2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2112

Wind Load Provisions and Steel Specifications for Russia

David P. Thompson, M.Sc., P. Eng., 1 and Mila Paramonov, M.Sc., P.Eng., 2
1
Principal,
kta Structural Engineers Ltd. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2H 2K6
Phone 403-265-4405, Fax 403-265-4565 e-mail: dpt@kta-eng.com
2
Senior Design Engineer,
kta Structural Engineers Ltd. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2H 2K6
Phone 403-265-4405, Fax 403-265-4565 e-mail: mila@kta-eng.com

ABSTRACT
Russian loading and design standards present many challenges for Structural
Engineers from North America. Structural Engineers have to deal with language,
wind loading, load combinations and design methodologies that are presented in a
different manner than in the United States.

Design for Steel Buildings in Russia is based on requirements of the State Standards
“Building Norms and Rules”, SNiP (Stroitelnye Normy i Pravila), SNIP 2.01.07-85
for loads and SNIP 2.23-81 for “Steelwork”. Structural design using these standards
is mandatory. In addition, guidance for steel design is found in “General Rules for
Steel Structure Design” SP 53-102-2004

This paper describes how SNIP 2.01.07-85 , SNIP 2.23-81 and SP 53-102-2004 are
used in the design of steel buildings under wind loads as well as comparing designs
wind loads to Canada and the United States.

DESIGN IN RUSSIA
In this section we will discuss the differences between design in Russia and the
United States.

The main differences between the United States and Russia are:
• Russia uses Limit States Design versus Load Factored Resistance Design or
Allowable Stress design
• The load groupings are presented in a different manner
• The load combinations are different
• The basic wind loads are based on a 10-minute sampling period and a five-
year return period
• The material factors use a similar presentation as European Standards
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2113

Design Philosophy

The design philosophy used in Russia is a complete Limit States approach. If you
want to compare this approach to the United States, the best example, would be
Prestress Concrete. In Prestress Concrete we are required to carefully check the
condition of the concrete members both at service and ultimate states. When
designing Prestress Concrete you often do not know whether service and ultimate
condition controls the design. In effect we combine both ASD and LFRD design
methods. The same is true in Russia. Directions for design calculations in Russia are
given in the Standards Reliability construction structures and grounds, GOST 27751 –
88, ST SEV 384-87

The Engineer is required to consider two categories of conditions;

The first category includes the conditions which lead to failure of the structure, due to
loss of shape or complete (partial) loss of load capacity. The design is to prevent
under Design loads (ultimate loads);
• Failure of the structures
• loss of stability of permanent shape of the overall structure
• loss of stability
• other phenomena, requiring the end the use of the overall structure
ie, excessive deformations as a result of creep, plasticity, shear in the joints,
opening of cracks, as well as the formation of cracks

The second category includes the conditions that effect the day to day operation of
structure or reduce the longevity of structures. Under Normative (service loads) the
design is required to:
• limit strain in the members (for example, limiting deflections, rotations)
• formation of cracks effecting the operation or durability of the structure
• limit crack lengths effecting the operation or durability of the structure
• loss of stability of shape effecting the operation of the structure
• other phenomena in which there is a need of temporary restrictions on use of
the structure because of an unacceptable corrosive damage

There are no secondary limit states, to consider once the design is done, all states are
equally important. The serviceability portions of the design standards are much more
thorough than presently used in ASIC 360.

Guidance for the classification of loads, load combinations, importance factors and
loading are found in “Loads and Effects”, SNiP 2.01.07-85 and “Reliable
Construction Structures and Grounds, Load and Impact Basics”, ST SEV 1407-88.
The following sections will provide an overview of these topics.
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2114

Classification of Loads

The approach for grouping loads in Russia differs from North America by
considering the duration the structure is subjected to a type of loads, instead of using
the likelihood of the load being subjected to a structure.

Loads in Russia are grouped into two main categories; Permanent (P) or Temporary
(T). The temporary loads are then subdivided into three groups, short-term temporary
loads (Ts), long-term temporary loads (Tl) and special temporary loads (Tsp).
Examples of the different categories of loads are shown below

Permanent loads (P):

ƒ weight of buildings
ƒ weight and pressure of soils, constant pressure of water;
ƒ prestressing.
Short-term loads (Ts):
• Maintenance Loads, Occupancy Loads
• Material handling equipment (eg forklifts, cranes, hoists)
• Environmental Loads
o snow loads
o loads from temperature effects
o wind loads;
Long-term loads (Tl):
ƒ temporary partitions
ƒ Stationary equipment: machine tools, appliances, motors, tanks, pipes,
equipment as well as the weight of solids and liquids.
ƒ positive and negative air pressure arising from the ventilation shafts;
ƒ stored materials and shelving equipment in warehouses, refrigerators,
granaries, libraries, archives and other similar premises;
ƒ thermal effects;
• decreased occupancy loads
• the thawing of permafrost;
• Load due to variations in moisture content, shrinkage and creep of
materials.
Special Loads (Tsp):
• seismic effects;
• impact of fire or explosion;
• effects caused by strains grounds, accompanied by fundamental
changes in the structure of the soil (eg, swelling subsiding soils), or
sinking

The loads provided in the SNIP standard are normative loads for use in checking the
effect load effects on the day to day operation of structure. The normative loads are
multiplied load factors, γf to create design loads. The design loads are used while
checking the ultimate states. The load combinations for both groups of limit states
are the same.
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2115

Load Combinations

Russian design standards use two types of load combinations. Load combinations for
regular conditions, (basic combinations) and combinations when considering Special
Loads

Load combination of consisting only permanent, long-term and short-term pressures

are shown in equation 1;

= P +∑ ψ2 Ts +∑ ψ1 Tl (1)

The SNIP standard uses ψ factors to address the likely hood of loads occurring at the
same time. The ψ factors for temporary loads are shown in Table 1

Table 1

Condition ψ1 ψ2
1a) one short-term load (Ts) - 1.0
1b) one long-term load (Tl) 1.0 -
2) up to three short-term load (Ts) with long-term loads (Tl) 0.95 0.9
2) four or more short-term load (Ts) with long-term loads (Tl) 0.95 0.8
2) If influence of short-term loads are known
– Primary short-term load 0.95 1.0
– Secondary short-term load 0.8
– Rest of short-term loads 0.6

The combination of loads for special loads, consist of permanent, long, short, and one
of the special loads as demonstrated in equation 2.

= P + Tsp + ψ2 Ts + ψ1 Tl (2)

Where ψ1 = 0.95 except in high seismic zones where 1.0 is used

Where ψ2 = 0.90 except

in high seismic zones where 1.0 is used
For collision, fire or explosion where 0.0 is used

There are several factors that are applied to the overall load combination. One you
would expect, the Importance factor γn and another which is a surprise, the Stability
factor γs that will be discussed in the Steel Design Section. The importance factor as
in ASCE -7 has a high level γn = 0.95 – 1.20, normal level γn = 0.95 and a reduced
level γn = 0.95- 0.80. Buildings permitted to use the reduced level of importance
includes greenhouses, summer pavilions, small warehouses and similar facilities
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2116

Wind Loading

Chapter 6 of Loads and Effects, SNiP 2.01.07-85 deal with wind loads . The SNiP
standard uses wind pressure as the basic parameter and uses four types of wind
pressures. The total wind load on the structure is composed of:
Wm Constant (median) wind pressure
Wp Gust (pulsating) wind pressure
Wf Frictional wind pressure
Wi Internal wind pressure

The constant wind pressure Wm is calculated by equation 3

Wm = Wo Kz (3)

where Wo - Normative value of wind pressure take from a map in the

standard
This value represents an average wind pressure taken 10 meter
above the ground, sampled over a 10 minute period, with a
return period of 5 years
Kz - Coefficient of change in wind pressure with height;
This coefficient is very similar to the exposure coefficient used
in ASCE-7 for open (A) and suburban terrain (B)
c- Aerodynamic coefficient., figures at end of Chapter 6
are similar to Cp values in ASCE-7

The pulsating (gust) wind pressure Wp is calculated by equation 4.

W p = W m ⋅ ξ ⋅ ζ ⋅ v, (4)
where Wm -- see equation 3
ξ - Coefficient of dynamic pressure;
ζ - Coefficient of change in gust wind pressure with height;

SNiP 2.01.07-85 permits Wp to be ignored in determining the internal pressure, wind

loads for, multi-storey buildings up to 40 m in height and single-story industrial
buildings up to 36 m with a height to span ratio of less than 1.5

Internal wind pressures Wi are calculated using the Aerodynamic coefficients shown
in the figures at end of Chapter 6

The load factor for wind γf is specified as 1.4. Popov identified 1.4 as the ratio to
convert a 5 year wind pressure to a 50 year wind pressure. This ratio also matches
what is predicted using the probability distribution for wind pressure in the Eurocode
dealing wind actions.
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2117

Steel Design

Reference documents for steel design in Russia are a code of practice “General Rules
for the design of Steel Structures” SP 53-102-2004 and the SNiP standard for Steel
Works. The code of practice requires that an additional stability factor γs of 1.3 be
used if Steel Frames are analyzed using computer programs. It is common practice to
include this factor for projects designed and constructed by foreign firms.

While the presentation of steel design in Russia is very different, many common
themes can be found with AISC. The design is definitely ultimate limit states even
though the load combinations and resistance equation look like allowable stress
design. Here is an example of how Axial and Bending Moments are handled

Resistance in yielding Ry = Ryn / γm (5)

N
≤1
Compression An R y γ c (6)
Mx My
+ ≤1
cxβWxn,minRyγc cyβWyn,minRyγc
Bending in two principal planes (7)

Mx My
+ ≤1
cxβWxn,minRyγc cyβWyn,minRyγc
Bending in two principal planes (8)
Mx My
+ ≤1
cxβWxn,minRyγc cyβWyn,minRyγc
Axial and Bending (9)

Where M, N = γs γn ( γfi P +∑ ψ2 γfi Ts +∑ ψ1 γfi Tl ) (10)

M -- Moment ; see equation 10

N -- Axial Force; see equation 10
Ry -- calculated resistance steel tension, compression, bending to
yield strength;
βr -- Coefficient for effect of shear on bending
γc -- Condition factor - to account for high risk members such as
columns
γf -- Load Factor
γm -- Material 1.0 – 1.10
γn -- Importance factor
γs -- safety factor for stability; Specified as 1.3 for computer analysis
c -- Coefficient to account for the ability of plastic deformation in
bending
W -- Section Modulus
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2118

Design Example

A design example was completed using all the information in the previous sections to
provide a comparison between the Russian Standards with the Canadian and United
States steel design standards.

An example was chosen that had been widely used previously. From 2004 to 2007
three test questions were posed to wind experts in 15 countries. The purpose of the
exercise was to be able to compare the consistency of how wind loads were calculated
on buildings around the world. The Low Rise Building from this exercise was
chosen.

The warehouse is a five bay rigid framed building 82’ x 50’. The building has a 10’ x
13’ roll up door on one side and a 39” x 84” man door with a 39” x 39” window on
the opposite side as shown in Figure 1

A load of 10 p.s.f. was used to account for the dead load of the building

The design wind speeds at 20 ft height were set at of 88 mph 39 m/s, 26 m/s and
0.42 kN/m2 23 m/s were specified for the averaging times of 3-seconds, 10-minutes,
and 1 hour. We assumed the return period for the winds were 50 years

Low Rise Building

Figure 1
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2119

The wind design criteria for the Warehouse in each country were considered as;
United States 88 mph Open Exposure Partially enclosed
Canada 0.42 kN/m2 Open exposure Partially enclosed
Russia 0.30 kN/m2 Open exposure -

The design arch was sized using one beam size as shown in Table 2

Design Arch Results

Table 2

Design Standard Beam Size

Canada W 14 x 30
Russia W 14 x 34
USA - ASD W 14 x 38
USA - LRFD W 14 x 48

There were several interesting observations;

• Canada, USA – ASD and USA – LRFD was governed by Strength
• Russia was governed by deflection
• Russian ultimate loads are much lower and appear very unconservative the
wind load represents a 1200 year wind because of the difference in winds
between Europe and North America see Figure 2
• Canada, and the United States Standards are suppose to all have the same
Margin of Safety.

2.00

1.80

1.60
USA
Pessure Ratio

1.40
Eurocode
[P/P50]

1.20
Russian Ultimate Design
Load
1.00
Ultimate LRFD
0.80

0.60

0.40
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Return Period [Years]

Figure 2
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2120

INFLUENCE OF RUSSIAN STANDARDS

While these standards apply to Russia, their influence is significant. The SNIP
standards in 1962 became obligatory recommendations for countries belonging to the
Council for Mutual Economic Aid (CMEA). The SNIP and GOST standards were
converted into CMEA model standards (i.e., ST SEV 3972-83) for use by the other
countries in the association. The Council for Mutual Economic Aid reached its full
extent in 1986.

Members Observers

Figure 3

Since 1991 the countries in the CMEA, especially the Eastern European countries,
have started transitioning to the use of the Euro codes. However, you still find the
influence of SNIP and GOST standards can be found in Europe and Asia as the basis
of design for one eighth of the world’s surface.

CONCLUSION
Russia has a very sophisticated system of design standards for loading and steel
design. While different than the United States the design standards provide similar
results as would be found following ASIC 360 and ASCE-7. This paper provides an
introduction of steel design in Russia.

Important points to remember are:

• Russian Standards are presented differently than in the United States. It is
necessary for a Structural Engineer understand these standards.
• Use American Design Standards rarely and very carefully for designs in
Russia
2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE 2121

• Russia uses limit states design.

o Design loads are at the Ultimate Load limit
o Attention must be paid to the Normative Load limit, these conditions
can govern
• Use the code of practice “General Rules for the design of Steel Structures” SP
53-102-2004 in addition to the other design standards when designing in
Russia.
• The probability distribution of wind pressures in Europe is less variable than
in the United States. Therefore, the ratio between the 1/50 year wind and
1/700 year wind is much smaller.

REFFERENCES
American Society of Civil Engineers, “Minimum design loads for buildings and other
structures. ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05.” American Society of Civil Engineers,
Reston, Virginia, (2006)

Holmes John D, Yukio Tamura, Prem Krishna, “Comparison of wind loads

calculated by fifteen different codes and standards, for low, medium and high-rise
buildings”, Proceedings of 11 Americas Conference on Wind Engineering, (2009)

National Research Council of Canada, “National Building Code of Canada”. (2005).

Permanent Commission for Cooperation, COMECON “The reliability of building

structures and grounds Reinforced steel Basic provisions on the calculation”, ST
SEV 3972-83 Moscow (1985)

Permanent Commission for Cooperation, COMECON, “Reliable Construction

Structures and Grounds, Load and Impact Basics, ST SEV 1407-88”, (1988)

Popov Nikolai A., “The wind load codification in Russia and some estimates of a gust
load accuracy provided by different codes” Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics Volume 88 (2000)

Russian Ministry of Construction, “GENERAL RULES FOR THE DESIGN OF

STEEL STRUCTURES, General rules for steel structure design, SP 53-102-2004”,
Moscow, (2005)

Russian Ministry of Construction, “Loads and Effects, SNiP 2.01.07-85*”, (2003)

Russian Ministry of Construction, “Steelwork, SNiP 2.23-81”, Moscow, (1995)

State Building Committee, USSR, “Reliability construction structures and grounds.”

GOST 27751 – 88, ST SEV 384-87”, Moscow (1988)

Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comecon , January 26, 2010