5.

Design of 18 m Span Shed with

Ridge-Type Roof Trusses
34 Particulars of Scheme
(a) A workshop building 18 m span, by 40 m long, by 5·5 m to the
eaves level is required for manufacturing purposes. Details are discussed
between the customer and the structural engineer, and frequently,
when this type of industrial building is required, the services of an
architect are considered unnecessary. The customer arranges for
the building work (e.g. preparation of site, foundations, brick walls,
etc.) to be carried out by a contractor of his own choice. Fabrication
and erection of the steel frame are carried out by the steel fabricator (or
constructional engineering firm) who mayaiso supply, usually through
a sub-contractor, any glazing or corrugated sheeting required for clad-
ding the frame. This type of building tends to be very competitive.
Nowadays buildings with ridge-type roof trusses are seen much less
frequently than in the past. The portal frame type of structure (see
'More Steel Frame Design Examples') is preferred by many as being
superior in appearance and ease of maintenance as weIl as providing
more usable interior space. Modem methods of production-line
fabrication which have been applied to portal frame construction have
resulted in this form of structure becoming very competitive in this
country. Nevertheless the rooftruss and column remains a good example
of framed trusswork.

(b) The following were decided during a meeting between the customer
and the design engineer.
(i) Size 0/ building. 18 m centres of side columns, 40 m centres of
gable columns and 5i m height from ground to eaves level.
(ii) Cladding (or covering). Asbestos-cement corrugated sheeting
with 12 mm thick insulation board was suggested with the object of
82 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
combining the initial economy of the outer covering with the advan-
tages of the underlining which reduces considerably the beat losses
from within the building. Steel sheeting provides an alternative means
of cladding but the cost of protection against corrosion can be bigb.
Modern forms of steel sheeting with a coloured protective coating can
be extremely attractive but are appreciably more expensive than
asbestos-cement products. A weIl designed and protected steel sheet is
likely to have a longer life than asbestos-cement and mayaiso be
preferred for appearance.
(iii) Glazing. A good standard of daylight illumination is required
and approximately one-third to one-half of the roof plan area is
provided with continuous 'patent type glazing' (i.e. aluminium- or
lead-covered steel bars designed to give puttyless glazing). An alterna-
tive means of admitting daylight to the building would be to arrange
for a certain proportion of the roof sheets to be replaced by transparent
roof sheets wbicb match tbe profile of the remaining sbeets. These
can be arranged in a pattern to give a more even distribution of lighting
than is possible with patent glazing arranged in linear areas along the
length of the building.
(iv) Ventilation. No special provision was required for ventilation.
(v) Condition 0/ site. There was a slight slope along the length of the
site, and it was decided to introduce a dwarf brick-wall to provide a
more effective break or finish between the sloping ground and interior
of the building than could be provided with relatively brittle asbestos-
cement sbeets.
(vi) Floor construction. A 100 mm tbick floor of reinforced concrete
laid on a weIl consolidated hardcore 150 mm tbick was considered
suitable for tbe floor, bearing in mind tbe condition of the ground as
weIl as tbe floor loading.
(vii) Access doors. No large pieces of equipment were to be manu-
factured and no provision was made for large doors but double-
leaved hinged doors were provided in each gable.
(viii) No special provision was required for plant which migbt
affect either tbe spacing or loading of structural members and tbe
design engineer was free to decide bis own arrangements.

35 Layout of Steelwork
(a) Tbe layout of steelwork in tbe form of a line diagram is given in
Fig. 5.1. Tbere being no restrictions affecting the layout of tbe steel-
work, adecision must be made regarding tbe economical spacing
of columns and roof trusses. Economy in tbis instance will be a function
of botb purlin and roof truss economies and the spacing of roof trusses
and columns may vary between 3 m and 6 m. Larger span trusses may
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 83
40 ...... CEtHR 5
rA
\5IDE/

~
(,ABLE C.01..1.I11 N
,\-·S '" WIND
(,I!>,OER

---+
-----
~
\'0 ...,
4·5",
HOOR

"Ir
1
LtVEL [------1
ROOF ROOF
/ TRlI&S TRUSS
4·5 / '- I -......
--
",
-<

/
r----<
4·5
'"
4 ... 4", 4", 4,., 4",
Li
A
PLAN AT ROOF TRUSS TIE l~VEL

ROOF Pu RLiNS '\

mpliiilllllll'- \.
I!HI I C, LAI ING \
111111 111111 111111 \..
'1111 111 111111

H (,LAZIN(,

PP.RT
-
PLAN AT
-
PUf/.I..IN
-
LEVEL

SIDE / / SflEETI ~G RA\LS

ßRAC ING
Klillh, f
11111111 1111,

PART SIDE. ElEVATIO

('I'IBLE ELEVATION

HG. 5.1. 18 m span shed.

Framing diagram.

generally be spaced at larger centres than smaller spans. In this ca se

the length of the building is 40 m wh ich divides conveniently into ten
equal spaces of 4 m each. Gable columns will be spaced at 4·5 m giving
four equal spaces in each gable frame.
This spacing of the main building frames at 4 m centres is suitable
when the purlin sections are to be fabricated from hot-rolled angle
84 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
seetions. An alternative form of purlin is available which is cold-rolled
from steel sheets 3 mm or 5 mm thick into the form of a 'Z'. Usually
galvanised steel strip is used for these lighter purlins which are larger
in depth than conventional rolled sections. Good section design results
in the section having a high moment of resistance consistent with a
minimum use of material and spans of 6 mare very economical.
If this latter pattern of purlin is preferred then the spacing of the main
building frames can be increased and a more economical building
provided.

(b) Whatever type ofroof covering is adopted it is essential to follow the

maker's recommendations as to roof slope and sheet fastenings. This
may weIl decide the pitch of the roof truss rafter slopes and in this
case a roof slope of 221° is adopted. Very shallow trusses result in
high loadings in the members and deep trusses will result in long
lengths of strut which are uneconomical. Commercial practice varies
between a ridge height of one-fifth to one-quarter of the span, cor-
responding to a rafter slope of 211° to 261°. Recommended spacings
for cladding or sheeting supports vary according to type of sheet
selected and in this case are:
roof 1·37 m; sides and gable 1·82 m.

(c) The best arrangement for the internal framing of the roof truss
would be for the rafter or node points to coincide with the purlin
positions. In this example the spacing of the purlins is 1·37 m which
does not coincide with the economical rafter panel length of 1·8 m to
2·3 m. A rafter panellength of 1·94 m is adopted with a form of roof
truss framing which does not give long lengths of struts. However,
because the purlin positions and the node or panel points do not
coincide it will be necessary to design the roof truss rafter for flexural
as weIl as axial loads. A 75 mm rise is given to the centre portion
of the roof truss, partly to offset deflection, and partly to improve
appearance.

(d) Grade 43 steel is used throughout the design.

36 Effect of Wind on Building ,

Before commencing the detailed design of the building it is necessary to
investigate the effect of wind upon it. CP3: Chapter V: Loading: Part 2,
Wind Loads, is the appropriate specification and careful consideration
should be given to it so that the wind loading on the structure may be
assessed as accurately as possible. Wind loading usually has two basic
effects:
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 85
(a) Local damage may be caused to small areas of c1adding and the
supporting members by relatively small pockets of high wind gust
pressure without endangering the stability of the structure (e.g.
isolated roof sheets or window glass may be broken).

(b) Larger pockets of wind may endanger the stability of the building
but because of their size it is likely that the average wind pressure will
be lower than in case (a) because the high local gust effect is spread
over a larger area. Class A loading refers to case (a) and Class B or C
loading refers to case (b). Tbe division between Class Band C loading
is determined by the size of the structure.
The design procedure for assessing wind loads may be carried out as
folIows.
(a) The basic wind speed (V) can be determined from the Code of
Practice and is based on the basic wind speed likely to be experienced
in the locality of the building (e.g. Manchester, V = 45 mts).
(b) Tbe design wind speed (V.) is the product of V, SI, S2, and S3, where
SI, S2, and S3 are factors taking into account the topography,
environment, and life of the building.
For this example the following values are assumed.
(i) For cladding (i.e. local damage)
V= 45 mtsec
SI = Topography factor = 1·0
GrOUnd roughness category 3]
S2 = 0·78 ( Height of building 10 m
Class A loading
S3 = 1·0
V. = 45 x 1 x 0·78 x 1 = 35·1 mts

(ii) For structure (i.e. stabiIity)

V = 45 mts
SI = 1·0
Ground roughness category 3 }
S2 - 0.74 { Height of building 10 m
- Class B loading-greatest horizontal
dimension of building is less than 50 m
V. = 45 x I x 0·74 x 1 = 33·3 mts
86 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
(e) Calculate dynamie wind pressure (q) for building. At this stage the
wind velocity is converted into apressure.
q = kV. 2
When using SI units
k = 0·613
q(cladding) = 0·613 X 35·P = 755 N/m 2
q(structure)= 0·613 X 33.3 2 = 680 N/m 2
(d) The pressure eoefficients (Cl') for the various building surfaces are
now evaluated from the Code of Practice and the wind loadings
calculated for each surface. The total wind load acting on the building
is the vectorial summation of the wind loads acting on the various
surfaces. External pressure coefficients are denoted Cl'e and internal
pressure coefficients are denoted CI'I.
Wind load normal to a building surface
= Area of surface X (sum of Cl'e and CI'I) X dynamic wind pressure
The precise assessment of internal pressures is likely to be difficult,
if not tedious, and in this case, as indeed in the majority of cases, a
simplified procedure is acceptable. Provided that no large openings
are present in the cladding surfaces the value of CI'I may be taken as
the more onerous of +0·2 or -0·3.
Internal press ure does not affect the overall conditions of building
stability but must be taken into account when individual structural
members are being considered.
In areas of cladding adjacent to eaves, ridge, and gable a special
risk occurs in that these areas are subject to high press ure as the wind
swirls and accelerates. Local values of Cl'e for the roof and sides are
-1·1 and -1·0 respectively.
The values of press ure coefficients appropriate to this example
are given in Fig. 5.2 and the following relationships were used to decide
the pressure coefficients.
. h height to eaves 5·5
Ratlo- = =-
w width of building 18
= 0·31
corresponding to hlw ~ !.
. [ length of building 40
RatIO - = =-
w width of building 18
= 2·2
corresponding to i < [lw< 4.
Roof angle = 22!O
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 87
-0,0
WIND +0'7
t
-
WIND
-0'3 i -0·4 ! +
I
-0,7 1-0'7

---,--
I I
f---t- --
-0.3 1 -004 I
-0·6 I -0·.,

-
-0.5
+0'7 I -0·25 -0·5
- ---+--- -I---t---

[ci)

~
-0·6 -0·\
PLAN PLAN
0·3
\

CRoSS SEC TIONS

FIG. 5.2. Details ofwind loading.

(a), (b), (c) Wind pressure coefficients for wind direction normal to
side of building. (d), (e), (f) Wind pressure coefficients for wind
direction normal to gable of building.

37 Roof Purlins
Roof purlins may be considered as secondary members and higher
stresses than those used for the design ofmain members are appropriate
provided that the resulting deflection does not crack brittle cladding
panels, impair the weathertightness of the roof, or give an appearance
of weakness in the structure. As previously stated it is possible to use
the normal hot-rolled sections for these members, or the use of cold
4
88 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
rolled steel purlins may be eonsidered. No standard seetions are
available for the latter type, eaeh manufaeturer marketing his own
seetion. If this type of purlin is preferred the maker's recommendations
as to loading and defleetion must be followed. For this example a
normal hot-rolled steel angle seetion is adopted.

Design 0/ sheeting pur/in

Dead load:
kN/m 2
Sheeting 0·161
Insulation 0·036
Purlin self weight 0·058

0·255
Superimposed load 0·695

0·950 kN/m 2 measured on slope

The superimposed load eorresponds to an allowanee of 0·75 kN/m 2

(see CP3: Chapter V: Loading) measured on plan area.
Area supported by one purlin = 1·37 x 4 = 5·48 m2
Load on one purlin = 5·48 x 0·95 = 5·21 kN
It is likely that some degree of eontinuity will exist over the supports
and a value for the bending moment of W x L/1O is reasonable.
However, eaeh end of the purlin should have at least two eonneeting
bolts to help eontinuity, otherwise a value of W x L/8 should be used.
M = WL/1O = 5·21 x 4/10 = 2·08 kNm
z = MI! = 2·08 X 103/165 = 12·60 em3
A 101·6 X 63·5 X 6·3 angle is suitable having a z = 15·4 em3 •
The 63·5 mm leg ofthe angle reeeives ample lateral stiffening from the
cladding and is quite satisfaetory over a span of 4 m.
BS 449: 1969, clause 45, recommends the following minimum
requirements:
Depth = span/45 = 4000/45 = 89 mm
Width = span/6O = 4000/60 = 67 mm
. _ W X L _ 5·21 X 4 X 103 _ . 3
MIO. Z - 1.8 X 103 - 1.8 X 103 - 11 6 cm
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 89
The proposed section meets these requirements apart from a slight
deficiency in width which is sufficiently small to be acceptable.
This method of purlin design is suitable for purlins located on roof
slopes of 300 or less. If the slope is greater, then the load should be
resolved into two components parallel to the legs of the angle section,
and bending stresses calculated about both axes and summated in a
similar manner to that adopted for the design of the side cladding
supporting rails.
Purlins are lightly-Ioaded members and it is possible that excessive
deftection may damage brittle c1adding materials. In cases where this
occurs it is important that some consideration be given to limiting the
deftection to, say, span/200. The true deftection will be difficult to
assess and should lie between the condition for a simply supported
purlin over one span (deftection = (5/384)(WL3 IEI» and the condition
for a two-span continuous beam (deftection = (1/185)(WL 3 IEI).
Assume deftection = span/200 = 20 mm, and since deftection =
(5/384)(WL 3 IEI) then the moment of inertia required
5 x 5·21 X 40003
- 384 x 210 x 20 = 103 cm4

A 101·6 x 63·5 x 6·3 angle has a moment of inertia = 106 cm3 •

The proposed section is satisfactory when viewed from the criterion of
deftection.
Purlins adjacent to areas of high local wind pressure should be
checked for the uplift condition in which an external pressure coefficient
of 1·1 combines with an internat pressure coefficient of 0'2, giving a
total pressure coefficient of 1·3 .
. d upI'r
Wm I' (
1 t on pur m q =
755 NI m 2) = 1,3 x 103 x 5·48
755

= 5,37 kN
Minimum vertical load acting in opposite direction
= dead load
= 0·255 x 5·48
= 1·39 kN
Net uplift = 5·37 - 1·39 = 3,98 kN
This is less than the load for which the purlin was designed and should
not produce unduly high stresses in the purlin at the underside edge
which in this loading condition will be in compression. It may be
argued that the hook bolts which secure the sheeting to the purlins
will provide some restraint to the edge of the purlin. If it is feIt to be
90 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
desirable a horizontal sag-rod can be used at the mid-span of the
purlins which occur adjacent to these areas of high local wind press ure.
An angle section 101 mm deep and spanning 4 m can be considered
adequate, indeed many designers would feel justified in using a lighter
section, say 75 mm deep.
The giazingpurlin will support a heavier load and may be designed in a
similar manner. A 101·6 X 63'5 X 7·82 angle is considered satisfactory.
An additional 50·8 X 50·8 X 6·32 angle is used in conjunction with
the glazing purlin to support the glazing bars. This angle may be in the
form of short lengths local to the glazing bar positions or if it is made
continuous in length it will prevent any broken panes of glass from
falling into the building.
38 Design of Roof Trosses
(a) Se/f weight 0/ t'IISS. From Fig. 5.3 it will be seen that a roof
truss of 18 m span weighs approximately 800 kg.
~o

·wo /
\00
/
V
/
,.......
0') /
.....
.Y.
/
t-
~
/
50 /
/
/
./
100
V
/'
o 10 20 30
SPAN (m]
FIG. 5.3. Weights of roof trosses.

Estimated weight of truss = 800 kg (8 kN).

Equivalent weight per sq. m of roof slope
weight of truss
- 2~--~~~~-----------
X rafter length X truss centres
8
- 2 X 9·72 X 4 = 0·103 kN
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 91
(b) Loading.
Dead 10ading:

Sheeting- Glazing-
Asbestos sheeting 0·161 Glazing 0·293
Insulation board 0·036 Purlins 0·122
Purlins 0·066 Self weight 0·103
Selfweight 0·103

0·366 0·518

Superimposed 10ading: 0·695 kN{m 2 (as for purlins).

Wind loading: (see Fig. 5.2(d) and (e».
Pressure coefficient = -0·7 - (+0·2) = -0·9
Dynamic wind pressure = 680 N{m 2

(c) Force diagrams (see Figs. 5.4 and 5.5). Force diagrams are the most
convenient method of obtaining the forces in the bars of the roof
truss. Strictly speaking, force diagrams can only be drawn for pin-
jointed frames but in practice the necessity for joint (or gusset) plates
between the members renders the frame statically indeterminate.
Practical necessity ignores this fact and simple force diagrams are
acceptable. A further advantage may be gained by assuming all loads
as being equal although glazing areas produce a higher intensity of
load than sheeted areas. The glazing areas are uniformly distributed
and no unacceptable error should arise because of this assumption.
Forces in bars due to the superimposed load can be obtained by
multiplying the dead load force by the ratio of superimposed load{
dead load. If conditions prevent the above assumption from being
acceptable then separate diagrams must be drawn for each loading
condition.
Length of sheeting per rafter = 6 m
Load from sheeting = 6 X 4 X 0·366 = 8·78 kN
Length of glazing per rafter = 4 m
Load from glazing = 4 X 4 X 0·518 = 8·29 kN
Total load per rafter = 17·07 kN
17·07
Dead load per panellength of rafter = -5- = 3·41 kN
Length of c1adding per rafter = 10m
92 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES

FRAME DIAGRAM

s:
7 BAR 5lC-7x
DEAD LOAD FoRCE
DIAG~AM 1'\

~""~ I~ I~ ~o ~5 kN
LOAD SCALE.
FIG. 5.4. Roof tross.
Force diagram for dead load

Superimposed load per rafter =

10 X 4 X 0·695
= 27·8 kN
Superimposed load per panellength of rafter
27·8
= -5- = 5·56 kN
Super load = 5·56 = 1.6
Ratio
Dead load 3·41
Length of cIadding per rafter = 10 m
Load firom wm. d 10 X 4 x 0·9 x 680
= 103
= 24·5 kN
24·5
Wind load per panellength of rafter = -5- = 4·9 kN
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 93

~·S
~'"
L! '2·4kN
14 I M IN
FRAME
Q
DIAG.RAM 24.SkN~

o 5 10 15 ?O 25
1",,1 I I I I

lO"'o SCALE. [k.N]

FIo. 5.5. Roof truss.
Force diagram for wind load

Force diagrams can now be drawn and the forces in the bars tabulated
as shown in Fig. 5.6. It is, however, not possible to draw the force
diagrams for the truss framing as shown without making a temporary
modification. Point 5 cannot be located because it lies on a line
joining points 7 and 8 which are not known at this stage in the con-
struction of the diagram. Point 5 is 'by-passed' temporarily by inserting
the bar 5x-7x (shown dotted). This enables points 7 and 8 to be located,
leading in turn to the location of point 5. Bar 5x-7x is now deleted.

(4) Design of roof truss members. After the forces in the bars have
been tabulated the first stage in the design of the members is the
relative importance of the various combinations of the three basic
loading conditions.
94 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
FIG. 5.6. Table of forces in roof truss members.

Dead Dead
Dead Super Wind +
Super
+
Wind
Bar
C T C T C T C T C T

B-l 42·0 67 57 109 15

E-6 35·0 56 55 91 20
Q-l 38 61 52 99 14
Q-8 21 34 26 55 5
1-2 4·0 6 6 10 2
3--4 6·0 10 8 16 2
2-3 3 5 4 8 1
7-8 17 27 26 44 9

C represents compression.
T represents tension.
All loads given in kN.

(i) Dead load (permanent load)

(ii) Superimposed load (occasionalload) } Positive
(iii) Wind load (occasional load) } Negative
The following combinations of loading are possible:
Case I Condition (i).
Case 11 Condition (i) + (ii).
Case III Condition (i) + (ii) + (-iii) = (i) + (ii) - (iii).
Case IV Condition (i) + (-iii) = (i) - (iii).
From the above possible combinations it will be seen that the
maximum positive case is Case 11, and provided that load (iii) is
greater than load (i) then the maximum negative case is Case IV.
Generally speaking, a member which is a strut under Case II (e.g.
roof truss rafter) will be adequate under Case IV. However, a tie
member under Case II which becomes a strut under Case IV will
require designing as a strut. This is a case in which the tie becomes
subject to load reversal due to the effect of wind and an increased [Ir
ratio of 350 is tolerable in these circumstances.
It has already been stated that the joint (or gusset) plates used to
connect the members together induce some degree of restraint at the
connection points. As the truss deflects, and because the ends of the
truss members are restrained, some bending or 'secondary stress' is
induced. This is ignored provided that all members are in the form of
angles and the use of flat bars for tie-members is not allowed.
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 95
(i) Compression members. Rafter- Member E-6. Design load 91·0
kN; panellength 1·94 m; purlin load 6·92 kN.
Ofthe five lengths forming the rafter, the length E6 has been selected
for design as carrying the most adverse condition ofaxial load and
ftexural bending caused by the purIin load and panel or node point
not being coincident. By inspection of the preliminary layout drawing
it is possible to locate the purlin which lies nearest to the centre of any
of the panel lengths. The maximum ftexural bending due to the purlin
loading will occur in this length.
The design of the rafter is treated in a similar manner to that out-
lined previously for a multi-storied column subject to axial compression
and bending. Good continuity exists over the node points. Across the
x axis of the rafter (Le. in the depth of the truss) an effective length of
strut member equal to 0·7 times the panel length will be adopted. On
the y axis (Le. across the truss horizontaIly) the rafter is restrained by
the connection between the purlins and the roof truss rafter. The
purlin cIeats forming the connection can be assumed to give only
partial restraint to the rafter, and an effective length of 0·85 times the
purlin spacing will be adopted.
Try two 88·9 x 63·5 x 7·85 angles.
r", = 2'79 cm r = 2·70 cm A = 22·74 cm2
y

I", = 177·6 cm 4 L", = 1·94 m L = 1·95 m y

I", = 0·7 x 1·94 = 1358 mm I/r", = 1358/27'9 = 49

Iy = 0·85 x 1·95 = 1660 mm I/ru = 1660/27 = 62
pe = 124 N/mm 2 (BS 449: 1969, Table 17a)
Ic = P/A = 91 x 103 /2.274 x 103 = 40 N/mm2
The complementary compressive bending stress will occur over the
node point on the underside of the angle section (see Fig. 5.7). An
approximation may be made as to the bending moment occurring at
this point. It would be extremely difficult to achieve a true analysis of
the moments occurring along the length of the rafter.
Bending moment over support
=i x bending moment on rafter length assuming simple
supports
2 W X a X b 2 6·92 X 0·68 X 1·26
=-x L ="3 1·94
3 X

= 2·05kNm
I" =M X Y = 2·05 X 106 X 60·4 = 69.6 / 2
Jbe I 1776 X 103 N mm
96 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
Check stress ratios:
/c/p" = 40/124 = 0·323
he/be = 69·6/165 = 0·423
0·746 (Iess than unity)

Section is satisfactory.

DEFLECTED SHAPE
OF F.AFTEp, (?

~
" ..,
'2.~~ c..\~~c=T'" TENSiON
C.OMPRESSION

FIG. 5.7. Bending in roof truss rafter.

Secondary struts-Members 3-4 or 4-5. Design load 16 kN; length

1·83 m (centres of end connections). The maximum llr ratio is 180 for
members of this type (see BS 449: 1969, c1ause 33) and because the
load is relatively small it is Iikely that this limit will be approached. These
members are not continuous, as was the rafter designed above, and
provided that at least two bolts are provided at each end ofthe member,
an effective length ofO·85 times the distance between end connections is
acceptable (see BS 449: 1969, clause 30).
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 97
Try 63·5 x 50·8 x 6·25 angle.
r u = 1·07 cm A = 6·82 cm2
= 1830 mm [ = 0·85 x 1830 = 1560 mm
L
[Ir = 1560/10·7 = 146 pe = 42 N/mm 2
Je = WIA = 16 x 103 /0.682 X 103 = 23·4 N/mm2
(ru is the least radius of gyration for this section.)
Section is satisfactory.
The remaining angle struts carry very small loads and two criteria
should be applied to such members.
(i) Limit [Ir ratio to 180.
(ii) Decide on the minimum size of angle leg (say 50 mm) that is
suitable for connection purposes.
Minor angle struts- Members 1-2 or 6-7. Design load 10 kN;
length 860 mm.
Try 50·8 x 50·8 x 6·32 angle.
rv = 0·99cm
[ = 0·85 x 860 = 731 mm
[Ir= 731/9·9 = 74 pe = 111 N/mm 2
Ic = W/A = 10 x 103 /0.608 X 103 = 16·5 N/mm 2

It should not be necessary to check any of the strut members for load
reversal conditions caused by wind loads.
(ii) Tension members. It is convenient to use angle sections for
the tie or tension members but as only one leg is usually connected it is
necessary to make allowance for the eccentricity of the connection
by assuming that only a portion of the unconnected leg is effective
(see BS 449: 1969, clause 42). Tbe area of hole must be allowed for
and it is usual to deduct the area of one hole only from each member.
If holes are required in both legs (e.g. at a joint in the main-tie) then
the spacing of holes in one leg must be 'staggered' in relation to the
holes in the other leg. The major tie-member in the frame is bar Q-I
which is subject to load reversal under wind conditions. Tbis produces a
strut condition which is more severe than when tension is present. Tbe
length of this member is taken as 5·25 m which is measured from the
roof truss eaves to the point along the tie where angle ties running
longitudinally along the building length are provided.
98 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
Main-tie. Member Q-1. Load 99 kN (tension) 14 kN (compression).
Try 76·2 X 63·5 X 7·90 angle.
Gross area of connected leg = (76·2 - 3·9) X 7·9 = 572 mm2
Gross area of unconnected leg = (63·5 - 3·9) X 7·9 = 471 mm2
Total gross area = 1043 mm 2
(The gross area of a leg is equal to the product of the angle thickness
and the leg size less half the thickness of the angle.)
Net area of connected leg = 572 - (7·9 X 22)
= 398mm2
3al
Net area of unconnected leg = 471 X 3-:----"--
al + a2
3 X 398
= 471 X 3 X 398 + 471
= 338mm2
Total net area = 736 mm 2
Pt = 155 N/mm 2
(BS 449: 1969, clause 41)
Allowable load = 736 X 155/103 = 114 kN
Section is satisfactory.
The load reversal condition will now be investigated.
L = 5250 mm [ = 0·85 X 5250 = 4460 mm
[/r = 4460/13·2 = 339
(Limit of [/r ratio is 350. See BS 449: 1969, clause 44.)
pe = 10 N/mm 2 + 25 per cent
(See BS 449: 1969, clause 13.)
= 12·5N/mm2
Je = W/A = 14 X 103 /1.04 X 103 = 13·4 N/mm2
These figures indicate that the member is slightly overstressed. However,
the design length of 5·25 m ignores the restraint value produced by the
connection at mid-point for members 1-2 and 2-3, and for this reason
the proposed section is satisfactory.
Load reversal in the remaining members is not likely to prove
troublesome with the exception of the centre portion of the main tie
(Q-8) and the crown-tie (7-8). The sections shown for both these
embers exceed the [/r limit of 350 but the degree of reversal is so
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 99
small as to be capable of being ignored. If preferred the sections
mentioned can be increased as folIows:
End main-tie (Q-l) 76·2 X 76·2 X 7·85 angle
Centre main-tie (Q-8) 76·2 X 63·5 X 6·25 angle
Crown-tie (7-8) 76·2 X 63·5 X 6·25 angle
In the latter two cases the 76·2 mm leg should be outstanding from the
plane of the truss.
Minor angle fies. Following the precept used in the design of the
minor struts a 50·8 X 50·8 x 6·32 angle will be suitable.
(e) Design 0/ connections. A detailed drawing of the roof truss is given
in Fig. 5.8 and 20 mm dia black structural bolts are used throughout
in the main connections. In the smaller angles (50·8 mm size of leg)
16 mm dia bolts will be used. If convenient, it is usual to erect the truss
in halves before despatch from the workshop to the site. Each half truss
would consist of a triangular frame bounded by one rafter, a crown-tie
and the outer portion of the main-tie. The central portion of the main-
tie and the central vertical suspender would be despatched loose. Site
connections would be made with black bolts. If preferred the truss
could be despatched as a bundle of loose pieces for assembly at site.
The ultimate cost of the truss will be affected by the choice of method
employed and it may be that either will be chosen in practice depending
upon the particular conditions at the time.
In the rafter only, the connection bolts are in double shear passing
through two angles, or in bearing passing through the gusset or con-
nection plate. Usually the design of the connection is settled by the
bearing value of the plate through wbich the bolt passes. For tbis
reason it is customary to have a thicker gusset plate at points of double
shear in order that the bearing value of the bolt will be closer to the
double shear value of the bolt. Otherwise, the bearing value associated
with a thinner gusset plate will result in a larger number of bolts being
required. At the ends of the rafter 10 mm thick gusset plates will be
used and 8 mm thick gusset plates will be used elsewhere.
The tabulated load values for bolts are given in Fig. 4.22.
Load values for a 20 mm dia bolt are:
single shear 25·1 kN,
double shear 50·3 kN,
enclosed bearing (in 10 mm thick plate) 40 kN
simple bearing (in 10 mm thick plate) 32 kN.
RaJter: Load 109 kN.
Number of bolts required = 109/40 = 3 minimum.
Main-tie: Load 99 kN.
Number of bolts required = 99/25·1 = 4 minimum.
 PlNGLE T IE
ASBESTOS-CEMENT SHEET5

tVV'~~A(/
~. . ) 'FDd=~ ....
r ~(n,", xG3 · S x ro .? - 41-10LIOS AT
8IH~xSS" )<7'9 AN<:>LE PUP,LlN ~ JOINT
PlIRLIN i, / 1
C.LEAT RooF TRUS5 RAFTER
PURLIN CLEAT5 V' EW f3
BOllS 20 DIA EXCEPT
\ MID- POINT OF IN 50 ·8 ANGL ES
Wt-lERE T HEY AR
{RMTEf'..
1(;; D IA. ,Ne;, ~A'O
CLADD ING ~ \
-.. C. L. TRU55
I 6~~1l~
<;Q
I'
RA FT EP-
I "2/65.9><(,,3. 5><7 .55 L
VI EW 1\ c-
GUSSETS
BARS ·c· ARE STHICK
50·6 x SO· 6)< " ' 32 L UNLESS
STATEP
RMTER A.
S LOPE
'22~D
"3 ·5" ro3 ·5" "''Z2L
[CENTRE PORTI ON OF
T I E RA ISED 75
,C.L .
9000 9000
" 371<9 UE!>
ELEVATION
FIG. 5.8. Details of roof truss.
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 101
Two bolts will be sufficient to transmit the remaining loads. No single
bolt connections should be used because the conditions of strut design
were based on an effective length of 0·85 Land an end connection of at
least two bolts.
Tbe number of bolts required in the intermediate rafter connections
should be sufficient to resist the difference in force between two ad-
joining panel members. In roof truss work the difference is small and
the necessity of providing a suitable connection is the criterion rather
than the problem of difference in force within adjoining members. It is
also necessary to ensure that the two angles forming the rafter section
act in unison with each other and do not tend to buckle apart between the
gusset plate connections. In double angle construction it is necessary
to ensure that the slenderness ratio (I/r) of the single angle between
fastenings is no greater than for the double angle over its whole design
length. To satisfy this condition an additional bolt is provided mid-way
between each gusset plate with a thick washer to act as a packing
piece between the angles.
Angle deats are used to secure the angle roof purlins. Each purlin
should have a two bolt connection at each end, making four bolts in
the vertical leg of the purlin deat where a purlin joint occurs and two
bolts elsewhere. Generally, purlins are provided with a two-bolt
connection at each end when the span exceeds 3 m. If a single bolt
connection is used below this span the effective length of the roof
truss rafter should be increased from 0·85 L to 1·0 L.

39 Design of Side Columns

(a) Design 0/ column shaft. The pressure coefficients for the wind
loads acting transversely across the building are shown in Fig. 5.2(b)
and (c). Internal wind pressure does not affect the overturning condi-
tion because it is acting equally in all directions. Wind load acts as
apressure over the whole surface under consideration, but for con-
venience of calculation it is assumed as concentrated at the centroid
of each surface.
Wind load on vertical faces
= 5·5 X 4 X (0·7 + 0·25) X 680/103 = 14·20 kN
Wind load on inclined roof surfaces
= Resultant horizontal component produced by 0·4 and 0·3
pressure coefficients
= (0·4 - 0·3) X (10 X 4 X (680/103 » X sin 22!0 = 1·03 kN
Overturning moment about column base line (see Fig. 5.9(a»
= 14·20 X 3·25 + 1·03 X 7·86 = 54·2 kN m
102 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
It will be assumed that the overturning moment is shared equally
between both columns. This assumption is based on the reasoning
that both column caps deflect an equal amount because they are
connected together by a roof truss which is capable of passing the
out-of-balance forces produced by the wind from one column to the

DIRECTION [0·3] [0-4]

OF WIND .. \~~...=.;::..::r-~!
~
"? E
[0..21..- [O'7tO' 2 51 14''20k N "
.n
~E
'"
1- 27·[ kN""
15·Z3kN
"..- 27·lkN""
3·02kN
"-INDUCED
[a.]
FIG. 5.9. Wind load sustained by side columns.

other allowing an equalisation of moment to take place. The out-of-

balance force at column cap level may be calculated as folio ws (see
Fig. 5.9(b)).
Moment at column base = 54·2/2 = 27·1 kN m
Wind load on column face
= 5·5 X 4 X 0·7 X 680/103 = 10·48 kN
Wind load at column cap level transferred from roof truss
= 1·03/2 X 7'86/6 = 0·67 kN

(Half of the roof wind load (1 ·03 kN) assumed to be applied at each cap
level and increased in relation to height of mid rafter level/co lu mn cap
level.)
Out-of-balance force (A) at column cap
= (10,48 X 3·25 + 0·67 X 6 - 27'1)/6 = 1·84 kN
This force is small and the rooftruss will be capable oftransmitting this
load without any modification being necessary to the existing design.
On large buildings it may require consideration and the roof truss
main-tie designed to accommodate this additional load.
In addition to the wind loading causing a bending moment at the
column bases it will also result in an increase in the load in the column
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 103
on the leeward side of the building and a corresponding decrease in
the load in the wind ward column as the overturning effect takes place.
Load induced in columns by wind
overturning moment 54·2
= = - = 3·02kN
span of columns 18
An assessment of maximum and minimum loading conditions in the
columns may now be made.
Max. kN Min. kN
Dead load from roof truss 17·05 17·05
Superimposed load from roof truss 27·20
Weight of side framing and sheeting 5·50 5·50
Self weight of column 3·00 3·00

52·75 25·55
Induced wind load (+) 3·02 (- )3,02

55·77 22·53

Moment at base due to wind = 27'1 kN m.

A preliminary choice of section may now be made bearing in mind
two conditions.
(i) In a column loaded as shown the effect produced by bending is
very much greater than the effect produced by axial load and for this
reason the column can be thought of as a bent vertical beam rather
than as a conventional column in wh ich the axial load effect is much
greater than the bending effect. A VB section should be chosen in
preference to a VC section.
(ii) Because of the canti lever be am effect it is likely that horizontal
deflection at the column cap level must be considered. The defiection
or displacement must not result in damage to the cIadding or lead to
unsightly deformation of the structure. It is doubtful whether an exact
analysis of this deflection could be made because it is affected by such
undefined factors as partial restraint at the eaves connection between
column and roof truss, stiffening effect of the cIadding upon the
building, floor construction, and the partial relaxation of the assumed
fixity of the foundation. For the purposes of this design the column
may be taken as behaving as a simple beam canti lever carrying a
uniformly distributed load producing a moment at the support equal
to the base moment of 27·1 kN m. Any modification to this assumption
must be made by the designer in the light ofhis experience with buildings
of this type.
Wx L3
Deflection = 8 X E X J
104 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
But M = W x L/2 and the deflection may be written as M x V/
4xExI.
Following the recommendations of BS 449: 1969, clause 31, the
deflection will be limited to 1/325 of the column height.

·
MaXlmum dfl·
e ectJOn = 6000
325 = 18 mm

27·1 X 103 X 6000 X 6000

Then 18 = 4 X 210 X I
and I = 6·45 X 107 mm 4 = 6450 cm4

A 304 X 124 X 37 kg UB has a moment of inertia = 7143 cm4 and

may be adopted as a trial section wh ich must now be checked for
conventional column behaviour.
lz = 1·5 X L = 1·5 X 6 = 9·0 m
ly = 0·75 X L = 0·75 X 6 = 4·5 m

(See BS 449: 1969, appendix D, Fig. 15.)

= 9000/123 =
I/r z 74 I/r ll = 4500/25·8 = 175
pe = 30N/mm2
(BS 449: 1969, Table 17a.)
D/T = 304/10·7 = 30
pbe = 82 N/mm 2
(BS 449: 1969, Table 3a.)
In checking the stress ratios it will be necessary to investigate two
conditions:
(i) Dead plus superimposed loadings in which the stress ratio must
notexceed unity (1.0).
(ii) Dead plus superimposed plus wind loadings in which the stress
ratio requirement may be increased by 25 per cent (1·25). The increase
in stress in case (b) when compared with case (a) is due solely to wind.
Wind forces can be classed as an occasionalload in that it is unlikely
that a building will be required to withstand maximum wind loadings
very frequently. In fact the wind pressures recommended by CP3 are
based on a maximum gale situation occurring only once in fifty years.
A 25 per cent increase in stress is justifiable in these circumstances
(see BS 449; 1969, clause 13).
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 105
Check stress ratios.
Dead plus superimposed 10ading
tc = W/A = 52·75 x 103 /4.74 x 103 = 1H N/mm2
f"e = 0
tc/Pe = 1H/30 = 0·37
f"e/Pbe =0
0·37 (less than unity)

Dead plus superimposed plus wind loadings

tc = W/A = 55·77 x 103 /4.74 x 103 = 11·8 N/mm2
!oe = M/z = 27·1 x 106 /470 x 103 = 57·7 N/mm2
tc/Pe = 11·8/30 = 0·394
fbe/Pbc = 57·7/82 = 0·705
1·099 (less than 1·25)
The proposed section may be regarded as satisfactory.

(b) Design 0/ column connections. Connections will be required on

the column for three purposes.
(i) Column cap, (ii) sheeting rails to support cladding, and (iii)
column base.
In cases (i) and (ii) the only requirement is for an adequate connec-
tion to be made between the parts and no calculations are proposed
because the loads are smalI.
Item (iii) (column base):
Maximum load = 55·77 kN
Minimum load = 22·53 kN
Bending moment = 27·1 kN m
Base shear shared equally between two columns
= 7·61 kN (see Fig. 5.9(a»
A built-up gussetted base will be adopted in which the gusset plates
will transfer the bending moment to the base plate. A suitable size
for the base may be determined by deciding the spacing of the anchor
bolts required to give a good resistance to overturning and for this
purpose an anchor bolt spacing of 450 mm is adopted. The anchor
bolt spacing across the other axis of 225 mm will result in a suitable
spacing between the bolt boxes during the casting of the concrete
foundation block.
106 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
Referring to Fig. 5.10 it is reasonable to suppose that the point of
rotation would be the line BC (point A in elevation).

55·771<.N [Ma.)C.1
.Z'Z.53kN [Min)

27"1 kNII'l

'Zoo
10
t.
~o DIA x....-"
4'50 A"ICHOP. 377
Bo LT l--..::c.:.;'-t--ook-::..;r

ALL WElDST E.LEVATION

Go FILlET
'"00

~~
1 ~~

'2'2. 5 I
]: I
:!~ "ilF
~I:: l~

450
1
c
PLAN
HG. 5.10. Column base design.

Moment occurring about point A

= 27·1 - 22·53 x 0·152 = 23·68 kNm

This moment is resisted by the tension load (T) in the anehor bolts.
23·68 x 103
Force (T) in 2 anehor bolts = 377
= 62·8 kN
or, 31·4 kN per bolt.
From Fig. 4.22 it will be seen that a 20 mm dia bolt will earry a tension
load of 28 kN. If an allowanee of 25 per cent in the allowable load is
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 107

",ROOF TRUSS

~~~~~
200 I PLATt: \0 ,HICK
H.f'. . GUT ER

: I
I·r·:~.r. ' 1150
I' .f, .u • ...1.
~ 1
;z
Ci PLAN ON CAP
A GlE R 1\ IL Cl
lOH" " 7"''2 ~ 7· 90 L -<
..J
V Sl'IAF'T Of COUJMN
304 x 124x 37k~ UB
5500
f-
Z ß.o-SE.
w
r: 450 PLATE
710 · 2 UJ ~IOTHICK
u
,
./
ANGLE CLI;. ...T
VIEW'A'
..... Vl
0 Z~S ~~300
f-
I I
81\·9.< 710·2 ~ 7·82 L
VI
ILJ
<0 15 ~OO
4 HOLES AT
JOINT
'"
..:: PLAN ON BASE

ANCHOR BOlT
20 DIA
450 LONC,\ ONCRETE
AROCORE.

ÄNCHOR
PLATf.
10 TH ICK

VIEW'A,' SECTION T\-IROUGH SIDE. OF ßUILDING

FIG. 5.11. Details of side columns.

made because the force in the anchor bolts is due to wind, then the
size of bolt proposed is adequate. The anchor bolts can be 450 mm
long with 10 mm thick anchor plates. Details of the column are given
in Fig. 5.11 and reference should be made to section 29 for a description
of procedure at site.
108 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
40 Design of Mass Concrete Foundation to Resist Overtuming
Two ca!Oes will be considered for foundation design.
(i) Dead plus superimposed plus wind loadings. (Overturning with
maximum verticalload.)
(ii) Dead plus wind loadings. (Overturning with minimum vertical
load.)
A foundation block relies for its stability upon positive pressure
acting across the fuH area of the base and the bed joint between the
ground and the concrete block cannot resist tension because there is no
jointing medium present. Because the overturning moment is large in
relation to the vertical load a block of sufficient weight should be
provided to ensure that no tension takes place at the heel of the base.
The two loading conditions are shown in Fig. 5.12.
w::: tOO'S7kN

M : ± '27· t kNrn

DETAILS OF LOADtNG

+KI I J I I I
PRESSURE DUE TO W

I:
cl. =
-IT~ 1791

PRE5SU~E~+T"i: 3 x 597 ~I•

DUE TO M ~

'!:!._t1/~!I
A Z w 1'1
COM61NED
PRESSvRE
A Z )
CASE I (ASE TI
FIG. 5.12. Foundation block design.

Case 1
Try a 2 m x I m x 1 m deep block.
Verticalload = 55'77
Weight of block = 2 x 1 x 1 x 22·4 = 44·8

100·57 kN

bd 2 1 X 22
Z of base = ""6" = - 6 - = 0·67 m3
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 109
Pressure due to verticalload

= -AW = -
100·57
2-- - 50·28 kN/m 2

Pressue due to overturning moment

= -Mz = -0·67
27·1
= 40·5 kN/m 2

Pressure at toe of block

W M
= A + Z = 50·28 + 40'5 = 90'78 kN/m:l
Pressure at heel of block
W M
= A - Z = 50·28 - 40·5 = 9·78 kN/m2

It will be seen that a size of block has been chosen with the necessary
weight to offset the overturning effect and ensure a positive pressure
over the fulllength of base.

Case 11
Verticalload = 22·53
Weight of block (as before) = 44·8

67·33 kN

A first investigation will show that the (W/A) pressure is less than the
(Mlz) pressure indicating that tension appears to be present at the
heel of the block. However, it is possible to overcome this by limiting
the length of block in the following manner.
Move the 67·33 kN load a distance e from the centre-line of the
block so that the overturning moment on the block remains the same.
This in no way affects the loading on the foundation and it is still
subject to the same verticalload and bending moment as before.
M= Wxe
M 27·1
or e = W= 67.33 = O'403m
If compression or positive pressure is present over the full base length,
the distance e must be less than 1 of the base length. In this case
1 x base length = 0·33 m indicating that if the full base length is
used, then tension will exist at the heel of the base.
110 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
Assume a restricted base of length d 1 • If zero pressure is present at
the heel of a length d 1 the position of the vertical load must coincide
with the third point next to the toe of the block. This third point lies
O' 597 m from the toe of the block.
d1 = 3 X 0·597 = 1·791 m
Apressure diagram as shown is applicable in which the area of the
pressure diagram is equal to the verticalload.
p X 1·791 X 0·5 X 1 = 67·33
P= 75 kN/m 2
A size of block was chosen to demonstrate the two conditions of
pressure and it is likely in practice that a smaller block would prove
suitable because both calculated bearing pressures are low.

41 Design of Side and Gable Sheeting Rails

On the sides of the building supporting the asbestos sheeting or cladding
are angle rails spaced vertically at 1·82 m and spanning 4 m on the
building sides and 4·5 m on the gables. The larger span will be adopted
for design purposes indicating that one size of angle will be adopted
for both locations. A bending moment equal to W X L/lO will be used
for design purposes.
Spacing of rails = 1·82 rn
span = 4·5 rn
Vertical loading: kN/rn 2
Asbestos sheets = 0·161
Insulation = 0·036
Self weight = 0·050
0·247 kN/rn 2

Load = 4'5 X 1·82 X 0·247 = 2·02 kN

M= W xL = 2·02 X 4·5 = 0'91OkNm

10 10
Try 101·6 X 76·2 X 7·90 angle (101·6 leg outstanding).

f (top edge, cornpression) = M; Y

= 0·91 X 106 X 19·0 = 26 N/ 2

668 X 103 rnrn
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED III
0'91 x 106 X 57·2
f(bottom edge, tension) = 668 X 103 = 78 N/mm2
The wind pressure coefficient is made up of two parts.
(a) Local external coefficient (Cpe ) = -1,0
(b) Internal coefficient (Cpl) = +0·2
Sum of pressure coefficients = Cpe - Cpl
= -1,0 - (+0'2) = -1,2
Dynamic wind pressure (q) for cladding = 755 N/m2 •
Horizontal loading
= Area X q = 1·82 X 4·5 X 1·2 X 755/103 = 7·41 kN
M =W xL = 7·41 X 4·5 = 3.34 kNm
10 10
3·34 X 106 X 31·6
f(front edge, tension) = 1380 X 103 = 76·5 N/mm2
. 3·34 X 106 X 70 2
f(rear edge, compresslOn) = 1380 X 103 = 170 N/mm

The disposition and summation of the stresses is given in Fig. 5.13.

'2·02. kN

+ 210
7(;"'5
- '50''5
J 31·'" 70 +26
+ 170
+1'36
-::::::::::,.. _I / -

-+!f
19·0 ,x 1~)I.tD)(7&'2 x 7·9
7·4 IkN L
':I Je
57·2 I
ALL STRESS ES
IN N/Mrtl2.
-78
-78 / STRESS DISTRIBUTION
-7&'5
DUE TO VERTICAL LOADING
--
- I 5 4 '5
,
IJnJ-r.....I
'4tt1UIIIllllil+
-710'<;;
170
STRESS DISTRIBUTION DUE
TO HORIZONTAL LOADING

FIG. 5.13. Stress distribution in sheeting rails.

112 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
Horizontal deflection assuming simple supports
5 X W X L3 5 X 7·41 X 45003
- 384 X E X 1- 384 X 210 X 1380 X 103 = 30·3 mm
30·3 I
= 4500 = 148 span
Although this deflection appears to be high it is not likely to result in
damage to the sheeting. If the angle rails are secured by two bolts at
each end the deftection will be rather less (say 20 mm) than the cal-
culated figure which is appropriate to simple supports.
The maximum calculated stress is compressive in nature, occurs at
the inside edge and is approaching the maximum of 206 N/mm2
(165 + 25 per cent). This edge at which the maximum stress occurs is
an unrestrained compression ftange but it may be assumed in the
design of sheeting rails that the stiffness of the sheeting together with
the hook bolts securing the sheets provide the necessary restraint.
Some designers contend that to prevent sag in a horizontal member
a limit of 200 should be placed on the value of [Ir for the member.
This is purely an empirical rule. Applying this idea to the present case
the l/r = 4500/22·3 = 202.
It is of interest to give further consideration to the design of the
angle rails. The span, as weil as the wind loading taken for design
purposes was the worst of several values applicable to the building
and it would be possible to adopt reduced sections where appropriate.
However, two further alternatives exist, the first of which is to reduce
the column spacings adjacent to the gable ends because it is on these
areas that the worst wind conditions apply. The effect of span reduction
would be to make the smaller section, appropriate to a lower pressure
area of the building, usable in areas of higher pressure. Or, the
size of angle rail appropriate to a lower pressure area may be adopted
and additional angles of the same section used in higher pressure areas.
Additionally it might be assumed that the vertical weight of the
sheeting was supported by the foundations, thus relieving the angle
rails of this portion of the load and resulting in a lighter section being
acceptable.
Whatever decision is made in assessing the validity ofthe above points
the design engineer will always attempt to provide an economical
solution appropriate to the particular environment in which he is
working.

42 Design of Gable Steelwork

The gable steelwork is required to resist a considerable area of wind
pressure in addition to the verticalload caused by the self weight of the
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 113
framing and cladding. It is in dealing with the wind pressure that the
main difficulty arises, and one solution which is frequently used in
practice is to support the gable columns at roof truss tie-level with a
horizontal wind girder (see Figs. 5.1, 5.14). Load reactions from the
gable wind girder at the corner columns of the buHding are transferred
to the foundation level by means of bracing in the sides of the building
(see side elevation Fig. 5.1).

(a) Design 0/ gable wind gi,de,. Two cases of wind pressure acting
on the gable frame require investigating (see Fig. 5.2).

Case J. Wind blowing on to gable. Total pressure coefficient in direction

of wind = 0·7 + 0·1 = 0·8.
An assumption will be made that the loads resulting from this
pressure may be divided equally between each gable and because the
wind may blow in either direction the members of the wind girders
must be designed for load reversal. Any out-of-balance loads between
the two wind girders will be passed along the structure, mainly by the
angle ties at roof truss tie-level, but also by the roof purlins, side rails
and cladding.

Case JJ. Wind blowing perpendicular to gable (normal to side of

building). In this case the pressure coefficient is 0·6 acting equallyon
each gable as a suction loading. Provided that the gable columns are
adequately framed and connected together, as they are in this case, by
angle ties at roof truss main-tie level, then no out-of-balance loads
exist. Provided that the angle ties are adequate to resist the tension
forces set up by this condition of wind loading it is not necessary to
consider Case 11 any further.
From the above it will be seen that Case I is the criterion for design.
Dynamic wind pressure on each of two gables
= pressure coefficient X q

0·4
= 2" X 680 = 272 N/m2
Referring to Fig. 5.1 5:
Wind load on area A = 2·25 X 3·212 X 272/103 = 1·96 kN
Wind load on area B = 4'5 X 4·60 X 272/103 = 5·65 kN
Wind load on area C = 4·5 X 5·988 X 272/103 = 7·32 kN
The force diagrams and tabulated loads in the bars of the gable wind
girder are given in Fig. 5.1 5.
11 304 x 124 x 37 kS UB C.L. OF ROO F "TRUSS
I. n j 15, C.l. OF GUS5E TS Dl
?'OOF T RUSS MAIN- TI E /"

8&'9 ~ 76-2 x 6-30L _ _ 200011'

r
GU55 ET PlATE5 8 lHleK "'/ 111710-'2.
ßOL T5 20 DIA
710-2 I
11 4000
'o0 .'bi-1o''L'' \- ~p- - _.~ 2:J!p m~
- f \1

-:>_<)1- -_\-
2000 11I
v~? =
\'

101_10 " 710-2 '" 7- 90 l ~

C 'Zo3xl:l3", 25k9 U l!> D 5ECTION D-D
B 4500 4500 4500

~Sll'
102
1 i
304xl24x37k9 UB
5Ec.rION c-c
SEC 11 0N ß-B

PLAN ON WIND GIRDER [ 5EGTION

ON FIG 5- 1 ~
A-Al
FIG. 5.14. Details of gable wind girder.
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 115
A 0 ~
- r______________~-,~----------~2rw
~ID~
3·7 ....
~~i5 :
1\ c~o-,>
WIND ,
2·75
m
,A
1
~_ , __
~::J!
<cd .....
..... "'1~oEP.

J
GA&LE
COLUMt-J
..,
2·75
FLooR ,I

4·5 4.5 AtJ

4·5 4.5 SECTION A-A
M no-. ",., m
ELEVATION oF GABL.E SHOWING
ARE.A5 RESISTED Sy WIND GIRDER
~AR FORc.E.~I<.Nl
ANGLE TIES
1 1/ V -;rROOF TROSS I
~-I
E-Z
.~~
-- - --I-H K-I 23

IM/~1~\~1F
J-3 30
1-2- 9
D '3-4 7
f
(·%kN
t f t5'6~ t
K 5.GSJ 7.32H
FRAME DIAGRAM 1'~6kN

cl.
~r-------------~~ 11·27\(101

Jr---~~~------~--~'
e~--------------~ FORCES F=OR
SIDE SP,ACING
hr---~~~------~----~

9r-------------~~
f FORc.E DIAGRAM

.5IDE Bf1..AcING

FIG. 5.15. Gable wind girder. Frame diagram, force diagram

and table of forces.

From the table of loads in the bars it will be seen that the loads are
smalI, and bars sizes are likely to be very slender. To maintain rigidity
and prevent sagging of the bars under their own weight, it will be
necessary to place a limit on the Ifr values for the individual bars.
Wind forces produce loads which only reach their full intensity on a
very few occasions, and a higher value of Ifr is permissible than for
main members of a frame carrying permanent or nearly permanent
116 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
loads. A maximum value of l/r equal to 250 will be adopted. Any
proposed section must be checked for excessive deflection as weIl as
strut behaviour.
Bar E-l. Load 25 kN.
1= 0·85 L = 0·85 X 5200 = 4410 mm
If l/r = 250 then r = 4410/250 = 17·7 mm. 2-63'5 X 50·8 X 6·25
angles bol ted together as shown in Fig. 5.14 have a r value of 19·5 mm.
Check for normal strut behaviour

~ = 4410 = 226
r 19'5
pe = 19 N/mm 2
As the loading is wholly induced by wind the above value may be
increased by 25 per cent:
pe = 19 + 25 per cent = 24 N/mm 2
Allowable load = area of section X pe
= 1364 X (24/103 ) = 32·8 kN
The proposed section is satisfactory. A depth of 110 mm (including
thickness of gusset plate) is available in this section to offset deflection
which is likely to occur in long struts carrying smallioads and which is
due to the self weight of the member. An approximate rule to allow
for this condition is to make the section depth equal to I/50 of the
span. In this case the ratio of span/50 is equal to 104 mm which is
satisfactory.
The remaining members may be designed in a similar manner. To
give the necessary strength to members K-l and J-3 it is connected to
a conveniently placed gable sheeting rail by means of batten plates
(see Fig. 5.14). Bar 1-2 is not required to carry a large axial load but
supports the dead weight of the girder and this should be borne in
mind when deciding a section for this particular member. An
88·9 X 76·2 X 6·30 angle is recommended for this section and meets the
span/50 rule previously adopted. This member must run unbroken
from the gable frame to the next adjacent truss and not be jointed at
any intermediate gussets.
The design of the bracing in the sides of the building required to
transfer the wind girder reaction load to foundation level will now be
considered. A single angle section arranged as shown in Fig. 5.16 is
satisfactory and the bracing system consists of the top sheeting rail
with the addition of the inclined angle already mentioned. To increase
the efficiency of the top sheeting rail it should be battened by bent
flats to the lowest purlin on the roof slope and if this is done it will not
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 117
be necessary to investigate this member any further. With regard to the
vertical load of 14 kN, the column is wholly adequate to carry this
small additional force. The load of 22 kN in the inclined bar may
be tensile or compressive in nature, depending upon the direction of
the wind. A 1ength of 7 m is excessive for economical strut design and
this may be reduced by fastening the bracing to the side sheeting rails
along its length. An estimated effective length for this member will be
taken as 1·25 times the distance between sheeting rail restraints,
bearing in mind the difficulty of accurately estimating the effect of
restraints in this case.
L = 2·22m 1 = 1·25 X 2220 = 2780 mm
Limit l/r to 250 then r = 2780/250 = 11·1 mm.
A 76·2 x 63·5 x 6·25 angle has a minimum r value of 13·3 mm.
Check for strut behaviour:
l/r = 2780/13·3 = 209
pe = 22 N/mm2 which may be increased by 25 per cent to 28 N/mm 2 •
28
Allowable load = 836 x 103 = 23·4 kN

(b) Design 0/ gable column. The gable columns will behave as simply
supported vertical beams spanning between the ground and the wind
girder position. This is a simplification of the situation in that the
columns will behave as a form of continuous member beyond the
wind girder level. Because of this continuity the maximum bending
moment is taken as WL/lO as compared with WL/8 for a simply
supported member.
Wind pressure coefficient for gable
= 0·7 + 0·3 = 1·0
Wind load acting on one gable column
= 4·5 X 5·5 X 1·0 X 680/103 = 16·8 kN
Bending moment = WL/lO = 16·8 X 5·5/10
= 9·25 kNm
Verticalload (gable sheeting, framing, etc.) = 14 kN
Try 203 X 133 x 25 kg UB:
l",= 0·85 L = 0·85 x 5500 = 4675 mm
l~ = 0·7 L = 0·7 x 5500 = 3850 mm
118 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
I/rz = 4675/85·3 = 55 I/r y = 3850/29·5 = 131
pe = 51 N/mm 2 (BS 449: 1969, Table 17a)
D/T = 203/7·8 = 26 pbe = 126 N/mm 2 (BS 449: 1969, Table 3a)
Check stress ratios:
_ W _ 14 X 103 _ • 2
/c - A - 3.23 X 103 - 434 N/mm

M 9·25 X 106
f"e = z= 231 X 103 = 40·1 N/mm 2

/c/Pe = 4·34/51 = 0·085

!be/Pbe = 40·1/126 = 0·319

0·404

The proposed section is satisfactory.

It should be noted that although the sum of the stress ratios is low
the I/r ratio is relatively high and any reduction in section is not
recommended.
In order to triangulate the gable frame below eaves level and to
increase its stability, a nominal bracing angle is introduced between
the corner column and the next gable column. A 76·2 X 63·5 X 6·25
angle will be satisfactory provided that it is fastened to the gable
sheeting rails in a similar manner to that employed for the side bracing.
This additional member will help to 'square-up' the structure during
erection. Such members are frequently used in practice for this purpose
although not required on the grounds of strength.

(c) Gable rafter. The loading condition for this member is similar to
the gable sheeting rails and the same section will be adopted. A small
angle (63·5 X 50·8 X 6·25) is introduced into the gable frame to
support the gable rafter at mid span points between the columns and
to complete triangulation of the frame. Details of the gable framing are
shown in Fig. 5.16.

43 Slendemess Ratios of struts (l/r)

In this chapter four limiting values of I/r have been used and to
prevent confusion they are summarized below.
(i) I/r = 180. This is the usual limit applied to columns and all
struts forming the main frame of a building.
(ii) I/r = 200. Applied to secondary members with light loading
where it is desirable to limit the flexibility of the secondary member.
'"
ALL HOLES COU!\JTERSUNK
ON SHEETING FACE
RAILS 5ECl!RED TO COlUMNS
BY 88,9" 88·9" 7-90 L C.LEATS
WElDED TO COLUMNS
GUSSET PLATES 8 TH ICK

I
101,,, x 76'1. " 7· 90L.

\J~---f ~ I 76'2 ~
f A : c =;1"""~ ...... ~~ ----.t* --..... b" ~41A
5"500 TO HOOR " ,
304 x 124)( 37kg UB 203" 133>< 25kg UB _ _ _ _ _ _
I ./
76-2" <03 - 5 >< 0 ' 25 ' , /
BRACING ........ '-11
7r,,·Z

4500 111 4500 4500

FOR 5 EC TI ON A-A
SEE FIG 5·14- 5ECT ION
PAR1 ElEVAT ION OF GABLE FRAME. B-B

FIG. 5.16. Details of gable frame.

120 STEEL FRAME DESIGN EXAMPLES
(iii) Ifr = 250. A limit applied to members introduced into a structure
to resist wind loadings only.
(iv) Ifr = 350. Applied to roof truss members which normally act
in tension but are subject to areversal of load during maximum wind
conditions.

44 Note Regarding Design Loads and Choice of Sections

In the examples of design given in this chapter it will be noted that
many of the design loads are smaIl, and for this reason it may be
thought possible that they may be ignored. To the experienced designer
the abbreviation of calculations is only possible because of his ex-
perience. This text is primarily concerned with design from a student's
or young engineer's point of view and in this context no such abbre-
viations are possible, nor have they been made. The student should
concentrate on correct load assessment, detailed design 0/ each member,
and maintaining equilibrium in all parts 0/ the structure as the prior
considerations. From the point of view of design the condition of
equilibrium will be met if the following three conditions are satisfied.
(i) Aigebraic sum of all horizontal forces and reactions acting on the
structure should be zero.
(ii) Aigebraic sum of all vertical forces and reactions acting on the
structure should be zero.
(iii) Aigebraic sum of all bending moments taken about any point
on the structure should equal zero.
For the purposes of design a structure is broken down into smaller
parts and sometimes into a two-dimensional problem. The student
should always be prepared to think in three dimensions because it is in
this context that the building exists. When an experienced designer
decides to adopt a section which appears to be aminimum, or less
than minimum size, he is judging the issue against his experience of
three-dimensional behaviour of similar complete structures rather
than upon consideration of a particular member of the structure in
isolation. To the inexperienced onlooker this sometimes appears to
consist of arbitrary decisions, but as stated above, it is only possible
because of his considerable experience. No attempt has been made to
simulate this refinement in this text and consequently some of the
sections chosen may appear to the experienced engineer to be less
competitive than he would accept in practice.

45 Design of Rainwater Gutters and Downpipes

Although rainwater goods are not part of the steel frame it is applicable
to consider suitable sizes in order to complete the scheme. Rainwater
 DESIGN OF 18 m SPAN SHED 121
goods are usually designed using empirical rules and the following
may be considered suitable for rainfall conditions likely to be
encountered in this country.
Centres of down-pipes = 12 m.
Cross-sectional area of one pipe = plan area drained/14·4 X 103
(mm units).
Cross-sectional area of gutter = twice area of downpipe.
Applying these rules to this example:
Centres of down-pipes = 12 m (fastened to every third column).
. db d . 12 X 9 X 106 00
Area d rame y one own-plpe = 14.4 X 103 = 75 mm.
2

A 100 mm dia down-pipe has a cross-sectional area of 7860 mm 2 •

Cross-sectional area of gutter = 2 X 7500 = 15 X 103 mm2 •
A 200 mm half-round (Le. semi-circular) gutter has a cross-sectional
area of 15·7 X 103 mm2 •
Materials from which rainwater goods are made are cast iron,
asbestos-cement, aluminium alloy, galvanized sheet steel, or rigid
plastics. Each length of gutter should be 2 m long and supported by
two forged flat steel straps bol ted to the lowest purlin. Down-pipes
are manufactured in similar lengths but one forged steel strap is
sufficient fastening for each length when bolted to the side column.