i An update to this article is included at the end

Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cscm

Short communication

Effect of steel hanger height on its members’ internal forces

due to wind loads: comparison between standards EN1991-1
-4 and NV65
Wissem Taktaka,*, Wissem Daoudb
a
General direction of Technological Studies, Higher Institute of Technological Studies of Rades, Avenue de France, BP 172, 2098, Radès
Médina Rades, Tunisia
b
General direction of Technological Studies, Higher Institute of Technological Studies of Nabeul, Campus Universitaire Mrezgua, 8000,
Nabeul, Tunisia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 12 July 2017 This paper presents a comparison between two standards, namely NF EN 1991-1-4/A1
Received in revised form 4 August 2018 (October 2010) of Eurocode 1 and NV65 (DTU P06-002) (February 2009), that estimate
Accepted 5 August 2018 wind loads on steel structures. For that purpose, a typical steel hanger was designed and
analysed using both standards. Five different heights for the designed hanger were
Keywords: considered going from five to 25 m with an increment of 5 m. The paper shows all obtained
Wind loads curves for the calculated internal forces (axial, shear, and bending moment) on the hanger
NV65 elements for all studied cases when using both standards.
EN1991-1-4
© 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
Internal forces
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Steel hanger

1. Introduction

All European Community countries adopted in June 2010 to use EN1991-1-4 standard instead of NV65 for calculating
wind loads when designing steel structures. For instance, in France, NF EN 1991-1-4 (November 2005) standard of
Eurocode 1 - Actions on structures - Part 1-4: General actions - Wind actions, modified by Amendment A1 (October 2010)
with index: P06-114-1, came out to cancel NV65 standard (DTU P06-002) (February 2009). However, France’s “national
application document” NF EN 1991-1-4/NA (March 2008), which defines the wind regions map for metropolitan France,
amended by: Amendment A1 (July 2011); Amendment A2 (September 2012), is identical to the wind map as defined by
NV65: 2009.
This paper provides the impact of this change on the calculated internal forces of the elements of a typical steel hanger.
The first part of the paper presents the effect of varying the hanger height on the calculated internal forces induced by wind
loads on the structural elements. The second part of the paper gives a comparison of the calculated internal forces when the
wind load is determined using the two selected standards.

* Corresponding author at: Civil Engineering Department, Higher Institute of Technological Studies of Rades, Avenue de France, BP 172, 2098, Radès
Médina Rades, Tunisia.
E-mail address: wissem.taktak@isetr.rnu.tn (W. Taktak).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2018.e00189
2214-5095/© 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/
4.0/).
2 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189

2. GENERAL assuMptions

2.1. Selected wind region

Fig. 1 gives the value of the wind speed for the different adopted regions in metropolitan France when using both
standards (NV65 and EN 1991-1-4). The difference between the speed values comes mainly from the differences in the basic
definitions adopted by both standards [1]. The reference used by the NV 65 standard corresponds to the maximum observed
speed whereas that of the EN 1991-1-4 corresponds to an average speed over a10-minute-period. For this study, Region 2 was
selected since it the most representative region in France.

2.2. Choice of site and terrain categories

Fig. 2 gives the design wind pressure according to both standards for different construction heights. With the NV65
standard, the wind pressure depends on the site type, while with the EN 1991-1-4, it depends on the selected terrain
category. In order to evaluate differences attributed to the two codes, comparables terrain category and site type should be
used. For that reason, differences in wind pressure using both codes for all site types and terrain categories were calculated
for several construction heights. Fig. 3 shows the cumulative variation in calculated wind presssure (using all considered
heights) for each combination of site type and terrain category. It is clear that the two closest cases are “terrain category II
and exposed site” and “terrain category IIIb and normal site”. Since, 66% of the geographical map of France lies within
“category II”, the case “terrain category II and exposed site” was selected for this comapartive study.

2.3. Choice of the designed hanger geometry and location

For the purpose of this study, a typical steel hanger was used (Fig. 4). The hanger is composed of one steel frame with a
height H, a width of 24 m, and a length of 60 m. The height (H) was varied from 5 m to 25 m with an increment of 5 m. The roof
has a slope of 10% (angle of about 5.7
). Pinned connections were assumed for the columns. The hanger is assumed to be a
closed building, located at an altitude of 200 m over a flat terrain. Table 1 summarizes the general assumptions of the study as
well as the engineering characteristics of the building.

3. Effect of the variation of the height on the internal forces

3.1. Study approach

After determining the general assumptions, the calculation of the wind pressures for the various load cases (wind on end
frames, wind on sidewall under over-pressure and under-pressure) was performed. The internal forces (FX: axial force, FZ:
Shear and MY: bending Moment) in the columns and beams were determined in order to obtain the envelope diagrams.

3.2. Internal forces in the columns

Figs. 5–7 show the envelope curves for the axial force, shear force, and bending moment in the columns as a function of
the hanger height (H), respectively. The following findings were noted:

 The axial force increases in the same rate when using both standards. In fact, when H increased from 5 m to 15 m, the
maximum axial force increased from 40.4 kN to 84.4 kN (an increase of approximately 109%) when using EN1991-1-4

Fig. 1. Design wind speed according to the regions.

 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189 3

Fig. 2. Variation of the wind pressure according to the categories of the terrain, the nature of the sites and the height considered.

Fig. 3. Cumulative variation of wind pressures according to terrain categories and site types.

Fig. 4. Dimensional characteristics of the reference gantry.

standard. On the other hand, an increase of approximately 100% was found when using the NV65 standard (from 31.8 kN to
63.5 kN).
 With heights over 15 m, there is a significant difference in the rate of increase in the axial force when using both standards.
For instance, when H is increased from 5 m to 25 m, the rate of increase in the axial force reached 319% using the EN1991-1-
4 standard and only 266% using the NV65 standard.
 The shear force was less affected by the height variation. In fact, when the height increased from 5 m to 25 m, the shear
force increased by 201% (from 43.6 kN to 131.4 kN) and by 187% (from 33.5 kN to 96.3 kN) when considering EN1991-1-4
and NV65 standards, respectively.
4 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189

Table 1
Summary of Study Assumptions.

Settings Choice Ref.

Common to both standards Parapet and awning Without

Wind region 2
Building Closeda
Building base rectangular and resting on the ground
Dynamic action of the wind is not taken into account
Length of the hanger 60m
Width of the hanger 24m Fig. 4
Height of the hanger Variable (H = 5 m–25 m, step of 5 m) Fig. 4
Slope 10% Fig. 4
Number of frames 11 Fig. 4
Column connection Pinned Fig. 4
Spacing of the frames 6m

NV65 Pressure distribution Constant

Exposed site ks = 1,3 NV65
x1.242
Effect of the height above the ground kh ¼ 2; 5 Hþ18 NV65
Hþ60
x1.241
Effect of dimensions d NV65
x1.244
Fig. 12

EN Terrain category II
1991-1-4 Return period 50 years
CDIRb , CTEMc, CALTd 1 EN1991-1-4
x4.2
Roughness length z0 = 005 m EN1991-1-4
x4.3.2
Terrain factor  0;07 EN1991-1-4
kr ¼ 0; 19 zz0;II
0
x4.3.2
  EN1991-1-4
Coefficient of roughness C r ¼ kr ln zz0
x4.3.2 (1)
Average slope of the terrain very low (<3
) EN1991-1-4
x4.3.3 (2)
Coefficient of orography C0 = 1 EN1991-1-4
x4.3.3 (2)
Coefficient of turbulence kI = 1 EN1991-1-4
x4.4 (1)
a
Permeabilities of the walls below 5%.
b
Coefficient depending on the direction of the wind.
c
Coefficient relative to the temporary constructions or temporarily exposed to the wind.
d
Coefficient taking into account geographical altitude.

 The bending moment is the mostly affected by the height increase. In fact, when the height increased from 5 m to 25 m, the
bending moment increased by 846% (from 140.1 kN.m to 1326.4 kN.m) and by 738% (from 117.7 kN.m to 987.7 kN.m) when
considering EN1991-1-4 and NV65 standards, respectively.

Fig. 5. Envelope curves of the variation of the axial force in the columns as a function of the height.
 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189 5

Fig. 6. Envelope curves of the variation of the shear force in the columns as a function of the height.

Fig. 7. Envelope curves of the variation of the bending moment in the columns as a function of the height.

3.3. Internal forces in the beams

Figs. 8–10 illustrate the envelope curves for the axial force, the shear force, and the bending moment in the beams as a
function of the hanger height, respectively. The following findings were noted:

 The axial force remains practically constant (48 kN) when the height is less than 10 m when using the EN1991-1-4. The
same is observed (value of 31.5 kN) when using the NV65 standard, but for heights less than 15 m.
 Beyond these heights, and going from 5 m to 25 m for example, the axial force increases by 106.5% and by 61.2% when using
the EN1991-1-4 and NV65 standards, respectively.
 For the shear force, the variation in height from 5 m to 25 m lead to a more significant increase than that found for the axial
force, namely 357.1% for EN1991-1-4 and 297.2% For NV65.

Fig. 8. Envelope curves of the variation of the axial force in the beams as a function of the height.
6 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189

Fig. 9. Envelope curves of the variation of the shear force in the beams as a function of the height.

Fig. 10. Envelope curves of the variation of the bending moment in the beams as a function of the height.

 Since a rigid connection is assumed between the columns and the beams, the exact same bending moment reported for the
columns are found in the beams.

4. Comparison between the two standards

In order the make the comparison between the two standards, a deviation D was defined as shown by Eq. (1)
XðEN1991:1:4Þ  XðNV65Þ
D¼  100 ð1Þ
XðNV65Þ
Where X represents either the wind speed, wind pressure, or interior forces (FX, FZ, MY). Looking into the envelope curves of
the internal forces, one can notice that the curves obtained by EN 1991-1-4 cover those determined by NV65. This means that
for any height value, EN1991-1-4 generates internal forces that are higher than those obtained using NV65, despite its lower
wind speed value and almost equivalent wind pressure. Table 2 compares wind speeds, wind pressures, and internal forces

Table 2
Wind speed and pressures at 10 m from the ground, and internal forces in the columns and beams.

Settings EN1991-1-4 NV65 D%

Speed [m/s] 24 35,69 32,74
Pressure [Pa] 846,82 781,65 8,34
Internal forces Column FX [KN] 57,70 42,01 37,35
FZ [KN] 43,21 31,60 36,74
MY [KN.m] 247 210,54 17,32
Beam FX [KN] 48,25 26,42 82,63%
FZ [KN] 55,71 40,19 38,62%
MY [KN.m] 247 210,54 17,32%
 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189 7

Fig. 11. Deviations of the maximum internal forces in the columns as a function of the height.

Fig. 12. Deviations of the maximum internal forces in the beams as a function of the height.

obtained for a height of 10 m. Figs. 11 and 12 show the deviations of the maximum internal forces between the two standards,
as a function of the height, for the columns and the beams, respectively. For the maximum columns’ axial force, the deviation
varies from 27% to 37%, for heights less than 15 m and is equal to 45.7% for a height of 25 m. For the maximum axial force in
the beams, the deviation increases considerably (98%) when the height increases from 5 m to 25 m. For the maximum shear
force and bending moment, this difference remains below 37% for the columns. For beams, the deviation of the shear force
varies from 14.7% to 34.3% and exceeds 46% for the bending moment.

5. Conclusion

In this paper, the effect of steel hanger height on its members’ internal forces due to wind loads was studied and a
comparison of the results was carried out. In this context, the study was performed on a typical designed hanger steel
structure, for which the height was varied from 5 m to 25 m. The structure was located in region 2 according to the map of
France [2] and assuming an exposed site according to NV65 standard and a category II terrain according to EN1991-1-4. The
following conclusions were draws from this study:

 The variation of the height does not have the same effect on the internal forces. Its influence is much more important on
bending moments when using both wind standards.
 Despite the use of similar general assumptions, the application of EN1991-1-4 standard for calculating wind actions
generates internal forces higher than those obtained by applying the NV65 standards.
 The deviation in the axial force calculations is larger compared to that of the shear and bending moment.
 It would be interesting to know the influence of the variation of the other dimensional characteristics of the structure
(hanger width, roof slope, frame spacing) on the internal forces under natural wind for both standards.
8 W. Taktak, W. Daoud / Case Studies in Construction Materials 9 (2018) e00189

References

[1] J. Bietry, L’Eurocode 1 partie 2.4" actions du vent" présentation et éléments de comparaison avec les normes NV 65. Construction Metallique (02), (1999)
.
[2] ICAB, (12 1), in: I. Sa (Ed.), Actions du vent Eurocode1 EN1991-1-4, 2016. Retrieved 12 May 2016 fromICAB https://www.icab.fr/guide/eurocode/en1991-
1-4/.
 Update
Case Studies in Construction Materials
Volume 14, Issue , June 2021, Page

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00486
 Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00486

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cscm

Erratum regarding missing Declaration of Competing Interest

statements in previously published articles

Declaration of Competing Interest statements were not included in published version of the articles that appeared in
previous volumes of Case Studies in Construction Materials. Hence, the authors of the below articles were contacted after
publication to request a Declaration of Interest statement:

1. Effects of calcined halloysite nano-clay on the mechanical properties and microstructure of low-clinker cement
mortar2018S2214-5095(18)30278-X10.1016/j.cscm.2018.e0021310C
2. Applicability of GPR and a rebar detector to obtain rebar information of existing concrete structures2019S2214-5095(18)
30406-610.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0024011C
3. Effect of aging process on the microstructure, corrosion resistance and mechanical properties of stainless steel AISI
2042019S2214-5095(19)30044-010.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0025311C
4. High performance fibre reinforced cementitious composites: Six memos for the XXI century societal and economical
challenges of civil engineering2019S2214-5095(18)30372-310.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0021910C
5. The architrave a tasselli2019S2214-5095(19)30073-710.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0025211C
6. Long term performance of gravel base course layers in asphalt pavements2018S2214-5095(18)30187-610.1016/j.
cscm.2018.e002089C
7. Effect of steel hanger height on its membersâTM internal forces due to wind loads: comparison between standards
EN1991-1-4 and NV652018S2214-5095(17)30135-310.1016/j.cscm.2018.e001899C
8. Explanation of the collapse of Terminal 2E at Roissyâ“CDG Airport by nonlinear deterministic and reliability
analyses2019S2214-5095(18)30360-710.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0022210C
9. Influence of timber grain distribution on orientation of saw cuts during application: Reference to heritage structures in
Sri Lanka2019S2214-5095(18)30394-210.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0023711C
10. Effect of water-based acrylic copolymer on void systems of cementitious repair mortar2019S2214-5095(19)30078-
610.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0026111C
11. Studies of the effect of recycled aggregates on flexural, shear, and bond splitting beam structural behavior2018S2214-
5095(18)30181-510.1016/j.cscm.2018.e001869C
12. Experimental determination of time lag and decrement factor2019S2214-5095(19)30400-010.1016/j.cscm.2019.
e0029811C
13. Comparison of technical and short-term environmental characteristics of weathered and fresh blast furnace slag
aggregates for road base applications in South Africa2019S2214-5095(18)30341-310.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0023911C
14. Impact of curing temperatures and alkaline activators on compressive strength and porosity of ternary blended
geopolymer mortars2018S2214-5095(18)30110-410.1016/j.cscm.2018.e002059C
15. Seismic risk analysis of multistory reinforced concrete structures in Saudi Arabia2018S2214-5095(18)30188-810.1016/j.
cscm.2018.e001929C
16. An experimental study on the lateral pressure in foam-filled wall panels with pneumatic formwork2018S2214-5095(18)
30209-210.1016/j.cscm.2018.e002039C
17. Acid resistance of quaternary blended recycled aggregate concrete2018S2214-5095(17)30264-410.1016/j.cscm.2018.03.0058C
18. A critical review on application of alkali activated slag as a sustainable composite binder2019S2214-5095(19)30209-
810.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0026811C
19. The probability distribution of pitting for accelerated corrosion reinforcement2018S2214-5095(18)30150-510.1016/j.
cscm.2018.e001939C

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00486
2214-5095/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 2 / Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00486

20. Alkali-silica reaction in Southern-FinlandâTMs bridges2018S2214-5095(18)30026-310.1016/j.cscm.2018.03.0068C

21. Expansion and strength properties of concrete containing contaminated recycled concrete aggregate2018S2214-5095
(18)30198-010.1016/j.cscm.2018.e002019C
22. Effect of internal curing on behavior of high performance concrete: An overview2019S2214-5095(19)30009-910.1016/j.
cscm.2019.e0022910C
23. Creep deflection of Wood Polymer Composite profiles at demanding conditions2019S2214-5095(18)30328-010.1016/j.
cscm.2019.e0022410C
24. Formaldehyde free particleboards from wood chip wastes using glutaraldehyde modified cassava starch as
binder2019S2214-5095(19)30004-X10.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0023611C
25. Mechanical and thermal conductivity properties of hemp fiber reinforced polyurethane composites2018S2214-5095(17)
30221-810.1016/j.cscm.2018.02.0018C
26. Reuse of carbon fiber composite materials in porous hot mix asphalt to enhance strength and durability2019S2214-5095
(19)30137-810.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0026011C
27. Material selection for repair of structural concrete using VIKOR method2018S2214-5095(18)30023-810.1016/j.
cscm.2018.03.0088C
28. Study of mechanical properties and recommendations for the application of waste Bakelite aggregate con-
crete2018S2214-5095(17)30172-910.1016/j.cscm.2018.02.0068C
29. Role of iron in the enhanced reactivity of pulverized Red mud: Analysis by MÃ{ssbauer spectroscopy and FTIR
spectroscopy2019S2214-5095(19)30155-X10.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0026611C
30. Boundary element inverse analysis for rebar corrosion detection: Study on the 2004 tsunami-affected structure in
Aceh2018S2214-5095(17)30124-910.1016/j.cscm.2018.02.0088C
31. Development of unfired earthen building materials using muscovite rich soils and alkali activators2019S2214-5095(19)
30086-510.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0026211C
32. A survey on problems encountered in current concrete construction and the potential benefits of self-healing
cementitious materials2018S2214-5095(17)30220-610.1016/j.cscm.2018.02.0028C
33. Experimental Study and Shear Strength Prediction for Reactive Powder Concrete Beams2018S2214-5095(17)30246-
210.1016/j.cscm.2018.03.0028C
34. Rubber concrete: Mechanical and dynamical properties2018S2214-5095(18)30184-010.1016/j.cscm.2018.e001849C
35. Flexural behaviour and theoretical prediction of lightweight ferrocement composite beams2018S2214-5095(18)30237-
710.1016/j.cscm.2018.e002049C
36. Field evaluation and behavior of the soil improved using dynamic replacement2018S2214-5095(18)30287-010.1016/j.
cscm.2018.e0021410C
37. Behavior of plain concrete beams with DSSF strengthened in flexure with anchored CFRP sheetsâ”Effects of DSSF content
on the bonding length of CFRP sheets2018S2214-5095(18)30202-X10.1016/j.cscm.2018.e001959C
38. Three-dimensional numerical simulation of conduction, natural convection, and radiation through alveolar building
walls2019S2214-5095(19)30051-810.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0024911C
39. Physical, chemical, and geotechnical properties of coal fly ash: A global review2019S2214-5095(18)30373-510.1016/j.
cscm.2019.e0026311C
40. Two-dimensional finite element analysis of the flexural resistance of LVL Sengon non-prismatic beams2019S2214-5095
(18)30321-810.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0022510C
41. Using algorithms to designate pre-fabricated wall materials: A case study with two implementation meth-
ods2019S2214-5095(18)30326-710.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0022010C
42. Investigating the effects of disc shaped thumb tacks as a âœfiberâ& reinforcement on various concrete
properties2019S2214-5095(19)30056-710.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0025711C
43. Structural study of maritime pine wood and recycled high-density polyethylene (HDPEr) plastic composite using
Infrared-ATR spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, SEM and contact angle measurements2019S2214-5095(18)30379-
610.1016/j.cscm.2019.e0022710C
44. Assessment of a cracked reinforced concrete beam: Case study2018S2214-5095(18)30109-810.1016/j.cscm.2018.
e001799C
45. Triangle bracing system to reduce the vibration level of cooling tower â “case study in PT Star Energy Geothermal
(Wayang Windu) Ltd â “Indonesia2018S2214-5095(17)30131-610.1016/j.cscm.2018.01.0068C
46. Low carbonation of concrete found on 100-year-old bridges2018S2214-5095(17)30157-210.1016/j.cscm.2017.12.0068C
47. Evaluation of surface geometries and physical properties of concrete reinforcement steel rods rolled in Niger-
ia2018S2214-5095(17)30169-910.1016/j.cscm.2017.12.0038C
48. Microstructures and physical properties of waste garnets as a promising construction materials2018S2214-5095(17)
30175-410.1016/j.cscm.2017.12.0018C
49. Analysis of the risk at the finishing of the building products and construction of paint compositions2018S2214-5095(17)
30174-210.1016/j.cscm.2018.01.0018C