190 views

Uploaded by Vincent Teng

- lecture_notesSteel structures_solved_examples.pdf
- Torsional Analysis of Steel Members
- Design for Torsion for Steel Structure
- Example Design of Circular Beam ACI 1999
- corrugated web beam
- castellated beams
- CW SAMPLE
- Steel Design Example - Nsba
- Column Calculation to EN1993
- Deflection in the Beam Which
- DSM Holes AISI Draft R1
- Biaxial Bending Moment Magnifier Method
- Arch Bridge Ultra High Pro
- Drvo Beton
- EScholarship UC Item 0xn8446t
- T3701a-DFE
- 2-LocalBuckling
- Designsectionmomentcapacityofhollowsections_bk140
- NSCJan15 Tech
- 75803

You are on page 1of 29

18

1.0

INTRODUCTION

In the previous chapter, the basic theory governing the behaviour of beams subjected to torsion was discussed. A member subjected to torsional moments would twist about a longitudinal axis through the shear centre of the cross section. It was also pointed out that when the resultant of applied forces passed through the longitudinal shear centre axis no torsion would occur. In general, torsional moments would cause twisting and warping of the cross sections. When the torsional rigidity (GJ) is very large compared with its warping rigidity (E), the section would effectively be in uniform torsion and warping moment would unlikely to be significant from the designer's perspective. Examples of this behaviour are closed hot-rolled sections (e.g. rectangular or square hollow sections) and rolled angles and Tees. Note that warping moment is developed only if warping deformation is restrained. Warping deformation in angle and T-sections are not small, only warping moment would be small. On the other hand, most thin walled open sections have much smaller torsional rigidity (GJ) compared with warping rigidity (E) values and these sections will be exhibiting significant warping moment. Hot rolled I sections and H sections would exhibit torsional behaviour in-between these two extremes and the applied loading is resisted by a combination of uniform torsion and warping torsion.

2.0

Any structural arrangement in which the loads are transferred to an I beam by torsion is not an efficient one for resisting loads. The message for the designers is "Avoid Torsion - if you can ". In a very large number of practical designs, the loads are usually applied in a such a manner that their resultant passes through the centroid. If the section is doubly symmetric (such as I or H sections) this automatically eliminates torsion, as the shear centre and centroid of the symmetric cross section coincide. Even otherwise load transfer through connections may - in many cases - be regarded as ensuring that the loads are effectively applied through the shear centre, thus eliminating the need for designing for torsion. Furthermore, in situations where the floor slabs are supported on top flanges of channel sections, the loads may effectively be regarded as being applied through the shear centre since the flexural stiffness of the attached slab prevents torsion of the channel. Where significant eccentricity of loading (which would cause torsion) is unavoidable, alternative methods of resisting torsion efficiently should be investigated. These include

Copyright reserved

Version II

18 -1

design using box sections, tubular (hollow) sections or lattice box girders which are fully triangulated on all faces. All these are more efficient means of resisting torsional moments compared with I or H sections. Unless it is essential to utilise the torsional resistance of an I section, it is not necessary to take account of it. The likely torsional effects due to a particular structural arrangement chosen should be considered in the early stages of design, rather than left to the final stages, when perhaps an inappropriate member has already been chosen. 3.0 PURE TORSION AND WARPING

In the previous chapter, the concepts of uniform torsion and warping torsion were explained and the relevant equations derived. When a torque is applied only at the ends of a member such that the ends are free to warp, then the member would develop only pure torsion. The total angle of twist ( ) over a length of z is given by GJ where Tq = applied torque GJ = Torsional Rigidity

Tq z

(1)

When a member is in non-uniform torsion, the rate of change of angle of twist will vary along the length of the member. The warping shear stress (w) at a point is given by

w =

E S wms t

(2)

where E = Modulus of elasticity Swms = Warping statical moment at a particular point S chosen. The warping normal stress (w) due to bending moment in-plane of flanges (bi-moment) is given by

w = - E .Wnwfs . ''

where Wnwfs = Normalised warping function at the chosen point S.

4.0

There will be some interaction between the torsional and flexural effects, when a load produces both bending and torsion. The angle of twist caused by torsion would be amplified by bending moment, inducing additional warping moments and torsional shears. The following analysis was proposed by Nethercot, Salter and Malik in reference (2). Version II 18 -2

4.1

The maximum stress at the most highly stressed cross section is limited to the design strength (fy /m). Assuming elastic behaviour and assuming that the loads produce bending about the major axis in addition to torsion, the longitudinal direct stresses will be due to three causes. M yt (3) byt = Zy w = E.Wnwfs . '' byt is dependent on Myt, which itself is dependent on the major axis moment Mx and the twist .

bx =

Mx Zx

Myt = Mx Thus the "capacity check" for major axis bending becomes:

(4)

bx + byt +w fy /m.

(5)

Methods of evaluating , , and for various conditions of loading and boundary conditions are given in reference (2).

4.2 Buckling Check

Whenever lateral torsional buckling governs the design (i.e. when pb is less than fy) the values of w and byt will be amplified. Nethercot, Salter and Malik have suggested a simple "buckling check" along lines similar to BS 5950, part 1

byt + w Mx Mx + 1 1 + 0.5 Mb f y / m Mb

(6) mx Mx

B + B 2 M E M p

ME M p

Version II

18 -3

in which

M p + ( LT + 1) M E 2

MP , the plastic moment capacity = fy . Zp / m Zp = the plastic section modulus ME , the elastic critical moment

=

Mp 2 E

4.3

LT 2

fy

Applied loading having both Major axis and Minor axis moments

When the applied loading produces both major axis and minor axis moments, the "capacity checks" and the "buckling checks" are modified as follows:

Capacity check:

bx + byt +w + by fy/m

Buckling check:

My byt + w Mx Mx + + 1 + 0.5 1 Mb fy Zy / m fy / m Mb

(7)

(8)

where M y = m y M y

byt = M y / Z y

4.4 Torsional Shear Stress

Torsional shear stresses and warping shear stresses should also be amplified in a similar manner: Mx vt = ( t + w ) 1 + 0.5 (9) Mb This shear stress should be added to the shear stresses due to bending in checking the adequacy of the section.

5.0 DESIGN METHOD FOR LATERAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING

The analysis for the lateral torsional buckling is very complex because of the different types of structural actions involved. Also the basic theory of elastic lateral stability cannot be directly used for the design purpose because

Version II

18 -4

the formulae for elastic critical moment ME are too complex for routine use and there are limitations to their extension in the ultimate range A simple method of computing the buckling resistance of beams is given below. In a manner analogous to the Perry-Robertson Method for columns, the buckling resistance moment, Mb, is obtained as the smaller root of the equation (ME - Mb) (Mp - Mb) = LT. ME Mb As explained in page 3, Mb is given by, ME M p Mb = B + B2 M E M p (10)

where

M p + ( LT + 1) M E 2

= = = = Elastic critcal moment fy . Zp / m Perry coefficient, similar to column buckling coefficient Plastic section modulus]

[ As defined above, ME Mp

LT

Zp

In order to simplify the analysis, BS5950: Part 1 uses a curve based on the above concept (Fig. 1 ) (similar to column curves) in which the bending strength of the beam is expressed as a function of its slenderness (LT ). The design method is explained below. The buckling resistance moment Mb is given by Mb= pb .Zp (11)

where pb = bending strength allowing for susceptibility to lateral -torsional buckling. Zp = plastic section modulus. It should be noted that pb = fy for low values of slenderness of beams and the value of pb drops, as the beam becomes longer and the beam slenderness, calculated as given below, increases. This behaviour is analogous to columns. The beam slenderness (LT) is given by,

LT = 2

E LT fy

(12)

where

LT =

Mp ME

Version II

18 -5

300

200

Beam buckling

pb N/mm2

100

0 50 100

LT

150

200

250

Fig.1 Bending strength for rolled sections of design strength 275 N/mm2 according to BS 5950

Fig. 2 is plotted in a non-dimensional form comparing the observed test data with the two theoretical values of upper bounds, viz. Mp and ME. The test data were obtained from a typical set of lateral torsional buckling data, using hot-rolled sections. In Fig. 2 three distinct regions of behaviour can be observed:-

stocky beams which are able to attain the plastic moment Mp, for values of LT below about 0.4. Slender beams which fail at moments close to ME, for values of LT above about 1.2 beams of intermediate slenderness which fail to reach either Mp or ME . In this case 0.4 < LT < 1.2

Beams having short spans usually fail by yielding. So lateral stability does not influence their design. Beams having long spans would fail by lateral buckling and these are termed "slender". For the practical beams which are in the intermediate range without lateral restraint, design must be based on considerations of inelastic buckling. In the absence of instability, eqn. 11 permits that the value of fy can be adopted for the full plastic moment capacity pb for LT < 0.4 . This corresponds to LT values of around 37 (for steels having fy= 275 N/mm2) below which the lateral instability is NOT of concern.

Version II

18 -6

Plastic yield

1.0

ME / MP

0.8

0.6

M / Mp

0.4

stocky

0.2

intermediate

slender

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

LT =

MP ME

Fig.2 Comparison of test data (mostly I sections) with theoretical elastic critical moments

LT = uv

ry

(13)

For flanged sections symmetrical about the minor axis,

4 Z p2 4 u = 2 2 x = 0.566 hs A and J A h s For flanged sections symmetrical about the major axis I y Z p 2 u = A2

1 4

( )

and

A x = 1.132 Iy J

Iy = 1 Ix A = cross sectional area of the member

Version II

18 -7

J hs t1, t2 b1, b2

We can assume

= = = = =

hs t1 t2 b1 b2

12 t1 b13 + t2 b23

the torsion constant the distance between the shear centres of the flanges flange thicknesses flange widths

u = 0.9 for rolled UBs, UCs, RSJs and channels = 1.0 for all other sections. v = a function of , x is given in Table 14 of BS5950: Part I ry (for a preliminary assessment v = 1) x = D/T providing the above values of u are used.

5.1 Unequal flanged sections

For unequal flanged sections, eqn. 11 is used for finding the buckling moment of resistance. The value of LT is determined by eqn.13 using the appropriate section properties. In that equation u may be taken as 1.0 and v includes an allowance for the degree of monosymmetry through the parameter N = Ic / (Ic + It ) . Table 14 of BS5950: Part 1 must now be entered with (E /ry )/x and N .

5.2 Evaluation of differential equations

For a member subjected to concentrated torque with torsion fixed and warping free condition at the ends ( torque applied at varying values of L), the values of and its differentials are given by

Tq

(1-

For

0 z

Version II

18 -8

Tq = (1 ) GJ

Tq

sinh a z cosh cosh a a tanh a

Tq G J a2

Similar equations are available for different loading cases and for different values of . Readers may wish to refer Ref. (2) for more details. We are unable to reproduce these on account of copyright restrictions.

6.0 SUMMARY

This chapter is aimed at explaining a simple method of evaluating torsional effects and to verify the adequacy of a chosen cross section when subjected to torsional moments. The method recommended is consistent with BS 5950: Part 1.

7.0 REFERENCES

(1)

British Standards Institution, BS 5950: Part 1: 1985. Structural use of steelwork in Building part 1: Code of Practice for design in simple and continuous construction: hot rolled sections. BSI, 1985. Nethercot, D. A., Salter, P. R., and Malik, A. S. Design of Members Subject to Combined Bending and Torsion , The Steel construction Institute , 1989. Steelwork design guide to BS 5950: Part 1 1985, Volume 1 Section properties and member capacities. The Steel Construction Institute, 1985. Introduction to Steelwork Design to BS 5950: Part 1, The Steel Construction Institute, 1988.

Version II

18 -9

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 1 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

Example 1

The beam shown below is unrestrained along its length. An eccentric load is applied to the bottom flange at the centre of the span in such a way that it does not provide any lateral restraint to the member. The end conditions are assumed to be simply supported for bending and fixed against torsion but free for warping. For the factored loads shown, check the adequacy of the trial section.

e = 75 mm

Replace the actual loading by an equivalent arrangement, comprising a vertical load applied through the shear centre and a torsional moment as shown below.

=

e W W

Version II

18 -10

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 2 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

W

Tq

(i) Plane

(ii) Torsional

Loading (Note: These are factored loads and are not to be multiplied by f) Point load, W = 100 kN Distributed load (self weight), w = 1 kN/m (say) Eccentricity, e = 75 mm Bending effects ( at U.L.S) Moment at B, Shear at A, Shear at B, Torsional effects ( at U.L.S) Torsional moment, Tq = W.e Tq = 100 75 10-3 = 7.5 kNm This acts in a negative sense, Tq = -7.5 kNm Generally wide flange sections are preferable to deal with significant torsion. In this example, however, an ISWB section will be tried. Try ISWB 500 250 @ 95.2 kg/m Section properties from steel tables. Depth of section Width of section D = 500 mm B = 250 mm MxB = 102 kNm FvA = 52 kN FvB = 50 kN

Version II

18 -11

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 3 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN

B = 250 mm

Web thickness Flange thickness Moment of inertia Moment of inertia Radius of gyration Elastic modulus Elastic modulus Cross sectional area Additional properties Torsional constant, =

t T Ixx Iyy ry Zx Zy A

= 9.9 mm = 14.7 mm = 52291 cm4 = 2988 cm4 = 49.6 mm = 2092 cm3 = 239 cm3 = 121.2 cm2

9.9 mm

D = 500 mm

14 7 mm

J =

4 2 2988 10 4 (500 14.7 ) 4 = I y h2

1 2BT 3 + (D 2T ) t 3 3

]

= 682 103 mm4

E 2 (1 + )

2 10 5 2 = 2 (1 + 0.3) = 76.9 kN / mm

Torsional bending constant,

E GJ

1 2

= 2591 mm

Version II

18 -12

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 4 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

Wnwfs

= =

=

S wms

30331 mm2 h B2 T = 16 485.3 250 2 14.7 = 16 = 2787 104 mm4 = Af . yf = ( 120.05 14.7) 242.7 = 428.2 103 mm3

Qf

Qw

= (A/2) yw

yw

235.3 14.7 250 242.7 + 9.9 235.3 2 = 14.7 250 + 9.9 235.3

= 194.2 mm

Qw

Version II

18 -13

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 5 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN

250 1.15 250 500 2 240.1 470.6 2 4 4

= 507 kNm

Material Properties

Check for Combined bending and torsion

= 217 N/mm2

(i)

Buckling check

byt + w Mx Mx + 1 + 0.5 fy Mb Mb m

Mx m = m M xB = 1.0

Mb

E = 4000 mm

=

B + B 2 M E M p

M p + ( LT + 1) M E 2

ME M p

B

where ME = elastic critical moment Mp = plastic moment capacity = fy.Zp / m =

Version II

18 -14

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 6 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN

= Mp 2 E

ME

LT 2 p y

LT

= the equivalent slenderness = nuv = the minor axis slenderness = E / ry = 4000 / 49.6 = 80.7 u = 0.9

n = 0.86,

v = slenderness factor (according to N and /x) I cf N = = 0.5 ( for equal flanged sections) I cf + I tf

x A = 1.132 I y .J

1 2

2

= 36.63

/x

v

= 2.2

LT

59.2

ME

Version II

18 -15

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 7 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN

M p + ( LT + 1) M E 2

BS 5950: Part 1 App.B.2.3

B

The Perry coefficient,

LT

= b ( LT - LO )

2 E = 0.4 py 2 2 = 3 8 .2 = 0.15

1 1

LT

B

Mb =

= 911 kNm

B + B2 M E M p

= 911 + 911 Myt = Mx .

)1 2

)

1

1143 507

2

= 411 kNm

1143 507 2

To calculate

Version II

18 -16

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 8 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

Ref. 2.0 App. B

3

sinh0.77

Myt =

102 0.023

M yt Zy

= 2.36 kNm

= 9.89 N / mm 2

byt =

2.36 10 6 = 239 10 3

E . Wnwfs .

To calculate

7.5 10 6 76.9 10 681.6 10 1.8 10 8 = 109 N / mm2

3 3

= =

Version II

18 -17

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 9 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN

1

byt + w Mx Mx + 1 + 0.5 fy Mb Mb m

102 10 6 411 10 6 +

(9.9

0.86

<

(i)

bx + byt + w bx

= Mx / Zx

fy / m

= 102 106 / 2092 103 = 48.8 N / mm2

Strictly the shear stresses due to combined bending and torsion should be checked, although these will seldom be critical. Shear stresses due to bending (at Ultimate Limit state) At support:In web,

bw

FVA . Qw I x .t

= =

Version II

18 -18

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 10 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN

= = 52 10 3 428.2 10 3 52291 10 4 14.7 2.9 N / mm 2

In flange,

bf

FVA . Q f I x .T

bw

= =

In flange, bf

Shear stresses due to torsion ( at Ultimate Limit state ) Stress due to pure torsion, Stress due to warping,

t

w

=

=

G.t. E . S wms . t

z cosh a

cosh

At = 0.5, a sinh

sinh a G J a 2 tanh a

Tq = 0.5 4000 2591 cosh

= 0.851,

Version II

18 -19

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 11 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan. 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000

At support,

z = 0

z a = 2000 cosh cosh z a = cosh(0) = 1.0

At midspan, z

= cosh(0.77) = 1.313

At support

= = = =

7.5 106 76.9 10 3 681.6 10 3 25912 0.812 10 11 7.5 106 76.9 10 3 681.6 10 3 1.7 10 5

tw tw

= = =

G.t. 76.9 103 9.9 (-1.7 10-5 ) - 12.95 N / mm2 G. T . 76.9 103 14.7 (-1.7 10-5) - 19.22 N / mm2

In flange,

tf tf

= = =

Version II

18 -20

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 12 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

= 3.1 N / mm 2

= 0

= = 7.5 10 6 0.851 1.313 1.313 3 3 2 76.9 10 681.6 10 2591 0.913 1.06 10 11

tw tf

= =

G.t. G.T.

= 0 = 0

= 4.02 N / mm 2

Version II

18 -21

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 13 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

0 1 2 3

At support

vt

( t

tw vt

Mx + w ) 1 + 0.5 Mb = =

In web at 3,

bw

vt

= - 26.3 N / mm2( acting downwards)

= 11.7 - 14.6

tf wf

vt

= bf + vt

( 19.2

= 25.1 N / mm 2

Version II

18 -22

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 14 of 14 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example. Flexural member Made by RSP Checked by RN Date Jan. 2000 Date Jan. 2000

= 0.6 fy / m = 0.6 250 /1.15 = 130 N / mm2 27.9 < 130 N / mm2

< fv

Referring back to the determination of the maximum angle of twist , in order to obtain the value at working load it is sufficient to replace the value of torque Tq with the working load value as is linearly dependent on Tq. Since Tq is due to solely the imposed point load W, dividing by the appropriate value of f will give :-

7.5 1.6

= 4.7 kNm

0.026 = 0.016 rads = 0.93 1.6 On the assumption that a maximum twist of 2 is acceptable at working load, in this instance the beam is satisfactory. the corresponding value of =

Version II

18 -23

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 1 of 6 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000

Example 2 Redesign the member shown in example 1, using a rectangular hollow section.

Try 300 200 8 @ 60.5 kg / m R. H. S Section properties. Depth of section Width of section Web thickness Flange thickness Area of section Moment of inertia Radius of gyration Elastic modulus Elastic modulus Plastic modulus Additional properties Torsional constant t3 h + 2 K Ah 3 Area enclosed by the mean perimeter of the section, Ah = (B - t ) (D - T) (neglecting the corner radii) = ( 200 - 8 )(300 - 8) J =

=

D B t T A Ix ry Zx Zy Zp

= 300 mm = 200 mm = 8 mm = 8 mm = 77.1 cm2 = 9798 cm4 = 8.23 cm = 653 cm3 = 522 cm3 = 785 cm3

8 mm D = 300

8 mm

200

56064 mm2

= =

Version II

18 -24

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 2 of 6 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000

2 56064 8 968 = = =

2 Ah t h

927 mm 2

Torsional constant, J

J t + K t 104 106 8 + 927 8

= =

= 840 10 3 mm3

Material properties

E = 2 (1 + )

2 10 5 = 76.9 kN / mm 2 2 (1 + 0.3)

250 / 1.15 = 217 N / mm2

= 250 / m =

( byt + w ) 1 + 0.5 M x Mx + fy Mb Mb

m

Since slenderness ratio (E / ry = 4000 / 82.3 = 48.6) is less than the limiting value 350 275 250 = 385 given in BS 5950 Part 1, table 38, lateral torsional 250 f y buckling need not be considered..

Version II

18 -25

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 3 of 6 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 Mcx 0.6 fy / m . Av

Hence

Mb

= =

Pv

Since FVB Mcx

D 300 2 = D + B A = 300 + 200 77.1 = 46.3 cm 2 = 0.6 (250 /1.15) 46.3 10 10-3 = 604.3 kN

50 < 363

BS 5950: Part 1 4.2.5 BS 5950: Part 1 4.3.7.2 table 13

Mcx

M m M To calculate

= 1.2 (250 /1.15) 653 10-3 = 170 kNm = m M xB = 1.0 = 1.0 102 = 102 kNm

The 100 kN eccentric load gives a value of Tq = 100 0.75 = 7.5 kNm

100 kN 100 kN 75 mm

L T0 = Tq / 2 T0 = Tq / 2

Version II

18 -26

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 4 of 6 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000

T0

= =

At centre of span,

z =

Myt =

. MxB

M yt Zy =

byt

Warping stresses ( w ) are insignificant due to the type of section employed. Check becomes Mx Mb

byt

fy

Mx 1 + 0.5 Mb =

0.6

<1

O. K

(ii ) Local capacity check

bx + byt + w bx

fy /m

= MxB / Zy

Version II

18 -27

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 5 of 6 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000 = 196 N / mm 2

=

bx

196 + 0.195 + 0

196.2

O. K Shear stresses due to bending ( at Ultimate Limit state) Maximum value occurs in the web at the support.

200

bw

Qw A1

FVA . Qw I x .t1

= = A 2

A1 y

150

150 8

395 cm A1

Qw

bw

52 10 3 395 10 3 9798 10 4 2 8

13.1 N / mm 2

= 4.5 N / mm 2

Version II

18 -28

CALCULATION SHEET

Job No. Sheet 6 of 6 Rev. Job title: Design of members subjected to bending and torsion Worked Example.Flexural member Made by RSP Date Jan 2000 Checked by RN Date Jan 2000

vt

= =

bw

vt

( t

5.9 N / mm 2

pv

< pv

BS 5950: Part 1 4. 2. 3

Version II

18 -29

- lecture_notesSteel structures_solved_examples.pdfUploaded bygugi
- Torsional Analysis of Steel MembersUploaded bySebastiao Silveira
- Design for Torsion for Steel StructureUploaded byPrantik Adhar Samanta
- Example Design of Circular Beam ACI 1999Uploaded byJosé Pablo Rosales Sánchez
- corrugated web beamUploaded byNegin Maleki
- castellated beamsUploaded bykhalidcosmos
- CW SAMPLEUploaded byLaurence Sarmiento
- Steel Design Example - NsbaUploaded byKenneth Phillips
- Column Calculation to EN1993Uploaded byseljak_veseljak
- Deflection in the Beam WhichUploaded bydox4use
- DSM Holes AISI Draft R1Uploaded bychristos032
- Biaxial Bending Moment Magnifier MethodUploaded byBhavin Solanki
- Arch Bridge Ultra High ProUploaded byDhananjay Kumar
- Drvo BetonUploaded bySonja Dragovic
- EScholarship UC Item 0xn8446tUploaded bytraveller_16812847
- T3701a-DFEUploaded byAnca Stefancu
- 2-LocalBucklingUploaded bybsitler
- Designsectionmomentcapacityofhollowsections_bk140Uploaded byPapa Confi
- NSCJan15 TechUploaded byskorabn
- 75803Uploaded byShyam Sundar Basukala
- Mat Chapter 18Uploaded byhemant_durgawale
- Design of Flexural Members 2Uploaded byZaini Norsazmira
- Ch11 Stability of Angle MembersUploaded byErnie Ernie
- British+and+European+SectionsUploaded bygenergia
- part-1Uploaded byMathurathipan Rajendraseelan
- CHAPTER_2_DESIGN_OF_BEAMS_FOR_FLEXURE_US.pdfUploaded byMisael Alejandro
- 3. COLUMN.pdfUploaded byfizan all
- Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear deformabilityUploaded byEmir Maslak
- unit15Uploaded byAwan Mi
- zahn91cUploaded byKok Hong Chiang

- CIDECT Design Guide 3Uploaded byparis062
- Project Management-Harvard ReferencingUploaded byVincent Teng
- Lecture notes.pdfUploaded byBurhan Kanjeta
- MAMansur 2006 Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings.pdfUploaded byvinthf
- Structural Stability From Theory to PracticeUploaded byVincent Teng
- Strip FootingUploaded byVincent Teng
- Hoarding DesignUploaded bypandazzz319
- Design of Water Retaining Structures to ECUploaded byVincent Teng
- DesignxxUploaded byScottie L
- Strut and Tie ModellingNew AS 3600 ProvisionsUploaded byVincent Teng
- Bearing Capacity of SoilsUploaded byMuqeem Khan
- Writing Work Method Statement Plain English Guidelines 0231Uploaded byVincent Teng
- SAMPLE RetainerAgreementUploaded byVincent Teng
- RC18_Column02Uploaded byassaad006
- Demolition e2004 (HK)Uploaded byDaniel Yong
- QLASSICUploaded byVincent Teng

- poem of the dayUploaded byapi-213837741
- Generalized Linear Model with Excel TutorialUploaded bySpider Financial
- Statistics TermsUploaded byRoma Blaise G Flores
- Comparative Analysis of Trip Generation ModelsUploaded byEpsonminces
- Georgii, Hans Otto. Stochastics. Introduction to Probability and StatisticsUploaded byrociogc02
- Practical Work 2AUploaded bySP Ng
- 2014_Ranzi@Hanoi_IAHR-WMO_Uncertainty.pdfUploaded byzilangamba_s4535
- Investors' trading activity: A behavioural perspective and empirical resultsUploaded byAdnan Karim
- Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing as Possible Index of ALSUploaded byAgung Hidayani
- 30563054Uploaded bydevon39
- Mogadishu Urban Analysis_Booklet for Email_low ResUploaded byAbdishakur Awil
- probreview.pdfUploaded byHasmaye Pinto
- primary research reportUploaded byapi-272999569
- Prime Number CalculatorUploaded bytutorciecle123
- Intrapreneurship versus independent entrepreneurshipUploaded byBenjamin Holt
- Distributed Leadership 3Uploaded bysivagami
- QFD Analysis in ServicesUploaded byGlenPalmer
- lesson plan 4Uploaded byapi-306606954
- Geoforum Volume 24 Issue 3 1993 Michael J. Healey; Michael B. Rawlinson -- Interviewing Business Owners and Managers- A Review of Methods and TechniquesUploaded byRodrigo Toniol
- Marshall Et Al. (2005) Contrasting Medical and Non-Medical DischargeUploaded byallie_carew
- Quiz 002 100%Uploaded byjrence
- R Tutorial 2 SurvivalUploaded byromain9999
- Discrete MathUploaded byImey Yemi
- MBA Project Report on Customer Relationship ManagementUploaded byimskjain
- acid base unit week wise1Uploaded byapi-246807376
- pl5-pl6Uploaded byMichelMash
- chi square ppt 2016Uploaded byapi-373344212
- chapter-1-4-tapos-na-ito.docxUploaded byRovelyn Alejandro Tubal
- Interpretation of Seismic and Well Data to Study the Subsurface Geometry of Bhal Saydan Structure_ Near Fateh-Jhang_ Punjab_ PakistanUploaded byAhmad Ghani Ghani
- sigi 3 portfolio amico zacharyUploaded byapi-352118505