Structural Steelwork Eurocodes

Development of
A Trans-national Approach
Course: Eurocode 3

Module 7: Introduction to the design of structural steelwork in

accordance with the new Eurocodes

Lecture 23: Comparative design of an unbraced sway frame using

rigid and semi-rigid joints

Contents:
1 Frame geometry and loading
1.1 Frame geometry
1.2 Loading
1.2.1 Basic loading
1.2.2 Frame imperfections
1.2.3 Load combination cases
1.3 Partial safety factors on resistance
2 Objectives
3 Frame with rigid joints
3.1 Assumptions and global analysis
3.2 Member sizes
3.3 Serviceability limit state requirements
3.4 Joint design
4 Frame with semi-rigid joints
4.1 Design strategy
4.2 Preliminary design
4.3 Characteristics and classification of the joints
4.3.1 Structural analysis
4.3.2 Design checks of the frame with semi-rigid joints
4.3.3 Ultimate limit state
4.3.4 Beam design
4.3.5 Column design
4.3.6 Joint Design
5. Conclusion

1
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

1 Frame geometry and loading

1.1 Frame geometry
The skeletal structure of a three bay three storey building is shown in Figure 1 (dimensions in
mm).

Roof

3500
2nd floor

3500
1st floor

3500

6500 6500 6500

10000

Figure 1 Frame geometry

The frame is 19,5 m wide, each span being 6,5 m; its total height is 10,5 m, each storey being
3,5 m high.
The spacing of the frames is 10 m.
The structure is assumed to be braced out of its plane and to be unbraced in its plane. In the
longitudinal direction of the building, i.e. in the direction perpendicular to the frame plane, a
bracing does exist so that the top of the columns is held in place. The lateral support for the floor
beams are provided by the floor slabs. The bases of the columns (foundation level) are assumed
to be nominally pinned.
The total height of the building is less than the maximum length allowed for transportation
(about 12 m); therefore, it was decided to use continuous columns throughout the total height of
the building.
For the members, use is made of standard hot rolled sections. EN  10025
Members, end-plates and stiffeners are made of S235 steel. EN 20898-1 &
EN 20898-2
Bolts are property class 10.9.

25/12/20
2
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

1.2 Loading

1.2.1 Basic loading

The values for the characteristic permanent and variable actions are :
Roof level
Variable actions (imposed loads) : 6 kN/m.
Permanent actions : 20 kN/m.
Floor level
Variable actions (imposed loads) : 18 kN/m.
Permanent actions : 30 kN/m.
The wind loads were established, according to the French regulations, for a building erected in
France, at an altitude of 200 m in wind region II. They are applied as point loads of respectively
10,5 kN at the roof level and 21 kN at the 1st and 2nd floor levels.
The basic loading cases, which are shown schematically in , have been considered in appropriate
combinations.
20 kN/m
10.5 kN

30 kN/m
21 kN

30 kN/m
21 kN

PERMANENT LOADING (G) WIND LOADING (W)

6 kN/m
6 kN/m 6 kN/m 6 kN/m

18 kN/m 18 18
18 kN/m
kN/m kN/m

18 kN/m 18 kN/m 18 kN/m 18

kN/m

loading case 3 (I3)

loading case 1 (I1) loading case 2 (I2)

IMPOSED LOADING CASES

Figure 2 Loading cases

1.2.2 Frame imperfections

Frame imperfections are considered by means of equivalent horizontal. The initial sway
imperfection is given as follows: Eurocode 3 -
  k c k s 0 5.2.4.3(1)

with :
1
kc  0.5  1
nc

25/12/20
3
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

1
k s  0.2  1
ns

1
0 
200
Here, one has nc = 4 (number of full height columns per floor) and ns = 3 (number of storeys in
the frame), wherefrom :

1
kc  0.5  = 0,866
4

1
ks  0.2  = 0,73
3 Eurocode 3 -
5.2.4.3 (7)
1 1
  (0.866).(0.73). 
200 315
The equivalent horizontal load H= V at each storey of the frame is derived from the initial
sway  and the total design vertical load V in any storey for a given load case. The relevant
values are listed in Table 1.
Basic loading case Storey V H
(see Figure 2) (kN) (kN)
G Roof 390 1,24
2nd floor 585 1,86
1st floor 585 1,86
I1 Roof 117 0,37
2nd floor 351 1,11
1st floor 351 1,11
I2 Roof 39 0,12
2nd floor 234 0,74
1st floor 117 0,37
I3 Roof 78 0,25
2nd floor 117 0,37
1st floor 234 0,74

Table 1 Equivalent horizontal forces

1.2.3 Load combination cases

It was decided to use the simplified combinations for the ultimate limit state and the Eurocode 3 -
serviceability limit state. 2.3.3.1 (5) &
The basic load cases are combined at the ultimate limit state as summarised in Table 2. 2.3.4.(5)

Ultimate limit state

Load combination case 1 1,35 G + 1,5 W
Load combination case 2 1,35 G + 1,5 I1
Load combination case 3 1,35 G + 1,5 I2
Load combination case 4 1,35 G + 1,5 I3
Load combination case 5 1,35 G + 1,35 W + 1,35 I1
Load combination case 6 1,35 G + 1,35 W + 1,35 I2
Load combination case 7 1,35 G + 1,35 W + 1,35 I3

25/12/20
4
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

Table 2 Load combination cases at ULS

The basic load cases are combined at the serviceability limit state as summarised in Table 3.
Serviceability limit state
Load combination case 1 G+W
Load combination case 2 G + I1
Load combination case 3 G + I2
Load combination case 4 G + I3
Load combination case 5 G + 0,9 W + 0,9 I1
Load combination case 6 G + 0,9 W + 0,9 I2
Load combination case 7 G + 0,9 W + 0,9 I3

Table 3 Load combination cases at SLS

The requirements on the frame displacements at the serviceability limit state are as follows for a
multi-storey building :
Eurocode 3 -
The allowable horizontal deflection in each storey is : 4.2.2 (1) & (4)
h/300 = 3500/300 = 11,7 mm.
The allowable horizontal deflection of the structure as a whole is :
h0/500 = 10500/500 = 21 mm.
The allowable vertical deflection of the floor beams is :
L/250 = 6500/250 = 26 mm.
The allowable vertical deflection of the roof beam shall is :
L/200 = 6500/200 = 32,5 mm.

1.3 Partial safety factors on resistance

For this worked example, the values of the partial safety factors on resistance are adopted as
follows :
 M 0  1,0 for the resistance of cross-sections;
 M1  1,1 0 for the buckling resistance of members;
 Mb  1,25 for the resistance of bolts;
 Mw  1,25 for the resistance of welds.

(The value of  M 0  1,0 is permitted in France provided that the steel material bears the
quality mark NF).

2 Objectives
The objective is to aim at joint economy . It is assumed that there is an interaction between the
two respective tasks of frame design and joint design. The use of unstiffened joints, which may
consequently become semi-rigid, is a priori considered as the principal means of obtaining this
economy.
To provide a basis for evaluating the effect on costs, the frame with rigid joints shall be
compared to the frame with semi-rigid joints.
Elastic global analysis is used to compute the internal forces and moments.
For the frame with rigid joints, it is only reported on the column and beam sizes and on the

25/12/20
5
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

connection detailing.
For the frame with semi-rigid joints, the detailed calculations of the members are given in
addition.
3 Frame with rigid joints
3.1 Assumptions and global analysis
All the beam-to-column joints were assumed to be perfectly rigid. A linear elastic analysis was
carried out for each load case.

3.2 Member sizes

The member sizes were first determined based on a preliminary design; their validity was
confirmed a posteriori on base of detailed calculations conducted at the end of the global
analysis for the various load combination cases. The member sizes obtained accordingly are
(Figure 3) :
Inner columns : HEB 260
Outer columns : HEB 220
Floor beams : IPE 360
Roof beams : IPE 450
IPE 360
Roof

IPE 450 2nd floor

IPE 450
1st floor

HEB 220 HEB 260 HEB 260 HEB 220

Figure 3 Member sizes (rigid joints)

3.3 Serviceability limit state requirements

The maximum horizontal deflection of the storeys is 10,1 mm ( < 11,7 mm )
The maximum horizontal deflection of the structure as a whole is 13,5 mm ( < 21 mm )
The maximum vertical deflection of the floor beams is 6,9 mm ( < 26 mm )
The maximum vertical deflections of the roof beams is 7,8 mm ( < 32,5 mm )
All the serviceability limit state requirements on the frame deflections are thus fulfilled.

3.4 Joint design

At the ultimate limit state, the joints have to resist the following values of bending moment
(Table 4) :
Maximum bending moments
(kNm)
Inner columns Outer columns

25/12/20
6
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

Roof level 147,2 81,1

Floor level 337,8 192,8

Table 4 Moments at joints (rigid joints)

To realize rigid joints with the required resistance, it was decided to use extended end-plate
moment connections. The joint detailing is represented in Table 5.
Interior column / beam Exterior column / Beam

Roof level

Floor level

Table 5 Joint details (rigid joints)

4 Frame with semi-rigid joints

4.1 Design strategy
It was decided to use joints with no shear stiffeners and no horizontal web stiffeners in the
columns to achieve economy in both the fabrication and erection stages by simplifying the joint
detailing. As a result, the joints are semi-rigid and there may be a need to resize the
members.Preliminary design
The member sizes obtained in Section 3.2 were used for preliminary sizing. However, due to
the semi-rigidity of the joints, the horizontal deflections are then larger than those computed in
Section 3.3 for the frame with rigid joints. In order to fulfil the serviceability limit state
requirements, the decrease in joint stiffness was compensated by an increase in column sizes.
It was decided to try for the columns, one section size higher than for rigid joints; thus sections
HEB 280 and HEB 240 were adopted as inner and outer columns respectively.
A quick check of the serviceability limit state of the frame with semi-rigid joints was carried out
with the mechanical joint properties given in the same tables. On this base, the following column
and beam sizes were selected (Figure 4) :
Inner columns : HEB 280
Outer columns : HEB 240

25/12/20
7
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

Roof beams : IPE 450

Floor beams : IPE 360
IPE 360
Roof

IPE 450 2nd floor

IPE 450
1st floor

HEB 240 HEB 280 HEB 280 HEB 240

Figure 4 Member sizes (semi-rigid joints)

The detailing of the unstiffened end-plate connections which were adopted is given in Table 6.

Interior column / beam Exterior column / Beam

Roof level

Floor level

Table 6 Joint details (semi-rigid joints)

25/12/20
8
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

Inner columns Outer columns

Joint Floor level Roof level Floor level Roof level
Sj,ini (kNm/rad) 66755 25593 40992 23720
Si,ini/2 (kNm/rad) 33377 12797 20496 11860
MRd (kNm) 220,5 115,8 151,3 94,8
2mrd /3 (kNm) 147,0 77,8 100,9 63,2

Table 7 Joint characteristics (semi-rigid joints)

25/12/20
9
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

4.2 Characteristics and classification of the joints

The mechanical properties of the joints given in the tables are computed based on the simplified
method of Eurocode 3-(revised) Annex J; therefore the moment resistance of the joints is
underestimated. In order to get more accurate values of the mechanical properties, it was
decided to use the DESIMAN software which models the general method described in Annex J
( Table 7).
For the calculation of the joints on the inner columns, the parameter  is taken equal to 1; this
assumption allows a non-iterative global analysis (see comments in Section 5). For an unbraced
frame, the joint can be classified as rigid if the following criterion is met:
 EI  Eurocode 3-
S j,ini  b   25
 (revised) Annex
 Lb  J
with : S j,ini : initial stiffness of the joint;
EI b / L b : rigidity of the beam of span Lb.At the floor level :
The rigidity of the beam floor IPE 400 (span of 6,5 m ) is :

EI b 210000  33740  10 4
  10  6  10901kNm/rad
Lb 6500
Criterion at the outer columns :

S j,ini 40992
  3.8 25
EI b 10901  Semi-rigid joint.
Lb
Criterion at the inner columns :

S j,ini 66755
  6.1 25
EI b 10901  Semi-rigid joint.
Lb
At the roof level :
The rigidity of the beam roof IPE 360 (span 6,5 m ) is :
EI b 210000  16270  10 4
  10 6  5256kNm/rad
Lb 6500
Criterion at the outer columns :

S j,ini 23720
  4.5 25
EI b 5256  Semi-rigid joint.
Lb
Criterion at the inner columns :

S j,ini 25593
  4.9 25
EI b 5256  Semi-rigid joint.
Lb
As might be expected, all the unstiffened joints must be classified as semi-rigid joints.

4.2.1 Structural analysis

25/12/20
10
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

A linear elastic analysis is conducted for both the ultimate and serviceability limit states. For this
purpose, the joints are characterised by their nominal stiffness Sj,ini/2.
For the sake of simplicity, the mechanical properties of all the joints are computed based on a
single value =1 of the transformation parameter. It is recalled that the transformation parameter
accounts for the influence of the flexibility of the column web panel on both the design moment
resistance and rotational stiffness of the joints; therefore, the actual value of  at each joint
depends on the actual moments and shear forces relative to each load combination case.
Assuming  =1 for all the joints of the frame and for all the load combination cases results in a
significant simplification in the global analysis and in a slight underestimation of both the
strength and stiffness of these joints.

4.2.2 Design checks of the frame with semi-rigid joints

At the serviceability limit state :
The maximum horizontal deflection of all the storeys is 9 mm (  11,7 mm
(*))
The maximum horizontal deflection of the structure as a whole is 19,9 mm ( < 21 mm)
The maximum vertical deflection of the floor beams is 10,6 mm ( < 26 mm)
The maximum vertical deflections of the roof beam is 12,1 mm ( < 32,5 mm)
(*) For the calculation of the deflections, the nominal stiffness of the joints was used. The actual
values will be larger because some joints will experience moments less than 2/3 MRd and would
then have a stiffness of Sj,ini . Therefore the slight excedence of the horizontal deflection at the
1st floor level, based on the nominal stiffness of the joints is acceptable.

4.2.3 Ultimate limit state

Eurocode 3 -
Sway classification of the frame
5.2.6.2 (6)
The classification of the frame subject to a given load combination case is investigated by
computing the ratio of the total design vertical load Vsd acting on the frame and the elastic
critical load Vcr of the frame for the sway buckling mode :
VSd  V
 Max  
Vcr  h H i

with :
i designation of the storey i;
VSd design value of the total vertical load;
Vcr elastic critical load of the frame for the sway buckling mode;
 horizontal displacement at the top of the storey relative to the bottom of this storey
obtained from a first order elastic analysis;
h storey height;
H total horizontal reaction at the bottom of the storey;
V total vertical reaction at the bottom of the storey.
The classification of the frame subject to each of the load combination cases is summarised in
Table 7. Because all the values of the ratio VSd / Vcr are smaller than 0,25, the frame Eurocode  3 -
behaves as a sway frame. As a result, the effects of sway must be considered in the design 5.2.6.2
checks of the ultimate limit state, whatever the load combination case.
According to Eurocode 3, three methods are available for this purpose :

25/12/20
11
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

 Second order analysis;

 First order analysis with amplification of the sway moments, provided that VSd Vcr 0.25 ;
 First order analysis with sway mode buckling lengths.
For the sake of simplicity, the second method, i.e. the first order analysis with amplification of
the sway moments, is selected. The sway moments are those associated with the horizontal
translation of the top of the storey relative to the bottom of the same storey. In this worked
example (symmetrical structure which is symmetrically loaded), the sway moments are due to
the horizontal loads only, where these include the equivalent forces for imperfections.
Load Storey  V H V
combination (mm) (kN) (kN) hH
Case 1
Roof 4,2 526,5 17,4 0,04
2nd floor 8,7 1316,3 51,4 0,06
1st floor 19,5 2106 85,5 0,14
Case 2
Roof 2,2 702 2,2 0,03
2nd floor 1,0 2018,3 6,4 0,09
1st floor 2,5 3334,5 10,6 0,22
Case 3
Roof 0,3 585 1,9 0,03
2nd floor 0,9 1725,8 5,7 0,08
1st floor 2,1 2691 8,7 0,18
Case 4
Roof 0,3 643,5 2,1 0,03
2nd floor 0,9 1569 5,1 0,08
1st floor 2,1 2709,8 8,7 0,19
Case 5
Roof 3,9 684,5 16,3 0,05
2nd floor 8,2 1948 48,7 0,09
1st floor 18,5 3211,7 81,1 0,21
Case 6
Roof 3,9 579,2 16,0 0,04
2nd floor 8,1 1684,9 47,9 0,08
1st floor 18,1 2632,5 79,2 0,17
Case 7
Roof 3,9 631,8 16,2 0,04
2nd floor 8,1 1579,5 47,6 0,08
1st floor 18,1 2685,2 79,4 0,17

Table 8 Frame classification (semi-rigid joints)

Eurocode 3
The value of the amplification factor to be applied to the sway moments is computed for each -  5.2.6.2.(3)
load combination. The results are given in Table 8.

VSd 1

Vcr V
1  Sd
Vcr
Load combination case 1 0,14 1,16
Load combination case 2 0,22 1,28
Load combination case 3 0,18 1,22
Load combination case 4 0,19 1,23
Load combination case 5 0,21 1,27
25/12/20
12
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

Load combination case 6 0,17 1,21

Load combination case 7 0,17 1,21

Table 9 Amplification factor (semi-rigid joints)

The amplification factor can be considered as affecting the value of the partial safety factors on
the horizontal actions. Table 9 is thus substituted for Table 2. Proceeding this way is especially
recommended because first order analysis permits the use of the principle of superposition.
Thus the internal forces and moments for the load combination cases of Table 9 can be easily
obtained and be used afterwards for the design checks of members and joints.

Load combination G W I1 I2 I3 Equivalent

horizontal forces
Case 1 1,35 1,74 1,16
Case 2 1,35 1,5 1,28
Case 3 1,35 1,5 1,22
Case 4 1,35 1,5 1,23
Case 5 1,35 1,72 1,35 1,27
Case 6 1,35 1,63 1,35 1,21
Case 7 1,35 1,63 1,35 1,21

Table 10 Equivalent horizontal forces (semi-rigid joints)

4.2.4 Beam design

IPE 450 beam at the floor levels
Actions
The load combination case 4 is the most critical for this beam. The bending moment at mid-span
is 241 kNm. The maximum shear at any cross-section of this beam is 240 kN.
Properties of the IPE 450 section
h = 450 mm bf = 190 mm tw = 9,4 mm tf = 14,6 mm
r = 21 mm
Iz = 1676 cm4 It = 6718 cm4 Iw = 0,79 dm6
Steel grade : S235, the flange thickness is less than 40 mm => fy =235 N/mm2
Section classification in bending
0.5
 235  Eurocode 3 - 5.3
  1
 fy 
 
c
Flange check :  6.51  10  Flange is class 1.
tf
d
Web check :  40.3  72  Web is class 1.
tw
All elements are class 1 :  Cross-section is class 1.
Shear resistance (Eurocode 3 - 5.4.6)
Shear area : Av = 50,85 cm2

25/12/20
13
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

fy
Av VSd
Shear resistance : 3 and  0.35
Vpl.Rd   690 kN Vpl.Rd
 M0
As this ratio is less than 0,5, the effect of shear on the moment resistance can be neglected.
Member resistance : lateral torsional buckling
Eurocode 3 -
Normally the concrete slab prevents lateral torsional buckling of the beams. However, at the Table F.1.2
erection stage, a check of the lateral stability of the beams is often required; the loads for this
case are less than the ultimate limit state load.
k=1 (assumption of simple supports for weak-axis bending) Eurocode 3 -
F.1.3.(1)
 C1 = 1,285 C2 = 1,562 C3 = 0,753
zj = 0 (symmetrical section)
 0 .5 
 2 EI z  k  I w  kL 2 GI t 
2
M cr  C1  
 I   2 EI  C2zg   2
 
 C2zg 
 kL 2  k w  z z

  Eurocode 3 -
 
F2.1.1 (1) and
kw = 0,5 (fixed warping end condition) and zg = 0,225 m => (2)
M cr  279.2 kNm
0.5
  2 EWpl.y 
 LT    112 .4
 M cr 
 
0.5
  w Wpl.y f y 
 LT    w  1   LT  0.3734  0.4
M cr  Eurocode 3 -
  5.4.5
There is thus no reduction for lateral torsional buckling. That means the member resistance is
given by the moment resistance of the cross-section.
Wpl. y  1702 cm 3
Wpl.Rd f y 1702x 235x10 3
M c.Rd  M pl.Rd    400 kNm
 M0 1.0
 Satisfactory.

4.2.5 Column design

Inner HEB 280 column
Actions
The maximum axial forces and moments in the inner columns are those for load combination
case 5. The distributions of the internal forces in these columns are given in Figure 5.

25/12/20
14
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

21 kNm 230 kN
Roof

10 kNm 65 kNm 658 kN 2 nd floor

1 st floor
28 kNm 123 kNm 1086 kN Eurocode 3 - 5.3

Moments Axial loads

Figure 5
The maximum shear force in the column is 40 kN.
Properties of HEB280 section
h = 280 mm bf = 280 mm tw = 10,5 mm tf = 18 mm r = 24 mm Eurocode 3 -
Steel grade S235 and the flange thickness is less than 40 mm 5.4.6
=> fy = 235 N/mm 2
Section classification in bending
0.5
 235 
  1
 fy 
 
c Eurocode 3 -
Flange check :  7.78  10  Flange is class 1.
tf 5.4.8.1
d
Web check :  18.67  33  Web is class 1.
tw
All elements are class 1  Cross-section class 1.
Shear resistance
Shear area : Av = 4109 mm2
fy
Av VSd Eurocode 3 -
Shear resistance : 3 and  0.07
Vpl.Rd   557.5 kN Vpl.Rd 5.5.4 (1)
 M0
As this is less than 0,5, the effect of shear on the moment resistance is neglected.
Eurocode 3 -
Resistance of the cross-section 5.5.1
M Sd  M N.y.Rd Eurocode 3 -
The criteria to be fulfilled is :
Annex E
For standard rolled section : M N.y.Rd  1.111  n  M pl.y.Rd
N Sd
n  0.352 from which M N. y.Rd  264.5 kNm
N pl.Rd

 Satisfactory.
Member resistance : flexural buckling
N Sd k y M y.Sd
 1
The section should satisfy : fy fy
 min A Wpl.y
 M1  M1
25/12/20
15
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

 min is the lesser of  y and  z , where  y and  z are the reduction factors determined as
follows () :
Computation of ly , the in-plane buckling length :

HEB280 K1 
Distribution factor
1

* *
K K
11 12 1st floor
IPE450 IPE450

HEB280 Kc

Distribution factor  =1
2

Kc : column stiffness coefficient :

Ic 19270
Kc   55.06 cm 3
L 350
K1 : stiffness coefficient for the adjacent length of column :
Ic 19270
K1   55.06 cm 3
L 350
K11* , K12* : effective stiffness coefficient of the beam with semi-rigid joints :
* * I b,eff
K 11  K 12 
Lb
Ib,eff : second moment of area of the beam with semi-rigid joints :
Ib
I b ,eff 
 
 
2EI b
1  3 
 S j,ini 
 Lb 
 2 
Ib : second moment of area of the IPE450 beam section;
Sj,ini : initial stiffness of the joint;
Sj,ini/2 nominal stiffness of the joint.
Thus, one has :
33740
I b ,eff   17043 cm 4
 
 
2  210000  33740  10 4
1  3 
 66755  10 6 
 6500  
 2 

* * 17043
K 11  K 12   26.22 cm 3
650

25/12/20
16
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

K c  K1 55.06  55.06
1    0.68
*
K c  K 1  K 11 *
 K 12 55.06  55.06  26.22  26.22

ly
 0.5  0.14 1   2   0.055 1   2  2  0.5  0.14  1.68  0.055  2.82  0.89
Lc

Therefore, l y  0.89  3500  3116 mm

ly y
y   25.7 1  93  93 y    A  0.5  0.277
iy 1
 y  0.976 (curve b)

The effective out-of-plane buckling length is taken as the system length : l z  3500 mm

lz z
z   49.4 1  93  93 z    A  0.5  0.531
iz 1 Eurocode 3 -
5.5.4 (2)
 z  0.828 (curve c)

 min   z  0.828

N Sd
ky  1 y  1.5 where
 y Af y
Wpl.y  Wel.y

 y   y 2 My  4   Wel.y
 0.9

 My  1.8 and  y  0.0096  k y  1.003

N Sd k y M y.Sd
  0.47  0.38  0.85
fy fy
 min A Wpl.y
 M1  M1
 Satisfactory.
Member resistance : lateral torsional buckling

N Sd k Lt M y.Sd
 1
The section should satisfy : fy fy
zA Wpl. y
 M1  M1
(Eurocode 3 - table F.1.1)
k=1 and   0 => C1 = 1,879 C2 = 0 C3 = 0,939
(Eurocode 3 - F.2.2.(1))
zj = 0 (symmetrical section) and zg = 0 (end moment loading)

25/12/20
17
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

L
i LT
 LT  0.25
 30.21
  L 
2 
   
0.5   a LT  
C1 1  
 25.66 
 
 
(Eurocode 3 - F2.1(1))
 LT
 LT    w  0.5  0.325  0.4
1
No allowance for lateral torsional buckling is necessary.
 Satisfactory.

4.2.6 Joint Design

Inner beam-to-column joints
Floor level joint (HEB280 / IPE450)
The load combination case 5 is found the most critical for this joint. The maximum
amplified bending moment applied to a joint is 217 kNm and the shear force is 240 kN.
For this joint :
Design moment resistance :220,5 kNm > 217 kNm
Shear resistance : 443,3 kN > 240 kN  Satisfactory
Roof level (HEB280 / IPE360)
The load combination case 5 is found the most critical for this joint. The maximum
amplified bending moment applied to a joint is 82 kNm and the shear force is 119 kN.
For this joint :
Design moment resistance :115,8 kNm > 82 kNm
Shear resistance : 161,4 kN > 119 kN  Satisfactory
Outer beam-to-column joints
Floor level (HEB240 / IPE450)
The load combination case 5 is found the most critical for this joint. The maximum
amplified bending moment applied to a joint is 145 kNm and the shear force is 221 kN.
For this joint :
Design moment resistance :151,3 kNm > 145 kNm
Shear resistance : 282,4 kN > 221 kN  Satisfactory.
Roof level (HEB240 / IPE360)
The load combination case 5 is found the most critical for this joint. The maximum
amplified bending moment applied to a joint is 66 kNm and the shear force is 115 kN.
For this joint :
Design moment resistance :94,8 kNm > 66 kNm
Shear resistance : 161,4 kN > 115 kN  Satisfactory.

5 Conclusion
Clearly the unbraced frame can get a substantial advantage from the semi-rigid concept. Though
25/12/20
18
Structural Steelwork Eurocodes – Development of a Trans-National Approach
Worked examples
Design of a 3-storey unbraced frame

the semi-rigidity of the joints requires an increase in the member sizes, because drifts and
deflections would be larger than in the solution with rigid joints, significant cost savings may be
expected from the use of much less expensive (unstiffened) joints.
Eurocode 3 permits the use of the semi-rigid design procedure. This implementation, compared
to most previous standards, has been hampered up to now by the lack of appropriate methods of
global analysis and design tools. The latter are now becoming readily available and their use in
the daily practice is therefore a matter of technology transfer and further code recognition

25/12/20
19