Plastic Design Portal Frame To Ec3

DepartmentofCiviland
StructuralEngineering

PlasticDesignofPortal
frametoEurocode3
WorkedExample
Universityof
Sheffield
Contents
1 GEOMETRY.......................................................................................................................................................................3
2DESIGNBRIEF..................................................................................................................................................................4
3DETERMININGLOADINGONFRAME.......................................................................................................................5
3.1Combinationfactors..................................................................................................................................................5
3.2Snowloading................................................................................................................................................................6
3.3Selfweightofsteelmembers........................................................................................................................................7
4INITIALSIZINGOFMEMBERS.....................................................................................................................................8
5LOADCOMBINATION(MAXVERTICALLOAD)(DEAD+SNOW)..................................................................10
5.1Frameimperfectionsequivalenthorizontalforces.......................................................................................................10
5.2Partialsafetyfactorsandsecondordereffects...........................................................................................................11
5.2.1SwaybucklingmodeStability(cr,s,est).............................................................................................................14
5.2.2Snapthroughbucklingstability(cr,r,est)..........................................................................................................16
5.3.2AccountingSecondOrdereffects..........................................................................................................................17
6MEMBERCHECKS........................................................................................................................................................20
6.1Purlins.......................................................................................................................................................................20
6.2Column(UB610x229x101)......................................................................................................................................21
6.2.1Classification..........................................................................................................................................................21
6.2.2Crosssectionresistance........................................................................................................................................21
6.2.3Stabilityagainstlateralandtorsionalbuckling(EN199311:2005(E)SecBB3.2.1):...........................................22
6.3Rafter(UB457x191x89)............................................................................................................................................29
6.3.1SectionClassification.............................................................................................................................................29
6.3.2CrosssectionResistance......................................................................................................................................29
6.3.3Checkrafterbucklinginapexregion....................................................................................................................31
6.3.4Stabilitycheckforlowerbendingmoments.........................................................................................................32
6.4Haunch(UB457x191x89).........................................................................................................................................35
6.4.1Classification..........................................................................................................................................................35
6.4.2HaunchStability.....................................................................................................................................................36
6.4.3Crosssectionresistance.......................................................................................................................................41
7.COMPARISONBETWEENDIFFERENTCODES....................................................................................................43
8APPENDIX......................................................................................................................................................................44

University of Sheffield

Department of Civil Structural Engineering




Date
16/02/2009
Geometry of the Frame
Sheet No

2
Reference Calculation

1 Geometry


Revised by: EC3 Plastic Portal Frame Design
Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Client brief
Sheet No

3

2DesignBrief
A client requires a single-storey building, having a clear floor area 30 m x 80

m, with a clear height to the underside of the roof steelwork of 5 m. The slope
of the roof member is to be at least 6
o
.
Figure1Planviewoftheframe

Figure23Dimensionalviewofthe building(Plum,1996)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Determining load on the frame
Sheet No

4

EN 1991-1-
1:2002 (E)
Annex A 1

See
Supporting
Notes Sec 6.4

3Determiningloadingonframe
3.1Combinationfactors
The combination must be found from Eurocode 1 (EN1991-1) or relevant NAD.
Note that because most portal frame designs are governed by gravity (dead + snow)
loading, so in this worked example only maximum vertical load combination is
considered. Therefore, the combination factor is never applied in this example,
but for full analysis the following load combination should be considered

1) Maximum gravity loads without wind, causing maximum sagging moment in the
rafter and maximum hogging moments in the haunches.

2) Maximum wind loading with minimum gravity loads, causing maximum reversal
of moment compared with case 1. The worst wind case might be from either
transverse wind or longitudinal wind so both must be checked.

Basic data :

Total length: b = 72 m
Spacing: s = 7.2 m
Bay width: d = 30 m
Height (max): h = 7.577m
Roof slope: = 6
o

Figure3 Framespacing(SX016,MatthiasOppe)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Determining loading on the frame
Sheet No

5

EN 1991-1-3
Sec 5.2.2
Eq.5.1

EN 1991-1-3
Sec 5.3
Table 5.1

See
Appendix A
Table A1

EN 1991-1-3
Annex C

See
Appendix A
Table A2

3.2Snowloading

General

Snow loading in the roof should be determined as follow

S =
C
c
C
t
S
k

Where:

is the roof shape coefficient

C
c
is the exposure coefficient usually taken as 1
C
t
is the thermal coefficient set to 1 for nominal situations
S
k
Is the characteristic value of ground snow load for
relevant altitude.

Roof shape coefficient

Shape coefficients are needed for an adjustment of the ground snow load to a snow
load on the roof taking into account effects caused by non-drifted and drifted snow
loading.

The roof shape coefficient depends on the roof angle so

u o Su
=0.8

Snow load on the ground

For the snow load on the ground; the characteristic value depends on the climatic region;
for site in the UK the following expression is relevant

S
k
=0.140z-0.1+(A/501)
Where:
Z is the( zone number /9 ) depending on the snow load on sea level
here in Sheffield z=3
A is the altitude above sea level A=175m


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Determining loading on the frame
Sheet No

6

Self-weight
estimated
needed to be
checked at
the end

Snow load on the roof

S
k
= 0.8 x 1 x 1 0.67 = 0.54 KN/m
2

Spacing = 7.2 m

For internal frame
UDL by snow = 0.54 x 7.2 = 3.89 m

Figure4Distributedloadduetosnowpermeterspan(SX016,MatthiasOppe)

3.3Selfweightofsteelmembers

Assume the following weight by members,

Roofing = 0.2 KN/m
2

Services = 0.2 KN/m
2

Rafter and column self weight = 0.25 KN/m
2

Total self weight _____________

0.65 KN/m
2


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Initial sizing if members
Sheet No

7

TP/08/43
EC3/08/16
Manual for
the design of
steelwork
building
structures to
EC3

See
Appendix B
for the
method

4InitialSizingofmembers

Figure5Dimensionsofportal(TheinstitutionofStructuralEngineers,TP/08/43EC3/08/16)

a) L/h = 30/6 = 5
r/L = 1.577/30=0.0526

b) Loading
1) Gravity loading
Snow loading = 0.54 x 7.2 = 3.80KN/m
Self weight = 0.65 x 7.2 = 4.68 KN/m

2) Factored load
w= (4.68 x 1.35 ) + (3.80 x 1.5 ) = 12.0 KN/m

c) Finding Mp for the sections

1) Total load on the frame (wL)= 12.0 x 30 = 360.5KN

2) Parameter wl
2
= 12.0 x 30
2
= 10816 KNm

3) From Graphs (Figure B2) obtain horizontal force ratio (0.36)
H= 0.36 x 360.5 = 129.8 KN

4) From Graphs (Figure B3) obtain rafter Mp ratio (0.034)
M
rafter,,Rd
= 0.034 x 10816 = 367.7 KNm


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Initial sizing if members
Sheet No

8

Section
Tables of
Universal
Beams

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E)
Table 3.1

5) From Graphs (Figure B4) obtained column Mp ratio (0.063)
M
column, Rd
= 0.063 x 10816 = 681.4 KNm.

6) Selecting members
a) W
pl (rafter),required
= (367.7 x 10
6
) / 275 = 1337 x 10
3
cm
3

Try UB 457x152x74

b) W
pl(column),required
= (681.4 x 10
6
)/275= 2478 x 10
3
cm
3

Try UB 533 x 210 x 109

Properties Rafter Section UB 457x152x74

G=74.2 Kg/m h= 462mm b=154.4mm
t
w
=9.6mm t
f
=17mm A=94.48 x 10
2
mm
2

d=428mm

I
y
= 32670 x 10
4
mm
4
W
pl,y
=1627 x 10
3
mm
3

i
y
=186 mm i
z
= 33,3 mm
I
z
= 1047 x 10
4
mm
4
W
pl,z
= 213.1 x 10
3
mm
3

I
t
= 66.18 x 10
4
mm
4
I
w
= 516.3 x 10
6
mm
6

Properties Column Section UB 533x210x109

G=109 Kg/m h= 539.5mm b=210.8mm
t
w
=11.6mm t
f
=18.8mm A=138.9 x10
2
mm
2

d=510.9mm

I
y
= 66820 x 10
4
mm
4
W
pl,y
=2828 x 10
3
mm
3

i
y
=218.7 mm i
z
= 45.7 mm
I
z
= 2692 x 10
4
mm
4
W
pl,z
= 399.4 x 10
3
mm
3

I
t
= 101.6 x 10
4
mm
4
I
w
= 1811 x 10
6
mm
6

Steel grade is S275
Assume Sections Class1, then check


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Ultimate Limit State Analysis
Sheet No

9

EN 1993-1-
1:2005 (E)
Sec 5.3.2

See
Supporting
Notes
Section 9

5LoadCombination(MaxverticalLoad)(Dead+Snow)

5.1Frameimperfectionsequivalenthorizontalforces

0 = 0
o
o
n
o
m

0 = [
1
200
[
2
6
u.S (1 +.S)

0 = 3.54 x 10
-3

The column loads could be calculated by a frame analysis, but a simple calculation
based on plan areas is suitable for single storey portals
(i) Permanent loads ( un-factored ):

Rafter = (74.5 x 15 x 9.8) / 10
3
= 11 KN
Roofing = (15 x 0.2 x 7.2) = 21.6 KN
Services = (15 x 0.2 x 7.2) = 21.6 KN
_________
Total = 54.2 KN

(ii) Variable loads ( un-factored )

Snow load = 15 x 0.54 x 7.2 = 58.3 KN

Thus the un-factored equivalent horizontal forces are given by:

(i) Permanent/column = 3.54 x 10
-3
x 54.2 = 0.19 KN

(ii) Variable/column = 3.54 x 10
-3
x 58.3 = 0.21 KN

Note EC3 requires that all loads that could occur at the same time are considered
together, so the frame imperfection forces and wind loads should be considered as
additive to permanent loads and variable loads with the appropriate load factors.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

10

For Second
Order effects
See
Supporting
Notes
Section 7.1 &
Section 7.2

Figure6Frameimperfectionsequivalenthorizontalforces

5.2Partialsafetyfactorsandsecondordereffects

Second order effects increases not only the deflections but also the moments
and forces beyond those calculated by the first order. Second-order analysis is
the term used to describe analysis method in which the effects of increasing
deflections under increasing load are considered explicitly in the solution
method.

The effects of the deformed geometry are assessed in EN 1993-1-1 by
calculating alpha crit (
crit
) factor. The limitations to the use of the first-order
analysis are defined in EN 1993-1-1 Section 5.2.1 (3) as crit

15 for plastic
analysis. When a second order analysis is required there are two main methods
to proceed:

1) Rigorous 2
nd
order analysis (i.e. using appropriate second order software).
2) Approximate 2
nd
order analysis (i.e. hand calculation using first order analysis
with magnification factors). Although the modifications involve
approximations, they are sufficiently accurate within the limits given by EN
1993-1-1.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

11

See
Supporting
Notes
Section 7.3

Carrying first order analysis to obtain first order moments and member forces using
partial safety factors (
G
=1.35) and (
Q
=1.5) with loading calculated above.
Then Checks if second order effects are relevant by calculating the following

cr,est
=min (
cr,s,est
,
cr,r,est
)

where

cr,s,est
= estimated of
cr
for sway buckling mode

cr,r,est
=estimated of
cr
for rafter snap-through buckling mode.

Figure7 Bendingmomentdiagramforfirstorderanalysis(Burgess,20/01/1990)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

12

Load Factor Hinge number Member Hinge status
1.02 1 RHC Formed
1.14 2 LHR Formed
Table1PositionofHingesandLoadfactors

Figure8Memberforces(Burgess,20/01/1990)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

13

See
Supporting
Notes
Section
7.3.2.1

See Figure 9

5.2.1SwaybucklingmodeStability(cr,s,est).

cr,s,est
= u.8 _1 -_
N
R,ULS
N
R,cr
] mox] __
h
i
v
ULS,i
] _
H
EHF,i
6
EHF,i
] min_

N
R,0LS
is the axial force in rafter {see figure 8 (150.8KN)}
N
R,c
is the Euler load of rafter full span
N
R,c
=
n
2
L I
r
L
2

Where
I
is the in-plan second moment of area of rafter

L is the full span length.

N
R,c
=
n
2
210 32670 10
4
(30 10
3
)
2
= 752 KN

_
h
i
v
ULS,i
] _
H
EHF,i
6
EHF,i
] is the minimum value for column 1 to n

o
LHP,
is the horizontal deflection for top of column as indicated in
Appendix

I
0LS,
is the axial force in columns {see figure 8 (207.5KN , 208.1KN)}

As can be seen that o
LHP,
is the lateral deflection at the top of each column
subjected to an arbitrary lateral load H
EHF
then here an arbitrary load H
EHF
can be
chosen and using analysis software the deflection at top of each column can be
obtained.

1) Arbitrary load H
EHF
=50KN
2) o
LHP,1
= 98mm
o
LHP,2
= 98mm


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

14

So either [
6
207.5
[
50
9810
-3
OR [
6
208.1
[
50
9810
-3

Min __
h
i
v
ULS,i
] _
H
EHF,i
6
EHF,i
]_ = min(14.75 , 14.75 ) = 14.75

Thus

cr,s,est
= u.8 _1 -[
150.8
752
] (14.7S) = 9.S

Figure9 Swaymodecheck (Burgess,20/01/1990)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

15

See
Supporting
Notes
Section
7.3.2.2 &
Section
7.2

F
o
=
16 1627 1u
3
27S
Su 1u
3
= 2S8.6KN

5.2.2Snapthroughbucklingstability(cr,r,est)

cr,r,est
= [
L
_
55.7[4+
L
h
U-1
_[
I
c
+I
r
I
r
_
275
]
jr
] tan20

D cross-section depth of rafter (462mm).
L span of the bay (30m).
h mean height of the column (6m).
I
c
in-plane second moment of area of column (66820 x 10
4
mm
4
)
I
in-plane second moment of area of rafter (32670 x 10

4
mm
4
)

nominal yield strength of the rafter (275 N/mm

2
)
0
roof slope if roof is symmetrical (6

o
)
0 F
r
/F
o
the ratio of the arching effect of the frame where
F
r
= factored vertical load on the rafter ( 432 KN see section 3)
F
0
= maximum uniformly distributed load for plastic failure of the rafter
treated as a fixed end beam of span L
F
o
=
16 w
pl,j,R
]
j
L

0 = 1.81

Thus

cr,r,est
= [
462
3010
3
_
55.7_4+
3010
3
610
3
]
1.81-1
_[
(66820+32670)10
4
3267010
4
[
275
275
tan2(6)

cr,r,est
= 6.2

Hence

cr,est
=min (
cr,s,est
,
cr,r,est
) = 6.2


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

16
See
Supporting
Notes 7.3.3

Although the snap-through failure mode is critical mode as shown in calculation
above, but because this example is for designing single bay portal frames, the snap-
through mode of failure is irrelevant but included to show complete design steps for
simple portal frame design. Snap-through failure mode can be critical mode in three
or more spans, as internal bay snap-through may occur because of the spread of
the columns inversion of the rafter (The institutionof Structural Engineers, TP/08/43
EC3/08/16) see figure 10.

Figure10Snapthroughfailuremodecriticalfor3bayormore

5.3.2AccountingSecondOrdereffects

To account for second order effects the partial safety factors can be modified by the
following criteria

1)
G
_
1
(1)-[
1
o
c
_ = 1.50
2)
Q
_
1
(1)-[
1
o
c
_ = 1.68


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

17

See
Supporting
Notes 7.3.3

Re-analyze the first order problem with the modified safety factors using same initial
sized sections gives the following results,

Load Factor Hinge number Member Hinge status
0.92 1 RHC Formed
1.02 2 LHR Formed
Table1Hingesobtainedfromanalysis

It could be seen that using Sections UB 533 x 210 x 109 and UB 457 x 152 x 74 is
suitable, although hinge 1 occurs at a load factors 1 , a mechanism is not formed
until the second hinge is formed. Therefore this combination of section sizes is
suitable

Hence size of member initially estimated is suitable and can withstand second-order
effects. Note that if the load factors in positions 1 and 2 were less than 1, then the
members size needs to be increased to sustain second order effects as the initially
sized members cannot sustain second order effects.

Figure11Bendingmomentdiagramforfirstorderanalysis(Burgess,20/01/1990)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

18

Figure12Memberforcesforfirstorderanalysis(Burgess,20/01/1990)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks Purlins
Sheet No

19

See
Supporting
notes
section 10.4

Note. Here
the safety
factors are
used as
indicated in
King span
load table

See
Appendix C

6Memberchecks
6.1Purlins
Today the design of the secondary members is dominated by cold formed sections.
The design of cold formed members consists of looking up the relevant table for the
chosen range of sections. The choice of a particular manufactures products is
dependent on clients or designers experiences and preferences. Table (Appendix C)
illustrates a typical purlin load table based on information from manufactures
catalogue (King span) for double span conditions. As the overall distance between
columns is 30 meters, which is assumed to be divided to 18 equal portions would
gives purlin centers 1.67 meters (on the slope). The gravity loading (dead (cladding
Load plus snow load) is w= (0.1x 1.4) + (0.54 x 1.6) = 1.004 KN/m
2
. From the Table
(Appendix C), knowing the purlin length of 7.2 m, purlin spacing of 1.25m and the
gravity load to be supported by purlin 1.004KN/m
2
, the M175065120 section seems
adequate.

Figure13 Connectionbetweenraftersectionandpurlins
Figure14 Purlincrosssection (Kingspan)
Purlin
Rafter


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks Column
Sheet No

20

See Figure11

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E)
Section 5.5

See
supporting
notes section
12.3

6.2Column(UB610x229x101)

- M
Ed
= 904.7 KNm
- V
Ed
= 150.1 KN
- N
Ed
= 208.2 KN

6.2.1Classification

Web ( Bending + Axial )

= 27S2SS =1.08
actual (d/t
w
) =
510.9
11.6
= 44.u4 72 Class 1

Flanges ( Axial Compressive )

actual (c/t
f
)=
[
210.8
2
-
11.6
2
- 12.7
18.8
= 4.61 9 Class1

So the column sections are overall class 1

6.2.2Crosssectionresistance
The frame analysis assumed that there is no reduction in the plastic moment
resistance from interaction with shear force or axial force. This assumption must
be checked;

6.2.2.1ShearforceeffectsofPlasticmomentresistance(EN199311:2005(E)Sec6.2.6)

V
Ed
< 0.5 V
pl,Rd

Av = 1.04 h t
w
= 1.04 x 539.5 x 11.6 = 6508.5 mm
2

V
pl,Rd
= A
S)
mo

V
pl,Rd
= 6Su8.S(27SS) (1.1 1u
3
) =939.4 KN
0.5 V
pl,Rd
= 469.7 KN

V
Ed
< 0.5 V
pl,Rd
so the plastic moment of resistance is not reduced by the
coexistence of axial force


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

21

See
supporting
notes section
12.4

See
supporting
notes section
13.4
I
m
= (S8 i
z
)__
N
Ld
S7.4A
+ _
w
pI
2
2
7S6C1
2
A I
t
(2SS)
2
__

6.2.2.2AxialforceeffectsofPlasticmomentresistance(EN199311:2005(E)Sec6.2.9)

Check
i. If
N
Ld
N
N,Rd

N
Ed
<
0.5 h
w
t
w
]
j
y
mo

208.2 <
0.5 (501.9)(11.6) (275)
1.110
3

208.2 < 727.8

ii. If

N
Ed
< 0.25 N
pl,Rd

N
Ed
< 0.25 plastic tensile resisitance of the section

N
Ed
<
0.25 A ]
j
y
mo

208.2 <
0.25 (138.910
2
) (275)
1.110
3

208.2 < 868.1

Therefore, the effect of shear and axial on the plastic moment resistance of the
column sections can be neglected according to EC3 EN1993-1-1: 2005.
6.2.3Stabilityagainstlateralandtorsionalbuckling(EN199311:2005(E)SecBB3.2.1):
.
The design of the frame assumes hinge forms at the top of the column
member, immediately below the haunch level. The plastic hinge position must be
torsionally restraint in position by diagonal stays. With the hinge position restraint,
the hinge stability is ensured by EC3 by limiting distance between hinge and the
next lateral restraint to L
m.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks - Column
Sheet No

22

I
m
= (S8 4S.7)__
208.2 10
3
57.4138.910
2
+ [
(2828 x 10
3
)
2
275
2
(756) (1)
2
(138.9 x 10
2
)(101.6 x 10
4
)(235)
2
_

I
m
= 1.53 m

Thus there must be a lateral restraint at a distance from the hinge not exceeding
(1.53m).

Therefore if 1.5 meters spacing assumed, this would ensure the stability between
the intermediate restraints at the top of the column where maximum bending
moment occurs, then the spacing of 1.8 meters is OK for sheeting rails below 2.4
meters from the top of the column, where the moment is lower.
Figure15 Columnmemberstability (Plum,1996)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

23

See
supporting
notes section
13.4

It must be checked that the column buckling resistance is sufficient, so that the column is
stable between the tensional restraint at S2 and the base. This part of the column would be
checked using slenderness calculated.

Different countries have different procedure to calculate the slenderness of the column and
check the susceptibility of this part to lateral tensional buckling. Thus the designer must refer
to the national Annex. In this example the procedure used in for assessing the significance of
the mode of failure is taken from (King, Technical Report P164).

Figure16Columnbetweentensionalrestraints(King,TechnicalReportP164)
(a) Calculate slenderness and

LT

Assume side rail depth = 200 mm
Figure17Column/Sheetingrailscrosssection(King,TechnicalReportP164)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

24
(King,
Technical
Report P164)

Distance from column shear center to center of the side rail, a

a = 607.3/2 + 200/2 = 369.75 mm

i
s
2
= i
y
2
+ i
z
2

+ a
2

i
s
2
= 218.72

+ 45.7
2
+ 369.75
2
= 186633 mm
2

Distance between shear center of flanges

h
s
= h t
f
= 539.5 18.8 = 520.7mm

= _
_u
2
+ [
I
w
I
z
_
I
2
s
_

using the simplification for doubly symmetrical I sections

I
w
= I
z
( h
s
/ 2 )
2

= _
_u
2
+ [
h
s
2
2
]
I
2
s
_

= _
_369.75
2
+ [
S39.S
2
2
]
186633
_ = 1.122

The slenderness of the column is given by:

z =
[
L
t
i
z
_u+
I
t
L
t
2
2.6 n
2
I
z
i
s
2

]
0.S

z1 =
[
3600
4S.
_1.122+
101.6 10
4
3600
2
2.6n
2
2692 10
4
186633
]
0.S
=64.35


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

25

Appendix D
Figure D1

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Sec 6.3.2.2

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Table 6.3
N
b,Rd
= X A
y
mo
z
L1
= (m
t
0.5
c) _[
w
pl,j
A
[
2u
s
2
_
0.5
z
Where:
m
t
is moment factor obtained from appendix D . Because loads combination
considered there is no lateral loads applied to the walls, so there are no intermediate
loads
=0/603.1=0
y=82.632/(L
t
/i
z
)=82.632/(4000/45.7)=0.944
m
t
= 0.53
c =1 for uniform depth members
z
L1
= (u.SS
0.5
1) _[
2828 10
3
138.9 10
2
[
2369.75
186633
_
0.5
64.SS =42.1

(b) Calculate buckling resistance for axial force

X
mn
= 1|+(
2
- z
2
)
0.5
]
= u.S | 1 +o(z
-u.2) + z
2
]
h/b=539.5/210.8=2.56
curvebforhotrolledIsections
=0.34
= z 82.8
= 64.SS82.8
= u.78


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

26

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Sec 6.3.2.2

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Table 6.3
= u.S | 1 +u.S4(u.78 -u.2) + u.78
2
] =
= u.9u
N
b,Rd
= X A
y
mo
= u.S | 1 +o
L1
(z
L1
-u.2) + z
L1
2
]
= u.S | 1 +u.21(u.48S -u.2) + u.48S
2
] =
= u.6S
X
z
=1|u.9u +(u.9u
2
- u.78
2
)
0.5
]=0.741
=(0.741x138.9x10
2
x275)/(1.1x10
3
)=2574.13KN
(c) Calculatebucklingresistanceforbending
M
b,Rd,y
=
X
LT
w
pl,j
]
j
mc

z
L1
= z
L1
86.8 = 42.1/ 86.8 = 0.485

X
L1
= 1|+(
2
- z
2
L1
)
0.5
]
X
L1
= 1|u.6S +(u.6S
2
- u.48S
2
)
0.5
]
=0.92
M
b,Rd,y
=
0.92 2828 10
3
275
1.1 10
6
= 6Su.4 KN


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

27

(King,
Technical
Report P164)
LT
= u.u6u6
k
L1
= 1 -_
LT
N
Ld
x
z
A
_ but k
L1
1.u
k
L1
= 1 -_
u.u6u6 2u8.2 1u
3
u.741 1S8.9 1u
2
27S
_ but k
L1
1.u
(d) Calculate buckling resistance to combined axial and bending

N
Ed
N
b,Rd,z
+
k
LT
M
j,Ed
M
b,Rd,j
1

= 0

M,LT
= 1.8 0.7 = 1.8 0.7 (0) = 1.8

LT
= u.1S z
z

M.LT
-u.1S but
LT
u.9
LT
= u.1S u.78 1.8 -u.1S but
LT
u.9

k
L1
= u.996
208.2
2574.13
+
0.996542.8
650.4
=0.91
The column is OK and stable over the section considered (between restraint S
o
and S
2
).


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks - Rafter
Sheet No

28

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E)
Section 5.5

See Figure11
(Burgess,
20/01/1990)

6.3Rafter(UB457x191x89)

6.3.1SectionClassification

Ensure the section is class 1 to accommodate plastic hinge formation.

= 27S2SS =1.08

Web ( combined axial and bending )

actual (d/t
w
) =
428
9.6
= 44.6

44.6 72 Class 1

Flanges ( Axial Compressive )

actual (c/t
f
)=
[
1S4.4
2
-
9.6
2
- 10.2
17
= S.66 9 Class1

The rafter section is Class 1

6.3.2CrosssectionResistance.

The frame analysis assumed that there is no reduction in the plastic moment
resistance from interaction with shear force or axial force. This assumption must
be checked because it is more onerous than that the cross-sectional resistance
is sufficient.

- Max. shear force V
Ed
= 160.5 KN at haunch tip

- Max. axial force N
Ed
= 166.9 KN at haunch tip


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

29

See
supporting
notes section
12.3

See
supporting
notes section
12.4

6.3.2.1ShearforceeffectsofPlasticmomentresistance(EN199311:2005(E)Sec6.2.6)

V
Ed
< 0.5 V
pl,Rd

Av = 1.04 h t
w
= 1.04 x 462 x 9.6 = 4613 mm
2

V
pl,Rd
= A
S)
mo

V
pl,Rd
= 461S (27SS) (1.1 1u
3
) =666 KN

0.5 V
pl,Rd
= 333 KN

V
Ed
< 0.5 V
pl,Rd
so the plastic moment of resistance is not reduced by the
coexistence of axial force.

6.3.2.2AxialforceeffectsofPlasticmomentresistance(EN199311:2005(E)Sec6.2.9)

Check
i) If
N
Ld
N
N,Rd

N
Ed
<
0.5 h
w
t
w
]
j
y
mo

166.9 <
0.5 (442.8)(9.6) (275)
1.1 10
3

166.9 < 531.4

ii) If
N
Ed
< 0.25 N
pl,Rd

N
Ed
< 0.25 plastic tensile resistance of the section
N
Ed
<
0.25 A ]
j
y
mo

231.1 <
0.25 (94.4810
2
) (275)
1.110
3

166.9 < 590.5


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks Rafter
Sheet No

30

See
supporting
notes section
13.2

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E) Sec
BB3.2.2

See section
6.1
I
m
= (S8 i
z
)__
N
Ld
S7.4A
+ _
w
pI
2
2
7S6C1
2
A I
t
(2SS)
2
__
I
m
= (S8 SS.S)
__
166.9 1u
3
S7.4 94.48 1u
2
+ _
(1627 1u
3
)
2
27S
2
7S6 1
2
94.48 1u
2
66.18 1u
4
(2SS)
2
__

6.3.3Checkrafterbucklinginapexregion

Another highly stressed region is the length of rafter in which the apex hinge
occur see fig below. Under (dead + snow) loading, the outstand flange is in
tension, while compression flange is restrained by purlin/rafter connection.

Therefore, the buckling resistance of the rafter member between purlins in the
apex region needs to be checked. Because the apex hinge is the last to form in
order to produce a mechanism (which is true for low pitched portal frame under
dead + snow loading), then adequate rotation capacity is not a design
requirement, i.e. hinge is required only to develop M
p
not to rotate.
It is set by EC3 EN1993-1-1: 2005 that if the value of L
m
(as defined in BB.3.1.1)
is not exceeded by restraint lateral torsional buckling can be ignored. So
assuming that the purlins act as restraint because of their direct attachment to the
compression flanges in the apex hinge region, then the purlin spacing should not
exceed

L
m
= 1221 mm = 1.221m

As purlin spacing is 1.67m (on slope), thus because L
m
has been smaller than
1.67m then the purlin spacing would have to be reduced in the apex region to 1.2m.

Figure18 Memberstabilityapexregion (Plum,1996)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

31

See Figure11
(Burgess,
20/01/1990)

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Sec 6.3.2.2

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Table 6.3
6.3.4Stabilitycheckforlowerbendingmoments
Where bending moment is lower, the purlin spacing can be increased:

Figure19Rafterunderlowerbendingmoments
Next critical case is in right hand rafter. Try purlin spacing at 1670 mm centres
Check for lateral torsional buckling between purlins:

o M
Edmax.y
= 345.6 kNm at haunch tip
o N
Ed.max
= 166.9 kN at haunch tip

(a) Calculate buckling resistance to axial force

L =1670 mm

z
= L/i
z
= 1670/33.3 = 50.15
z
=
z
/ 86.8 = 50.15 / 86.8 = 0.578
= 0.5 [ 1 + ( 0.2 ) +
2
]
=0.5 [ 1 + 0.34 ( 0.578 0.2) + (0.578)
2
] = 0.7313

X
z
=
1
+
2
-\
2
=
1
0.7313+0.7313
2
-0.578
2
= 0.8480

N
b,Rd,z
=
X
z
A ]
j
mc
=
(0.8480) (9448) (275)
1.110
3
= 2003.0 KN


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

32

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Sec 6.3.2.2

EN1993-1-
1:2005
Table 6.3
H
c
=
1 n
2
21uuuu x 1u47 x 1u
4
167u
2
x 1u
6

_
S16.S x 1u
6

1u47 x 1u
4
+
(167u
2
x 81uuu x 66.18 x 1u
4
)
n
2
x 21uuuu x 1u47 x 1u
4

H
c
= 648.1 KNm
(b) Calculate buckling resistance to bending moment

H
c
=
C
1
n
2
L I
z
L
cr,Lt
2
_
I
w
I
z
+
(L
cr Lt
2
u I
t
)
n
2
L I
z

Take C1 = 1 (conservative)

LT
= _
w
pl,j
]
j
M
cr

LT
= _
1627 10
3
275
648.110
6
= 0.831

LT
= 0.5 [ 1 + ( 0.2 ) +
2
]
LT
= 0.5 [ 1 + 0.21( 0.831 0.2 ) + 0.831
2
] = 0.912

X
LT
=
1
+
2
-\
2

X
LT
=
1
0.912+0.912
2
-0.831
2
= 0.80

M
b,Rd,y
=
X
LT
w
pl,j
]
j
mc

M
b,Rd,y
=
0.8 1627 10
3
275
1.110
6
= 325.4KNm


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

33

(c) Calculate buckling resistance to combined axial and bending

Check that

N
Ed
N
b,Rd,z
+ k
LT

M
j,Ed
M
b,Rd
1

Take k
LT
= 1 ( conservative )

166.9
2003
+ 1x
345.6
325.4
1

1 1

The value is slightly greater than one but due to the conservative assumption of
K
LT
=1 the rafter can be assumed to be stable between intermediate restraint
(purlin/sheeting rails) and purlin spacing could be increased to 1.67m between apex
and hunch region shown in figure 19. Otherwise if the value was significantly greater
than 1 the purlin spacing (1.67m) should be reduced.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

34

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E)
Section 5.5

6.4Haunch(UB457x191x89)
The depth of a haunch is usually made approximately twice depth of the basic rafter
sections, as it is the normal practice to use a UB cutting of the same serial size as
that of the rafter section for the haunch, which is welded to the underside of the
basic rafter (UB 457x191x 89). Therefore it is assumed that the haunch has an
overall depth at connection is 0.90 m.

6.4.1Classification

= 27S2SS =1.08

Web
The web can be divided into two, and classified according to stress
and geometry of each.

actual (d/t
w
) =
428
9.6
= 44.6

web 1 ( bending ) -------- 44.672 Class 1
web 2 ( Compressive) --- 44.638 Class 2

Flanges ( Axial Compressive

actual (c/t
f
)=
[
1S4.4
2
-
9.6
2
- 10.2
17
= S.66 9 Class1

Thus the haunch section is a class 2.
Figure20Haunchregioncrosssectionclassification
(King,TechnicalReportP164)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks - Haunch
Sheet No

35

See
Supporting
notes
section 13.1
& 13.3

6.4.2HaunchStability

First, check the stability of the haunched portion of the rafter ( from eaves
connection to the haunch/ rafter intersection) as this represents one of the most
highly stressed lengths, and with its outstand flange (inner) in compression, this part
of the rafter is the region most likely to fail due to instability. As it has already
decided to stay the inside corner of the column/haunch intersection (column hinge
position), assume that the haunch/rafter intersection is also effectively torsionally
restrained be diagonal braces, giving an effective length of 3m as indicated in Fig
below.

Figure21Memberstabilityhaunchrafterregion (Plum,1996)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks Haunch
Sheet No

36

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E)
clause
BB.3.1.2 (3)B

EN 1993-1-1:
2005 (E)
section
BB.3.1.3

See
supporting
notes section
Appendix B

It would appear that clause BB.3.1.2 (3)B is the most appropriate creation to check
the stability of the haunched portion, as there is three flanged haunch, so the
distance between rotational restraint should be limited to

I
s
=
C
n
L
k
c

Where:
L
k
is length limit specified where

lateral torsional buckling effects can be
ignored where the length L of the segment of a member between restraint
section at a plastic hinge location and adjacent torsional restraint.

L
k

=
__5.4+
600]
j
E
]_
h
t
]
_(
z
)_
_
5.4_
]
j
E
]_
h
t
]
_
2
-1

L
k

=
_[5.4+
6002S
210000
[
462
1
(45.7 )]
_
5.4[
2S
210000
[
462
1
2
-1
= 3738 mm

L
k
= 3.738m

c is the taper factor (shape factor) which accounts for the haunching of
the restraint length (BB.3.3.3)

c = 1 +
3
_
h
t
]
_-9
(
h
h
h
s

)
2
3

_
L
h
L
j

c = 1 +
3
[
462
1
-9
(
462-17
462
)
2
3
_
3
3
= 1.15


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

37

Figure22Dimensionsdefiningtaperfactor(BSEN199311:2005)

C
n
Is the modification factor for non-linear moment gradient (BB.3.3.2).

The plastic moduli are determined for five cross-sections indicated on the figure
below, the actual cross-section considered are taken as being normal to the axis of
the basic rafter (unhaunched member). The plastic moduli together with the relevant
information regarding the evaluation of the ratios N
i
/M
i
are given in the following
table. The worst stress condition at the hunch/rafter intersection (location 5) is
taken.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Member checks Haunch
Sheet No

38

Position on haunch (FIG ) 1 2 3 4 5
Distance from the eaves
(m)
0 0.75 1.5 2.25 3
Depth of bottom web
(mm)
428 321 214 107 0
Factored moment (M
y,Ed
)
(KNm)
904.5 764.8 625.1 485.3 345.6
Factored axial force (N
Ed
)
(KN)
171.1 170.1 169.1 168.1 167.1
Moment capacity
(KNm)
1157 1011 784 686 447
Plastic modulus
(cm
3
)
4209 3677 2849 2495 1627
Ratio
(N/M)
0.19 0.22 0.27 0.35 0.48
a Value for (R) calculation
(mm)
532.5 479.0 425.5 332.0 231.0
R Value 0.86 0.84 0.89 0.79 0.86
Table2Memberforcesatlocationsindicatedinfigure18

Figure23Memberstabilityhaunchregion (Plum,1996)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

39

See
supporting
notes section
Appendix A

The modification factor C
n
is determined by the form;

C
n
= [
12
R
1
+3R
2
+4R
3
+R
S
+2(R
s
-R
E
)

in which R
1
to R
5
are the values of R according to equation below at the ends,
quarter points and mid-length ( R values at positions 1 to 5 indicated in Table 2)

In addition, only positive values of (R
s
-R
L
) should be included where,
- R
E
is the greater of R
1
and R
5

- R
s
is the maximum value of R anywhere ( R
1
to R
5
)
- R =
M
j,Ed
+ u N
Ed
]
j
w
pl,j

Where (a) is the distance between the centroid of the member and the centroid of
restraining members (such as purlins restraining rafter). Here for simplicity a
conservative value of (a) is found by conservative method of ignoring the middle
flange as shown if figure (19).

Figure24Simplificationfordistancebetween
centriodofrafterandpurlinsections


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

40

See
supporting
notes section
12.3
C
n
= _
12
R
1
+SR
2
+4R
3
+SR
4
+R
5
+2(R
s
-R
L
)
]
C
n
= _
12
(u.86) +(S u.84) +(4 u.89) +(S u.79) +(u.86) +2(u.89 -u.86)
]
C
n
=1.17
Ibus os I
s
=
C
n
L
k
c

I
s
=
1.17 3.738
1.15
= S.4m > Sm
Thus this portion of the rafter is stable over the assumed restrained length of 3 m
(haunch length), as L
s
is around 3m.

If the I
s
value was found to be less than the haunch length then a torsion restraint
should be provided in the haunch region as shown below
6.4.3Crosssectionresistance.

6.4.3.1ShearforceeffectsofPlasticmomentresistance

The shear in the rafter has been checked above, showing that V
Ed
< 0.5 V
pl,Rd
.
In the haunch, the shear area A
v
increases more than the applied shear V
Ed
,
so the shear force has no effect on the plastic moment capacity of the haunch.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Sheet No

41

See
supporting
notes section
12.4

6.4.3.2AxialforceeffectsofPlasticmomentresistance,
The tables provided below gives the axial and moment resistances of the
haunch section at points 1to 5 shown in figures 18. A series of checks is
carried out to determine whether the cross-sectional moment resistance M
N,Rd

is reduced by coexistence of axial force.

Position
Distance
(mm)
N
Ed
(KN)
A
(mm
2
)
N
pl,Rd

(KN)
A
web

(mm
2
)
(A
web,
f
y
)/y
mo

(KN)
1 0 171.1 16092 4023 8216 2054
2 0.75 170.1 15064 3766 7190 1798
3 1.5 169.1 14038 3510 6163 1541
4 2.25 168.1 13010 3253 5136 1284
5 3 167.1 11983 2996 4109 1027
N
pl,Rd
= A

f
y
/ y
mo
and f
y
=275N/mm
2

Table3Axialforceatpositionsindicatedinfigure18forhaunch

Position
Distance
(mm)
M
Ed

(KNm)
Is N
Ed
> Does Axial force
affect plastic bending
resistance
0.5 A
web
f
y

/y
mo

0.25
N
pl,Rd

1 0 950 No No No
2 0.75 850 No No No
3 1.5 751 No No No
4 2.25 652 No No No
5 3 553 No No No
Table4Checkingthesignificanceofaxialforceonplasticmomentofresistance



Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Comparison between outcomes of different codes
Sheet No

42
7.ComparisonbetweenDifferentCodes
As the dimensions of portal frame designed in this worked example were deliberately chosen to be
exactly the same as worked-example in (King, Technical Report P147) a comparison was done
between the carried out worked example to (BS EN 1993-1-1:2005), (BS9590-1:2000) and
(ENV1993-1-1:1992).
The following is a summary of different outcomes and source of design,
Design
no
Design
Code
Column
Section
size
Rafter Section
Size
Haunch
Length
(m)
Purlin
Spacing
(m)
Design
Source
1
BS EN 1993-1-
1:2005
533x210 UB
109
457x152UB
74
3 1.67
Worked -
example
2 BS9590-1:2000
610x229 UB
113
533x210 UB
82
3 1.85
(King,
Technical
Report
P164)
3
ENV1993-1-
1:1992
610x229 UB
113
457x191UB
74
3 1.85
(King,
Technical
Report
P164)
Table5Comparisonbetweendifferentcodeoutcome


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix A
Sheet No

43

EN 1991-1-
3:2003 (E)
Section 5.3.2

EN 1991-1-
3:2003 (E)
Table C1
8Appendix
A.1 Roof shape coefficient

The values given in table A1 apply when the snow is not prevented from sliding off the
roof. Where the snow fences or other obstruction exists or where the lower edge of
the roof is terminated with a parapet, then the snow load shape coefficient should not
be reduced below 0.8.

Table A1- Snow load shape coefficients (BS EN 1991-1-3:2003)
A.2Snowloadrelationships

The snow load on ground; the characteristic value depends on the climatic region; the
following table gives different expressions for different regions,

Table A2- Altitude-Snow load relationships (BS EN 1991-1-3:2003)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix A
Sheet No

44

EN 1991-1-
3:2003 (E)
Figure C.4

Where:
S
k
is the characteristic snow load on the ground (KN/m
2
)
A is the site altitude above the sea level (m)
Z is the zone number given on the map ( see fig A1 )

The following maps gives the zone number Z for UK and republic of Ireland if other Z
values for regions mentioned in Table A2 refer to EN 1991-1-3 Annex C pages ( 41 to 52 ).

Figure A1 UK , Republic of Ireland : snow loads at sea level (BS EN 1991-1-3:2003)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix B
Sheet No

45

TP/08/43
EC3/08/16
Manual for
the design of
steelwork
building
structures to
EC3

B1InitialsizingusingWellerscharts

The method described relies for its simplicity on a series of three charts developed by
Alan Weller. The chart has been constructed with the following assumptions and which
leads to reasonably economic solution (Note. This is not a rigorous design method; it is
a set of rules to arrive at initial size).

1) The rafter depth is approximately span / 55
2) The hunch length is approximately span /10
3) The rafter slope lies between 0
o
and 20
o
.
4) The ratio of span to eaves height is between 2 and 5.
5) The hinges in the mechanism are formed at the level of the underside of the
haunch in the column and close to the apex.

Each chart requires a knowledge of the geometry of the frame and the design loading as
input data in order to determine approximate sizes for the column and rafter members

Using of charts

Figure B1 Dimensions of portal (The institutionof Structural Engineers, TP/08/43

EC3/08/16)

a) Calculate the span/height to eaves ratio = L/h
b) Calculate the rise/span ratio = r/L
c) Calculate the total design load FL on the frame and then calculate FL
2
, where F is
the load per unit length on plan of span L (e.g. F =qs, where q is the total factored
load per m
2
and s is the bay spacing).

d) From figure B2 obtain the horizontal force ratio H
FR
at the base from r/L and L/h
e) Calculate the horizontal force at the base of span H=H
FR
W L.


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix B
Sheet No

46

TP/08/43
EC3/08/16
Manual for
the design of
steelwork
building
structures to
EC3

f) From figure B3 obtain the rafter M
p
ratio M
PR
from r/L and L/h.
g) Calculate the M
p
required in the rafter from M
p (rafter)
= M
PR
x W L
2
.
h) From figure B4 obtain the column M
p
ratio M
PL
from r/L and r/h.
i) Calculate the M
p
required in the rafter from M
p (rafter)
= M
PL
x W L
2
.
j) Determine the plastic moduli for the rafter W
pl,y,R
and the column W
pl,y,C
from
W
pl,y,R
=M
p,(rafter)
/f
y

W
pl,y,C
= M
p,(column)
/f
y

Where f
y
is the yield strength.

Using the plastic moduli, the rafter and column sections may be chosen from the range of
plastic sections as so defined in the section books.

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.4
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
R
i
s
e
/
s
p
a
n
H/wL
Span to eaves height
Figure B2- Horizontal force at the base (The institutionof Structural
Engineers, TP/08/43 EC3/08/16)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix B
Sheet No

47

TP/08/43
EC3/08/16
Manual for
the design of
steelwork
building
structures to
EC3

2.0 5.0 4.0
4.5 3.5
3.0
2.5
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045
R
i
s
e
/
s
p
a
n
M / wL
pr
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.05 0.055 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.065 0.075
5.0 2.0 4.5 2.5 4.0 3.0 3.5
0.045
R
i
s
e
/
s
p
a
n
M / wL
pl
Figure B3- M
p
ratio required for the rafter (The
institutionof Structural Engineers, TP/08/43 EC3/08/16)
Figure B4- M
p
ratio required for the column (The institutionof
Structural Engineers, TP/08/43 EC3/08/16)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix C
Sheet No

48

King Span
Website
Link
http://www.ki
ngspanstructur
al.com/multibe
am/rp/load_ta
bles.htm
C1KingSpanMultibeamPurlin(Loadtables)
Loading Load Factor

Dead load 1.4
Dead load restraining uplift or overturning 1.0
Dead load acting with wind and imposed loads combined 1.2
Imposed load 1.6
Imposed load acting with wind load 1.2
Wind load 1.4
Wind load acting with wind and imposed load 1.2
Forces due to temperature effects 1.2


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix C
Sheet No

49


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix D
Sheet No

50

(King,
Technical
Report P164)
D1Equivalentuniformmomentfactormtforallothercases

This formula, derived by (Sinhgh, 1969), is applicable in all cases, especially when the
bending moment diagram is not a straight line between the tensional restraints defining the
ends of the element.

Figure D1- Moment factors (King, Technical Report P164)


Prepared by:
Cia06mh
Date
16/02/2009
Appendix D
Sheet No

51

(King,
Technical
Report P164)

M
Ed1
to M
Ed5
are the values of the applied moments at the ends, the quarter points
and mid- length of the length between effective torsional restraints, as shown in
Figure D.2. Only positive values of M
Ed
should be included. M
Ed
is positive when it
produces compression in the unrestrained flange.

Figure D2- Intermediate moment (King, Technical Report P164)
D2Equivalentsectionfactorc
For uniform depth members, c = 1,0.

References
BSEN199113:2003Eurocode1ActionsonstructuresPart13:GeneralactionsSnowloads[Book].389Chiswick
HighRoad,London,W44AL:Standards,InstitutionBritish.
BSEN199311:2005Eurocode3:DesignofsteelstructuresBSEN199311:2005[Book].389ChiswickHighRoad,
London,W44AL:Standards,InstitutionBritish.
BurgessIanPLTPortalframedesignSoftware.20/01/1990.Vol.Ver1.3.
KingCMDesignofSteelPortalforEurope[Book].[s.l.]:ThesteelconstructionInstitute,TechnicalReportP164.
Kingspan[Online]//www.kingspanstructural.com.February10,2009.
http://www.kingspanstructural.com/pdf/double_span_tiled_roofs.pdf.
PlumLJMorris&DRStructuralSteelwrokDesigntoBS59502ndEdition[Book].[s.l.]:Harlow:Longman,1996.
SinhghK.P.Ultimatebehaviouroflaterallysupportedbeams[Book].UniversityofManchester:[s.n.],1969.
SX016,MatthiasOppeDeterminationofloadsonabuildingenvelope[Online]//www.accesssteel.com.AccessSteel.
October20,2008.http://www.accesssteel.com/Discovery/ResourcePreview.aspx?ID=J6osLkASHmChe7uBKVEzGw==.
TheinstitutionofStructuralEngineersManualforthedesignofsteelworkbuildingstructurestoEurcode3[Book].
TP/08/43EC3/08/16.



Plastic Design Portal Frame To Ec3

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Plastic Design Portal Frame To Ec3

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

DepartmentofCiviland

A client requires a single-storey building, having a clear floor area 30 m x 80

is the roof shape coefficient

is the in-plan second moment of area of rafter

in-plane second moment of area of rafter (32670 x 10

nominal yield strength of the rafter (275 N/mm

roof slope if roof is symmetrical (6

(a) Calculate slenderness and

Distance from column shear center to center of the side rail, a

(d) Calculate buckling resistance to combined axial and bending

Where bending moment is lower, the purlin spacing can be increased:

(b) Calculate buckling resistance to bending moment

The following is a summary of different outcomes and source of design,

Figure B1 Dimensions of portal (The institutionof Structural Engineers, TP/08/43

Loading Load Factor

Figure D1- Moment factors (King, Technical Report P164)

For uniform depth members, c = 1,0.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi