JANUARY 27, 2021

PUBLIC ASSEMBLY BUILDING

BEA_7_496 MASONRY AND TIMBER ENGINEERING

STUDENT NO: 3529955

MSC STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
London South Bank University
Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 3
2. Preliminary Design .................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1. Design appraisal ................................................................................................................................ 3
2.1.1. Safety ........................................................................................................................................ 3
2.1.2. Economy ................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1.3. Buildability ................................................................................................................................ 3
2.1.4. Robustness ................................................................................................................................ 4
2.1.5. Durability .................................................................................................................................. 4
2.2. Proposal 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.1. Functional Framing .................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.2. Load Transfer ............................................................................................................................ 6
2.2.3. Lateral stability .......................................................................................................................... 7
2.3. Proposal 2 ......................................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.1. Functional Framing .................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.2. Load Transfer .......................................................................................................................... 10
2.3.3. Lateral stability ........................................................................................................................ 11
2.4. Reason for chosen solution ............................................................................................................. 11
3. Calculations ............................................................................................................................................ 12
3.1. Timber Rafter (50 x 100mm) ........................................................................................................... 12
3.2. Glulam Beam spanning between timber frames .............................................................................. 17
3.3. Glulam Column ............................................................................................................................... 22
3.4. Masonry Panel Lateral Stability ....................................................................................................... 25
3.4.1. Wind Load Calculation ............................................................................................................. 25
3.4.2. Masonry Wall Lateral Stability ................................................................................................. 26
4. Method Statement ................................................................................................................................. 28
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................... 29
APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................................................... 30
LETTER TO ARCHITECT ................................................................................................................................ 30
APPENDIX B .................................................................................................................................................... 32
DRAWINGS ................................................................................................................................................. 32
Figure 1 Frame Geometry - 1st proposal ........................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2 Lower & Upper Floor Plan ................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 3 Proposed roof layout .......................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 4 Load Path Transfer .............................................................................................................................. 7
Figure 5 Rigid Moment Connections ................................................................................................................. 7
Figure 6 Garden Gazebo (keengardener.co.uk, n.d.) ......................................................................................... 8
Figure 7 Transversal Frame (12mmm span) ...................................................................................................... 9
Figure 8 Diagonal Frame (15621mm span) ........................................................................................................ 9
Figure 9 Timber frames combined into a star-like structure .............................................................................. 9
Figure 10 Overall Building 3D Model ............................................................................................................... 10
Figure 11 Load Transfer Path .......................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 12 Rigid Joint Connection (Swedish Wood, 2016) ................................................................................. 11
Figure 13 Three-pin arch conditions (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013) ............................................. 11
Figure 14 Dead Load Axial Forces.................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 15 Live Load Axial Forces...................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 16 Proposed storeroom under Upper Hall ............................................................................................ 31
 1. Introduction
Wooden and masonry buildings houses are an example of a combined project in which the stone provides
durability while the timber have excellent heat saving properties and architectural impact.
The project of a combined brick and timber building has many advantages, and has an outstanding appearance,
compared to buildings made of homogeneous material. The wooden elements heat up faster and cools more
slowly, which saves its insulation.
However, there are also challenges involved. Selecting a construction team from universal workers or using
professional labour for two types of raw materials can prove difficult. Also, the complexity of the installation
during the transition from one material to another and the quality of their connection can be another issue.

2. Preliminary Design
2.1. Design appraisal
2.1.1. Safety
During Construction

 Crane and additional mechanized equipment’s should be used for hauling, lifting and positioning timber
frames and large timber elements.
 Brick layering needs to be done by qualified workers. Scaffolding need to be installed for working at
heights. Other measures for working on heights are to be set in place
 Roofing needs to be installed considering the prevention measures for working on heights
During Use

 Wood is particularly sensitive to moisture and is subject to cracks, so preliminary treatment with special
compounds and impregnations is required
 As the brick will stay exposed engineered bricks are therefore suggested.
 Structure is designed for a 60 min fire resistance.
Maintenance and Refurbishments

 Easy to maintain, however due to height of some timber elements trained staff might be required, that
has a permit to work on heights.
 Treatment against thermites and other insect might be periodically required.
Demolition

 Both timber and masonry can be recycled.

 Before demolition timber elements need to be inspected for eventual decay and asses if is safe to be
demolished by manpower or by mechanized means

2.1.2. Economy
Costs will vary depending on type and strength of masonry used, timber frame shape, quantity of timber used or
timber type

2.1.3. Buildability
As the timber frames will come partially assembled it will be quite straight forward to be erected on site.
The other timber beams, joist or rafters should be easy to install and connect
Masonry layering should be done by qualified labours
 2.1.4. Robustness
The timber frames are manufactured from glulam GL24h. Currently glulam is a material quite robust in some
cases being a viable alternative to steel.
Masonry is also a consider a robust material. There are many types of masonry with different compressive
strength properties. The robustness of the structure is influenced by the masonry block used

2.1.5. Durability
Again, the properties that glulam can achieve lately are quite amazing. Life spans of 100-150 years are by
manufacturers.
Masonry is already known as a durable material, with masonry building exceeding 200 years lifespan

Two solution are proposed based on the floor plan and section provided.

2.2. Proposal 1
2.2.1. Functional Framing

Figure 1 Frame Geometry - 1st proposal

A timber frame as in the Figure 1 was considered. The same frame can be used for lower and upper floor of the
building to the symmetry, with the specification that additional concrete piers might need to be build as there is
at least a 5m difference in between the toe of the arch and the foundation of the structure especially on the left
side of the upper floor. Additionally, transfer beams are needed to connect the ridge point of the top frame to the
ridge point of the lower ground floor, and to support the roof in between the two ridge parts
This geometry was considered because of the aesthetical aspect that an arch can give, structural reliability
provided as a three-pin arch can withstand high loads over large spans (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB,
2013)
A preliminary sizing of the glulam elements was assessed as follows:
Glulam arch:

 h ≃ 250mm deep (L/50 (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013))

 b ≃ 100mm (h/3)
Glulam beams:

 h ≃ 400 mm deep (L/17 (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013))

 b ≃ 150mm (h/3)
Glulam columns

 h =b ≃ 250 mm for 3500mm high (L/15 (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013))
 h =b ≃ 450 mm for 8500mm high (L/20 (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013))
All the dimensions were rounded up to the nearest 50mm

Figure 2 Lower & Upper Floor Plan

The proposed plan layout for lower and upper floor is depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 3 Proposed roof layout

The proposed roof layout is presented in Figure 3. The overall shape is a saltbox roof with the highest ridge
beam on top of upper floor sloping for 6500mm to the front (entrance) and 1950 towards the back of the
building, to the lower floor.
The structure is quite symmetrical therefore the loads distributed to its structural elements should be roughly
similar for the most of them (half for the elements constituting the perimeter)

2.2.2. Load Transfer

As per the scheme in Figure 2 the dead and live loads are initially taken by the timber rafters which spans in
between the primary beams and transferred to those. From the primary beams the loads are transferred to the
inclined beams of the frame which is further transfer either to the arch through the middle post above the arch or
the connections in the tangent zones, or, directly to the columns. Both columns and arch are connected
individually to the foundation
 Figure 4 Load Path Transfer

2.2.3. Lateral stability

As the existence of the large unobstructed windows cannot really allow for bracing moment connections are
suggested.

Figure 5 Rigid Moment Connections

 2.3. Proposal 2
2.3.1. Functional Framing
A different type of geometry and symmetry was considered for the second proposal. If for the first design the
overall structure was divided in two symmetrical structures with the ridges connected by a sloped roof, now four
identical structures are used and combined into final design.
The structural design was inspired from various garden gazebos. The main advantage is that the geometry of the
gazebo provides lateral stability in all directions.

Figure 6 Garden Gazebo (keengardener.co.uk, n.d.)

The frames used are spanning transversally and diagonally through the structure. As the geometry used is similar
for all the frames, the dimensions will vary as the diagonal frames will span over a larger distance (15621mm).
 Figure 7 Transversal Frame (12mmm span)

Figure 8 Diagonal Frame (15621mm span)

Figure 9 Timber frames combined into a star-like structure

As it can be seen in the Figure 9 the frames are intersecting on the ridge vertical axis, creating a star shaped
structure. The overall proposed geometry is presented in Figure 10:

Figure 10 Overall Building 3D Model

2.3.2. Load Transfer

Figure 11 Load Transfer Path

As per the scheme in Figure 11 the dead and live loads are initially taken by the timber rafters which spans in
between the primary beams and transferred to those. From the primary beams the loads are transferred to the
inclined beams of the frame which is further to the columns and further to the foundation
 2.3.3. Lateral stability
Again, horizontal stability is accomplished by preventing angular changes between elements that are prone to
collapse. (Swedish Wood, 2016)

Figure 12 Rigid Joint Connection (Swedish Wood, 2016)

In this case, the connections between members are such that, under any loading, the angle of intersection between
members remains constant. Those are frequently referred to as rigid connections or rigid joints (Swedish Wood,
2016).

2.4. Reason for chosen solution

Some key aspects were looked at when deciding in between the two proposal
As for final design the second proposed solution was chosen
Some other technical aspects were considered when choosing this type of frame. An arched structure is viable for
structures with a span in between 20-100m, a roof pitch that satisfy the relationship f/l>0.144, and a depth of the
arched beam of h=L/50 (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013).

Figure 13 Three-pin arch conditions (Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB, 2013)

As bracing the structure can prove quite challenging additional post and beam structure needs to be built between
the frames, with rigid connections to act like moment frames (Figure 5). The sole purpose of those is to provide
horizontal stability as the tangent beams can have their end supported on the masonry wall instead.
The trusses system proposed in the second option is able to provide lateral stability in four directions which is an
advantage while the moment frames can be easily created by connecting the top of the columns with beams, and
the connection made rigid by a stiffening member.
While using more timber the second option provides a better load transfer because of the way the trusses are
interconnecting, providing a more sound and robust design.

3. Calculations
An imposed load of 1𝑘𝑁/𝑚2 was considered. For permanent loads Structural Engineering Pocket Book (Cobb
F, 2003) suggest a load in between 0.06 and 0.08 𝑘𝑁/𝑚2 for roofing metal sheets. Therefore, considering the
additional insulation a value of 0.1 𝑘𝑁/𝑚 2 was used.

3.1. Timber Rafter (50 x 100mm)

Max length: 2050mm @600mm cts on a 26.6° pitch

𝐷𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 0.1 𝑘𝑁/𝑚2

𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 1𝑘𝑁/𝑚 2

On 26.6° slope:

𝐷𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 (𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒) = 0.1 𝑘𝑁⁄ 2

𝑚
𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 (𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒) = 1 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ∗ cos 26.6 = 0.9 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2

@600mm cts

𝐷𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 0.1 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ∗ 0.6𝑚 = 0.06 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚

𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 0.9 𝑘𝑁⁄ 2 ∗ 0.6𝑚 = 0.54 𝑘𝑁⁄ 2

𝑚 𝑚

Load Duration Class (LDC) (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.2

For permanent action LDC = Permanent

For imposed roof actions LDC = Medium term

Partial safety factors for each action: (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.1
𝛾𝐺 = 1.35;
𝛾𝑄 = 1.5

Partial safety factors for material: (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.19
Solid timber 𝛾𝑚 = 1.3

Service Class (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.1

SC 2

Other strength modification factors:

𝐾𝑚𝑜𝑑 = 0.6 Permanent (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.3

𝐾𝑚𝑜𝑑 = 0.8 medium

𝐾𝑑𝑒𝑓 = 0.8 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.4

150 0.2
𝐾ℎ = ( ) or 1.3 for h<150 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.20
ℎ

𝐾ℎ = 1.08

𝐾𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝐾 𝑐𝑟 (EN 1995-1-1, 2014) Cl.

𝐾 𝑐𝑟 = 0.67 6.1.7 (2)

𝐾𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 – used for lateral buckling (ISE Manual, 2007) Table

3.21; Figs 3.2 – 3.4, Table
𝐾𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = 1
4.2

𝐾𝑚 – factor considering redistribution of bending stress in a cross section

(ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.20
𝐾𝑚 = 0.7 rectangular section

𝐾𝑠𝑦𝑠 – system strength factor

𝐾𝑠𝑦𝑠 = 1.1

Consider ULS

Bending (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.2.1.1

𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑
𝑀𝑦𝑑
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 =
𝑊𝑦

𝑘ℎ ∗ 𝑘𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 ∗ 𝑘𝑠𝑦𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑚,𝑘

𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚
 (BS EN 338:2016, 2016) Table 1
𝑓𝑚,𝑘 = 24

Case 1 - Permanent load

(2.05𝑚)2
𝑀𝑦𝑑 = 1.35 ∗ 0.06 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ∗ 8
= 0.043 𝑘𝑁𝑚

50 ∗ 1002
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = (0.043 ∗ 106 )/( ) = 0.52 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚 2
6
1.08∗1∗1.1∗0.6∗24
𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = = 13.16 𝑁⁄
1.3 𝑚𝑚 2
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 OK

Case 2 - Permanent + impose loads

(2.05𝑚)2
𝑀𝑦𝑑 = (1.35 ∗ 0.06 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 + 1.5 ∗ 0.54 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ) ∗ 8
= 0.47 𝑘𝑁𝑚

𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = (0.47 ∗ 106 )/((50 ∗ 1002 )/6 = 5.64 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

1.08∗1∗1.1∗0.6∗24
𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = 1.3
= 13.16 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚 2

𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 OK

Shear: (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.2.1.2

𝜏𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑣.𝑑.
𝜏𝑑 = maximum 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠
1.5 ∗ 𝐹𝑣 ∗ 𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝜏𝑑 =
𝑏ℎ
𝐹𝑣 = 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒
𝑘𝑠𝑦𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑣,𝑘
𝑓𝑣,𝑑 = ∗ 𝑘𝑐𝑟
𝛾𝑚

𝑓𝑣,𝑘 = 4 (BS EN 338:2016, 2016) Table 1

Case 1 - Permanent load

2.05𝑚
𝐹𝑣 = 1.35 ∗ 0.06 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 ∗ 2
= 0.08𝑘𝑁𝑚

𝜏𝑑 = (1.5 ∗ 0.08 ∗ 103 )/(50 ∗ 100) = 0.024 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

 1.1∗0.6∗4
𝑓𝑣,𝑑 = 1.3
∗ 0.67 = 1.36 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

𝜏𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑣.𝑑. OK

Case 2 – Permanent + impose load

2.05𝑚
𝐹𝑣 = 1.35 ∗ 0.06 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 + 1.5 ∗ 0.54 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 ∗ 2
= 0.91𝑘𝑁𝑚

𝜏𝑑 = (1.5 ∗ 0.91 ∗ 103 )/(50 ∗ 100) = 0.27 𝑁⁄

𝑚𝑚 2
1.1∗0.6∗4
𝑓𝑣,𝑑 = 1.3
∗ 0.67 = 1.36 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

𝜏𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑣.𝑑. OK

Bearing (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.2.1.3

𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑

𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 = 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

𝐹𝑐 ∗ 90 ∗ 𝑑
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝑏∗𝐿
𝑘𝑐,90 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

Case 1 - Permanent load

𝐹𝑐 = 𝐹𝑣 = 0.08 𝑘𝑁𝑚
0.08 ∗ 103
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 0.014 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2
50 ∗ 100
𝑘𝑐,90 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

𝑘𝑐,90 = 1 (ISE Manual, 2007) Fig. 3.7 & 3.8

𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘 = 2.54 (characteristic compressive strength to the grain)

1 ∗ 0.6 ∗ 2.5
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 1.15 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
1.3
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 OK

Case 2 - Permanent + impose load

𝐹𝑐 = 𝐹𝑣 = 0.91 𝑘𝑁𝑚
 0.91 ∗ 103
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 0.18 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2
50 ∗ 100
𝑘𝑐,90 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

𝑘𝑐,90 = 1 (ISE Manual, 2007) Fig. 3.7 & 3.8

𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘 = 2.5 (characteristic compressive strength to the grain)

1 ∗ 0.6 ∗ 2.5
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 1.15 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
1.3
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 OK

Deflection (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl.

5𝑊𝐿 3𝑘𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑊𝐿 5.2.1.6 & Table 5.1
𝛿= +
384𝐸𝐼 𝐸𝐴

5 ∗ 0.06 ∗ 2050 ∗ 20503 1.2 ∗ 0.08 ∗ 106

𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡,𝐺 = + = 0.3 𝑚𝑚
50 ∗ 1003 11000 ∗ 50 ∗ 100
384 ∗ 11000 ∗
12

5 ∗ 0.54 ∗ 2050 ∗ 20503 1.2 ∗ 0.9 ∗ 106

𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡,𝑄 = + = 2.73 𝑚𝑚
50 ∗ 1003 11000 ∗ 50 ∗ 100
384 ∗ 11000 ∗ 12

𝛴𝑈,𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 = 2.73 + 0.3 = 3𝑚𝑚

𝑈𝑓𝑖𝑛 = 0.3 ∗ (1 + 0.6) + 2.73 ∗ (1 + 0.3 ∗ 0.6) = 3.7 mm (EN 1995-1-1, 2014)

Allowable Deflection: (EN 1995-1-1, 2014) Table

𝐿⁄ NA 1
250 = 8.2 𝑚𝑚

8.2 > 3.7 OK

 3.2. Glulam Beam spanning between timber frames

Max length: 6000mm @2050mm cts

A preliminary sizing of h=L/15 and b=h/3 was used, rounded up to the nearest 50mm. Therefore, a section of
400 x 150mm GL24h was considered.

Loading can be taken either as point load every 600mm from the joist’s reaction load, either, for simplification,
as UDL. UDL method was preferred.

𝐷𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 0.1 𝑘𝑁/𝑚2

𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 1𝑘𝑁/𝑚 2

@2050mm cts

𝐷𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 0.1 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ∗ 2.05𝑚 = 0.2 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚

𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 0.9 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ∗ 0.6𝑚 = 2.05 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚

Load Duration Class (LDC) (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.2

For permanent action LDC = Permanent

For imposed roof actions LDC = Medium term

Partial safety factors for each action: (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.1
𝛾𝐺 = 1.35;
𝛾𝑄 = 1.5

Partial safety factors for material: (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.19
Glulam 𝛾𝑚 = 1.25

Service Class (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.1

SC 2

Other strength modification factors:

𝐾𝑚𝑜𝑑 = 0.6 Permanent (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.3

𝐾𝑚𝑜𝑑 = 0.8 medium
𝐾𝑑𝑒𝑓 = 0.8 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.4

600 0.1
𝐾ℎ = ( ) or 1.1 for h<150 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.20
ℎ

𝐾ℎ = 1.04

𝐾𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝐾 𝑐𝑟 (EN 1995-1-1, 2014) Cl.

𝐾 𝑐𝑟 = 0.67 6.1.7 (2)

𝐾𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 – used for lateral buckling (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.21;
𝐾𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = 0.8 Figs 3.2 – 3.4, Table 4.2

𝐾𝑚 – factor considering redistribution of bending stress in a cross section

(ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.20
𝐾𝑚 = 0.7 rectangular section

𝐾𝑠𝑦𝑠 – system strength factor

𝐾𝑠𝑦𝑠 = 1.1

Consider ULS

Bending (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.2.1.1

𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑
𝑀𝑦𝑑
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 =
𝑊𝑦
𝑘ℎ ∗ 𝑘𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 ∗ 𝑘𝑠𝑦𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑚,𝑘
𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

(BS EN 338:2016, 2016) Table 1

𝑓𝑚,𝑘 = 24

Case 1 - Permanent load

(6𝑚)2
𝑀𝑦𝑑 = 1.35 ∗ 0.2 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 ∗ 8
= 1.2 𝑘𝑁𝑚
 150 ∗ 4002
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = (1.2 ∗ 106 )/( ) = 0.3 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2
6
1.04∗0.8∗1.1∗0.6∗24
𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = = 9.6 𝑁⁄
1.25 𝑚𝑚2
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 OK

Case 2 - Permanent + impose loads

(6𝑚)2
𝑀𝑦𝑑 = (1.35 ∗ 0.2 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 + 1.5 ∗ 2.02 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ) ∗ 8
= 14.9 𝑘𝑁𝑚

150 ∗ 4002
𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = (14.9 ∗ 106 )/( ) = 3.71 𝑁⁄
6 𝑚𝑚 2
1.04∗0.8∗1.1∗0.6∗24
𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 = 1.25
= 9.6 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑚,𝑦,𝑑 OK

Shear: (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.2.1.2

𝜏𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑣.𝑑.
𝜏𝑑 = maximum 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠
1.5 ∗ 𝐹𝑣 ∗ 𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝜏𝑑 =
𝑏ℎ
𝐹𝑣 = 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒
𝑘𝑠𝑦𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑣,𝑘
𝑓𝑣,𝑑 = ∗ 𝑘𝑐𝑟
𝛾𝑚

𝑓𝑣,𝑘 = 4 (BS EN 338:2016, 2016) Table 1

Case 1 - Permanent load

6𝑚
𝐹𝑣 = 1.35 ∗ 0.2 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 ∗ 2
= 0.8𝑘𝑁𝑚

𝜏𝑑 = (1.5 ∗ 0.08 ∗ 103 )/(150 ∗ 400) = 0.02 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

1.1∗0.6∗4
𝑓𝑣,𝑑 = 1.25
∗ 0.67 = 1.41 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

𝜏𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑣.𝑑. OK

Case 2 – Permanent + impose load

6𝑚
𝐹𝑣 = 1.35 ∗ 0.2 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 + 1.5 ∗ 2.02 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 ∗ 2 = 9.9𝑘𝑁𝑚
𝜏𝑑 = (1.5 ∗ 9.9 ∗ 103 )/(150 ∗ 400) = 0.25 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚 2
1.1∗0.6∗4
𝑓𝑣,𝑑 = ∗ 0.67 = 1.41 𝑁⁄
1.25 𝑚𝑚2
𝜏𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑣.𝑑. OK

Bearing (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.2.1.3

𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑

𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 = 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

𝐹𝑐 ∗ 90 ∗ 𝑑
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝑏∗𝐿
𝑘𝑐,90 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

Case 1 - Permanent load

𝐹𝑐 = 𝐹𝑣 = 0.8 𝑘𝑁𝑚
0.8 ∗ 103
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 0.053 𝑁⁄
150 ∗ 100 𝑚𝑚2
𝑘𝑐,90 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

(ISE Manual, 2007) Fig. 3.7 & 3.8 &

𝑘𝑐,90 = 1 (EN 1995-1-1, 2014) Cl. 6.1.5 (2)

𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘 = 2.74 (characteristic compressive strength to the grain)

1 ∗ 0.6 ∗ 2.7
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 1.3 𝑁/𝑚𝑚 2
1.25
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 OK

Case 2 - Permanent + impose load

𝐹𝑐 = 𝐹𝑣 = 9.9 𝑘𝑁𝑚
9.9 ∗ 103
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 0.66 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2
150 ∗ 100
𝑘𝑐,90 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

𝑘𝑐,90 = 1 (ISE Manual, 2007) Fig. 3.7 & 3.8

𝑓𝑐,90,𝑘 = 2.7 (characteristic compressive strength to the grain)
1 ∗ 0.6 ∗ 2.7
𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 = = 1.3 𝑁/𝑚𝑚 2
1.25
𝜎𝑐,90,𝑑 ≤ 𝑓𝑐,90,𝑑 OK

Deflection (ISE Manual, 2007) Cl.

5𝑊𝐿3 𝑘𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑊𝐿 5.2.1.6 & Table 5.1
𝛿= +
384𝐸𝐼 𝐸𝐴

5 ∗ 0.2 ∗ 6000 ∗ 60003 1.2 ∗ 0.27 ∗ 106

𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡,𝐺 = + = 0.36 𝑚𝑚
150 ∗ 4003 11600 ∗ 150 ∗ 400
384 ∗ 11600 ∗ 12

5 ∗ 2.02 ∗ 6000 ∗ 60003 1.2 ∗ 3.3 ∗ 106

𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡,𝑄 = + = 3.68 𝑚𝑚
150 ∗ 4003 11600 ∗ 150 ∗ 400
384 ∗ 11600 ∗
12

𝛴𝑈,𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 = 3.68 + 0.36 = 4𝑚𝑚

𝑈𝑓𝑖𝑛 = 0.36 ∗ (1 + 0.6) + 3.68 ∗ (1 + 0.3 ∗ 0.6) = 4.9 (EN 1995-1-1, 2014)

Allowable Deflection: (EN 1995-1-1, 2014) Table

𝐿⁄ NA 1
250 = 24 𝑚𝑚

24 > 4.9 OK
 3.3. Glulam Column
A quick analysis of the 3D model has showed that the highest axial forces are in the columns supporting the
midframe:

Figure 14 Dead Load Axial Forces

Figure 15 Live Load Axial Forces

As the highest column there is 8.5m a preliminary sizing of h=L/20 was used, rounded up to the nearest
50mm. as a square section is preferred in the case of columns a section of 450 x 450mm GL24h was
considered.
Characteristic loads:

𝐷𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 19.5𝑘𝑁

𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 32𝑘𝑁

Load Duration Class (LDC) (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.2

For permanent action LDC = Permanent

For imposed roof actions LDC = Medium term

Service Class (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.2

SC 2

Partial safety factors for material: (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.19
Glulam 𝛾𝑚 = 1.25

Material properties:

GL24h homogenous (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.15

Mean MOE parallel to grain

𝐸𝑜,𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 = 11600 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

Min MOE parallel to grain

𝐸𝑜.05 = 9400 𝑁⁄
𝑚𝑚2

𝑓𝑐,0,𝑘 = 24 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2 (BS EN 338:2016, 2016) Table 1

Other strength modification factors:

𝐾𝑚𝑜𝑑 = 0.6 Permanent (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.3

𝐾𝑚𝑜𝑑 = 0.8 medium

𝐾𝑑𝑒𝑓 = 0.8 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 2.4

𝐾𝑠𝑦𝑠 – system strength factor (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.20
𝐾𝑠𝑦𝑠 = 1.1

ULS

Case 1 – Permanent condition

1.35𝑔𝑘 = 1.35 ∗ 19.5 = 26.3𝑘𝑁

Case 2 – Medium term conditions

1.35𝑔𝑘 + 1.5𝑞𝑘 = 1.35 ∗ 17 + 1.5 ∗ 43.5 = 74.3 𝑘𝑁

Design Equation:
(ISE Manual, 2007) Cl. 5.3.1
𝜎𝑐,0,𝑑 ≤ 𝑘𝑐,𝑦 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,0,𝑑

Where:

𝜎𝑐,0,𝑑 = 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

𝑘𝑐,𝑦 = 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table

3.20 and Fig 3.5 & 3.6

From (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.22 take effective length as 1*L (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.22
𝐿𝑒𝑓,𝑦 = 8500𝑚𝑚

𝐿𝑒𝑓,𝑧 = 8500𝑚𝑚
𝐿𝑒𝑓,𝑦 8500
= = 28.3
ℎ 300
𝐿𝑒𝑓,𝑧 8500
= = 28.3
𝑏 300

𝑘𝑐,𝑦 = 0.45 (ISE Manual, 2007) Table 3.22

𝑘𝑐,𝑧 = 0.45

𝑘𝑠𝑦𝑠 ∗ 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∗ 𝑓𝑐,0,𝑘

𝑓𝑐,0,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚

𝑓𝑐,0,𝑑 = 12.7 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

Case 1:

26.3 ∗ 103
𝜎𝑐,0,𝑑 = = 0.13 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚 2
450 ∗ 450
0.13 < 0.45 ∗ 12.7 = 5.7 OK

Case 2:

74.3 ∗ 103
𝜎𝑐,0,𝑑 = = 0.37 𝑁⁄
450 ∗ 450 𝑚𝑚 2
0.37 < 5.7 OK

3.4. Masonry Panel Lateral Stability

3.4.1. Wind Load Calculation (BS EN 6399-2, 1997)

Wind speed 20 m/s

𝑚
𝑉𝑏 = 20
𝑠
𝐾𝑏 = 1 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Table 1
𝐻𝑟 = 8.5𝑚 Reference height

Basic wind speed calculation in accordance with (BS EN 6399-2, 1997)Section 2.2.1

𝛥𝑠 = 100 site altitude above sea level in meters (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Cl 2.2.2.2

𝑆𝑎 = 1 + 0.001 ∗ 𝛥𝑠 = 1.1 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Cl 2.2.2.3

𝑆𝑑 = 1 Direction factor (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Cl 2.2.2.4

𝑆𝑠 = 1 seasonal factor

𝑆𝑝 = 1Probability factor (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Cl 2.2.2.5

𝑉𝑠 = 𝑉𝑏 𝑆𝑎 𝑆𝑑 𝑆𝑠 𝑆𝑝 = 22 𝑚/𝑠

Effective wind speed calculation in accordance with BS 6399-2 Section 2.2.3

𝑆𝑏 = 1.85 terrain and building factor - Section 2.2.3.3 - Table 4 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Cl
2.2.2.3 Table 4
𝑉𝑒 = 𝑉𝑠 𝑆𝑏 = 40.07 Effective wind speed

Building Length L=20

Building width W=24

𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻𝑟
𝐿
= 2.35 external pressure coefficient - longitudinal (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Table 5
𝐻𝑒

Longitudinal Coefficients
𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 = 0.75 BS 6399-2 - Table 5 (interpolation)

𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 = −0.23 BS 6399-2 - Table 5 (interpolation)

𝑊
𝐻𝑒
= 0.8 external pressure coefficient - transversal (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) Table 5

𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇 = 0.8 BS 6399-2 - Table 5

𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇 = −0.3 BS 6399-2 - Table 5

𝐶𝑎.𝐿 = 0.78 BS 6399-2 Figure 4

𝐶𝑎.𝑇 = 0.78 BS 6399-2 Figure 4

Dynamic pressure per BS 6399-2 Section 2.1.2

𝑞𝑠 = 0.613𝑉𝑒2 = 0.98 𝑁/𝑚2 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) (1)

𝑃𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 = 𝑞𝑠 ∗ 𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 ∗ 𝐶𝑎.𝐿

(BS EN 6399-2, 1997) (2)
𝑃𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 = 0.57 𝑁/𝑚 2
𝑃𝑒.𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 = 𝑞𝑠 ∗ 𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 ∗ 𝐶𝑎.𝐿 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) (2)
𝑃𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝐿 = −0.19 𝑁/𝑚 2

𝑃𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇 = 𝑞𝑠 ∗ 𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇𝐿 ∗ 𝐶𝑎.𝑇 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) (2)

𝑃𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇 = 0.61 𝑁/𝑚 2
𝑃𝑒.𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇 = 𝑞𝑠 ∗ 𝐶𝑝𝑒.𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇𝐿 ∗ 𝐶𝑎.𝑇 (BS EN 6399-2, 1997) (2)
𝑃𝑒.𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑.𝑇 = −0.23 𝑁/𝑚2

3.4.2. Masonry Wall Lateral Stability

Wind load use worst case 0.61 𝑁/𝑚 2

Wall length 5m (office wall)

Wall spanning horizontally

Check for Bending:
(BS EN 1996-3, 2006) 5.18
𝑀𝐸𝑑 = 𝑎 ∗ 𝑊𝐸𝑑 ∗ 𝐿2

𝑊𝐸𝑑 = 1.5 ∗ 0.61 = 0.92 𝑘𝑁/𝑚 2 (BS EN 1996-3, 2006) (6.15)

1 & Table 1; (ISE Manual,
𝑀𝐸𝑑 = ∗ 0.92 ∗ 52 = 2.88 𝑘𝑁𝑚 2007) Table 4.9
8
𝑓𝑥𝑘2 1.1 2202
𝑀𝑅𝑑 = 𝛾𝑚
∗ 𝑘 = 2.7 ∗ 100 ∗ 6
= 3.29 𝑘𝑁𝑚

𝑀𝑅𝑑 > 𝑀𝐸𝑑 OK

Check for Shear: (BS EN 1996-3, 2006) 6.12

𝐿
𝑉𝐸𝑑 = 𝑊𝐸𝑑 ∗
2
5
𝑉𝐸𝑑 = 1.5 ∗ 0.92 ∗ = 3.45𝑘𝑁
2
𝑉𝑅𝑑 = 𝑓𝑣𝑑 ∗ 𝐴
𝑓𝑣𝑘
𝑓𝑣𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚
𝑓𝑣𝑘 = 𝑓𝑣𝑘0 + 0.4 ∗ 𝜎𝑑 (EN 1995-1-1, 2014) (3.5)

𝑓𝑣𝑘0 = 0.1 𝑁/𝑚 2 NA to (BS EN 1996-3, 2006) Table 5

1𝑚 ∗ 3.5𝑚 ∗ 22 𝑘𝑁⁄𝑚 2 ∗ 103

𝜎𝑑 = = 0.077𝑘𝑁/𝑚
106
𝑓𝑣𝑘 = 0.13 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2

0.13 𝑁⁄ ∗ 220𝑚𝑚 ∗ (5000𝑚𝑚 + 2 ∗ 3500𝑚𝑚)

𝑉𝑅𝑑 = 𝑚𝑚2 = 343.2𝑘𝑁
103
𝑉𝑅𝑑 > 𝑉𝐸𝑑 OK
4. Method Statement
 Site preparation. Lower floor surface to be excavated and leveled. Foundations trenches to be excavated
and piles drive in where required.
 Foundations and pile caps to be poured and the metal connections for the columns to be casted in. Waiting
for the required period for concrete curing.
 Masonry retaining walls and the inner building wall to be erected.
 Lower level floor slab to be poured. Waiting for the required period for concrete curing.
 Scaffolding to be installed.
 Masonry walls to be erected before installing timber frames to prevent deterioration of any kind
 Glulam frames to be delivered to site and unloaded by crane and supervised by a trained person. Frames
to be stored on a previously prepared surface in a standing position.
 Glulam frames to be installed according to manufacturer specification on both floors. Frames to be lifted
by cranes. Frames to be connected with horizontal beams, while creating moment frames using specified
type of connections along the walls.
 Roofing to be installed.
 Services, door and windows to be installed.
Bibliography
BS EN 1996-3. (2006). Eurocode 6. Design of masonry structures. Simplified calculation methods for
unreinforced masonry structures.

BS EN 338:2016. (2016). Structural timber. Strength classes.

BS EN 6399-2. (1997). Loading for buildings. Code of practice for wind loads.

Cobb F, F. (2003). Structural Engineering Pocket Book.

EN 1995-1-1. (2014). Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures. General. Common rules and rules for buildings.

Holger Gross, Gross Produktion AB. (2013, 10 17). Glulam Handbook Volume 1. Stockholm, Sweden:
Skogsindustrierna – The Swedish Forest Industries Federation.

ISE Manual. (2007). Manual for the design of timber building structures to Eurocode 5.

keengardener.co.uk. (n.d.). https://www.keengardener.co.uk. Retrieved from keengardener.co.uk:

https://www.keengardener.co.uk/

Swedish Wood. (2016). Design of Timber Structures - Volume 1. Stockholm: Swedish Forest Industries
Federation.
APPENDIX A
LETTER TO ARCHITECT

Dear Mr. Architect

Further to our discussions, with the client where he expresses his desire of building a storage room under upper
floor on the indicated location, I write to you to confirm that the desired wall opening is possible and our
recommendation on how the currently proposed inner masonry wall currently separating the two floor levels can
be modified to suit client needs. The wall opening and storage room in question is indicated on Figure 16 on the
following page.
During our preliminary appraisal that wall was designed as a continuous cavity wall for the whole 20m length
3.5m height, with another 3.5m masonry piers above 1m wide (0.5m at the ends) at a distance of 4m edge to edge.
Therefore, above the desired opening there will be no masonry wall however there is a cantilevering balcony and
the timber floor joists that will need to be supported. Hence, we propose that an additional post and beam frame
to be installed at the desired location with the dimensions and connection details to be communicated at a further
date.
Additionally, the wall under consideration undertake the role of a retaining wall as the site is located on a sloped
terrain. Consequently, 3 new retaining walls need to be designed and erected during the site preparation, serving
as a boundary for the newly discussed storage room.
As those new retaining walls will have no doubt bearing role for the structure above, foundations need to be
designed also.
However, all the above changes will result in a cost increase as this will add up to the structural design cost but
also the labour cost. The construction programme will also suffer delays due to these changes.
Please let us know if the changes in the design previously mentioned are acceptable and advise your client
accordingly.
Please let us know if the solutions are then acceptable so we can proceed with the structural design.

Best Regards
Figure 16 Proposed storeroom under Upper Hall
APPENDIX B
DRAWINGS