cbr anak teknik sipil

© All Rights Reserved

1 views

cbr anak teknik sipil

© All Rights Reserved

- Modul Mstower
- Ashraf Habibullah, G. Robert Morris - Makalah
- Teori Pelat
- Modul Mstower
- Mekanika Statika-struktur Rangka Batang - teknik sipil - universitas gunadarma
- hal 8
- Struktur Kurikulum S2 Teknik Metalurgi Dan Material
- (Sifat Mekanik)
- 2_kuliah Stress Strain Heru Sukanto
- 01_A Pendahuluan Statika Struktur
- Stabilitas Struktur
- 01 pendahuluan Statika Struktur.pdf
- Properties of Material Teknik
- 00-kontrak-statika-genap-13-14
- Tugas 1 Toll Gate
- 01 a Pendahuluan Statika Struktur
- PVP2010-25173
- Torsi- 3 sld per pg
- kuliah 7 penuangan logam cair.ppt
- Tranlate Stress-Strain Diagram Presentation

You are on page 1of 60

PENDAHULUAN

1.1. Latar Belakang

yang berbeda. Baik perbedaan buku dan pengarang, untuk membahas tentang

kelebihan dan kekurangan dari buku yang ingin dibandingkan. Laporan

pengkritikan buku ini bertujuan menambah wawasan mahasiswa – mahasiswi

Universitas Negeri Medan . Dan buku yang ingin penulis kritik berjudul Steel

Framed Structures.Dalam kedua buku ini sangat lah tepat untuk di critic karena

adanya perselisihan yang ada pada kedua buku dalam masalah teori.

Buku Steel Framed Structures merupakan buku yang mencakup seluruh

pelajaran mengenani berbagai macam Struktur rangka baja yang digunakan dalam

proses penggunaan material dalam hal konstruksi sipil.

- Membantu pembaca mengetahui gambaran dan penilaian

umum dari dua buku secara ringkas

dari penulis yang lainya.

- Menambah ilmu pengetahuan dalam pembelajaran Struktur

Rangka Baja

- Mengetahui berbagai jenis Struktur Rangka Baja

- Mengetahui perbedaan buku yang ingin dibandingkan

1

BAB II

Chapter 1

Frame instability and the plastic design of rigid frames

SUMMARY

Idealised approximations to material stress-strain relationships lead to

corresponding idealised limit loads—in particular, the rigid-plastic collapse load

and the least elastic critical load. The real behaviour, allowing for stability and

change of geometry, causes a reduction of carrying capacity below the rigid-

plastic collapse value. The extent of the reduction depends on the slendernesses of

the members and may be related to the value of the elastic critical load.

Justifications for the Merchant-Rankine load, and for the modification suggested

by Wood, are discussed, and applications to unbraced multi- storey frames show

the usefulness of this procedure. An example of the design of a multi- storey

frame involving frame stability effects is given. Special frame stability problems

in single-storey pitched roof frames are discussed, and safeguards are described

and illustrated by reference to two designexamples.

to the various approximations that may be made to the real stress-strain behaviour

of the material of which the structure is composed. Mild steel has a stress-strain

curve in tension or compression of the form shown in Fig. 1.1(a), in which an

elastic phase OA up to an upper yield stress σU and a strain εy=σU/E (where E is

the elastic modulus) is followed by plastic deformation at a lower yield stress σ L

up to a strain εs of the order of 10εy. Beyond a strain of εs, strain-hardening occurs,

the strain ultimately becoming non-uniform due to necking, leading to fracture at

an ultimate stress σult some 25–40% above σL and at an elongation of some 30%.

Within the range of structural interest, the idealised elastic- plastic stress-strain

2

relation in Fig. 1.1(b) is a sufficiently closeapproximation.

behaviour of entire structures on the basis of any assumed stress-strain

relationship. However, even if the idealised elastic-plastic stress-strain relation of

Fig. 1.1(b) is used, limits of computer capacity can soon be reached. Further

idealisations of behaviour facilitate design and may be used if their respective

limitations are recognised. Provided the effects of the deformations of the

structure on the equations of equilibrium are neglected, the idealised elastic

behaviour (Fig. 1.1(c)) leads to a linear relationship between intensity of loading

and the deformations and stresses induced in the structure, and is the basis for

many design procedures. However, the analysis is valid only up to the stage at

which yield is reached somewhere in the structure—a point which has no

consistent relationship to the ultimate strength of the structure. For this purpose,

the rigid-plastic stress-strain relationship in Fig. 1.1(d), leading to the concept of

plastic collapse mechanisms, gives for many structures a close estimate of the

actual load at which collapse would occur.

offers a straightforward means of assessing the ultimate load of a continuous

structure. For many single-storey and low-rise frames, plastic design can form the

basis of the design procedure, but it may be necessary to estimate the effect of

instability on the plastic collapse load. The reason why instability affects the

collapse load lies in the effect of deformation on the calculated internal forces—

deformations either within the length of a member, or of the frame as a whole. The

problem is therefore best introduced by considering the effect of deformations on

plastic collapse loads.

The fundamental theorems of plasticity refer strictly to rigid-plastic

3

materials, that is, to materials with an infinitely high modulus of elasticity (Fig.

1.1(d)). The structure is assumed to have no deformations at the collapse load. In

exploring the effect of the finite deformations induced by elastic behaviour before

collapse occurs, it is instructive first to consider the effect of finite deformations in

a rigid-plastic structure.

LOADS: THE MERCHANT-RANKINELOAD

plastic, a drooping load-deflection curve GH is obtained (Fig. 1.7), descending

from the rigid- plastic collapse load factor λP. If ideal elastic behaviour is

assumed, the load-deflection curve OBC rises to the elastic critical value λC. The

actual behaviour OAFD follows the elastic curve up to the load factor λy at which

yield first occurs, rising to a peak at F, before approaching the rigid-plastic

mechanism line GH at large deflections. Merchant (1954, 1958) suggested that it

might be possible to consider the failure load factor λF as some function of the

load factors λy, λP and λC, and also of the purely abstract load factor λG (Fig. 1.7)

obtained at the intersection of the elastic curve OAC with the rigid-plastic

mechanisms line GH. The advantage of such an approach is that these load factors

are much easier to calculate than the failure load factor λF itself.

Merchant (1954) tested, for a large number of theoretical structures, the

following formula, which may be regarded as a generalisation of Rankine’s

4

formula for struts. The failure load factor λF is approximated to by the Merchant-

Rankine load factor λMR, where

(1.11)

requirement for such structures is satisfied. If λF/λP is plotted vertically and

λF/λC horizontally, eqn (1.11) with λF=λMR is simply given by the straight line AB

in Fig. 1.11. The points plotted on Fig. 1.11 were obtained theoretically by Salem

(1958) for one- and two-storey frames loaded as shown. Lines corresponding to

various ratios of λP/λC have been drawn, and it is readily seen that the Merchant-

Rankine formula (eqn (1.11)) is most successful when λP/λC is small and the

collapse load is close to the rigid-plastic collapse value. When λP/λC>0·3 the

scattering of the points away from the Merchant-Rankine formula is considerable.

Merchant suggested the formula as a safe (that is, lower) limit for the collapse

load. Its theoretical significance has been discussed by Horne(1963).

RANKINE LOADS

Merchant (1954) to the conclusion that the Merchant-Rankine load (eqn (1.11))

represented an approximate lower bound to the failure load. He did not claim it as

a strict lower bound (see Fig. 1.11). However, if it is to be used as the basis for

design, one needs some assurances that no serious error on the unsafe side will

arise. Some evidence has been given emphasising the extent to which the

Merchant-Rankine load is not a lower bound (Adam, 1979) and for this reason

Anderson and Lok (1983) examined a number of 4-, 5- and 10-storey unbraced

frames. These frames were realistic in that they were designed economically for

wind and floor loadings specified in codes, with sway deflections at unit factored

wind loading limited to 1/300 of each storey height. Some of their results are

summarised in Table 1.1. Two loading conditions are considered—one with

maximum wind loading and the other with maximum vertical loading. Values are

5

quoted for the ratio soft helo west elastic critical load factorλC, the Merchant-

Rankine load factorλMR and the modified Merchant-Rankine load factor λWMR to

the accurately calculated ‘second-order’ (i.e. allowing for change of geometry)

elastic-plastic failure load factor λF. It will be seen that, without exception, the

Merchant-Rankine load is a safe estimate of the failure load. Anderson and Lok

found that only when the storey height exceeded the span of the beams, and when

the wind loading was exceptionally low, was the Merchant- Rankine load higher

than the elastic-plastic failure load. Such frames are not realistic— and if they

occurred, would certainly be braced.

Anderson and Lok recommend that the Merchant-Rankine formula should

not be used when the bay width is less than the greatest height.

SINGLE STOREY FRAMES

General Considerations

The assumption has usually been made in the past that overall stability

problems do not affect the design of single-storey frames, the argument being that

the mean axial stresses in the columns are generally small. While this latter

statement is correct, it is also true that such frames may be quite slender in the

plane of bending, and this may bring down the ratio of critical load to plastic

collapse load to an unacceptably lowlevel.

Single-Bay Frames

subjected to wind loading will usually ensure that overall stability is not a

controlling factor. This is certainly the case when the horizontal deflections at the

tops of the stanchions are limited to height divided by 300, under unfactored

loads. However, if it can be shown that greater deflections would not impair the

strength or efficiency of the structure, or lead to damage to cladding, then this

deflection limit may be allowed to be exceeded, and there will undoubtedly be a

6

desire to take advantage of this in many single-storey frames. A safeguard against

deflections which could affect strength and safety is therefore needed, and is

provided by the following requirement (see Horne, 1977).

horizontal loads applied in the same direction at the top of each column, and equal

to 1% of the vertical load in the column due to factored loads, must not exceed

1·8h, where h is the height of the column in metres. In calculating δ, allowance

may be made for the restraining effect of cladding.

Chapter 2

MATRIX METHODS OF ANALYSIS OF MULTI-STOREYED SWAY

FRAMES

SUMMARY

involves consideration of nonlinear effects induced by changes of geometry and

the influence of member axial forces. In recent years, nonlinear matrix methods of

analysis have been developed and it is now possible to analyse the complete

loading history of such frames up to collapse. This chapter deals with the elastic

linear, nonlinear and instability analysis of frames using matrix methods. Rigorous

formulations of the problem are presented first so that the approximations

frequently incorporated in such analyses can be identified. Approximate methods

for determining elastic critical loads and the magnitude of the nonlinear effects are

thenpresented.

ENERGY PRINCIPLES

The total potential energy V of a structural system (Washizu, 1968) can be

defined by the equation

7

(2.1)

where Piand qirepresent the external forces and corresponding displacements, and

σiand εirepresent the internal stresses and corresponding strains. V0 is the potential

energy of the system prior to application of external forces. The integrals in eqn

(2.1) represent the work done by the external forces and the strain energy of the

structure, which are equal. Therefore, along any equilibrium path, V is constant

and hence the first and second variations of V along the equilibrium path, denoted

by δV and δ2V, arezero.

Assuming that V can be expressed in terms of a number of prescribed

displacements, qi, δV and δ2V are defined as

(2.2)

(2.3)

Since the structure as a whole, and individual parts of the structure, are in

equilibrium, eqn (2.3) is valid for all δqi, not just variations along an equilibrium

path. Equation (2.3) provides a basis for linear and nonlinear iterative analysis

while equation (2.4) provides a basis for nonlinear incrementalanalysis.

Variational principles can also be used to investigate the stability of

structures. For equilibrium δV=0. Stability of the system requires that positive

work be done to move the system from the equilibrium state and hence δV=0

corresponds to a minimum value. Conversely, if, as the system moves slightly

from the equilibrium state, energy is given out, which can be manifest only as

kinetic energy, the system is unstable. Hence for stable equilibrium, δV=0 and the

second variation of V for stationary values of the external forces, denoted by

δ2VP, is positive definite. From equation (2.4), δ2VP is given by

(2.5)

8

zero, indicating a possible transition from stable equilibrium to instability.

or iteratively.Incremental analysis involves the determination of the incremental

or tangent stiffness matrix relating small increments in external forces and

corresponding displacements; this depends on the current geometry and state of

stress. Complete solutions for the entire loading history can then be obtained by

incrementing either forces or displacements (Roberts, 1970; Roberts and Ashwell,

1971). Incrementing displacements has the advantage that solutions do not break

down at horizontal tangents on load-deflection curves, which is one form of

critical load condition.

Iterative solutions are based on the determination of a secant stiffness

matrix, which is derived assuming that the current geometry and state of stress is

known (Majid, 1972). The first cycle then gives new values for the current

geometry and state of stress which are then included in the second cycle, and the

sequence is repeated until the assumed values are consistent with the calculated

values.

In general, incremental analysis is theoretically more sound than iterative

analysis. Incremental analysis follows the complete loading history and is able to

detect bifurcations or branching points along equilibrium paths. This is not true of

iterative solutions which may not converge to the lowest equilibrium path which is

of interest in practice. However, for multi-storey frames, such complexities

seldom exist and either form of solution appears satisfactory. Incremental analysis

is considered first since it illustrates the full interaction between bending and axial

displacements for individual elements and will help to indicate the approximations

often made in iterative solutions.

Incremental Analysis

9

derived as follows (Roberts, 1970). It is assumed that all displacements are small

so that nonlinear strains can be related to the initial geometry; this is a satisfactory

assumption for the majority of practical frames. For an element having an initial

transverse imperfection w0, the nonlinear expression for the axial strain ε is

(Timoshenko and Gere,1961)

ELASTIC INSTABILITY

As mentioned previously, the most significant nonlinear influence in the

elastic behaviour of frames is the influence of axial forces on the flexural stiffness

of members. Tensile axial forces can be considered as increasing the flexural

stiffness while compressive forces decrease the flexural stiffness. If a set of

compressive member axial forces is increased to the extent that the bending

stiffness of the frame as a whole reduces to zero, the frame becomes unstable.

There are a number of ways in which the elastic instability of frames can be

analysed, many of which reduce to the solution of the same basic set of equations

after simplifying assumptions are made.

Vanishing of the Second Variation of Total PotentialEnergy

structures is based on the vanishing of the second variation of total potential

energy, defined by eqn (2.5) (Roberts and Azizian, 1983). Assuming that the

nodal displacements qiare linear functions of displacement variables, δ2qivanishes

and critical conditions are defined by the equation δ2VP is identical to the right

hand side of eqns (2.31) and (2.32) and is a complete quadratic form which

changes from positive definite to zero, indicating critical conditions, when the

determinant of [KL]+ [KGA] vanishes. Hence critical conditions for the complete

structure occur when

An alternative way of interpreting eqn (2.48) is that critical conditions

occur when the incremental or tangent stiffness matrix becomes singular.

Although eqn (2.48) is of general applicability, it requires a knowledge of the

axial and flexural deformations at the critical points on the loading path. The

analysis can be simplified if it is assumed that prior to the frame becoming

unstable, onlyaxial

10

Horne’s Method

critical loads of plane multi-storey sway frames, the only analytical requirement

being that of performing a standard linear elastic analysis of the frame. The

method can be illustrated by considering the instability of the column of length a

shown in Fig.2.4(a).

Assuming that the column buckles into a state of neutral equilibrium, i.e.

zero kinetic energy, the potential energy remains constant and the loss of potential

energy of the external forces is equal to the increase in strain energy of the

column. If, due to buckling, the end A of the column sways by with a

corresponding axial shortening δū, the governing energy equation can be written

Two extreme cases are now considered for the buckled shape, as shown in Fig.

2.4(c) and (d). The first, which is a simple rigid body rotation, represents the case

in which the columns of a frame are stiff compared with the beams. The second,

which is a pure sway mode, represents the case in which the beams are stiff

compared with the columns. Assuming simple polynomials to represent the

buckled shape δw, the axial shortening is given by

Although considerable effort has been devoted to determining the elastic

critical loads of plane multi-storey sway frames, elastic critical loads have found

little direct application in practice. Sway limitations (Anderson and Islam, 1979;

Majid and Okdeh, 1982) to prevent serious damage to non-structural cladding

ensure that so-called ‘instability effects’ or second order nonlinear effects are

relatively minor. Apart from this, elastic critical loads do not provide a direct

measure of the magnitude of the second order effects and further complicated

calculations are required to provide information of use to designers.

Roberts (1981) proposed a procedure for estimating the magnitude of the

11

second-order effects, based on a standard linear elastic analysis. The results can

also be used to estimate, very simply, the elastic critical loads of frames if

required.

displacement and member forces at all the joints of the frame. For any member, it

is possible to deduce the displacements w, rotation wx, moments m, shear forces ƒ

and axial forces t at the joints or nodes relative to the local coordinate axes of the

member.

Each member is in equilibrium, only in the absence of the axial forces

which produce the second order effects. It is assumed that the member axial forces

produce an additional transverse deflection δw of the member. The corresponding

axial shortening δū is then given by The equivalent load vectors for each member

of the frame can now be determined and a second linear elastic analysis performed

with the frame loaded by all the member equivalent load vectors to give a first

approximation for the second-order effects. Since this is only a first

approximation, the final solution should ideally be obtained iteratively.

A new set of equivalent loads should be calculated from member axial

forces and displacements w+δw and the process repeated until the calculated

values of w+δw are consistent with those assumed. An approximation to the

iterative procedure can however be made as follows. Consider any of the non-zero

displacements, for example the sway of the ith storey of the frame (see Fig.

2.5). Assuming that δw is proportional to w, the final value of , which is

denoted by , is given approximatelyby

Equation (2.68) was expressed in terms of storey sway for a particular

reason. Provided that the primary loading produces sway in each storey, an

estimate of the sway critical load can be made using the principle (Horne and

Merchant, 1965) that member axial forces at a load factor A have the effect of

increasing the deformations corresponding to the lowest elastic critical load by a

factor 1/(1−λ/λcr). If λ is taken as unity for the primary frameloads

ILLUSTRATIVEEXAMPLES

12

Meaningful comparisons of the various nonlinear methods of analysis

discussed are limited, since detailed solutions seldom appear in the literature and

so-called ‘exact’olutions of nonlinear problems are often questionable. However,

all the methods discussed have one aspect in common. After making certain

simplifying assumptions, they all lead to a prediction of the elastic critical loads of

frames and it is this aspect which will be used, herein, for comparison.

Details of the frames analysed are shown in Fig. 2.6. A single element

was used to represent each member (beam or column) of the frame and the axial

forces in members were assumed either statically determinate or as given by a

preliminary linear elastic analysis. With

the exception of methods incorporating stability functions, improved

accuracy is achieved by using more than one element to represent each member,

due to the approximate displacement functions assumed in deriving the element

stiffness matrices. In applying the method discussed in Section 2.6, the frames

were also loaded with horizontal forces at each storey equal to 10% of the vertical

load applied at that storey, to excite sway deformations.

Results of the analysis discussed in Section 2.6 are presented in Table

2.1, in which βivalues for each storey are given, the maximum from which the

elastic critical load factor is calculated being underlined. Also given in Table 2.1

are critical load factors determined in accordance with Section 2.5.1 (eigenvalue

solution), Section 2.5.2 (stability functions) and Section 2.5.3 (Horne’s method).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Matrix formulations for the elastic linear, nonlinear and instability

analysis of frames have been presented. Nonlinear analysis can be performed

either incrementally using the tangent stiffness matrix or iteratively using the

secant stiffness matrix. Rigorous derivations of both the tangent and secant

stiffness matrices indicate fullinteraction between bending and axial

displacements.

Critical loading conditions occur when the second variation of the total

potential energy changes from positive definite to zero, indicating a transition

from stable equilibrium to instability, this condition being defined by the

13

vanishing of the determinant of the incremental or tangent stiffness matrix.

For practical multi-storeyed sway frames, sway limitations to prevent

damage to non- structural cladding generally ensure that nonlinear effects are of

only minor significance. This enables simplifying approximations to be introduced

in matrix analysis, the most significant of which is the assumption that member

axial forces are either statically determinate or as given by a preliminary linear

elastic analysis. This assumption is equivalent to considering only the influence of

axial forces on the flexural behaviour of members and neglects axial shortening

due to flexure. Based on this assumption, approximate methods of estimating

second order effects and elastic critical loads can be established, and several

alternative approaches for determining elastic critical loads reduce to the solution

of the same set of equations.

Chapter 3

DESIGN OF MULTI-STOREY STEEL FRAMES TO SWAY

DEFLECTION LIMITATIONS

SUMMARY

specified limits on horizontal sway deflection. Approximate methods for

rectangular frames require only simple calculations, and their use is illustrated by

a worked example. More general approaches are also given. These necessitate

iterative calculation and take the form of specialised computer programs. Accurate

allowance can then be made for secondary effects which are of particular

significance in the design of very slender unbraced structures.

Design Studies

The frames examined were rectangular in elevation, of four, seven and ten

storeys in height, and from two to four or five bays in width. Two ratios of bay

width to storey height r were considered, namely 1·33 and 2·0, although within a

particular frame these two dimensions were constant. All bases were fixed.

The unfactored loads are given in Table 3.1 together with the maximum

14

and minimum basic wind speeds. For simplicity, the resulting horizontal wind

pressure was taken as uniform over the height of the frame, although designers

often use a reduced pressure on the lower storeys. On the other hand, no

allowance was made for eccentricity of vertical loading arising from fabrication

and erection tolerances, and no account was taken of any reduction in live loading

permitted for the design of columns. In the studies, the maximum value of floor

loading was combined with minimum values of wind loading, and vice-versa. A

number of other load combinations were examined also.

The design strength of structural steel, py, was taken as 240 N/mm2,

corresponding to the grade commonly used in medium-rise unbraced frames.

Sway due to unfactored horizontal wind load was to be restricted to 1/300 of each

storey height for the bare frame, in accordance with recent recommendations (BSI,

1977; ECCS, 1978).

Minimum sections were determined by designing against failure by

beam-type plastic hinge mechanisms or by squashing, using partial safety factors

γf of 1·4 and 1·6 on dead and imposed load, respectively (BSI, 1977). These

sections were then increased, as appropriate, to satisfy the restriction on sway at

working load. The method of Anderson and Islam (1979a) described below was

used. Column sections were made continuous over at least two storeys, but beam

sections were changed at each floor level if required. The designs were then

subjected to a second-order elasto-plastic computer analysis (Majid and Anderson,

1968), with γf values of 1·4, 1·2 and 1·2 applied to dead, imposed and wind loads,

respectively (BSI, 1977). If the factored load level was achieved before collapse

occurred, then ultimate strength under combined loading was not the governing

criterion for that particular frame.

Results

The results are summarised in Table 3.2. These are applicable to frames

whose steel design strength is in the region of 240 N/mm2, such as British Grade

43 and European Fe 360 material. The designer needs to determine the ratio of the

sum of the column axial forces P to the corresponding total column wind shear F

in each storey. P and F are calculated using the factored combined loads. The ratio

is then averaged over all the storeys of the frame. Ultimate strength under

15

combined load is not likely to be critical, provided the limits on P/F are not

exceeded.

Example

Consider the six-storey two-bay frame shown in Fig. 3.1 which is

subjected to the unfactored loadings shown in Table 3.3. The dynamic wind

pressure has been calculated from a basic wind speed of 44 m/s. With frames

spaced longitudinally at 4·5 m centres, the factored combined loads are as given in

Fig. 3.1, the corresponding values of P/F being stated alongside each storey. The

average value is 31·5 andr=L/h=1·6. It is clear from Table 3.2 that ultimate

strength will not be critical for design. The appropriate procedure is therefore to

calculate first the sections required to sustain the factored values applicable to

dead plus imposed vertical load, and then to increase the sections as necessary in

order to limit sway at working load. A final check analysis can then be undertaken

to confirm adequate ultimate strength under combinedloading.

the method due to Anderson and Islam (1979a, b) enables suitable section

properties to be calculated directly for rectangular frames. The design equations

are based on threeassumptions:

the bottom storey) and at the mid-length of eachbeam.

their relative widths.

bottom storey, and enable each storey to be considered in isolation. Expressions

16

relating the sway deflection over a storey height to the inertias of the

corresponding columns and surrounding beams can then be derived.

Intermediate Storey

Figure 3.2 shows an intermediate storey of height h2 subject to

horizontal load. By treating each bay individually, it can be shown that

assumptions (ii) and (iii) result in zero axial load in the internal columns. It is also

implied by the assumptions that the column inertias are related asfollows

grossly inaccurate to assume a point of contraflexure at mid-height of a ground

storey column. Design equations have been derived for pinned base frames

(Anderson and Islam, 1979a, b), but such bases result in very high inertias for the

bottom storey members, in comparison with elsewhere in the frame. Fixed bases

are preferable for multi-storey frames, unless the need to minimise stress on the

soil is of over-riding importance. The equations given below apply to fixed

baseconditions.

The subassemblage is shown in Fig. 3.4. It is assumed that the fixity of the

base and the avoidance of reverse column taper result in sections being governed

by the sway ∆ of the storey next to the bottom. The column section is therefore

continuous over the bottom two storeys. Anderson and Islam also derived

equations applicable to fixed base frames when sway of the bottom storey

governed design. This case can arise when the height of the bottom storey is much

greater than that of the storey above. These special equations are avoided by

checking bottom storey sway using the analysis method described later, and

modifying sections ifnecessary.

By comparing Figs. 3.3 and 3.4 it can be seen that eqn (3.6) still applies

for the rotation θB. θG is obtained by deriving thesway

Example

17

The method is demonstrated by designing the six storey frame,

discussed earlier, to a limiting sway index of 1/300 under unfactored wind

loading. With a longitudinal spacing of 4·5 m, the resulting loads are as shown in

Fig. 3.5(a). E is taken as 205 kN/mm2. Column sections will only be changed

every second storey, to reduce fabrication costs. As a result, it is only necessary to

design three storeys from theframe.

The sections shown in Fig. 3.5(a) are the minimum ones which withstand

dead plus imposed vertical loading only, using γf=1·4 and 1·6, respectively. They

are obtained by simple plastic theory, taking py=240 N/mm2, and selecting from

the range of British Universal sections.

Design for sway is commenced at the fifth storey, using eqn (3.16) to

calculate an inertia for the internal column of 5672 cm4, as shown in Table 3.4. As

can be seen from the sections in the Appendix, the nearest Universal Column

(UC) is 203×203×60 kg/m (I=6088 cm4). This is adopted, as shown in Fig. 3.5(b).

The required inertia for the external column is half that for the internal member.

The lack of a UC with a suitable property necessitates the provision of a

203×203× 46 kg/m section (I=4564 cm4). The beam inertias are now calculated

from eqns (3.10) and (3.8), taking the effective value of I3,2 as the value actually

provided for the internal column (6088 cm4). The required beam inertias are given

in Table 3.4, and the chosen sections in Fig. 3.5(b). The minimum beam section

305×127×37 kg/m is retained for the lower beam as its inertia is 99% of that

required.

A similar procedure is followed for the third storey, except that it is worth

considering two alternatives for the external column. In the first case a

203×203×71 kg/m UC is chosen (I=7647 cm4). Beam desing is then based on an

effective I3,2 of 14307 cm4 corresponding to the actual section of the internal

column. For the alternative, a 203×203× 60 kg/m UC (I=6088 cm4) is proposed

for the external column. As this is less than twice the inertia of 14307 cm4

provided for the internal column, an effective value of I3,2=2×6088=12176 cm4

must be used for beam design. When the required beam inertias in Table 3.4 are

compared with the list of available Universal Beams (UB), it is found that the

same sections are required in both cases. Hence it is more economical to choose

18

the lighter section for the external columns, as shown in Fig.3.5(b).

The results for the second storey come from the use of eqns (3.22),

(3.21), (3.19) and (3.18). After column sections are chosen, beam design is based

on an effective I3,2 of 17510 cm4.

successfully provides section properties needed to satisfy limits on sway. Rarely,

if ever, will these properties correspond exactly to available sections, but

additional column stiffness can be offset by reduced beam stiffness, and vice-

versa. The use of eqns (3.1)–(3.3), though, precludes a similar trade-off between,

for example, internal and external columns. A designer may wish, therefore, to use

an analysis to modify slightly the sections, to achieve greater economy. Suitable

methods are due to Wood and Roberts (1975) and Moy (1974). The former

method has been included in ECCS recommendations (1978) and is described

below. Such analyses can also be used to check deflections in the top or bottom

storeys if, exceptionally, these could be critical.

Substitute Frame

To use the analysis, each storey of the actual frame must be replaced by an

equivalent structure having the form of Fig. 3.6. This is done by first transforming

the actual frame into a substitute beam-column structure, as shown in Fig. 3.8 for

the six storey frame. The basis of the substitute frame (Wood, 1974) is that:

- for horizontal loading on the real frame, the rotations of all joints at any

one level are approximately equal,and each beam restrains a column at

bothends.

Ultimate Strength

However, it should be noted that when the design of Fig. 3.9 is subjected to the

factored loading (Fig. 3.1), it is found to possess adequate strength. This confirms

19

the prediction made in Section 3.2.3, that this criterion would not be critical

fordesign.

dominant, then the structure should be designed first to this criterion. The method

of Wood and Roberts then provides a useful check for the sway at working load. If

in fact some deflections are found to be excessive, Moy (1974) has shown that the

most economical procedure is usually to increase the stiffness of the beams.

The simplified methods described above do not allow for the reduction in

frame stiffness due to compressive forces, nor for the effects of axial shortening

and unsymmetrical loading on sway.

The reduction in stiffness can easily be included by using additional

horizontal shears (Vogel, 1983). If Pudenotes the total vertical loading carried by

the columns at storey level u, then the total shear at this level should be increased

by . Moy (1977) has given an estimate of the sway due to differential axial

shortening. This was derived for frames subject to uniform horizontal loading,

with the floors assumed to be rigid and column cross-sectional areas varying

linearly from the top level to the bottom. Anderson and Islam (1979b) used this

approach on a 15-storey frame and found the accuracy to be reasonable. However,

when sway due to differentialaxial shortening or unsymmetrical vertical loading is

likely to be significant, then simplified methods become appropriate only to the

initial design stage. The final design should be obtained using a standard elastic

analysis program to examine trial sections, or from specialised programs, such as

those of Anderson and Salter (1975) or Majid and Okdeh (1982).

A flow diagram for the procedure due to Anderson and Salter is shown

in Fig. 3.10. Due to the non-linear relationship between deflection and stiffness, a

number of iterations will usually be necessary before the deflection limits are

20

satisfied. The method is based on standard routines for elastic analysis and linear

programming, and therefore can be developed easily. The procedure is applicable

to a wide variety of frames, and secondary effects are readily included.

The previous method aims to minimise cost by generating a light

design, but no account is taken of the variations in price per tonne that exist in the

supplier’s section catalogue, nor of the restricted number of sections available.

The program developed by Majid and Okdeh (1982) overcomes these limitations

by costing alternative selections of available sections using a supplier’s price list.

This method also adopts an iterative procedure to avoid direct solution of the

structure’s stiffness equations. The general procedure is explained with reference

to the single storey fixed base frame of Fig. 3.11. For simplicity, axial

deformations will be ignored, and the shear in each column will therefore be F/2,

with equal rotations θ at B andC.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

This chapter has described two approximate methods to design

medium-rise unbraced rectangular frames in which sway deflections control the

choice of sections. The method of Anderson and Islam has the advantage that it

actually generates a design without the need for trial analyses. Provided secondary

effects, particularly differential axial shortening, are not significant, the design

will be satisfactory. The choice of sections can be refined by using the analysis

due to Wood and Roberts. Both methods can be used by hand, or programmed for

a micro-computer. The second method enables account to be taken of cladding

stiffness.

If sway due to differential axial shortening is significant, as in very

slender frames, then specialised computer methods are more appropriate. Two

such methods have been described.

21

Chapter 4

INTERBRACED COLUMNS AND BEAMS

SUMMARY

sets of columns and beams are developed and detailed. The equations which allow

the critical load factor for any specific case to be evaluated are set out and

summary charts prepared using such values. Such charts link buckling load to

brace stiffness and number of columns, also allowing for brace eccentricity in

some cases.

Basic in-plane buckling with linear elastic support is detailed and

expanded to cases of flexural torsional buckling involving eccentricity of linear

braces and the addition of rotational and torsional support. Beam systems are

detailed for the cases of uniform moment and for uniform spread load applied at

flanges. The charts included only present a sample of what might be assembled.

The appendices contain the detailed composition of the 2×2 and 4×4 determinants

from which the charts are assembled. The evaluation of these determinants by

desk computer isstraightforward.

SHAPE FUNCTIONS

The deformed shapes illustrated in Fig. 4.3 are two of the four basic

shape functions which can be used to describe the deformed shape of a general

uniform section beam- column interbrace length. As mentioned, the basic solution

form of eqn (4.8) implies a linear combination of sine, cosine and linear terms in

z, involving four constant scale factors for the components. In the case of a beam-

column, it makes good physical sense to use the two end displacements y and the

two end slopes y′ (Fig. 4.3) as those parameters. This follows normal structural

practice. Since the same forms arise for either x- or y-direction displacements in

the case of the doubly symmetric member, the symbol u(z) will be used to

describe the general shape function forms within amember.

22

Basic Function Components

Two function forms are required to describe the type of shape function

shown in Fig. 4.3:

Q(z)whereQ(l)=1, Q(0)=Q′(0)=Q′(l)=0

R(z)whereR′(l)=1, R′(0)=R(0)=R(l)=0

Obviously Q and R are linear combinations of the components of the solution to

eqn (4.1) as shown in eqn (4.8), the combinations being arranged so that their end

values are zero or unity. The formulae for the basic s and c functions, for instance,

are derived directly from these using the end curvatures and slopes ofR.

Similar forms may be developed for the flexural-torsional buckling problems

discussed in latersections.

Consider a column pinned at each end and braced at intervals along the

length by elastic linear braces, as illustrated in Fig. 4.5. In such a case the buckling

displacements are assumed to take place in the x−z plane. If the braces are

irregularly spaced, the buckling load will continue to rise with the brace stiffness,

though not necessarily steadily. The mode of buckling with very weak braces

would be close to the half sine wave form into which the unbraced column would

buckle. As the braces are stiffened the effective length decreases, until at some

stage the mode associated with the lowest buckling load will involve two

(distorted) half waves. The practical way to determine the buckling loads is to find

the load factors at which the stiffness matrix of the structure, assembled using s

and c functions, has a zero determinant. This is further illustrated by examining

the simpler, but nonsymmetrical, case shown in Fig. 4.6. The initially straight

uniform column would have a buckling load of π2EI/l2, i.e. PE, if unbraced and

other natural modes of the unbraced column would occur at 4PE, involving two

half sine waves with the length, 9PE involving three half sine waves, etc. The

brace shown would interfere with the pure first mode and would cause the first

critical load to rise above PE continually as the brace stiffness increases. The same

would occur with the second mode, but the three half sine wave mode form

naturally has a node at the brace point and will not cause the brace to be strained.

23

This buckling load, 9PE, effectively represents an upper limit to the column axial

compression capacity. A plot of buckling load versus brace stiffness would take

the form shown in Fig. 4.7. The three regimes correspond to the first, second and

third modes of buckling, the lower envelope being the effective critical value for

the associated brace stiffness. Specific nondimensional design charts can be

prepared and some are presented later in this chapter.

The compression chords of trusses, such as that shown in Fig. 4.8,

constitute a particular case within this general class of irregular compression

members. The panel lengths are usually equal, the braces equally spaced, but the

compressive force in each chord section is different, varying in a stepped

parabolic manner within a simply supported truss. Braces (purlins) are not always

attached to each panel point of the chord. This class of structure is discussed in

detail by Medland (1977), where the critical load levels are related to brace

stiffness and spacing in a series of nondimensional charts, such as Fig. 4.9. This

figure relates the maximum panel ρ value within the chord at buckling (ρcr) to the

brace stiffness factor ƒ. This nondimensional factor is the actual linear brace

stiffness divided by 12EI/l3, the shear stiffness of a panel chord. In Fig. 4.9 the

four curves relate to cases where only two brace lines are attached (at the 1/3

points) but the number of load points is varied. In this nondimensional form the

three distinct segments of the plots corresponding to the single, double and finally

triple ‘half sine wave’ modes of buckling are apparent and the ρcr value rises with

the number of load points. This rise is a result of a lesser proportion of the chord

length being at peak compression. It is also apparent that the critical load factor

continues to rise if the number of load points is greater than two, in this two brace

case. This is consequence of the non-uniformity in the axial compression within

the chord. No finite brace stiffness will force the chord into a mode which does

not involve displacement at some brace.

The same general analysis applied to a structure comprising a number of

trusses in parallel, their compression chords interbraced by equally spaced lines of

braces as shown schematically in Fig. 4.10, indicates that the curves shown in Fig.

4.9 remain relevant if the nondimensional brace stiffness factor ƒ is divided by the

empirically derived factor

24

dp=0·425n2+1·275n+1·0

In eqn (4.15), n is the number of bays (number of columns −1). The one set of

curves covers all n. A very similar factor applies to chords under uniform

compression throughout their length.

Figure 4.11 further illustrates the type of design chart which can be prepared from

such analyses. In this case it is assumed thatevery

second load point of the chord is braced. As the number of braces (and panels) is

increased the curves become smoother and lower, crowding towards a ρcrvalue of

1.0 for large brace stiffnesses. The broken line indicates the lower bound curve for

the special case of column sets under uniform compression. This curve can be

seen to be a not too conservative lower bound for the stepped parabolic cases, and

the results of a more complete study allow such lower bound design curves to be

calculated efficiently.

compressed columns interbraced at equal intervals by equal stiffness braces. As

stated above, this case provides a conservative estimate for some less regular

cases. The interbraced column length (element) of column number m between

brace lines n and n+1 is designated element n,m. There are N internal brace lines

and N+1 columnelements.

The displacements within column element n,m are governed by the

basic differential equation (eqn (4.1)), arranged here in the general

for which a basic form of solution is given in eqn (4.14). It is reiterated that the

functions Q and R are such that, at an end, one of them will have a value of 1.0,

the other zero. The same applies to their derivatives.

25

Single Column Example

Consider initially the single column shown in Fig. 4.13. The linear springs

brace each point to a solid foundation on each side. When buckling occurs under

the uniform axial compression, the displacement, slope, moment and shear must

be continuous at each brace point. Using the displacement form of eqn (4.14), and

capitalising on the special forms of Q(z) and R(z), the continuities of one brace

point provide a general relationship. At node n,m joining elements n−1, m and

n,m the four continuities in the above order are written

un−1,m(l)=un,m(0)=Dn,m (say)

The form of eqns (4.22) simply recognises the recurrent form (physically

and, hence, mathematically) of the structure and buckling modes. Equations (4.22)

state that the distribution of brace point displacements Dmwithin the length of the

column is sinusoidal, while the distribution of slopes Bmat those points is

cosinusoidal. This implies pinned support at nodes 0 and N+1. The number of half

sine waves within the length is obviously j. The detail of the approach is treated in

Segedin and Medland (1978) and Medland (1979), and draws on a recurrence

approach put forward for a vibration problem by Miles(1956).

Equations (4.23) and (4.24) constitute a pair of homogeneous linear

equations in Bmand Dm, the slope and displacement amplitude factors. In the

manner of all buckling problems, no unique solution is available. Apart from the

trivial Bm=Dm=0 solution, a range of proportions Bm: Dmare able to be found and

each corresponds to an axial force (represented in t through λ) which causes the

2×2 determinant of the coefficients in eqns (4.23) and (4.24) to become zero.

While the form of the development of the two basic equations may appear

complicated, the evaluation of the 2×2 determinant at a set β and θjand increasing

trial values of t is almost trivial once programmed into a desk computer or

calculator.

26

Multiple Column Case

The effect on the above development of there being M columns in

parallel, as shown in Fig. 4.12, is confined to the fact that each spring at a node is

extended by the relative displacements of the columns. As a result, the third

component of eqn (4.20) becomes

A uniform, doubly symmetric cross-section member under axial

compression can buckle in three distinct forms. The lowest buckling load would

normally involve bending about the minor axis in a simple Euler manner, at a load

dictated by the section properties and end support conditions. If this mode is

prevented, or considerably restrained by outside influence, both Euler buckling

about the major axis and pure twist buckling about the longitudinal axis through

the shear centre of the cross-section are possible. If the section has only one

degree of symmetry (e.g. a channel section, an equal leg angle or an I-section with

unequal flange widths) the shear centre will not coincide with the centroid and the

buckling mode will be either pure displacement in the plane of the axis of

symmetry or combined ‘lateral’ displacement and twist. If no symmetry exists, the

buckling mode contains components of both lateral displacements as well as twist,

as illustrated in Fig. 4.15. Adoubly symmetric member on which the axial

compression stress is not symmetrically disposed over the cross-section will

behave in a similar manner. These latter cases are generally referred to as

undergoing flexural-torsional buckling. Given simple support conditions at each

end against each form of displacement, the buckling component forms will all

vary sinusoidally within the length, each having its own amplitude dependent on

its inherent stiffness in thatmode.

In the following, such combined modes occur not as a result of the

section properties (which are doubly symmetric) but because the elastic

constraints (braces) are attached eccentrically to the compression member. As

mentioned earlier, such eccentric attachments precipitate flexural torsional

buckling but often provide some restraint to those movements in compensation.

In members which are subjected to torsion, warping occurs. The torsional shears

27

cause the basic ‘plane-sections-remain-plane’ assumption to be violated in all but

circular cross-section members. If this distortion is resisted by a stiffening

attachment or, more subtly, by there being non-uniform torsion or torsional

resistance within the member, additional local stresses are engendered. Resistance

to warping considerably enhances the torsional stiffness of the member,

particularly for I and channel shapes, but the resulting stresses can cause local

problems. Figure 4.16(a) illustrates the distortions involved in the free twisting of

an I-section member, while Fig. 4.16(b) shows the extra distortion and

consequently torsional resistance and energy absorption which accompanies the

twist where warping is resisted. The figure illustrates how the warping effect in a

flanged member is dominated by the flanges moving out of plane with one

another.

bracing members are not simply tension-compression members but, like girts and

purlins, have considerable bending resistance themselves. The connection with the

braced member is often eccentric to the shear centre of that member and is also

capable of transferring rotational forces in the plane of the structure. In such cases

the brace mayprovide torsional, rotational and warping support as well as the basic

lateral, and at the same time causes the buckling mode of the braced member to

involve those four components. Figure 4.17 illustrates a typical connection within

a grid and the associated support forms.

Since out-of-plane displacement is assumed to be zero in the buckling modes, the

four further continuity equations of twist , rate of change of twist , torsional

moment and warping moment must be satisfied. As an example, the torsional

moment continuity across a brace point at which the effective stiffness resisting

torsion is KT (moment per unit twist), the linear in-plane spring stiffness is KL and

the eccentricity of that brace from the shear centre is e, can be written

The coefficient of KT contains the direct and carryover twist effects, while

the other two involve the contributions due to the net extension of the linear

spring, attached eccentrically, by the amount e. The sign convention for

28

displacements and forces is shown in Fig. 4.18. The form selected for is

the same as that for un,min eqn (4.14). The with different coefficients and using α

instead of λ. The full set of continuity equations across the general brace point can

be written. These are presented in detail by Medland (1979). The factor α

represents the axial load and is definedby

α2=(PI0/A−C)/C1

Upon substitution of eqns (4.22) and (4.27), the set of four equations

which are the four degrees of freedom equivalent of the pair of equations (4.28)

and (4.29) may be written and their 4×4 determinant evaluated at increasing levels

of axial force until it becomes zero at the fact that column members exist which

have very similar areas and minor axis I-values but very different warping

constants (for example) is the reason for the lack offurther nondimensionalisation.

Figure 4.19 illustrates the effects of linear brace eccentricity on critical ρ value for

two columns of similar area and flange width but different torsional properties.

Figures 4.20 and 4.21, respectively, indicate the effect of adding torsional and

rotational bracing to a basic eccentric linear braced system. As values of the

nondimensional torsional and rotational brace stiffnesses are raised, the critical ρ

values associated with a given linear support stiffness rise, compensating in some

measure for the eccentricity of the linear braces. The broken curve on each figure

is the ρcr: β plot for a zero eccentricity four linear brace datum case. For realistic

cases, in-plane rotational braces are, not surprisingly, relatively inefficient in

compensating for what is basically a torsional effect. The scale of the

nondimensional rotational stiffness factor γ is small compared to β and η. Specific

cases selected to illustrate the sensitivities are presented in Medland(1979).

Flooring systems comprising parallel beams linked together by lateral

members have the same general features as the column sets discussed previously.

The lateral bracing members will normally be eccentric and may provide

rotational, torsional and lateral bracing. The beams, however, will always buckle

in a flexural-torsional mode. The governing differential equations for an interbrace

beam length under uniform moment M are

29

The nondimensional eccentricity factor e* is again used for any attached bracing

andplotsofρcr(=Mcr/M0)against brace stiffness and eccentricity can be assembled

sin Fig.

torsional brace at the shear centre of the section is illustrated in Fig. 4.23,

while the effect of rotational bracing with eccentric linear is shown in Fig. 4.24.

To determineany specific value on such charts involves the evaluation of the

determinant of a 4×4 system of linear equations in the same way as the flexural-

torsional braced column cases were handled. The detail of the component factors

is contained in Medland (1980). The detailed set of equations whose determinant

is zero at a buckling load is shown in Appendix 3, with explanatorynotes.

For any buckling involving torsion, the geometry of the cross-section has a

marked effect. The a/l ratio is a means of categorising this effect. Figure 4.25

indicates this sensitivity by comparing the critical uniform moment values of

torsionally constrained members at different a/l ratios.

The case where the loading of the beam is due to a uniform spread load

is more common than that of a uniform moment. Such loading is

While the elastic critical loads, the determination of which has been the

subject of Sections 4.1 to 4.5, are important parameters for the designer, a means

of estimating the strength required of the braces must also be found. To determine

the critical loads, only the brace stiffness needs to be considered. Strength is

required if the braced members deform. Some bracing systems are primarily

designed to carry loading to a foundation and will be designed accordingly. If a

brace is placed basically to prevent buckling, it theoretically needs no strength

until buckling occurs. In practice the compression element being braced (strut,

compression flange, etc.) is not perfectly straight and is subjected to secondary

loading which pushes it off line. This results in the braces being strained when the

strut isloaded.

30

In this section the compression members are assumed to have a specific

crookedness before axial loading is applied. In general, such an initial shape

between the ends of the member can be expressed as a Fourier sine series which,

in the case of a pin-ended column, can be regarded as a series containing the

successive buckling mode shape functions, say

Upon application of a compressive force P, the jth component of the

series is magnified by division by a factor homogeneous because no rotational

springs are attached. The linear springs are stretched by the amount (u−u I) at each

brace point and the uI component makes that equation nonhomogeneous. A

specific ‘magnified’ initial displacement set is defined by the solution of these two

simultaneous equations under any applied axial force. If that force reaches any one

of the basic critical loads of the original perfectly straight system the

displacements become infinite. Obviously the applied axial force must remain

below the lowest critical load of the system.

A detailed derivation of the relationship between the forces in the braces

and the spring stiffnesses at a given axial force level for the type of structure

shown in Fig. 4.23 is presented by Medland and Segedin (1979). Figure 4.27

illustrates the type of non dimensi on al chart which can be prepared from suchan

analysis.Thefactor represents the brace force as a percentage of the axial column

force P, divided by the number of columns in parallel M. The symbol is the

actual brace stiffness K, divided by the nondimensionalising factor 12EI/l 3 and

further divided by 2(1−cos θi) which incorporates the form of the

initialdisplacements.

A coordinated approach to the problem of elastic lateral and flexural-

torsional buckling in multiply braced column and beam members has been

summarised. In very regular systems (e.g. uniform axial compression or moment)

the calculation of the buckling load factor is reduced to the evaluation of 2×2 or

4×4 stiffness determinants at increasing load factors until the determinant

becomes zero. This may have to be repeated for two or three trial modes

ofbuckling.

31

Relationships between brace stiffness and column properties for any

number of equally spaced brace lines and columns (or beams) are summarised in

these determinants. In less regular cases (e.g. stepped parabolic axial compression)

a larger, but sparse, matrix determinant is involved. For some of these cases it has

been established that the corresponding uniform case provides a safe and not too

conservative bound. For beams under uniform spread load a mixed analysis

involving a beam-column finite element and some recurrence capitalisation is

used. Eccentricity of load and bracing is covered in the analyses. By assuming

initially deformed members, formulae and charts for brace strength requirements

are putforward.

32

2.2. Ringkasan Isi Buku Kedua

PROBLEM FORMULATOIN

Before starting to design a structure it is important to clarify what

purpose it is to serve. This may seem so obvious that it need not be stated, but

consider for example a building, e.g. a factory, a house, hotel, office block etc.

These are among the most common structures that a structural engineer will be

required to design. Basically a building is a box-like structure, which encloses

space.

Why enclose the space? To protect people or goods? From what?

Burglary? Heat? Cold? Rain? Sun? Wind? In some situations it may be an

advantage to let the sun shine in the windows in winter and the wind blow

through in summer (Figure1.1). These considerations will affect the design.

How much space needs to be enclosed, and in what layout? Should it be

all on ground level for easy access? Or is space at a premium, in which case

multi-storey may be justified (Figure1.2). How should the various parts of a

building be laid out for maximum convenience? Does the owner want to make

a bold statement or blend in with the surroundings?

33

The site must be assessed: what sort of material will the structure be built

on? What local government regulations may affect the design? Are cyclones,

earthquakes or snow loads likely? Is the environment corrosive?

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

Architects rather than engineers are usually responsible for the problem

formulation and conceptual design stages of buildings other than purely

functional industrial buildings. However structural engineers are responsible for

these stages in the case of other industrial

buildings. Engineers sometimes accuse architects of designing weird

structures that are not sensible from a structural point of view, while architects in

return accuse structural engineers of being concerned only with structural issues

and ignoring aesthetics and comfort of occupiers. If the two professions

understand each other’s points of view it makes for more efficient, harmonious

work.

2. What is the basis for payment for work done?

3. What materials should be used for economy, strength, appearance, thermal

and sound insulation, fire protection, durability? The architect may

34

have definite ideas about what materials will harmonise with the

environment, but it is the engineer who must assess their functional

suitability.

4. What loads will the structure be subjected to? Heavy floor loads?

Cyclones? Snow?Earthquakes? Dynamic loads from vibrating machinery?

These questions are firmly in the engineer’s territory.

purposes, for example to hold something vertically above the ground, such as

power lines, microwave dishes, wind turbines or header tanks. Bridges must span

horizontally between supports. Marine structures such as jetties and oil platforms

have to resist current and wave forces. Then there are moving steel structures

including ships, trucks and railway rolling stock, all of which are subjected to

dynamic loads.

Once the designer has a clear idea of the purpose of the structure, he

or she can start to propose conceptual designs. These will usually be based on

some existing structure, modified to suit the particular application. So the more

you notice structures around you in everyday life the better equipped you will be

to generate a range of possible conceptual designs from which the most

appropriate can be selected.

CHOICE OF MATERIALS

Steel is roughly three times more dense than concrete, but for a given

load-carrying capacity, it is roughly 1/3 as heavy, 1/10 the volume and 4 times as

expensive. Therefore concrete is usually preferred for structures in which the

dead load (the load due to the weight of the structure itself) does not

dominate, for example walls, floor slabs on the ground and suspended slabs

with a short span. Concrete is also preferred where heat and sound insulation are

required. Steel is generally preferable to concrete for long span roofs and bridges,

tall towers and moving structures where weight is a penalty. In extreme cases

where weight is to be minimised, the designer may consider aluminium,

35

magnesium alloy or FRP (fibre reinforced plastics, e.g. fibreglass and carbon

fibre). However these materials are much more expensive again. The designer

must make a rational choice between the available materials, usually but not

always on the basis of cost.

Although this book is about steel structures, steel is often used with

concrete, not only in the form of reinforcing rods, but also in composite

construction where steel beams support concrete slabs and are connected by shear

studs so steel and concrete behave as a single structural unit (Figs.1.4, 1.5). Thus

the study of steel structures cannot be entirely separated from concrete structures

1.4 ESTIMATION OF LOADS (STRUCTURAL DESIGN

ACTIONS)

Having decided on the overall form of the structure (e.g. single level

industrial building, high rise apartment block, truss bridge, etc.) and its location

(e.g. exposed coast, central business district, shielded from wind to some extent

by other buildings, etc.), we can then start to estimate what loads will act on the

structure. The former SAA Loading code AS 1170 has now been replaced by

AS/NZS 1170, which refers to loads as “structural design actions.” The main

categories of loading are dead, live, wind, earthquake and snow loads. These will

be discussed in more detail in Chapter 2. A brief overview is given below.

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Once we know the shape and size of the structure and the loads that may

act on it, we can then analyse the effects of these loads to find the maximum load

effects (action effects), i.e. axial force, shear force, bending moment and

sometimes torque on each member. Basic analysis of statically determinate

structures can be done using the methods of engineering statics, but statically

indeterminate structures require more advanced methods. Before desktop

computers and structural analysis software became generally available, methods

such as moment distribution were necessary. These are laborious and no longer

necessary, since computer software can now do the job much more quickly and

efficiently. An introduction to one package, Spacegass, is provided in this book.

36

However it is crucial that the designer understands the concepts and can

distinguish a reasonable output from a ridiculous output, which indicates a

mistake in data input.

After the analysis has been done, we can do the detailed design –

deciding what cross section each member should have in order to be able to

withstand the design axial forces, shear forces and bending moments. The

principles of solid mechanics or stress analysis are used in this stage. As

mentioned above, dead loads will depend on the trial sections initially assumed,

and if the actual member sections differ significantly from those originally

assumed it will be necessary to adjust the dead load and repeat the analysis and

member sizing steps.

We also have to design connections: a structure is only as strong as its

weakest link and there is no point having a lot of strong beams and columns etc

that are not joined together properly.

Finally, we must document our design, i.e. provide enough information so

someone can build it. In the past, engineers generally provided dimensioned

sketches from which draftsmen prepared the final drawings. But increasingly

engineers are expected to be able to prepare their own CAD drawings.

37

Chapter 2

STEEL PROPERTIES

INTRODUCTION

To design effectively it is necessary to know something about the

properties of the material. The main properties of steel, which are of importance

to the structural designer, are summarised in this chapter.

Steel is the strongest, stiffest and densest of the common building

materials. Spring steels can have ultimate tensile strengths of 2000 MPa or more,

but normal structural steels have tensile and compressive yield strengths in the

range 250-500 MPa, about 8 times higher than the compressive strength and over

100 times the tensile strength of normal concrete. Tempered structural aluminium

alloys have yield strengths around 250 MPa, similar to the lowest grades of

structural steel.

the load carrying capacity of a structural element, the elastic modulus or

Young’s modulus E, a measure of the stiffness or stress per unit strain of a

material, is also important when buckling is a factor, since buckling load is a

function of E, not of strength. E is about 200 GPa for carbon steels, including all

structural steels except stainless steels, which are about 5% lower. This is about

3 times that of Aluminium and 5-8 times that of concrete. Thus increasing the

yield strength or grade of a structural steel will not increase its buckling capacity.

The specific gravity of steel is 7.8, i.e. its mass is about 7.8 tonnes/m3,

about three times that of concrete and aluminium. This gives it a strength to

weight ratio higher than concrete but lower than structural aluminium.

38

2.3 DUCTILITY

Structural steels are ductile at normal temperatures under normal

conditions. This property has two important implications for design. First, high

local stresses due to concentrated loads or stress raisers (e.g. holes, cracks, sudden

changes of cross section) are not usually a major problem as they are with high

strength steels, because ductile steels can yield locally and relive these high

stresses. Some design procedures rely on this ductile behaviour. Secondly, ductile

materials have high “toughness,” meaning that they can absorb energy by plastic

deformation so as not to fail in a sudden catastrophic manner, for example

during an earthquake. So it is important to ensure that ductile behaviour is

maintained.

The factors affecting brittle fracture strength are as follows:

(1) Steel composition, including grain size of microscopic steel structures, and

the steel temperature history.

(2) Temperature of the steel in service.

(3) Plate thickness of the steel.

(4) Steel strain history (cold working, fatigue etc.)

(5) Rate of strain in service (speed of loading).

(6) Internal stress due to welding contraction.

In general slow cooling of the steel causes grain growth and a reduction in

the steel toughness, increasing the possibility of brittle fracture. Residual

stresses, resulting from the manufacturing process, reduce the fracture

strength, whilst service temperatures influence whether the steel will fail in brittle

or ductile manner.

Every steel undergoes a transition from ductile behaviour (high energy

absorption, i.e. toughness) to brittle behaviour (low energy absorption) as its

temperatures falls, but this transition occurs at different temperatures for different

steels, as shown in Fig.2.1 below. For low temperature applications L0

(guaranteed “notch ductile” down to 0 C) or L15 (ductile down to -15 C) should

39

be specified.

Stress effects

Ductile steel normally fails by shearing or slipping along planes in the

metal lattice. Tensile stress in one direction implies shear stress on planes

inclined to the direction of the applied stress, as shown in Fig.2.2, and this can be

seen in the necking that occurs in the familiar tensile test specimen just prior to

failure. However if equal tensile stress is applied in all three principal directions

the Mohr’s circle becomes a dot on the tension axis and there is no shear stress to

produce slipping. But there is a lot of strain energy bound up in the material, so

it will reach a point where it is ready to fail suddenly. Thus sudden brittle fracture

of steel is most likely to occur where there is triaxial tensile stress. This in turn is

most likely to occur in heavily welded, wide, thick sections where the last part of

a weld to cool will be unable to contract as it cools because it is restrained in all

directions by the solid metal around it. It is therefore in a state of residual triaxial

tensile stress and will tend to pull apart, starting at any defect or crack

The failure of King’s St Bridge in Melbourne in 1962 provided a good

example of brittle fracture. One cold morning a truck was driving across the bridge

when one of the main girders suddenly cracked (Fig.2.3). Nobody was injured

but the subsequent enquiry revealed that some of the above factors had

combined to cause the failure.

1. A higher yield strength steel than normal was used, and this steel was

less ductile and had a higher brittle to ductile transition temperature

than the lower strength steels the designers were accustomed to.

2. Thick (50 mm) cover plates were welded to the bottom flanges of the

bridge girders to increase their capacity in areas of high bending

moment.

3. These cover plates were correctly tapered to minimise the sudden

change of cross

section at their ends (Fig.2.2), but the welding sequence was wrong in

40

some cases: the ends were welded last, and this caused residual triaxial

tensile stresses at these critical points where stresses were high and the

abrupt change of section existed.

joints impart low restraint to plate elements, since high restraint could initiate

failure. Also stress concentrations, typically caused by notches, sharp re-entrant

angles, abrupt changes in shape or holes should be avoided.

CONSISTENCY

The properties of steel are more predictable than those of concrete,

allowing a greater degree of sophistication in design. However there is still some

random variation in properties, as shown in Fig.2.4.

Although steel is usually assumed to be a homogeneous, isotropic

material this is not strictly true, as all steel includes microscopic impurities,

which tend to be preferentially oriented in the direction of mill rolling. This

results in lower toughness perpendicular to the plane of rolling (Fig.2.5).

Some impurities also tend to stay near the centre of the rolled item due to

their preferential solubility in the liquid metal during solidification, i.e. near the

centre of rolled plate, and at the junction of flange and web in rolled sections.

The steel microstructure is also affected by the rate of cooling: faster cooling will

result in smaller crystal grain sizes, generally resulting in some increase in

strength and toughness. (Economical Structural Steel Work [3])

As a result, AS 4100 [4] Table 2.1 allows slightly higher yield stresses

than those implied by the steel grade for thin plates and sections, and slightly

lower yield stresses for thick plates and sections. For example the yield stress for

Grade 300 flats and sections less than 11 mm thick is 320 MPa, for thicknesses

from 11 to 17 mm it is 300 MPa and for thicknesses over 17 mm it is 280 MPa.

41

CORROSION

Normal structural steels corrode quickly unless protected. Corrosion

protection for structural steelwork in buildings forms a special study area. If the

structural steelwork of a building includes exposed surfaces (to a corrosive

environment) or ledges and crevices between abutting plates or sections that

may retain moisture, then corrosion becomes an issue and a protection system is

then essential. This usually involves consultation with specialists in this area.

The choice of a protection system depends on the degree of corrosiveness

of the environment. The cost of protection varies and is dependent on the

significance of the structure, its ease of access for maintenance as well as the

permissible frequency of maintenance without inconvenience to the user.

Depending on the degree of corrosiveness of the environment, steel may need:

42

Epoxy paint

ROZC (red oxide zinc chromate) paint

Cold galvanising (i.e. a paint containing zinc, which acts as a sacrificial

coating, i.e. it corrodes more readily than steel)

Hot dip galvanising (each component must be dipped in a bath of

molten zinc after fabrication and before assembly)

Cathodic protection, where a negative electrical potential is maintained

in the steel, i.e. an oversupply of electrons that stops the steel losing

+++ and hence an oxide.

electrons more readily than the steel and so keep the steel supplied with electrons

and inhibit oxide formation.

LOAD ESTIMATION

INTRODUCTION

Before any detailed sizing of structural elements can start, it is necessary

to start to estimate the loads that will act on a structure. Once the designer and

the client have agreed on the purpose, size and shape of a proposed structure and

what materials it is to be made of, the process of load estimation can begin.

Loads will always include the self-weight of the structure, called the “dead

load.” In addition there may be “live” loads due to people, traffic, furniture, etc.,

that may or may not be present at any given time, and also loads due to wind,

snow, earthquakes etc. The required sizes of the members will depend on the

weight of the structure but will also contribute to the weight. So load estimation

and member sizing are to some extent an iterative process in which each affects

the other. As the designer gains experience with a particular type of structure it

becomes easier to predict approximate loads and member sizes, thereby reducing

the time taken in trial and error. However the inexperienced designer can save

time by intelligent use of some short cuts. For example the design of structures

43

carrying heavy dead loads such as concrete slabs or machinery may be dominated

by dead load. In this case it may be best to size the slabs or machinery first so the

dead loads acting on the supporting structure can be estimated. On the other hand

many steel- framed industrial buildings in warm climates where snow does

not fall can be designed mainly on the basis of wind loads, since dead and live

loads may be small enough in relation to the wind load to ignore for preliminary

design purposes. The wind load can be estimated from the dimensions of the

structure and its location. Members can then be sized to withstand wind loads and

then checked to make sure they can withstand combinations of dead, live and

wind load. Where snowfall is significant, snow loads may be dominant.

Earthquake loads are only likely to be significant for structures supporting a lot

of mass, so again the mass should be estimated before the structural elements are

sized.

Dead load is the weight of material forming a permanent part of the

structure, and in Australian codes it is given the symbol G. Dead load estimation

is generally straightforward but may be tedious. The best way to learn how to

estimate G is by examples.

Probably the simplest form of structure – at least for load estimation - is a

concrete slab supported directly on a grid of columns, as shown in Fig.3.1.

slab is 200 mm (0.2 m) thick, and the columns are spaced 4 m apart in both

directions. We want to know how much dead load each column must support.

First, we work out the area load, i.e. the dead weight G of one square

Next, we multiply the area load by the tributary area, i.e. the area of slab

supported by one column. We assume that each piece of slab is supported by the

column closest to it. So we can draw imaginary lines half way between each row

44

of columns in each direction. Each internal column (i.e. those that are not at the

edge of the slab) supports a tributary area of 16 m2, so the total dead load of the

slab on each column is 16x5 = 80 kN.

Assuming there is no overhang at the edges, edge columns will support a

little over half as much tributary area because the slab will presumably come to

the outer edge of the columns, so the actual tributary area will be 2.1x4 = 8.4 m2

and the load will be 42 kN. Corner columns will support 2.1x2.1 = 4.42 m2 and a

load of 22.1 kN.

To find the load acting on a cross-section at the bottom of each column

where G is maximum, we must also consider the self-weight of the column.

Suppose columns are 150UC30 sections (i.e steel universal columns with a mass

of 30 kg/m, 4m high between the floor and the suspended slab. The weight of one

column will therefore be 30x9.8/1000x4 = 1.2kN approximately. Thus the total

load on a cross section of an internal column at the bottom will be 80 + 1.2 = 81.2

kN.

If there are two or more levels, as in a multi-level car park or an office

building, the load on each ground floor column would have to be multiplied by

the number of floors. Thus if our car park has 3 levels, a bottom level internal

column would carry a total dead load G = 3x81.2

= 243.6 kN.

A more common form of construction is to support the slab on beams,

which are in turn supported on columns as shown in Figs.3.2 and 3.3 below.

Because the beams are deeper and stronger than the slab, they can span further so

the columns can be further apart, giving more clear floor space.

To calculate the dead load on the beams and columns, we now add

another step in the calculation. Assuming we still have a 200mm thick slab, the

area load due to the slab is still the same, i.e. 5 kPa.

45

Assume columns are still of 200x200mm section, at 4 m spacing in one

direction. But we now make the slab span 4m between beams, and the beams span

8m between columns. So we have only half as many columns. But we now want to

know the load on a beam. We could work out the total load on one 8m span of

beam. But it is normal to work out a line load, i.e. the load per m along the

beam. The tributary area for each internal beam in this case is a strip 4m wide,

as shown in the diagram above. So the line load on the beam due to the slab only

46

We must also take into account the self-weight of the beam.

Suppose the beams are 610UB101 steel universal beams weighing

approximately 1 kN/m. The total line load G on the internal beams is now 20 + 1

= 21 kN/m. This will be the same on each floor because each beam supports only

one floor. The lower columns take the load from upper floors but the beams do

not. A line load diagram for an internal beam is shown in Fig.3.4 below. Note

that we specify the span (8 m), spacing (4 m), load type (G) and load magnitude

(21 kN/m).

Walls

Unlike car parks, most buildings have walls, and we can estimate their

dead weight in the same way as we did with slabs, columns and beams.

Sometimes walls are structural, i.e. they are designed to support load. Other walls

may be just partitions, which contribute dead weight but not strength. These non-

structural partition walls are common because it is very useful to be able to knock

out walls and change the floor plan of a building without having to worry about it

falling down.

Suppose a wall is 100 mm thick and is made of reinforced concrete

weighing 25 kN/m3. The weight will be 25 x 0.1 = 2.5 kN/m2 of wall area. If

floor, i.e. the line load it will impose on a floor will be 10 kN/m. The SAA

Loading Code AS 1170 Part 1, Appendix A, contains data on typical weights of

building materials and construction. For example a concrete hollow block

masonry wall 150 mm thick, made with standard aggregate, weighs about 1.73

kN/m2 of wall area. A 2.4 m high wall of this type of blocks will impose a line

load of 1.73 2.4 = 4.15 kN/m.

47

Light steel construction

Although the dead weight of steel and timber roofs and floors is much less

than that of concrete slabs, it must still be allowed for. The principles are still the

same: sheeting is supported on horizontal “beam” elements, i.e. members designed

to withstand bending “beams,” i.e. flexural members, running at right angles to

each other. These have special names, which are shown in the diagrams below.

Roof construction

Corrugated metal (steel or aluminium) roof sheeting is normally supported

on relatively light steel or timber members called purlins which run horizontally,

i.e. at right angles to the corrugations which run down the slope. In domestic

construction, tiled roofing is common. Tiles require support at each edge of each

tile, so they are supported on light timber or steel members called battens, which

serve the same purpose as purlins but are at much closer spacing, usually 0.3m.

The purlins or battens are in turn supported on rafters or trusses. Rafters

are heavier, more widely spaced steel or timber beams running at right angles to

the purlins or battens, as shown in Fig.3.5, and spanning between walls or

columns.

Purlins usually span about 5 to 8 m and are usually spaced about 0.9 to 1.5

m apart. This spacing is dictated partly by the distance the sheeting can span

between purlins, and partly by the fact that it is easier to erect a building if the

purlins are close enough to be able to step from one to another before the

sheeting is in place.

48

Chapter4

METHODS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

Although analysis is an essential stage in design, some textbooks on the

design of steel structures pay little attention to this stage. Textbooks on structural

analysis, on the other hand, can be rather divorced from the practicalities of

design. Section 4 of AS 4100[1] is entitled “methods of structural analysis,” and it

contains some guidelines and rules, but on its own it is not enough to guide the

designer through the analysis process. AS 4100 Supplement – 1999, the Steel

Structures Commentary [2], contains further explanation and lists a large number

of references on analysis. The present chapter does not attempt to duplicate

existing references but provides some brief explanatory material including

diagrams and examples where it is felt that these will help to clarify the provisions

of AS 4100[1].

AS 4100[1] Clause 4.1.1 refers to three methods of analysis: elastic,

plastic and “advanced.” Most analysis is now done using commercial software

packages such as Spacegass[3], Microstran[4] and Multiframe[5], using elastic

methods, and this chapter will focus mainly on this approach, with a brief section

on plastic analysis. Neither the code nor the commentary give any guidance as to

how “advanced” analysis may be carried out.

Clause 4.1.2 of AS 4100[1] defines braced members, in which transverse

displacement of one end of the member relative to the other is prevented, and

sway members, in which such displacement is allowed. Examples of braced

members include all the members in a braced frame Fig.4.1 (b) and the

horizontal members in a rectangular sway frame Fig.4.1 (a). Examples of

sway members include the vertical members in a rectangular sway frame Fig.4.1

(a) and the columns and rafters in a pitched roof portal frame.

49

FORMS OF CONSTRUCTION ASSUMED FOR STRUCTURAL

ANALYSIS

Clause 4.2 of AS 4100[1] distinguishes between “rigid,” “semi-rigid” and

“simple” construction. Most designers assume either rigid construction in which

the angles between members do not change, or simple construction in which

connections are assumed not to develop bending moments. Examples are shown in

Fig.4.2.

Semi-rigid construction, in which connections provide some flexural

restraint but may not maintain original angles, may exist in reality but is more

difficult to analyse and this analysis is usually avoided in practice.

Clause 4.3 deals with some assumptions that can be made to simplify

structural analysis in some situations. For example the analysis of regular shaped

structures with a large number of members can be simplified by treating sub-

structures in isolation from the rest of the structure.

For example the regular three-dimensional structure shown in Fig.4.3(a)

below has 3 storeys, 4 bays in the X direction and 1 bay in the Z direction.

According to Clause 4.3.1(a), this could be treated as a series of two-dimensional

frames of 3 storeys and 4 bays in the x-y plane, and a series of two-dimensional

frames of 3 storeys and 1 bay in the y-z plane as long as loads and stiffness do not

vary markedly from one bay to another Clause 4.3.1(b) deals with vertical loads

on braced multi-storey building frames, in which a floor level plus the columns

above and below can be treated as a sub-structure in isolation from the rest of

the structure, as shown in Fig.4.3(b) below.

50

The effect of finite width of members

Structural analysis of skeletal structures treats structural members as "line

elements," ignoring the fact that they actually have a finite width. Because of this

finite width, it is usually impracticable to make connections at the centroid of

each member. For example floor beams in simple construction multi-storey

buildings must be joined to the sides of columns, and the weight supported by the

beam does not act through the centroid of the column. The column must therefore

carry not only axial force but bending moment also, as shown in Fig.4.3(c) below

(unless there is another beam on the other side that exerts an equal and

opposite moment on the column).They must therefore be designed as beam-

columns, i.e. members under combined axial and bending loads, using Section 8

of AS 4100.

Clause 4.3.2 of AS 4100 defines the span length as the centre to centre

distance between supports, not the actual length of the beam, as shown in

Fig.4.3(c) below. Clause 4.3.4 of AS4100 specifies the minimum eccentricity e of

the load R from a simply supported beam acting on a column, as shown in

Fig.4.3(c): “A beam reaction or a similar load on a column shall be taken as

acting at a minimum distance of 100mm from the face of the column towards the

span or at the centre of the bearing, whichever gives the greater eccentricity.”

loads

In the detail shown in Fig.4.3(e) below, the beam is simply supported on

the angle, which is bolted to the face of the column. It is not clear exactly where

the end reaction acts, so in accordance with Clause 4.3.4, it is taken as either the

middle of the support (75 mm from column face) or 100 mm, whichever is

greater, i.e. 100 mm.

To calculate the bending moment caused in the column by the eccentricity

in the diagram above,

(ignoring the fact that 6 m is the distance between centres of columns and

51

the actual beam length is a bit less. We will also assume the 30 kN/m

includes the self-weight of the beam.

2. End reaction to support beam =180/2 = 90 kN.

3. Assume that this reaction force acts at a distance of 100 mm from the face

of the column, i.e. in this case 200 mm from the centreline of the column,

since the column section is approximately 200 mm deep. Thus it will

exert a moment of 90 kN x 0.2 m = 18 kNm.

This moment must be balanced by moments in the columns above

and below the

connection.

4. Next the distribution factors between connecting members are calculated.

Because a joint must be in equilibrium, the sum of the bending moments in

the members connected at any joint must be zero (taking clockwise as

positive and anticlockwise as negative). The 18 kNm moment exerted by

the beam must be balanced by moments at the ends of the

columns above and below, where they connect to the beam. For example

if the storey height below is 4 m and that above is 3 m, the moments

are distributed in the ratio 3

below to 4 above, i.e. the column below takes 18×3/7 = 7.7 kNm at the

connection and the column below takes 18×4/7 = 10.3 kNm. These

moments in the columns are assumed to decrease linearly to zero at the

floor levels above and below, as shown in Fig.4.3(d). If

there were another beam to the left of the column, the moment in it at this

connection would also have to be taken into account.

ELASTIC ANALYSIS

Most analysis of steel structures is done using elastic theory, although in

practice some local yielding and plastic behavior is acceptable. Methods of

analysis vary from approximate analysis using simplifying assumptions,

through to highly sophisticated finite element analysis. Manual methods of

analysis have now been largely replaced by faster and more accurate computer

52

methods, but the designer should be aware of the existence of the older manual

methods such as moment amplification and moment distribution.

Clauses 4.4.1 and 4.4.2 of AS 4100 deal with first order analysis, in

which deflections in members are not taken into account in calculating moments

and forces, and second order analysis in which they are. Second order effects are

illustrated in the examples below.

Illustrative Example 1:

A 6 m high signpost of 150x150x6 mm SHS section in Grade 350 steel

carries a 50kN vertical load at an eccentricity of 0.5m, as shown in Fig.4.4(a).

First order analysis predicts a uniform bending moment of 25 kNm, which

corresponds to a maximum stress of 247 MPa, well below yield. The deflection at

the top due to this uniform bending moment would be approximately 200mm.

However this deflection increases the moment arm of the eccentric load

about the column base from 500 to 700 mm, thereby increasing the deflection,

which in turn increases the moment arm, and so on. Second order or non-

linear elastic analysis predicts 297 mm deflection at the top and a maximum

bending moment of 39.84 kNm at the bottom, as shown below. This is a 59%

increase, enough to cause the column to yield. Although this is an extreme

example it illustrates the importance of second order effects.

Illustrative Example 2:

The moment amplification effect is further illustrated in Fig.4.4(b) below.

A two storey frame carries a wind load from the left and gravity loads on the two

beams. First order analysis predicts a lateral movement of 215 mm at the top floor

due to the wind load, but this movement creates an eccentricity which increases

the bending moments in the columns and increases the lateral movement.

AS4100 provides equations for calculating moment amplification effects

in braced members in Clause 4.4.2.2 and for sway members in Clause 4.4.2.3.

These equations tend to give conservative predictions for normal cases and do not

53

accurately predict extreme cases such as those shown above. They are intended

for use as a part of a manual analysis process, but most analysis is now done

using software packages which make the moment amplification equations

obsolete.

54

BAB III

KEUNGGULAN BUKU DAN KELEMAHAN BUKU

Judul buku : Steel Framed Structures Stability and Strength

Pengarang : R.Narayanan, dkk

Penerbit : Taylor and Francis

Tahun Terbit : 2005

Nomor ISBN : 0-203-97408-5

Jumlah Halaman Buku : 7 6 halaman

Judul buku : Steel Structures Design Manual To AS 4100

Pengarang : Iyad Hassan Al-jamel & Brian kirke

Tahun Terbit, Cetakannya : 2004 cetakan ke - 1

Jumlah Halaman Buku : 229 halaman

55

KEUNGGULAN BUKU

teori struktur baja, batang tarikdan material baja. Sehingga Kedua buku ini

memiliki keterkaitan antar bab pada setiap materi yang menjeaskan tentang

struktur baja, batang tarik maupun material baja.

memperjelas dan juga adanya penjelasan manfaat yang terdapat di baja,dan juga

adanya banyak grafik atau pun tabel-tebel yang ada pada kedua buku.

56

KELEMAHAN BUKU

untuk membaca dan memahami materi tentang struktur baja. Penjelasan pada

kedua buku singkat sehingga tidak maksimal untuk para pembaca memahaminya.

b) Kemutakhiran buku

Kemuktakhran yang terkait dalam isi buku dalam sisi negatifnya adalah

kurangnya gambar-gambar yang guna memperjelas ataupun bagian dari

lapangan,sehingga para pembacasusah mengerti dalam segi perancangan yang

sebenarnya.

57

BAB IV

IMPLIKASI

Impilikasi terhadap :

a) Teori

Dalam kedua buku terdapat banyak penjelasan teori mengenai baja tarik,

batang tarik dan sebagainya sehingga kita bisa mengetahui analisis untuk

perencanaan struktur.

dapatkan di indonesia, seperti jembatan sungai ular, jembatan kereta api di

Tembung dan pengerjaan struktur rangka atap pada rumah bangunan permanen

yang ada di Medan.

c) Analisis Mahasiswa

Berdasarkan pada hasil kritikan dua buku diatas bahwa implikasi terhadap

Analisis Mahasiswa berisi analisa-analisa terhadap pemahaman dalam

mengerjakan suatu struktur bangunan. Sehingga Mahasiswa dapat pembelajaran

mengenai proses analisis struktur rangka baja dengan metode sederhana maupun

manual.

58

BAB V

PENUTUP

6.1. Kesimpulan

Dalam kedua buku ini kita dapat mengetahui tentang adanya struktur

rangka baja ,dengan setiap metode-metode perhitungannya,bahwa dalam struktur

baja ini kita harus mengetahui dulu yang paling utamanya ialah baja tersebut.

Struktur rangka baja merupakan salah satu pembelajaran yang sangat perlu

diaplikasikan dalam dunia perancangan konstruksi bangunan. Bukan hanya beton,

kayu, dan bambu. Material baja juga diperlukan dalam hal melaksanakan

pekerjaan konstruksi sipil.

6.2 Saran

Saran dalam kedua buku adalah sebaiknya buku dapat di perjelas dalam

penjelasan mengenai teori ataupun masalah perhitungan yang ada pada buku, dan

juga dapat memperjelas gambar-gambar yang ada pada buku, masalah perhitungan

sangat membingungkan bagi sang pembaca akibat teori yang kurang jelas pada

buku, sehingga para pembaca sulit untuk memahami isi buku.

59

DAFTAR PUSTAKA

taylor&francis e-Library, 2005

4100,june 2004

60

- Modul MstowerUploaded bykakarot_4
- Ashraf Habibullah, G. Robert Morris - MakalahUploaded byAndreas Galih Pamungkas
- Teori PelatUploaded byWahyu Wiyati
- Modul MstowerUploaded bydietariyani
- Mekanika Statika-struktur Rangka Batang - teknik sipil - universitas gunadarmaUploaded byI Kadek BAgus Widana Putra
- hal 8Uploaded byEm Zhy
- Struktur Kurikulum S2 Teknik Metalurgi Dan MaterialUploaded byHarry
- (Sifat Mekanik)Uploaded bygillangrizky
- 2_kuliah Stress Strain Heru SukantoUploaded byEgi Agustian Maulana
- 01_A Pendahuluan Statika StrukturUploaded byDeviantoRizkyPermadi
- Stabilitas StrukturUploaded bymarwan_juna
- 01 pendahuluan Statika Struktur.pdfUploaded byhasnan
- Properties of Material TeknikUploaded byWawanW36
- 00-kontrak-statika-genap-13-14Uploaded byMuhammad Raihan Balfas
- Tugas 1 Toll GateUploaded byRicky Cung
- 01 a Pendahuluan Statika StrukturUploaded byHilmanNurFahmi
- PVP2010-25173Uploaded byfirdaus
- Torsi- 3 sld per pgUploaded bypastcal
- kuliah 7 penuangan logam cair.pptUploaded byAndre Satria Maulana
- Tranlate Stress-Strain Diagram PresentationUploaded byRichardus Gusti Ngurah Dima
- Evaluation of a Leaf Spring Failure OkUploaded byAgustian Bakhtiar
- Tugas Kelompok 2bUploaded byMuhammad Balyan
- Deformasi konsistenUploaded byAnonymous 291PWog
- StructureSlidesChapt.1Uploaded bySiti Nurahma
- Proposal Bioplastik InggrisUploaded byHengky Herdianto Notonegoro
- Kuliah2Uploaded byAnggi Novi Andri
- 00-kontrak-statika-genap-13-14Uploaded byWindy Aprilliani
- Kuliah 7 Penuangan & Sifat Material(1)Uploaded byAndre Satria Maulana
- 10174-13017-2-446920178325Uploaded byDorado Sb
- IBR PolymersUploaded byDeariska Dahlan