Ec3 Design 170412092432 PDF

Design of a steel frame according to Eurocode –
SAP2000 Training Program
CSI Portugal & Spain

1
Contents of Frame Design Example
Contents
1. Architectural and environmental conditions

2. Architecture
3. Portal frames
4. Roof and walls sheeting
5. Purlins
6. Bracing systems
7. Actions
8. Actions combinations
9. Steel sheeting design
CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 2

Contents of Frame Design Example
Contents (cont.)
10. Modeling the structure

11. Load assignments
12. Frame buckling analyses
13. Equivalent imperfection forces
14. Members buckling lengths
15. Members automatic ULS check
16. Members automatic design
17. SLS check

1. Architectural and Environmental Conditions
Objective: Design steel structure for indoor sports facility in the suburbs
of the city of Évora (Portugal) with a covered area of 60 x 30 m2
Arquitectural requirements:
• Soil suitable for slallow foundations

• Materials: steel S275 for framework and S235 for roof and wall sheeting
concrete C25/30
rebar reinforcement: S400

2. Architecture
Roof shapes
1) Flat frame
imin = 0.5-1% for drainage
2) Duopitch or gable frame
Slope decreases
moments in the middle
region of the rafters

2. Architecture
3) Single slope, monopitch or shed frame 4) Parabolic or circular frame
5) Multispan frame

2. Architecture
Chosen solution: 15 steep duo-pitch roof shape
Portal frame components:

3. Portal Frames
Portal frames structural behaviour

1) Simply supported beam
Simply supported because of (i) support

conditions or (ii) variable inertia
2) Articulated (pinned) frame
Isostatic

3. Portal Frames
3) Rigid connections frame
Hiperstatic
Plastic stress-resultant
redistributions possible
4) Cable stayed frame
Very slender rafters prone

to up-lifting by wind

3. Portal Frames
Rafter solutions
1) Hot-rolled I- or H-section profiles 2) Welded beams (composed

of unperforated plates)
L < 30 ~ 35 m Support moments higher than
span in rigid connections frame
Solution: use knee joint
knee joint
3) Tapered beams: simply supported rafter

Simply supported beam
For simply supported

rafters or articulated
frames

3. Portal Frames
4) Perforated beams: honeycomb

Increased bending resistance and
stiffness maintaining shear resistance
Tubes can pass throught the beams
Higher costs (cuting and welding)
Usually pinned beams (may not resist bending +
shear at supports)
5) Cellular beams: uniform or tapered

Similar to honeycomb + esthetics L0/h = 15-30
Fabrication Uniform section Tapered section

3. Portal Frames
Constant depth Variable depth

6) Planar trusses
20 < L < 100 m
L0/h = 10-12 L0/h = 5-6

7) Spatial trusses
Cubes or tetrahedron shape

Hollow section profiles
Complex connections
Light solutions for long spans
Reduces bracing required
Boeing factory Olympic pool

3. Portal Frames
8) Cable-stayed solutions
Extreme rafter slenderness
Additional column compression
Roof weight vs up-lifting forces
Possible up-lift due to wind forces
Solution for large spans

3. Portal Frames
Chosen solution:
Rafter: planar truss; RHS profiles;

welded connections
Rigid
Rigid connection connection
(bolted) (bolted)
Column:
HEA or
HEB

3. Portal Frames
Portal frames spacing
1) Regular (5-7 m) • IPE, Z, U or channel purlins

• Moderate actions
• Economical solution
2) Reduced (< 5 m) • Very high loads (wind, snow, insulation materials, soil)
3) Increased (> 7 m, < 12 m)
• Trussed purlins
• Interior constraints to column locations
• Roof sheeting suitable for long spans
Chosen spacing:
6m

4. Roof and Walls Sheeting
Elements: (i) Sheeting (iii) Drainage elements
(ii) Purlins (iv) Joint elements and purlins bracing
Sheeting:
1) Corrugated fibre-cement: economical, brittle, unesthetical,
heavy, low insulation, asbestos fibres are unhealthy
2) Trapezoidal steel sheeting: longer spans, lighter, thermal insulation
possible, better esthetics, enough longitudinal strength for purlins
bracing
3) Corrugated aluminium sheeting: very light, corrosion resitant,
expensive, too deformable (shorter spans), high noise in heavy rain
4) Translucid plastics (polycarbonate): low strength (shorter spans),
sensitive to sunlight exposure (become brittle), combustible, very light
Adopted solution:
Steel sheeting with thermal insulation; 1.5 m spans

5. Purlins
Functions:
Main:
• Transmit roof loads to the rafters
• Brace the rafters upper chords or flanges
Optional:
• Brace the rafters lower chords (indirectely through the
lower chords bracing rods)
• Brace the portal frames for out-of-plane displacements
• Transmit longitudinal horizontal endwall loads to the
bracing system
Purlin solutions:
1) Spans up to 9 m - Hot rolled (IPE, UNP)

- Cold-formed (Z-, channel or lipped channel section)
2) Spans up to 15 m - planar or spatial truss beams - Planar beam with rods
- Planar beam with profiles

Chosen solution:
UNP (channel) profiles

5. Purlins
Connection to the rafter:
Types of connections to the rafters: (i) lower flange

bolted, (ii) plate bolted to the web, (iii) use a channel
Ovalisation: elongated bolt hole to function as a
movement joint for thermal action
Purlin configurations:
Vertical Inclined
• For predominatly vertical loads (snow or life) • For predominatly normal loads (wind)
• Easier to execute
Chosen configuration: Inclined

5. Purlins
Supports and joints: Purlin connection:
1) Simply supported
2) Gerber
3) Continuous beam
4) Two-span beam
Chosen solution:
Two-span beam in alternated
configuration (see next slide)

5. Purlins
Two-span alternated configuration reactions:

• Distributes more uniformly the loads on the rafters
Purlin
Rafter
Two-span
alternated:
Two-span non-
alternated: 1.875/2 6.25/2 3.75/2 6.25/2 3.75/2
One-span: 2.5/2 5/2 5/2 5/2 5/2

5. Purlins
Spacing
• Determined by the sheeting span (1.2-2 m

normally)
• Possibility of reduced spacing in localised

zones (e.g., where wind loads are higher)
Chosen spacing:
1.5 m

6. Bracing systems
1) Frame longitudinal and transversal bracing
2) Rafter lower chords bracing
3) Purlins bracing

6. Bracing systems
Transversal bracing Longitudinal bracing

• resists longitudinal horizontal loads (e.g., wind loads in the enwalls) • resists transversal horizontal loads
• prevents global buckling • prevents global buckling
• braces the rafters (absorbs their imperfection equiv. loads) • only used in highly deformable frames
Central Double-sided
• thermal action generates • thermal action may result in Chosen bracing:
negligible axial forces high axial forces
• Transversal double-sided
• purlins under compression for • purlins are not subjected to
wind loads (additional beams compression due to wind • No longitudinal bracing
may be necessary)
6. Bracing systems
Rafter lower chord bracing

• May be uniformly spaced or more concentrated on the most compressed zones
Diagonal Perpendicular
• transfers the instability loads to the purlins • works only in tension
• normally at q=45 • must be fixed at both ends
• low q: less flexible but may not work in compression
• high q: more flexible due to purlin bending endwall
column
purlin
rafter
chord bracing rod
chord bracing rod

Chosen bracing:
• Diagonal at 45

6. Bracing systems
Purlins bracing
Bracing rod, tie rod or sag bar:
• Absobs the roof in-plane load component
• Limits purlin minor axis bending
• Reduces purlins lateral buckling length
• Connected using nuts and washers
Bracing rod anchor:

a) Ridge (eave) purlins absorb the rod tension b) Diagonal rods transmit the tension to the rafters

7. Actions
1) Dead
EN 1991: Part 1-1
2) Live
EN 1991: Part 1-1
3) Wind actions
EN 1991: Part 1-4
4) Thermal actions
EN 1991: Part 1-5

7.1 Dead and Live Actions
Dead
Structural elements:  s  77 kN m 3 EN 1991-1-1 Table A.4

Note: members dead weight is automatically determined in SAP2000
Sheeting self-weight: qEd  0.05 kN m 2
Live
Roof: q Ed  0.4 kN m 2 (distributed)

EN 1991-1-1 Table 6.10
QEd  1 kN (concentrated)
H category – roof not accessible except for normal maintenance and repair

7.2 Wind Action
Wind force: Notes:

reference area • Fw.Ed is normal to the surface
Fw. Ek  q pc p Aref • friction force can be neglected
peak velocity differential pressure when: A// 4A∟
pressure coeficient
e.g.: A//  3a 2
Peak velocity pressure (qp) A  2a 2
Basic wind velocity: vb  cdir cseasonvb.0  1.0 1.0  27  27 m / s Évora county (Zone A): vb.0=27 m/s
(National Annex, Table NA.I)
directional factor season fundamental
factor velocity
Basic velocity pressure:
1 2 1
qb  vb  1.25  272  0.456 kN / m2
2 2
Peak velocity pressure:

q p (15 m)  ce (15 m)qb  1.98 0.456  0.903kN / m2
Terrain category: III (regular cover of vegetation or buildings)

7.2 Wind Action
External pressure coeficient (cpe) Internal pressure coeficient (cpi)

If area of opennings in each face is known:
Two wind directions are considered:

Area of openings with cpe  0
q  0º q  90º
 Area of all openings
Otherwise:
c pi  0.2,  0.3
(both should be considered)

7.2 Wind Action
Number of loading cases:
2 wind directions × 2 internal pressures = 4 wind loading cases
Differential pressure coeficient (cp):

c p  c pe  c pi

7.3 Thermal Action
Temperature in a element according to EN 1991-1-5:
1) Uniform
2) Linearly varying neglected (elements are flexible for bending)
3) Nonlinear neglected (elements are thin-walled)
Uniform temperature variation of an element:

Example:
Tu  T  T0
average temp. of an element average temp.

in summer or winter during construction
considering a temp. profile
Tin  Tout
T
2

7.3 Thermal Action
Uniform temperature variation for the steel members:
Inside temp. Outside temp. Members temp. Temp. variation
Summer T1  25º C Tm ax  45º C T  0.5Tmax  T3  T1   35 º C T   T  T0  15º C
Winter T2  18º C Tm in  5º C T  0.5Tmin  T2   6.5º C T   T  T0  13.5º C
Notes: National Annex, Évora county (Zone A) T3  0 T0  20 º C

Table NA.5.1 (National Annex, (bright light surface) (construction during
Location: Évora Tables NA.I and NA.II) Temp. profile is deemed spring or automn)
linear (conservative)

8. Actions Combinations
Actions combinations according to EN 1990:

• 50 combinations
• 7 are deemed the most unfavourable (green) Load pattern
DEAD LIVE WIND_1 WIND_2 WIND_3 WIND_4 TEMP+ TEMP-
CB_LIVE ULS_STR/GEO-B1_0 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_1 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_2 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_3 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_4 1.35 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_5 1 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_6 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_7 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_8 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_9 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_10 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_11 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_12 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_13 1.35 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_14 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_15 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_16 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_17 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_18 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_19 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_20 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_21 1 1.5 0.9
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_22 1.35 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_23 1.35 1.5

8. Actions Combinations
Load pattern
DEAD LIVE WIND_1 WIND_2 WIND_3 WIND_4 TEMP+ TEMP-
CB_WIND3 ULS_STR/GEO-B1_24 1.35 1.5
CB_WIND4 ULS_STR/GEO-B1_25 1.35 1.5
CB_WIND1 ULS_STR/GEO-B1_26 1 1.5
CB_WIND2 ULS_STR/GEO-B1_27 1 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_30 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_31 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_32 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_33 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_34 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_35 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_36 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_37 1.35 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_38 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_39 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_40 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_41 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_42 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_43 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_44 1 0.9 1.5
ULS_STR/GEO-B1_45 1 0.9 1.5
CB_TEMP1 ULS_STR/GEO-B1_46 1.35 1.5
CB_TEMP2 ULS_STR/GEO-B1_47 1.35 1.5
Note: automatic load combinations obtained using CTM 1.0 software

9. Steel Sheeting Design
Trapezoidal sheet sheeting:
Maximum wind load: qW .Ed   Q q pc p.max  1.5  0.9031.5  2.03 kN / m2 (up-lifting)
Permissable loads [kN/m2]

Thickness: 0.5 mm
Span: 1.5 m
Permissable load:
qRd  2.41 kN / m 2
qRd  2.41  qW . Ed  2.03

OK
Chosen thickness:
• 0.5 mm

9. Steel Sheeting Design
Sheeting distributed self-weight:
5% of weight increase due to

joint additional elements 6 m long sheets with 0.3 m overlaping
pEd  1.05  4.7 10 3  9.81  6 5.7  0.051 kN / m 2
sheet mass per sqr meter
Actions on the purlins
Sheeting self-weight: pG.Ed  pEd L  0.051 1.5  0.077 kN m
Uniform life load: pQ. Ed  qEd L cos   0.4 1.5  cos15 º  0.58 kN m
Maximum wind load: pW . Ed  qW .Ed L  2.03 1.5  3.05 kN m

10. Modeling the Structure
Modelled members:
Purlins bracing rod
Sheeting
equivalent beam
Lower chord
bracing
Rafter truss Purlin
Girt or wall purlin
Girts bracing rod

Endwall column
Transversal bracing
Portal frame column

Two frame models are used:
1) Stiffness model
Objective: perform buckling analyses
• Longitudinal purlins and sheeting axially fixed
• Purlins connect the rafters to the transversal bracing contributing
to their stability
2) Strength model
Objective: determine stress resultants for member design
• All purlins axially released (simply supported)
• Purlins do not transmit thermal loads, since they are provided with
movement joints (slotted connections)

Local axes of roof and

wall purlins:
1- axial
2- major deflection
3- minor deflection
Axis 3 (cyan) of UNP profile should

be pointing upwards to avoid dirt or
water accumulation in the profile
Axis 2 (green) should be pointing in-wards

to make the application of wind loads easy

Portal frame
Rafter (planar truss)
Minor
node
Major
node
Option 1: model members with Option 2: model members with

the shortest length possible the longest length possible
Advantages Column
• buckling lengths are easily • it is only necessary to determine
identified the imperfection forces and P-
effects in the major nodes
Disadvantages
• it is necessary to determine the • buckling lengths may be more
imperfection forces (and eventual difficult to determine
P- effects) in all minor nodes Chosen option:
• only possible if the member is
uniform (continuous) • Option 2

Steel sheeting modeling

Rafter lower chord P- instability: Frame model: Purlin
• Sheeting
contributes to
stabilize the
rafters lower
chords
Equivalent inertia beam:
(spaced 1 m)
11. Load Assignments
Dead Live

Wind 1 Wind 2

Wind 3 Wind 4

Thermal
The thermal actions on the purlins

can be ignored because they are
provided with movement joints
Purlins:
T  0º C
Rafters, columns and bracing:

T  15º C

12. Frame Buckling Analysis
Frame buckling loads may be determined using equations (5.1) and (5.2) of EC3-1-1:
Fcr H h
 cr  (5.1)  cr  (5.2)
FEd VEd  H
• Equation (5.2) is only valid for not significantly compressed and shallow ( 26 ) rafters
• Average compression force per column (LIVE load combination): VEd  120 kN
• SAP2000 stiffness model is used and 1st order analyses are performed to determine H
a) Longitudinal buckling b) Transversal buckling

 H .m ax  0.0012 m  H .m ax  0.0015 m
H h 1 11 H h 1 11
 cr     cr   
VEd  H 120 0.0012 VEd  H 120 0.0015
 76.4  10  61.1 10
No global 2nd order effects need to be considered

The lower chords buckling length may be verified using a buckling analysis:
• Useful to check if lower chord bracing has enough lower chord

bracing
stiffness to function propertly
• Only part of the structure needs to be analysed
(decreases number of buckling modes to be checked)
• Additional restraints substitute the transversal
bracing effect additional
restraint
• Use stiffness model (purlins and sheeting axially fixed)
• Negative buckling loads are ignored
• Buckling length is the distance between inflection points
of the buckled lower chord
Bracing system must resist the effect of member

imperfections (eventually amplified by 2nd order
effects) (EC3-1-1: 5.3.3) braced point compressed
chord

Chord buckling modes

a) LIVE load combination
Buckling mode 2: Buckling mode 4:
 b.2  7.37  b.4  11 .58
bracing almost upper chord
100% effective buckling
lower chord
buckling
• Buckling length may be considered as • Sheeting shear stiffness likely to prevent

the distance between bracing points this mode
• Bracing must resist imperfection forces

Chord buckling modes

b) WIND3 load combination
Buckling mode 1: Buckling mode 4:
 b.1  7.08 bracing almost  b.4  13 .51
100% effective
upper chord
buckling
lower chord
buckling
• Buckling length may be considered as

the distance between bracing points • Sheeting shear stiffness likely to prevent
this mode
• Bracing must resist imperfection forces

13. Equivalent Imperfection Forces
Lower chord bracing design

One took advantage of bracing compressive
stiffness therefore it must be checked for its
buckling strength
Member length: L  1.54 m

Max. chord compressive N Ed  310 kN Axial force (lower chord):
force (LIVE comb):
Average comp. force: 0.25 N Ed
Imperfection:   0.005
Lateral force: 2   0.25 N Ed  0.775 kN Comp. Braced point

Bracing axial force: 0.775 cos 45 º  1.10 kN
Bracing buck. strength: N b. Rd  65 .93 kN  1.10 kN OK

(L50x5)

Instability loads on the transversal bracing

Purlin
1) Bolt hole ovalisation (slotted connection) effect

d  24 m

11m
Slotted hole ovalisation
of +/- 4 mm every 12 m
• The purlins only work axially for displacements higher than the ovalisation   4  24 12  8 m m
2) Columns initial geometric imperfection 3) The effect of the ovalisation

must be added to the imperfection
m  0.51 1 m  0.51 1 6  0.76
(EC3-1-1: 5.3.3) e0.equiv  e0    17  8  25 mm
number of members to brace
e0   m L 500  0.76 11 500  17 mm

4) Bracing force Supported by left bracing Supported by right bracing
Compressive force per column:
VEd  120 kN (LIVE load comb.)
Bracing force applied in each bracing system corner:

5) Effect of ovalisation displacement in columns
FEd  6VEd e0.equiv L
 6 120  25 103 11  1.64 kN  H  0.0072 m / kN
(from SAP2000 strength model)
Neglectable (less than
1% of the wind load)
H    H 
 8 103 0.0072
 1.11kN
to be applied on top of each column

Portal frame in-plane imperfection

Columns equivalent geometric imperfections
  0 h m 0  1 200
 m  0.51  1 m
h  2 h with 2 3  h  1
h  15 m h  2 3
m  0.51 1 m  0.51 1 2  0.866

1 2
  0.866  0.00289
200 3
Imperfection equivalent forces

N Ed  0.00289 120  0.35 kN

14. Members Buckling Lengths
In SAP2000 the buckling lengths of members are determined by:
Buckl. length = K factor × L factor × Member length
Related to the rotational Related to the

stiffenesses at the member ends intermediate bracing
There are 5 types of K factors: Note:

• K2.y – major plane in sway mode - K2 (sway mode) values
• K1.y – major plane in braced mode are used by default
• K2.z – minor plane in sway mode
• K1.z – minor plane in braced mode
• KLT – lateral torsional mode
There are 3 types of L factors:

• major axis L factor
• minor axis L factor
• lateral torsional L factor

Determination of K factors
according to Annex E of old EC3:
Braced
1  K c K c  K11  K12 
2  K c K c  K 21  K 22 
K factor  K(1 ,2 )
• In SAP2000 the K factors are determined Unbraced

from the components of the beams
stiffenesses in the considered plane:
 
1  K c  K c   K1i cosqi 
 i  Note:
 
2  K c  K c   K 2i cosqi  - If ‘P-Delta done’ is
 i  checked, K2.y= K2.z= KLT=1

L factor automatic determination
• In SAP2000 the effect of intermediate

bracing due to other bars intersecting the
member is incorporated by the L factor:
(i) Only members with q 60 w.r.t. the buckling

plane are considered as bracing elements
(ii) Stiffness or strength requirements for bracing

members are not checked
(iii) L factor is equal in minor axis buckling and

lateral torsional buckling  1 if q  60º
L factor (major)  
0.7 if q  60º
 1 if q  30º
L factor (minor)  
0.7 if q  30º

Overwriting K factors and L factors

1st Overwrite – Lateral Bracing
• For L factors for minor plane and lateral torsional buckling
• Point bracing and/or uniform bracing on top and/or bottom
flange are possible
• Top or bottom always braces minor plane buckling
• Top or bottom only braces lateral buckling if the respective
flange is under compression
• L factor = maximum unbraced length
2nd Overwrite – Direct Overwrite
• For all K factors and L factors

• Overwrites the lateral bracing
overwrite if L factors are specified

Lower chord buckling lengths
Member length: L  14.752 m

Diagonal nodes spacing: 1 .5 m
Bracing spacing: 4.5 m
Manually determined factors:

L Factor(Major)  1.5 14.752  0.102
L Factor(Minor)  4.5 14.752  0.305
L Factor(LTB)  4.5 14.752  0.305
Automatically determined factors:
OK

Upper chord buckling lengths
Member length: L  15.261m

Diagonal nodes spacing: 1 .5 m
Purlins spacing: 1 .5 m
Manually determined factors:

L Factor(Major)  1.5 15.261  0.098
L Factor(Minor)  1.5 15.261  0.098
L Factor(LTB)  1.5 15.261  0.098
Automatically determined factors:
OK

Purlins buckling lengths
Member length: L  6m Equiv. Sheeting

1m
bars spacing:
Braced nodes spacing: 3m
Manually determined factors: Automatically determined factors:

Major  1
K Factor 
Minor  1
(non - sway)
LTB  1
Major  6 6  1

L Factor Minor  3 6  0.5 OK Not OK
LTB  3 6  0.5
 Factors after overwrite:
Overwrites:
• Equiv. sheeting rods don’t provide
lateral bracing. L Factor Minor and
LTB are 0.5 due to the bracing rods
OK OK
Portal frame columns
Member length: L  11m Girts spacing: 1 .5 m

Chord nodes spacing: 0.932 m

Major  0.5 ~ 0.7
K Factor 
Minor  1
(non - sway)
LTB  1
Major  11  0.932 11  0.915

L Factor Minor  1.5 11  0.136 Not OK OK
LTB  1.5 11  0.136
 Factors after overwrite:
Overwrites:
• Column has a K Factor Major
between 0.5 (fixed-fixed) or 0.7
(fixed-pinned). The latter value is
adopted conservatively OK OK

Endwall columns
Member length: L  14 m Girts spacing: 1 .5 m
Major  0.7
K Factor 
Minor  1
(non - sway)
LTB  1
Major  14 14  1
 Not OK OK
L Factor Minor  1.5 14  0.107
LTB  1.5 14  0.107

Factors after overwrite:
Overwrites:
• Column has a major K Factor of

0.7 (fixed-pinned).
OK OK

15. Members Automatic ULS Check
Check members for collapse ULS

Steel frame design preferences:
• Use SAP2000 frame strength model
• Set design code and coutry
• Interaction factors method

(EC3-1-1: Annex A and B)
• Check ‘P-Delta done’ if 2nd order effects

at the nodes are already determined
(Sway K Factors become unitary)
• Ignore seismic code (EC8)
• Demand/Capacity ratio limit should be

1 for ULS but may be user specified

16. Members Automatic Design
1) Assign Auto select section properties to the groups

Define -> Section Properties -> Frame Sections
Add New Property -> Auto Select List
2) Select design groups

Design -> Steel Frame Design ->
Select Design Groups
3) Start design of structure

Design -> Steel Frame Design -> Start Design/Check of Structure
Note:
• If optimised member sections are significantly smaller
than the original ones, it may be necessary to run the
buckling analyses again with the new sections

17. SLS Check
Serviceability limit state (SLS): Limitation of vertical and horizontal displacements

(National Annex EN 1993-1-1)
Action combinations for SLS:
DEAD LIVE WIND2 TEMP
SLS_CARAC_0 1 1 0.6
SLS_CARAC_1 1 1
SLS_CARAC_2 1 1 0.6 Note: automatic load
SLS_CARAC_3 1 1 combinations obtained
SLS_CARAC_4 1 0.6 1 using CTM 1.0 software
SLS_CARAC_5 1 1
1) Vertical displacements:  lim it  L 200 (general roof cathegory)

(of every beam)
Purlins (UPN 140):  m ax  0.025 m   lim it  6 200  0.030 m

Rafter:  max  0.027 m   lim it  30 200  0.150 m
Endwall column span (HE300A):  max  0.015 m   lim it  14 200  0.070 m
2) Horizontal displacements:  lim it  h 150 (frames without lift equipment)

(on columns top)
Column (HE400A):  max  0.009 m   limit  11 150  0.073 m

Ec3 Design 170412092432 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ec3 Design 170412092432 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ec3 Design 170412092432 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of a steel frame according to Eurocode –

SAP2000 Training Program

CSI Portugal & Spain

1. Architectural and environmental conditions

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 2

10. Modeling the structure

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 3

• Soil suitable for slallow foundations

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 4

imin = 0.5-1% for drainage

2) Duopitch or gable frame

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 5

3) Single slope, monopitch or shed frame 4) Parabolic or circular frame

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 6

Chosen solution: 15 steep duo-pitch roof shape

Portal frame components:

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 7

Portal frames structural behaviour

Simply supported because of (i) support

2) Articulated (pinned) frame

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 8

3) Rigid connections frame

4) Cable stayed frame

Very slender rafters prone

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 9

1) Hot-rolled I- or H-section profiles 2) Welded beams (composed

3) Tapered beams: simply supported rafter

For simply supported

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 10

4) Perforated beams: honeycomb

5) Cellular beams: uniform or tapered

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 11

Constant depth Variable depth

L0/h = 10-12 L0/h = 5-6

Cubes or tetrahedron shape

Boeing factory Olympic pool

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 12

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 13

Rafter: planar truss; RHS profiles;

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 14

Portal frames spacing

1) Regular (5-7 m) • IPE, Z, U or channel purlins

3) Increased (> 7 m, < 12 m)

• Roof sheeting suitable for long spans

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 15

Elements: (i) Sheeting (iii) Drainage elements

(ii) Purlins (iv) Joint elements and purlins bracing

Steel sheeting with thermal insulation; 1.5 m spans

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 16

1) Spans up to 9 m - Hot rolled (IPE, UNP)

2) Spans up to 15 m - planar or spatial truss beams - Planar beam with rods

- Planar beam with profiles

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 17

Connection to the rafter:

Types of connections to the rafters: (i) lower flange

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 18

Supports and joints: Purlin connection:

CSI Portugal - Design of a Steel Frame 19

Two-span alternated configuration reactions: