Design of An Aircraft Hangar For The Airport in Du

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/339326067
Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf
Thesis · February 2020

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10648.34569/1
CITATIONS READS
0 22,129
1 author:
Janakiram Karlapudi
Technische Universität Dresden
23 PUBLICATIONS 63 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Janakiram Karlapudi on 01 October 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fakultät Bauingenieurwesen Institut für Stahl- und Holzbau, Professur für Stahlbau
Design of an aircraft hangar for the

airport in Düsseldorf
by
Janakiram Karlapudi
from
Hyderabad, India
A Project work submitted to the Faculty of Civil Engineering, Institute of Steel and Tim-
ber Construction, Chair of Steel Construction of Technische Universität Dresden in
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Responsible Professor
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Richard Stroetmann
Advisor
Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Faßl
Dresden, February and 2018

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ II

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ III

Declaration
I hereby certify that this project work has been composed by myself and describes my
own work unless otherwise acknowledged in the text. All references and verbatim ex-
tracts have been quoted and all the sources of information have been specifically
acknowledged. This Project work has not been submitted or accepted in any previous
application for a degree.
Furthermore, I declare that all rights in this Project work are delegated to the Institute of
Steel and Timber Construction, Chair of Steel Construction of Technische Universität
Dresden.
Dresden, 15-02-2018
Signature
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ IV

Acknowledgements
It has been a period of intense learning for me in the technical arena. Writing this dis-
sertation has had a big impact on me. I would like to reflect on the people who have
supported and helped me so much throughout this period. I would particularly like to
single out my supervisor Dipl. Ing. Thomas Faßl, I want to thank you for your excellent
cooperation and for all of the opportunities. I am immensely grateful to Prof. Dr.-Ing.
Richard Stroetmann for giving me such a wonderful opportunity to do the project work
under the Institute of Steel and Timber Construction, TU Dresden. I am indeed very
grateful to my parents for their love and support. Finally, there are my friends. I am very
thankful to my friends for their support and encouragement all through the project work.
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ V

Abstract
The objective of this project work is to design an aircraft hangar structure with an area
of approximately 10000 m2, for the maintenance purpose of aircrafts such as Airbus A
320 and Boing 737 at Düsseldorf airport, Düsseldorf, Germany. Considering the di-
mensions of aircraft into account, the opening of door system should not be less than
45 m in width and 20 m in height. Additionally, a preliminary draft of the site and floor
plan of a multi-storey office and workshop complex with a combined area of approxi-
mately 750 m2 and a single-storey storage area of approximately 350 m2 is carried out.
Analysis and design of the proposed structure are carried out by assuming that the
subsoil at the construction site has sufficient load-bearing capacity.
Design and calculations of all structural steel members are carried out according to
Eurocodes and their respective German National annexures. Rstab software is used in
the design process and Auto cad drawing tool is used for producing technical drawings.
Analysis and design of three typologically different structural systems for the roof struc-
ture are carried out. A comparative study is performed between the three different
structural systems and a suitable and economical structural system is considered for
the final design. The major structural components such as frames, bracings, gables as
well as secondary structural components of the hangar structure are designed under all
types of loading actions and outlined by technical drawings. Typical connections of the
structure are designed and outlined. Moreover, an appropriate 3D visualization of the
hangar structure is incorporated in the document.
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ VI

Table of Contents
1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar ............................................................................. 1
1.2 Hangar Layout................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Steel as a structural element for hangar structures............................................ 3
1.4 Types of Large Span structural systems............................................................ 3
1.4.1 Hangar Structure - Pre-Engineered Metal Building ............................................ 3
1.4.2 Large Span Lattice Frame roof structure – Coal storage shed........................... 4
1.4.3 Space Trusses for Long span structures ........................................................... 5
1.4.4 Beam String Structure with straight beam ......................................................... 5
1.4.5 Top and Bottom Chord Arched type roof structure ............................................ 6
1.4.6 Box Girders for Long span roof structure ........................................................... 7
2 Loading................................................................................................................. 9
2.1 Permanent Load................................................................................................ 9
2.2 Variable Loads .................................................................................................. 9
2.2.1 Imposed roof Load ............................................................................................ 9
2.2.2 Snow Load ........................................................................................................ 9
2.2.3 Wind Load ....................................................................................................... 10
3 Load Combinations ........................................................................................... 12
3.1 Ultimate Limit States (ULS) ............................................................................. 12
3.2 Serviceability Limit States (SLS)...................................................................... 13
4 Preliminary Designs .......................................................................................... 15
4.1 Design Considerations .................................................................................... 15
4.1.1 Clear span and height ..................................................................................... 15
4.1.2 Steel grade and sub-grade .............................................................................. 15
4.1.3 Structural analysis by Rstab program .............................................................. 15
4.1.4 Technical Drawings – AutoCAD ...................................................................... 16
4.2 Preliminary Design 1 – Conventional roof truss for long span structure ........... 16
4.2.1 Load Calculation ............................................................................................. 17
4.2.2 Member Verification ........................................................................................ 19
4.3 Preliminary Design 2 - Trapezoidal Lattice Girder roof stabilized by Cables .... 23
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ VII


4.4 Preliminary Design 3 - Arch roof truss structure .............................................. 28
4.5 Comparison between preliminary designs ....................................................... 31
4.5.1 Comparison of structural quantity .................................................................... 31
4.5.2 Comparison of sub-structure criteria ................................................................ 31
4.5.3 Comparison by the ease of construction.......................................................... 32
4.5.4 Miscellaneous ................................................................................................. 33
5 Final Design Details – Aircraft Hangar Structure ............................................ 34
5.1 Aircraft Hangar Design Dimensions ................................................................. 34
5.2 Main Frame ..................................................................................................... 35
5.3 Bracing system................................................................................................ 38
5.3.1 Horizontal Roof Bracings ................................................................................. 38
5.3.2 Vertical Bracings ............................................................................................. 39
5.4 Gable frame .................................................................................................... 41
5.5 Secondary Structural Components .................................................................. 42
5.5.1 Purlin ............................................................................................................... 43
5.5.2 Side Runner .................................................................................................... 44
5.6 Connections .................................................................................................... 45
5.6.1 Column base connection ................................................................................. 45
5.6.2 Beam-Column connection ............................................................................... 47
5.6.3 Connection of Ropes to Steel member ............................................................ 50
5.7 Hangar Door System ....................................................................................... 53
5.8 Roof and sidewall cladding .............................................................................. 55
5.9 General Arrangement of Adjacent Buildings .................................................... 57
5.10 Deflections ...................................................................................................... 58
5.11 Visualization of Hangar Structure .................................................................... 59
6 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 61
7 Lists .................................................................................................................... 63
7.1 List of abbreviations ........................................................................................ 63
7.2 List of symbols ................................................................................................ 63
7.3 List of figures ................................................................................................... 64
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ VIII

7.4 List of tables .................................................................................................... 66

8 References ......................................................................................................... 67
9 Appendix/Appendices ....................................................................................... 71
9.1 Appendix A (CD-R).......................................................................................... 71
9.2 Appendix B ...................................................................................................... 71
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ IX

1 Introduction
1.1 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar

The aircraft hangar is a large and closed structure to provide sufficient space for the
maintenance purpose of aircrafts. Hangars are mainly designed for the maintenance of
only one type of aircraft or mixed type of aircrafts. Larger hangars also facilitate the
repair, assembly, manufacture and storage of aircrafts. Figure 1 shows the Monarch
Aircraft Hangar structure for the Birmingham airport constructed by John Sisk & Son
Builders.
Figure 1: Aircraft Maintenance Hangar [1]

The maintenance of an aircraft includes the periodic checks, repair and installation of
damaged aircraft components. This maintenance work is carried out with the help of
docking systems. There are several types of docking systems, but the typical main
docking systems are nose dock, body dock, wing dock and tail dock [2]. These docks
(Figure 2) are movable and provide several vertical levels to access the aircraft for
maintenance purpose [2]. Initially, the aircraft is parked in a hangar structure and then
docks are moved to that parking place of aircraft. Normally docks can be moved out-
side the hangar structure. Generally, docks occupy large floor area and they obstruct
the placing of other aircrafts when they are not in use. The solution to this problem is to
use the docking system which is hanging from the roof.
Usually, hangars are provided with small capacity overhead cranes covering the full
area. These cranes are using to carry and transport the parts of the aircraft. Some-
times, high capacity cranes are required to carry the aircraft engine. Additionally, fire-
fighting systems, foam systems and blowers hang from the roof [3].
„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 1

Figure 2: Docking system [4]
1.2 Hangar Layout

The typical hangar dimensions for the maintenance of Airbus A 320 and Boeing 737
are 125 m width and 78 m long. The principal dimensions of the different type of the
aircrafts such as Boeings, Airbuses and MacDonald/Douglas are listed in Table 1. The
Airbus A 320 is 37.57 m long with a wingspan of 33.91 m and the height of aircraft is
11.8 m tall from the floor to the top of the tail. The Boing 737 is 33.40 m long with a
wingspan of 28.88 m and the height of aircraft is 11.13 m tall from the floor to the top of
the tail (Table 1). The mentioned object conditions to achieve flexible inward and out-
ward movement of aircraft are the height and width of the gate opening should not be
less than 20 m and 45 m respectively. So, the considered clear height of hangar struc-
ture is 20 m, to allow the clearance over the 11.8 m height tall fin of the aircraft. The
clear width of gate opening is 125 m to provide free access to 33.91 m width aircraft
into the hangar. Whereas these hangar clear dimensions are allowing the aircraft either
“nose-in” position or “tail–in” position. A “nose-in” position means that the nose enters
the hangar first, and in a “tail-in” position the tail precedes the nose when entering the
hangar. At the rear end of the hangar, a multi-storey office, workshop complex and
single storey storage area are to be planned. The central offices of the hangar and the
adjacent buildings shall be placed in the basement of the office complex. The ground
floor has to be used as workshop and storage area. The social and office rooms have
to be arranged on the level 1 and 2.

Table 1: Dimensions of Aircraft [3]
Length Span (or) Width Height Engine Weight

Type of Aircrafts
(m) (m) (m) (kg)
Airbus A 300-600 54.08 44.84 16.62 4143
Airbus A 320-200 37.57 33.91 11.8 2092
Airbus A 310-200 46.66 43.89 15.8 4143
Boeing 707 46.61 44.41 12.93 2173
Boeing 727 46.69 32.92 10.36 1585
Boeing 737 33.40 28.88 11.13 1800
Boeing 767 48.51 47.57 15.85 4143
Boeing 747-400 70.61 64.31 19.35 5600
1.3 Steel as a structural element for hangar structures

Generally, for long span structures steel is the reliable choice because of its sustaina-
bility, affordability and durability. “The durability is also what allows for the versatile
design of large, clear span buildings such as aeroplane hangars, warehouses, agricul-
tural buildings and indoor arenas. It also permits for the construction of skyscrapers,
the tallest of which stands in Dubai at 2722.4 feet tall” [5]. Steel is a light structural el-
ement. Because of its lightness, it helps in the reduction of transportation cost as well
as reduction of dimensions of sub base structure.
Most of the steel structures are built with the pre-fabricated steel parts. These pre-
fabricated steel parts of required dimensions are transported to the construction site to
erect the structure. This decreases the construction time significantly and helps to
make it possible to complete large projects within the weeks. This prefabrication pro-
cess also reduces the human errors in on-site fabrication and reduces the project cost.
Recycling of structural steel is possible at the end of the structures lifespan and this
recycled steel again can be used as structural element [6]. Because of durability of
steel, it requires so little maintenance and it is a more economical choice for building
owners. Repairs and replacements are also very less during the working life of struc-
ture. Because of all these reasons steel is flexible and most reliable choice for con-
struction of large structures.
1.4 Types of Large Span structural systems
1.4.1 Hangar Structure - Pre-Engineered Metal Building
Pre-Engineered Metal Building (PEB) is the most efficient and economical solution for
the fastest construction of a single-storey industrial building (Figure 3) having less
column-free areas. PEB is the better framing solution for the structure whose span
length less than the 30 meters. For the spans over 80 meters, the cost of construction
will increase adequately because of member properties of the structure. The main ad-
vantages of the PEB structure are the faster erection, minimal maintenance and the

possibility of expansion of structure. The hangar structure having 73.8 meters clear
span, 10 bays of each 8.48 meters length and 22 meters height to accommodate 19
meters height aircraft was designed and erected with the help of Pre-Engineered build-
ing in Mumbai airport, India [7].
Figure 3: Pre-Engineered Hangar Structure [8]
1.4.2 Large Span Lattice Frame roof structure – Coal storage shed
Figure 4 shows the lattice frame roof structure of a large span single storey industrial
building for coal storage purpose. This coal storage shed is 60 meters wide and 100
meters long. Lattice frame is more suitable for gravity loads on the roof structure.
These frames have high stiffness against deflection of the roof structure. Lattice frame
is also used for the structures having loads hanging from the roof structure. Lattice
trusses are more expensive than portal frames for small span structures. Generally,
these trusses are supported either by steel or concrete columns [9].
Figure 4: Lattice Frame assembly for Large Span structures [9]

1.4.3 Space Trusses for Long span structures
The hangar structure shown in Figure 5 is constructed for maintenance purpose of two
Boeing 747-400 type aircrafts for Air India at Mumbai, India [10]. The detailed dimen-
sions of this aircraft type are mentioned in Table 1 in this document. The required clear
span and length of hangar structure to accommodate two aircrafts of type 747-400 are
130 meters and 90 meters respectively. Because of the large column-free area, the
deflection of the structure, as well as overall rigidity of structure, is extremely important.
Moreover, the hangar roof structure should carry the vertical hanging loads from all
types of the docking system. By considering all these principal factors the hangar struc-
ture roof is constructed with the help of space truss system.
“Space Frame is a structural system, assembled of linear elements so arranged that
the loads are transferred in a three-dimensional manner. Space Frames are rigid joint
structural system whereas space trusses are the pin-jointed structural system” [10, pp.
2-3]. The Space truss system is one of the most economical solutions for the structures
having large column-free spaces. The deflections of the structural roof system are well
under permissible limits because of high stiffness of space trusses. The construction
time of space trusses is saved by using factory-produced components. All the structural
components used to construct space truss are circular hollow members and the dead
loads are less, but they have to be considered nevertheless. This helps in saving the
material used in constructing column and substructure members.
Figure 5: Space trusses for Long span hangar structure [10]
1.4.4 Beam String Structure with straight beam
Figure 6 represents the long span retractable roof structure which is constructed based
on the Beam String Structural system [11]. “The Retractable roof system is a system
which follows the scissor mechanism to fold the roof trusses to create open configura-
tion or closed configuration of the roof” [11, p. 175]. Beam String System (BSS) is a
typical type of hybrid structural system which is comprises of the beam as a top chord
to resist compressive stress and rope as a bottom chord to resist the axial tensile

stresses under gravity loads. The pre-stressing of the ropes also aids in reducing the
high amount of deflections in the roof structure thereby stabilizing the entire system.
Figure 6: Retractable roof – Beam String Structure [11]

The major disadvantage with Beam String System is out-plane buckling of the system
while folding. There are no proper stabilizing members at the top chord beam to resist
out-plan buckling and this results in higher member properties, in terms of the material
consumed for the top chord member. This beam system results in large horizontal re-
actions at the roof column joints because of the high amount of tensile stresses in the
rope. Structures like Nanjing International Convention and Exhibition Center is con-
structed based on the Beam String System which as shown in Figure 6 [11].
1.4.5 Top and Bottom Chord Arched type roof structure
Figure 7 shows the typical arrangement of top and bottom chords of the roof truss. The
main advantage of this arrangement is to nullify the horizontal loads developing at the
support of the roof truss due to external loading on the roof. The top chord member
under the influence of compression stress, is typically arranged in the form of an arch.
This type of arched roof truss system is the most suitable for the very strong suction
forces due to wind [12]. Additionally, pre-stressed cables are laid on top of the top
chord member and at the bottom of the bottom chord members to increase the stiffness
of structure under deflections. Under the action of external gravity loads, top chord
member resists the compressive stress and bottom pre-stressed cable resists
deflections and consequently develop tensile stress. The key role of the cables is to
increase the stiffness of the structure as well as to develop resistance against external
loading due to pre-stressing force in the cable [12].

Figure 7: Girder with top and bottom chord arched [12]
1.4.6 Box Girders for Long span roof structure
Figure 8 represents the two-way load carrying roof structure of the maintenance hangar
for Northwest Airlines in Duluth, MN. This maintenance hangar is used to accommo-
date aircraft type Airbus A 320 and Boeing 757 with an area about 200,000 sq.-ft. Box
trusses are used in both the directions of the roof truss to transfer the external loads
and hanging loads from the roof to the column members. Cantilever box trusses are
used in the roof construction of this hangar [13]. The tension forces developed in the
top chord of the box girder due to cantilever action is transferred to the footing with the
help of tension tie. These tension forces in the footing are restrained by the rock an-
chors installed through the pile caps and anchored to the granite bedrock [13]. Braced
bay is installed both at the front and back of the structure to transfer the forces arising
from the wind actions directly to the footing with the use of bracings.
Figure 8: Hangar Structure – Northwest Airlines, Duluth, MN [13]

From the study of all the above structural arrangements of the long-span roof struc-
tures as well as from the advantages and disadvantages involved in the above struc-
tures, three different structural arrangements are adopted for the hangar roof structure.
Generally, the structural systems which have high stiffness or high resistance to the
deflection of the long-span roof are selected for the preliminary design check. The se-
lected three structural arrangements are presented in section 4 of this document. The
preliminary design calculations are to be performed for these three typologically differ-
ent structures under all the loading actions based on the site location and the utility of
the structure. The best structural arrangement of a hangar system must comprise of
the most efficient design calculations coupled with most efficient and economical com-
ponent dimensions

2 Loading
The loads considered in the design of hangar structure are in accordance with Euro-
code EN 1991 and its respective German National annex DIN EN 1991/NA.
2.1 Permanent Load

The permanent loads acting on the structure are self-weight of the main members,
secondary steelwork and cladding (both roof and wall). The specific weight of the clad-
ding material and insulating material is to be considered according to manufacturer’s
catalogue if possible. Otherwise, it has to be as per the Eurocode EN 1990 [14]. Typi-
cal weight of cladding including purlins is in the range of 0.2 to 0.4 kN/m2 spread over
the whole roof area.
2.2 Variable Loads
2.2.1 Imposed roof Load
The imposed roof load calculations are performed according to Eurocode EN 1991-1-1
[15]. The Hangar structure roof is not accessible, except for normal maintenance and
repair works. These types of roofs come under the roof category H according to Table
6.9 of EN 1991-1-1 [15]. A uniformly distributed load, 𝑞𝑘 , is applied over the entire roof
area. The value of distributed load for H category roofs is taken as 0.4 kN/m2 according
to Table 6.10 of EN 1991-1-1 [15]. It should be noted that, according to clause 3.3.2(1)
of EN 1991-1-1 [15], “on H category roofs, imposed loads, need not be applied in com-
bination with either snow loads and/or wind actions”.
2.2.2 Snow Load
Snow loads in Germany are to be calculated according to Eurocode EN 1991-1-3 [16]

and its respective National Annex DIN EN 1991-1-3/NA [17]. The characteristic snow
load on roof, 𝑠, is equal to the multiplication of characteristic snow load on ground, 𝑠𝑘 ,
by the snow load shape coefficient 𝜇𝑖 , the exposure coefficient 𝐶𝑒 and the thermal coef-
ficient 𝐶𝑡 according to clause 5.2(3) of EN 1991-1-3 [16].
𝑠 = 𝜇𝑖 𝐶𝑒 𝐶𝑡 𝑠𝑘 (1)
EN 1991-1-3 [16] clause 5.2(7), 5.2(8) recommends that both 𝐶𝑒 and 𝐶𝑡 be taken as
1.0. The snow load shape coefficient, 𝜇𝑖 , is different for the different shape of roofs and
these values considered from the Table 5.2 of EN 1991-1-3 [16].
Table 2: Snow load shape coefficients
Angle of pitch of roof 𝛼 0° ≤ 𝛼 ≤ 30° 30° ≤ 𝛼 ≤ 60° 𝛼 ≥ 60°

𝜇1 0.8 0.8(60 - 𝛼)/30 0.0
𝜇2 0.8 + 0.8 𝛼/30 1.6 --

The characteristic snow load on ground, 𝑠𝑘 (kN/m2), depends on the snow zone and
altitude of site location, which is susceptible to variations depending on the sites. Ger-
man National annex DIN EN 1991-1-3/NA [17], clause 4.1 provides various formulas
for various snow zones to calculate snow load for the design of the structure. This
clause 4.1 provides snow load zone map for all of Germany and this map helps to find
the appropriate snow zone for the required construction site.
𝐴 + 140 2
Zone 1: 𝑠𝑘 = 0.19 + 0.91 ∗ ( ) (2)
760
𝐴 + 140 2
Zone 2: 𝑠𝑘 = 0.25 + 1.91 ∗ ( ) (3)
760
𝐴 + 140 2
Zone 3: 𝑠𝑘 = 0.31 + 2.91 ∗ ( ) (4)
760
Where A is the altitude of the site in meters from mean sea level. The characteristic
values in zones 1a and 2a are obtained by increasing the values from zones 1 and 2 by
a factor of 1.25. Figure NA.2 of DIN EN 1991-1-3/NA [17] recommends a minimum val-
ue of characteristic snow load on the ground up to the altitude levels mentioned in the
Table 3 and for altitudes above the limits in the Table 3, the above formulas are to be
used.
Table 3: Characteristic value of snow load 𝒔𝒌 on the ground [17]
Zone Minimum value Altitude Limit

Zone 1 0.65 kN/m2 Up to 400 m
2.2.3 Wind Load
Wind actions on structures located in Germany should be calculated according to Eu-

rocode EN 1991-1-4 [18] and respective National Annex DIN EN 1991-1-4/NA [19].
Wind pressure on the structure is taken as peak velocity pressure multiplied by pres-
sure coefficients which are given in the Eurocode. The values of external and internal
pressure coefficients considered in the design calculations are as per the National An-
nex recommendations. The wind force calculations carried out in four stages
1) Calculation of the Peak velocity pressure
Peak velocity pressure, 𝑞𝑝 , on the structure depends on the basic velocity pressure and
terrain category of site location. This means different values for peak velocity pressure
for different site locations. This basic velocity pressure (Table 4) should be adopted
from the Annex NA.A of National Annex DIN EN 1991-1-4/NA [19] with the respective
wind zone in which the construction site is located.

Table 4: Basic velocity pressure
Wind Zone vb,0 in m/s qb,0 in kN/m2

WZ 1 22.5 0.32
WZ 2 25.0 0.39
WZ 3 27.5 0.47
WZ 4 30.0 0.56
Annex NA.B of DIN EN 1991-1-4/NA [19] recommends the terrain category for the site
location and clauses NA.B. 1, NA.B. 2 and NA.B. 3 of the same annex suggests a
procedure for peak velocity pressure calculations according to the respective terrain
categories.
2) Determination of External pressure coefficients
External pressure coefficient, cpe, for members with the loaded area up to 1 m2, cpe,1, and
loaded area over 10 m2, cpe,10, are suggested in the Eurocode [18]. Logarithmic interpo-
lation is used to calculate the coefficients for loaded areas in between 1 m2 and 10 m2.
National Annex simplifies this by considering coefficients pertaining to those of loaded
area over 10 m2 even for the members whose loaded area is only over 1m2. The value
of external pressure coefficients is mainly dependent on the dimensions of the struc-
ture. The values of external pressure coefficients for both wall and roof of the structure
are recommended by clause 7.2 of Eurocode [18].
3) Determination of Internal pressure coefficients
“Internal pressure coefficient, cpi, depends on the size and distribution of the openings
in the building envelope” [18, p. 51]. Internal pressure coefficients are given by clause
7.2.9 of EN 1991-1-4 [18]. For structures where there are no dominant openings, the
internal pressure coefficients should be determined based on the opening ratio in the
face and taken from the figure 7.13 of Eurocode [18]. The opening ratio is the ratio of
the sum of openings where external pressure coefficient is negative or zero to the sum
of the area of all openings. Eurocode [18] suggests that wherever it is not possible to
estimate an opening ratio for a particular case, then the internal pressure coefficient
should be taken as the more onerous of +0.2 and -0.3.
4) Calculation of Wind pressure
Wind pressure Wp = (cpe±cpi) * qp
For the calculation of wind pressure, both internal and external pressure coefficients
shall be considered to act in unison at same time. “The worst combination of external
and internal pressure shall be considered for every combination of possible openings
and other leakage paths” [18].

3 Load Combinations
Load combinations for the both Ultimate and Serviceability limit states design of struc-
tures are considered from the Eurocode EN 1990 [14] and its respective German Na-
tional annex DIN EN 1990/NA [20].
3.1 Ultimate Limit States (ULS)

“The ultimate limit states is a design criterion which focused mostly on the safety of
people and the safety of the structure” [14, p. 31]. Several ultimate limit states such as
EQU, STR, GEO, FAT (Figure 9) etc. shall be verifies as relevant, according to the
clause 6.4.1 of Eurocode [14].
Figure 9: Diagram showing EQU, GEO, STR, FAT limit states [21]
The fundamental combination expression for permanent and transient design situation
as mentioned in EN 1990 (Eq. 6.10) [14] is

j 1
Gk , j""pP""Q ,1Qk ,1""  Q ,1 0, iQk , i
G, j
i 1
(5)
The recommended values of  factors for the building are taken from Table A1.1 of
Eurocode EN 1990 [14]. The values of partial safety factors ( G, j , p , Q ,1 ) are consid-
ered from the Table A1.2(A), Table A1.2(B), Table A1.2(C) of EN 1990 [14] according
to the respective ultimate states.

3.2 Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

“Serviceability limit states is a design criterion which focused mainly on the function of
the structure, structural members under normal use, the comfort of people and the ap-
pearance of the construction works” [14, p. 31]. In serviceability limit states three load
combinations are considered
• Characteristic combination
• Frequent combination
• Quasi-permanent combination
The load combination expressions for each one of the serviceability limit states are
taken from Eurocode EN 1990 [14].
Characteristic combination
As mentioned in clause 6.5.3 of EN 1990 [14], the characteristic combination is normal-
ly used for irreversible limit states.
Expression for characteristic combination from EN 1990, Eq.6.14b [14] is
G
j 1
k, j "" P"" Qk ,1""  0, iQk , i
i 1
(6)
Frequent combination
The Frequent combinations are normally used for reversible limit states according to
the clause 6.5.3 of EN 1990 [14].
Expression for frequent combination from EN 1990 [14], Eq.6.15b is
G
j 1
k, j "" P"" 1,1Qk ,1""  2, iQk , i
i 1
(7)
Quasi-permanent combination
The clause 6.5.3 of EN 1990 [14] states “Quasi-permanent combination is normally
used for long-term effects and the appearance of the structure”.
Expression for quasi-permanent combination from Eq.6.16b of EN 1990 [14] is
G
j 1
k, j "" P""  2, iQk , i
i 1
(8)
The recommended values of  factors for the building are taken from Table A1.1 of
Eurocode EN 1990 [14].
The factors applied to the load actions for combinations at the Ultimate limit states
(ULS) and serviceability limit states (SLS), based on Eurocode EN 1990 [14] and Ger-
man national annex DIN EN 1990/NA [20] are mentioned in Table 5.

Table 5: Factors for design combinations at ULS & SLS
Ultimate limit states Serviceability limit states

Combination Dead Imposed Snow Wind Dead Imposed Snow Wind
DL IL SL WL DL IL SL WL
DL+IL 1.35 1.5 - - 1.0 1.0 - -
DL+IL+SL 1.35 1.5 1.5*0.5 - 1.0 1.0 0.5 -
DL+IL+SL+WL 1.35 1.5 1.5*0.5 1.5*0.6 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.6
DL+SL 1.35 - 1.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 -
DL+SL+WL 1.35 - 1.5 1.5*0.6 1.0 - 1.0 0.6
DL+WL 1.35 - - 1.5 1.0 - - 1.0
DL+WL+SL 1.35 - 1.5*0.5 1.5 1.0 - 0.5 1.0

4 Preliminary Designs
The analysis and design of large span hangar structure are worked out with the help of
Rstab program tool. The Analysis and design process is carried out through different
alternative roof systems for the long span structural system. A comparative study of all
these alternatives is made and the most suitable and economical structural system for
the final execution is selected.
4.1 Design Considerations

Design of all structural steel members is carried out according to the Eurocode EN
1993-1-1 [22] and its respective German National annex DIN EN 1993-1-1/NA [23].
4.1.1 Clear span and height
The clear span length of the hangar structure is 125 m. The clear internal height of the
hangar structure is 20 m which is measured from the top of the finished floor level to
the bottom of roof truss bottom chord member.
4.1.2 Steel grade and sub-grade
S355 grade material is used for all structural steel members and 1570 (Rope strength
class) material is used for ropes. All design calculations are performed by considering
the strength values from these material types. Selection of steel grades is normally
carried out according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-10 [24] and the strength values for
ropes are taken from the EN 1993-1-11 [25], DIN EN 12385-4 [26] and DIN EN 12385-
10 [27].
4.1.3 Structural analysis by Rstab program
“Rstab is a powerful program tool to perform design and analysis of three dimensional
(3D) beams, frames and trusses, consisting of steel, reinforced concrete, timber,
aluminium and other materials” [28]. This design software works based on finite ele-
ment iterations. Rstab provides several tools and features to develop 3D modelling of
the structure easily and quickly. Design of the structural members according to respec-
tive design considerations (code of practice) is performed with the help of add-on mod-
ules which are already incorporated in the Rstab tool.
It is a powerful tool which enables in generating automatic load combinations according
to the code of practice and provides access to edit the load cases and combinations.
Rstab program allows export and import of several types of file formats like CAD, Tekla
and Excel. Graphical user interface aids in expedition of the modelling of three-
dimensional (3D) structural arrangement. The operation of the program is possible in
different languages. Photorealistic rendering of the 3D model provides direct control of
input data [28]. Display and hiding of the objects such as nodes, members, supports
and other structural elements, help in easy modelling and studying of structural
behaviour. Automatic generation of wind and snow loads according to the respective
code of practice is possible. This program facilitates in printing graphical view of struc-

ture as well as the corresponding project report with input details, internal forces and
results.
4.1.4 Technical Drawings – AutoCAD
AutoCAD is one of the widely used Computer-Aided-Drafting tools, used primarily in

outlining a structure both in 2D (2-dimensional) and 3D (3-dimensional). In this project
work, the hangar structure dimensions, member arrangements and connection details
are outlined with line diagrams by AutoCAD software. The main advantage of using
Computer-Aided-Drafting tool is to speed up the drawing work and make document
editions easier in case of any errors.
4.2 Preliminary Design 1 – Conventional roof truss for long span

structure
The hangar roof structure is constructed in order to carry and support the weight of the
cladding sheets and load due to atmospheric actions like wind and snow. Generally, it
is easier and more economical to construct single-storey small-span industrial buildings
with portal frames when compared with long span structures. The main alternative for
portal frames with long span is truss construction. This truss member system provides
better framing solution for large column free structures. Generally, the deflection of the
roof system is the most critical criterion for long-span structures. The height of the roof
truss is dependent on the span length. The thumb rule for the height of the roof truss is
L/15 to L/18 which is dependent on the intensity of load acting on the roof, where L is
the length of the span. The Conventional roof truss for a hangar structure is shown in
Figure 10 below.
Length of the span (L) = 125 m.
Height of the roof truss = L/15 = 8.333 ≈ 8 m.
Total height of the structure (z) = 20+8 = 28 m.
Figure 10: Conventional roof truss for long span structure

4.2.1 Load Calculation
Load calculations for the industrial structures is carried out with the help of Eurocodes
and Bautabellen [29].
Dead load
The dead load is taken as 30 kg/m2, which is inclusive of the weights of trapezoidal roof
sheeting, purlins and fixtures etc.
Imposed load
Imposed load on H type roofs is taken as 0.4 kN/m2 according to Table 6.10 of EN
1991-1-1 [15].
Snow load
The aircraft maintenance hangar would be constructed in Düsseldorf, Germany. Ac-
cording to the snow zone map, the construction location belongs to the snow zone 1.
The characteristic snow load on roof, 𝑠, from Eq (1)
𝑠 = 𝜇𝑖 𝐶𝑒 𝐶𝑡 𝑠𝑘
The values of 𝐶𝑒 , 𝐶𝑡 are taken as 1.0 which described in the section 2.2.2 and the val-
ues of 𝜇𝑖 , 𝑠𝑘 are taken from the Table 2 and Table 3 respectively.
Therefore,
𝑠 = 𝜇𝑖 𝐶𝑒 𝐶𝑡 𝑠𝑘 = 0.8 * 1.0 * 1.0 * 0.65 = 0.52 kN/m2.
Wind load
Wind load calculations are performed according to the section 2.2.3 of this document.
According to German National Annex DIN EN 1991-1-4/NA [19], the hangar construc-
tion area belongs to wind zone 2 and a mixed profile inland terrain category which acts
as a transitional category between the terrain category II and III
Peak velocity pressure 𝑞𝑝 :
𝑞𝑝 (𝑧) = 1.5 ∗ 𝑞𝑏 for 𝑧 ≤ 7𝑚
𝑧 0.37
𝑞𝑝 (𝑧) = 1.7 ∗ 𝑞𝑏 (10) for 7 𝑚 ≤ 𝑧 ≤ 50 𝑚
Where, 𝑞𝑏 is the basic velocity pressure and values for 𝑞𝑏 is taken from the Table 4 of
section 2.2.3 in this document.
Therefore, Peak velocity pressure 𝑞𝑝 ,
𝑞𝑝 (7) = 1.5 ∗ 0.39 = 0.585 kN/m2 for 𝑧 ≤ 7 𝑚
28 0.37
𝑞𝑝 (28) = 1.7 ∗ 0.39 ∗ (10) = 0.970 kN/m2 for 7 𝑚 ≤ 𝑧 ≤ 50 𝑚

External pressure coefficients cpe:
a) Vertical walls
ℎ 28
For = = 0.224 ≤ 0.25
𝑑 125
D: cpe = +0.7
E: cpe = -0.3
b) Flat roofs
with e = min(b;2h) = min(87.25;56) = 56 m
F: cpe = -1.0
G: cpe = -1.0
H: cpe = -0.3
I: cpe = -0.2
Internal pressure coefficients cpi:

In this structure, it is difficult to estimate the permeability and opening ratio of the build-
ing. So internal pressure coefficient cpi should be taken as more onerous of -0.3 and
+0.2. An internal pressure coefficient equal to +0.2 turns out to be unfavorable to wind
suction calculations.
Calculation of Wind pressure Wp:
Wind pressure Wp = (cpe±cpi) * qp
Wind pressure for height up to 7m
D: Wp = (0.7+0.0) * 0.585 = 0.4095 kN/m2
E: Wp = (-0.3-0.2) * 0.585 = 0.2925 kN/m2
Wind pressure for height more than 7m and up to 50 m
D: Wp = (0.7+0.0) * 0.970 = 0.679 kN/m2
E: Wp = (-0.3-0.2) * 0.970 = -0.485 kN/m2
F: Wp = (-1.0-0.2) * 0.970 = -1.164 kN/m2
G: Wp = (-1.0-0.2) * 0.970 = -1.164 kN/m2
H: Wp = (-0.3-0.2) * 0.970 = -0.485 kN/m2
I: Wp = (-0.2-0.2) * 0.970 = -0.388 kN/m2

4.2.2 Member Verification
Analysis and design of the hangar structure is performed with the help of Rstab soft-
ware. After the initial analysis, the immediate step is to verify the member resistance
manually and then do a secondary design check. In the member verification stage, the
strength and the buckling resistance of the cross-sectional members are compared
with those of the prescribed design values according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1
[22]. The member properties and member loads of the main members of hangar struc-
ture are mentioned in Table 6. The details about all the member properties and mem-
ber length of the hangar structure are mentioned in the technical drawing (Figure 11).
Figure 11: Preliminary Design 1 – Technical Drawing indicating the structure

Table 6: Cross-sectional properties of Preliminary Design - 1
Cross- Maximum Axial Cross-section Load

Type
section force (kN) class Combination
Top Chord HE A 320 -2043 Class 2 C03
+1703 @ midspan
Bottom Chord HE A 320 Class 2 C03
-820 @ support
Column HE A 360 -2451 Class 3 C03
C03: - 1.35 * Dead load (𝐺) + 1.5 * Imposed load (𝑄𝑖 𝐻) + 0.75 * Snow load (𝑄𝑠 )
In the above Table, the negative sign indicates the compression force and positive sign
indicates the tension force in the member. A sample member verification for the top
chord member is mentioned here. All the members are considered as truss elements
i.e. the members only transfer axial forces. Generally, this cross-section class is based
on the width to thickness ratio of both web and flange portion of the member and it is
also dependent on the stresses and moments developed in the member [30].
Cross-section check - Compression
The verification of compression resistance of the member is performed according to the
clause 6.2.4 of Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22].
The design value of the compression force NED shall satisfy:
𝑁𝐸𝐷
≤ 1.0 (9)
𝑁𝑐,𝑅𝑑
Where the ultimate value of design compression force NED = 2043 kN (compression).
This design value of compression force is taken from the Rstab program. 𝑁𝑐,𝑅𝑑 is the
design resistance of the cross-section for uniform compression and it should be deter-
mined as follows:
𝐴𝑓𝑦
𝑁𝑐,𝑅𝑑 = (10)
𝛾𝑀,0
Where A is the gross area of the section = 124 cm2, fy is yield strength of steel member
= 355 N/mm2 and  M0 is the partial safety factor equal to the 1.0 according to the clause
6.1, Note 2B of Eurocode [22].
Therefore
124 ∗ 100 ∗ 355
𝑁𝑐,𝑅𝑑 = = 4402 𝑘𝑁
1.0 ∗ 1000
𝑁𝐸𝐷 2043
= = 0.464 ≤ 1.0
𝑁𝑐,𝑅𝑑 4402
The ultimate design compressive force is much lesser than the design compressive
resistance of cross-section HE A 320 and it satisfies the cross-section check for the
compressive force.

Stability analysis – Flexural buckling check

The buckling of the member is caused due to the compression stresses in the member
when it reaches the critical buckling load or Euler Buckling load ( Pcr ).
 2 EI
The theoretical equation for the critical buckling load Pcr 
(KL ) 2
Where, 𝐸 is Elastic modulus of section, 𝐼 is second-moment of area, 𝐿 is the length of

the member and 𝐾 is the effective length factor.
Figure 12: Buckling of compression member [31]

In the above figure, buckling of the member takes place in both the axes due to the
compression force. The buckling of the member about its major axis is known as in-
plane buckling and about its minor axis is known as out-of-plane buckling. Buckling of
the cross-section should be verified in both the axis. Stability check of the members is
performed according to the clause 6.3.1.1 of Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22].
Figure 13: In-plane & Out-of-plane Buckling of member [31]
A compression member should be verified against buckling as follows:
NED
 1.0 (11)
Nb, Rd
Where NED is the design value of the compression force and Nb , Rd is the design buck-
ling resistance of the compression member. The design buckling resistance of a com-
pression member should be taken as

𝜒𝐴𝑓𝑦
𝑁𝑏,𝑅𝑑 = (12)
𝛾𝑀1
Where 𝐴 is the gross cross-sectional area of the section = 124 cm2, 𝑓𝑦 = 355𝑁/𝑚𝑚2,
𝛾𝑀1 is the partial safety factor equal to 1.1, 𝜒 is the reduction factor for the relevant
buckling mode.
1
𝜒= 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝜒 ≤ 1.0 (13)
∅ + √∅2 − 𝜆2
Where
∅ = 0.5[1 + 𝛼(𝜆 − 0.2) + 𝜆2 ] (14)
As we already know the equation for the non-dimensional slenderness 𝜆
𝐿𝑐𝑟 1
𝜆= (15)
𝑖 𝜆1
Where
235
𝜆1 = 93.9𝜀 = 93.9 × √ = 76.399,
355
𝐿𝑐𝑟 = buckling length in the buckling plane = 5000 mm in both the axis,
𝑖𝑦 = radius of gyration about 𝑦 − 𝑦 axis = 13.58 cm
𝑖𝑧 = radius of gyration about 𝑧 − 𝑧 axis = 7.49 cm

Therefore, non-dimensional slenderness
5000
𝜆𝑦 = = 0.481
13.58 × 10 × 76.399
5000
𝜆𝑧 = = 0.873
7.49 × 10 × 76.399
The value of the reduction factor 𝜒 is calculated from the Figure 6.4 of EN 1993-1-1
[22]. Accordingly, the category of buckling curve should be considered from the Table
6.2 of Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22]. In this case, the member section belongs to buck-
ling curve “b”. From the Figure 6.4 and with 𝜆 values,
The value of reduction factor about y-axis 𝜒𝑦 = 0.892
The value of reduction factor about z-axis 𝜒𝑧 = 0.617

Apply these values to the buckling resistance equation,
Buckling resistance of compression member about y-axis is calculated as
0.892 × 124 × 100 × 355
𝑁𝑏,𝑦,𝑅𝑑 = = 3569.62 𝑘𝑁
1.1
Buckling resistance of compression member about z-axis is calculated as
0.617 × 124 × 100 × 355
𝑁𝑏,𝑧,𝑅𝑑 = = 2469.12 𝑘𝑁
1.1

𝑁𝐸𝑑 2043
= = 0.572 ≤ 1.0
𝑁𝑏,𝑦,𝑅𝑑 3569.62
𝑁𝐸𝑑 2043
= = 0.827 ≤ 1.0
𝑁𝑏,𝑧,𝑅𝑑 2469.12
Hence, the ultimate compressive force is much lesser than the buckling resistance of
the section in both the axis. It means that the bending about both the axis are well with-
in the limits. Therefore, the section property HE A 320 is adopted for top chord since it
fulfils member verifications.
4.3 Preliminary Design 2 - Trapezoidal Lattice Girder roof stabilized

by Cables
The trapezoidal roof is often used for the large column-free areas because the depth of
the roof structure provides large stability and stiffness to structure. The vertical mem-
bers of the roof structure at support having a length of at least 1/10th of the truss height
at mid-span are found to reduce the forces in the chord members adjacent to supports
considerably [32]. Consequently, the secondary bending moments of the chord mem-
bers are reduced [32]. This depth of the roof truss at both ends gives the Trapezoidal
configuration to the roof truss. The main purpose of providing a pitch to the roof is to
drain off the rainwater. Accumulation of water ponds on the roof cladding will increase
the loading on the roof structure. The pitch angle adopted for this trapezoidal roofing is
less than 5-degree i.e. almost treat as a flat roof. The large depth of the roof truss re-
sults in decrease of the torsional resistance of the roof structure and consequently the
load effect on top of the roof increases. The depth of the roof truss should not exceed
the prescribed limit, which is necessary to minimise the twisting of the roof and at same
time the roof structure should show sufficient stiffness to the deflections.
A better solution to these problems is trapezoidal lattice girder roof stabilized by cables.
This configuration of roof truss shows maximum resistance to twisting because of less
depth of the roof at centre and providing high stiffness to roof structure under deflection
by using cables which are in turn connected to the top chord of the roof truss. The ca-
bles act as a stabilization member for roofs under gravity loads. Some portion of the
loads are transferred to the footing through the cables and it helps to reduce the deflec-
tion of the roof truss. The deflection of roof truss may increase the stress in the chord
members of the roof truss. The Pratt truss type configuration is more suitable for the
gravity loads because arrangement of the top chord provides maximum resistance to
the compression forces. The simple Locked-coil ropes are used as cables to reduce
the deflection of roof truss by transferring the load from truss to column. These rope
specifications are taken from the PFEIFER standard catalogue [33]. A special ar-
rangement of cables is adopted to transfer the loads acting on the roof truss to the foot-
ing without developing moments in the structure. This arrangement of cables is shown
in Figure 14.

Figure 14: Trapezoidal Lattice Girder roof stabilized by Cables
The same type of roof sheeting material as preliminary design 1 is used to cover this
structural roof system. So, the quantity of dead load calculated in the preliminary de-
sign 1 is used to analyze and design the structure. Similarly, the roof of this structure is
only accessible for maintenance and repair purposes. Imposed load value is also equal
to the value taken in the preliminary design 1. The snow load mainly depends on the
site location. Wind actions changes according to the height of the structure and the
pitch of the roof. The method for the calculation of wind actions is mentioned in the
section 4.2.1 in this document and the same method is followed for the calculation of
wind intensity on the structure.
The member properties of the major structural elements are mentioned in the Table 7.
The detailed view of the member properties and the member lengths are mentioned in
Figure 15.
Table 7: Cross-sectional properties of Preliminary Design - 2
Maximum Axial Cross- Load

Type Cross-section
force (kN) section class Combination
Top Chord HE A 280 -2032 Class 3 C03
-1990 @ support
1416 @ midspan
Column HE A 280 -2395 Class 3 C03
PV 360 +765 - C03
Ropes
PV 150 +241 - C03

In the above table, the negative sign indicates the axial compressive force and the pos-
itive sign indicates the axial tensile force.
Cross-section and Buckling resistance of compression member

The sections of the hangar structure are to be verified for their cross-section resistance
and buckling resistance against applied compression force. These verifications are
followed according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22] and its respective German Na-
tional annex DIN EN 1993-1-1/NA [23]. The calculation for the member verification ac-

cording to Eurocode for the preliminary design 1 is mentioned in section 4.2.2 in this
document. The section verification of hangar structure is performed similarly to the cal-
culations mentioned in the preliminary design 1. All the adopted member properties for
all the sections satisfy the member verification checks such as the cross-sectional re-
sistance and buckling resistance.
Rope capacity check – Tension
Rope members are only tension carrying members and having no resistance under
compression. “The rope is an assembly of several strands laid helically in one or more
layers around a core” [25, p. 6]. There are different varieties of ropes (Figure 16) pres-
ently available in the market but each has its special advantages and disadvantages.
By taking all the specifications and features into account, fully locked coil ropes are
used to transfer the loads from roof truss to the column members of the structure. Fully
locked coil ropes are ropes with fully locked Z-shaped wires on its outer layer [25, p. 6].
These Z-shaped wires provide a smooth outer surface (Figure 17) and a permanently
closed surface which prevents the entering of any substances into the inner layers
thereby protecting against corrosion [33]. These locked coil ropes have a high modulus
of elasticity and because of the smooth outer surface, they possess high resistance to
surface pressure. Design of fully locked coil ropes is performed according to the Euro-
code EN 1993-1-11 [25] and its respective German National annex [34]. A sample de-
sign calculation of ropes mentioned in the Cable-Stayed Bridge text book [35] is fol-
lowed as a reference. The structural properties of ropes (grade of rope etc.) are con-
sidered according to the Eurocode DIN EN 12385, Part 4 [26] and Part 10 [27]. Addi-
tionally, the characteristic values for the design breaking strength and rope engineering
properties are considered from the PFEIFER company catalogue [33]. Design methods
and process for connections of rope materials to the structural steel as well as the
standard fixing materials for the connection are clearly outlined by PFEIFER catalogue
[33].These PFEIFER [33] standards are approved by the European Commission. The
design calculations for the verification of breaking resistance of the rope PV 360 with
grade 1570 are performed below. A similar method is used for the verification of break-
ing resistance of a fully locked coil rope PV 360 with grade 1570.
Figure 16: Types of Cables [33, 35]

Figure 17: Fully Locked Coil rope - Surface [33]

Breaking Resistance verification:
The breaking resistance of the rope members (tension members) should be verified by
the following equation.
For the ultimate limit states, breaking strength shall be verified that
𝐹𝐸𝑑
≤1 (16)
𝐹𝑅𝑑
Where 𝐹𝐸𝑑 is the design value of the axial rope force equal to 765 kN and 𝐹𝑅𝑑 is the
design value of the tension resistance.
𝐹𝑢𝑘 𝐹𝑘
𝐹𝑅𝑑 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 { ; } (17)
1.5𝛾𝑅 𝛾𝑅
Where
𝐹𝑢𝑘 is the Characteristic value of the breaking strength equal to 3590 kN for PV 360,
taken from the PFEIFER catalogue [33] for 1570 grade rope and 𝛾𝑅 is the partial factor
equal to 1.0, considered from the NDP zu 6.2(2) Anmerkung 4 of German National an-
nex DIN EN 1993-1-11/NA [34].
𝐹𝑘 is the Characteristic value of the proof strength of the tension component. For the
design of fully locked coil ropes this check is not required according to the Note 2 of
𝐹𝑢𝑘
clause 6.2 of EN 1993-1-11 [25] because 𝐹𝑘 ≥ 1.5
.
Therefore,
𝐹𝑢𝑘 3590
𝐹𝑅𝑑 = { }= = 2393.3 𝑘𝑁
1.5𝛾𝑅 1.5 × 1.0
But PFEIFER catalogue suggests 𝐹𝑅𝑑 = 2176 𝑘𝑁
𝐹𝐸𝑑 765
= = 0.35 ≤ 1
𝐹𝑅𝑑 2176

Hence, the locked coil rope has sufficient strength to transfer the applied tension force
in the member.
Serviceability check:
This check is necessary to determine whether the stress developed in the rope is in the
elastic range for the relevant design situations during construction and in-service
phase. These stress criteria shall be verified by the following equation.
𝐹𝐸𝑑
𝜎𝐸𝑑 = ≤ 𝑓𝑆𝐿𝑆 (18)
𝐴
Where 𝐹𝐸𝑑 is the design value of axial rope force = 765 kN, 𝐴 is the area of the rope
member is equal to 2490 mm2, taken from the PFEIFER catalogue [33] and 𝑓𝑆𝐿𝑆 is the
stress limit for service condition.
𝑓𝑆𝐿𝑆 = 0.45𝜎𝑢𝑘 for fully locked coil ropes from German National annex [34]
Where 𝜎𝑢𝑘 is the ultimate tensile strength of the rope is equal to 1570 N/mm2 for 1570
grade rope.
Therefore,
𝑓𝑆𝐿𝑆 = 0.45𝜎𝑢𝑘 = 0.45 × 1570 = 706.5 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
𝐹𝐸𝑑 765 × 1000
𝜎𝐸𝑑 = = = 307.25 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 ≤ 𝑓𝑆𝐿𝑆
𝐴 2490
The rope member PV 360 is adopted to stabilize the roof truss from deflections be-
cause it satisfies all the resistance checks according to Eurocode [25] and its respec-
tive German National annex [34].
4.4 Preliminary Design 3 - Arch roof truss structure

An arch roof truss (Figure 18) is most suitable for the structures with large spans and
high wind actions. The arch shape of truss provides very high stiffness to the structure
under vertical deflections due to its load transferring behaviour. Because of the arch
action, some part of the vertical gravity load is transferred as horizontal thrust on the
structure. This results in the decrease in the vertical deflection of the structure but
causes a high amount of horizontal shear forces on the structure.
The arch roof structure is a highly economical construction in withstanding wind ac-
tions. This arch shape structure provides high resistance to failure due to wind actions.
Similarly, the depth of the roof truss and radius of the arch will affect the deflection and
load transferring criteria of the structure. The arrangement of the arch roof structure is
shown in Figure 18. Under the application of vertical load, both the top and bottom
chords are in compression up to a certain deflection limit which is in turn dependent on
arch radius. Later the bottom chord carries tensile forces and top chord carries the
compressive forces. The wind action results in suction on the structure. The bottom
and the top chords are always in tension because of the wind suction acting on the
structure. Steel has more resistance towards tension and because of this reason, arch-
shaped roofs are more suitable for the structures where wind actions are high. The
shape of the curve is calculated according to the form-finding equations.

Figure 18: Arch Roof truss structure
Dead load and imposed load on the arch roof structure are equal to the loads applied
to the structure preliminary design 1 because the same type of roof cladding is used for
roof structure. Also, the snow loads are the same for the location of the structure. Wind
actions are different as compared to the other preliminary designs because the shape
and the height of the structure is different with the other preliminary designs. The
method which is implemented in the section 4.2.1 can be used for the calculation of
wind actions on the structure. All these calculations are performed according to the
Eurocodes [18] and its respective German National annex [19]. The load intensities for
dead, imposed and snow loads are to be taken from the section 4.2.1 in this document.
The section properties of the major members and its internal forces are incorporated in
Table 8. All further details about member properties and members length of all the sec-
tions are detailed in the Figure 19.
Table 8: Cross-sectional properties of Preliminary - 3
Cross- Maximum Axial force Cross- Load

Type
section (kN) section class Combination
-1846 @ midspan
Top Chord HE A 320 Class 2 C03
1290 @ support
-1546 @ support
1165 @ midspan
-1850 @ outer column
Column HE A 320 Class 2 C03
1750 @ inner column
In the above table, the negative sign indicates the axial compressive force and the pos-
itive sign indicates the axial tensile force.

The cross-sectional resistance and the buckling resistance of the section is verified
according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22] and its respective German National annex
DIN EN 1993-1-1/NA [23]. A sample calculation for the verification of both cross-
sectional and stability resistance is performed in the section 4.2.2 in this document. A
similar method is followed to carry out the member verification of all the sections. It is
found that all the members satisfy the member design ratio, which is less than 1.
Hence, all the adopted members are safe under both axial forces compression and
tension.

4.5 Comparison between preliminary designs

A study is conducted among all the three preliminary designs and the best design in
terms of structural quantity, sub-structure design criteria and construction criteria is
selected, and the final design is carried out.
4.5.1 Comparison of structural quantity
The quantity of structural steel required for each structural system is worked out in or-
der to satisfy all design criteria according to Eurocodes. The corresponding quantities
are mentioned in Table 9. All these values are redirected from the Rstab software.
Table 9: Quantity of Structural Steel for all Preliminary Designs
Preliminary Structure Type

Quantity (tons)
Design
Conventional Roof Truss for
1 65
long span structure
Trapezoidal Lattice Girder 48.75 (structural steel)
2
Roof Stabilized by Cables + 3.7 (rope)
3 Arch Roof Truss structure 55.2
By comparing the structural quantities of all preliminary designs, it is concluded that

there is no predominant difference between the quantities of all the structural systems.
Nevertheless, preliminary design 2 shows that comparatively less amount of steel is
required to that of other preliminary designs. In preliminary design 2, the lattice girder
roof structure is stabilized by cable elements. However, there is a possibility of reduc-
ing the structural deflection by stiffening the roof structure with the help of applying pre-
stressing forces in the cable. These pre-stressing cables will reduce the external load
effects on the structure by developing counteracting reactions resulting from the ap-
plied pre-stressing forces. In doing so, more rope quantity may be incurred in the de-
sign. The percentage reduction of structural steel quantity in preliminary design 2 is 24
percentage when compared to the steel quantity of preliminary design 1. Similarly, the
percentage reduction of steel quantity in preliminary design 3 is 15.5 percentage when
compared to steel quantity of preliminary design 1.
4.5.2 Comparison of sub-structure criteria
Design and construction of sub-structure also have a profound effect on the overall
cost of the structure. All type of reactions (shear, compression, tension and moment)
should be transferred from the super-structure to ground through the sub-structure. The
critical support reactions of each structural system are mentioned in Table 10. All the
values mentioned in Table 10 are according to ultimate limit states and obtained from
the Rstab software.

Table 10: Support reactions of all Preliminary Designs
Preliminary Support Reactions (kN)

Structure Type
design Tension Compression Shear
Conventional roof truss for
1 255 -776 373
Long span structure
Trapezoidal Lattice Girder
2 170 -776 614
Roof Stabilized by Cables
3 Arch Roof truss structure 1584 -2494 697
Generally, the material used for the construction of sub-structural elements is concrete.
It is widely known that concrete material is weak in transferring tensile forces. On ob-
servation of the results in Table 10, the preliminary design 3 transfers a large amount
of tension force as well as compression force to the foundation. At the same time shear
force is more when compared to the remaining preliminary designs. The main reason
for the large amount of force acting on the foundation is due to the arch action of the
roof truss. This arch action converts the external gravity loads on the roof into horizon-
tal loads and transfers the same through the column members. To resist a large
amount of tension force in the foundation, it is recommended to follow advanced tech-
niques while designing and constructing the foundation. The advanced techniques in-
clude pile foundation, provision of anchors to the bed rock to control uplifting forces in
the foundation. This might result in the increase of the foundation costs subsequently
leading to the increase in cost of construction. The preliminary design 1 is transfers the
minimum loads to the foundation in terms of tension, compression and shear
4.5.3 Comparison by the ease of construction
The construction time and the construction techniques are pivotal in producing the
most economical structures. The easiest way of construction is to produce all the shop
fabricated elements and transport them to site. On site, all the necessary joints are laid
and then placed accordingly. Constructing the roof structure of 125 m span length is a
challenging task in itself. There are different methods to construct a long-span roof
truss. The most common and conventional method for the installation of long spans is
intermediate column method. Initially, a few intermediate supporting columns are
placed under the roof structure. Later on, after finishing the construction of all the ele-
ments including joints, these intermediate columns are removed. This method doesn’t
demand technical supervision. This method is suitable for all types of preliminary de-
signs. Another method of installation is to construct the whole roof structure on the
ground itself and then lift and place the whole roof with the help of cranes. This method
requires the location of lifting nodes on roof truss as well as technical supervision to
ensure safety in the workplace. This method can be used for all the Preliminary de-
signs and it is best suited for the Preliminary design 2 because the roof structure is
primarily stabilized by the cables. Typically, perform the assembly of some portion of
roof on ground. Afterwards lift and connect to the cables (which are already construct-
ed) in preferred locations of roof truss. The same procedure should have repeated for

the remaining portion of the structure. This is safest and easiest method for the con-
struction of the cable supporting structure.
4.5.4 Miscellaneous
The depth of the roof truss will increase the stiffness of the structure by providing high
resistance to the deflections. The both preliminary designs 1 and 3 have deeper roof
truss when compared to the preliminary design 2. When the depth of the truss increas-
es then there is a possibility of twisting of the truss structure. The external loading on
the structure due to sheeting, maintenance and snow act on the top portion of the roof.
In this case, these external gravity loads have a pronounced effect on the twisting of
the roof structure. The laterally supporting members on the top chord of the roof like
purlins resist these twisting forces developed in the truss arising to external loading.
But in the case of preliminary design 2 this twisting effect is less severe because the
depth of the roof is smaller than the other preliminary designs. Additionally, the top
chord of the lattice girder is connected to the ropes, thereby generating some re-
sistance against twisting of the roof frame.
It can be concluded that, after comparing all the preliminary designs, the preliminary
design 2 – Trapezoidal Lattice Girder Roof Truss Stabilized by Cables is selected as
the most convenient, economical and safe structure for the long span structures. Later,
a final design for the same is performed.

5 Final Design Details – Aircraft Hangar Structure
The final design of the hangar structure mainly includes the re-checking of the design
of main frame members according to the exact loading on the frame due to all type of
load actions and it includes the design of roof bracings, vertical bracings, gables, sec-
ondary members of the frame as well as connection details of the frame. For the hang-
ar structure, the components design and connection design calculations, a few steel
structure design books mentioned in [36, 37, 38, 39] are referred.
5.1 Aircraft Hangar Design Dimensions

The required area for the aircraft maintenance hangar should be approximately 10,000
sq. m in order to accommodate aircraft A 320 and Boing 737. The available dimensions
of the site (Figure 20), where the hangar structure is going to be constructed, are 125
meters wide and 87.25 meters long. Figure 21 clearly shows the clear dimensions of
the hangar structure i.e. 125 m clear span, 78 m length, 21 m clear height and 9750 sq.
m area. The distance between each bay is maintained as 6 m.
Figure 20: Available dimensions for hangar structure (site view)

Figure 21: Floor Plan at Ground – Aircraft Hangar Structure
5.2 Main Frame

After careful selection of suitable structural arrangement for the hangar structure from
all Preliminary designs, the final design of structure has been carried out. Figure 23
represents all the detailed information about the member properties and the length of
sections. The same frame members are used for all other intermediate and end
frames. The main task in the final design is to implement the necessary changes in the
member length and section property of all sections according to the additional loading
resulting from the wind actions from all the directions. It is necessary to apply the exact

loading values coming due to the all the load actions. It includes necessary changes in
the structural dimensions to control the flow of loads and as well as to ensure safe
transfer of loads to the sub-base structure. The “Detail A” represented in Figure 23 ex-
plains the all necessary information about roof truss sections which is shown in Figure
24. The analysis and design of the Frame (Figure 22) is carried out with the Rstab
software. The design is performed according to the Eurocode 3 [22].
Figure 22: Rstab Model – Final Design

Table 11 gives the member properties of the final hangar structure. In the below table,
the negative sign indicates the axial compressive force and the positive sign indicates
the axial tensile force.

Table 11: Member properties of Hangar Structure – Final Design
Maximum Axial Load

Type Cross-section force (kN) Combination
-2680 @ midspan C03
Top Chord HE A 360
1945 @ support
-2412 @ support C03
Bottom Chord HE A 340
1990 @ midspan
Column HE A 340 -2755 C03
PV 150 +463 C03
Ropes
PV 90 +163 C03
Figure 23: Main Frame Details – Aircraft Hangar Structure

Figure 24: Roof Truss Details – Aircraft Hangar Structure
5.3 Bracing system

Bracings are the structural members mainly used to transfer the horizontal load actions
i.e. wind, earthquake, safely to the sub-structure. Normally, horizontal and vertical ar-
rangement of bracing system is adopted to transfer the horizontal wind actions from the
whole super-structure to the sub-base structure. Analysis and design of bracing mem-
bers are carried out with the help of the Rstab software. Design of bracings is per-
formed according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22] and its respective German Nation-
al annex DIN EN 1993-1-1/NA [23].
5.3.1 Horizontal Roof Bracings
The main function of the roof bracings is to transfer the horizontal wind actions acting
on the roof truss bottom chord because of wind load on the gable columns. This hori-
zontal wind action is transferred from the horizontal roof bracings to the vertical roof
bracings presented in the same bay. Additionally, these horizontal roof bracings pro-
vide the stiffness to the structure during construction. The acting wind loads on the
hangar doors is also borne by the roof bracings and transferred to the vertical bracings.
Figure 25 represents the horizontal roof bracing system for the hangar structure. Here,
in this hangar structure, the total horizontal bracing loads are transferred to the vertical
bracings presented in the inner column bay. This vertical bracing system is shown in
Figure 26. These horizontal wind actions are carried by bracings as axial forces (either
tension or compression). Generally, cross bracing or inverted V-shaped bracing sys-
tems are used to transfer the loads.

Figure 25: Roof Plan at Bottom Chord Level
5.3.2 Vertical Bracings
These bracings are also meant to transfer the horizontal load actions due to wind,
earthquake and crane loads. Additionally, vertical bracings are needed to transfer the
horizontal loads from the roof structure to the sub-base structure i.e. need to transfer
the loads originating from the horizontal roof bracings. These bracings also provide
some amount of stiffness to the structure in longitudinal direction during erection. Gen-
erally, both the horizontal roof bracings and vertical bracings are provided in the same
bay of the structure to ensure safe transfer of horizontal loads on the structure. Other-

wise, it is necessary to provide sufficient strength to the intermediate members to carry

the horizontal loads. The vertical bracing arrangement for the inner columns of hangar
structure is shown in Figure 26 and for the outer columns of the hangar structure is
shown in Figure 27.
Figure 26: Vertical Bracings system to inner columns
Figure 27: Vertical Bracings system to outer columns

Vertical bracings are provided in between the column members and connected to the
column with the help of gusset plates. The bracings of the outer column take up very
small amount of horizontal wind actions and no loads are transferring from the roof
bracings. Only two braced bays for the inner columns and one braced bay for outer
columns are provided at front and back portion of the hangar structure to transfer wind
loads parallel to the vertical bracing planes to the foundation. Generally, cross type,
inverted V shape, K pattern bracings are adopted for the vertical bracings. Vertical
bracing gives stability to the column members in the lateral direction.
5.4 Gable frame

The main reason for the gable columns is to provide adequate support to the side
sheeting material as well as to transfer the wind loads acting on the side sheeting to
the horizontal roof bracings. These gable columns are present in the plane of end
frame of the structure and won’t bear the gravity loads arising from the roof truss. This
is the very simplest form of the gable column arrangement and this method provides an
opportunity to extend the structure in the future according to the requirements. The
gable frame arrangement for the aircraft maintenance hangar structure is shown in
Figure 28. These gable columns are designed as vertical beams loaded by the horizon-
tal wind loads. These wind loads are transferred to the bottom chord of the roof struc-
ture and base structure of the gable column equally. Generally, where there is no need
of a future extension of the structure then the gable columns are designed as the load
carrying members and these takes load from the roof structure. Side runners of the
structure provide the stability in the lateral direction to the gable column. Design of
gable columns is performed according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22] and its re-
spective German national annex DIN EN 1993-1-1/NA [23].

Figure 28: Gable End Frame Details
5.5 Secondary Structural Components

The secondary structural components of the hangar structure are Purlins and Side
Runners. The design of all these secondary structural members is carried out accord-
ing to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22] and its respective German National Annex DIN
EN 1993-1-1/NA [23].

5.5.1 Purlin
Purlins are the secondary members of the structure, which provide support to the roof
sheeting material on top of the roof truss. The purlins transfer all vertical loads which
are either due to gravity or suction caused by the external loads on the roof truss
member. These purlins are connected to the top chord member of the roof truss at
each node point (roof truss vertical member connecting node) and provide lateral sta-
bility to the member under twisting of the member. The suction load acts at the bottom
of the purlin member due to wind action and on the top of the purlin gravity load is act-
ed by impact and snow actions. The common and the most popular arrangement of the
purlins is two spans continuous beam arrangement over the supports [40]. The single
span purlin arrangement is also used where the deflection of purlins is high. The main
advantage of two-span arrangement is to provide the lateral stability to the bottom
flange member of purlin under suction loads due to wind actions. Also, a single direct
member also can be provided as a purlin member [40]. Normally the availability of the
length of sections are in the range of 12 m to 15 m. It is economical to provide the bay
length of the structure according to this available length. For the long bay structure,
two-span purlins are provided with the help of splice joints at the support. Sometimes,
because of high-end moments, the splice members are bigger than the purlin mem-
bers. There are chances of snow and rainwater accumulation at the end of the sides of
the structure. This results in heavier loads on the end purlins. This demands a heavier
purlin member at the ends of the structure. In order to tackle this issue, it is recom-
mended to reduce the spacing between the purlins on both sides of the structure. An-
other alternative would be to design the purlin member as continuous over the support
and provide single span purlin at the end spacings of the truss [40]. Figure 29 repre-
sents the single-span and continuous-span lap joint for the purlin member.
Figure 29: Example of Single-span(a) and continuous-span Purlin laps(b) [41]

Normally, channel sections are used for the purlin members where the wind forces are
strong. But the shear centre of the channel sections is not in the centre of the section
and because of the inclination of the roof, this results in less twisting resistance to the

purlin. But roof angle of the hangar is less than 5 degrees and almost equal to the flat
roofs. Therefore, there might be less effect due to twisting of the member. So, channel-
sections are used as purlin members for the hangar structure. There is also another
type of the section known as unequal flange Zed section, which is also used for the
purlin member where the gravity loads on the purlins are heavy. The shear centre of
the Zed sections is exactly at the centre of the member even when the member is an-
gled, and this provides higher resistance to the twisting under gravity loads. But this
type of sections is more expensive than the channel and I sections. Figure 30 indicates
the different common shapes of the sections which are used for purlin members. Sag
rods are provided to hold the purlin members together as well as in providing stability in
the lateral directions.
Figure 30: Common Purlin Sections [40]
5.5.2 Side Runner
Side runners are used to provide the support for the side sheeting element of the
hangar structure. Channel sections (UPE 200) are used as the side runners. The major
load coming on to the side runner is due to the wind actions. This wind force is acting
horizontal to the structure and the side runners are arranged in such way that the major
axis of the section undergoing bending is due to wind actions and the bending of minor
axis is due to the self-weight and other gravity loads. The sag rods and tensions wires
provide stiffness to the side runner, which is having minor axis bending due to self-
weight and other vertical loads [30]. Figure 31 represents the general arrangement of
the side runners, sag rods and tension wires for the industrial building.
Figure 31: General arrangement of Side runners, Sag rod and Tension wires [30]

5.6 Connections
Connections are a typical part of the design of a steel structure and it helps to make the
whole structure into a single unit by uniting the parts of the structure. Generally, in steel
structures connections are done with the help of bolts, rivets and welds along with gus-
set plates, angles or any other steel members. Design of connections is performed in
such a way that, it should fulfil the load transfer assumptions made during the analysis
of structure. Of course, it is difficult to fulfil the whole assumptions accurately but the
only way to justify those assumptions would be to arrange the fasteners and weld. “In
reality, the Pinned connections almost never truly pinned and Fixed connections are
almost never truly fixed” [42]. Engineers should design the connections that should
approximately follow the behaviour of assumptions. The design of all type of connec-
tion details is performed according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-8 [43] and its respective
German National Annex DIN EN 1993-1-8/NA [44]. The assumption made in the design
of Hangar structure is that all the structural members should carry only axial forces and
there is no transfer of moment. So that all the members are considered as truss ele-
ments and the design is performed. Three typical connection details of the hangar
structure were designed and presented in this document.
5.6.1 Column base connection
Column base connection is the major interface between the steel structure and the
foundation of the structure to transfer all vertical and shear loads from the
superstructure to the sub-structure. The major components of the column base connec-
tion are shown in Figure 32. The base plate is an element to transfer vertical compres-
sion force to the concrete foundation as areal loads. The tension force from the steel
structure is transferred through the anchors in terms of bond strength of the concrete.
The length of the anchor bolt depends on the tension force to be transferred and the
bond strength of the sub-base concrete.
Figure 32: Typical components of column base connection [45, 46]

The column base connection details for a column i.e. “Detail B” mentioned in the Figure
23 of the hangar structure is shown in the Figure 33. The design of the column base
connection was performed manually. The rope PV 150 is connecting the roof and col-
umn base location. It is transferring the tension forces from roof to the foundation. The
fatigue resistant open splitter sockets are used to connect the rope member to the col-
umn base. The connection details and technical specifications for the rope members
are adopted from the PFEIFER catalogue [33]. A weld design is used for the connect-
ing plate between the rope and the column base. And the design is carried out manual-
ly according to the Eurocode [43].
Figure 33: Column base connection details

Eurocode suggests several types of design checks to determine whether the provided
connection is sufficient to transfer the super-structure loads safely to sub-structure. The
main parts of this column base connection are a base plate, anchor rod and shear key.
The design checks according to Eurocodes [43, 22] for all the elements of column base
connection is mentioned below in Table 12.
Table 12: Checks for Column Base connection [36]
Element Checks
Check for Required Area
Check for Effective Area
Check for plate thickness under compression
Base Plate
Check for T-stub (thickness of base plate due to
tension)
Weld check
Check for Tension Capacity of Anchor Rod
Anchor Rod Check for required length of Anchor rod accord-
ing to the Bond Strength of the Concrete
Check for Shear resistance in both axes
Check for Combined Shear and Moment
Shear Key
Check for length of Shear Key to transfer shear
force to concrete
Recommended detailing practice
Gusset Plate in Shear – gross section check
Gusset
Gusset Plate in Shear – net section check
Plate
Gusset Plate in Shear – block tearing check
Check for tension capacity
Check for Shear Resistance
Bolt Group
Check for Bearing Resistance on Gusset Plate
on Gusset
Plate Check for Bearing Resistance on the inclined
truss member
5.6.2 Beam-Column connection
This connection is needed to transfer the axial forces coming from the bottom chord
member and inclined truss element to the column member. “Detail D” mentioned in
Figure 23 is representing the simple Beam-Column connection which have been de-
tailed in Figure 34. The load is transferring from the bottom chord of the member to the
column through endplate connection. Similarly, the load coming from the inclined truss
element is transferred to the column by simple gusset plate connection. The load com-
ing from the inclined truss member is transferred as both horizontal and vertical loads

through the gusset plate and these loads act as shear on the gusset plate. Welded
connection is designed between the gusset and column-beam.
Figure 34: Beam-Column connection details

The Figure 35 shows the simple end plate connection where the plate is welded to the
web of the beam member and this whole is connected to the supported column mem-
ber with the help of bolts. The resistance of both the end plate and the bolt is required
to be verified under compression and tension forces coming from the bottom chord of
the hangar roof structure. The necessary checks for the safe design of endplate con-
nection according to Eurocode are mentioned in Table 13. End, edge and pitch dis-
tances are provided according to the Table 3.3 of Eurocode EN 1993-1-8 [43]. Design

verification of steel members (like plates, column and beam) at connection is per-
formed according to the Eurocode EN 1993-1-1 [22]. Rstab software is used to perform
the connection design with the help of “Joints – Design of joints” add-on module and
verified manually. Figure 36 represents general connection failure details.
Figure 35: Simple Beam-Column endplate connection [47]
Table 13: Checks for Beam-Column & inclined roof element connection [36]
Element Checks
Recommended detailing practice (edge and end distanc-
es, pitch distance)
End Plate
Supported beam – Welds
Tying Resistance under tension (T-stub)
Bolt group on Check for Tension Capacity of Bolt Group
end plate
Check for Resistance of web against compression
Column Member
Check Tying resistance of web under Tension (T-stub)
Recommended detailing practice
Gusset Plate in Shear – gross section check
Gusset Plate Gusset Plate in Shear – net section check
Gusset Plate in Shear – block tearing check
Check for tension capacity
Check for Shear Resistance
Bolt Group on Check for Bearing Resistance on Gusset Plate
Gusset Plate
Check for Bearing Resistance on the inclined truss
member
Inclined Truss Check for Block tearing capacity
Member

Figure 36: Practical examples of connection failure [47]
5.6.3 Connection of Ropes to Steel member
The “Detail C” represented in Figure 23 shows the arrangement of three ropes which
are connected to the steel column member. The clear details of this connection are
presented in Figure 37. The fatigue resistant open splitter sockets are used as a con-
nection interface between the ropes and the structural steel member. Dimensions and
technical details of open splitter socket, as well as the thickness of plate used to con-
nect the splitter sockets are taken from the PFEIFER catalogue [33].

Figure 37: Ropes to Column connection details

Here in this connection detail it shows three ropes (Figure 38) of “PV 90” which are
connected at the same location of the column member at one end and it’s connected to
the top of the top chord member of the roof truss on the another end (Figure 39). The
T-shaped plate is used for the connection between the column member and ropes.
This simple bolted connection between plate member to the column member has
performed manually. For verification purpose, Rstab add-on module “Joints – Design of
joints” is used. The necessary checks which has been performed to verify the bolt re-
sistance under the applied loads are mentioned in Table 14.

Figure 38: Simple connection of rod system [48]
Figure 39: Connection of Tension Rod on top of Beam [47]
Table 14: Checks for T-shaped Plate connection [36]
Element Checks
Recommended detailing practice (edge and end dis-
tances, pitch distance)
Tying Resistance under tension (T-stub in tension)
Bearing Capacity of Plate
Plate
Plate in Shear – gross section check
Plate in Shear – net section check
Plate in Shear – block tearing check
Check for in-plane bending
Check for Tension Capacity of Bolt Group
Bolt group on end plate Check for Shear Capacity of Bolt group
Check for Bearing Capacity of bolt
Check for Bearing Capacity of column
Column Member
Check Tying resistance of web under Tension (T-stub)

5.7 Hangar Door System

One of the most important parts of the hangar structure is Hangar door. The efficient
door system should be functional, weather tight, long lasting, safe and moreover that
should be economical. There are mainly four different types of door systems are avail-
able in the market for long span structures.
1) Sliding doors: -
This door slides horizontally on rollers. These doors facilities to open entire
opening once or a portion of opening at a time. The advantages of this system
are weight of doors directly transferred to ground, safe and easy construction.
Sometimes those rolling tracks are jammed and need to clean. This system can
operate both manually and electrically [49]. Figure 40 shows the Horizontal slid-
ing door arrangement for an aircraft hangar structure.
Figure 40: Horizontal Sliding Hangar Doors [49]

2) Vertical fold doors: -
These doors are folded vertically with the help of electrized motors and provide
an opening. This type of door system is mainly suitable for short span struc-
tures. These doors are low cost and good aesthetic view. The disadvantage of
this system is the weight of door system leaves on hangar structure [50]. Figure
41 represents the vertical folding door system for an aircraft hangar structure.
Figure 41: Vertical folding Hangar Doors – PVC Fabric [50]

3) Bi-Folding doors: -
Bi-Folding doors (Figure 42) are vertical opening doors by folding each other.
Here two door leaves are connected by hinges at the middle. Door leaves have
folded each other by compressing these connected hinges. Bi-Folding doors
are costlier and not suitable for long span structures. Door weight needs to car-
ry by hangar structure [51].
Figure 42: Bi-Folding Hangar Doors [51]

4) Hydraulic hangar door: -
This door system also works by providing a vertical opening. Here only single
leaf of the door is folded up with the help of hydraulic rams. This type of hangar
door system also not suitable for structure required large openings. Excessive
cost of execution. Manual operation is not possible during a functional problem
with the Hydraulics [51]. Figure 43 shows the hydraulic hangar door arrange-
ment.
Figure 43: Hydraulic Hangar Doors [51]

By considering the typical parameters such as economy of door system, operational

efficiency and load on the structure due to doors, horizontal sliding door system is
adopted for hangar Structure.
5.8 Roof and sidewall cladding

The purpose of cladding system in the structure is to transfer the loads due to atmos-
pheric actions and the roof maintenance loads to the secondary structural components
such as purlins or side runners. This cladding provides structural rigidity to the second-
ary structural components. The proper arrangement of the cladding should provide
adequate thermal insulation, acoustic insulation and it should act as airtight envelope.
Cladding system separates the fully enclosed area of the building from the external
environment [52]. Generally cladding is composed with four major components. Those
are Liner sheet, Bar-bracket, Insulation material and Weather sheet. The components
and arrangement of roof and sidewall cladding is shown in Figure 44 and Figure 45.
Figure 44: Built-up double skin Roof cladding [52]
Figure 45: Built-up double skin Sidewall cladding [53]

The Liner sheet is shallow trapezoidal profile made with steel or aluminum material and
is the first installation component of cladding system. The main purpose of this liner
sheet is to provide support to the thermal insulation, provide airtight layer and provides
lateral restraint to secondary structural components [52]. The typical profile of liner
sheet available in the market shown in Figure 46.
Figure 46: Liner sheet profile [52]
The Weather sheet is the topmost part of the cladding system (Figure 44). This Weath-
er sheeting is also shallow trapezoidal profile made with steel or aluminum like Liner
sheet, but the thickness of sheeting is different. The main purpose of this sheeting is to
provide weather-tight seal to structure. This is the member directly carrying the load
from wind and snow actions and transferring through remaining cladding material to the
secondary structural component. So, this should show sufficient resistance to the bend-
ing and deflection due to load actions. The thickness of Weather sheeting majorly de-
pends on the span between the purlins. The typical profile of the Weather sheet is
shown in Figure 47.
Figure 47: Weather sheet profile [52]

The Mineral wool quilt is used as thermal insulation material and placed between the
Weather sheet and liner sheet. The purpose of the insulating material is to act as a
barrier between two heat conducting material. The main reasons for selecting Mineral
wool quilt as insulating material are low cost, lightweight, low thermal conductivity and
easy handling [52]. Generally, this insulation material available as compressed rolls for
easy transportation and when unroll this, it expands to required thickness to fill the
space between the Built-up sheet. The thickness of the insulating material depends on
the heat conductive requirement. This gap (space) between the Weather sheet and
Liner sheet provides with the help of Spacer system. The typical arrangement of this
Spacer system shown in Figure 48. This system mainly comprised with Bar and Sway
bracket. This Spacer system provides support to the Weather sheet. This spacer sys-
tem should have sufficient stiffness to transfer the loads coming from the Weather
sheet to the purlins.
Figure 48: Bar-Bracket Spacer System [52]
5.9 General Arrangement of Adjacent Buildings

Along with the hangar structure design, a preliminary draft of general arrangement
drawing for a multi-storey office and workshop complex as well as a single-storey stor-
age area need to be carried out. Figure 49 clearly explains the provided dimensions for
the adjacent buildings and storage area. The length and width of the single-storey stor-
age area are 9.25 m and 43.77 m respectively. The required area for the single-storey
storage area is equal to approximately 350 sq. m and the available area for the single-
storey storage purpose is 400 sq. m approximately. Similarly, the required area for the
multi-storey office and workshop complex together is approximately 750 sq. m. The
available area for the construction of both multi-storey office and workshop complex is
approximately 770 sq. m with dimensions of 9.25 m length and 83.73 m width. The
central offices of the hangar structure are planned in the basement of the office com-
plex as well as the social and office rooms are planned in the level 1 and 2 of the
complex building. The ground floor is used for workshop and storage area.

Figure 49: General Arrangement Drawing – Hangar Structure
5.10 Deflections
Deflections is the criteria which helps to assess the stability of the structure. In the in-
dustrial buildings deflection should be within the limit to resist the failure of claddings
and fixings. The excess deformation of structure cause accumulation of rain water and
snow on low pitched roofs and it causes increase of load on the structure. Excessive
sagging and noticeable deflections of the roof structure leave the impact on columns
and supporting walls by developing cracks. These deformations cause damage to the
monorails and gantry girders. The elastic deformation of structural members is calcu-
lated under serviceability (serviceability limit states) conditions according to Eurocode
EN 1990 [14]. The limits for the deflection of the structure is not mentioned in any code
of practices and it should be considered according to practice, experience and judge-
ment of the engineer. The maximum vertical deflection limit is considered as
span(L)/200 according to the journals and surveys conducted by University of Queens-
land [54, 55]. The maximum vertical deflections values are taken from the Rstab soft-
ware and Figure 50 shows the roof deflected shape. Maximum vertical deflection of
hangar roof structure is 413.3 mm under the serviceability load combination “G + Q i H +
0.5Q s”.
Clear span (L) = 125 m
Limited vertical deflection = 125000/200 = 625 mm > 413.3 mm

Hence, the hangar structure is stable and showing safe deflections due to applied
loads in serviceability criteria.
Figure 50: Deflected shape of hangar structure
5.11 Visualization of Hangar Structure

The visualization of aircraft hangar structure is carried out with the help of Tekla pro-
gram and Rstab software. Tekla software enables visualization of structural steel
members in 3D. This is also one of the computerized drafting tool, often used for de-
veloping the structural drawings. The visualization of hangar structure is shown in Fig-

ure 51. Here, this visualization mainly concentrated on the load bearing structure of the
hangar.
Figure 51: Visualization of Hangar Structure

6 Conclusion
In this project, the analysis and design of an aircraft hangar structure for the mainte-
nance purpose of Airbus A 320 and Boing 737 is performed according to Eurocodes
and their respective German National annexures. The clear dimensions of the hangar
structure are 78 m long (13 bays of each 6 m length), 125 m width and 21 m height.
A structure is analyzed by its Stability, Strength and Stiffness (SSS). This aircraft
maintenance hangar structure is designed based on criteria which fulfil the stability
under service loads and at the same time being durable, safe and economical. To
achieve economy and feasibility pertaining to the structural arrangement under all ob-
jective conditions (such as approximately 10,000 sq. m maintenance area, at least 45
m door opening, and clear height of hangar should not less than 20m) for the hangar
structure, three typologically different roof structural arrangements are analyzed in or-
der to arrive at a preliminary design of a hangar structure. The following are the prelim-
inary designs considered based on their stability criteria for their utility in the long-span
structures:
1. Conventional roof truss for long-span structures
2. Trapezoidal lattice girder roof stabilized by cables
3. Arch roof truss structure
In comparison with other preliminary designs, Trapezoidal lattice girder roof stabilized
by cables is chosen for the final design owing to its advantages over other two struc-
tural arrangements. The advantages are as follows.
- the decrease in the structural steel quantity
- safe transfer of loads to the foundation through proper cable arrangement
- achieving stiffness of roof even with less depth of roof structure
- less uplift force on sub-base structure compared with the arch roof truss struc-
ture but noticeable shear on the foundation when compared with conventional
roof truss structural arrangement.
Material selection is done based on strength class (s355) decided according to the load
intensity on the members. The strength of the rope is considered according to the
PFEIFER catalogue [33]. According to the design requirements and objective condi-
tions, the provided height of the hangar structure is 26.5 m. High compressive stresses
develop in the structural members because of the large column-free area. Columns
and chord members of roof truss are provided with I-sections due to their high re-
sistance to buckling under axial compression. Members are provided in the transverse
direction (78m) to resist the buckling of the mainframe in the lateral direction. Bracings
are provided to transfer the horizontal wind loads on the structure to the foundation.
Three typical connections such as column base connection, column-beam connection
and the connection of ropes to steel column are designed and calculated according to
Eurocode. All these connections are designed as the bolted connections. Hangar door
system is selected in such way to provide a large door opening to hangar structure, to
facilitate the simultaneous entry of more aircrafts at a time. Horizontal sliding door sys-
tem is adopted for the hangar door, as it does not influence the structural design. It can

also be operated both manually and automatically. The mineral wool quilt is used as a
thermal insulating material for roof and sidewall cladding because of its features such
as light weightiness, high thermal insulation, low cost and adaptability.
Multi-storey office and workshop complex, as well as a single-storey storage area, are
provided as per the required area and the dimensions of the structures are outlined in
the technical drawing. Preliminary designs, final design and construction details (com-
ponents and joints. Etc.) are drafted using drawing tool and a 3d visualization of the
structure is presented.

7 Lists
7.1 List of abbreviations

PEB Pre-Engineered Metal Building
BSS Beam String System
ULS Ultimate Limit States
SLS Serviceability Limit States
2D Two Dimensional
3D Three Dimensional
DL Dead Load
IL Imposed Load
SL Snow Load
WL Wind Load
7.2 List of symbols

𝑞𝑘 uniformly distributed imposed load
𝑠 characteristic snow load on roof
𝑠𝑘 characteristic snow load on ground
𝐶𝑒 exposure coefficient
𝜇𝑖 snow load shape coefficient
𝐶𝑡 thermal coefficient
𝐴 altitude of the site in meters
𝑞𝑝 peak velocity pressure
𝑞𝑏,0 basic velocity pressure
𝑐𝑝𝑒 external pressure coefficient
𝑐𝑝𝑖 internal pressure coefficient
𝑊𝑝 wind pressure
𝛾𝐺,𝑗 , 𝛾𝑝 , 𝛾𝑄,1 partial safety factors
Ψ factor
𝑃 pre-stressing force
𝐺𝑘,𝑗 Permanent load
𝑄𝑘,𝑖 variable load

𝑁𝐸𝐷 design value of compression force

𝑁𝑐,𝑅𝑑 design resistance of cross-section
𝐴 gross cross-sectional area

𝛾𝑀,0 , 𝛾𝑀,1 partial safety factor
𝑓𝑦 yield strength of member
𝑃𝑐𝑟 critical buckling load

𝐼 second moment of area
𝐸 modulus of elasticity
𝐿 length of the member
𝐾 effective length factor
𝑁𝑏,𝑅𝑑 design buckling resistance
χ reduction factor
𝜆 non-dimensional slenderness
𝐿𝑐𝑟 buckling length in buckling plane
𝑖 radius of gyration
𝐹𝐸𝑑 design value of axial rope force
𝐹𝑅𝑑 design value of tension resistance
𝐹𝑢𝑘 characteristic value of the breaking strength
𝛾𝑅 partial factor
𝐹𝑘 characteristic value of proof strength of tension component
𝑓𝑆𝐿𝑆 stress limit for service condition
𝜎𝑢𝑘 ultimate tensile strength
𝜎𝐸𝐷 design tensile strength
𝐺 Dead load
𝑄𝑖 𝐻 Imposed load on roof
𝑄𝑠 Snow Load
𝑄𝑤 Wind Load
7.3 List of figures

Figure 1: Aircraft Maintenance Hangar [1]..................................................................... 1
Figure 2: Docking system [4]......................................................................................... 2
Figure 3: Pre-Engineered Hangar Structure [8] ............................................................. 4

Figure 4: Lattice Frame assembly for Large Span structures [9] ................................... 4
Figure 5: Space trusses for Long span hangar structure [10] ........................................ 5
Figure 6: Retractable roof – Beam String Structure [11] ................................................ 6
Figure 7: Girder with top and bottom chord arched [12] ................................................ 7
Figure 8: Hangar Structure – Northwest Airlines, Duluth, MN [13] ................................. 7
Figure 9: Diagram showing EQU, GEO, STR, FAT limit states [21]............................. 12
Figure 10: Conventional roof truss for long span structure .......................................... 16
Figure 11: Preliminary Design 1 – Technical Drawing indicating the structure............. 19
Figure 12: Buckling of compression member [31] ....................................................... 21
Figure 13: In-plane & Out-of-plane Buckling of member [31] ....................................... 21
Figure 14: Trapezoidal Lattice Girder roof stabilized by Cables .................................. 24
Figure 16: Types of Cables [33, 35] ............................................................................ 26
Figure 17: Fully Locked Coil rope - Surface [33] ......................................................... 27
Figure 18: Arch Roof truss structure ........................................................................... 29
Figure 20: Available dimensions for hangar structure (site view) ................................. 34
Figure 21: Floor Plan at Ground – Aircraft Hangar Structure ....................................... 35
Figure 22: Rstab Model – Final Design ....................................................................... 36
Figure 23: Main Frame Details – Aircraft Hangar Structure ......................................... 37
Figure 24: Roof Truss Details – Aircraft Hangar Structure .......................................... 38
Figure 25: Roof Plan at Bottom Chord Level ............................................................... 39
Figure 26: Vertical Bracings system to inner columns ................................................. 40
Figure 27: Vertical Bracings system to outer columns ................................................. 40
Figure 28: Gable End Frame Details ........................................................................... 42
Figure 29: Example of Single-span(a) and continuous-span Purlin laps(b) [41]........... 43
Figure 30: Common Purlin Sections [40] ..................................................................... 44
Figure 31: General arrangement of Side runners, Sag rod and Tension wires [30] ..... 44
Figure 32: Typical components of column base connection [45, 46] ........................... 45
Figure 33: Column base connection details ................................................................ 46
Figure 34: Beam-Column connection details ............................................................... 48
Figure 35: Simple Beam-Column endplate connection [47] ......................................... 49
Figure 36: Practical examples of connection failure [47] ............................................. 50

Figure 37: Ropes to Column connection details .......................................................... 51

Figure 38: Simple connection of rod system [48]......................................................... 52
Figure 39: Connection of Tension Rod on top of Beam [47] ........................................ 52
Figure 40: Horizontal Sliding Hangar Doors [49] ......................................................... 53
Figure 41: Vertical folding Hangar Doors – PVC Fabric [50]........................................ 53
Figure 42: Bi-Folding Hangar Doors [51] ..................................................................... 54
Figure 43: Hydraulic Hangar Doors [51] ...................................................................... 54
Figure 44: Built-up double skin Roof cladding [52] ...................................................... 55
Figure 45: Built-up double skin Sidewall cladding [53]................................................. 55
Figure 46: Liner sheet profile [52] ............................................................................... 56
Figure 47: Weather sheet profile [52] .......................................................................... 56
Figure 48: Bar-Bracket Spacer System [52] ................................................................ 57
Figure 49: General Arrangement Drawing – Hangar Structure .................................... 58
Figure 50: Deflected shape of hangar structure .......................................................... 59
Figure 51: Visualization of Hangar Structure ............................................................... 60
7.4 List of tables

Table 1: Dimensions of Aircraft [3] ................................................................................ 3
Table 2: Snow load shape coefficients .......................................................................... 9
Table 3: Characteristic value of snow load 𝒔𝒌 on the ground [17]................................ 10
Table 4: Basic velocity pressure ................................................................................. 11
Table 5: Factors for design combinations at ULS & SLS ............................................. 14
Table 6: Cross-sectional properties of Preliminary Design - 1 ..................................... 20
Table 7: Cross-sectional properties of Preliminary Design - 2 ..................................... 24
Table 8: Cross-sectional properties of Preliminary - 3 ................................................. 29
Table 9: Quantity of Structural Steel for all Preliminary Designs ................................. 31
Table 10: Support reactions of all Preliminary Designs ............................................... 32
Table 11: Member properties of Hangar Structure – Final Design ............................... 37
Table 12: Checks for Column Base connection [36] .................................................... 47
Table 13: Checks for Beam-Column & inclined roof element connection [36] ............. 49
Table 14: Checks for T-shaped Plate connection [36] ................................................. 52

8 References
[1] Monarch Aircraft Hangar, "Johnsiskandson.com," [Online]. Available:

https://www.johnsiskandson.com/uk/expertise/aviation/monarch-aircraft-hangar-
birmingham-airport. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[2] ESDEP Course, “Fgg-web.fgg.uni-lj.si,” [Online]. Available: http://fgg-

web.fgg.uni-lj.si/~/pmoze/esdep/master/wg01b/l0520.htm#SEC_1. [Accessed 07
Febraury 2018].
[3] G. S. Ramaswamy, “Review of Recent Trends in the Planning, Analysis, Design

and Construction of Space Frame Roofs for Aircraft Hangars,” International
Journal of Space Structures, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 159-166, 1999.
[4] Aircraft Docking, "Japanese.mobiletowerscaffold.com," [Online]. Available:

http://www.mobiletowerscaffold.com/sale-2384659-front-windshield-radome-
aircraft-scaffolding-for-aircraft-maintenance-nose-dock.html. [Accessed 07
Febraury 2018].
[5] Whirlwindsteel, “7 Advantages of Structural Steel Frame Construction,”

Whirlwindsteel.com, [Online]. Available:
https://www.whirlwindsteel.com/blog/bid/407580/7-advantages-of-structural-
steel-frame-construction. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[6] Advantages of Structural Steel Frame Construction, “articleneed.com,” 27

November 2017. [Online]. Available: http://articleneed.com/advantages-of-
structural-steel-frame-construction/. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[7] A. M. Kadam and R. S. Talikoti, “Aircraft Hangar Design - Pre-Engineered

Building,” International Journal of Modern Trends in Engineering and Research,
vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 522-526, April 2016.
[8] MSC Metal Structure Concepts, “5 Reasons Pre Engineered Metal Buildings
Make Good Airplane Hangars,” 01 March 2016. [Online]. Available:
http://www.mscsteel.com/blog/5-reasons-pre-engineered-metal-buildings-good-
airplane-hangars.html. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[9] M. Masani and Y. D. Patil, “Large Span Lattice Frame Industrial Roof Structure,”
IOSR Journal of Mechanical and civil Engineering, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 01-07, Jan
- Feb 2015.
[10] G. S. Ramaswamy, M. Eekhout and G. R. Suresh, Analysis, Design and

Construction of Steel Space Frames, London: The authors and Thomas Telford
Limited , 2002.
[11] J. Cai, J. Feng and C. Jiang, “Development and analysis of a long-span

retractable roof structure,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 92, pp.

175-182, 2014.
[12] N. Antoniou, T. Nikolaidis and C. C. Baniotopoulos, “Designing long-span steel

girders by applying displacement control concepts,” Engineering Structures, vol.
59, pp. 21-27, 2014.
[13] C. Sofronio and P. E. Mendez, “A Fresh Look At Hangar Design,” Modern Steel
Construction, May 1997.
[14] EN 1990, Eurocode - Basics of Structural design, 2002.
[15] EN 1991-1-1, Eurocode 1 : Actions on Structures - Part 1-1 : General actions -

Densities, self-weight, Imposed loads for buildings, 2002.
[16] EN 1991-1-3, Eurocode 1 : Actions on structures - Part 1-3 : General actions -

Snow loads, 2003.
[17] DIN EN 1991-1-3/NA, National Annex to Eurocode 1 : Actions on structures -

Part 1-3 : General actions - Snow loads, 2010.
[18] EN 1991-1-4, Eurocode 1 : Actions on structures - Part 1-4 : General actions -

wind actions, 2005.
[19] DIN EN 1991-1-4/NA, National Annex to Eurocode 1 : Actions on structures -

Part 1-4 : General actions - Wind actions, 2010.
[20] DIN EN 1990/NA, National Annex to Eurocode - Basics of Structural design,

2010.
[21] J. A. Calgaro, EN 1990: Eurocode - Basis of structural design.
[22] EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures - Part 1-1 : General rules
and rules for buildings, 2005.
[23] DIN EN 1993-1-1/NA, National Annex to Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures

- Part 1-1 : General rules and rules for buildings, 2017.
[24] EN 1993-1-10, Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures - Part 1-10 : Material

toughness and through-thickness properties, 2005.
[25] EN 1993-1-11, Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures - Part 1-11 : Design of

structures with tension components, 2006.
[26] DIN EN 12385-4, National annex to Steel wire ropes - Safety - Part 4 : Stranded
ropes for general lifting applications, 2008.
[27] DIN EN 12385-10, National annex to Steel wire ropes - Safety - Part 10 : Spiral
ropes for general structural applications, 2008.
[28] Dlubal Software, “RSTAB - Structural Frame & Truss Analysis Software,” Dlubal,
[Online]. Available: https://www.dlubal.com/en/products/rstab-beam-
structures/what-is-rstab. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].

[29] K.-J. Schneider und A. Goris, Bautabellen für Ingenieure mit

Berechnungshinweisen und Beispielen, 22nd Hrsg., Köln: Bundesanzeiger
Verlag GmbH, 2016.
[30] D. M. Koschmidder and D. G. Brown, Elastic Design of Single-Span Steel Portal

Frame Buildings to Eurocode 3, Berkshire: SCI, 2012.
[31] Coursehero, “Compression Member Design,” [Online]. Available:

https://www.coursehero.com/file/6944816/CE470-CompressionDesign-1/.
[Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[32] N. Subramanian, Steel Structures Design and Practice, New Delhi: Oxford
University Press , 2010.
[33] PFEIFER, “www.pfeifer.com,” SEIL-UND HEBETECHNIK GmbH, 10 2015.

[Online]. Available:
https://www.pfeifer.de/fileadmin/user_upload/DE_doc/seilbau_doc/download/kat
alog/Prospekt_Zugglieder_de-en.pdf. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[34] DIN EN 1993-1-11/NA, National Annex to Eurocode 3 : Design of steel

structures - Part 1-11 : Design of structures with tension components, 2010.
[35] H. Svensson, Cable-Stayed Bridges. 40 Years of Experience Worldwide., Ernst

& Sohn GmbH, 2012.
[36] Tata Steel, Joints in Steel Construction, Simple Joints to Eurocode, London: The
Steel Construction and The British Constructional Steel Association, 2014.
[37] K. M. Ghosh, Practical Design of Steel Structures, Scotland, UK: Whittles

Publishing, 2010.
[38] W. T. Segui, Steel Design, Fourth Edition, Thomas Canada Limited.
[39] S. S. Ray, Structural SteelWork, Analysis and Design, London: Blackwell

Science L.td, 1998.
[40] The Southern African Institute of Steel Construction, “Introduction to Economics

of Structural Steelwork,” 1st ed., Johannsburg, The Southern African Institute of
Steel Construction, 2001.
[41] A. Newman, Metal Building Systems Design and Specifications, 2nd ed., New
Delhi: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2004.
[42] L. S. Muir and W. A. Thomton, Structural Steel Designer's Handbook, 3rd ed., R.
L. Brockenbrough and F. S. Merritt, Eds., New Delhi: McGraw-Hill Companies,
1999.
[43] EN 1993-1-8, Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures - Part 1-8 : Design of

joints, 2005.
[44] DIN EN 1993-1-8/NA, National Annex to Eurocode 3 : Design of steel structures

- Part 1-8 : Design of joints, 2010.
[45] J. M. Fisher and L. A. Kloiber, Base Plate and Anchor Rod Design, 2nd ed.,
American Institute of Steel Construction, 2006.
[46] I. Gomez, C. Smith, A. Kanvinde and G. Deierlein, “Shear Transfer in Exposed

Column Base Plates,” American Institute of Steel Construction, 2009.
[47] P. S. Green, T. Sputo and P. Veltri, A Teaching Guide for Structural Steel
Connections, American Institute of Steel Construction.
[48] Arch Expo, “Facade steel cable / for tensile structures / for interior fittings /
stainless steel - I-SYS - Carl Stahl ARC GmbH,” 2018. [Online]. Available:
http://www.archiexpo.com/prod/carl-stahl-arc-gmbh/product-85704-783242.html.
[Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[49] Butzbach GmbH Industrietore, "Butzbach-hangardoors.com," [Online]. Available:

http://www.butzbach-hangardoors.com/en/home. [Accessed 07 Febraury 2018].
[50] Shipyarddoor, "Aircraft Hangar Door - PVC Fabric Flexible Giant," [Online].
Available: http://www.shipyarddoor.com/aircraft-hangar-door/. [Accessed 07
Febraury 2018].
[51] Aero.Door, "Doors: Aircraft Hangar Doors, Manufactured, Installed, Serviced or

Repaired," [Online]. Available: http://hangardoors.aero/bifold-doors/. [Accessed
07 Febraury 2018].
[52] M. D. Heywood, Best Practice for the specification and Installation of Metal
Cladding and Secondary Steelwork, Ascot: The Steel Construction Institute,
2006.
[53] Steelconstruction.info, “Building Envelopes,” [Online]. Available:

https://www.steelconstruction.info/Building_envelopes. [Accessed 07 Febraury
2018].
[54] S. T. Woolcock and S. Kitipornchai, “Survey of Deflection Limits for Portal

Frames in Australia,” J. Construct. Steel Research, no. 7, pp. 399-417, 1987.
[55] NCCI, Practical deflection limits for single storey building, Access Steel, 2013.

9 Appendix/Appendices
9.1 Appendix A (CD-R)

A01 - Rstab Models of Preliminary Designs
A02 - Rstab Models of Final Design
A03 - Design Protocol for Preliminary Designs
A04 - Design Protocol for Final Design
A05 - Technical Drawings
A06 - Project report
A07 - Visualization of Hangar Structure
A08 - References
A09 - Load Calculation Excels
9.2 Appendix B
B01 - Load on Main Frame
B02 - Load on Gable End Frame Column
B03 - Load on Hangar Outer Column
B04 - Load on Hangar Inner Column
B05 - Load on Purlin
B06 - Load on Side runner
B07 - Rope Design Calculations
B08 - Technical Drawings
S01 – Preliminary Designs - Technical Drawing
S02 & S03 – Final Design - Technical Drawing

B01 - Load on Main Frame
consider slope = 2 degree

arranging purlins at every 5 meters
length of the span = 125 m
clear height of the structure= 21 m
eve height = 2.18144 m
considered eve height = 2.5 m
total height of structure = 26.5 m
Therefore, slope of roof= 2.29422 degree
Dead load
length of each bay = 6 m
distance between purlins= 5 m
unit weight of roof or wall cladding = 15 kg/m2
(purlin unit weight not considered)
30 kg/m2
(with inclusive of purlins)
load on each frame = 180 kg/m
load on each node = 900 kg
9 kN
Imposed load
According to EN 1991-1-1 [2], table 6.9
Imposed load on roof = 0.4 kN/m2
load on each frame= 2.4 kN/m
load on each node= 12 kN
Snow load
snow zone = 1 for Düsseldorf Airport
characteristic snow load= 0.3 kN/m2 for zone 1
(Central East-Euro code formula)
0.65 kN/m2 (according national annex)
maximum of above two should consider for snow load calculation
roof inclination= 2.29422
According to Eurocode EN 1991-1-3
snow load s= u1*Ce*C1*sk
here u1= 0.8
Ce= 1
C1= 1
snow load s= 0.52 kN/m2
load on each frame= 3.12 kN/m
load on each node= 15.6 kN
Wind Load
according to class N. A. B. 1 (2) of National annex DIN EN 1991-1-4/NA - There are
four terrain categories according to table NA.B.1 and two mixed profiles. The mixed
profile coastal describes the conditions in a transition area between the terrain category
I and II. The mixed profile inland describes the conditions in a transitional area between
the terrain category II and III. The peak velocity pressure values for terrain categories
calculated from Table NA. B. 2 and peak velocity pressure values for two mixed profiles
calculated from class NA.B.3.2

NA.B.3.2 Simplified assumptions for peak velocity pressure on structures up to a height

of 25 m above ground
(1) For structures extending at altitudes up to 25 m above ground, the speed pressure
may be assumed to be constant throughout the building height for the sake of simplicity.
The corresponding velocity pressures are given in Table NA.B.3 for the 4 wind zones
according to Annex NA.A.
(2) The values given in Table NA.B.3 for the coast apply to coastal areas in a strip
along the 5 km wide coast inland and on the islands of the Baltic Sea. On the islands of
the North Sea, the simplified procedure is only permitted up to a building height of 10 m.
For higher buildings, see NA.B.3.3.
Note: it means the height up to 25m, the peak velocity pressure qp calculate from table
NA. B. 3 and over 25m qp calculate from NA. B. 3. 3
Anhang NA.A - A.1(1)
Wind zone vb,0 in m/s qb,0 in kN/m2

1 22.5 0.32
2 25 0.39
3 27.5 0.47
4 30 0.56
basic wind velocity:

vb = Cdir . Cseason. vb, 0 .......EN. 1991-1-4 – 4.2(2)
where:
Cdir is directional factor = 1.0
Cseason is season factor = 1.0
vb, 0 is fundamental value of basic wind velocity
qb = 1/2. ρ .vb2(z) * 10-3
Considering our construction area is belongs wind zone 2 and mixed profile inland de-
scribes the conditions in a transitional area between the terrain category II and III
Structure height is less than 25m
height up to 10m
qp = 0.65 kN/m2 Tabelle NA.B.3
height from 10 m to 18 m
Structure height is greater than 25m

height upto 7m (including 7)

qp = 1.5 * qb kN/m2 (NA.B.1)
2
0.585 kN/m
height from 7m to 50m
qp = 1.7* qb*(z/10)0.37 kN/m2 (NA.B.2)
Consider height of structure (z) = 28 m
qp = 0.970 kN/m2
Wind Pressure:
Wp = (cpe ± cpi) * qp
Internal pressure coefficient values taking as most onerous values because we
do not have proper information about openings of a structure.
cpi = 0.2 -0.3
Wind load on surface of wall

h/d = 0.208
External pressure coefficients from EN. 1991. 1. 4 – table 7.1
D: cpe = 0.7
E: cpe= -0.3
consider bay length = 6 m
Wind pressure calculations for the structure height less than 25m
Wind Pressure: Wp = (cpe ± cpi) * qp * bay length
upto 10m
D: Wp = 2.73 kN/m
E: Wp = -1.95 kN/m
D: Wp = 3.36 kN/m
E: Wp = -2.400 kN/m
D: Wp = 3.78 kN/m
E: Wp = -2.7 kN/m
Wind pressure calculations for the structure height greater than 25m

height upto 7m (including 7)
D: Wp = 2.457 kN/m
E: Wp = -1.755 kN/m
height from 7m to 50m
D: Wp = 4.076 kN/m
E: Wp = -2.911 kN/m

Wind load on roof

here roof angle is 2 degrees, so it comes under flat roofs
h/d = 0.208
External pressure coefficients from EN 1991-1-4 – table 7.2
F & G: cpe = -1
H: cpe= -0.3
I: cpe= -0.2
considered bay length = 6 m
Wind pressure calculations for the structure height less than 25m
F & G: Wp = -6.48 kN/m

H: Wp = -2.7 kN/m
I: Wp = -2.16 kN/m

F & G: Wp = -6.987 kN/m
H: Wp = -2.911 kN/m
I: Wp = -2.329 kN/m
external pressure coefficients for curved roof structures according to class 7.2.8 of Eu-
rocode
h/d = 23/125 = 0.184
f/d = 5/125 0.04
A: cpe -0.268
B: cpe -0.72
C: cpe -0.58

A: Wp = -2.725 kN/m
B: Wp = -5.357 kN/m
C: Wp = -4.542 kN/m

B02 - Load on Gabble End Frame Columns

Spacing = 5 m
Height = 20 m
Dead Load
0.1
self-weight of sheeting, insulation, fixtures = 5 kN/m2
dead load per meter height of column = 0.75 kN/m
dead load = 15 kN
Wind load
wind pressure = Wp = (cpe ± cpi) * qp
Peak velocity pressulre considering from the wind load calculations
External pressure coefficient values considered from table 7.1 of
EN 1993-1-4
External pressure coefficient cpe = 0.7
(when wind blowing perpendicular to gabble frame)
External pressure coefficient cpe = -0.8
(when wind blowing parallel to gabble frame)
Internal Pressure coefficient cpi = 0.2
Peak velocity pressure qp = 0.9 kN/m2
Wind load/meter length of column in X = 3.15 kN/m
Wind load/meter length of column in Y= -4.5 kN/m
Wind load = -90 kN
Design of Gable column member is carried out with the help of Rstab software.
Proceeding with software reduces the section economisation time.
B03 - Load on Hangar Outer Column
Spacing = 2.5 m
(distance between inner and outer columns)
Wind load calculation

Peak velocity pressure considering from the wind load calculations
External pressure coefficient values considered from table 7.1 of EN 1993-1-4
When wind blowing perpendicular to gabble frame
When wind blowing parallel to gabble frame
Wind load/meter length of column in X = 0.7875 kN/m
Wind load/meter length of column in Y= -1.575 kN/m

B04 – Load on Hangar Inner Column
Spacing = 2.5 m
(distance between inner and outer columns)
Wind load calculation

Peak velocity pressulre considering from the wind load calculations
External pressure coefficient values considered from table 7.1 of
EN 1993-1-4
External pressure coeffi-
cient cpe = 0.7
External pressure coeffi-
cient cpe = -1.2
Internal Pressure coeffi-
cient cpi = 0.2
Wind load/meter length of column = 0.7875 kN/m
Wind load/meter length of column = -1.575 kN/m
Here the wind load from all the gable columns are transferred to this inner column
through the horizontal wind bracings
Therefore, the reactions coming from this horizontal bracing is applied on the inner
column
When wind blows perpendicular to gable frame
load coming from middle gable column = -31.5 kN
load coming from end gable column = -15.75 kN
total number of intermediate columns = 25
Support reaction on the inner column = -409.5 kN
When wind blows parallel to gable frame
load coming from middle gable column = 45 kN
load coming from end gable column = 22.5 kN
total number of intermediate columns = 25
Support reaction on the inner column = 585 kN
Here negative indicates compression and positive sign indicates tension
B05 - Load on Purlin

Span = 6 m
Spacing between purlins = 5 m
This 5 m spacing was considered because of the distance between nodes on
top chord of roof truss is equal to 5 m. This kind of loading helps to avoid de-
velopment of any local bending moment in the top chord due to eccentrical
loading and provides lateral support to the top chord at regular intervals.

Dead Load
self-weight of roof sheeting, insulation, fixtures = 0.15 kN/m2
dead load per meter length = 0.75 kN/m
dead load = 4.5 kN
Imposed load
Imposed load on roof = 0.4 kN/m2
roof angle = 2.294217 degree
This roof angle almost very less and the horizontal load generate due to incli-
nation of roof is nearly equal to zero.
Imposed load on roof/meter = 2 kN/m

Imposed load = 12 kN
Snow load
Snow load on roof = 0.52 kN/m2
roof angle = 2.294217 degree
This roof angle almost very less and the horizontal load generate due to incli-
nation of roof is nearly equal to zero.
snow load on roof/meter = 2.6 kN/m
snow load = 15.6 kN
Wind load
All values are considering from the wind load calculations
External pressure coefficient cpe = -1
Wind load/meter length of purlin = -5.4 kN/m
Wind load = -32.4 kN
B06 - Load on Side runner

Span = 6 m
Spacing between side runners = 2 m
Dead Load
self-weight of sheeting, insulation, fixtures = 0.15 kN/m2
dead load per meter length = 0.3 kN/m
dead load = 1.8 kN
Wind load in x
Wp = (cpe ± cpi) *
wind pressure = qp
Internal Pressure coefficient cpi = 0

Wind load/meter length of purlin = 1.26 kN/m

Wind load = 7.56 kN
Wind load in y
Wp = (cpe ± cpi) *
wind pressure = qp
Wind load/meter length of purlin = -2.52 kN/m
Wind load = -5.04 kN
B07 - Rope Design Calculations
Considering the characteristic breaking force values from the PFEIFER Catalogue.
Fully Locked Coil ropes are used to stabilize the roof Element
Ultimate Limit states design

Clause 6.2 of EN 1993-1-11 explains the design check for ropes
FEd/FRd ≤ 1.0
Where:
FEd is the design value of the axial rope force
FRd is the design value of the tension resistance
Design check for PV 150 cable
FEd = 463 kN taken from the Rstab program
FRd = 921 kN according to PFEIFER catalogue
FEd/FRd = 0.5027144 ≤ 1.0

Hence rope is safe under axial forces
FRd = 555 kN according to PFEIFER catalogue
FEd/FRd = 0.2936937 ≤ 1.0

Hence rope is safe under axial forces
Serviceability Limit states design

Clause 7.2 of EN 1993-1-11 explains the design check for ropes
σEd = FEd/A ≤ fsls
Where:
A is cross sectional area of the rope i.e. this value taken from the cata-
logue

σEd is stress in cable due to axial load

fsls is stress limits for service conditions = 0.45 * σuk
(from Table 7.2 of Eu-

rocode)
Where:
σuk ultimate tensile strength of Locked coil ropes
σuk = 1570 N/mm2
A= 1060 mm2 according to PFEIFER catalouge
fsls = 0.45 * σuk =
706.5 N/mm2
σEd = 436.79245 N/mm2 ≤ fsls
Hence rope is safe
A= 634 mm2 according to PFEIFER catalouge
fsls = 0.45 * σuk =
706.5 N/mm2
σEd = 257.09779 N/mm2 ≤ fsls
Hence rope is safe

0.0M
0.0M
0.0M
View publication stats

Design of An Aircraft Hangar For The Airport in Du

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of An Aircraft Hangar For The Airport in Du

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf

Thesis · February 2020

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Design of an aircraft hangar for the

Dresden, February and 2018

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ II

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ III

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ IV

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ V

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ VI

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ VII

4.3.2 Member Verification ........................................................................................ 24

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ VIII

7.4 List of tables .................................................................................................... 66

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ IX

1.1 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar

Figure 1: Aircraft Maintenance Hangar [1]

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 1

Figure 2: Docking system [4]

1.2 Hangar Layout

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 2

Table 1: Dimensions of Aircraft [3]

Length Span (or) Width Height Engine Weight

1.3 Steel as a structural element for hangar structures

1.4 Types of Large Span structural systems

1.4.1 Hangar Structure - Pre-Engineered Metal Building

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 3

Figure 3: Pre-Engineered Hangar Structure [8]

Figure 4: Lattice Frame assembly for Large Span structures [9]

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 4

1.4.3 Space Trusses for Long span structures

Figure 5: Space trusses for Long span hangar structure [10]

1.4.4 Beam String Structure with straight beam

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 5

Figure 6: Retractable roof – Beam String Structure [11]

1.4.5 Top and Bottom Chord Arched type roof structure

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 6

Figure 7: Girder with top and bottom chord arched [12]

1.4.6 Box Girders for Long span roof structure

Figure 8: Hangar Structure – Northwest Airlines, Duluth, MN [13]

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 7

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 8

2.1 Permanent Load

2.2 Variable Loads

2.2.1 Imposed roof Load

2.2.2 Snow Load

Snow loads in Germany are to be calculated according to Eurocode EN 1991-1-3 [16]

Angle of pitch of roof 𝛼 0° ≤ 𝛼 ≤ 30° 30° ≤ 𝛼 ≤ 60° 𝛼 ≥ 60°

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 9

Zone Minimum value Altitude Limit

2.2.3 Wind Load

Wind actions on structures located in Germany should be calculated according to Eu-

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 10

Table 4: Basic velocity pressure

Wind Zone vb,0 in m/s qb,0 in kN/m2

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 11

3.1 Ultimate Limit States (ULS)

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 12

3.2 Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

„Design of an aircraft hangar for the airport in Düsseldorf “ 13

Table 5: Factors for design combinations at ULS & SLS

Ultimate limit states Serviceability limit states