Today, practically all industries have major applications of structural steel.

From industry
equipment to finished products, structural steel is used everywhere. Buildings, bridges, high-rise
buildings and warehouses are made using structural steel sections. Industry experts prefer the use
of structural steel over any other building material for construction. This is mainly because of the
innumerable benefits structural steel provides. But as everything else in the world, there are
certain downsides of using structural steel in building structures. Here we are going to focus on
the advantages and disadvantages of structural steel structures.

Advantages of Structural Steel Structures

Steel is tensile. It has a high strength to weight ratio which means it has high strength per unit
mass. So no matter how large the overall structure is, the steel sections will be small and
lightweight, unlike other building materials.

Steel can be easily fabricated and produced massively. Steel sections can be produced off-site at
shop floors and then assembled onsite. This saves time and increases the efficiency of the overall
construction process.

Structural steel is very flexible. You can mold it into any shape, without changing its properties.
You can convert it into sheets or turn it into wires as per the design.

Structural steel is relatively cheap compared to other building materials.

It is very durable. Structural steel structures can withstand external pressures such as
earthquakes,         thunderstorms, and cyclones. A well-built steel structure can last up to 30
years if maintained well.

Disadvantages of Structural Steel Structures

1. Steel is an alloy of iron. This makes it susceptible to corrosion. This problem can be
solved to some extent using anti-corrosion applications.
2. It has high maintenance costs  as it has to be painted to make it corrosion-resistant
3. There are extensive fireproofing costs involved as steel is not fireproof. In high
temperatures, steel loses its properties.
4. Buckling is an issue with steel structures. As the length of the steel column increases the
chances of buckling also increases.
5. Steel has a high expansion rate with changing temperatures. This can be detrimental to
the overall structure.

If you are on the lookout for structural steel fabricators, then reach out to us at the earliest. At
Northern Weldarc, we are a team of highly experienced structural steel fabricators. We specialize
in oil and gas, commercial, pulp and paper, and petrochemical industries.
ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF STEEL – DESIGN – FUTURE OF THE CODES
F. Werner Department of Civil Engineering, Bauhaus University Weimar,
Germany1. General The development of the planning job is characterised by several factors:
• Growing project sizes; • Growing complexity (volume and technical level) of the projects; •
Very short processing times; • Effectiveness in the usage of the building-materials; •
Automation of the design processes; • Cooperative engineering based on CAE and CAAD.
Fig 1. Steel structure with about 2000 elements; calculation time: 30s – second order analysis for 10
load combinations This leads to new demands on structural design. On the other hand the
development of computer technology in conjunction with the development of structural me-
chanics allows for qualitatively new ways in the organisa-tion of analysis and design of
steel-, steel-glass, and steel-concrete constructions. This brings to an end an epoch
characterised by: • Analysis through breakdown of structures into single elements; • Linear
calculations in reference to material and geometry; • Application of extensive hand formulas
with very restricted scopes of application and very idealistic boundary conditions; • Purely
intuitive variant construction without real optimization procedures; • Global safety
considerations. It is not easy to forecast when these mentioned de-velopments will become
operative and this varies region-ally. To achieve these objectives however we have to
formulate new initiatives in research, teaching and in the development of the necessary
design tools! The progress in the area of the structural design does not only depend on the
technical possibilities but also demands solutions on the following areas: • Highly trained
engineering personal; • Robust software products which can be effectively and safely used in
practice; • A normative bases which offers advise and protec-tion to the engineer in practical
work. The difference between scientific analysis carried out by theoretical mechanics and the
practical analysis or design, even if this may be very demanding, is substan-tial. In practice
only methods and procedures are used whose reliability has been confirmed. The probability
that the demanded reliability of the constructions is warranted
must be very high (Werner). For this reason the stan-dards acquire great significance on one
hand and their form and contents must on the other hand be brought into line with the new
qualities. The currently observed trends particularly in the Eurocodes, which extensively
portray recipe books character, depict a dim future, Werner (2000)! 2. Analysis and design of
beam structures The number of the details in steel constructions is very high. In the previous
codes the proofs of details played only a subordinate roll. References have only been given
to general questions like connecting elements, one-sided angle connections, cable
connections or design of thick flanges. Fig 2. Tapered beam element with additional central node
Within the last few years extensive investigations on beam connection behaviour have been
performed. At present the results of this work are found in textbook like form in the codes. If
one examines these carefully, it is not difficult to find several contradictions to the other
parts of and to the principle requirements of the codes (Eurocode, 1993): • The description of
sway frame is done without a consistent and exact theoretical exact basis (Euro-code 3, part
5.2). But the given moment characteris-tics for connections however then require non-linear
analyses. • The influence of semi-rigid connections on internal forces is e.g. negligible for
practically important frame systems. The influence from stabilisation forces perpendicularly
to the frame plane which could be of importance in many cases is not men-tioned. • Any use
of the calculation algorithms is meaningful and effective only with computer programs
(Euro-code 3, app. J). • As a matter of principle, a code should not take text-book character !
the size of the descriptions in cur-rent documents is too big (Eurocode 3, app. J). The
consideration of single structural planes or structural elements is at present only justified for
simple systems. The model of complex and in general spatial structures, very often reveals
interactions which lead to remarkable rearrangements of internal forces. This is particularly
the case in bracing systems, walls and floors where simply defined loads are assigned to two-
dimensional systems. This can be accepted for the pre-planning phase but otherwise should
contain more exact analyses. The application of a simplified geometrically nonlinear
calculation, e.g. as second order theory is the current state of technology (Fig. 1). For the
purpose of the effectiveness real geometrically nonlinear analyses should only be used for
systems with big deformations, like cable structures. The important problem of definition of
imperfection forms will be discussed later. Material savings for structural steel frames in the
background of reliable design procedure are of high rele-vance for competitive steel design.
An essential devel-opment is the creation of automated systems for the de-sign of such
special types of structure. Besides the problems of the optimisation, which cre-ate the basis
of such synthesis systems, the reliability of the analysis software has to be checked under
new con-siderations. In comparison to practical approaches, the system design based on
stochastic methods can take completely nonsensical forms. In these cases simplified analysis
methods can lead to completely incorrect conclu-sions. For frames with non-uniform
members a procedure for practical application was developed using stochasti-cally
optimisation to find a cross section distribution for optimal weight design. Compared to
traditional design methods weight savings of up to 15 % were achieved (Fig. 3). Design
requirements are based on specifications in the national German Code DIN 18800 1 and the
EC 3. The used beam element is defined by the cross sec-tion at the left and right element
end, by its material con-stants and by the number of integration segments along the beam
axis (Fig. 2). The stiffness within the element is central integration segment 23
Fig 3. Shapes of an optimised frame structure computed in the integration points of the actual
cross section. As a result, the changeable element stiffness is registered exactly in terms of
mechanical calculation. For the description of deformation behaviour perpendicular to the
beam axis an approximation approach of 5th order and along the beam axis an approach of 2nd
order is applied. These form functions are very flexible, so that one ele-ment is sufficient to
model one tapered member, Müller, Osterrieder, Werner (1999). The next step in the
development is the use of sec-ond order analysis on the basis of flexural-torsional the-ory. To
achieve this all necessary checks –strength and stability – will be performed in one step (see
part STA-BILITY CHECKS).Real plastic calculations, i. e. application of the geometrically
nonlinear yield area theory, play a subordi-nate role in the steel structures. Besides the
problems of the required software tools the fields of practical applica-tion where any
advantages are evident are not defined. The determination of the plastic limit load capacity of
cross-sections is through the codes, where they rather don’t belong (and generally existing
methods) and is limited to simple symmetrical I- sections. The use of calculation methods
based on optimization algorithms creates a larger application field for cross sectional forms
(Fig. 4) as well as for internal force combinations. For example warping moments can be
taken into account without major problems, Osterrieder, Werner, Kretzsch-mar (1997). For
any set of internal forces, in a defined section, implied in the analyses of strength or buckling

[]
problems and given by the reference vector: ωMMMNFzy=the multiplication factor ∀,
which extends the force vec-tor F towards the yield surface has to be determined. The yield
limit state is defined by: Equilibrium conditions
0000=−Σ=−Σ=−Σ=−ΣωαωσασασασMAMAyMAzNAiiiziiiyiiiiiyield conditions
ff−≥+≤σσ
yiyi
The linear objective function has the form: αααα ⇒⇒⇒⇒ Maximum Fig 4. Yield surface for
L-profile By solving this numerical optimization problem, f.i. by Revised Simplex, load
carrying capacities for any type of profile are to be calculated in an easy way. Yield surface
for L-profile: Section: 100x75x9Internal forces: My,d = 7,0 kNm Nd = 143,44 kN Mz =0 steel
grade St37: fy,k = 24 kN/cm2first yield design leads to:
2,2,8,2122,361,154,14391,6181700maxcmkNcmkNdRdS=>=+∗=σσfirst hinge design leads to: fully

plastic properties: NP = 358.6 kN My,P = 10.87 kNm n = 143,44/358,60 = 0,4 , my = 7,0/10,87

= 0,644The given load combination satisfies the yield condi-tion. Thus allows for a load
increase of 67%. 3. Stability checks An important and critical area where up to now no
satisfactory solutions are available is stability checks. It is only for plane problems where
reasonable solutions are available. The concepts for lateral torsional buckling and plate
buckling in the codes have only been improved in detail during the last years (Fig. 5) Fig 5.
Concept for Lateral Torsional Buckling - DIN 18800 and EC3 The modern codes (DIN 18800,
EC3) contain neces-sary details on imperfections. But research is still re-quired in this area in
order to come up with more certain predefinitions for spatial systems. Furthermore the
boundary conditions must be specified for imperfections. In current documents they are
treated like safety factors, but cannot be easily and systematically assigned to them. One of
the problems is shown in figure 6. Fig 6. Imperfection forms for a column: I - similar to the
deflection II - similar to the first eigenmode According to the code the first eigenmode is to be
the imperfection shape. At the same time the imperfection has to meet the most unfavourable
strain situation. For a column with a slenderness λ in the middle range the first eigenmode
does not meet these requirements. In this case Flexural torsional buckling check with singleelementsSecond order - M
y

the internal moments at the supports can be higher for an imperfection form according to the
deflections. In its current form the EC3 expresses the uncertainty of a practical use of this
method of calculation. In a long and winded way simplified formulas are mixed with
particular instructions and theoretical references (EC3, part 5.2). Currently developments are
in progress in this field and that will lead to more effective and reliable results than the
presently available methods according to the codes. The problem here, as already described,
is that the standards still show essential gaps in defining boundary conditions. And there are
very few prospects for change! Improving the handling of lateral torsional buckling problems
is of great importance. The available formula apparatuses with confusing coefficients can
only seldom meet practical requirements, such as: Multispan beams with unequal spans and
arbitrary loads both in magnitude and point of application; Semi-rigid support conditions at
the ends and in the spans; Coupling of components in spatial structures etc. Fig 7. Purlin
system analysed by beam elements with an additional torsional degree of freedom φ ́ The use of
beam elements with an additional tor-sional degree of freedom φ ́ allows the creation of
robust analysis systems which solve very effectively a large class of problems (Fig. 7).
Development work still needs to be done, particularly in defining transition conditions
between profiles with different shapes and frame splices and connections. The changes in
conditions for section-deformation, especially warping conditions can not be easily
described. Simplified presumptions lead in general to uneconomic solutions. Particularly for
crane support beams and purlin systems, very economic and realistic design with the
necessary safety level are possible, Oster-rieder, Werner, Friedrich, Ortlepp (1999). It is also
possible to generate practical design tools which can replace the restricted valid concepts of
the codes for thin-walled, asymmetrical cross sections, like purlins (Fig. 7). Thus it is
possible to eliminate a big portion of the differences in load carrying capacities normally
observed between results from experiments and those from calculations. Especially boundary
conditions like elastic restraints from claddings or special internal supports can be modelled
in a practical way. The load carrying capacity is very sensitive to elastic restraints, so with
small springs stiffness a noticeable increase of the critical load can be achieved. Research
work is still nec-essary on connecting conditions for beams with different shapes, splices,
frame corners etc. structures. The descrip-tion of the warping restraints or transformation of
warp-ing parameters in this area requires a new quality of mod-els. One of problems here is
also the definition of boundary conditions, like: • Imperfection forms • Support conditions •
Limitation of deflections. These issues are important for congruence between theoretical
model and reliability of calculation results, Werner, Osterrieder, Lehmkuhl (1999). Fig 8.
Practical buckling problem restistance The large field of the plate buckling particularly in cases
where horizontal and vertical stiffeners and torsion-stiff flanges exist is difficult to handle on
the basis8000 60006000b = 220a = 330[cm]yxr r r Ψ r Ψ r 555511027,5L 12x8x1L 12x8x1t = 1,2r
xy y x x x x

Fig 9. Buckling problem with eigenmodes for: Φx!8cr,x = 3,03 Φy!8cr,x = 4,37 θ!8cr,x,y = 1,96 overall
stress: !8cr,o = 2,03 of the code. Advanced software tools are coming up allowing fast checks
and design even for sophisticated problems. Due to missing normative conditions for real
nonlinear analyses, it is reasonable to use the way prescribed by the codes. Modern FE-
analysis tools are applied to determine the eigenvalues and then the normal buckling
coefficients of the codes are used. According to the codes the plate buckling problems are
separated in different load cases [Fig. 8]. The design is then realised through interaction
formulas. This is a cumbersome method but which the practising engineer however trusts.
For FE-methods which can analyse complex failure forms assumptions are still missing for
corresponding buckling factors. Suggestions are available to handle this problem in a
practical way , Ortlepp, Werner, Osterrieder (2000). 4. Summary The historically major
objective of the codes i.e. the creation of a safety standard, must be shifted into the center of
focus once again. For the representation and storage of knowledge, methods and catalogues
very effective media systems are today at our disposal. They could complement the new
generation of codes in a very effective way. References 1. DIN 18800 - Stahlbauten (Steel
structures; design and construction) 11/1990 2. Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures, ENV
1993 3. Eurocode 1 – Basis of design and actions on struc-tures, ENV 1991 4. Müller,
A.;Osterrieder, P.; Werner, F.: Optimal De-sign of Steel Frames with Non-uniform
Members. In-ternational Conference on Steel Structures, Hongkong 1999 5. Ortlepp, O.;
Werner; F.; Osterrieder, P.: Practical Buckling Capacity Curve for Coupled Instabilities of
Pates. CIMS 2000, Lissabon Portugal 6. Osterrieder, P.; Werner, F.; Friedrich, M.; Ortlepp,
O.: Advanced Finite Element Buckling Analysis in Engineering Practise. SDSS 99,
Timishuara 1999 7. Werner, F.: Probleme der Normengestaltung (Prob-lems of code-
configuration); http://www.uni-weimar.de/Bauing/stahlbau/norm_ref.pdf, 2000 8. Werner,
F;.Osterrieder, P.; Lehmkuhl, H.: Stability Design of Thin Walled Memebers including Local
Buckling. 2nd International Conference on Thin-Walled Structures, Singapore 1998 9.
Werner, F.; Lehmkuhl, H.: Use of Numerical Meth-ods for Practical Analyses of Structural
Elements. CIMS 2000, Lissabon Portugal 2000 10. Osterrieder, P.; Werner, F.; Kretzschmar,
J.: Plastic Flexural-Torsional Buckling Design of Beams with Open Thin-Walled Cross
SDSS 97, Nagoya 1997 Įteikta 2001 02 15 ..............................................................................