 0. L = 5.5 Web is Class 1 element Therefore.2 Limit c/tf Class 2 = 10.0 CROSS-SECTION RESISTANCE n= NSd Npl.1 n ≥ 0.1 28.3 kNm Mny.001 / 1.Rd(1-n) W pl.y.Rd A fy Npl.94 <= 9.y.

Rd η M c .(38.9 x 100 x 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column.0m) STC.y.3 Buckling about y-y axis (Curve b) βA = λy√βA = tf λ√βA 38 40 1 38.1 x 10) = 38.05 = 2209.Rd = βA f c A γM1 l y = 0. y .94 1 x 128.y.Rd = = 1351.7 N/mm Nb.1 1 η= = + < γMO / γM1 1 Therefore. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.0 N b .y.001 / 1. y .0 IN-PLANE FAILURE ABOUT MAJOR AXIS Members subject to axial compression and major axis bending must satisfy k y M y .Rd 1.y.3 kN ky = 1. Rd Nb.08 2209.7 x 92.5 x 28.3 0.Sd ηMc. sufficient resistance against in-plane failure against major axis . L = 5.3 .85 x 5 x 1000 = 4250 mm Slenderness ratio λy = l y / iy = 4250 / (11. Sd N Sd + ≤ 1 .5 NSd Nb.38) x (40 . MAHMOOD 4.124 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.248) 2 = 249.Rd = 1 x 249.38) / (250 .3 <= fc 250 248 40mm fc = 250 .95 (Conservative value) + kyMy.85 L (Restrained about both axes) = 0.

JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1006 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Column Design (Internal Column. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 5.0 3. Use : 254x254x73 UC OK OK . L = 5.0 4.125 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 CONCLUSION Cross Section Resistance In-plane Failure About Major Axis Use of the section is adequate.0m) STC.

126 APPENDIX D .

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.y = M / fy = 268.92 x 10^3 / 275 = 977.127 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.9 cm3 Try 457x152x52 UB . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 1 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD Grade = S275 Section Mass (kg/m) 19 22 23 25 25 25 28 28 30 31 33 33 37 37 39 39 40 42 43 45 46 46 48 51 52 54 54 Wpl.y (cm ) 171 260 232 259 307 336 354 408 313 395 481 539 485 540 654 718 626 612 568 773 722 889 706 895 1096 843 1051 3 Section Mass (kg/m) 57 60 60 67 67 67 67 74 74 74 82 82 82 89 92 98 101 101 109 113 122 125 140 149 179 238 Wpl.y (cm3) 1009 1195 1283 1213 1346 1442 1472 1509 1624 1659 1802 1832 2058 2020 2366 2234 2619 2887 2827 3287 3203 3673 4139 4575 5515 7462 178x102x19 254x102x22 203x102x23 203x133x25 254x102x25 305x102x25 254x102x28 305x102x28 203x133x30 254x146x31 305x102x33 356x127x33 254x146x37 305x127x37 356x127x39 406x140x39 305x165x40 305x127x42 254x146x43 356x171x45 305x165x46 406x140x46 305x127x48 356x171x51 457x152x52 305x165x54 406x178x54 356x171x57 406x178x60 457x152x60 356x171x67 406x178x67 457x152x67 457x191x67 406x178x74 457x152x74 457x191x74 457x152x82 457x191x82 533x210x82 457x191x89 533x210x92 457x191x98 533x210x101 610x229x101 533x210x109 610x229x113 533x210x122 610x229x125 610x229x140 610x305x149 610x305x179 610x305x238 M = 268.92 kNm W pl.0m) Rev 1 STC. L = 6.

6 10.99 53.y = W el.0 1.0 SECTION CLASSIFICATION Grade of steel t= 10. MAHMOOD 1.y = Av = A= Iy = iLT = aLT = c/tf = d/tw = 52 449.2 Section Properties Mass Depth Width Web thickness Flange thickness Depth between fillets Plastic modulus Elastic modulus Shear area.8 152.0m) Rev 1 STC.4 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 2 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.128 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.6 kg/m mm mm mm mm mm 3 cm cm cm 3 2 2 Area of section. fy = fu = = mm 275 430 S275 <= N/mm N/mm 2 (Fe 430) 40mm 2 . UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Second moment of area.6 1096 950 36.6 21370 3.1 DATA Trial Section L= 6 m Initial trial section is selected to give a suitable moment capacity.9 407. = 457x152x52 UB = h= b= tw = tf = d= W pl.5 66. cm 4 cm cm cm 2. L = 6.9 Therefore. The size is then checked to ensure suitability in all other aspects. Section chosen 1.59 121 6.

05 = 36.7 Web is Class 2 element 457x152x52 UB is a Class 2 section Class 1 limit : d/tw = 46.92 = 331.001 γMO = 1.Rd = 0.7 3.15 kN VSd 0.0m) Rev 1 STC.5 x 100 275 1. it is low shear Mc.5Vpl. L = 6.5 x 551.92 kN VSd < Vpl.28 kN V pl.129 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 3 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.5Vpl.Rd Sufficient shear resistance 4. MAHMOOD Classification of Trial Section (a) Outstand element of compression flange.Rd = W pl.6 > 46.2 (b) Web.05 kNm MSd Mc. subject to bending (neutral axis at mid depth) : d/tw = 53.Rd < Moment capacity is adequate .y fy / γMO = 1096 x 275 x 0. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR.05 √3 = 551.05 = 287.001 / 1.92 kNm 0. flange subject to compression only : c/tf = 6.Rd < Therefore.99 <= 9.2 Flange is Class 1 element Class 1 limit : c/tf = 9.0 SHEAR RESISTANCE VSd = 179.0 MOMENT RESISTANCE MSd = 268. Rd = Av ⎛ f y ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ γ MO ⎜ ⎝ 3⎠ x 0.

1 Crushing Resistance Design crushing resistance. shear buckling must be checked if d/tw d/tw = > 53.8 < 63.5 σf. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 5.0m) Rev 1 STC. tw fyw (ss + sy) Ry. ⎛ bf sy = t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.5 Ry. L = 6.130 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.28 kN < Ry.81 mm ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f .Ed = Longitudinal stress in flange (My / I) = 0 at support (bending moment is zero) γMO = 1.81) x 7.68 kN VSd = 179.0 SHEAR BUCKLING For steel grade S275 (Fe 430).0 RESISTANCE OF WEB TO TRANSVERSE FORCES Stiff bearing at support.Rd = γM1 At support.05 = 196.001 / 1.Rd = (50 + 48. not susceptible to LTB 6. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎜ ⎣ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. ss = Stiff bearing at midspan. ss = 50 75 mm mm 7.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.6 63.0 LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING (LTB) Beam is fully restrained.8 Shear buckling check is NOT required 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 4 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.Rd Sufficient crushing resistance .6 x 275 x 0.05 2 N/mm fyf = 275 sy = 48.

92 287. h= a= 449.3 ≤ = 1. Ra.5 ⎛ f yf ⎞ ⎟ ×⎜ ⎜f ⎟ ⎝ yw ⎠ 0.Rd 268.05 205 299.94 <= 1.5 ⎡⎛ t f ⎢⎜ ⎜t ⎢ ⎣⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.Rd = > 0.5t w (Ef yw ) 2 0.131 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.12 1.5 0.0m) Rev 1 STC.5 ⎡ ⎛γ σ MO f . L = 6.5 OK Buckling Resistance At support.2 Crippling Resistance Design crippling resistance At support. ⎛ bf s y = 2t f ⎜ ⎜t ⎝ w VSd = 0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.28 kN Sufficient crippling resistance 2 At mid span.6 = γM1 = E= Ra.16 VSd = kN/mm kN 179. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. Ed × ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎜ f yf ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 0. MSd Mc.5 ⎛t + 3⎜ w ⎜t ⎝ f ⎞⎛ s s ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ d ⎠ ⎞⎤ 1 ⎟⎥ γ ⎠⎥ ⎦ M1 ss/d ≤ 50 / 407.2 0.05 7.5 +a+ ss 2 but beff ≤ h 2 + s s [ 2 0. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 5 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams. MAHMOOD At midspan.8 0 mm mm beff = 1 2 2 h + ss 2 [ ] 0.5 Crushing resistance is OK 7.5 ] . Rd = 0.

5 x 407.9 kN > At mid span. buckling about y-y axis.001 / 1. λ = 2. Rb.0m) Rev 1 STC.98) / (135 . L = 6. VSd = 0 VSd = 179.8^2 + 50^2) + 0 + 50 / 2 = 251.05 = 179.1 l = 0.5 d/t = 2.6 2 = 1909.9 N/mm 2 Rb.9 x 1909. use curve a λ √βA = λ √βA 130 135 134.6 = 134.6 / 7.88 mm Ends of web restrained against rotation and relative lateral movement.88 x 0.3 x 7.130) = 98.5 = 452. UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD beff = 0.132 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.75d Rolled I-section.(134.28 kN Sufficient buckling resistance Sufficient buckling resistance at midspan .130) x (103 .1 fc 103 98 fc = 103 .Rd = βA = βAf c A γM1 1 γM1 = 1.3 mm <= [h + ss ] 2 2 0.05 A = beff x tw = 251.1 . JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 6 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.Rd = 1 x 98.6 mm Buckling resistance of web.5 x SQRT(449.

UTM Made by Checked by CCH DR. MAHMOOD 8.26 3.δ0 Iy = E= δ= δ1 = δ2 = 21370 210 cm 4 2 kN/mm 4 3.133 Job No: UTM 81310 SKUDAI.0 1.0 δ2 = Variation of deflection due to variable loading δ1 = Variation of deflection due to permanent loading δ0 = Pre-camber of beam in unloaded state = 0 δmax = δ1 + δ2 .95 = 11.21 mm Recommended limiting vertical deflection for δmax is L 250 = δmax < = 6000 250 24 24 mm mm Deflection limit is satisfactory. .26 + 3. L = 6.14 mm OK δmax = 7. JOHOR Client: Job Title: Subject: Page 1004 7 Braced Steel Frame Design (EC 3) Beam Design (Floor Beams.6 15 kN/m kN/m γG = γQ = 1.95 mm mm < L / 350 = 17.0 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT (DEFLECTION) Partial factor for dead load Partial factor for imposed floor load Dead Imposed gd = qd = 27.5(gd / qd) x L 384 EI 7.0m) Rev 1 STC.

- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- Design Aids EuroCode
- The Behaviour and Design of Steel Structures to BS5950
- BS and EC
- Ec2 Bs8110 Compared
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- BS5950 - Connections Handbook
- BS5950!2!2001 Specification for Steel Sections
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- From BS5950 to EC3
- Design of Steel Beam EC3
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- SHS Design to BS 5950 Part 1
- BS 5950 Design Guide
- EC3 GB_Welding
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- Overview of Eurocode 3
- BS 5950-Part1(1990)
- BS 5628 - 1
- !Multi Storey Steel Building
- Design of Steel I-Section (BS5950)
- EC3extract
- Chapter9 Laterally Restrained Beams
- steel_design
- Designers guide to EC3
- TTT Handout LG Nov2008 Lecture Note on EC3 Design
- Design of Structural Steelwork_0903384590
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- steel-ec3 (1)

- Instrumentation & Site Plan 967A
- SSB04 Detailed Design of Portal Frames
- HOUS06 Precast Housing Structures (1)
- beam-shear-design.ppt
- Fu Well 200517
- Br Inch Hansen
- Extended Structural Analysis Design and Drawing Checklists
- Planning-Building-Regulations.pdf
- Manual for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Building Structure (Binding)
- Col 717706
- Reinforced Concrete Design to BS 8110 Simply Explained
- Design Guide BC1 2012
- Foundation Engineering Handbook, h.y. Fang
- Structural Sections BS4
- Column Base Plates Prof Thomas Murray
- Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings
- Lecture 4 - Jack-In Pile
- Seismic Code
- How to Model and Design High Rise Buildings Using Etabs
- BS5950 Vs EC3
- Etabs Concrete Design
- BS 2573-1 1983
- Seismic Analysis & Design of 10 Story RC Building (Equivalent Lateral Force)
- Environmental Statement Vol 3 Appendix E Part 54 of 56_tcm21-162474
- Approved Document
- Approved Document
- CV6315 Tunnel Lecture 1
- BS5950 Vs EC3
- Norfibre Paper
- Etabs Concrete Design

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Loading