Worked Examples in EC3 and EC4 PDF

Steel and Steel and Concrete
Composite Buildings
Companion Document to
EN 1993 and EN 1994
On 5th May 2006 the responsibilities of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM)
transferred to the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)
Department for Communities and Local Government

Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU
Telephone: 020 7944 4400
Website: www.communities.gov.uk
Companion Document to EN 1993 and EN 1994 – Steel and Steel and Concrete
Composite Buildings – 2005
Whilst this document provides practical guidance on the use of Eurocode BS EN 1993 and 1994
– Steel and Steel and Concrete Composite Structures. It shall not be used for the design of
actual projects until both the Eurocode and its National Annex are published by the British
Standards Institution and approved for use by the First Secretary of State for England and
Wales.
It should be noted that the guidance has been based on the latest draft Eurocode
BS EN 1993 and 1994 available at the time of writing.
© Crown Copyright, 2007
Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.
This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium
for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to
it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be
acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified.
Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply
for a Click-Use Licence for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp,
or by writing to the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, St Clements
House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich, NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or email:
HMSOlicensing@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk
If you require this publication in an alternative format please email

alternativeformats@communities.gsi.gov.uk
DCLG Publications
PO Box 236
Wetherby
West Yorkshire
LS23 7NB
Tel: 08701 226 236
Fax: 08701 226 237
Textphone: 08701 207 405
Email: communities@twoten.com
or online via the DCLG website: www.communities.gov.uk
January 2007
Product Code: 06 BD 04021 (f)

CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 8
1.1 Steel Structures 8
1.2 Composite steel and concrete structures 9
1.3 Aim and scope of this publication 9
CHAPTER 2 EUROCODES SYSTEM 10

2.1 Eurocodes Terminology 12
2.1.1 Types of clause used in the Eurocodes 12
CHAPTER 3 GENERAL DESIGN ISSUES 14

3.1 Convention for member axes 14
3.2 The explicit use of γ factors 14
3.2.1 Symbols used in the Eurocodes 15
3.3 Documents required when designing with the Eurocodes 16
CHAPTER 4 EN1993 STEEL STRUCTURES 17

4.1 Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings 17
4.1.1 Material Properties 17
4.1.2 Ductility requirements for structural steel 17
4.1.3 Fracture toughness 18
4.1.4 Structural stability of frames 18
4.1.5 Structural imperfections 19
4.1.6 Buckling – members in compression 19
4.1.7 Buckling – uniform members in bending 20
4.1.8 Buckling – uniform members in bending
and axial compression 21
4.2 Part 1-2: General rules – Structural fire design 21
4.2.1 Material properties 21
4.2.2 Structural fire design 23
4.2.3 Members in compression 23
4.2.4 Combined bending and axial compression 23
4.2.5 Structural connections 23
4.3 Part 1-8: Design of joints 23
4.3.1 Definitions 24
4.3.2 Material properties 24
4.3.3 Groups of fasteners 24
4.3.4 Analysis, classification and modelling 24
4.3.5 Structural joints connecting H or I sections 26
4.4 Part 1-10: Material toughness and
through-thickness properties 27
4.4.1 Fracture toughness 27
4.4.2 Through-thickness properties 28
4.5 Part 5: Steel Piling 29
CHAPTER 5 EN1994 STEEL AND CONCRETE

COMPOSITE STRUCTURES 31
5.1 Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings 31
5.1.1 Material Properties 31
5.1.2 Structural stability 32
5.1.3 Structural imperfections 32
5.1.4 Calculation of action (load) effects 32
5.1.5 Beams – Ultimate Limit State 33
5.1.6 Beam serviceability limit state 34
5.1.7 Lateral torsional buckling 35
5.1.8 Members in compression 35
5.1.9 Composite joints in frames for buildings 36
5.1.10Composite slabs with profiled metal sheeting 36
5.2 Part 1-2: Structural fire design 37
5.2.1 Fire exposure 37
5.2.2 Material Partial Factors 37
5.2.3 Structural analysis 37
5.2.4 Design procedures 37
5.2.5 Unprotected Composite Slabs 38
CHAPTER 6 EFFECTS ON UK STRUCTURAL

DESIGN PROCEDURES 40
CHAPTER 7 DESIGN ROUTE MAPS 41
CHAPTER 8 REFERENCES 54
APPENDICES 56
Appendix A – Eurocode clause reference tables 56
WORKED EXAMPLES 61
Anchored Sheet Pile Wall 62
Cantilever 83
Cantilever Sheet Pile Wall 90
Simply Supported Beam with Full Lateral Restraint 104
Simply Supported Beam with Lateral Restraint at the Load Points 111
Steel Driven Pile in Stiff Clay 119
Base Plate without Bending Moment 128
Simply Supported Beam with Full Lateral Restraint – Fire Limit State 134
Simply Supported Composite Beam – Fire Limit State 148
Partial Depth (flexible) End Plate Connection 157
Connections in Fire 176
Column in Simple Construction – Fire Limit State 186
Column with Axial and Bi-Axial Moments (Due to simple connection) 195
Simply Supported Steel and Concrete Composite Beam 210
Concrete Filled CHS Composite Column 223
Continuous Steel and Concrete Composite Beam 235
5
Companion Document to EN 1993 and EN 1994 – Steel and Steel and Concrete Composite Buildings
6
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
The aim of this Companion Document is to provide UK designers with an overview of the
Eurocodes system, and with detailed information for the principal parts of Eurocode 3 and
Eurocode 4 namely:
Eurocode 3
Part 1-1 General rules and rules for buildings
Part 1-2 Structural fire design
Part 1-8 Design of joints
Part 1-10 Material toughness and through-thickness properties
Part 5 Piling
Eurocode 4
The scope of this document was developed in consultation with industry. It comprises:
• An overview of the impact that Eurocodes 3 and 4 will have in the UK

• Route maps for the design of building elements to the Eurocodes in the UK
• The major technical differences between the Eurocodes and the UK Standards
The document focuses on guidance for buildings. Design guidance relating to bridges and
other civil engineering works is not considered. Where the Eurocode design guidance is the
same as that currently (late 2004) given in British Standards or there is little change between
the Codes no discussion has been included. To keep this document concise detailed design
guidance is not presented.
BRE and Buro Happold have made every effort to ensure the accuracy and quality of all the
information in this document when first published. However, they can take no responsibility for
the subsequent use of this information, nor for any errors or omissions it may contain.
© Queen's Printer and Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office
7
1 Introduction
The objectives of the Eurocodes are
• To establish a common set of design rules for buildings and civil engineering works to be
used across Europe.
• To remove the barriers to ‘free’ movement of products and engineering services between
European countries, by removing the obstacles caused by different nationally codified
practices for the assessment of structural reliability.
The emerging Eurocodes (ENs) have been developed following work undertaken to modify
the European Prestandards (ENVs). The ENVs were published with National Application
Documents in the early 1990s to allow Designers to undertake provisional designs and make
comments on their content. Unlike the Eurocodes the ENVs did not have the status of
European Standards.
Following a period of co-existence the current British Standards will be superseded by the
Eurocodes. These Eurocodes will be denoted as BS EN in the UK.
The Eurocodes can be considered to be divided into codes that provide fundamental
guidance for structural design (Basis of Structural design), guidance that may apply to all
designs (loads, geotechnics and seismic) and detailed guidance for structural materials (steel
concrete etc.).
1.1 Steel Structures

EN 1993 (Eurocode 3) gives structural design rules for steel structures. It is divided into six
main design areas, which are sub-divided into the following parts:
Part 1 General rules and rules for buildings

Part 1-3 General rules Supplementary rules for cold-formed members and sheeting
Part 1-4 Stainless steels
Part 1-5 Plated structural elements
Part 1-6 Strength and stability of shell elements
1
Part 1-7 Strength and stability of planar plated structures transversely loaded
Part 1-9 Fatigue strength of steel structures
Part 1-11 Design of structures with tension components made of steel
Part 1-12 Additional rules for the extension of EN 1993 to steel grades up to S700
Part 2 Steel Bridges
Part 3 Towers, masts and chimneys
Part 3-1 Towers and masts
Part 3-2 Chimneys
Part 4 Silos, tanks and pipelines
1
It should be noted that while there is an ENV version of part 1-7 there may not be an EN
version of this part of Eurocode 3.
8
Introduction
Part 4-1 Silos

Part 4-2 Tanks
Part 4-3 Pipelines
Part 5 Piling
Part 6 Crane supporting structures
1.2 Composite steel and concrete structures

EN1994 (Eurocode 4) gives structural design rules for composite steel and concrete
structures. It is divided into two main design areas, which are sub-divided into the following
parts:
Part 1 General rules and rules for buildings

Part 2 Bridges
1.3 Aim and scope of this publication

The aim of this Companion Document is to provide UK designers with an overview of the
Eurocodes system, and with more detail given for parts of Eurocode 3 and Eurocode 4.
This Companion Document focuses on the guidance given for buildings. Design guidance
presented in the Eurocodes relating to bridges and other civil engineering works is not
considered.
The main differences between the current British Standards (2004) and the Eurocodes 3 and
4 are discussed. Where the design guidance is the same or there is little change between the
Codes no discussion has been included.
To keep this document concise detailed design guidance is not presented.
The parts of Eurocode 3 and 4 that are covered by this companion document are:
Eurocode 3
Part 5 Piling
Eurocode 4
9
p g
2 Eurocodes System
The numbering system used by the structural Eurocodes is EN199#-#-#: ####. The 199#
number is not the publication date, but the number of the Eurocode. The second and third #
denote the part of the Eurocode. The year of publication is given after the Eurocode number
(####). Eurocode 3 part 1.1 is used here to illustrate the Eurocodes numbering system that
will be used in the UK, BS EN 1993-1-1:2004. The letters BS are added to the front of the
2
Eurocode number to show that it has been published by BSI and contains the UK National
title page, forward and annex.
The structural Eurocode system will contain the following codes:
BS EN 1990 — Basis of Structural Design

BS EN 1991 — Actions on Structures
BS EN 1992 — Design of Concrete Structures
BS EN 1993 — Design of Steel Structures
BS EN 1994 — Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures
BS EN 1995 — Design of Timber Structures
BS EN 1996 — Design of Masonry Structures
BS EN 1997 — Geotechnical Design
BS EN 1998 — Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance
BS EN 1999 — Design of Aluminium Structures
The organisation of design guidance in the Eurocode system is different to the current British
Standards (BS) system. Safety, serviceability and durability design guidance for different
types of structures is presented in BS EN 1990 (Basis of Structural Design), the current BS
system presents this design guidance within each material code. Therefore a copy of Basis
of Structural Design is required for all designs performed using the Eurocodes. For both the
Eurocodes and current BS systems product standards are used with design codes. The links
between the different Eurocodes are shown in Figure 1.
Structural safety,
EN1990
serviceability & durability
EN1991 Actions on structures
EN1992, EN1993, EN1994 Design & detailing

(material codes)
EN1995, EN1996, EN1999
Geotechnical & Seismic

EN1997 EN1998
design
ETAs Product harmonised

technical standards
Figure 1. Links between the individual Eurocodes
2
British Standards Institute
10
Eurocodes System
The individual material Eurocodes are divided into parts. Part 1 gives general rules and rules
for buildings, Parts 2, 3 etc. give rules for other applications (bridges etc.). These ‘high level’
parts are divided into sub-parts.
In addition to the ‘inter-action’ between the materials codes and Basis of Structural Design the
parts of each material code may cross-reference each other. This is due to the Eurocodes
presenting guidance in only one place (i.e. rules are not repeated in several parts) and
subsequently referring to that clause in other parts of the Eurocode. In some cases parts of
different material Eurocodes may be referenced e.g. a part of EN 1994 (Composite Steel and
Concrete Structures) may reference a part of EN 1992 (Concrete Structures) or EN 1993
(Steel Structures).
Each part of a Eurocode published by a National Standards Authority will be divided into
distinct sections, these are:
• National title page

• National forward
• EN title page
• EN main text
• EN Annex(es)
o Normative Annexes contain design rules / methods / values to be used when designing
to the Eurocode.
o Informative Annexes contain recommended design rules / methods or informative
values, e.g. snow densities.
• National Annex
The technical content of the EN main text and EN Annex(es) is the same across the whole of
Europe. Those sections and the EN title page make up the 'EN' document published by
3
CEN . The National Standards Authority (BSI in the UK) is responsible for developing and
publishing the National title page, National forward and National Annex. The addition of these
National sections in the UK makes the 'EN' document in to a 'BS EN' document.
Each part of a Eurocode will have an accompanying National Annex. These annexes will
contain information that should be referred to when designing a structure to be constructed in
that country. Therefore if a UK designer was designing a building to be constructed in France
they would need to refer to the French National Annexes for all the Eurocodes used during
design and not the UK National Annexes.
The National Annex will contain information on the values / methods that should be used,
where a national choice is allowed in the main text of the Eurocode. The national choices are
collectively referred to as Nationally Determined Parameters (NDPs). NDPs may be given for
coefficient values, loads (both applied and self-weight) and where a choice in design
approach is given. The EN main text specifies recommended values / approaches, the
National Annex can either accept the recommendations given or specify different values /
approaches to be used.
The National Annex will state how / if the content of an Informative EN Annex may be used for
the design of structures to be constructed in that country. Information given in a Normative EN
Annex may only be altered by the National Annex if the EN text allows different rules / values
to be given in the National Annex. References may be given to separate documents that give
guidance to help with the design of a structure. Such guidance is known as Non-Conflicting
Complementary Information (NCCI) and may not be presented in the National Annex itself.
3
European committee for standardization
11
The numbering system used in the Eurocodes follows the International Organisation for
Standardisation (ISO) practice i.e. a comma is used in place of a decimal point.
2.1 Eurocodes Terminology

The Eurocode system uses different terminology to that used in the current BS system. An
important change that will effect every design approach is the change in terminology for
loading. In the Eurocodes the term “loads” is replaced by the term “actions”. The Eurocodes
also introduce the terms permanent action, variable action and accidental action.
Permanent actions include the self-weight of the structural and non-structural elements.
These self-weights are combined to form a single value for consideration during design
checks. Loads due to prestressing are also considered as permanent actions.
Variable actions are defined in Basis of Structural Design as ‘actions for which the variation in
magnitude with time is neither negligible nor monotonic.’ Loads considered as variable
actions include:
• Imposed floor & roof loads

• Snow loads
• Wind loads
Variable actions are sub-divided into two groups:
• Leading variable actions

These are variable actions which when acting on a structure cause the most significant
structural effects.
• Accompanying variable actions

These are variable actions that act on a structure at the same time as the leading
variable action.
Accidental actions are caused by events that usually have a short duration but have a
significant effect. It is considered that such events have a low probability of occurrence
during the design working life of a structure. Accidental design situations that should be
considered include fire and explosion.
Some variable actions may be classed as accidental actions for design checks. These are,
snow, wind and seismic. The Eurocodes and National Annexes identify when they may be
considered as accidental actions.
Another difference in the terminology used is that the Eurocodes use the term "resistance"
rather than "capacity" when defining the value of the forces that can be resisted by an
element before it fails i.e. moment resistance, shear force resistance etc.
The term "execution" is used in the Eurocodes to define all the processes associated with the
erection of a building or civil engineering works. The term may be applied to both on and off
site processes.
2.1.1 Types of clause used in the Eurocodes

The Eurocodes define two types of clause, Principles and Application rules. These terms will
be new to UK designers as the current BS system does not contain these clause types.
Principles are generally denoted by the letter P following a clause number, e.g. 1.3(2)P.
Principles are ‘general statements and definitions for which there is no alternative, as well as,
12
Eurocodes System
requirements and analytical methods for which no alternative is permitted unless specifically
stated.’
Application rules are generally denoted by a clause number without the letter P, e.g. 1.3(2).
Application rules are ‘generally recognised rules which comply with the Principles and satisfy
their requirements.’ It is permitted to use alternative design rules in place of those given in
Application rules. However, it must be shown that the alternative design rules meet the
requirements of any relevant Principles. It must also be shown that the alternative rules
provide equivalent structural safety, serviceability and durability to that expected from the
Eurocodes. If a design is carried out using an alternative rule to that given in an Application
rule the design cannot be said to be wholly in accordance with the Eurocode. However, it can
be said that the design is in accordance with the Principles of the Eurocode. This may have
implications for CE marking.
The Eurocodes also use different terms to identify when a rule must be used or when an
alternative to that given can be used. When the term shall is used in a clause the rule must
be used (as for a Principle). If a clause contains the word should an alternative to that rule
can be used (as for an Application rule).
The majority of Eurocodes make the distinction between Principle and Application rules using
the notation discussed earlier. However of the Eurocodes considered by this Companion
Document, EN1993-1-1 (General rules), EN1993-1-2 (Fire design) and EN1993-1-10
(material toughness and through-thickness properties), do not currently (November 2004) use
the letter P to denote a Principle, instead only the term shall identifies a rule as a Principle.
EN1993-1-1 does present supplementary guidance for the design of steel buildings, denoted
by the letter B after the clause number e.g. 5.1.1(4)B.
13
3 General Design Issues
3.1 Convention for member axes

The Eurocodes define the member axes differently to BS 5950. The Eurocodes system is in
keeping with the system generally used in computer software for global structural analysis. It
defines the longitudinal axis of the member as x-x, with the major axis of the cross-section as
y-y and the minor axis as z-z. The convention used in BS 5950 defines the major axis of the
cross-section as x-x, the minor axis as y-y and the longitudinal axis of the member as z-z.
The same convention is used for the u-u and v-v axes for angle sections in both Eurocode 3
and BS 5950.
Designers unfamiliar with using the Eurocodes should pay particular attention to the
difference in axes convention. This is particularly important when using section tables that
use the BS 5950 convention. Figure 2 shows the axes convention and notation used for a
universal beam section.
z
tf
r
y y d h
tw
z
b
Figure 2. Member axes convention and dimension symbols used in the Eurocodes
3.2 The explicit use of factors
In contrast to the current British Standards the Eurocodes do not ‘hide’ the material partial
factors (γ ) This results in expressions appearing more complex, or different property values
( Mi).
compared with those currently used in the UK.
An example of expressions with an increase in the number of terms from the British Standard
to the Eurocodes is the resistance of a cross-section for uniform compression:
Af y
Nc ,Rd = For Class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections
γM 0
Where: NcRd is the resistance of the cross-section for uniform compression (N)
2
A is the cross-sectional area (mm )
2
fy is the yield strength (N/mm )
γM0
M0 is the partial material factor for the resistance of the cross-section
14
General Design Issues
3.2.1 Symbols used in the Eurocodes

The Eurocodes use different symbols for section properties compared with those used in BS
5950. The section properties with different symbols used in the Eurocode and BS 5950 are
given in Table 1 and shown in Figure 2. Section properties not included in Table 1 have the
same symbols in both codes.
Table 1. Section properties with different symbols used in the Eurocodes and BS 5950
Symbol used in design code

Section property BS 5950 Eurocode
Depth of cross-section D h
Effective section modulus Zeff Weff
Elastic section modulus Z Wel
Flange thickness T tf
Net area of cross-section An Aeff
Outer diameter of circular D d
sections
Plastic section modulus S Wpl
Radius of gyration r i
Radius of root fillet - r r1
channel sections*
Torsional constant J IT
Warping constant H Iw
Web thickness t tw
Width of cross-section B b
* Symbol used for radius of root fillet for other sections does not differ between codes
In addition to the section property symbols given in Table 1, symbols for other coefficients and
values differ between the Eurocodes and British Standards. Table 2 presents some Latin
upper case letters used in the Eurocodes to define actions and forces. The letters given in
Table 2 define a number of different terms within the British Standards therefore a direct
comparison can not be given.
Table 2. Examples of Latin upper case letters used within the Eurocodes to define actions
and forces
Terms Latin upper case letter used

within the Eurocodes system
Actions (General) F
Permanent action G
Variable action Q
Moment M
Axial force N
Shear force V
Resistance of element (used as the R
main symbol or as a subscript)
Effect of an action (used as a subscript E
to one of the above)
15
The symbols used by the Eurocodes can have long chains of subscripts. This appears
cumbersome at first, however with use this system will be found to help interpretation
because the subscripts result in symbols that are nearly self defining. The multiple subscripts
used in the Eurocodes have been assembled following the guidance given in ISO3898: 1987,
commas are used to separate the multiple subscripts. Examples of the use of multiple
subscripts in the Eurocodes are given in Table 3.
Table 3. Examples of symbols with multiple subscripts used in the Eurocodes
Terms Eurocode symbol

Design bending moment about the y-y axis My.Ed
Design resistance to bending moment about the y-y axis My.Rd
Characteristic resistance to bending moment about the y-y axis My,Rk
Plastic design shear resistance Vpl,Rd
Design resistance to tension forces Nt,Rd
Effective cross-sectional area for local buckling when considering Ac,eff,loc
plate buckling
Minimum elastic section modulus Wel.min
3.3 Documents required when designing with the Eurocodes

The Eurocodes present Principles and Application rules for design rather than design
guidance. This approach results in information that is considered to be ‘textbook’ information
being omitted. Therefore the designer must rely on appropriate textbooks/design guides to
provide this information. Information that is omitted from Eurocodes 3 and 4 includes:
• Calculation of buckling lengths for members in compression.

• Determining the non-dimensional slenderness parameter for later torsional buckling and
torsional or flexural torsional buckling.
• Determining the critical moment for lateral torsional buckling.
• Tables giving expressions to determine moments in continuous beams.
The above list should not be considered as exhaustive.
The structure and the content of the Eurocodes results in the following documents being
required for design:
• Eurocodes
o EN1990 – Basis of Structural Design
o EN1991 – Actions on Structures
o EN199# - Material codes (normally several parts will be needed)
o EN1997 & EN1998 – Geotechnical and Seismic design
• Textbooks, design guides or similar sources of information
• Product standards / manufacturers’ information
16
EN 1993 Steel Structures
4 EN1993 Steel Structures
The following sections highlight the main differences between the guidance given in Eurocode
3 and BS 5950.
4.1 Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings

EN1993-1-1 [1] (hereafter referred to as EC3-1-1) gives general structural design rules for
steel structures and buildings. Steel grades from S235 to S460 are covered by the guidance
given in EC3-1-1. BS 5950: Part 1 covers steel grades from S275 to S460. Part 1-12 of
Eurocode 3 will present guidance that can be used to apply the rules given in part 1-1 to steel
grades up to S700.
4.1.1 Material Properties

Clause 3.2.1(1) of EC3-1-1 allows the National Annex to choose between the nominal values
for the yield and ultimate strength of structural steel given in the product standard BS EN
10025 and those given in Table 3.1 of EC3-1-1.
The material properties for structural steels given in BS 5950: Part 1 [2] are based on the
properties given in the product standard BS EN 10025 [3].
The main difference between the properties given in the product standard and those given in
EC3-1-1 is that the simplified table in EC3 uses a reduced number of thickness steps. The
result is that for steel thickness between 16mm and 40mm and between 63mm and 80mm the
values given in Table 3.1 of EC3-1-1 are approximately 4% higher than those values given in
both BS 5950:Part 1 and BS EN 10025. Furthermore, Table 3.1 only gives values up to
80mm thick while BS EN 10025 gives values up to 250mm and BS 5950 Part 1 has a
maximum thickness of 150mm. The UK National Annex to EC3-1-1 may recommend the use
of the nominal values given in BS EN 10025 in place of those given in Table 3.1.
4.1.2 Ductility requirements for structural steel

The ductility requirements given in EC3-1-1 apply to all steels regardless of the method used
for global analysis. Whilst EC3-1-1 allows the National Annex to define ductility limits, the
Eurocode recommended limits are:
• fu/fy≥ 1.10
• Elongation at failure not less than 15%
• εu ≥ 15εy
Where:
fu is the ultimate strength
fy is the yield strength
εu is the ultimate strain
εy is the yield strain (fy / E)
BS 5950: Part 1 has a different approach. It states that the design strength py should not be
greater than Us/1.2 where Us is the minimum tensile strength Rm specified in the relevant
product standard (BS EN 10025). This limit applies to all grades of steel regardless of the
17
method used for global analysis. However when plastic global analysis is used the steel
grades must satisfy the following additional criteria:
• ffuu/fyy ≥ 1.20
1.20
• Elongation at failure not less than 15%
• εuu ≥ 20ε
20 y
A comparison of the above limits shows that the EC3-1-1 limits are less onerous that those
given in BS 5950: Part 1.
The reason for the differences in the two sets of recommendations has been difficult to
establish but the following comments on the development of the limits used in both BS 5950
and EC3-1-1 might be helpful in understanding the code writers' thinking.
The origin of the BS 5950: Part 1 rules was the old BCSA ‘black book’ 23 or 29 which
extended plastic design from BS15 steels (later grade 43 and now called S275) to BS968
steels (later grade 50 and now called S355). The 1969 amendment extended BS 449 to
grade 50 for elastic analysis. For the early draft of BS 5950 the issue of allowing plastic
design of grade 50 steel in the UK was considered. On the basis of specific tests it
seemed plastic design could be allowed with smaller b/t and d/t limits i.e. for more
compact sections. The use of a general rule to avoid having to test every new grade of
steel was investigated. Professor Horne was consulted and his view was that the only
way to be sure a steel was NOT alright would be if it failed specific tests, but that it was
possible to make an informed judgement about parameters that would help decide if a test
was even necessary. As a result of these discussions a set of rules specific to plastic
global analysis were developed which meant than any steel that satisfied them was
satisfactory. A steel that did not meet these criteria might also be satisfactory but specific
tests were needed to be certain it could be used for plastic global analysis.
The EC3-1-1 drafting panel had a wider definition of plastic analysis than that used in the
UK. Their understanding was that ‘plastic analysis’ or even ‘plastic design’ means not only
plastic global analysis but that using the plastic modulus of a class 1 or class 2 cross-
section is also ‘plastic analysis’. The wider definition may have contributed to the
difference in values given in EC3-1-1 and BS5950: Part 1 for the plastic analysis limits.
4.1.3 Fracture toughness

EC 3 and BS 5950 use different terminology and different approaches to establish the fracture
toughness of a material to avoid brittle fracture. BS 5950: Part 1 uses the ‘minimum service
temperature’, Tmin, to determine fracture toughness. In the UK Tmin is usually taken as -5°C
for internal steelwork and -15°C for external steelwork. The method used in EC3 is based on
a reference temperature of TEd which is determined from equation 2.2 of EC3-1-10 (see
section 4.4.1 for further details).
4.1.4 Structural stability of frames

In both standards the designer is required to determine if the effects of the deformed
geometry of the structure will significantly affect or modify structural behaviour, for example by
introducing additional (secondary) moments. In EC3-1-1 this is achieved by checking that the
critical load factor, αcr1
cr, for the structure under consideration satisfies the following limits:
αcrcr ≥ 10 for elastic analysis
αcrcr ≥ 15 for plastic analysis
18
If θcr is above these limits then the effects of deformed geometry (second order effects) can
be neglected and a first order analysis may be used. If θ cr is less than 10, or 15, then the
effects of the deformed geometry should be considered. This defines the boundaries, but
unlike BS5950: Part 1 EC3-1-1 does not use the terms ‘non-sway’ and ‘sway’ sensitive to
describe the frames.
The limit used for elastic analysis in BS 5950: Part 1 is identical to that used in EC3-1-1. The
only difference is that the limit in BS 5950: Part 1 is for clad structures where the stiffening
effect of the cladding is not explicitly taken into account when calculating the elastic critical
load factor. No such limitation is placed on the method given in EC3. Consequently, bare
steel frames designed using EC3-1-1 may be less stiff than those designed to BS 5950.
Unlike EC3-1-1, BS 5950: Part 1 includes two simplified methods for taking account of
secondary effects for the plastic design of multi-storey rigid frames and a separate method for
the plastic design of portal frames.
4.1.5 Structural imperfections

A feature of EC3-1-1 is its explicit allowance in the calculation procedures for practical
imperfections that have an influence on the resistance of members or structures. A number
of alternative procedures are given in Section 5.3, some with limited scope. Generally they
consider:
• System imperfections
An initial-bow imperfection is introduced in the design of braced bays and built up
compression members. In the case of bracing systems any additional deflections due
to the action of the bracing system in resisting externally applied forces also have to
be taken into account.
• Frame imperfections
These are introduced into the analysis of all frames in the form of an equivalent initial
sway. For convenience this can be replaced by a closed system of equivalent forces,
except when determining reactions onto foundations. The frame imperfections are
intended to account for the possible effects of other forms of imperfection which may
affect the stability of frames such as lack-of-fit.
• Member imperfections
These are introduced in the design of compression members through a series of
imperfection factors which represent an equivalent lack of straightness. The values of
the imperfection factors also account for the effects of typical residual stress patterns.
Local bow imperfections of members, in addition to global sway imperfections, should
be included in the global analysis of frames that are sensitive to second order effects.
While BS 5950: Part 1 does not disallow this method of analysis system, frame and member
imperfections are not explicitly included in the standard. An allowance is made for them
within the buckling curves given in BS 5950: Part 1.
4.1.6 Buckling – members in compression

BS
BS 5950: Part11uses
5950: Part usesaamodified
modified Perry
Perryformula
formula to to
determine member
determine memberbuckling resistance.
buckling resistance.
This method is described in Annex C of BS 5950: Part 1. In
This method is described in Annex C of BS 5950: Part 1. In EC3-1-1 the member EC3-1-1 the member buckling
buckling
resistance
resistanceisisderived
derivedfrom
fromthetheresistance
resistance of ofthethecross-section by applying
cross-section a reduction
by applying a reductionfactor,
factor,
χ.. Different valuesofofχ are
Differentvalues aredetermined
determined forfor
flexural buckling
flexural (χy (y-y
buckling or χzor(z-zz (z-z
axis)axis)
( y (y-y axis)),
axis)),
lateral
lateral torsional
torsionalbuckling ), ),torsional
buckling(χ(LTLT torsional (χT( ) Tand
) andtorsional-flexural buckling
torsional-flexural (χTF(). TF
buckling The). The
reduction factor is a function of an imperfection factor (α) and the
reduction factor is a function of an imperfection factor ( ) and the non-dimensionalnon-dimensional
19
slenderness ratio λ of the compression member. λ is a function of the slenderness ratio of

the member Lcr/i, where Lcr is the buckling length in the plane of buckling. The buckling length
is similar to the effective length used in BS 5950: Part 1. Unfortunately, unlike BS 5950: Part
1, EC3-1-1 does not give guidance on the buckling lengths to be used. Consequently,
guidance on the buckling lengths (or effective length) must be obtained from either BS 5950:
Part 1, design guides or appropriate textbooks.
Another feature of EC3-1-1 is the introduction of two additional checks for members with open
cross-sections subject to compression. These checks are for the torsional and torsional-
flexural buckling of members in compression. The methods use the same base equations
used for flexural buckling but with the non-dimensional slenderness λ replaced by either the
non-dimensional slenderness for torsional ( λ T ) or torsional-flexural buckling ( λ TF ). These
parameters can be used to determined either χT or χTF and either the elastic torsional flexural
buckling force or the elastic torsional buckling force of the member. EC3-1-1 does not include
guidance on how to calculate these two parameters and the designer must rely on an
appropriate textbook.
4.1.7 Buckling – uniform members in bending

In EC3-1-1 the lateral torsional buckling of a laterally unrestrained beam is determined from
the resistance of the cross-section by applying a reduction factor, χ. The reduction factor, χLT,
is a function of both the imperfection factor ,αLT, and the non-dimensional slenderness ratio,
λ LT , of the beam. This approach is similar to the method used for calculating the buckling
resistance of a column.
The method used in BS 5950: Part 1 is different and is based on a modified Perry-Robertson
expression. A full description of this method is given in Annex B of BS 5950: Part 1.
The main difference between these two methods is that while BS 5950 is based on the
calculation of the equivalent slenderness , λLT, EC3-1-1 requires the designer to evaluate the
elastic critical moment for lateral-torsional buckling (Mcr) as an intermediate step before
calculating the non-dimensional slenderness ratio , λ LT . This is the traditional way of
evaluating λ LT but unfortunately EC3-1-1 does not include data for the evaluation of Mcr.
Designers must therefore rely on an appropriate textbook.
Furthermore, EC3-1-1 contains two methods for calculating the lateral torsional buckling of a
member. These are:
• The general case, and

• A method specifically for rolled sections or equivalent welded sections.
The second method has been calibrated against test data and has been shown to give
reasonable results for rolled sections. The calibration also showed the method to be
unsatisfactory for welded sections. It is therefore suggested that designers use the general
case for welded sections and the specific method for rolled sections. However, the UK
National Annex (once published) should be referred to for guidance on which method to use.
The second method includes a correction factor to allow for the shape of the bending moment
diagram. This correction factor is in addition to the equivalent uniform moment factors used
to allow for the differences between a uniform moment and the actual moment distribution
along the beam.
20
4.1.8 Buckling – uniform members in bending and axial compression

EC3-1-1 introduces two alternative methods for calculating the buckling resistance of a
member subject to combined bending and axial compression. Both approaches use
interaction equations which have a similar general form to those used in BS 5950: Part 1.
However, this is where the similarity ends. The methods in EC3-1-1 include interaction
factors, k, which account for the shape of the bending moment diagram and the class of the
cross-section. The interaction factors have been derived from two alternative approaches
and expressions for each interaction factor are included in Annex A for Method 1 and Annex
B for Method 2. Both methods require the evaluation of complex expressions in order to
determine the interaction factors. However, Method 2 is a little easier. A comparison
between Methods 1 and 2 and BS 5950 has shown that Method 2 is in better agreement with
BS 5950: Part 1 than Method 1. Furthermore, there is some doubt over the applicability of
Method 1 to asymmetric sections. For these reasons the National Annex may allow both
methods to be used but restrict the scope of Method 1 to bi-symmetrical sections.
4.2 Part 1-2: General rules – Structural fire design

The fire part of Eurocode 3 (EN1993-1-2 [4], hereafter referred to as EC3-1-2) is not radically
different from the UK standard for the fire resistant design of steel structures. BS 5950 Part 8
[5] is a performance based code that allows for calculation of fire resistance in addition to the
use of fire test data. The principal difference between the two codes is that the calculation
procedures in BS 5950: Part 8 are limited to a thermal exposure based on the standard fire
curve while EC3-1-2 allows for alternative thermal exposures based on the factors influencing
fire growth and development. The design procedure for EC3-1-2 is illustrated in Figure 3.
Effectively the scope of BS 5950: Part 8 is restricted to the left hand branch of the diagram.
All the fire parts of the structural Eurocodes are designed to be used with the fire part of the
Eurocode for Actions (EN1991-1-2 [6] hereafter referred to as EC1-1-2). The thermal actions
(either nominal or parametric) are taken from this document and the resulting thermal and
mechanical analysis undertaken using the principles and design methods detailed in EC3-1-2.
4.2.1 Material properties

For fire resistant design by calculation the most common method in the Eurocodes is to use a
modified form of the equations for resistance at ambient temperature using reduced material
properties corresponding to the appropriate temperature. For this reason EC3-1-2 contains
detailed guidance on the material properties of carbon and stainless steels. These are
presented as stress-strain relationships and as reduction factors relative to the ambient
temperature strength and elastic modulus. It is important to note that the variation of Young’s
modulus with temperature is different to the variation in steel strength . The information is
presented in the form of strength reduction factors (k(ky,yθ) in EC3-1-2 and strength retention
factors in BS 5950: Part 8. The strength reduction factors given in EC3-1-2 correspond to the
2% strain values in Table 1 of BS 5950: Part 8. Elevated temperature properties are also
presented for thermal elongation, specific heat and thermal conductivity. The relationships
given in EC3-1-2 are identical to those in BS 5950: Part 8. The corresponding properties for
stainless steel may be found in Annex C of EC3-1-2. Annex A of EC3-1-2 presents an
alternative stress-strain relationship for carbon steels allowing for strain hardening.
21
Figure3: Design Procedure EN1993-1-2
22
Project Design
Prescriptive Rules Performance Based Code

(Thermal Actions given by Nominal Fire) (Physically based Thermal Actions)
Member Analysis of Part Analysis of Selection of Simple or Advanced

Analysis of the Structure Entire Structure Fire Development Models
Calculation of Calculation of Selection of Member Analysis of Analysis of

Mechanical Mechanical Mechanical Analysis Part of the Entire
Actions at Actions at Actions Structure Structure
Boundaries Boundaries
Tabulated Simple Advanced Simple Advanced Advanced Calculation of Calculation of Selection of

Data Calculation Calculation Calculation Calculation Calculation Mechanical Mechanical Mechanical

Models Models Models Models Models Actions Actions Actions
(if available) at Boundaries at Boundaries
Simple Advanced Advanced Advanced

Calculation Calculation Calculation Calculation
Models Models Models Models
(if available)
4.2.2 Structural fire design

In EC3-1-2 fire resistance may be determined either by simple calculation models, advanced
calculation models or testing. The current British Standard is based on fire resistance derived
from standard fire tests and fire resistance derived from calculations. The main difference in
approach is that BS 5950: Part 8 includes tabulated data for limiting temperatures and design
temperatures based on the results from standard tests while EC3-1-2 does not include
tabulated data for design temperatures.
4.2.3 Members in compression

For compression members with Class 1, Class 2 or Class 3 cross-sections a non-dimensional
slenderness is calculated based on the buckling length in the fire situation. In general the
buckling length should be determined as for ambient temperature design. However, in a
braced frame the buckling length may be determined based on continuity at the connections
provided that the fire resistance of the building components that separate the fire
compartments is not less than the fire resistance of the column. Thus in a braced frame
where each storey comprises a separate fire compartment, intermediate columns are
assumed to be fixed in direction at either end and the effective length is half of the system
length. In the top storey the buckling length may be taken as 0.7 x the system length. This is
different to the approach used in BS 5950: Part 8 where the buckling length is determined
following the guidance given for ambient temperature design i.e. current UK practice is more
conservative. It is anticipated that this issue will be addressed in the UK National Annex for
EC3-1-2.
4.2.4 Combined bending and axial compression

For members subject to combined bending and axial compression the calculation method in
EC3-1-2 is more complex than the corresponding calculation in BS 5950: Part 8 and differs
from the method in EC3-1-1. The interaction formula for the combination of axial load and
minor and major axis bending is based on the procedure in the original draft for the
development of the Eurocode, ENV 1993-1-1 as the new method in EC3-1-1 has not been
verified for the fire situation at the time of writing.
4.2.5 Structural connections

The latest version of BS 5950: Part 8 contains guidance on the calculation of the thickness of
protection required for structural connections and takes into account the relative load ratio of
the connection compared to that of the connected members. EC3-1-2 in addition to similar
guidance includes a more detailed approach in Annex D where the design resistance of bolts
in shear and tension, and the design resistance of welds can be calculated using a
temperature profile based on the temperature of the bottom flange of the beam at mid-span.
This method is mainly applicable for simple connections although potentially could be applied
to all components of the connection using the approach in EN1993-1-8.
4.3 Part 1-8: Design of joints

EN1993-1-8 [7] (hereafter referred to as EC3-1-8) gives guidance for the design of steel joints
subject to predominantly static loads. Steel grades S235, S275, S355 and S460 are covered
by the guidance given.
23
4.3.1 Definitions
EC3-1-8 starts by defining the different components that constitute a steel joint and makes a
clear distinction between a connection and a joint. This can be confusing for UK designers
who generally use the words joint and connection interchangeably to describe the junction
between two steel members. In EC3-1-8 the word connection is used to define the location
at which two or more elements meet, while the word joint is used to define the zone where
two or more members are interconnected. Therefore a beam-to-column connection is the
interface between the flange (or web) of the column and the end of the beam, and includes all
the components (bolts, welds, end-plate, column flange etc) required to transfer the internal
forces from the beam to the column. The joint however is the assembly of all the basic
components which play a part in the behaviour of the configuration. For example, a single-
sided beam-to-column joint consists of a connection and a column web panel. It is important
that UK designers recognise this distinction as it is used throughout the standard.
4.3.2 Material properties

In EC3-1-8 the nominal values of the yield strength, fyb, and the ultimate tensile strength, fub,
for grade 8.8 and 10.9 bolts are considerably greater than the equivalent values used in BS
5950: Part 1. This is due to the standards taking account of different effects within the quoted
material property values. EC3-1-1 gives ultimate values and BS5950: Part 1 gives
permissible values. The partial material factors are included in the properties given in BS
5950: Part 1 but are defined separately in EC3-1-8. BS5950 Part 1 material properties may
be used to account for prying actions without the direct calculation of the prying force by
applying a factor to the material properties, EC3 gives a separate check for prying action.
4.3.3 Groups of fasteners

The approach used in EC3-1-8 is different to that used in the BCSA/SCI publications on
Joints in Steel Construction [8, 9 & 10]. In EC3-1-8 the design resistance of a group of
fasteners may be taken as the sum of the design bearing resistances of the individual
fasteners provided the design shear resistance of each individual fastener is greater than or
equal to the design bearing resistance. If this condition is not satisfied then the design
resistance of a group of fasteners should be taken as the number of fasteners multiplied by
the smallest design resistance of any of the individual fasteners.
In the BCSA/SCI publications the design resistance of a group of fasteners is taken as the
sum of the design resistances of the individual fasteners.
This difference in approach may cause problems for flexible end-plates. The current
approach in the UK often means that the top bolts are designed for bearing failure and the
remaining bolts for shear. Because the EC3-1-8 rules do not allow mixed modes of failure the
capacity of the bolt group according to the Eurocode philosophy would often be based on the
number of fasters multiplied by the design bearing resistance of the top bolts. Clearly this
may significantly reduce the apparent shear capacity of flexible end-plate connections and in
some cases may result in an increase in the number of bolts needed.
4.3.4 Analysis, classification and modelling

Joint design depends very much on the designer’s decision regarding the method by which
the structure is to be analysed. Both EC3-1-8 and BS 5950: Part 1 recognise that either
elastic or plastic global analysis may be used, for frames that are simple, semi-continuous or
continuous. When elastic analysis is adopted joint stiffness is relevant, when the analysis is
plastic then strength of the joint is relevant. EC3-1-8 goes a step further than the British
Standard and includes a table that relates the type of framing, method of global analysis and
24
the joint classification. Table 4 gives details (note that some of the terminology used in the
Eurocode has been slightly modified for clarity).
Table 4. Type of framing, analysis used and joint classification/requirements
Method of global Classification/requirements of joint

analysis
Elastic Nominally pinned Rigid Semi-rigid
Rigid-plastic Nominally pinned Full-strength Partial-strength
Elastic-plastic Nominally pinned Rigid and Semi-rigid and partial strength or
full-strength Semi-rigid and full-strength or
Rigid and partial-strength
Type of framing Simple Continuous Semi-continuous
Although the relationship between type of framing, method of global analysis and joint
requirements (represented by their classification) has been known for some time, its inclusion
in a major structural code is new and some explanation of its use is required.
Simple frame design is based on the assumption that the beams are simply supported and
that the beam-to-column joints are sufficiently flexible and weak to restrict the development of
significant beam end-moments. In continuous framing the type of joint used will depend on
the method of global analysis. When elastic analysis is used the joints are classified
according to their stiffness and rigid joints must be used. When plastic analysis is used the
joints are classified according to their strength and full-strength joints must be used. When
elastic-plastic analysis is adopted then the joints are classified according to both their stiffness
and strength and rigid, full-strength joints must be used.
Semi-continuous frame design recognises the fact that most practical joints possess some
degree of both stiffness and moment resistance. When elastic analysis is used the joints are
classified according to their stiffness and semi-rigid joints should be used. If plastic global
analysis is used the joints are classified according to their strength and partial-strength joints
should be used. When elastic-plastic analysis is used the joints are classified according to
their stiffness and strength, and semi-continuity could be achieved in a number of ways (see
Table 4).
The traditional UK approach of classifying a joint only recognises two types (pinned and rigid)
and it is relatively straightforward to use engineering judgement to choose between these.
For an extended system, such as the one used in EC3-1-8, the structural properties of a joint
may need to be quantified in order to classify it. EC3-1-8 includes methods for doing this, and
it is the inclusion of these methods that constitutes the biggest difference between the design
of joints to the Eurocode and the traditional methods used in the UK.
By comparing the quantified stiffness of a joint against the limits given in EC3-1-8 it can be
classified as pinned, rigid or semi-rigid. Similarly a joint can be classified by comparing its
quantified moment resistance with limits for pinned, full-strength or partial strength joints. A
fuller description of a joint’s behaviour can also be obtained by classifying it using both
stiffness and strength. Such a classification leads to joints which are pinned, rigid/full-
strength, rigid/partial strength and semi-rigid/partial-strength.
One problem that this may cause is that joints which have traditionally been taken as pinned
or rigid may not be pinned or rigid under the new classification system. This situation is
complicated by the fact that the Eurocode not only gives guidance on calculating stiffness and
strength (for some joint types), but clause 5.2.2.1 also allows classification on the basis of
‘experimental evidence’ or ‘experience of previous performance’. Clearly the results of these
three approaches for a given joint may not always agree. This could prove problematical if
25
checking authorities require designers to demonstrate that a joint is pinned or rigid, and could
lead to increased design time and/or changes to the UK’s commonly used joints.
To establish the stiffness boundary between rigid and semi-rigid joints the relationship
between joint stiffness and the Euler buckling load for a single-bay, single-storey frame was
investigated [11]. It was decided that a semi-rigid joint can be considered as rigid provided
the difference between the Euler buckling load for a single-bay, single-storey frame with semi-
rigid joints and the Euler buckling load of a similar frame with rigid joints was less than 5%.
By adopting this approach a classification method based on the rigidity of the connected
beam was developed. While such a system is easy to use it has attracted criticism, some of
which is detailed below:
• When compared to the stiffness limits given in some national standards the limits in EC3-
1-8 appear to be conservative.
• The classification system given in EC3-1-8 can be applied to any steel structure but as
the limits have been determined on the basis of a single-bay, single-storey frame the
accuracy of its application to multi-bay, multi-storey frames is questionable.
• The stiffness boundaries between joint types have been determined on the basis of the
ultimate limit state and on the assumption that a difference of 5% between the
performance of a frame with rigid and semi-rigid joints is small and can be neglected.
However, this does not necessarily mean that the differences at serviceability limit states,
where displacements of the structure are more important, are equally small and can be
neglected. Clearly, when deriving classification criteria both serviceability and ultimate
limit states should be considered.
4.3.5 Structural joints connecting H or I sections

The method described in Chapter 6 of EC3-1-8 for the design of joints between H or I
sections is based on the component approach. Explicit guidance is only given for flush and
extended end plate joints, although a designer might need to calculate stiffness and/or
strength for other types of joint in order to classify them. As well as this limitation it is worth
noting that the procedures for calculating the design moment resistance and rotational
stiffness of a joint are complex and time-consuming and are not suitable for hand calculation.
Computer software is recommended for these complex calculations.
4.3.5.1 Design resistance

In the given method for calculating moment resistance the potential resistance of each
component is calculated. These potential resistances are then converted to actual forces by
balancing the forces in the tension components with those in compression. The moment
capacity of the joint is then calculated by summing the product of the forces in the tension
components and their distances from the centre of compression. This approach is very
similar to the method described in the BCSA/SCI publication Joints in Steel Construction:
Moment connections [9] (which was in fact heavily based on the Eurocode). However, the
Eurocode also includes methods for calculating a joint’s rotational stiffness and rotation
capacity. Both of these methods will be new to UK designers and are therefore briefly
described below.
4.3.5.2 Rotational stiffness

Calculating the stiffness of any joint can be a difficult process. For this reason Reference 9
takes a pragmatic approach and gives simple rule-of-thumb detailing guidelines which, if
followed, will in most circumstances ensure an appropriate joint stiffness, so that frame design
assumptions are not invalidated.
26
EC3-1-8 incorporates a method for calculating the stiffness of a bare steel joint based on work
initially carried out by Zoetemeijer [12] and more recently by Jaspart [13 & 14]. This method
uses the component approach in which the rotational response of the joint is determined from
the mechanical properties of the different components (end-plate, cleat, column flange, bolts
etc.). The advantage of this approach is that the behaviour of any joint can be calculated by
decomposing it into its components.
The stiffness of each joint component is represented by a linear spring with a force-
displacement relationship. Tables are included in EC3-1-8 which give expressions for
evaluating the stiffness of the different components. The combined effect of the components
is determined by considering each spring, with an appropriate lever arm, to give a rotational
stiffness.
4.3.5.3 Rotation capacity

The rotation capacity of a joint is very important (a ‘pin’ or ‘plastic hinge’ must be able to
rotate sufficiently) but this is difficult to calculate accurately. However, numerous researchers
have investigated rotation capacity and have identified many sources of ductility in joints,
some of which are listed below:
• Column web panel in shear

• Column flange in bending
• End plate in bending
• Tension flange cleat in bending
EC3-1-8 gives a number of practical rules for checking the rotation capacity of a joint. These
rules are based on the above sources of ductility for bolted joints and entail checking that the
critical mode of failure is based on one of the above components.
4.4 Part 1-10: Material toughness and through-thickness properties

EN1993-1-10 [15] (here after referred to as EC3-1-10), gives design guidance for the
selection of steel for fracture toughness and through-thickness properties.
4.4.1 Fracture toughness

To determine the maximum permissible thickness of a steel element using EC3-1-10 the
reference temperature, steel grade and stress at the reference temperature are required. The
following expression is used to determine the reference temperature:
TEd md++ ∆
= TTmd
Ed = TTr + ∆T+σ +T∆T
r +T R +R +T∆T
+ε +T∆T
cf εcf
Where
md isisthe
TTmd theminimum
minimum service
service temperature
temperaturewithwithaaspecific
specificreturn
returnperiod,
period,given
given in EN
in EN1991-1-5
1991-1-5
∆TTrr isisananadjustment
adjustment for
for radiation
radiation loss, obtained from EN 1991-1-5
loss, obtained from EN 1991-1-5
∆TTσ isisthetheadjustment
adjustment for stress
stress and
andyield
yieldstrength
strengthofofmaterial,
material,crack
crackimperfections
imperfections andand
member shape
member shape and
and dimensions,
dimensions,given
givenininENEN1993-1-10
1993-1-10
∆TTRR isisaa safety
safety allowance,
allowance, ifif required,
required,totoreflect
reflectdifferent
differentreliability levels
reliability for for
levels different
different
applications, obtained from EN 1993-1-10
applications, obtained from EN 1993-1-10
∆TTε isisthetheadjustment
adjustment for
for a
a strain
strain rate
rate other
otherthan
thanthe
thereference
reference strain rate,
strain obtained
rate, obtainedfrom EN
from
1993-1-10
EN 1993-1-10
∆Tε is the adjustment for the degree of cold forming, defined in EN 1993-1-10
T cfcf is the adjustment for the degree of cold forming, defined in EN 1993-1-10
Elastic analysis should be used to determine the stress at the reference temperature. The
maximum element thicknesses given in Table 2.1 of EC3-1-10 relate to three levels of stress,
27
0.25fy(t), 0.5fy(t) and 0.75fy(t). Where fy(t) is the nominal yield strength adjusted for the
thickness of the element.
The current UK guidance gives maximum thickness values for minimum temperatures of
-5°C, -15°C, -25°C, -35°C and -45°C. The minimum temperature of -5°C for internal
steelwork given in BS 5950: Part 1 relates to the temperatures experienced during
construction, when it is vulnerable to brittle fracture. The values given in EC3-1-10 consider a
wider range of temperatures, +10°C to -50°C in 10°C intervals. Interpolation between the
values is allowed, but extrapolation beyond the extreme values given in the table is not
permitted.
The minimum temperature used in BS 5950: Part 1 and the reference temperature (TEd) of
EC3-1-10 are not equivalent to each other. The minimum temperature used in BS 5950: Part
1 is similar to the minimum service temperature with a specific return period (Tmd).
Maximum element thickness values are given for different steel grades in both codes,
although more steel grades/types are considered in BS 5950: Part 1. Table 5 gives the steel
grades/types considered in both standards. Comparing the steel grades covered by BS 5950:
Part 1 and EC3-1-10 it appears that no allowance has been made in Table 2.1 of EC3-1-10
for the steel grades used for hollow sections. EC3-1-10 allows the use of fracture mechanics
for a numerical evaluation. Therefore this method may be used for the steel grades used for
hollow sections.
Table 5. Material property standards for which maximum element thicknesses are given in
BS 5950: Part 1 and EN 1993-1-1
Material property standards for which maximum element thicknesses are given in standards
BS 5950: Part 1 EN 1993-1-1
S275 to S460 steel grades S275 to S690 steel grades
BS EN 10025 BS EN 10025
BS EN 10113 BS EN 10113
BS EN 10137 BS EN 10137
BS EN 10166
BS EN 10210
BS EN 10219
BS7668
A note to clause 2.2(5) of EC3-1-10 allows the National Annex to ‘give maximum values of the
range between TEd and the test temperature and also the range of σEd Ed,, to which the validity of
values for permissible thickness in Table 2.1 may be restricted.’ A further note to this clause
allows the National Annex to limit the use of Table 2.1 for steel grades up to S460. The UK
National Annex to EC3-1-10 is currently under development and no comment can be made at
this time on the values that may be included in it.
4.4.2 Through-thickness properties

Section 3 of EC3-1-10 gives a method for determining the susceptibility of steel to lamellar
tearing. Lamellar tearing is a weld induced flaw and is usually detected during ultrasonic
inspection of welds. The main risk of lamellar tearing is with cruciform joints, T-joints, corner
joints and when full penetration welds are used.
28
To check if lamellar tearing may be ignored EC3-1-10 requires the ‘available design’ and
4
‘required design’ Z-values to be compared. The available design Z-value is given in BS EN
10164 [16]. The required design Z-value is obtained from coefficients given in EC3-1-10
relating to weld depth, shape and position of welds, material thickness, restraint of shrinkage
and influence of preheating. BS 5950: Part 2 [17] states that ‘the material shall be tested for
through-thickness properties to the specified quality class in accordance with BS EN 10164.
The inclusion of the Z-value check in EC3-1-10 may result in designers having to perform this
check for every welded joint in a structure. Currently in the UK only joints identified as being
at risk from lamellar tearing are checked. EC3-1-10 allows the National Annex to limit the
scope of section 3 to ‘certain steel products’. This may be used in the UK National Annex to
limit the Z-value checks to specific types of welded joints.
4.5 Part 5: Steel Piling

EN1993-5 [18] (hereafter referred to as EC3-5) gives guidance for the design of all types of
steel piles including hot and cold formed sheet piles, bearing piles and piling systems built up
from component parts. It gives guidance for different shapes, sizes and arrangements of
steel piles. Although some of these are not common in the UK at present they may find future
application.
The fields of application considered by the Eurocode are:
• Steel piled foundations of civil engineering works on land and over water
• Temporary or permanent structures necessary for the execution of steel piling
• Temporary or permanent retaining structures composed of steel sheet piles, including all
kinds of combined walls.
Guidance for steel piles filled with concrete is also included in EC3-5.
EC3-5 contains an annex giving detailed rules for the design of cold formed pile sections and
combined walls. These areas have not previously been dealt with in UK guidance.
Current UK standards do not contain an equivalent code to EC3-5. BS 8002 [19] is basically
a geotechnical code that requires input from BS 5950: Part 1 to allow the design of steel piles.
Current SCI documents cover some aspects of UK steel pile design. However, the guidance
given in these documents does not give the detail required for a ‘full’ design, and it only
applies to simple structures.
EC3-5 introduces some new concepts to the traditional UK design process, these include:
• The use of plastic design for piling

• Four classes for sheet piling and the resultant different design approaches
• A more formal system for assessing the structural performance of piling structures
The checks on shear in a sheet pile wall, which are perhaps covered ‘by inspection’ in current
practice need to be formally assessed, as do shear buckling and combined moments, shear
and axial loading. Many of these checks will require section data and it is likely that either
data sheets giving member capacities or the basic geometric information will be provided by
the sheet pile manufacturers. The effects of water pressures on the structural design are also
to be taken into account (which is a new concept for UK designers), and specific rules for the
transfer of shear in the interlocks of piles and its effect on the strength and stiffness of pile
4
Z-value is the transverse reduction of area in a tensile test of the through-thickness ductility
of a specimen, measured as a percentage
29
sections are included. This issue is addressed qualitatively in BS 8002 but is covered in more
depth in EC3-5, as it has a much higher profile outside the UK. Compared with current UK
practice EC3-5 deals more formally with combined-walls and cellular structures, as well as
high modulus walls.
Conflicting views have emerged within the UK industry on the implementation of EC3-5.
These views have emerged because of the significant differences in scope and approach
between current UK practice and the Eurocode system. One of the major areas for concern is
the effect that a move from lumped factor design to a partial factor approach will have on
design requirements. This is compounded by changes in the specific calculations that are
required to satisfy the new code. There are situations where formal calculations are now
required which would previously have been dealt with by inspection in the UK. There is also
concern that these design changes may make designs less efficient, or effective, compared
with current UK practice.
One of the most difficult areas to assess is the effect that the plastic design rules will have on
the design process as there is little or no experience with these design rules within the UK.
The design calculations need to consider the situation at all stages in the life of the structure
and if the proposed section has appropriate parameters, the wall can be designed on the
basis of plastic section properties and moment redistribution. This assumes that the pile
section is capable of sustaining a moment of resistance as the pile rotates plastically and this
ability may change with the amount of corrosion that the section has sustained. This may be
accepted practice in structural designs but the response of soil when the system is at or
approaching plastic conditions is not understood.
There is reference made to EN 12063, the standard covering site activities which goes into
significantly more detail than current British Standards on some aspects of site work (i.e.
welding).
One potential area of conflict with current UK methods is the fact that there is no overt
difference between the requirements for temporary and permanent construction. This was
previously dealt with by allowing increased stress levels in temporary works piling (BS8002:
1994 [19]) and not considering corrosion on the section properties. Under the new rules there
will be no change in stress, which may be a retrograde step in some minds.
30
EN 1994 Steel and Concrete Composite Structures
5 EN1994 Steel and Concrete Composite Structures
The main differences between the design guidance given in Eurocode 4 and BS 5950 are
discussed in this section.
5.1 Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings

Eurocode 4 applies to the design of composite structures and members for building and civil
engineering works. The Eurocode is concerned only with the requirements for the resistance,
serviceability and durability of composite steel and concrete structures. EN1994-1-1 [20]
(hereafter referred to as EC4-1-1) gives a general basis for the design of composite structures
along with specific rules for buildings.
EC4-1-1 provides design guidance for some types of element not common in the UK, such as
partially encased concrete beams, composite columns in buildings, high strength structural
steels and composite joints together with various methods of continuous beam design and the
detailing of the continuous joints.
5.1.1 Material Properties
5.1.1.1 Concrete
Unless given in EC4-1-1, concrete material properties must be obtained from EN1992-1-1
[21] (hereafter referred to as EC2-1-1) for both normal weight and lightweight concrete.
However, EC4-1-1 does not cover the design of composite structures with concrete grades
lower than C20/25 or higher than C60/75. EC4-1-1 therefore extends the range of concrete
strengths compared to those available in BS 5950.
The classification for normal weight concrete used in the Eurocodes system (Cx/y) gives the
2
cylinder strength (x) and the cube strength (y) in N/mm . The design strengths used in the
Eurocodes are based on the cylinder strengths and not the cube strengths, so care should be
taken by designers to use the correct value.
5.1.1.2 Structural steel

Reference should be made to EC3-1-1, clauses 3.1 and 3.2 for the properties of structural
steel, however, EC4-1-1 does not cover steel grades with a characteristic strength greater
2
than 460N/mm . This is in common with BS 5950: Part 3 where the design strength of
structural steel is obtained by reference to BS 5950: Part 1. However, a comment is made in
BS 5950 that due to a lack of test evidence, the design strength should not be taken as
2
greater than 355N/mm . This limit is lower than that given in EC4-1-1.
Research has shown that to prevent premature concrete crushing some design rules should
2
be modified for steels with strength greater than 355N/mm . Such modifications have been
2
incorporated into EC4-1-1 so that it can cover steels with strengths up to 460N/mm .
31
5.1.2 Structural stability

The effects of the deformed geometry of the structure must be considered and an important
design Principle outlined states that second-order effects should be considered if they
increase the action effects significantly or modify significantly the structural behaviour.
It is suggested that this increase in internal forces may be neglected if the increase in forces
due to second-order effects is less than 10% of the forces determined in first-order analysis.
The Eurocode also states that if second-order effects in individual members and relevant
member imperfections are fully accounted for in the global analysis of the structure, individual
stability checks on the members (such as lateral torsional buckling presumably) are not
necessary.
This is in contrast to BS5950 where there is no specific requirement to consider the increase
in internal forces due to second-order effects but individual stability checks are required.
An additional Principle stated is that appropriate allowances must be made for creep and
cracking of concrete and for the behaviour of joints when determining the stiffness of the
structure.
Part 3, BS5950, uses a slightly different approach where the specific effects of concrete creep
do not have to be considered provided that material values given are used when calculating
the modular ratio.
The effects of concrete cracking are considered in BS5950, where the cracked section
method is used to determine member stiffness for elastic analysis, although the un-cracked
section is used to calculate deflections.
5.1.3 Structural imperfections

When using EC4-1-1 appropriate allowances must be made to cover the effects of
imperfections, including residual stresses and geometrical imperfections present even in the
unloaded structure, such as lack of verticality, out of straightness and the unavoidable minor
eccentricities present in joints. The assumed shape of any imperfections must take into
account the elastic buckling mode of the structure or member in the most unfavourable
direction and form, in the plane of buckling considered.
Equivalent geometric imperfections should be used unless the effects of local imperfections
are included in the member resistance design formulae. EC4-1-1 gives values of initial bow
imperfections for composite columns and whilst there are no specific imperfection
requirements for beams, EC4-1-1 incorporates the effects of imperfections within the formulae
for the buckling resistance moment of laterally unrestrained composite beams. A similar
approach is adopted in the current British Standard. The designer should refer to EC3-1-1 for
the effects of global imperfections and for the formulae for buckling resistance of steel
members, which also incorporate the effects of member imperfections.
No specific requirements for dealing with member or global imperfections are outlined within
BS 5950: Part 3.
5.1.4 Calculation of action (load) effects

Action effects are generally calculated by elastic global analysis even where the capacity of a
cross-section is based on its plastic or non-linear resistance. Elastic global analysis should
also be used for serviceability limit states, with, where appropriate, corrections for non-linear
effects.
32
Allowance must also be made for shear lag. This is achieved for continuous beams by using
an effective width of slab. In much the same way as in BS 5950: Part 3, EC4-1-1 outlines a
number of provisions for determining the effective width of concrete slab, with the total
effective width for the sagging portion of a beam (noted as beff1 in EC4-1-1) being the familiar
Le/4 but no greater than the geometric distance between the beam centres.
EC4-1-1 does not give separate values of effective slab width for slabs spanning
perpendicular to and parallel to the supporting beam. A subtle distinction between the two
cases is given in BS 5950: Part 3, where the effective width of a slab spanning parallel to the
beam is limited to 0.8 times the beam spacing.
In contrast to BS 5950: Part 3, EC4-1-1 makes allowance for the shrinkage of concrete, in the
serviceability limit state, as well as cracking of concrete, creep, the sequence of construction
and any pre-stressing.
The effects of creep are dealt with using the modular ratio for short-term loading modified by a
creep coefficient depending upon the age of the concrete at the moment considered, t, and
the age at loading, t0, and a creep multiplier which can be used to account for the effects of
concrete shrinkage. In practice, the effects of curvature due to shrinkage of normal weight
concrete may often be ignored (see clause 7.3.1(8), EC4-1-1 for details). This is a little
different to the approach used in BS 5950: Part 3, where the modular ratio is determined
considering the proportion of long-term to short-term loading.
In common with BS 5950: Part 3, EC4-1-1 considers the effects of cracking on the flexural
stiffness of composite beams in two ways.
Involved Method – An initial “un-cracked analysis” is carried out assuming the un-cracked
stiffness, EaI1, throughout. In areas where the extreme fibre tensile stress
in the concrete is twice the concrete strength, the stiffness of the section is
reduced to the cracked flexural stiffness, EaI2. An updated distribution of
internal forces is then determined by re-analysis, termed the “cracked
analysis”.
Simple Method – The effect of cracking can be modelled by taking a reduced flexural
stiffness over 15% of the span on each side of each internal support, with
the un-cracked flexural stiffness taken elsewhere. This method may be
used for continuous beams where the ratio of the adjacent spans
(shorter/longer) is greater than or equal to 0.6.
The more complicated method given in BS 5950: Part 3, is basically the same as the simple
method given in EC4-1-1, where a cracked section is assumed over 15% of the span on each
side of each internal support, with the un-cracked section assumed elsewhere.
The simplified method given in the BS 5950: Part 3 involves carrying out an elastic analysis,
assuming all members are un-cracked. The resulting negative moments over the supports
and at mid-span can then be re-distributed in accordance with guidance given in Table 4 of
BS 5950: Part 3, which effectively models the reduced stiffness of the member over the
supports. EC4-1-1 also allows some limited redistribution, in accordance with Table 5.1, with
both cracked and uncracked analysis for buildings, for the verification of all limit states other
than fatigue.
5.1.5 Beams – Ultimate Limit State

In EC4-1-1 the resistance moment of a composite cross-section with full interaction between
the structural steel, reinforcement and concrete is given by plastic theory. It is assumed that
33
the effective area of the structural steel is stressed to its design yield stress, fyd, in either
tension or compression and the effective area of concrete in compression resists a stress of
0.85fcd (which is constant over the whole depth between the plastic neutral axis and the most
compressed fibre of concrete). The value fcd is the design cylinder compressive stress which
is determined according to the following expression (given in EC2-1-1):
fcd = αcc fck / γC
Where: αcc is a coefficient that takes account of long term effects on compressive stress and
unfavourable effects due to the way the load is applied
fck is the cylinder compressive stress
γC is the concrete partial factor
EC2-1-1 allows the relevant National Annex to specify a value for αcc, however, the guidance
given in EC4-1-1 has been developed using αcc equal to one. Therefore where fcd is given in
EC4-1-1 it represents fck / γC. See reference [23] for further discussion on this topic. In
principle, this is exactly the same approach as that taken in BS 5950: Part 3. However, the
concrete cube compressive stress is used with the material safety factor included in BS 5950:
Part 3. Therefore in BS 5950: Part 3 the concrete is assumed to resist a stress of 0.45fcu over
the whole depth between the plastic neutral axis and the most compressed fibre of concrete.
In keeping with the other Eurocodes, EC4-1-1 does not give any guidance for the
determination of the effective or equivalent span, LE.
EC4-1-1 outlines limits on the degree of shear interaction required, including the requirement
that full shear interaction is attained when the effective span is greater then 25m. The
minimum degree of shear interaction for spans less than 25m is determined based upon the
yield stress of the steel section and effective span and should always be greater than 0.4.
BS 5950: Part 3 gives similar guidance, but stipulates that full shear interaction is required
when the span is greater than 16m, and shear interaction must be greater than 0.4 for spans
up to 10m. For intermediate spans the minimum degree of shear interaction is given by the
simple equation (L-6)/10 ≥ 0.4.
The vertical shear strength is based on that of the bare steel section in exactly the same way
as BS 5950: Part 3.
5.1.6 Beam serviceability limit state

Serviceability requirements are specified in relation to limiting deflections and concrete
cracking. Elastic analysis must be used for the serviceability limit state and the effective width
of the concrete flange, considered in beam design, is as defined for the ultimate limit state.
EC4-1-1 refers the user to EN1990 A1.4.4 for criteria reflecting to the dynamic properties of
floor beams. Unlike BS5950, stress limits under construction loading are not given (these
need only be checked if fatigue is a consideration).
EC4-1-1 states that the effect of cracking of concrete in regions subject to hogging moments
should be taken into account by adopting appropriate global analysis methods. This is in
contrast to BS 5950: Part 3, where the gross uncracked section is used when calculating
deflections.
Although no specific procedures are stated in EC4-1-1, the effects of creep must be included
when calculating deflections. It is therefore necessary to consider relevant values of the
modular ratio when calculating the equivalent second moment of area of the gross section
and distinguishing between shorter term and long term loading. This effect is covered in BS
34
5950: Part 3, by the use of an effective modular ratio, for the proportion of total loading that is
long term.
EC4-1-1 does not make allowance for increased deflections in beams with partial shear
interaction (provided the degree of shear interaction is above 0.5). This is in contrast to BS
5950: Part 3, where the deflection of a beam with partial shear interaction is increased from
that with full interaction, based upon the degree of shear interaction provided. EC4-1-1 does
not provide any guidance on the procedure to be used if the shear interaction is between 0.4
and 0.5.
5.1.7 Lateral torsional buckling

The possibility of the onset of lateral torsional buckling is covered in more depth in EC4-1-1
than in BS 5950: Part 3.
In general, the methods outlined in EC3-1-1 (discussed in section 4.1.8) can be adopted
when checking the lateral torsional buckling resistance of the steel section during
construction, and EC4-1-1 outlines a method applicable to composite beams with uniform
cross-sections classified as Class 1, 2 or 3. This method basically decreases the composite
moment resistance of the section using a reduction factor based on the relative slenderness
of the section, λLT
LT..
EC4-1-1 also outlines some detailing rules which can be used to prevent lateral torsional
buckling. These include ensuring that adjacent spans do not differ in length by more than
20%, the top flange of the steel section is connected to a reinforced concrete or composite
slab which is in turn connected to another member approximately parallel to form an inverted
U frame, and by laterally restraining the bottom flange of each member and stiffening the web
at each support. No such advice is presented in BS 5950: Part 3.
5.1.8 Members in compression

The first point to note is that at present there is no specific British Standard that covers the
design of composite columns in building structures. Whilst BS 5950: Part 3 Section 3.1 refers
to BS 5950 Part 3 Section 3.2, Code of Practice for the Design of Composite Columns and
Frames, it has never been published. BS 5400: Part 5 ‘Code of practice for the design of
composite bridges’ [24], does, however, cover the design of concrete encased sections and
concrete filled circular and square hollow sections, although clearly this is for use with bridge
structures.
EC4-1-1 covers the design of composite columns and composite compression members with
concrete encased sections, partially encased sections and concrete filled rectangular and
circular tubes. It should be noted that EC4-1-1 only covers isolated non-sway columns in
frames where all other structural members within the frame are also composite or steel. The
Eurocode considers elements constructed with grade S235 to S460 steel and with normal
weight concrete with grades between C20/25 and C50/60. It should be noted that the upper
concrete strength limit is less than that for other design guidance contained within EC4-1-1.
EC4-1-1 provides two methods for the calculation of the resistance of composite columns; the
General Method and the Simplified Method.
General Method – This takes explicit account of both second-order effects and
imperfections. The method is relatively complex and requires the use of
numerical computational tools. Whilst EC4-1-1 includes a description of
the processes to be considered it does not include detailed rules for the
general method. It is not covered at all in BS 5400.
35
Simplified Method – This can be applied to a doubly symmetric member with a uniform cross-
section over its height. The method makes use of the European buckling
curves for steel columns, which implicitly take account of imperfections.
Both methods assume the following:
1. There is full interaction between the steel and concrete sections until failure occurs
2. Geometric imperfections and residual stresses are taken into account in the calculation
3. Plane sections remain plane whilst the column deforms.
5.1.9 Composite joints in frames for buildings

BS 5950: Part 3 does not cover the design of composite joints. The design guidance given in
EC4-1-1 will be completely new to the majority of UK designers.
EC4-1-1 defines a composite connection as ‘a joint between a composite member and

another composite, steel or reinforced concrete member, in which reinforcement is taken into
account in design for the resistance and stiffness of the joint’.
The guidance given in EC4-1-1 applies principally to moment-resisting beam-column

connections and relates to ultimate resistance, rotational stiffness and rotation capacity.
Joints are classified as rigid, nominally pinned, or semi-rigid for stiffness, and as full strength,
nominally pinned or partial strength in relation to moment resistance.
In summary, the vertical shear resistance of the joint is assumed to come solely from the steel
components and is therefore calculated in accordance with the guidelines outlined in EC3-1-
8. The design moment resistance (with full shear connection) is calculated using the
provisions of EC3-1-8 but taking account of the contribution of the slab reinforcement in
tension (where the top row of reinforcing bars in tension may be treated in a similar manner to
a bolt-row in tension in a plain steel joint).
The moment capacity of the joint is calculated assuming the effective area of longitudinal
reinforcement in tension is stressed to its design yield stress, fsd, and the effective area of the
bottom flange of the beam and part of the web etc. in compression to its design yield strength,
fyd.
5.1.10 Composite slabs with profiled metal sheeting

Section 9 of EC4-1-1 covers the design of single span composite floor systems, including
cantilevered floors, in building applications. The scope is limited to in-situ concrete used with
sheets with narrowly spaced webs.
As with the design of a composite beam the effective area of concrete in compression resists
a stress of 0.85fcd, constant over the whole depth between the plastic neutral axis and the
most compressed fibre of concrete.
A similar approach is adopted in BS 5950: Part 3, with the concrete cube compressive stress
being used. The concrete is assumed to resist a stress of 0.45fcu over the whole depth
between the plastic neutral axis and the most compressed fibre of concrete. BS 5950: Part 3
recommends that the lever arm should not exceed 0.9 times the effective depth of the slab to
the centroid of the steel sheet. In addition, the concrete stress block should not exceed 0.45
times the effective depth of the slab to the centroid of the steel sheet. There is no such
limitation outlined in EC4-1-1.
An important point to note is that the most usual mode of failure of a composite slab is by
longitudinal shear, which can be difficult to predict theoretically. As such, composite slab
36
design in the UK is generally based on manufacturers’ load capacity tables/software which

are based on experimental testing (the semi-empirical m-k method). Informative Annex B of
EC4-1-1 outlines testing procedures on composite slabs, which are not the same as
traditionally used in the UK. The national annex may comment on this difference. Please
refer to Johnson and Anderson [19] for more details. In addition, EC4-1-1 allows the design
longitudinal shear resistance to be determined using both the m-k method and the partial
interaction method. This is in contrast to BS 5950: Part 3.
5.2 Part 1-2: Structural fire design

EN1994-1-2 [25] (hereafter referred to as EC4-1-2) covers the fire design of composite steel
and concrete structures. In essence, it identifies the differences between the fire design and
the ambient design methods and provides supplementary information for the design for fire.
This is similar to the scope of BS 5950 Part 8, except that the current British Standard covers
both bare steel and composite construction in fire.
EC4-1-2 is not applicable to uncommon material grades, such as concrete grades lower than
C20/25 and higher than C60/75 and LC60/75. EC4-1-2 provides design guidance for some
types of element that are not common in the UK, such as partially encased concrete beams
and composite columns.
5.2.1 Fire exposure

The nominal fire exposure given in EC4-1-2 is similar to BS 5950: Part 8, where the exposure
to standard and hydro carbon fire curves is adopted. However, EC4-1-2 also allows the
consideration of parametric fire exposure, which considers real behaviour (as discussed in
section 4.2).
5.2.2 Material Partial Factors

The recommended material partial factors given in EC4-1-2 are the same as those given in
BS 5950: Part 8 except for concrete. EC4-1-2 recommends a value of 1.0 for concrete
compared with 1.1 given in BS 5950 Part 8. However, it should be noted that the Eurocodes
consider cylindrical compressive stress compared with cube compressive stress used in the
British Standards. The resulting difference between the concrete design values is small, with
the Eurocode value being approximately 2% greater than the BS5950 Part 8 value.
5.2.3 Structural analysis

While the assessment methods given in both EC4-1-2 and BS 5950: Part 8 assume that the
structural members are individual elements, EC4-1-2 also provides brief guidance on global
structural analysis and the use of an analytical model which takes into account secondary
effects and whole building behaviour. Recommendations on the validation of these advanced
calculation models are also given. Such guidance promotes the use of performance design
for structural fire design.
5.2.4 Design procedures

EC4-1-2 provides three design methods:
• Tabulated data
• Simple calculation models
• Advanced calculation models
37
The tabulated design data is provided for some structural types which are not easily
addressed by simplified calculation methods. They are not common types of construction in
the UK. The following elements are included:
Simply supported beams

• Composite beams comprising a steel section and concrete upper flange.
• Composite beams comprising a steel beam with partial concrete encasement.
• Encased steel beams, for which the concrete has only an insulating function.
Columns
• Composite columns comprising totally encased steel sections
• Composite columns comprising partially encased steel sections
• Composite columns comprising concrete filled hollow sections.
Note: The tables only cover the case where columns at the level under consideration are fully
continuous with the columns above and below, and the fire is limited to only a single storey.
The simple calculation models provided in EC4-1-2 are more akin to the concept adopted for
BS 5950 Part 8. However, EC4-1-2 recommends additional checks which include vertical
shear resistance, combined bending and vertical shear and longitudinal shear resistance on
composite beam design. Similar checks for other elements such as column and slab
members are also given.
EC4-1-2 provides recommendations for size, arrangement and detail of composite beams
with concrete encasement, composite columns and beam to column joints, to achieve various
fire resistance. This is to ensure composite action during fire exposure and the transmission
of the applied forces and moments in the beam to column joints. The recommendations fall
into the following categories:
• Minimum cover to steel section

• Minimum axis distance to the main bar reinforcement
• Minimum percentage and size of reinforcement
• Minimum size and maximum spacing of links
• Details at connections
Such recommendations are not given in BS 5950: Part 8 although many of them are good
practice and can be accommodated within typical construction details in the UK. One
recommendation which does not fall into this category is clause 5.2 (2) which relates to
partially encased composite beams and recommends a maximum cover of 35mm. It is not
unusual to have 40mm cover in reinforced concrete design in the UK. However, concrete
encased composite beams are not a common form of construction in the UK.
5.2.5 Unprotected Composite Slabs

Informative Annex D of EC4-1-2 presents design rules for determining the fire resistance of
unprotected composite slabs exposed to fire beneath the slab. It is worth noting that EC4-1-2
considers a concrete slab thickness and determines a fire resistance period, where the UK
method considers a fire resistance period and determines the concrete slab thickness.
When determining the sagging moment resistance the contribution of the steel deck is
included in the EC4-1-2 method. This design philosophy differs from that currently used in
the UK’s Fire Engineering approach, where the contribution of the steel deck is not included
when determining the sagging moment resistance of a composite floor at elevated
temperatures. The steel deck contribution is excluded from the UK method as it is fully
exposed to the fire which causes the strength of the deck to decrease as it becomes hot.
Observations from real fires in the UK (Broadgate, Basingstoke, etc) and observations from
38
standard fire tests show that considering the deck and concrete to act compositely during a
fire may be unconservative. However, the simple method currently used in the UK is based
on tests and will therefore include a component representing the deck.
Annex D of EC4-1-2 is an Informative Annex this allows each National Annex to specify how it
should be used within that country. It is envisaged that the UK National Annex may not allow
the use of Annex D in the UK.
39
6 Effects on UK structural design procedures
An initial difference UK designers will find when using the Eurocodes (in comparison with the
current British Standards) is that the Eurocodes set out Principles and Application rules for
design rather than providing detailed calculation procedures. Due to this approach
information that is considered to be ‘textbook’ information is not included in the Eurocodes.
Currently the British Standards include this type of information, therefore UK designers will
need to be prepared for this change.
UK designers will find that when designing to the Eurocodes an increased number of design
standards are required. This is due to the Eurocode system not reproducing guidance once
it has been presented in another part of a Eurocode, it only refers back to earlier guidance.
This issue was discussed in section 2.
For some design checks / approaches UK designers will have to become familiar with new
calculation methods. Initially this may lead to increased design time whilst designers become
familiar with the new checks. Areas where new design checks / approaches are given in
Eurocodes include:
• Fire design of steel members subjected to combined bending and axial compression
The Eurocode method is more complex than the current British Standard.
• Determination of the design resistance of bolts in shear and tension, and the design
resistance of welds at elevated temperatures.
Not currently covered in British Standard.
• Steel and concrete composite columns.
The current British standards do not include guidance for composite columns in
buildings.
• Steel and concrete composite connections.
The current British standards do not include guidance for composite connections.
However, there is a BCSA/SCI composite connections publication [10].
• Classification of connections.
More complex system in Eurocodes than current British Standard.
• Through-thickness checks at welded connections.
Eurocode requires more checks to be undertaken than current British Standard.
It is considered that the more complex design checks in EC3-1-8 for connections may result
in designers placing more reliance on computer software. This is due to the checks for
design moment resistance and rotational stiffness of a connection being complex and time
consuming and not suitable for hand calculations.
The Eurocodes, unlike the current British Standards, permit the adoption of novel forms of
construction provided that the design principles of the Eurocodes are maintained. This gives
UK designers greater structural design ‘freedom’ compared with the British Standards.
However, current Building Regulations do not require structural designs to be fully compliant
with British Standards, but they must show how the Building Regulation requirements are
meet. Any designs to the emerging Eurocodes would need to demonstrate compliance with
the requirements of the Building Regulations.
Whilst there might be an increase in design effort in the initial years, the development of
design aids and designers' familiarity with the Eurocodes will reduce this in the future.
40
Design Route Maps
7 Design Route Maps
This section presents route maps for the design of some structural elements to assist the
designer in becoming familiar with the layout of the guidance given in the Eurocodes. The
route maps do not consider all types of structural elements, as it is considered such guidance
will be provided in design guides.
The route maps given in this section are:
High level design overview Page 42
Simply supported beam Page 43
Column Page 44
Composite simply supported beam Page 46
Composite continuous beam Page 47
Composite Column Page 48
Fire Engineering design of Steel Structures – General Page 50
Summary of Structural Fire Engineering Design to the Eurocodes Page 51
Fire limit state design – simply supported beam Page 52
Steel sheet pile Page 53
To supplement the information given in the route maps Appendix A contains tables that
reference clause numbers within the Eurocodes for the design topics considered in this
Companion Document.
41
42
High level design overview route map
Design of structural members / elements for a framed building
Ambient temperature design Fire limit state design Robustness design checks Foundation design
Actions Actions Guidance on the type of Actions

EN1990 — Combinations of EN1990 — Combinations of analysis required for the EN1990 — Combinations of
actions actions structure actions
EN1991-1-1 — Dead and EN1991-1-1 — Dead and EN1991-1-7 — Accidental EN1991-1-1 — Dead and
imposed actions imposed actions actions imposed actions
EN1991-1-3 — Snow EN1991-1-2 — Fire Textbook information EN1991-1-3 — Snow
EN1991-1-4 — Wind EN1991-1-4 — Wind EN1991-1-4 — Wind
EN1991-1-6 — Actions during EN1997 — Geotechnical
execution actions
Member design Member design Member design

Steel EN1993-1-2 — Steel, Fire EN1997 — Geotechnical (sizing
EN1993-1-1 — General rules EN1994-1-2 — Composite steel of members)
EN1993-1-5 — Plated elements & concrete, Fire EN1993-5 — Piling
EN1993-1-8 — Joints EN1992 -1-2 — Concrete, Fire EN1992 — Concrete
EN1993-1-10 — Fracture Textbook information
Other parts of EC2, 3, & 4
toughness
(as for ambient temperature
EN1991-1-5 — Thermal actions
design)
Composite steel and concrete
Textbook information
EN1994-1-1 — General rules
EN1992 — Concrete structures

Design Route Maps
Simply supported beam route map – Full lateral support provided
Values for Permanent (G) and

Variable (Q) Actions BS EN 1991-1-1
Partial Factors γG & γQ BS

EN 1990 Table A1.2(3)
Combination of actions
BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
More than one Yes Combination coefficients (ψi)

variable action? BS EN 1990 Table A1.1
No
Material strength prEN10025-3

(Product standard)
Section Classification
Table 5.2
Material partial factors γMi Clause 6.1(1)
Yes Undertake checks given in

Does shear buckling need to be Section 5 of BS EN 1993-1-5
checked? Clause 6.2.6(6)
No
Shear resistance Plastic design

Clause 6.2.6(1), 6.2.6(2) & 6.2.6(3)
Undertake
checks for Yes
maximum Does the shear reduce the moment Reduced material strength
moment capacity? Clause 6.2.8(2) Clause 6.2.8(3)
plus shear
and No
maximum Check Moment resistance Clause 6.2.5
shear plus
moment
Serviceability limit state checks BS EN 1990 Clause 6.5
& A1.4, and BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 7.2 & National
Web Checks refer to BS EN 1993-1-5 Clause

6.2(1), 6.4(1) & (2), 6.5(1) (2) & (3)
Note: Clause / Table numbers given refer to BS EN 1993-1-1 unless otherwise stated.
43
Column route map – Axial load only
Values for Permanent (G) and

Variable (Q) Actions BS EN 1991-1-1
Factors γGG&&γQQBS
Partial Factors BS
EN 1990 Table
TableA1.2(3)
A1.2(3)
Combination of actions
BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
More than one Combination

Combinationcoefficients
coefficients(ψ(i) i)
Yes
variable action? BS
BSEN
EN1990
1990Table
TableA1.1
A1.1
No
Material strength prEN10025-3
(Product standard)
Check thickness of cross-section Clause 3.2.3

and BS EN 1993-1-10 Table 2.1
Section Classification Table 5.2
Materialpartial
Material factors ψMiMi Clause
partial factors Clause 6.1(1)
6.1(1)
Class 4
Class 3 web,
with class 1 Calculate effective cross-section
or 2 flanges. properties Clause 6.2.2.5
Calculate MEd due to any change
Calculate effective in centroid location.
web properties Change in centroid location
Clause 6.2.2.4 determined following method given
in BS EN 1993-1-5
Calculate the buckling length

(no values given in BS EN 1993-1-1)
Continuedon
Continued onpage
page 45
45
44
Design Route Maps
Column route map – Axial load only (continued)
From page 45
From page
From 44
44
–
Calculateslenderness
Calculate slendernessfor
forflexural
flexural buckling
buckling (λ)
( Clause 6.3.1.3
) Clause 6.3.1.3
–
Is λ 0.2 or
Yes
NEd –
λ 0.04
Ncr
No
Flexural Select buckling curve from Table 6.2
buckling
check
Obtain imperfection factor from Table 6.1
Calculate reduction factor Clause 6.3.1.2
Calculate buckling resistance Nb,Rd Clause 6.3.1.1
Class 4
–
Account for λ MEd using interaction
given in Clause 6.3.4 or 6.3.3
Is the cross- No
section open?
Yes
Calculate Slenderness for torsional and flexural-
– –
torsional buckling ( λ T or λTF ) Clause 6.3.1.4
Textbook required to determine Ncr,T and Ncr,TF
– –
to calculate ( λ T or λ TF )
– – –
Repeat flexural buckling checks, replacing λ with λT or λ TF and with χ T or χ TF
Check compressive resistance Clause 6.2.4
Unsymmetrical Class 4 sections
Account for MEd Clause 6.2.9.3(2)
45
Composite simply supported beam route map
Values for Permanent (G) and Variable (Q) Actions BS EN 1991-1-1
Combination of actions BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
Yes
More than one Combination
coefficients(ψ( i) i)
variable action? BS
BS EN
EN1990
1990Table
TableA1.1
A1.1
No
Material strengths to prEN10025-3

(Product standard) and BS EN 1992-1-1.
Material partial factors Mi from BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.1(1) and BS EN 1992-1-1.
Determine non-composite moment resistance, Mpl,a,Rd, and lateral-torsional buckling

resistance Mb,Rd of steel section to BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.5 and 6.3.2 respectively.
Determine the vertical resistance to shear, VRd, of the

section to
steel section to BS
BS EN
EN1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.6
1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.6
Vertical shear, VEd Yes

greater than half shear Adopt a reduced design steel strength for
resistance VRd? bending in accordance with Clause 6.2.2.4(2)
No
Determine effective breadth of slab, beff, to Clause 5.4.1.2
Calculate Composite moment resistance, Mpl,Rd, of cross-section at supports and at

mid-span to Clause 6.2.1.2, assuming full shear interaction between the structural
steel and concrete.
Calculate the shear connector resistance to Clause 6.6.3.1 and determine the
actual degree of shear connection, η , to Clause 6.6.1.
Sufficient shear
studs to ensure full
Yes shear interaction? No
Moment resistance of composite Calculate moment resistance of

cross-section, MRd is moment composite cross-section with partial
resistance for full shear interaction, shear connection, MRd. Clause
Mpl,Rd. 6.2.1.3
Check composite and non-composite deflections to Clause 7.3.1 and

check the dynamic property of floor beams to BS EN1994-1-1, 7.3.2
46
Design Route Maps
Composite continuous beam route map
Values for Permanent (G) and Variable (Q) Actions BSEN1991-1-1
Combination of actions BSEN1990 Table A1.2(B)
Yes Combination
coefficients(ψi)
More than one BS EN 1990 Table A1.1A1.1
( i) BSEN1990 Table
variable action? No

(Product standard) and BS EN1992-1-1.
Material partial factors Mi from BSEN1993-1-1 Clause 6.1(1) and BS EN 1992-1-1.
Determine non-composite moment resistance, Mpl,a,Rd, and lateral-torsional buckling

resistance Mb,Rd of steel section to BS EN1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.5 and 6.3.2 respectively.
Determine the vertical resistance to shear, VRd, of the

steel section
section to
to BS
BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause
EN1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.6
6.2.6
Vertical shear, VEd Yes

Adopt a reduced design steel strength for
greater than half shear bending in accordance with Clause 6.2.2.4(2)
resistance VRd?
No
Determine effective breadth(s) of slab, beff, to Clause 5.4.1.2
Calculate composite moment resistance, Mpl,Rd, of cross-section at supports and at

mid-span to Clause 6.2.1.2, assuming full shear interaction between the structural
steel, reinforcement and concrete.
Calculate the shear connector resistance to Clause 6.6.3.1 and determine the
actual degree of shear connection, η, to Clause 6.6.1.
Sufficient shear
studs to ensure full
Yes shear interaction? No
Moment resistance of composite Calculate moment resistance of

cross-section, MRd is moment composite cross-section with partial
resistance for full shear interaction, shear connection, MRd. Clause
Mpl,Rd. 6.2.1.3
Check the lateral-torsional buckling capacity, Mb,Rd, of

the composite section to Clause 6.4.
Check composite and non-composite deflections to Clause 7.3.1 and

check the dynamic property of floor beams to BS EN1994-1-1, 7.3.2
47
Composite column route map
Values for Permanent (G) and Variable (Q) Actions BSEN1991-1-1
Combination of actions BSEN1990 Table A1.2(B)
Yes
Combination
coefficients(ψi)
More than one
BS
( iEN 1990 TableTable
) BSEN1990 A1.1 A1.1
variable action?
No

(Product standard) and BS EN1992-1-1.
Material partial factors γMi from BS EN1993-1-1, 6.1(1) and BS EN 1992-1-1.
Select column type (concrete encased or infilled hollow section) and use an
appropriate approximate method to determine a trial column section.
Steel section fully Check the minimum wall thickness

encased in accordance No
of section to prevent local buckling
with Clause 6.7.5.1(2)? of the section, Clause 6.7.1(9)
Yes
Calculate the plastic resistance to compression, Npl,Rd, of the

composite cross section, as the sum of the plastic resistances of the
steel section, concrete and reinforcement, in accordance with Clause
6.7.3.2 and equation (6.30).
Check that the steel contribution ratio to the plastic resistance to

compression, defined as σ, in Clause 6.7.3.3(1) is between 0.2 and 0.9.
Select an appropriate steel section if not.
Calculate the characteristic plastic resistance to compression, Npl,Rk, of

the composite cross section.
Determine the effective flexural stiffness, (EI)eff, of the composite cross-

section in accordance with Clause 6.7.3.3(3).
Calculate the elastic critical buckling force, Ncr, for the relevant buckling
mode and buckling length. Assuming an Euler buckling mode, the
critical buckling force can be calculated using: NCr = π 2 (EI ) l e2 , where
le is the effective length of the column.
Continuedon
Continued on page
page 49
49
48
Design Route Maps
Composite column route map (continued)
Frompage
From page 48
48
–
Determine the relative slenderness, λ , of the composite section in
accordance with equation (6.39), Clause 6.7.3.3(2), using the
characteristic plastic resistance and the critical buckling force.
Check for long term creep effects on the effective elastic flexural stiffness
in accordance with Clause 6.7.3.3(4) and re-evaluate the relative
slenderness.
Note: this revised slenderness value may mean that the section is no longer within the
slenderness limit of 2.0 (clause 6.7.3.1(1)), or it may mean that no enhancement due to any
concrete confinement within a tubular section is possible.
Determine the vertical resistance to shear, Vpl,Rd, of the

composite section to BS EN1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.6
Vertical shear, VEd Yes Adopt a reduced design steel strength for
greater than half shear bending in accordance with Clause 6.2.2.4(2)
resistance Vpl,Rd?
No
Calculate Composite moment resistance, Mpl,Rd, of the cross-section to Clause 6.2.1.2,

assuming full shear interaction between the structural steel, reinforcement and concrete.
Determine the maximum plastic moment resistance in

the presence of compressive normal force, Mmax,Rd.
Using the values for moment resistance, the plastic resistance of the concrete, Npm,Rd
and the maximum plastic moment resistance, Mmax,Rd, produce the interaction curve
described in Clause 6.7.3.2(5).
N Ed
Check that equation (6.44): 1.0 is satisfied.
xN pl ,Rd
Where x is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode given in
–
BS EN1993-1-1, 6.3.1.2 in terms of the relative slenderness λ .
M Ed M Ed
Check that equation (6.45): = ≥ α M is satisfied
M pl , N , Rd µ d M pl , Rd
Where MEd is the maximum design moment and Mpl,N,Rd is the plastic bending
resistance taking into account the normal force NEd (taken from Figure 6.18, and is
basically the value of moment resistance at the relevant applied normal force, NEd,
determined using the interaction curve produced above).
Note: For steel grades between S235 and S355 inclusive, the coefficient M
should be taken as 0.9 and for
steel grades S40 and S460 it should be taken as 0.8.
Assess whether specific provisions are needed in order to achieve

adequate load interaction, Clause 6.7.4.
49
Fire engineering design of steel structures – General route map
Define performance criteria – National

Regulations (AD-B), time equivalence
(EN1991-1-2), Fire engineering design
Consider relevant design fire

scenarios
Nominal fire curves (standard Natural fires – parametric

fire, external fire curve, curves, advanced methods
hydrocarbon fire – EN1991-1-2
Determine temperature profile – by calculation

(4.2.5.1(1), 4.2.5.2 (1)), from test data or using advanced
methods
Calculation of mechanical actions using modified procedure

based on ambient temperature design (4.2.3.1, 4.2.3.2,
4.2.3.3, 4.2.3.4, 4.2.3.5)
50
Design Route Maps
51
Summary of structural fire engineering design to the Eurocodes
Determine fire resistance requirements from Building Regulations or fire engineering
calculations
Assess performance by calculation according to type of member
Tension Compression Beams in bending Class 3 beams Combined bending and axial
members members class class 1 or 2 cross 4.2.3.4 compression 4.2.3.5
4.2.3.1 1,2,or 3 cross sections 4.2.3.3
sections 4.2.3.2
Nfi,t,Rd >Nfi,Ed Nb,fi,t,Rd > Nfi,Ed MM , θ,>RdM
fi, fl,Rd >M
fi,Ed
fi,Ed θ,Rd
MMfi,fl,,Rd > >M
Mfi,Ed
fi,Ed θ,Rd
RRfi,fl,,Rd > >R
Rfi,Ed
fi,Ed
52
Fire limit state design – Simply supported beam route map
(assumes knowledge of maximum steel temperature)
Determine fire resistance requirements from Building Regulations or fire engineering calculations
Analysis route Tabulated data route
Assess performance from test or manufacturers data

Calculation 4.2
Determine section factor A/V
Class 1 or 2 Class 3 4.2.3.4 Consult protection manufacturers data

4.2.3.3 sheet (Yellow Book*)
plastic elastic
Apply protection thickness derived
Uniform Non-uniform Uniform Non-uniform from test or assessment
temperature temperature temperature temperature
4.2.3.3 (1) 4.2.3.3 (2) 4.2.3.4 (1) 4.2.3.4 (2)
Mfi,t,Rd > Mfi,t,Ed
Design Route Maps
Steel sheet pile route map
Values of permanent and variable actions from EN1997-1 and EN1991
Combination of actions from EN1990 Table A1.2(B) & A1.2(C)
More than one Yes Combination coefficients

variable action? EN1990 Table A1.1
No
Material strengths to EN10248 and EN10249

(product standards)
Material partial factors γmi from EN1993-5, 5.1.1
Select sheet pile section on the basis of

experience and manufacturers data
Determine reduced section properties in respect of

corrosion over the life of the structure
Determine the design moment resistance for the chosen section taking into
account:
• Class of section (EN1993-5, 5.2.1 and Table 5.1)
• Rotation capability (Annex C)
• Shear force transfer factors βB and βD (EN1993-5, 5.2.2 and 6.4(3))
• Reductions due to water pressure (EN1993-5, 5.2.4 and Table 5.2)
• Design bending moment and shear force (EN1993-5, 5.2.2)
• Design axial load and Elastic critical load and effective buckling
length for the chosen section (EN1993-5, 5.2.3)
Check section capability to resist concentrated loads from wallings etc

(EN1993-5, 7.4.3)
Check structural requirements for crimping or welding if necessary

(EN1993-5, 5.2.2 and 6.4)
Assess installation of the selected section (EN1993-5, 2.7 and EN12063)
Confirm capability of selected sheet pile section for the specified conditions
53
8 References
1. BS EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.1: General rules and
rules for buildings, British Standards Institution, London, (In preparation)
2. BS 5950-1: 2000 Structural use of steelwork in building – Part 1: Code of practice for
design – Rolled and welded sections, British Standards Institution, London, May 2001
3. BS EN 10025: 1993, Hot rolled products of non-alloy structural steels. Technical delivery
conditions, British Standards Institution, London, November 1993
4. BS EN 1993-1-2, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.2: General rules –

Structural fire design, British Standards Institution, London, (In preparation)
5. BS 5950-8: 2003, Structural use of steelwork in building – Part 8: Code of practice for fire
resistant design, British Standards Institution, London, 2003
6. BS EN1991-1-2: 2002, Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1.2: General actions –

Actions on structures exposed to fire, British Standards Institution, London, November
2002
7. BS EN 1993-1-8, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.8: Design of joints,

British Standards Institution, London, (In preparation)
8. BCSA and SCI, Joints in Steel Construction – Simple Connections, SCI, 2002
9. BCSA and SCI, Joints in Steel Construction – Moment Connections, SCI, 1995
10. BCSA and SCI, Joints in Steel Construction – Composite connections, SCI, 1998
11. Stark, J. W. B & Bijlaard, F. S. K. Design rules for beam-column connections in Europe.
TNO Report number BI-83-60, Delft, The Netherlands, 1983.
12. Zoetemeijer, P. A. Design method for the tension side of statically loaded beam-column
connections. Heron 20, Number 1, Delft University, Delft, The Netherlands, 1974.
13. Jaspart, J.P. Etude de la semi-rigidét des noeuds pouter-colomme et son influence sur la
résistance et la staibility des ossatures ne acier. PhD Thesis University Liege, Belgium,
1991.
14. Weynand, K, Jaspart, J. P & Steenhuis, M. The stiffness model of revised Annex J of
Eurocode 3. Connections in Steel Structures III behaviour strength and design,
rd
Proceedings of the 3 International workshop on connections, Pages 441-452, Trento,
Italy, May 1995.
15. BS EN 1993-1-10, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.10: Material

toughness and through-thickness properties, British Standards Institution, London, (In
preparation)
16. BS EN 10164: 1993, Steel products with improved deformation properties perpendicular
to the surface of the product. Technical delivery conditions, British Standards Institution,
London, August 1993
54
References
17. BSI, BS 5950-2: 2001: Structural use of steelwork in building Part 2: Specification for
materials, fabrication and erection – Rolled and welded sections, British Standards
Institution, London, August 2001
18. BS EN 1993-5, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 5: Piling, British Standards
Institution, London, (In preparation)
19. BS 8002: 1994, Code of practice for earth retaining structures, British Standards
Institution, London, April 1994
20. BS EN 1994-1-1, Eurocode 4 – Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part
1.1: General rules and rules for buildings, British Standards Institution, London, (In
preparation)
21. BS EN 1992-1-1, Eurocode 2 – Design of concrete structures – Part 1.1 General rules
and rules for buildings, British Standards Institution, London, (In preparation)
22. BS 5950-3.1: 1990, Structural use of steelwork in building Part 3 Section 3.1 Code of
practice for design of simple and continuous composite beams, British Standards
Institution, London, February 1999.
23. Johnson R P and Anderson D, Designers’ Guide to EN 1994-1-1 Eurocode 4: Design of

composite steel and concrete structures Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings.
ISBN: 0 7277 3151 3. Thomas Telford 2004.
24. BS 5400-5: 1979, Steel, concrete and composite bridges Part 5: Code for practice for
design of composite bridges, British Standards Institution, London, October 1999.
25. BS EN 1994-1-2, Eurocode 4 – Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part
1.2: General rules – Structural fire design,, British Standards Institution, London, (In
preparation)
55
Appendix AA ––Eurocode
Appendix Eurocodeclause
clausereference
referencetables
tables
Steel design
Design Topic Eurocode Clause Number Companion Document
Section Number
Loading
Values BS EN 1991-1-1 Section 6 & 2.1
Annex A
Partial factors BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
Combinations BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
Combination coefficients ( i) BS EN 1990 Table A1.1
Analysis methods
Modelling BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.1
Global analysis BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.2
Imperfections BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.3
Non-linear materials BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.4
Sway stability
Classification BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.2.1 4.1.4
Frame stability BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.2.2
Notional horizontal force BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.3 4.1.5
Material properties BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 3.2.1 & 4.1.1
Table 3.1 or Product Standard
Cross-section classification BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 5.5 &
Table 5.2
Shear resistance
Cross-section capacity BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.6
Shear buckling resistance BS EN 1993-1-5 if requirements
of BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause
6.2.6(6) are met
Moment resistance BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.5
Lateral Torsional Buckling 4.1.7
General method BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.3.4
Member with plastic hinges BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.3.5
Web bearing resistance BS EN 1993-1-5
Web buckling resistance BS EN 1993-1-5
Tension resistance BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.3
Compression resistance
Effective length No values given
Buckling resistance BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.3.1, 4.1.6
Table 6.1 & 6.2 (Class 4 Clause
6.3.4 or 6.3.3)
Compression and bending
Axial load & buckling BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.3.3 4.1.8
resistance
56
Appendices

Section Number
Compression and bi-axial BS EN 1993-1-1 Class 1 & 2
bending Clause 6.2.9.1(6), Class 3
Cross-section resistance Clause 6.2.9.2, Class 4 Clause
6.2.9.3(2)
Buckling checks BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.3.3
Moment shear and axial force BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.2.10
Deflection limits BS EN 1993-1-1 Section 7 &
National Annex
Uniform built up compression
members
General BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.4.1
Laced compression BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.4.2
members
Battened compression BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.4.3
members
Closely spaced built up BS EN 1993-1-1 Clause 6.4.4
members
57
Steel and Concrete Composite Design

Section Number
Loading
Values BS EN 1991-1-1 Section 6 & 2.1 & 5.1.4
Annex A
Partial factors BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
Combinations BS EN 1990 Table A1.2(B)
Combination coefficients (ψi) BS EN 1990 Table A1.1
Design methods BS EN1990
Material properties BS EN1992-1-1 and prEN 5.1.1
10025-3
Cross-section classification BS EN 1993-1-1 Table 5.2
Shear resistance BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.2.2 5.1.5
Cross-section capacity BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.2.2.2
Shear buckling resistance BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.2.2.3
Moment capacity BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.2.1 5.1.5
Lateral Torsional Buckling BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.4 5.1.5
Transverse forces on Webs BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.5
Compression resistance BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.7 5.1.7
Effective length
Buckling resistance BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.7.3.5
Compression and uniaxial BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.7.3.6 5.1.7
bending
Shear capacity BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.2.2.2
Axial load & buckling BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.7.3.6
resistance
Compression and bi-axial BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.7.3.7 5.1.7
bending
Shear capacity BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.2.2.2
Axial load & buckling BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.7.3.6
resistance
Shear Connection BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.6
Longitudinal Shear in beams BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.6.2
Stud Connector Resistance BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 6.6.3 &
6.6.4
Composite Joints BS EN 1994-1-1 Section 8 5.1.9
Design methods BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 8.3
Resistance of Components BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 8.4
Composite slabs with profiled BS EN 1994-1-1 Section 9 5.1.10
steel sheeting
Actions and action effects BS EN 1994-1-1 Clause 9.3
58
Appendices
Fire Design – Steel

Section Number
Loading
Thermal actions BS EN1991-1-2 Section 3
Mechanical actions BS EN1991-1-2 Section 4
Values
Partial factors - material BS EN 1993-1-2 National
Annex
Combinations BS EN1990 Table A1.3
Partial factors - loading BS EN 1991-1-2 National
Annex
Design methods BS EN 1993-1-2 Section 4 4.2.3, 4.2.4 and 4.2.5
Material properties BS EN 1993-1-2 Section 3 4.2.1

(Annex C for stainless steel)
Cross-section classification BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.2
Moment capacity BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.3.3 (Class 1

or 2 sections)
BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.3.4 (Class 3
sections)
Tension resistance BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.3.1
Tension and bending

Cross-section capacity
Buckling resistance
Compression resistance BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.3.2 4.2.3
Effective length 4.2.3.2 (3) and (4)
Cross-section capacity 4.2.3.2 (1)
Buckling resistance 4.2.3.2 (1)
Compression and bending BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.3.5 4.2.4
Critical temperature BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.4

Unprotected steel temperature BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.5.1
development
Protected steel temperature BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.5.2
Advanced calculation models BS EN 1993-1-2 4.3
Connection performance BS EN 1993-1-2 4.2.1 (6) 4.2.5
59
Steel Sheet Pile design

Section Number
Loading
Values BS EN1991-1 and EN1997-1
Tables A3 and A4
Partial factors BS EN 997-1 and EN1990
Table A1.2(B) & A1.2(C)
Combinations BS EN1990 Table A1.2(B) &
A1.2(C)
Combination coefficients (ψi) BS EN1990 Table A1.1
Design methods BS EN1990 and EN1997-1
Section 9 and Annex C
Material properties
Hot rolled sheet piles EN10248
(Product)
Cold formed piles (Product) EN10249
Material partial factors
EN1993-5 Clause 5.1.1(4)
Cross-section classification BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.1 and 4.5
Table 5.1
Moment capacity
Bending only BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.2(2) 4.5
Bending and shear BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.2(9)
Bending and compression BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.3(11)
Bending, shear and BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.3(12)
compression
Shear resistance
Cross section capacity BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.2(4) 4.5
Shear buckling capacity BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.2(7)
Compression resistance
Elastic critical load BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.3(2)
Effective length BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.3(5)
Cross section capacity BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.3(9)
Shear force transmission
factors
βB BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.2.2(2)
βD BS EN1993-5 Clause 6.4(3)
Welding or crimping of BS EN1993-5 Clauses
interlocks 5.2.2(10) and 6.4(4)
Resistance to concentrated BS EN1993-5 Clause 7.4.3
loads
Durability BS EN1993-5 Clause 4
Fatigue BS EN1993-5 Clause 5.1.3
60
Worked
Examples
61
Project Title: Project Number: Sheet 1 of 21 Rev:
EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples 02
Subject: Made by/date:

Anchored sheet pile wall JP / January 2005
Client: Checked/date:
PS / April 2005
Anchored sheet pile wall
The following Standards have been used for this worked example:
BS EN 1990:2002, Basis of Structural Design, July 2002, with UK National Annex, March 2004
BS EN 1991-1-1:2002, Eurocode 1 – Actions on structures – Part 1.1: General actions – Densities, self-
weight, imposed loads for buildings, July 2002
prEN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings,
December 2003
prEN1993-1-8, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures - Part 1.8: Design of Joints, December 2003
prEN1993-5, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 5: Piling, July 2004
BS EN 1997-1, Eurocode 7 – Geotechnical design – Part 1: General rules, currently in preparation
BS EN ISO 4063:2000, Welding and allied processes – Nomenclature of processes and reference
numbers,April
numbers, April2000
200
BS EN ISO 29692:1994, Metal arc welding with covered electrode, gas shielded metal arc welding and
gas welding – joint preparations for steel, June 1994
BS EN 12699:2001, Execution of special geotechnical work – displacement, February 2001
Notes on European Standards

BSEN denotes a European Standard that has been published by BSI
prEN denotes a draft European standard that is not publicly available
Note on values contained in this worked example

The computer software used to calculate the expressions given in this worked example does not
round the values at intermediate stages during the calculation. Therefore some values given on the
following sheets may appear to be ‘incorrect’ when determined using ‘rounded’ input values.
BRE and Buro Happold have made every effort to ensure the accuracy and quality of all the information
in this document when first published. However, they can take no responsibility for the subsequent use
of this information, nor for any errors or omissions it may contain.
© Queen's Printer and Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office 2005

PS / April 2005
1. Introduction Table & clause

numbers given
Design a ‘propped’ / anchored sheet pile wall to retain a height of 6.50 m of sandy relate to
soils as shown in Figure 1. EN1997-1
unless stated
otherwise
2
Surcharge 10 kN/m
1.00 m
j
4.00 m
Layer 1
5.00 m
h
Loose Fine Sand
GWL
Free WL
Layer 2 i
Compact Fine Sand
6.00 m
0.50 m
Over dig
2 d
γw = 9.81 kN/m
Figure 1. Section through sheet pile wall (not to scale)
1.1. Soil parameters

Layer 1
3
Density of dry loose fine sand, γd.1 = 14.7 kN/m
3
Density of wet loose fine sand, γsat.1 = 19.1 kN/m
Take the characteristic effective shear strength parameters equal to those given
Cohesion, ck.1' = 0
Effective friction angle, φk.1' = 32°
Layer 2
3
Density of dry compact fine sand, γd.2 = 15.4 kN/m
3
Density of wet compact fine sand, γsat.2 = 19.4 kN/m
Characteristic effective shear strength parameters equal to those given
Cohesion, ck.2' = 0 Effective friction angle, φk.2' = 37°

PS / April 2005
2. Design
The guidance given in EN 1997-1 is used to determine the design loads. It is

currently (2004) considered that in the UK ‘Design Approach 1’ (DA 1) of EN 1997-1
will be adopted. The UK National Annex to EN 1997-1 will finally specify which
approach should be used in the UK.
For DA 1, EN1997-1 gives two ‘combinations’ that need to be considered for ultimate
limit state design which in general relate to structural and ground related behaviour
(Combination 1 and 2 respectively).
For this example the free earth support method of design is adopted here. The
general steps to be followed in determining the design loads on the shortest piles
are:
• Determine the earth pressures acting.
• Determine the length of pile by taking moments about the prop or anchor point
so that there is zero resultant moment.
• Determine the prop / anchor force as the difference between active and
passive pressures acting on the sheet pile.
• Determine maximum bending moment which occurs at the level of zero shear
to determine design requirement of sheet pile section.
• Design anchorage of system.
2.1. Actions
To calculate the active and passive earth pressures account has to be taken of the
vertical stress due to the ground and the surcharge.
At any depth the horizontal active pressure (σ’a) is composed of two components one
from the retained soil weight (σ’a.g) and one from the surcharge (σ’a.q).
"' a.g = (K a x " v ' ) ! (2 x c ' x (K a )) Annex C Eq. C1

Note: This is an unfavourable (destabilising) action
Where:
σv’ is the vertical effective stress at the given depth (total stress less water pressure)
Ka is the coefficient of active earth pressure
c’ is the design value of cohesion intercept
!' a.q = K a x q and is an unfavourable variable geotechnical action Annex C Eq. C1

Where:
q is the surcharge load

PS / April 2005
At any depth the limiting passive earth pressure is calculated from

!' p = (K p x ! v ' ) + (2 x c ' x (K p )) and is favourable Annex C Eq. C2
Where:
σv’ is the vertical stress at the depth on the passive side
Kp is the coefficient of horizontal passive earth pressure
EN 1997-1 gives suggested values for active and passive coefficients of earth
pressure which are related to the design soil parameters and the ratio of the interface
angle of friction (δ) to the critical state soil angle of friction (φcv) i.e. δ / φcv.
The design values of the above actions are determined by using the above equations
and the relevant partial factors. Table A3
So the design active pressure at a given depth is determined from:

" 'a.d = (# G x " 'a.g ) + (# Q x " 'a.q )
For this example, c’ = 0
Therefore
! "'a.d = (# G x K a x " v' ) + (# Q x K a x q)
And design passive resistance is determined from:
! "' p.d = (K p x " v ' ) / ! R (as c’ = 0 in this example) Table A13

Where:
γR is the resistance partial factor
This example has differential water pressures acting across the wall as shown in
Figure 1. It is assumed that the water pressures equalise at the toe of the wall and
that pressure can be determined from the general expression:
U f = ((2 x (d + h " j) x (d " i)) /((2 x d) + h " i " j)) x ! w (assuming that the wall is thin) CIRIA 580
Where: (see Figure 1 also)

Uf is the equalised pore water pressure at the toe of the wall
d is the wall embedment depth
h is the free standing height (including overdig)
j is the depth to the GW surface on the retained side
i is the depth to the GW surface on the excavated side (+ve down)
γw is the unit weight of water
Note: Potential for piping should be considered
It is assumed that the pore pressures vary linearly from the free surface through the
soil to this equalised value (on the passive side the free water maintains a hydrostatic
profile).

PS / April 2005
In general terms the water pressure acting behind the wall would be an unfavourable EN1997-1
action whilst that on the passive side would be favourable. 2.4.2
Note: However giving them different partial factors is unrealistic and the ‘single source’
principle in EN1997 is applied.
As such the action can be calculated based on the net water pressure acting on the
pile. As this resultant action is unfavourable γG is applied giving a net resultant
pressure.
u d = " G x !u
Where:
ud is the design water pressure
Δu is the net water pressure
2.2. Combination 1
Use A1 “+” M1 “+” R1 for Combination 1 for this example 2.4.7.3.4.2 (1)
Where:
A represents the partial factors for actions (γF) or the effect of actions (γE)
M represents the partial factors for material (γM)
R represents the partial factor for resistance (γR)
“+” means used in combination
For Combination 1
The material factors (γm) are: Annex A
γφ = 1.0 (partial factor for angle of shear resistance) Table A4
γc = 1.0 (partial factor for cohesion) Table A4
and the weight density factor is 1.0 Table A4
#1
" d '= tan ($ " x tan " k ') = " k ' (design effective shear angle)
c d ' = ! c x c k = c k (design effective cohesion)
Therefore:
! Layer 1 φd.1’ = 32° and cd.1’ = 0.0
Layer 2 φd.2’ = 37° and cd.2’ = 0.0
Using these values and the charts given in EN 1997-1 the values of Ka and Kp are
determined for " / !cv ' = 0.67 . The values determined are given in Table 1. 9.5.1 (6)
Table 1. Ka and Kp values

Ka Kp Figure C1.1
Layer 1 0.26 5.28 Figure C2.1
Layer 2 0.21 7.95

PS / April 2005
For Combination 1
The action partial factors are: Annex A
Unfavourable permanent action, γG = 1.35 Table A3
Unfavourable variable action, γQ = 1.5 Table A3
And the resistance partial factor is, γR = 1.0 Table A13
Using these factors and the equations in section 2.1 the pressure diagram in Figure 2
is obtained
3.9
4.00 m
5.00 m
5.10 m
7.00 m
24.54
0.0
19.82
9.25 m
10.00 m
9.17 23.01
0.0
7.5
35.05 135.10
0.0 37.22 181.42
Net water
Effective Earth Pressure
pressure
2
All Pressures given in kN/m
Figure 2. Pressure diagram for Combination 1
Moments are taken about the tie at a depth of 1 m to determine the pile length and
using a mixture of iteration and ‘trial and error’ this gives a pile length of 9.25 m.
The horizontal component of the anchor load (Poh per m run of wall) is equal to the
difference between the total active, passive and water pressures acting on the wall.
Poh = !p ad
+ !u + !p d pd
Poh = 198.96 + 43.00 - 148.82 = 93.14 kN
Figure 3 shows the shear forces acting across the sheet pile. The point of zero shear
is seen to be at a depth of 5.3m.
The maximum bending moment is at the point of zero shear and so taking moments
about and above this point it is found to be 222.2 kNm
Therefore Mmax = 222.2 kNm

PS / April 2005
1.00 m
-88.97
4.00 m
5.00 m
6.70 m
7.00 m
7.70 m
-38.57
9.25 m
-11.12
51.48
63.06
77.05
0.0
All Shear forces given in kN
Figure 3. Shear force diagram for Combination 1
2.3. Combination 2
The calculations for Combination 1 are repeated for Combination 2 using

A2 “+” M2 “+” R1 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)
(see section 2.2 on sheet 4 for definitions)
So, γφ = 1.25 and γc = 1.0 Table A4
tan ! d ' = (tan ! R ' ) / 1.25

Therefore
Layer 1 φd’ = 26.56 cd’ = 0.0
Layer 2 φd’ = 31.08 cd’ = 0.0
Using these values and " / !cv ' = 0.67 the values given in Table 2 were determined. 9.5.1 (6)

Ka Kp Figure C1.1
Layer 2 0.27 4.97

PS / April 2005


Using these factors and the equations in section 2.1 the pressure diagram in Figure 4
is obtained.
Moments are taken about the tie at a depth of 1 m to determine the pile length and
using a mixture of iteration and ‘trial and error’ this gives a pile length of 9.92 m.
The horizontal component of the anchor load (Poh) is equal to the difference between
the total active, passive and water pressures acting on the wall.
Poh = ! p ad + ! u d + ! p pd
Poh = 217.0 + 32.58 - 158.34 = 91.24 kN
Figure 5 shows the shear forces acting across the sheet pile. The point of zero shear
is seen to at a depth of 5.45m.
The maximum bending moment is at the point of zero shear and so taking moments
about and above this point it is found to be 225.18 kNm
Therefore Mmax = 225.18 kNm
For Combination 2,
The design horizontal component of the tie force is, Poh = 91.24 kN/m
The design bending moment is, MEd = Mmax = 225.18 kNm

PS / April 2005
4.29
4.00 m
5.00 m
5.40 m
7.00 m
0.0 23.7
19.38
9.92 m
10.00 m
9.17
23.25
7.5 0.0
35.74 135.10
0.0
35.96 113.42
Net water Effective Earth Pressure
pressure
2
Figure 4. Pressure diagram for Combination 2
1.00 m
2.00 m
-86.85
4.00 m
-75.29
5.00 m
6.40 m
7.00 m
8.00 m
-37.6
-12.25
9.92 m
33.67
54.51
72.49
0.0
All Shear forces given in kN


PS / April 2005
2.4. Discussion
From the above it can be seen that Combination 2 gives the longer pile length.
Combination 1 should be repeated using the Combination 2 pile length and using a
soil structure interaction program to check the anchor load and maximum bending
moment. In this example this has been done using the FREW package. (There is
currently an ongoing debate with regards to this procedure which will hopefully be
resolved very soon). These calculations are undertaken using unfactored parameters
but applying γG = 1.35 to the output results. The FREW calculations are affected by
the stiffness assigned to the sheet pile section so an iterative procedure is required
where the section needs to be selected before the calculations can be undertaken.
As will be discussed below EC3-5 requires loss of section to be allowed for also and
so calculations were performed with both the as new and corroded section
stiffnesses (maximum loss assumed over full length), this resulted in maximum tie
loads of 110 kN/m run (corroded section) and maximum bending moment of
167.4kNm (as new section). When factored by γG = 1.35 these become 148.5kN/m
and 226kNm respectively. As these values exceed those of the hand calculations
above they are carried forward for design.
3. Selection of pile section

EN 1993-5 allows the use of both elastic and plastic section modulus for pile
selection depending on the 'class of section'
The Section classification limits for U profiles are: EN1993-5

Class 1 The same limit as for Class 2, plus a rotation check has to be carried out. Table 5.1
Class 2 (b / tf) / ε ≤ 37 (45) Table 5.1
Class 3 (b / tf) / ε ≤ 49 (66) values for Z piles are in brackets Table 5.1
Where:
b is the flat portion of the flange measured between the corner radii, provided that the
ratio r / tf is not greater than 5.0, otherwise a more precise method should be used
tf is the thickness of the flange for flanges with constant thickness
! = ( 235 / f y ) where fy is the yield strength
For typical steels used for sheet piling f y = 270 or 355 N / mm 2 giving
! = 0.93 or 0.81 respectively.

EN1993-5
EN 1993-5 explains that section Class determines the method of analysis to use. 5.2.1(3)
Class 1 – uses plastic analysis involving moment redistribution and check on rotation
capacity.
Class 2 – uses elastic global analysis, but advantage can be taken of plastic
resistance of the cross-section.

PS / April 2005
Class 3 – uses elastic global analysis and elastic distribution of stress over the cross-
section.
It can be seen that to use Class 1 then more sophisticated computation analyses are
needed than those given here (and as will be discussed below, more refined
information on plastic section modulus with loss of section).
Having established the maximum value of design bending moment (MEd). The
selected section has to fulfil: EN 1993-5
MEd ≤ Mc.Rd Eq. 5.1
Where:
Mc.Rd is the design moment of resistance of the cross-section
EN1993-5 says that Mc.Rd should be determined using equations that relate to the
Class of cross-section
The design moment of resistance of the cross-section (Mc.Rd) is determined as: EN1993-5
For Class 1 and 2 Mc.Rd = (" B x Wpl x f y ) / ! M0 5.2.2(2) Eq. (5.2)
For Class 3 Mc.Rd = (" B x W el x f y ) / ! M0 5.2.2(2) Eq. (5.3)
Where:
βB is a factor that takes account of a possible lack of shear force transmission in the
interlocks, βB = 1.0 for Z-piles. But may be ≤ 1.0 for U piles (this will be set in the
National Annex but will be taken as 1.0 here)
Wpl is the plastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall
Wel is the elastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall
γM0 is the partial safety factor determined from clause 5.1.1(4)
For the partial factors γM0, γM1 and γM2 applied to resistance refer to EN1993-1-1 EN1993-5, 5.1.1(4)
EN1993-1-1
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Note: Recommended value used for γM0. This value may be altered by the UK National
Annex to EN1993-1-1.
Note: The Class of a given physical section can of course change with steel grade e.g. an
as manufactured AZ13 is Class 2 in S270, but Class 3 in S355 and this can result in the
value of Mc.Rd increasing very little despite the higher value of fy as the elastic modulus is
used for Class 3.
Similarly, the section class may change with time as a result of corrosion
So:
The design bending moment from Combination 1 , MEd = 226 kNm Sheet 10

PS / April 2005
2
For S270 grade steel the yield stress is fy = 270 N/mm
Therefore for S270 grade steel the minimum section modulus required is
3 3
226×10 / 270 = 837.04 cm /m
On this basis a PU12 is chosen based on manufacture's data and being the smallest
standard section fulfilling the elastic section requirements
3 3
Modulus Wel = 1200 cm and a plastic modulus Wpl = 1457 cm
Note: A PU12 section in 270 grade is a Class 2 section and so either elastic or plastic
values could be used - other smaller standard sections have too low a section modulus.
For PU12 (b / tf) / ε becomes, (258 /9.8 ) / 0.93 = 28.3 ≤ 37 (see above).
Therefore
Mc.Rd = (βB × Wel × fy) / γM0 = 324.00 kNm
MEd = 226 kNm
Mc.Rd > MEd, therefore OK
On this basis a section PU12 would be satisfactory (This design can be compared
directly with that using current design procedures in the Arcelor Piling handbook)
However there is a requirement in EN1993-5 that the loss of section due to corrosion
be accounted for. In this case then for a 100 year design life assuming the ground is EN1993-5
non aggressive and the maximum bending moment is within the free water depth Tables 4.1 & 4.2
(and considered very polluted) then the loss of section is
1.2 mm + 4.3 mm = 5.5 mm
The section modulus remaining when the loss of thickness due to corrosion has been
taken into account should be found from manufacturers' literature (Note: at present
manufactures’ make available information on the change of elastic section modulus with loss
of section, however at present the same information is not generally available for the
corresponding change of plastic section modulus but it is anticipated that this will be made
available in the future. The required information was calculated for this example).
In this case, for a total loss of thickness of 5.5mm and a bending moment capacity in
excess of 226 kNm/m, it will be necessary to adopt a PU22 section being the
smallest standard section fulfilling the requirements when loss of section allowed for.
Manufacturers information shows that PU22 is a Class 2 section (as (b / tf) / ε equals
(297 / 12.1) / 0.93 = 26.39 ≤ 37) but becomes a Class 3 after corrosion has been
taken into account (as (b / tf) / ε equals (292 / 6.6) / 0.93 = 47.57 ≤ 49) and therefore
3
has to use the elastic section modulus for design purposes, Wel = 1210cm .

PS / April 2005
This gives a design moment resistance after loss of section of

MEd = 226 kNm Sheet 10
3.1. Shear check

A check on shear at each cross-section has to be carried out such that EN1993-5
VEd < Vpl.Rd 5.2.2(4)
Where:
VEd is the design shear force
Vpl.Rd is the plastic shear resistance for each web given by
Vpl.Rd = ( A v x f y ) /( ( 3) x ! M0 ) EN1993-5, Eq(5.5)
Where:
Av is the projected shear area for each web acting in the same direction as VEd.
Av may be determined from the following expression EN1993-5, 5.2.2(5)

A v = t w x (h ! t f ) Eq.(5.6)
Where:
h is the overall height
tw is the web thickness
tf is the flange thickness
Figures 4 and 5 show that for the design length then the shear is of the order of 90kN
per m run at the level of the tie, but the FREW calculations with loss of section give a
value of 99kN per m run (but not dissimilar values occur at greater depths) which is
59.4 kN per sheet pile of 600mm width. Therefore the design shear force per sheet
is:
VEd = 59.4 kN
For EN1993-5 design we check for PU22 - allowing for loss of section due to
corrosion.
Determine the plastic shear resistance for the web (Vpl.Rd) (see note below)
h = 450 mm – 5.5 mm = 444.5 mm
tw = 9.5 mm – 5.5 mm = 4.0 mm
tf = 12.1 mm – 5.5 mm = 6.6 mm
2
Av = tw × (h – tf) = 1752 mm EN1993-5, Eq(5.6)

PS / April 2005
Therefore
Vpl.Rd = (Av × fy) / (√(3) × γM0) = 273.05 kN EN1993-5, Eq(5.5)
VEd / Vpl.Rd = 0.22
Vpl.Rd > VEd therefore OK
As VEd / Vpl.Rd < 0.5 no reduction in the plastic bending moment resistance is required EN1993-5, 5.2.2(9)
Note: Strictly one should check the shear at all levels with the relevant loss of section and
shear force as the losses will be less away from the water, however here the most critical
values have been taken and as all is satisfactory then no further calculations are
necessary.
Therefore the PU22 section is OK in bending with loss of section due to

corrosion
3.2. Buckling resistance

It is also required that shear buckling resistance of the web of the sheet piles should EN1993-5
be verified if: 5.2.2(6)
c / tw > 72 x ε for the selected section
c / tw > 72 × 0.93 = 66.96 for the S270 steel
Where:
c is the length of the web EN1993-5
c = (h " t f ) /(2 x sin ! ) for u sections Figure 5.1
where:
α is the inclination of the web (defined in Figure 5.1 of EN1993-5)
For a PU22 full section

h = 450 mm tf = 12.1 mm tw = 9.5 mm α = 62.4°
c = (h – tf) / (2 × sin(α)) = 247.07 mm
Therefore c / tw = 26.01 < 67
As c / tw < 67 Shear buckling check is not required EN1993-5, 5.2.2(6)
If loss of section is included in the above calculation then for PU22, c / tw becomes
37.4, so a shear buckling check is still not required.

PS / April 2005
If U piles are connected by welding or crimping to improve shear transmission in the EN1993-5
interlock then connection shall be verified assuming that the shear force can be 5.2.2(10)
transferred only in the connected interlocks.
The driveability of the section should also be checked
4. Anchor design
For Ultimate Limit State Design the force to resisted by the anchors is 148.5 kN/m. Sheet 10
Assuming ties are at 2.40m spacing and sloping down at 5° towards the anchorage,
the anchor tie load can be determined as:
Anchor tie load is 1.1 x ULS design load/m x spacing between anchors x (1/slope)
Anchor tie load is 1.1 × 148.5 × 2.4 × (1/cos (5°)) = 393.5 kN/m
Note: The 1.1 factor is included to allow for possible unequal distribution on a continuous
beam.
Consider M42 tie bar with upset ends on 40mm dia. bar in steel grade ASDO355
2
Thread area As = 1120 mm
The plain bar will be subject to corrosion of 1.2mm all round for a 100 yrs design life
in non aggressive natural soils. However the tie rods will be laid in a trench, which EN1993-5 Table 4.1
will subsequently be backfilled. If it is believed that the backfill will not be properly
compacted the corrosion allowance may need increasing. Conversely it is common
practise to wrap tie rods in Denso tape, which may well reduce the potential corrosion
allowance. So assuming 1.2mm all round on a 40mm bar, diameter becomes 40 -2.4
= 37.6mm
2 2
Then the bar area Ag = π × 37.6 / 4 = 1110 mm
2
For steel grade ASDO355 Yield strength fy = 355 N/mm
2
Tensile strength fu = 510 N/mm
4.1. Ultimate limit state verification

The tensile resistance (Ft.Rd) of anchors shall be taken as the lesser of the tensile EN1993-5, 7.2.3(1)
resistance of the threads (Ftt.Rd) and the tensile resistance if the shaft (Ftg.Rd)
The tensile resistance of the threads is determined from:
Ftt.Rd = k t x (( f ua x A S ) / ! Mb ) EN1993-5, 7.2.3(2)
Where:
2
As is the tensile stress area at the threads (As =1120 mm )
2
fua is the tensile strength of the steel anchor (fua = 510 N/mm )
kt = 0.9
Note: Recommended value used for kt. This value may be altered by the UK National
Annex to EN1993-5.
γMb = 1.25 EN1993-5 7.1(4)

PS / April 2005
EN1993-1-8.
From previous calculation, Ftg.Rd = 394 kN
EN 1993-1-8
B p.Rd = (0.6 x " x dm x t p x fu ) / ! M2 Table 3.4
Where:
dm is the mean of the across points and across flats dimensions of the bolt head or
the nut, which ever is smaller, dm = 70 mm
tp is the thickness of the plate, tp = 30 mm
2
fu = 510 N/mm Sheet 10
γM2 = 1.25 EN1993-1-8
Note: Recommended value used for γM2. This value may be altered by the UK National Table 2.1
Bp.Rd = 0.6 × π × dm × tp × fu / γM2 = 1615.03 kN
Ftg.Rd < Bp.Rd therefore:

Bt.Rd = Ftg.Rd =394.0 kN
Anchor tie load is 393.5 kN (from sheet 10) < 394 kN

Therefore the tensile resistance of the washer plate assembly is satisfactory
The washer plate should also be verified for bending resistance

The plate should be considered to span across the waling webs with the load from
the nut uniformly distributed over the mean dimension dm.
-3
Design bending moment is (393.5 / 2) × (53 – (35 / 2))×10 = 6.98 kNm
2 -6
Elastic resistance moment is ((135 × 30 ) / 6) × (355×10 / 1) = 7.19 kNm
Since the resistance moment is greater than the design moment the bending
resistance of the washer plate can be considered satisfactory.
4.3. Walings
EN1993-5 (under Walings and bracing) contains a note suggesting that it might be EN1993-5 7.3(2)
appropriate to allow for the failure of an anchor. If such an allowance is made in the
structural analysis of the waling then it would seem reasonable to apply some
increase to the anchor tie rod loading to prevent progressive collapse by tie rod
failure. No such allowance is included in the calculations above.
Clause 7.3 paragraph (3) states that “the resistance of waling members should be in EN1993-5 7.3 (3)
accordance with EN 1993-1-1”.
As before assuming 2.4m span with a continuous beam and no allowance for tie rod
failure.
2
Max bending moment is 0.1 × 148.5 × 2.4 = 85.54 kNm

PS / April 2005
Max shear force is 0.6 × 148.5 × 2.4 = 213.84 kN
Assume twin UPE 200 channels in steel grade S355J0. No allowance is made for
corrosion since it is normal to either paint walings or surround them in concrete.
4.3.1. Bending moment check

From manufacturer’s literature the section is class 1, therefore the design resistance
bending moment (Mc.Rd) is determined from: EN1993-1-1
Mc.Rd = Mpl.Rd = ( Wpl x f y ) / ! M0 6.1.5(2) Eq. (6.13)
Where:
3
Wpl is the plastic section modulus, Wpl = 220.1 cm (for a single UPE 200 channel)
2
fy is the yield strength of the section, fy = 275 N/mm
γM0 = 1.00 EN1993-1-1, 6.1(1)
Mc.Rd = (2 × Wpl × fy) / γM0 = 121.06 kNm
Note: The plastic modulus is multiplied by 2 as twin channel sections are used.
Design bending moment, MEd = 85.54 kNm Sheet 17

EN1993-1-1
MEd / Mc.Rd = 0.71 < 1.0 therefore OK 6.2.5(1), Eq (6.12)
4.3.2. Shear check

The design shear resistance for a Class 1 section is determined from EN1993-1-1
(
Vc,Rd = V pl,Rd = Av x f y / ( 3) / " M 0) 6.2.6(2), Eq. (6.18)
Where:
Av is the shear area
! For a rolled channel section with load parallel to the web the shear area is
determined from EN1993-1-1
A v = A ! (2 x b x t f ) + (( t w + r ) x t f ) 6.2.6(3)
Where:
tf is the flange thickness,
tw is the web thickness,
r is the root radius,
b is the overall breadth
For UPE 200
2
tf =11mm tw = 6 mm r = 13 mm b = 80 mm A = 2900 mm
2
Av = 1349 mm (for a single channel section)
Vc.Rd = (2 × Av × (fy / √(3))) / γM0 = 428.37 kN
Note: The shear area is multiplied by 2 as twin channel sections are used.

PS / April 2005
Design shear force, VEd = 213.84 kNm Sheet 18

EN1993-1-1
VEd / Vc.Rd = 0.50 < 1.0 therefore OK 6.2.6(1), Eq (6.17)
4.3.3. Combined bending and shear check

Since the design shear force is less than half the plastic shear resistance its effect EN1993-1-1
on the moment resistance may be neglected. 6.2.8(2)
4.3.4. Buckling check

It is not possible to verify the buckling resistance of the unrestrained channels since
there is no guidance on determining the value of Mcr, the elastic critical moment for
lateral-torsional buckling.
4.3.5. Localised stress check

Verification of the resistance of the sheet pile to the localised stresses produced EN1993-5, 7.4.3
by the connections between sheet piles, walings and tie rods.
For this example it is assumed that the waling is behind the pile wall and that
alternate pile pans are fastened to the waling with tie bolts (Figure 7-4 of EN1993-5).
(The tie bolts are checked in a similar manner to the anchor tie rods and a
satisfactory size is M30 bolts in steel grade S355J0 with 210x210x25 washer plates.)
The resistance of the sheet pile wall is determined using the method given in 7.4.3(3)
a) Shear resistance of flange EN1993-5, 7.4.3(3)

Verify that FEd ≤ RVf,Rd EN1993-5 Eq.(7.4)
Where:
FEd is the design value of the localised transverse force applied through the flange
(anchor load x span i.e. 1.2m here).
FEd = 148.5 × 1.2 = 178.20 kN
RVf,Rd is the design value of the shear resistance of the flange under the washer plate
given by
R Vf .Rd = (2.0 x ((b a + h a ) x t f ))(f y /( ( 3) x ! M0 ) EN1993-5 Eq.(7.5)
Where:
ba is the width of the washer plate, ba = 210 mm
ha is the length of the washer plate (but ≤ 1.5 x ba), ha = 210 mm < 1.5 x ba
tf is the flange thickness, tf = 9.8 ! (1 + 1.2) = 7.6 mm (allowing for corrosion)
Note: The corrosion allowances are 1.0 mm for the atmospheric exposure and 1.2 mm for
the buried face.
2
fy is the yield strength of the sheet pile, fy = 270 N/mm
γM0 = 1.00 EN1993-1-1, 6.1(1)

PS / April 2005
RVf.Rd = (2 × ((ba + ha) × tf)) × (fy / (√(3) × γM0)) = 995.17 kN
FEd < RVf.Rd therefore OK
b) Tensile resistance of webs EN1993-5, 7.4.3(3)

Verify that FEd ≤ Rtw.Rd EN1993-5 Eq.(7.6)
Where:
RVf.Rd is the design value of the tensile resistance of 2 webs given as
R tw .Rd = (2 x h a x t w x f y ) / ! M0 EN1993-5 Eq.(7.7)

Where:
tw is the web thickness, tw = 9.0 ! (1 + 1.2) = 6.8 mm (allowing for corrosion)
Note: The corrosion allowances are 1.0 mm for the atmospheric exposure and 1.2 mm for
the buried face.
Rtw.Rd = (2 × ha × tw × fy) / γM0 = 771.12 kN
FEd < Rtw.Rd therefore OK EN1993-5 Eq.(7.6)
c) Width of washer plate EN1003-5 7.4.3(3)

Verify that ba ≥ 0.8b EN1993-5 Eq.(7.8)
Where:
ba is the width of the washer plate ba = 210 mm
b is the width of the flange (as defined in Table 5.1 of EN1993-5), b = 258 mm
0.8 × b = 206.40 mm
ba > b therefore OK
d) Thickness of washer plate EN1003-5 7.4.3(3)

The minimum thickness for the washer plate is 2 x t f
where:
Tf is the flange thickness, tf = 9.8 mm
2 × tf = 19.60 mm
The specified thickness of the washer plate is 25 mm
25 mm > 2 x tf therefore OK
There is a requirement to verify the bending capacity which will depend on the
method of analysis adopted to determine the design bending moment. Using

PS / April 2005
Engineering judgement it is considered that the 25 mm thick washer plate will be

sufficient for the applied load in this example.
Therefore thickness of washer plate is OK

EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples 02a

Cantilever DBM / July 2004
CR / October 2004
Cantilever
The following Codes have been used for this worked example:
December 2003
DDENV1993-1-1:1992, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
buildings, (Together with United Kingdom National Application Document), November 1992
prEN 10025-2, Hot rolled products of non-alloy structural steels – Part 2: Technical delivery conditions for
flat products, March 1998
BS5950-1:2000 Structural use of steelwork in building – Part 1: Code of practice for design – Rolled and
welded sections, British Standards Institution, London, May 2001
Notation used for European Standards

DDENV denotes a European Prestandard that was made available for provisional application, but
does not have the status of a European Standard


CR / October 2004
A 3m cantilever beam is fully fixed at one end and free at its tip. Design the beam in Table & clause
grade S275 steel. numbers given
relate to
EN1993-1-2
Point load (F2) unless stated
Uniformly distributed load (F1)
otherwise.
3.000 m
Figure 1. Overview of cantilever
1. Loading
1.1. Permanent actions (G)
Uniformly Distributed Load (UDL) Gk1 = 3.00 kN/m
Point load Gk2 = 20.00 kN
1.2. Variable actions (Q)

Point Load Qk = 30.00 kN
Note:The loading is ‘normal’ (not destabilising) according to BS5950 terminology
1.3. Loading factors
Partial loading factor for permanent actions γG = 1.35 EN 1990 Table
Partial loading factor for variable actions γQ = 1.50 A1.2(B) & N.A
Note: For strength / capacity check on a structural member EN 1990 recommends the
use of STR checks given in Table A1.2(B).
As the variable actions considered in this example are not independent ψ factors
need not be considered.
2. Design values of actions – Ultimate Limit State

UDL FEd1 = (γG × Gk1) = 4.05 kN/m EN 1990 Table
Point load FEd2 = (γG × Gk2) + (γQ × Qk) = 72.00 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
2.1. Design Moment (MEd)

Span of beam L = 3.00m
Maximum moment occurs at support
MEd = ((FEd1 × L2) / 2) + (FEd2 × L) = 234.23 kNm
2.2. Design Shear force (VEd)

At the support
VEd = (FEd1 × L) + FEd2 = 84.15 kN

CR / October 2004
Try Section: UB 457 x 191 x 82

z
tf
r
y y d h
tw
z
b
Figure 2. Section dimensions
h = 460.00 mm b = 191.30 mm d = 407.60 mm

2
tw = 9.90 mm tf = 16.00 mm r = 10.20 mm A = 104.48 cm
3. Section Classification
For tf = 16.00 mm Yield strength is fy = 275 N/mm2 prEN 10025-2

7.3 & Table 4
ε = √(235 / fy) = 0.92 Table 5.2
Flange
C = (b – tw – 2 × r) / 2 = 80.50 mm Table 5.2
C / tf = 5.03
Class 2 limiting value of C / tf for the outstand of a rolled section is
9 × ε = 8.32 > 5.03 Table 5.2
Therefore flange is Class 1
Web
d / tw = 41.17
Class 2 limiting value of d / tw for the web with its neutral axis at mid-depth is
72 × ε = 66.56 > 41.17 Table 5.2
Therefore web is Class 1
Therefore Section is Class 1
4. Shear buckling
η = 1.0 (conservative value) 6.2.6(6)
72 × ε / η = 66.56
hw is the depth of the web, therefore hw = h - (2 × tf) = 428.00 mm
hw / tw = 43.23
hw/tw < 72ε/η
Therefore no check for shear buckling is required

CR / October 2004
5. Combined moment and shear check at the support

Check that the design value of the shear force (VEd) is less than the design shear
resistance (Vc.Rd) of the cross-section.
For plastic design the design shear resistance of the cross-section (Vc.Rd) equals the 6.2.6(1)
design plastic shear resistance (Vpl.Rd).
2
Shear Area Av = A – (2 × b × tf) + ((tw + (2 × r)) × tf) = 4811 mm 6.2.6(3)
2
But not less than η × hw × tw = 4237 mm
Therefore Av = 4811 mm2
Partial factor for the resistance of the cross-section irrespective of section Class is
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Vpl.Rd = (Av × (fy / √(3))) / γM0 = 763.90 kN 6.2.6(2) Eq 6.18

Design shear resistance Vc.Rd = Vpl.Rd = 763.90 kN 6.2.6(1)
Design shear force at supports VEd = 84.15kN Sheet 2
VEd / Vc.Rd = 0.11 < 1.0, therefore OK 6.2.6(1)

VEd < 0.5 Vc.Rd 6.2.8(2)
Therefore the effect of shear on moment resistance can be neglected
Moment resistance for a Class 1 or 2 cross-section

Mc.Rd = Mpl.Rd = (W pl.y × fy) / γM0 = 503.60 kNm 6.2.5(2) Eq. 6.13
Where:
W pl.y is the plastic modulus about the y axis (major axis of the beam)
W pl.y = 1831 cm3
MEd = 234.23 kNm Sheet 2

MEd < Mc.Rd 6.2.5(1)
Therefore section is OK in bending
6. Lateral Torsional Buckling Check

The cantilever is restrained laterally, torsionally and against rotation on plan at the
support and free at the tip. Furthermore it is assumed that the point load is applied at
the shear centre (i.e. not destabilising).

CR / October 2004
The criteria to satisfy is that the design value of the applied moment is less than the
design buckling moment resistance (Mb.Rd) of the cross-section.
MEd ≤ Mb.Rd 6.3.2.1(1)
The design value of the moment MEd is taken as the largest moment over the span,
which occurs at the support for this example.
The design buckling resistance Mb.Rd is defined as:

Mb.Rd = (χ LT x W y x Fy ) / γ M1 6.3.2.1(3)
Where:
W y = W pl.y for a Class 1 or 2 cross-section 6.3.2.1(3)
χLT is the partial reduction factor for the lateral torsional buckling
γM1 is the partial factor for the resistance of members to instability by member checks
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
General method for determining χLT 6.3.2.2(1)

2
χ LT = 1/( Φ LT + ( Φ LT − λ LT ))
Where:
Φ LT = 0.5 × (1 + (α LT × (λ LT − 0.2)) + λ2LT ) 6.3.2.2(1)
αLT is an imperfection factor given in Table 6.3
λ LT = ( ( W Y × f y ) / Mcr )
Unfortunately EN1993-1-1 does not give expressions for calculating the Elastic
Critical Moment, Mcr, and therefore designers must use textbooks to obtain the most
appropriate equation for Mcr. One approach is given below, the companion example
for a simply supported beam with lateral restraints offers an alternative. The value of
λ LT can be calculated directly by modifying the method given in BS5950: Part 1.
Therefore as an alternative to calculating Mcr, λ LT can be calculated from the
following equation.
λ LT = λ LT /(λ 1 × C 1 )
Where:
λ LT = u × v × λ × β w BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7
Lcr is the effective length for lateral torsional buckling

CR / October 2004
i is the radius of gyration about the relevant axis

u is the buckling parameter BS5950-1, 4.3.6.8
v is the slenderness factor BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7
βw is a ratio given in clause 4.3.6.9 of BS5950: Part 1
C1 is the equivalent uniform moment factor for lateral torsional buckling. Tables of
this factor for different bending moment distributions and support conditions are
given in Annex F of DDENV1993-1-1.
Note: Other publications are being produced by ECSC and ECCS, The STEEL project
will also produce tabulated values for C1 which will be publicly available on a website.
For a cantilever without intermediate restraint the effective length, Lcr, can be taken BS5950-1, 4.3.5
from Table 14 of BS5950-1.
Lcr = LE = 0.8 × L = 2.40 m BS5950-1 Table14
Note: It may appear strange to use an effective length that is less than the actual length of
the beam for a cantilever but it should be remembered that in the case of a cantilever the
effective length makes allowance for both the support conditions and the pattern of
moment.
Note: The 0.8 factor used is consistent with the assumption that load is ‘normal’ (not
destabilising)
λ = Lcr / iz = 56.72 BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7

Where:
iz is the radius of gyration about the minor axis (z-z) iz = 4.23 cm
For a rolled I, H or channel section with equal flanges: BS5950-1, 4.3.6.8

X = D / T = h / tf = 28.75
Therefore u = 0.9
For a section with equal flanges BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7

η = 0.5
λ / X = 1.97 BS5950-1 Table19
Therefore v = 0.96 BS5950-1 Table19
βw = 1.0 BS5950-1, 4.3.6.9
λLT = u × v × λ × √(βw) = 49.00 BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7
C1 = 1.0
When shape of bending moment diagram allowed for in calculation of LCT (as here).
Otherwise see DD ENV1993-1-1 Table F.1.2

CR / October 2004
λλLT_bar
LT = λLT / λ / √(C1) = 0.86
h / b = 2.40
h / b > 2.0 therefore use buckling curve b Table 6.4
For buckling curve b αLT = 0.34 Table 6.3
Note: The buckling curve and αLT are the recommended values given in EN1993-1-1.
The UK National Annex may recommend the use of different values.
2
LT – 0.2)) + λ
ΦLT = 0.5 × (1 + (αLT × (λλLT_bar λ LT ) = 0.986 6.3.2.2(1)
2
LT_bar
χLT = 1 / (ΦLT + √(ΦLT2 - λλLT_bar22

LT )) = 0.68 6.3.2.2(1)
Design buckling resistance Mb.Rd is:

Mb.Rd = χLT × Wpl.y × (fy / γM1) = 344.59 kNm 6.3.2.2(1)
MEd = 234.23 kNm < Mb.Rd Sheet 2
Therefore section is OK
7. Deflection under Serviceability Load Check

For this example it is assumed that serviceability is concerned with eliminating
damage to the structure, its finishes and any non-structural components. Therefore
the deflections to be taken into account are those that occur after execution.
Consequently, only those deflections associated with the variable actions are
considered.
Unfactored variable action F2 = Qk = 30.00 kN Sheet 2

For the section under consideration
E = 210000 N/mm2 and Iy = 37051.35 cm4
Vertical deflection (w) under variable action is:

w = (F2 × L3) / (3 × E × Iy) = 3.47 mm
Assume the beam is carrying plasterboard or other brittle finish, therefore:

wlim = L / 360 = 8.33 mm Draft UK National
Annex EN1993-1-1
Note: The limit above has been taken from the Draft UK National Annex for EN 1993-1-1,
it may change during the development of the National Annex. The value given for this
limit has been taken from Table 8 of BS 5950: Part 1 .
w < wlim Therefore section is OK


Cantilever Sheet pile wall JP / December 2004
PS / April 2005
Cantilever Sheet pile wall
December 2003
numbers, April 200
BS EN 12699:2001, Execution of special geotechnical work – displacement , February 2001



PS / April 2005

numbers given
Design a cantilever sheet pile wall to retain a height of 3.6 m of sandy soils as shown relate to
in Figure 1. EN1997-1
unless stated
EN1997-1 requires an allowance of 10% for unforeseen over dig (to a maximum of otherwise
0.5 m) so the retained weight considered in this example is determined for
a height of 4.0 m (3.6 + 0.36 ≈ 4.0 m). 9.3.2.2(2)
2
Surcharge 10 kN/m
3.60 m
Layer 1
5.00 m Loose Fine Sand
0.40 m
Unplanned
1.00 m GWL GWL
Layer 2
Compact Fine Sand
4.00 m
2
γw = 9.81 kN/m
Figure 1. Section through sheet pile wall
1.1. Soil parameters

Layer 1
3
Density of dry loose fine sand, γd.1 = 14.7 kN/m
3
Density of wet loose fine sand, γsat.1 = 19.1 kN/m
Take the characteristic effective shear strength parameters equal to those given
Cohesion, ck.1' = 0
Effective friction angle, φk.1' = 32°
Layer 2
3
Density of dry compact fine sand, γd.2 = 15.4 kN/m
3
Density of wet compact fine sand, γsat.2 = 19.4 kN/m
Characteristic effective shear strength parameters equal to those given
Cohesion, ck.2' = 0 Effective friction angle, φk.2' = 37°

PS / April 2005
2. Design
The guidance given in EN 1997-1 is used to determine the design loads. It is

currently (2004) considered that in the UK ‘Design Approach 1’ (DA 1) of EN 1997-1
will be adopted. The UK National Annex to EN 1997-1 will finally specify which
approach should be used in the UK.
For DA 1, EN1997-1 gives two ‘combinations’ that need to be considered for ultimate
limit state design which in general relate to structural and ground related behaviour
(Combination 1 and 2 respectively).
The general steps to be followed in determining the design loads on the sheet pile
are the same as often used in current practice for designing a cantilever wall, namely:
• Determine earth pressures acting
• Determine the length of the pile so that when taking moments about the toe the
resultant is zero or close to zero.
• Adjust depth to allow for simplified method.
• Determine the level of zero shear across the pile – the level above which the
active and passive pressure diagrams are equal.
• Take moments about and above the zero shear to determine the required
moment capacity of the sheet pile.
2.1. Actions
To calculate the active and passive earth pressures account has to be taken of the
vertical stress due to the ground and the surcharge.
At any depth the horizontal active pressure (σ’a) is composed of two components one
from the retained soil weight (σ’a.g) and one from the surcharge (σ’a.q).
" 'a.g = (K a x " v ') # (2 x c' x (K a ))

Note: this is an unfavourable (destabilising) action Annex C Eq. C1
Where:
! σv’ is the vertical effective stress at the given depth
Ka is the coefficient of active earth pressure
c’ is the design value of cohesion intercept
" 'a.q = K a x q and is an unfavourable variable geotechnical action Annex C Eq. C1

Where:
q is the surcharge load
!

PS / April 2005
At any depth the limiting passive earth pressure is calculated from

" 'p = (K p x " v ') + (2 x c' x (K p )) Annex C Eq. C2
Where:
σv’ is the vertical stress at the depth on the passive side
! Kp is the coefficient of passive horizontal earth pressure
EN 1997-1 gives suggested values for active and passive coefficients of earth
pressure which are related to the design soil parameters and the ratio of the interface
angle of friction (δ) to the soil critical state angle of friction (φcv) i.e. δ / φcv.
The design values of the above actions are determined by using the above equations
and the relevant partial factors. Table A3
So the design active pressure at a given depth is determined from:
" 'a.d = (# G x " 'a.g ) + (# Q x " 'a.q )

where
γG partial factor for permanent unfavourable action
! γQ partial factor for variable unfavourable action
For this example, c’ = 0

Therefore
" 'a.d = (# G x K a x " v' ) + (# Q x K a x q)
And design passive pressure is determined from:
! " ' p.d = (K p x " v ') / # R (as c’ = 0 in this example)

Where:
γR is the resistance partial factor
!
2.2. Combination 1
Use A1 “+” M1 “+” R1 for Combination 1 for this example 2.4.7.3.4.2 (1)
Where:
For Combination 1, the material factors (γm) are: Annex A

γφ = 1.0 (partial factor for angle of shear resistance) Table A4
γc = 1.0 (partial factor for cohesion) Table A4
and the weight density factor is 1.0 Table A4
φ φ φ

PS / April 2005
For an active moment of 342.7 kNm/m and a passive moment of 344.8 kNm/m the
depth to the toe of the pile is found to be 6.72 m. It is usual when using this simplified
design method to add 20% to the depth of embedment to allow for the simplifications,
therefore design depth is; 4 m + 2.72 m × 1.2 = 7.26 m
To determine the bending moment required for the pile section, moments are to be
taken about and above the level of zero shear.
The point of zero shear is found to be at 5.45 m and so

Active moment = 206.5 kNm / m
Passive moment = 47.1 kNm / m
Therefore the maximum bending moment is the difference 159.4 kNm/m
2.3. Combination 2
The calculations given for Combination 1 are repeated for Combination 2 using
A2 “+” M2 “+” R1 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)
(see section 2.2 on sheet 4 for definitions)
So, γφ = 1.25 and γc = 1.0; Table A4
tan ! d ' = (tan ! R ' ) / 1.25

Therefore
Layer 1 φd’ = 26.56 cd’ = 0.0
Layer 2 φd’ = 31.08 cd’ = 0.0
Using these values and " / !cv ' = 0.67 the values given in Table 2 were determined. 9.5.1 (6)

Ka Kp Figure C1.1
Layer 2 0.27 4.97


and so the pressure diagram given in Figure 3 can be determined.

PS / April 2005
4.3
4.00 m
5.00 m
5.79 m
6.00 m
7.36 m
10.00 m
55.0
28.5, 23.4
73.1
26.6
27.5 133.5
149.6
33.2
213.1
511.0
37.7
2
Figure 3. Effect Earth Pressure diagram for Combination 2

Note: As the water pressures are equal on both sides and therefore balance, they have been
ignored.
For an active moment of 431.2 kNm/m and a passive moment of 433.2 kNm/m the
depth to the toe of the pile is found to be 7.36 m. As above we need to add 20% to
allow for the simplification of this design method so the depth of the pile toe is
4 m + 3.37 m × 1.2 = 8.04 m
The point of zero shear is found to be at 5.80 m, and so as above then in taking
moments, a maximum bending moment of 168.20 kNm/m is found.
2.4. Discussion
This example shows that Combination 2 gives the longer pile, and the larger bending
moment based on these initial calculations. The above simple approach takes no
account of redistribution of stress which is allowed in EN1997-1. Combination 1 has
to be checked for the pile length obtained from Combination 2 and this will require
the use of a spring or finite element model with factored outputs. This has been done
using the package FREW in this case. (N.B. There is currently an ongoing debate
with regards to this procedure which will hopefully be resolved very soon) Based on
the FREW calculations using unfactored parameters then a Maximum bending
moment of 140.4 kNm/m is found. As the calculation is based on unfactored
parameters they are multiplied by 1.35 giving a value of 189.6 kNm/m for the

PS / April 2005
reworked Combination 1. Therefore the maximum value of bending moment to be

carried forward is the greatest of all values and is taken as 189.54 kNm/m.
3. Selection of Pile section
EN 1993-5 allows the use of both elastic and plastic section modulus for pile
selection depending on the 'class of section'
The Section classification limits for U profiles are: EN1993-5

Class 1 The same limit as for Class 2, plus a rotation check has to be carried out. Table 5.1
Class 2 (b / tf) / ε ≤ 37 (45) Table 5.1
Class 3 (b / tf) / ε ≤ 49 (66) values for Z piles are in brackets Table 5.1
Where:
b is the flat portion of the flange measured between the corner radii, provided that the
ratio r / tf is not greater than 5.0, otherwise a more precise method should be used
tf is the thickness of the flange for flanges with constant thickness
! = ( 235 / f y ) where fy is the yield strength
For typical steels used for sheet piling f y = 270 or 355 N / mm 2 giving
! = 0.93 or 0.81 respectively.

EN1993-5
EN 1993-5 explains that section Class determines the method of analysis to use. 5.2.1(3)
Class 1 – uses plastic analysis involving moment redistribution and check on rotation
capacity.
Class 2 – uses elastic global analysis, but advantage can be taken of plastic
resistance of the cross-section.
Class 3 – uses elastic global analysis and elastic distribution of stress over the cross-
section.
It can be seen that to use Class 1 then more sophisticated computation analyses are
needed than those given here (and as will be discussed below, more refined
information on plastic section modulus with loss of section).
Having established the maximum value of design bending moment (MEd), the
selected section has to fulfil: EN 1993-5
MEd ≤ Mc.Rd Eq. 5.1
Where:
Mc.Rd is the design moment of resistance of the cross-section

PS / April 2005
EN1993-5 says that Mc.Rd should be determined using equations that relate to the
Class of cross-section
The design moment of resistance of the cross-section (Mc.Rd) is determined as: EN1993-5
For Class 1 and 2 Mc.Rd = (" B x Wpl x f y ) / ! M0 5.2.2(2) Eq. (5.2)
For Class 3 Mc.Rd = (" B x W el x f y ) / ! M0 5.2.2(2) Eq. (5.3)
Where:
βB is a factor that takes account of a possible lack of shear force transmission in the
interlocks,; βB = 1.0; for Z-piles. But may be ≤ 1.0 for U piles (this will be set in the
National Annex but will be taken as 1.0 here)
Wpl is the plastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall
Wel is the elastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall
γM0 is the partial safety factor determined from clause 5.1.1(4)
For the partial factors γM0, γM1 and γM2 applied to resistance refer to EN1993-1-1 EN1993-5, 5.1.1(4)
EN1993-1-1
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Note: The Class of a given physical section can of course change with steel grade e.g. an
as manufactured AZ13 is Class 2 in S270, but Class 3 in S355 and this can result in the
value of Mc.Rd increasing very little despite the higher value of fy as the elastic modulus is
used for Class 3.
Similarly, the section class may change with time as a result of corrosion
So:
The design bending moment is,; MEd = 189.54 kNm; Sheet 7
2
For S270 grade steel the yield stress is; fy = 270 N/mm
Therefore for S270 grade steel the minimum section modulus needed is
3 3
189.54×10 / 270 = 702.00 cm /m
On this basis a PU8 is chosen based on manufactures' data with elastic section
3
Modulus; Wel = 830 cm
Note that a PU8 section in 270 grade is a Class 3 and so uses elastic values.
For PU8 (b / tf) / ε becomes,; (318 / 8 ) / 0.93 = 42.7; ≤ 49 see above)
Therefore
Mc.Rd = (βB × Wel × fy) / γM0 = 224.10 kNm;

Note: this calculation can be compared directly with that given in the Arcelor Piling handbook
using current design practice.

PS / April 2005
However there is a requirement in EN1993-5 that the loss of section due to corrosion
be accounted for. In this case consider air one side and non aggressive ground on the EN1993-5, 4.4(2)
other and so for a structure life of 100 years and corrosion rates are selected from Tables 4.1 & 4.2
the Tables on EN 1993 giving 1 and 1.2 mm respectively, however as the point of
maximum bending moment is below excavation level the loss of section will be
1.2 mm + 1.2 mm = 2.4 mm.
The section modulus remaining when the loss of thickness due to corrosion has been
taken into account should be found from manufacturers' literature.
Note: At present manufactures’ make available information on the change of elastic section
modulus with loss of section, however currently the same information is not generally available
for the corresponding change of plastic section modulus but it is anticipated that this will be
made available in the future. The required information was calculated for this example).
PU8 is a Class 3 section and so works with the elastic section modulus which meets
the design requirement with no corrosion as shown above, but falls to 600 on loss of
section of 2.4 mm and so does not fulfil the minimum section modulus.
Manufacturers information for available standard sections shows that PU12 is a

Class 2 section (as (b / tf) / ε equals; (258 / 9.8) / 0.93 = 28.31; ≤ 37) but just falls to
Class 3 after corrosion of 2.4mm has been taken into account (as (b / tf) / ε equals;
(258 / 7.4) / 0.93 = 37.49; ≥37) and would therefore require the use of the elastic
section modulus for design purposes with reduced section.
Although this section can be designed plastically when new (uncorroded), the elastic
3
section modulus has to be used for PU12 with loss of section and is; Wel = 900 cm
This gives a design moment resistance after loss of section of
MEd = 189.540 kNm; Sheet 7
Mc.Rd ≥ MEd, therefore OK
3.1. Check Shear
A check on shear at each cross-section has to be carried out such that EN1993-5
VEd < Vpl.Rd 5.2.2(4)
Where:
VEd is the design shear force
Vpl.Rd is the plastic shear resistance for each web given by

PS / April 2005
Vpl.Rd = ( A v x f y ) /( ( 3) x ! M0 ) EN1993-5, Eq(5.5)

Where:
Av is the projected shear area for each web acting in the same direction as VEd.
Av may be determined from the following expression EN1993-5, 5.2.2(5)

A v = t w x (h ! t f ) Eq.(5.6)
Where:
Figure 5 shows that at the design length of 8.04m then the shear is of the order of
370kN per m run (the reworked combination 1 gives only 87.35 and so the greater is
taken) which is 222 kN per sheet pile of 600mm width. Therefore the design shear
force per sheet is:
VEd = 222 kN
For the EN 1993-5 design requirements we have had to select the PU12 section
to allow for loss of section so:
check for PU12 - allowing for loss of section due to corrosion

Determine the plastic shear resistance for the web (Vpl.Rd)
h = 360 mm – 2.4 mm = 357.6 mm
tw = 9 mm – 2.4 mm = 6.6 mm
tf = 9.8 mm – 2.4 mm = 7.4 mm
2
Av = tw × (h – tf) = 2311 mm ; EN1993-5, Eq(5.6)
Therefore
Vpl.Rd = (Av × fy) / (√(3) × γM0) = 360.30 kN ; EN1993-5, Eq(5.5)
VEd / Vpl.Rd = 0.62
Vpl.Rd > VEd therefore OK
However it is required that if VEd / Vpl.Rd ≥ 0.5 then the design plastic moment of EN1993-5, 5.2.2(9)
resistance has to be reduced.
The reduced plastic moment resistance is determined from:
2
M V.Rd = ((& B x Wpl ) % (($ x A v ) /( 4 x t w x sin(# )))) x ( f y / " M0 ) ! Mc.Rd EN1993-5 Eq (5.9)
Where:
βB = 1.0; Sheet 9
Wpl is the plastic section modulus for the reduced section area as the effects of
3
corrosion are considered here; Wpl = 1120 cm

PS / April 2005
EN1993-5
2
ρ = ((2 × VEd / Vpl.Rd) – 1) = 0.05; Eq (5.10)
2
Av = 2311 mm
tw = 6.6 mm
α is the inclination of the web according to Figure 5.1 of EN1993-5; α = 50.4°
2
fy = 270 N/mm ;
γM0 = 1.0; (see note on sheet 9) Sheet 9
2
MV.Rd = ((βB × Wpl) – ((ρ × Av ) / (4 × tw × sin(α)))) × (fy / γM0) = 298.57 kNm; EN1993-5 Eq (5.9)
Mc.Rd = 243.000 kNm; Sheet 9
MV.Rd > Mc.Rd
Therefore the limiting bending moment resistance value to be considered for the
PU12 section in this example is Mc.Rd.
Therefore the PU12 section is OK in bending with loss of section due to

corrosion
1.00 m
2.00 m
4.5
4.00 m
16.2
5.4 m
7.00 m
54.9
8.00 m
10.00 m
9.00 m
1.00 m
43.1
-0.7
-333.8
-652.6
-1039.7
-1495.1
All Shear forces given in kN per m run


PS / April 2005
1.00 m
2.00 m
4.6
4.00 m
16.1
5.7 m
7.00 m
53.8
8.00 m
10.00 m
1.00 m
52.5
-0.07
-186.1
-374.1
-842.9
All Shear forces given in kN per m run
It is also required that shear buckling resistance of the web of the sheet piles should EN1993-5
be verified if: 5.2.2(6)
c / tw > 72 x ε for the selected section
c / tw > ;72 × 0.93 = 66.96; for the S270 steel
Where:
c is the length of the web EN1993-5
c = (h " t f ) /(2 x sin ! ) for U sections Figure 5.1
where:
α is the inclination of the web (defined in Figure 5.1 of EN1993-5)
For a PU12 full section

h = 360 mm; tf = 9.8 mm; tw = 9 mm; α = 50.4°
c = (h – tf) / (2 × sin(α)) = 227.251 mm;
Therefore; c / tw = 25.25; < 67
As c / tw < 67 Shear buckling check is not required EN1993-5, 5.2.2(6)


PS / April 2005
If loss of section is included in the above calculation then for PU12, c / tw becomes
32.2, so a shear buckling check is still not required.
If U piles are connected by welding or crimping to improve shear transmission in the EN1993-5
interlock then connection shall be verified assuming that the shear force can be 5.2.2(10)
transferred only in the connected interlocks.
The driveability of the section should also be checked


Simply supported beam with full lateral restraint DBM / July 2004
CR / October 2004
Simply supported beam with full lateral restraint
December 2003
prEN1993-1-5, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.5: Plated structural elements, September
2003

The following publication has been used for this worked example
SCI & BCSA. Steelwork Design Guide to BS 5950-1:200 Volume 1 Section Properties Member Capacities
th
6 Edition, P202, 2002.


CR / October 2004
The beam shown below is fully restrained along its length and has stiff bearing of Table & clause
50mm at the supports and 75mm under the point load. For the loads shown design numbers given
the S275 grade steel beam. relate to
EN1993-1-1
Point Load (F1) unless stated
Uniformly Distributed Load (F1) otherwise.
3.250m 3.250m
Figure 1. Overview of simply supported beam
1. Loading
Uniformly Distributed Load (UDL) (including self weight) Gk1 = 15 kN/m
Point load Gk2 = 40 kN
UDL Qk1 = 30 kN/m
Point load Qk2 = 50 kN
Note: Variable actions are not independent of each other.

UDL FEd1 = (γG × Gk1) + (γQ × Qk1) = 65.25 kN/m EN 1990 Table
Point load FEd2 = (γG × Gk2) + (γQ × Qk2) = 129.00 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
Maximum moment occurs at mid-span of beam
2
MEd = ((FEd1 × L ) / 8) + ((FEd2 × L) / 4) = 554.23 kNm
At the ends
VEd.end = ((FEd1 × L) / 2) + (FEd2 / 2) = 276.56 kN
At mid-span
VEd.mid = VEd.end - ((FEd1 × L) / 2) = 64.50 kN

CR / October 2004
To determine a trial section size for a simply supported beam the bending moment
capacity is considered. For this example a trial section size has been selected by
considering the moment capacities given in the SCI / BCSA publication P202.
z
tf
r
y y d h
tw
z
b
h = 533.10 mm b = 209.30 mm d = 476.50 mm
2
tw = 10.10 mm tf = 15.60 mm r = 12.70 mm A = 117.38 cm
2
For tf = 15.60 mm Yield strength is fy = 275 N/mm prEN 10025-2
7.3 & Table 4
ε = √(235 / fy) = 0.92 Table 5.2
Flange
C = (b – tw – 2 × r) / 2 = 86.90 mm Table 5.2
C / tf = 5.57
9 × ε = 8.32 Table 5.2
Web
d / tw = 47.18
72 × ε = 66.56 Table 5.2
4. Shear buckling
72 × ε / η = 66.56
hw / tw = 49.69
hw/tw < 72ε/η

CR / October 2004
5. Combined moment and shear checks

5.1. Maximum moment and co-existent shear
2
2
2
Therefore Av = 5761 mm
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Vpl.Rd = (Av × (fy / √(3))) / γM0 = 914.75 kN 6.2.6(2)

Design shear force at maximum moment VEd.mid = 64.50kN Sheet 2

VEd.mid / Vc.Rd = 0.07 < 1.0, therefore OK 6.2.6(1)
VEd.mid < 0.5 Vc.Rd 6.2.8(2)
Therefore effect of shear on moment resistance can be neglected
Moment resistance for a Class 1 or 2 cross-section (Mc.Rd)

Mc.Rd = Mpl.Rd = (Wpl.y × fy) / γ M0 = 649.02 kNm 6.2.5(2) Eq. 6.13
Where:
Wpl.y is the plastic modulus about the y axis (major axis of the beam)
3
Wpl.y = 2360 cm

MEd < Mc.Rd
Therefore section is OK in bending
5.2. Maximum shear and co-existent moment

Vc.Rd = 914.75 kN 6.2.6(1)
Maximum design shear force VEd.end = 276.56 kN Sheet 2

Moment at maximum shear MEd.end = 0 kNm
VEd.end / Vc.Rd = 0.07 < 1.0, therefore OK 6.2.6(1)

CR / October 2004
6. Check for deflection of beam
For this example it is assumed that serviceability is concerned with eliminating EN 1990
damage to the structure, its finishes and any non-structural members. Therefore A 1.4.3(3)
the deflections to be taken into account are those that occur after execution of the
member or finish concerned.
Consequently only those deflections associated with the variable actions are
considered.
Unfactored variable actions

UDL Qk1 = 30kN/m
Point load Qk2 = 50 kN

2
E = 210 kN/mm 3.2.6(1)
4
Iy = 55227.31 cm
6.1. Deflection under variable actions

w = (1 / (E × Iy)) × (((5 × Qk1 × L4) / 384) + ((Qk2 × L3) / 48)) = 8.48 mm

Annex EN1993-1-1
7. Resistance of the web to transverse forces at the end of the beam Table & clause
numbers given
Note: EN 1993-1-1 does not give design checks for the resistance of webs, designers are in Section 7
referred to EN 1993-1-5. refer to
prEN1993-1-5
For this example the load is applied to one flange close to an unstiffened end, 6.1(2)c) &
therefore it is considered as Type c. Figure 6.1
The design resistance (FRd) of an unstiffened web is given by:

FRd = ( f yw x L eff x t w ) / ! M1 6.2(1) Eq 6.1

CR / October 2004
Where:
2
fyw is the yield strength of the web fyw = 275 N/mm
Leff is the effective length for resistance to transverse forces, given by:
L eff = ! F x l y 6.2(1) Eq 6.2
Where:
ly is the effective loaded length appropriate to the length of stiff bearing
χF is the reduction factor due to local buckling, given by
" F = 0 .5 / ! F 6.4(1) Eq 6.3
! F = ((l y x t w x f yw ) / Fcr ) 6.4(1) Eq 6.4

3
Fcr = 0.9 x k F x E x ( t w / h w ) 6.4(1) Eq. (6.5)
Determine kF
For webs without longitudinal stiffeners k F should be obtained from Figure 6.1 6.4(2)
For Type c) ss = 50 mm c = 0 mm Figure 6.1
kF = 2 + 6 × ((ss + c) / hw) = 2.60
kF < 6, therefore OK
hw is the clear web depth between flanges hw = h - (2 × tf) = 501.90 mm Figure 5.1
Therefore
3
Fcr = 0.9 × k F × E × (tw / hw) = 1007.87 kN 6.4(1) Eq. (6.5)
ly is determined from two dimensionless parameters m1 and m2, and relates to the
stiff bearing length(ss).
For Type c the effective loaded length (ly) is the smaller of the following values 6.5(3)
l y = l e + ( t f x ( ( (m1 / 2) + (l e / t f ) 2 + m 2 )) 6.5(3) Eq 6.11
l y = l e + ( t f x ( (m1 + m 2 ))) 6.5(3) Eq 6.12
l y = s s + ((2 x t f ) x (1 + (m1 + m 2 ))) 6.5(2) Eq 6.10

Where
2
l e = (k F x E x t w ) /(2 x f yw x h w ) ! s s + c 6.5(3) Eq 6.13
2
fyw is the yield strength of the web fyw = 275 N/mm therefore:
2
le = (kF × E × tw ) / (2 × fyw × hw) = 201.59 mm > ss + c = 50.00 mm
Therefore le = ss + c = 50.00 mm
m1 = ( f yf x b f ) /( f yw x t w ) 6.5(1) Eq 6.8
m 2 = 0.02 x (h w / t f ) 2 if ! f > 0.5 6.5(1) Eq 6.9
m2 = 0 if " f ! 0.5 6.5(1) Eq 6.9

bf is the width of the flanges, therefore bf = b = 209.30 mm Figure 5.1
m1 = (fyf × bf) / (fyw × tw) = 20.72

CR / October 2004
2
m2 = 0.02 × (hw / tf) = 20.7 when ! F > 0.5
m2 = 0 when ! F ≤ 0.5
Initially assume m2 = 0
2
ly1 = le +(tf × √((m1 / 2)+( le / tf) + m2)) = 120.86 mm 6.5(3) Eq. (6.11)
ly2 = le +( tf × √(m1 + m2)) = 121.01 mm 6.5(3) Eq. (6.12)
ly3 = ss + (2 × tf × (1 + √(m1 + m2))) = 223.23 mm 6.5(2) Eq. (6.10)
Therefore ly = ly1 = 120.86 mm
λ!bar.F
F
= √((ly × tw × fyw) / Fcr) = 0.58 6.4(1) Eq. (6.4)
As ! F > 0.5 m2 ≠ 0 therefore recalculate ly for m2 = 0.02 × (hw / tf)2 = 20.7

2
ly1 = le +(tf × √((m1 / 2)+( le / tf) + m2)) = 150.29 mm 6.5(3) Eq. (6.11)
ly2 = le +( tf × √(m1 + m2)) = 150.40 mm 6.5(3) Eq. (6.12)
ly3 = ss + (2 × tf × (1 + √(m1 + m2))) = 282.00 mm 6.5(2) Eq. (6.10)
Therefore ly = ly1 = 150.29 mm
λ!bar.F
F
= √((ly × tw × fyw) / Fcr) = 0.65 6.4(1) Eq. (6.4)
χF = 0.5 / λ! F = 0.77 <1.0 therefore OK
bar.F 6.4(1) Eq. (6.3)
Leff = χF × ly = 115.84 mm 6.2(1) Eq. (6.2)
γM1 = 1.00 EN 1993-1-1 6.1(1)
FRd = (fyw × Leff × tw) / γM1 = 321.76 kN 6.2(1) Eq. (6.1)
FRd = 321.76kN
Design shear forces at the ends is: VEd.end = 276.56 kN Sheet 2
FRd > VEd.end Therefore section OK.

Simply supported beam with lateral restraint at the load DBM / July 2004
points
JM / October 2004
Simply supported beam with lateral restraint at the load points
BS EN 1990: 2002, Basis of Structural Design, July 2002, with UK National Annex, March 2004
December 2003
DDENV1993-1-1:1992, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
buildings, (Together with United Kingdom National Application Document), November 1992

The following publication has been used for this worked example
SCI & BCSA. Steelwork Design Guide to BS 5950-1:200 Volume 1 Section Properties Member Capacities
th
6 Edition, P202, 2002.


points
JM / October 2004
A 9m simply supported beam is laterally restrained at the ends and at the points of Table & clause
load application only. Design the beam in grade S275 steel. numbers given
relate to
EN1993-1-2
Point Load 1 Point Load 2
unless stated
(F1) (F2) Uniformly Distributed Load
(F3) otherwise.
A B
3.00m 3.00m 3.00m
Figure 1. Overview of beam
1. Loading
Point load 1 Gk1 = 40.00 kN
Point load 2 Gk2 = 20.00 kN
Uniformly Distributed Load (UDL) Gk3 = 3.00 kN/m
Point Load 1 Qk1 = 60.00 kN
Point Load 2 Qk2 = 30.00 kN

Point load 1 FEd1 = (γG × Gk1) + (γQ × Qk1) = 144.00 kN EN1990 Table
Point load 2 FEd2 = (γG × Gk2) + (γQ × Qk2) = 72.00 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
UDL FEd3 = (γG × Gk3) = 4.05 kN/m
Calculate moments and shear forces for this combination of permanent and variable
Actions (Combination 1)

points
JM / October 2004
Bending Moment Diagram - Combination 1

0.0 kNm
R,F R,F
A B
9.000
396.4 kNm
Figure 2. Bending moment diagram
Shear Force Diagram - Combination 1

138.2 kN
0.0 kN
R,F R,F
A B
9.000
-114.2 kN
Figure 3. Shear force diagram

Maximum moment occurs under point load 1
MEd = 396.45 kNm

Maximum shear force (at the support A)
VEd.A = 138.23 kN
Shear at maximum moment

VEd.F1 = 126.08 kN

points
JM / October 2004
To determine a trial section size for this example the buckling moment capacities in
the SCI / BCSA publication P202 have been considered.
z
tf
r
y y d h
tw
z
b
h = 460.00 mm b = 191.30 mm d = 407.60 mm

2
tw = 9.90 mm tf = 16.00 mm r = 10.20 mm A = 104.48 cm
2
For tf = 16.00 mm Yield strength is fy = 275 N/mm prEN 10025
7.3 & Table 4
ε = √(235 / fy) = 0.924 Table 5.2
Flange
C = (b – tw – 2 × r) / 2 = 80.50 mm Table 5.2
C / tf = 5.03
9 × ε = 8.32 > 5.03 Table 5.2
Web
d / tw = 41.17
72 × ε = 66.56 > 41.17 Table 5.2


points
JM / October 2004
4. Shear buckling
72 × ε / η = 66.56
hw / tw = 43.23
hw/tw < 72ε/η
5. Combined moment and shear checks

5.1. Maximum moment and shear
2
2
2
Therefore Av = 4811 mm
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Vpl.Rd = (Av × (fy / √(3))) / γM0 = 763.90 kN 6.2.6(2)

Design shear force at maximum moment VEd.F1 = 126.08kN Sheet 3

VEd.F1 / Vc.Rd = 0.17 < 1.0, therefore OK 6.2.6(1)
V Ed.F1 < 0.5 Vc.Rd 6.2.8(2)
Therefore the effect of shear on moment resistance can be neglected
Moment resistance for a Class 1 or 2 cross-section (Mc.Rd)

Mc.Rd = Mpl.Rd = (Wpl.y × fy) / γ M0 = 503.60 kNm 6.2.5(2) Eq. 6.13
Where:
Wpl.y is the plastic modulus about the y axis (major axis of the beam)
3
Wpl.y = 1831 cm


points
JM / October 2004
MEd < Mc.Rd 6.2.5(1)

5.2. Maximum shear and moment

Design shear force at support A is:
VEd.A = 138.23 kN Sheet 3
Moment at support A is zero.
VEd.A < Vpl.Rd
6. Lateral Torsional Buckling Check

The beam is adequately restrained at supports A and B, and at point loads 1 and 2.
from the bending moment diagram the critical unrestrained length is between point
loads 1 and 2. Therefore the span considered is LLT = 3.00m.
The criteria to satisfy is that the design value of the applied moment is less than the
design buckling moment of the cross-section.
MEd ≤ Mb.Rd 6.3.2.1(1)
The design value of the moment MEd is taken as the largest moment in the laterally
unrestrained span between point loads 1 and 2 (MEd = 396.45 kNm).
Note: The method shown here for lateral torsional buckling is the general method.
EN1993-1-1 contains an alternative method for rolled sections which gives higher values.
However, the National Annex needs to give values for ! LT.0 and β before it can be used.
The design buckling resistance Mb.Rd is defined as:

Mb = (" Lt x W y x f y ) / ! M1 6.3.2.1(3)
Where:
Wy = Wpl.y for a Class 1 or 2 section 6.3.2.1(3)
χLT is the partial reduction factor for the resistance of the member to instability 6.3.2.2(1)
γM1 is the partial factor for the resistance of members to instability by member checks
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
General method for determining χLT 6.3.2.2(1)

2 2
% LT = 1/($ LT + ( $ LT # " LT )) ! 1.0
Where:

points
JM / October 2004
% LT = 0.5 # (1 + ($ LT # (! LT " 0.2)) + !2LT ) 6.3.2.2(1)

" LT = ( ( Wpl.y ! f y ) / Mcr )
Mcr is the elastic critical moment for lateral torsional buckling
EN1993-1-1 does not give expressions for calculating Mcr and therefore designers
must use textbooks to obtain the most appropriate equation for Mcr. One approach is
given below. The companion example for a cantilever offers and alternative.
Consider the self-weight of the beam to be insignificant (i.e. the member is not loaded
between the effective lateral restraints at the point loads). Then the DDENV1993-1-1
gives the following expression for calculating the elastic critical moment of a beam
with uniform doubly symmetrical cross-section.
M cr = C1 ! (( " 2 ! E ! I z ) /(k ! L LT ) 2 ) ! (( (k / k w ) 2 ! (I w / I z )) + (((k ! L LT ) 2 ! G ! I t ) /( " 2 ! E ! I z )))
4
Iz is the second moment of area about the minor axis Iz = 1870.83 cm
4
It is the torsion constant It = 69.21 cm
9 6
Iw is the warping constant Iw = 920×10 mm
k and k w are effective length factors k = kw = 1.00
C1 is a factor given in Table F.1.1 of DDENV1993-1-1. Its value is dependent on
loading and end restraint.
For k = 1.00 and ψ = 3/4 DDENV1993-1-1
C1 = 1.141 Table F.1.1
G = E /(2 " (1 + ! ))
ν is Poisson ratio ν = 0.3
2
E = 210 kN/mm
2
Therefore G = E / (2 × (1 + ν)) = 80769.23 N/mm
2 2 2 2 2
Mcr = C1×((π ×E×Iz)/(k×LLT) )×√(((k/kw) ×(Iw/Iz))+(((k×LLT) ×G×It)/(π ×E×Iz)))
3
= 1.2×10 kNm
Therefore
! LT =
λLT_bar √((Wpl.y × fy) / Mcr) = 0.64
h / b = 2.40
h / b > 2.0 therefore use buckling curve b Table 6.4
For buckling curve b αLT = 0.34 Table 6.3
2
ΦLT = 0.5 × (1 + (αLT × (λ!LT_bar
LT – 0.2)) + λ!LT ) = 0.78 LT_bar
2
6.3.2.2(1)

points
JM / October 2004
Therefore
2 22
χLT = 1 / (ΦLT + √(ΦLT - λ!LT_bar
LT )) = 0.82 6.3.2.2(1)
Design buckling resistance Mb.Rd is:

Mb.Rd = χ LT × Wpl.y × (fy / γ M1) = 410.98 kNm 6.3.2.2(1)
MEd = 396.45 kNm < Mb.Rd Sheet 3
7. Deflection under Serviceability Load Check

For this example it is assumed that serviceability is concerned with eliminating
damage to the structure, its finishes and any non-structural components. Therefore
the deflections to be taken into account are those that occur after execution.
Consequently, only those deflections associated with the variable actions are
considered.
Unfactored variable actions

F1 = Qk1 = 60.00 kN Sheet 2
F2 = Qk2 = 30.00 kN
2 4
E = 210 kN/mm and Iy = 37051.35 cm
Deflection under variable action at the centre is:

w = (((F1×L3)/(48×E×Iy))×((3×LLT/L)-(4×(LLT/L)3)))
3 3
+(((F2×L )/(48×E×Iy))×( (3×2×LLT/L)-(4×((2×LLT)/L) )))
= 14.75 mm

Annex EN1993-1-1

8. Resistance of the web to transverse forces
This should be assessed using guidance from EN 1993-1-5. See companion example
on simply supported beam wilh full lateral restraint for details.

Steel driven pile in stiff clay JP / October 2004
PS / February 2005
Steel driven pile in stiff clay
December 2003

numbers, April 2000
BS EN 12699:2001, Execution of special geotechnical work – displacement , February 2001


PS / February 2005
1. Introduction
Design the steel driven pile shown in Figure 1 in grade S275 steel.
Fc (1500 kN)
Figure 1. Driven pile layout
1.1. Soil parameters Table & clause

For the stiff clay considered in this worked example numbers given
3
Soil density γ = 20 kN/m relate to
Shear strength of the soil cu = 60 + (8 × z) (kPa) EN1997-1
unless
2. Design otherwise
The guidance given in EN1997-1 is used to determine the design loads. stated.
Design Approach 1 (axially loaded piles) is to be used in the UK. 2.4.7.3.4.2(2)
EN1997-1 gives two Combinations that need to be considered for ultimate limit state
design.
2.1. Design Combination 1

For axially loaded piles Combination 1 becomes A1 “+” M1 “+” R1
Where:
2.1.1. Design actions

Permanent action Fc = Gk = 1500 kN
Partial factor γG = 1.35 Table A3

PS / February 2005
Design load Fc:d1 = Fc × γG = 2025.00 kN Eq. (1)
Note: For simplicity the difference between the weight of the pile and the displaced
overburden has not been included.
2.1.2. Design resistance of pile

2.1.2.1. Basic Pile reduction factors
For an open ended pile:
The unit pile base capacity is 9cu Eq. (2)
(assuming open ended pile plugs)
The unit pile shaft capacity is α × cu Eq. (3)
Where:
α is the factor for frictional resistance depending on the type of soil and pile.
For a driven pile in stiff clay adopt α = 0.6
Note: Value for α is obtained from textbooks / Engineers experience.
Therefore
The pile shaft capacity is Σ (0.6 × cu) over the pile length
2.1.2.2. Characteristic resistance

Material factors (M1)
γM = γcu = 1.0 Table A4
Therefore the design shear strengths are:
c ud = c uk x ! M = c uk
In this example the given shear strength profile is the characteristic profile (see
section 1.1), cuk will be used throughout this example.
From equation (2) the base resistance is:

R b:k = 9 x c u:k x A b Eq. (4)
From equation (3) the shaft resistance is:
R s:k = 0.6 x c u:k x A s Eq. (5)
Where:
Ab is the base area of the pile
As is the shaft area of the pile
c u:k is the average shear strength of the soil along the shaft
2.1.2.3. Design resistance

BSEN1997 allows for pile design using ground properties and applying a partial
factor to obtain the design resistance for axial piles. Partial factors γb and γs are
applied to base and shaft resistance respectively.

PS / February 2005
For driven piles and combination 1

γb = γs = 1.0 Table A.6
When deriving characteristic values for pile design from ground parameters, partial 7.6.2.3(8)
factors have to be corrected by a model factor (γR:d ). The value of the model factor
will be assigned in the National Annex. A value of 1.4 is used in this example.
Therefore, the partial factors for pile resistance for driven piles are:
γb:d1 = γR:d × γb = 1.4 × 1.0 = 1.4
γs:d1 = γR:d × γs = 1.4 × 1.0 = 1.4
From equation (4) the base resistance (Rb:d) is:

Rb:d = Rb;k / γb:d = (9 / 1.4) × cu:k × Ab
From equation (5) the shaft resistance (Rs:d) is:
Shaft resistance Rs:d = Rs;k / γs:d = (0.6 / 1.4) × cc u:k × As
bar.u:k
The design compressive resistance (Rc:d1) is determined from:

Rc:d1 = Rb:d + Rs:d Eq (6) 7.6.2.3(3)
2.1.3. Determining pile length to carry prescribed load

Assuming a 610mm diameter pile
Radius r = 305 mm
2 2
Base area Ab = π × r = 2922.47 cm
Substituting in to equation (6) the design compressive resistance (Rc:d1) is:
R c : d1 = (6.43 x (60 + (8 x l )) A b ) + (0.43 x ((60 + (60 + (8 x l ))) / 2) x A s ) Eq. (7)

Where:
l is the pile length
Using a spread sheet and equation (7) values for Rc:d1 can be determined for
different pile lengths, see Table 1.

PS / February 2005
Table 1. Design compressive resistance for length of driven pile

Pile length (m) Design compressive resistance
(Rc:d1) (kN)
10 1082
15 1816
16 1981
17 2154
18 2334
Fc:d1 = 2025.00 kN Sheet 3, Eq. (1)
From Table 1 it can be seen that a pile of 17 m length gives Rc:d1 > Fc:d1
Therefore, l1 = 17 m and Rc:d1 = 2154 kN
2.2. Design Combination 2

The guidance given in EN1997 is used to determine the design loads.
Design Approach 1 (axially loaded piles) is used 2.4.7.3.6.4.2(2)
For axially loaded piles without unfavourable ground forces on them (M2),
Combination 2 becomes A2 “+” M1 “+” R4
and following the procedures for combination 1 the design is repeated using
combination 2 partial factors.
As in combination 1 the Material factor on shear strength (M1) is γM = γcu = 1.0,
and so the equations of 2.1.2.2 hold.
2.2.1. Design actions

Permanent action Fc = Gk = 1500 kN
Partial factor γG2 = 1.00 Table A3
Design load Fc:d2 = Fc × γG2 = 1500.00 kN Eq. (8)
2.2.2. Design resistance of pile

Partial factors for driven piles combination 2: 7.6.2.3(8)
γb = γs = 1.3 Table A.6
As discussed in section 2.2.3 a model factor (γR:d ) of 1.4 will be used. 7.6.2.3(8)
Therefore the partial factors for the pile resistance for combination 2 are:
γb:d2 = γR:d × γb = 1.4 × γb = 1.82
γs:d2 = γR:d × γs = 1.4 × γs = 1.82
Applying these partial factors

From equation (4) the pile base resistance is:
Rb:d2 = Rb;k / γb:d2 = (9 / 1.82) × cu:k × Ab

PS / February 2005
From equation (5) the pile shaft resistance is:

Rs:d2 = Rs;k / γb:d2 = (0.6 / 1.82) × cc u:k × As
bar.u:k
The design compressive resistance (Rc:d2) is:

Rc:d2 = Rb:d2 + Rs:d2
Substituting in to equation (6) the design compressive resistance (Rc:d2) is:
R c:d2 = ( 4.95 x (60 + (8 x l )) A b ) + (0.33 x ((60 + (60 + (8 x l ))) / 2) x A s ) Eq. (9)
2.2.3. Determining pile length to carry prescribed load

Taking a pile diameter of 610mm
Using a spread sheet and equation (9) values for Rc:d2 can be determined for
different pile lengths, see Table 2.
Table 2. Design compressive resistance for length of driven pile

Pile length (m) Design compressive resistance
(Rc:d2) (kN)
10 834
15 1396
16 1524
17 1657
18 1795
Fc:d2 = 1500.00 kN Sheet 5 Eq. 8

From Table 2 it can be seen that a pile of 16 m length gives Rc:d2 > Fc:d2.
This length is less than that determined for combination 1.
Therefore take, l2 = 16 m and Rc:d2 = 1524 kN
Therefore based on Combination 1 an 17 m steel driven pile of 610 mm diameter
would carry the applied load.
Of the two combinations for an 18 m pile Combination 1 is critical as:

Rc:d1 = 2154 kN Fc:d1 = 2025 kN
Rc:d2 = 1657 kN Fc:d2 = 1500 kN
Rc:d1 / Fc:d1 = 1.06 < Rc:d2 / Fc:d2 = 1.11

PS / February 2005
3. Determine wall thickness of driven pile

The steel driven pile is to be designed in grade S275 steel. prEN10025-2
2
For thicknesses up to 16mm fy = 275 N/mm Table 4
3.1. Section classification
t
d
From the earlier calculations d = 610 mm

However, the thickness of the section is not known.
The expressions given in EN1993-1-1 relate to Class 1, 2 and 3 tubular
cross-sections only. Therefore determine the minimum thickness for all Classes of
cross-section.
ε = √(235 / fy) = 0.92 Table 5.2
2
Class 1 limit d / t ≤ 50ε EN1993-1-1
2
Minimum thickness for Class 1 cross-section is t1 = d / (50 × ε ) = 14.28 mm
2
2
2
2
Therefore the minimum thickness of the pile is t = t3 = 7.93 mm

So use a thickness of 8 mm
3.2. Compressive resistance of cross-section

To determine the compressive resistance of the steel pile EN1993-5 refers to the EN1993-5
guidance given in EN1993-1-1. 5.3.3.1
The compressive resistance (Nc.Rd) of the steel pile to the design value of the
compressive force (NEd) must satisfy: EN1993-1-1
NEd / Nc.Rd ≤ 1.0 6.2.4(1)

PS / February 2005
For uniform compression the resistance (Nc.Rd) of the cross-section for Class 1, 2 or 3
sections is:
EN1993-1-1
Nc.Rd = ( A x f y ) / ! M0 6.2.4(2) Eq 6.10
For a tubular cross-section this becomes
Nc.Rd = (((# x(d 2 " (d " (2 x t )) 2 ) / 4 )) x f y ) / ! M0
Where: EN1993-1-1
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Consider a wall thickness of t = 8mm

2 2
Nc.Rd = ((π × ((d – (d – (2 × t)) ) / 4)) × fy) / γM0 = 4160.73 kN
NEd = 2025 kN Sheet 3 Eq. (1)
NEd / Nc.Rd = 0.49 < 1.0
Therefore compressive resistance of cross-section OK

As a result of the low utilisation a smaller diameter section may be considered, but
the design calculations will need to be repeated and a longer pile length is likely to be
determined.
4. Corrosion
There is a requirement to consider potential loss of section due to corrosion. This EN 1993-5
will depend on ground conditions (Table 4.1) and contact with free water (fresh and Section 4
sea, Table 4.2). in this example assuming natural ground would result in a loss of EN 1993-5
section of 1.2 mm for a 100 year design life. Table 4.1
This will result in
d = 610 – 1.2 = 608.80 mm
t = 8 – 1.2 = 6.80 mm
2 2
Nc.Rd = ((π × ((d – (d – (2 × t)) ) / 4)) × fy) / γM0 = 3536.62 kN
Therefore
NEd / Nc.Rd = 0.57 < 1.0 so section is satisfactory
Had the upper layers of ground been non compacted and aggressive fills then the EN 1993-5
section loss would have been 5.75 mm. Table 4.1
This would result in
d = 610 – 5.75 = 604.25 mm
t = 8 – 5.75 = 2.25 mm

PS / February 2005
2 2
Nc.Rd = ((π × ((d – (d – (2 × t)) ) / 4)) × fy) / γM0 = 1170.20 kN
Therefore
NEd / Nc.Rd = 1.73 > 1.0 so section is not adequate
Consider a section with a wall thickness of 10mm gives.

d = 610 – 5.75 = 604.25 mm
t = 10 – 5.75 = 4.25 mm
2 2
Nc.Rd = ((π × ((d – (d – (2 × t)) ) / 4)) × fy) / γM0 = 2203.04 kN
Therefore
NEd / Nc.Rd = 0.92 < 1.0 so section is satisfactory
5. Driveability
Driveability of the cross-section needs to be checked by a suitable method. EN1993-5

It is possible that the driveability may require a thicker walled section. 2.1.5P
EN1993-5 does not include a method for checking driveability.
EN 12699 suggests that the maximum calculated stress during driving should not EN 12699
exceed 0.9 x fy but if the stresses are monitored then this stress can be 20 % higher. 7.7.3.1 & 7.7.3.2
6. Imperfections and deformations
EN 1993-5 assumes that the given section of the steel takes into account general
manufacturing imperfections. It also assumes that any welding and joining complies
with BS EN ISO 4063:2000 and BS EN ISO 23692: 1994.
Requirements for installation monitoring and testing are covered by EN 12699: 2000.

Base plate without bending moment GHC/December 2004
CR/December 2004
Base plate without bending moment
BS EN 1990, Basis of Structural Design, July 2002, with UK National Annex, March 2004
BS EN 1991-1-1, Eurocode 1 – Actions on structures – Part 1.1: General actions – Densities, self-weight,
imposed loads for buildings, July 2002
BS EN 1992-1-1, Eurocode 2 – Design of concrete structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
buildings, April 2003
prEN 1993-1-8, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.8: Design of joints, December 2003

The following design guidance documents have been used for this worked example:
SCI and BCSA, Joints in Steel Construction – Simple Connections, P212, 2002, SCI


CR/December 2004
1. Introduction
The method given in Eurocode 3 uses the same approach as BS5950-1: 2000, that is the ‘effective are
method’. The ‘T-stub model’ is used to determine the resistance in compression of the base plate and
underlying ground / concrete.
Design the base plate for a 254 x 254 x 89 UC in grade S275 steel (shown in Figure 1).
leff.2 tf
c
leff.1 tw beff.2
c
c Minimum 70 mm to centreline of bolt hole
beff.1 c c
Figure 1. Base plate dimensions
1.1. Column section dimensions
Section: UC 254 x 254 x 89

z
tf
r
y y d h
tw
z
b
h = 260.30 mm b = 256.30 mm d = 200.30 mm

2
tw = 10.30 mm tf = 17.30 mm r = 12.70 mm A = 113.31 cm

CR/December 2004
2. Loading Table & clause

numbers given
The design axial column load, NEd = 1000 kN relate to
Note: The above value has been determined using the partial loading factors, load EN1993-1-8
combination and combination factors given in Annex A of EN 1990. For brevity this unless stated
process has not be included in this worked example (see other worked examples in this otherwise.
series for the methodology to use).
3. Material properties
3.1. Steel
For steel grade S275 with a thickness of between 16 mm and 40 mm prEN 10025-2
2
Yield strength is fy = 265 N/mm 7.3 & Table 4
Note: The guidance given in prEN 10025-2 has been used to determine the yield strength
for steel instead of that given in Table 3.1 of EN1993-1-1, as it is assumed that the UK
National Annex to EN 1993-1-1 will specify the use of that standard instead of the values
given in Table 3.1.
3.2. Concrete
Compressive strength equals the Characteristic cylinder strength (fck)

For concrete grade C40/50 EN 1992-1-1
2
fck = 40 N/mm
Design compressive strength is determined from f cd = " cc x ( f ck / ! C ) 3.1.6(1)
Where:
γC is the partial safety factor for concrete EN1992-1-1
γC = 1.5 (For the persistent and transient design situations) 2.4.2.4(1) &
Note: Recommended value used for γC. This value may be altered by the UK National Table 2.1
αcc is the coefficient taking account of the long term effects on the compressive
strength and unfavourable effects resulting from the way the load is applied. EN1992-1-1
αcc = 1.0 3.1.6(1)
Note: Recommended value used for αcc. This value may be altered by the UK National
However, due to confinement of the concrete it is permissible to consider an

enhanced characteristic strength. This is a function of the confinement stress σ2, EN1992-1-1
however EN1992-1-1 gives no guidance on calculating the latter. Future guidance 3.1.9(2)
may be given in the National Annex to EN1992-1-1. For this example it is assumed
that the enhanced compressive strength (fck.c) is:
2
fck.c = 1.2 × fck = 48 N/mm

CR/December 2004
Therefore the enhanced design compressive strength is:

2
fcd.c = αcc × (fck.c / γC) = 32 N/mm
4. Design
4.1. Size of effective area
Determine the required dimension by considering the axial load and the strength of
the grout / concrete.
The design bearing strength of the ‘support’, considering a flange is determined from:
f jd = (! j x FRdu ) /(b eff .1 x l eff .1 ) 6.2.5(7) Eq. 6.6
Where:
beff.1 and leff.1 are shown in Figure 1.
βj is the foundation joint material coefficient
βj = 2/3 Assuming that the characteristic strength of the grout will not be less than
0.2 times that of the concrete and the thickness of the grout will not be
greater than 0.2 times the smallest width of the base plate.
FRdu is the concentrated design resistance force given in EN1992,
FRdu = A c 0 x f cd x ( A c1 / A c 0 ) ! 3 x f cd x A c 0 6.7(2) Eq. 6.63
Where:
Ac0 is the loaded area (taken as beff x leff for base plate)
Ac1 is the maximum design distribution area with a similar shape to Ac0 (defined
in Figure 6.29 of EN1992-1-1). However, for the case of a base plate A c1 = A c 0 in
order to satisfy the criteria:
• The centre of Ac1 should be in the line of action passing through the centre of
Ac0
• Areas should not overlap
As A c1 = A c 0 and A c 0 = b eff .1 x l eff .1

FRdu = b eff .1 x l eff .1 x f cd
Substituting this into equation 6.6 of EN1993-1-8 gives the design bearing strength of
the ‘support’ as
2
fjd = 2/3 × fcd.c = 21.33 N/mm 6.2.5(7) Eq. 6.6
Therefore the bearing area required is:

2
NEd / fjd = 46875 mm
Where:
NEd is the design axial column load, NEd = 1000 kN Sheet 3

CR/December 2004
The bearing area provided is:

(2 x (l eff .1 x b eff .1 ) + (l eff .2 x b eff .2 )
Where:
beff.1, beff.2, leff.1 and leff.2 are defined in Figure 1.
l eff .1 x b eff .1 = (256.3 + (2 x c )) x (17.3 + (2 x c )) = ( 4 x c 2 ) + (547.2 x c ) + 4433.99
l eff .2 x b eff .2 = (260.3 ! (2 x 17.3) ! (2 x c )) x (10.3 + (2 x c )) = ( !4 x c 2 ) + ( 430.8 x c )

+ 2327.71
Substituting the expressions for (leff.1 x beff.1) and (leff.2 x beff.2) into the above equation
gives the bearing area of (978 x c ) + 6761.7
2
For the area required (46875 mm ) the dimension c equals:
c = (46875 – 6761.7) / 978 = 41.02 mm
This will provide a bearing area that is sufficiently large to avoid crushing of the
concrete under the applied axial load.
4.2. Plan dimensions of the base plate
c = 41.02 mm ≥ 70 mm
≥ 49.5 mm
≥ 49.5 mm
≥ 70 mm
c = 41.02 mm
≥ 50 mm
≥ 50 mm
Figure 2. Corner dimensions of base plate
Therefore the size of the base plate is not governed by dimension c, rather by the
detailing requirements shown in Figure 2.
Choose plate
Width 260.3 + (49.5 x 2) + (50 x 2) = 459.3 mm say 460 mm
Length 256.3 + ( 49.5 x 2) + (50 x 2) = 455.3 mm say 460 mm

Simply supported beam with full lateral restraint – Fire Limit TL / August 2004
State
YW/ October 2004
Simply supported beam with full lateral restraint – Fire Limit State
The following Eurocodes and pre-Eurocodes have been used for this worked example:
BS EN 1991-1-2, Eurocode 1 – Actions on structures – Part 1.2: General actions – Actions on structures
exposed to fire, November 2002.
December 2003
prEN 1993-1-2, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.2: General rules structural fire design,
June 2004



State
YW/ October 2004
1. Introduction
The principles of the design of steel structures for the fire limit state are set out in EN1993-1-2. Many of
the concepts will be familiar to UK designers as the equivalent National standard, BS5950 Part 8, is, like
EN1993-1-2, a limit state code which takes into account uncertainties in material strength and load
distribution. It recognises the important influence of applied load on the performance in fire of structural
steel elements. A number of routes of various degrees of complexity are available to the designer in order
to provide the required performance. These range from a simple reliance on the results from standard fire
tests on isolated members to a consideration of the physical parameters influencing fire development
coupled with an analysis of the entire building. The design procedure is summarised in Figure 4.
Any fire design must take into account the following three inter-dependent relationships:
• The fire model used to assess the structural performance

• The thermal response of the structure
• The response of the structure
1.1. Choice of fire model

The fire model (thermal actions) adopted for design may be either nominal or physically based. Examples
of nominal fire models are the standard (ISO 834, BS476 Part 20) fire curve used for furnace tests on
structural elements, the external fire curve used for members subject to external flaming from openings
and the hydrocarbon curve used for offshore, petrochemical or other extreme exposure conditions.
Examples of physically based thermal actions include empirically based parametric fire curves, localised
fires or mathematically based simulations of the anticipated thermal exposure. For the purpose of this
document the thermal exposure will be restricted to the familiar standard time-temperature response.
1.2. Thermal response of the structure

Once the fire model has been chosen consideration should be given to the temperature development
within the structural member(s). Heat transfer to structural elements is a complex process which requires
a solution of the equations for energy conservation and mass balance. However, for structural steel the
situation can be simplified to an assumption of uniform temperature through the cross-section. Tabulated
values are available in National standards based on specific fire resistance periods. Alternatively iterative
simple calculation models (suitable for use in a spreadsheet) are presented for unprotected and protected
steel to enable the designer to calculate the temperature of the member at a specific time period
dependent on the fire model used. Advanced calculation models are available to determine more
accurately the heat transfer to structural members. However, the use of such advanced methods is
beyond the scope of this simplified guidance.
1.3. Structural response

The basic concept of the simplified structural fire engineering design procedure in the Eurocode is to
provide data on the reduction in strength and stiffness at elevated temperature to enable the designer to
utilise familiar methods to assess the resistance at specified time or temperature steps. Reduced partial

State
YW/ October 2004
factors for loading at the fire limit state are used to assess performance against the reduced resistance to
determine whether additional protection or an alternative design (such as the use of a larger section than
required for ambient conditions) should be used. Again advanced non-linear methods are available to
determine more precisely the response of a frame or an entire building to the effects of fire but the use of
such techniques is outside the scope of this guidance.
For the purpose of this document the worked examples considered will follow the simplified design
procedure summarised in Figure 5.
For step 1 the fire resistance requirements will be as specified in Approved Document B and related to
building occupancy and height above ground. The fire resistance requirements will be provided as a
specified time to failure under standard test conditions. It is important to note that there are alternative
(physically based) methods for determining required performance not considered here.
The calculation of the load effects at the fire limit state is similar to the procedure adopted in the latest
version of BS5950 Part 8. The designer must be familiar with both EN1990 (Basis of Structural Design)
which provides the required load combinations (as for ambient temperature design) and with EN1991-1-2
(the fire part of the Actions code) which in addition to specifying the available options for thermal actions
for temperature analysis (see above) also specifies the mechanical actions for structural analysis. In
particular EN 1991-1-2 specifies the partial factor for imposed (assuming leading variable action) loading
for the fire limit state. The value chosen for use in the UK is ψ1 as detailed in Table 1 below.
Table 1. ψfi values for the UK

Action ψ1 ψ1
Imposed loads in buildings,
Category A: Domestic, residential 0.5 0.3
Category B: Office areas 0.5 0.3
Category C: Congregation areas 0.7 0.6
Category D: Shopping areas 0.7 0.6
Category E: Storage areas 0.9 0.8
Category F: Traffic areas, ≤ 30 kN 0.7 0.6
Category G: Traffic areas, 30 - 160 kN 0.5 0.3
Category H: Roofs 0 0
Snow load: H 1000m a.m.s.l 0.2 0
Wind loads on buildings 0.2 0
The partial factor for imposed loading at the fire limit state is a recognition of the small probability that the
full design load will be in place at the time of a fire. The relatively large influence of imposed loads on steel
construction provides benefits in terms of the reduction factor for the design load level for the fire limit
state. This relationship is illustrated in Figure 6.
The procedure is illustrated with reference to a simple worked example illustrating the use of unprotected
structural steel in fire.

State
YW/ October 2004
Laterally restrained simply supported secondary beams are located at 3m centres. Table & clause
Carry out the design checks for a 406 x 178 x 54 UB in grade S355 steel for a fire numbers given
resistance period of 30 minutes under a uniform temperature distribution. relate to
EN1993-1-2
Uniformly distributed load
unless stated
otherwise.
6m
Figure 1. Overview of simply supported beam
Secondary beams at centres l = 3.00 m
2. Loading
2
Uniformly Distributed Load over whole floor area Gk.area = 3.00 kN/m
Uniformly Distributed Load along beam (UDL) Gk = Gk.area × l = 9.00 kN/m
2
Uniformly Distributed Load over whole floor area Qk.area = 3.50 kN/m
Uniformly Distributed Load along beam (UDL) Qk = Qk.area × l = 10.50 kN/m

For the fire limit state partial loading factors (γi) are not applied to either permanent EN 1990 Table
actions or variables actions. A1.3
Combination coefficient for variable action ψ1 = 0.50 Table A1.3 & A1.1
Note: EN 1990 allows use of either ψ1 or ψ2 with the main variable action. The National & UK National
Annex will specify which coefficient to use. EN 1991-1-2 ‘Actions on structures exposed Annex
to fire’ recommends the use of ψ2, however it is expected that the UK National Annex will
specify the use of ψ1.
3. Design values of actions – Ultimate Limit State Accidental design situation

UDL FEd.fi = Gk + (ψ1 × Qk) = 14.25 kN/m EN 1990 Table
Note: EN 1990 includes Ad (design value of an accidental action)in Eq. 6.11b. In this A1.3 & Eq. 6.11b
example Ad is the effect of the fire itself on the structure i.e. the effects of the restrained
thermal expansion, thermal gradients etc. However, EN1991-1-2, 4.1(4) states that
‘Indirect actions from adjacent members need not be considered when fire safety
requirements refer to members under standard fire conditions’. Furthermore 4.1(1) states
‘Imposed and constrained expansions and deformations caused by temperature changes
due to fire exposure results in effects of actions, e.g. forces and moments which shall be
considered with the exception of those where they:
– May be recognised a priori to be negligible or favourable
– Are accounted for by conservatively chosen support models and boundary conditions
and/or implicitly considered by conservatively specified fire safety requirements.’
Mfi.θ.Rd = 59 kNm < Mfi.d (64.13 kNm), therefore beam needs fire protection or
designer could try a larger beam section. In this case a 457 x 152 x 82 UB is
used.

State
YW/ October 2004
Therefore beam may remain unprotected for 30 minutes fire exposure
As an alternative the check may be carried out in the temperature domain.
6.2. Repeat check in the temperature domain for the 457 x 178 x 54 UB
For the original member selection (406 x 178 x 82 UB). The degree of utilisation (µ0)
is determined from:
Efi.d / Rfi.d.0
For this check the effect of actions (Efi.d) is the bending moment at the fire limit state:
Mfi.d = 64.13 kNm Sheet 5
and Rfi.d.0 is the design moment resistance at time t = 0 is equal to the plastic
moment capacity:
MRd = Mpl.Rd = 374.40 kNm
µ0 = Mfi.d / MRd =0.171 4.2.4(4)
Note: This value is lower than the lowest tabulated value in Table 4.1 of EN1993-1-2
therefore it is necessary to calculate θa.cr explicitly.
3.833
θa.cr = 39.19 × ln((1 / (0.9674 × µ0 )) – 1) + 482 = 748 °C 4.2.4(2)
Note: This temperature is slightly less than the design temperature previously adopted
(760°C) and therefore some minor fire protection would be required. The time-temperature
relationship for the unprotected section is illustrated in Figure 7.
7. Temperature-time response
It is possible to calculate the temperature-time response of the bare
steel member using the formula given in EN 1993-1-2.
The steel temperature difference (Δθa.t) for the specific time step is determined from:
ksh × ((Am / V) / (ca × pa)) × hnet.d × Δt 4.2.5.1(1)
Where:
ksh is the shadow factor (for I sections under nominal fire actions, determined from:
0.9 × [Am / V]b / [Am / V] 4.2.5.1(2)
Am / V is the profiled section factor for unprotected members
[Am / V]b is the boxed value of the section factor
Am is the surface area of the member per unit length (m²)
ρa is the unit mass of steel (7850 kg/m³)
ca is the specific heat of steel (600 J/kgK)
hnet,d is the design value of the net heat flux per unit area (W/m²) – from EN1991-1-2
Δt is the time interval (seconds)
The net heat flux is composed of radiative and convective components of which
the rediative (hnet.r) is determined from:
-8 4 4
5.67 × 10 × Φεres × ((θr + 273) - (θm + 273) ) EN1991-1-2, 3.1(6)
Where:
-8
5.67 × 10 is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant

State
YW/ October 2004
Φ is the configuration facture (1.0)

εres is determined from εm - εf
εm is the emissivity of the material (0.8)
εf is the emissivity of the fire (1.0)
θr is the radiation temperature of the fire environment
θm is the member surface temperature
The convective heat flux (hnet.c) is determined from:

αc × (θg - θm) EN1991-1-2, 3.1(3)
Where:
2
αc is the convective heat transfer coefficient (25 W/m K for the standard
time-temperature curve)
θg is the gas temperature
θm is the member temperature

State
YW/ October 2004
The solution is solved iteratively using a spreadsheet and a time step equal in this case to 5 seconds. The
steel temperature using the above equations is calculated as 833°C at 30 minutes and the
time/temperature relationship for the steel and atmosphere temperature is illustrated in Figure 7. Although
the method is illustrated here with reference to the standard time-temperature curve one of the main
advantages is that the procedure can be adapted to cover any known time-temperature relationship.
Clearly the examples above has been chosen to illustrate certain concepts such as:
• The potential use of unprotected steel

• The use of two simple verification methods (based on resistance and temperature respectively)
• The importance of load ratio (degree of utilisation) on the performance in fire of structural steel
members
The example chosen is not particularly practical as the very low level of utilisation means that it is very
inefficient at the ultimate limit state. For steel construction a more realistic case would be to consider the
same section (406 x 178 x 54 UB) for an increased fire resistance period. The same condition will be
assessed for a required period of fire resistance of 60 minutes.
It is clear from the above that the section will require fire protection. In this case a number of alternatives
are available to the designer, they may:
• Determine the section factor according to the Eurocode classification and utilise tabulated values such
as those in the “Yellow Book”
• Calculate the critical temperature for the appropriate fire resistance period and specify this as a target
value for fire protection
• Calculate the thickness of fire protection required using the formula in the Eurocode.
Section Factor
The section factor (Am / V) is the ratio between the exposed surface area and the volume of steel. This is
synonymous with the Hp/A value familiar to UK designers. For UK sections the section factor is tabulated in
-1
the “Yellow Book” and, for the example here the relevant figure for four sided exposure is 215m . The
value can be easily calculated using the tables in the Eurocode. As an example for the fire resistance
period required a thickness of 1.15mm of a particular water based thin film intumescent coating would
provide the required level of fire resistance.
The steel temperature at 60 minutes is approximately 937°C for an unprotected section. Clearly this is way
above the critical temperature of 748°C. The critical temperature can then be used as the target value for
fire protection manufacturers to demonstrate that the steel temperature can be kept below it for the
specified period.

State
YW/ October 2004
For members with passive fire protection the method of calculating the heat transfer is similar to that above
for unprotected steel. The use of a highly insulating layer considerably reduces the heating rate of the
member. The appropriate formula is:
!% a.t = ((& p x A p /( V x (% g.t " % a.t ))) / (dp x c a x $ a x (1 + (# / 3)))) x ( ! t " ((e ( # / 10 ) " 1) x ! g.t ))
With:
! = ((c p x p p ) / (c a x p a )) x d p x ( A p / V )
Where
Ap / V is the section factor for protected steel member
ca is the specific heat of the steel
cp is the specific heat of the protective material
dp is the thickness of fire protection
θa,t is the temperature of the steel at time t
θg,t is the temperature of the gas at time t
Δg,t is the increase in gas temperature over the time step t
λp is the thermal conductivity of the fire protection material
ρa is the density of the steel
ρp is the density of the protection material
As an example the use of 20mm Gypsum boarding to the section:

Thickness dp = 20 mm
Density ρp = 800 kg/m³
Specific heat cp = 1700 J/kg°K
Thermal conductivity λp = 0.2 W/m°K
Section factor for boxed protection 4 sided A p / V = 70 m -1
Therefore
φ = 0.9817
Using an iterative spreadsheet calculation the temperature of the insulated steelwork is calculated as
496°C after 60 minutes of the standard fire. This is within the critical temperature for the member and
therefore the protection is adequate. (Note: there is still a requirement to demonstrate the “stickability” of
the fire protection material). The results are illustrated in Figure 8.
The example above has been used to illustrate the potential use of unprotected steel and to illustrate
verification in the terms of resistance and temperature. The alternative calculation procedures are related
as the former requires a knowledge of the temperature of the member at the fire resistance period (used to
derive the reduction factor ky,θ) while the latter requires a knowledge of the degree of utilisation (μfi).

Simply supported beam with full lateral restraint – Fire Limit State TL / August 2004
YW/ October 2004
Project Design
Prescriptive Rules Performance-Based Code

(Thermal Actions given by Nominal Fire (Physically based Thermal Actions)
Member Analysis of Part Analysis of Selection of Simple or Advanced

Analysis of the Structure Entire Structure Fire Development Models
Calculation of Calculation of Selection of Member Analysis of Analysis of

Mechanical Actions Mechanical Actions Mechanical Analysis Part of the Entire
at Boundaries at Boundaries Actions Structure Structure
Tabulated Simple Advanced Simple Advanced Advanced Calculation of Calculation of Selection of

Data Calculation Calculation Calculation Calculation Calculation Mechanical Mechanical Mechanical
Models Models Models Models Models Actions Actions Actions
(if available) at Boundaries at Boundaries
SimpleCalculation Advanced Advanced Advanced

Models Calculation Calculation Calculation
(if available) Models Models Models
Figure 4. Fire Design routes available


State
YW/ October 2004
Step 1: Determine fire resistance

requirements (National regulations (AD-
B), Fire engineering design)
Step 2: Calculate load effects at the fire

limit state (EN1990 / EN1991-1/
EN1991-1-2 / EN1992-1)
Step 3: Choose the relevant section /

protection to meet the requirements
obtained in 1 (EN1993-1-2)
Figure 5. Simplified design procedure
Figure 6. Relationship between reduction factor and ratio of dead and imposed load

State
YW/ October 2004
Unprotected steel temperature for 30 minute fire resistance period 406x178UB54
900
800
700
600
temperature (deg C)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
time (mins)
furnace temperature steel temperature
Figure 7. Unprotected steel temperature for 30 minute fire resistance period 406x178UB54
Protected steel temperature for 60 minute exposure
1000
900
800
700
temperature (deg C)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
time (mins)
furnace temperature steel temperature
Figure 8. Protected steel temperature for 60 minute fire resistance period 406x178UB54

Simply supported composite beam – Fire Limit State TL / October 2004
YW / November 2004
Simply Supported Composite beam – Fire Limit State
prEN1992-1-1, Eurocode 2 – Design of concrete structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
December 2003
prEN 1994-1-2, Eurocode 4 – Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part 1.2: General rules
structural fire design, October 2003



YW / November 2004
1. Loading
2
Uniformly Distributed Load over whole floor area Gk.area = 3.92 kN/m
Uniformly Distributed Load along beam (UDL) Gk = Gk.area × l = 11.76 kN/m
2
Uniformly Distributed Load over whole floor area Qk.area = 5.00 kN/m
Uniformly Distributed Load along beam (UDL) Qk = Qk.area × l = 15.00 kN/m
1.3. Loading factors – Ambient temperature

1.4. Loading factors – Fire limit state
specify the use of ψ1.For a more detailed explanation of the choice of partial load factors
see simply supported beam example for fire design.
2. Ambient temperature design values of actions

Ultimate limit state EN1990 Table
Design UDL FEd = (γG × Gk) + (γQ × Qk) = 38.38 kN/m A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
2.1. Design Moment
Maximum moment occurs at mid-span of beam
2
MEd = (FEd × L ) / 8 = 479.70 kNm
3. Fire limit state design values of actions

Ultimate Limit State Accidental design situation EN1990 Table
Design UDL FEd.fi = Gk + (ψ1 × Qk) = 19.26 kN/m A1.3 & Eq. 6.11b
Note: EN 1990 includes Ad (design value of an accidental action)in Eq. 6.11b. In this

YW / November 2004
3.1. Design Moment – Fire limit state
2
Mfi.d = (FEd.fi × L ) / 8 = 240.75 kNm
Section: UB 406 x 178 x 60
z 1000
tf
130
12.8
y y d 7.9
h 406
tw
r
z 178
b (all dimensions in mm)
Figure 3. Section dimensions Figure 4. Beam cross-section
h = 406.40 mm b = 177.90 mm d = 360.40 mm

tw = 7.90 mm tf = 12.80 mm r = 10.20 mm
From the ambient temperature design worked example the cross-section is Class 1.
prEN 10025-2
2
For tf = 12.80 mm Yield strength isfy = 355 N/mm 7.3 & Table 4
2
Normal weight concrete strength class C25/30, cylinder strength fck = 25 N/mm prEN1992-1-1
Table 3.1
5. Ambient temperature moment resistance
From the ambient temperature design worked example the moment resistance is:
MRd = Mpl.Rd = 800.94 kNm
6. Fire limit state – Critical temperature model

Note: When using the critical temperature model the temperature of the steel section is
considered to be uniform.
Check model limits: 4.3.4.2.3(2)
Depth of steel cross-section h = 406.40 mm < 500 mm
Depth of concrete hc = 130 mm > 120 mm
Beam is simply supported and subject to only sagging bending moments
Therefore OK to use critical temperature model
The critical temperature is related to the load level and the strength of the steel at
elevated temperature by the relationship: 4.3.4.2.3(3)
1.0" fi.t = f ay.!cr / f ay (for fire resistance periods other than 30 minutes) Eq. 4.10b
Where:
fay. θcr is the strength of the steel section at the critical temperature

YW / November 2004
fay is the strength of the steel section at ambient temperature (fay = fy)
! fi.t = E fi.d.t / R d (as defined in clause 4.1(7)P)
Efi.d.t is the design effect of actions in the fire situation at time t (E fi.d.t = ! fi x E d )
Ed is the design effect of actions at ambient temperature
Therefore:
ηfi = FEd.fi / ((γG × Gk) + (γQ × Qk)) = 0.502
Efi.d.t = ηfi × MEd = 240.75 kNm
ηfi.t = Efi.d.t / MRd = 0.301
Note: The use of very similar symbols for ηfi and ηfi,t is confusing. The former is the
relationship between the load (or actions) under fire conditions and the corresponding
load under normal conditions while the latter is the relationship between the effects of
actions (in this case bending moment) under fire conditions and the resistance at ambient
temperature. This is a similar concept to the load ratio as defined in BS5950: Part 8
Therefore the strength of the steel section at the critical temperature is:
2
fay. θcr = ηfi.t × fay = 106.71 N/mm 4.3.4.2.3(3)
The strength reduction coefficient at time t is:

ky. θ.max = fay. θcr / fay = 0.301 Table 3.2
Note: For this example the strength reduction coefficient is equal to the load level for fire
design (ηfi.t), however, it should be noted that this is dependant on the fire resistance
period.
The critical temperature at which the yield strength will reduce to a value of
2
106.5 N/mm must be determined and compared with the required fire resistance
period (60 minutes).
Steel temperature θa = 600°C ky. θ = 0.47 Table 3.2

Steel temperature θa = 700°C ky. θ = 0.23
From interpolation when ky. θ = ky. θ.max = 0.301
θa.max = 600 + ((100 × (0.47 – 0.301)) / (0.47 – 0.23)) = 670 °C
The increase in temperature of the various parts of an unprotected steel beam during
the time interval Δt is given by:
•
!# a.t = k shadow x (1 / (c a x " a ) x ( A / Vi ) x h net x !t 4.3.4.2.2(3) Eq 4.6
Where:
kshadow is the correction factor for the shadow effect
ca is the specific heat of steel (600 J/kgK)
3
ρa is the density of steel (700 kg/m )

YW / November 2004
Ai is the exposed surface area of the part i of the steel cross-section per unit
2
length (m /m)
-1
Ai / Vi is the section factor of the part I of the steel cross section (m )
3
Vi is the volume of the part I of the steel cross-section per unit length (m /m)
Δt is the time interval (seconds)
•
2
h net is the design value of the net heat flux per unit area (W/m )
(obtained from EN1991-1-2) EN1991-1-2
• • •
h net = h net.c + h net.r 3.1 (2)
•
h net.r = # m x # f x 5.67 x 10 "8 x ((! t + 273 ) 4 " (! a.t + 273 ) 4 )
-8
Where 5.67 x 10 is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant
θt is the ambient gas temperature at time t(°C)
θa.t is the steel temperature at time t (assumed uniform in each part of the
cross-section) (°C)
εm is the emissivity of the material (0.7) 2.2 (2)
EN1991-1-2
εf is the emissivity of the fire (1.0) 3.1 (6)
•
h net.c = # c x (! g " ! m )
k shadow = 0.9 x ((e 1 + e 2 + (b 1 / 2) + (h 2w + (b 1 ! b 2 ) 2 / 4))) /

(h w + b 1 + (b 2 / 2) + e 1 + e 2 ! e w )
Where the dimensions are given in figure 4.3 of EN1994-1-2 (see Figure 5)
Alternatively the configuration factor approach from EN1991-1-2 can be used –

In this case the section factor used is that for the lower flange of the steel section.

YW / November 2004
z
e1
y y hw h
ew
r
b1
Figure 5. Steel beam cross-section dimensions for calculation of correction factor

for the shadow effect
Here the correction factor for the shadow effect is 0.736

And the section factor assuming 4 sided exposure is 167.5m-1
An iterative method using an excel spread sheet is used to calculate the increase in
temperature of the uninsulated steel section. The time-temperature response is
illustrated in Figure 6.
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
FURNACE steel
Figure 6. Time-temperature response for unprotected steel beam
From Figure 6 it can be seen that the critical temperature of 670 °C corresponding to
a reduction in the effective yield stress to a value of 106.5 N/mm² occurs after

YW / November 2004
approximately 16 minutes. Therefore the steel member will require protection to

achieve the 60 minute fire resistance period required.
This can be achieved either by applying a sprayed or boarded fire passive fire
protection system, an intumescent paint or by providing partial protection by filling
between the flanges with reinforced concrete. In this instance a sprayed passive fire
protection system is used. As with the EN1993 example the iterative calculation
procedure for determining the rise in the steel temperature needs to be carried out
taking into account the properties of the fire protection system. For protected
members the relevant formula is:
"! a.t = (((% p / d p ) /(c a x $ a )) x ( A p.i / Vi ) x (1 / (1 + ( w / 3)))

4.3.4.2.2(6) Eq4.8
x (! g.t # ! a.t ) x "t ) # ((e w / 10 # 1) x "! t )
Where
w = 0.419 = (c p / ! p / (c a x ! a )) x d p x (A p.i / Vi )
where:
λp is the thermal conductivity of the fire protection material (0.174 W/mK)
dp is the thickness of the fire protection material (0.025m)
Api is the area of the inner surface of the fire protection material per unit length
of the relevant part of the steel member
cp is the specific heat of the fire protection material (1200 J/kgK)
Δθa.t is the increase in the ambient gas temperature during time interval t (°C)
ρp is the density of the fire protection material ( 430 kg/m³)
Therefore:
w = 0.419
As sprayed protection is applied directly to the surface of the steel member the
-1
section factor remains unchanged at 167.5m .
For a similar time step the temperature rise is similarly calculated for the protected
section using a spreadsheet. The results are illustrated in Figure 7 (on sheet 9).
In this instance the temperature at 60 minutes is just over 450°C and the critical
temperature is not exceeded even for the 90 minute period. Consequently the design
is acceptable for the fire resistance period. However, the design is not particularly
efficient and the designer may wish to complete the calculation using a smaller
section size.

YW / November 2004
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
FURNACE steel temperature
Figure 7. Time-temperature response for insulated beam


Partial depth (flexible) end plate connection GHC/November 2004
CR/December 2004
Partial depth (flexible) end plate connection
prEN 1993-1-8, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.8: Design of joints, December 2003



CR/December 2004
1. Introduction
This example considers the design and detailing of a ‘simple’ partial depth end plate connection in
accordance with prEN1993-1-8. Note that part 1-8 requires connection behaviour to be compatible with
the assumptions made in the frame analysis and design. The connection behaviour is described in terms
of:
• Moment resistance
• Rotational stiffness
• Rotation capacity
Depending on the type of analysis used the connection must be classified in terms of one or more of the
above attributes. Explicit rules are given to quantify these attributes (Section 6 of prEN1993-1-8) for flush
or extended end plate connections between H or I sections. Clause 6.1.1(2) says that ‘for other joint
configurations, design methods for determining the design moment resistance, rotational stiffness and
rotation capacity should be based on appropriate assumptions for the distribution of internal forces.’ This
example uses this approach to calculate the three key attributes for a partial depth end plate. Subsequent
comparison with the classification limits confirm that the connection may be regarded as ‘simple’.
It is worth noting that Part 1-8 also allows a joint to be classified on the basis of experimental evidence or
experience of previous satisfactory performance in similar cases. It is anticipated that in practice
designers will rely on these approaches, using standard connections as given in the SCI/BCSA ‘Green
Books’ to avoid lengthy calculations.
The dimensions of the connection considered in this example are taken from the simple connections
Green Book. The depth of the end plate is chosen as approximately 60% of the beam depth to ensure
appropriate torsional restraint of the beam.
Note that ‘design’ in this context actually means verifying that a chosen connection is adequate. This
example therefore simply calculates this by properties of a specific connection.
50mm
40mm
6mm fillet
weld 8mm
End plate 180mm wide, 230mm deep, S275
M20, 8.8 bolts at 90mm cross-centres
40mm
126.4mm
203 x 203 x 86
UC, S275 406 x 178 x 60
UB, S275, 7 m Not to scale
span
Figure 1. Partial depth end plate

CR/December 2004
2. Endplate dimensional checks Table & clause

e2 p2 numbers given
relate to
e1 d0 = 22 mm (hole diameter) EN1993-1-8
e1 = 40 mm (end distance) unless stated
e2 = 45 mm (edge distance)
230 mm
p1 otherwise.
p1 = 150 mm (spacing)
p2 = 90 mm (spacing)
d0
180 mm
Not to scale
Figure 2. Endplate dimensions
Minimum end distance, e1min = 1.2 × d0 = 26.40 mm < 40 mm therefore OK Table 3.3
Minimum edge distance, e2min = 1.2 × d0 = 26.40 mm < 45 mm therefore OK Table 3,3
Minimum bolt spacing, p1min = 2.2 × d0 = 48.40 mm < 150 mm therefore OK Table 3.3
In this case the bolt spacing is not limited to a maximum distance. Table 3.3
(see Table 3.3 of EN1993-1-8 for details of when maximum bolt spacing is important)
3. Calculation of moment resistance

The resistance of torsion and compression (and web panel shear) components is
determined.
Appropriate lever arms are defined to allow subsequent calculation of the moment
resistance.
3.1. Tension resistance

3.1.1. Bolt tension
The top row of bolts will provide a certain level of tensile resistance. The bottom row
of bolts are assumed to only provide shear resistance (see later check on point of
rotation).
Tension resistance per bolt is determined from the expression given in Table 3.4 3.6.1(1)
Ft.Rd = (k 2 x f ub x A s ) / ! M2 Table 3.4
Where:
k2 = 0.9 as bolts are not countersunk Table 3.4
2
fub = 800 N/mm (Ultimate tensile strength of a 8.8 bolt) Table 3.1
2
As = 245 mm (tensile stress area of the bolt)
γM2 = 1.25 Table 2.1
Note: Recommended value used for γM2. This value may be altered by the UK
National Annex to EN1993-1-8.
Therefore
Ft.Rd = (k2 × fub × As) / γM2 = 141.12 kN

CR/December 2004
So the potential resistance of 2 bolts in tension is 282.24 kN

3.1.2. End plate in bending
20 mm Point of rotation
126.4 mm
8 mm
Not to scale
Figure 3. Joint detail
Rotation that can occur before the lower flange of the beam comes in to contact with
the column flange is:
3
(8 / 126.4) × 10 = 63.29 mrad
It is widely recognised that a connection at a simply supported beam must be able to
sustain a minimum of 30 mrad rotation. It may therefore be safely assumed that:
• The lower beam flange will not contact the column flange.
• The point of rotation may be taken as, say, 20 mm above the bottom edge of
the end plate.
Note: Such an approximation is acceptable if the purpose of the calculation is to confirm
the connection may be classified as ‘simple’ rather than accurately predicting its moment
resistance.
Determine the resistance of the end plate in bending using an equivalent T-stub 6.2.6.5 (1)
emin is determined from Figure 6.8 6.2.6.5(3)

It is the lower value of:
(180 – 90) / 2 (end plate) Figure 6.8
(209.1 – 90) / 2 (column flange)
Therefore emin = 45 mm
leff (per bolt) is the smallest value obtained from considering a number of possible Table 6.6
yield lines. For a partial depth end plate these are determine based on consideration
of Figure 6.10 of Part 1.8 (see also moment connection Green Book).
m = ((90 – 7.9) / 2) – (0.8 × 6 × √(2)) = 34.26 mm Figure 6.8


CR/December 2004
m leff = 2 × π × m = 215.27 mm
e = emin
e m leff = (π × m) + (2 × e) = 197.64 mm
e m leff = (4 × m) + (1.25 × e) = 193.30 mm
ex = 40 mm
ex
leff = ex + (2 × m) + (0.625 × e) = 136.65 mm
Therefore leff = 136.65 mm is the critical value
The T-stub length is used to determine a moment resistance (for bending of the end
plate over the length of the yield line). This is then used to calculate a potential
tensile resistance for three modes of failure:
• Mode 1 – End plate bending
• Mode 2 – Combined end plate bending and bolt failure
• Mode 3 – Bolt failure
Mode 1:
FT.1.Rd = ( 4 x Mpl.1.Rd ) / m Table 6.2
Where:
m = 34.26 mm Sheet 4
2
Mpl.1.Rd = (("l eff .1 x t f x f y ) / ! M0 ) / 4 Table 6.2
Σleff.1 is the value of Σleff for mode 1 Σleff.1 = 136.65 mm Table 6.2

CR/December 2004
tf is the flange thickness of the equivalent T-stub tf = 12.8 mm (flange thickness of the
beam)
2
fy is the yield strength of the steel fy = 275 N/mm
γM0 = 1.0 EN1993-1-1
Note: Recommended value used for γM2. This value may be altered by the UK 6.1(1)
Therefore,
2
Mpl.1.Rd = ((Σleff.1 × tf × fy) / γM0) / 4 = 1.54 kNm
and
FT.1.Rd = (4 × Mpl.1.Rd) / m = 179.70 kN Table 6.2
Mode 2
FT.2.Rd = ((2 x Mpl.2.Rd ) + (n x !Ft.Rd )) /(m + n) Table 6.2
Where:
Mpl.2.Rd = Mpl.1.Rd = 4.92 kNm Table 6.2
n = emin = 45 mm but, n ≤ 1.25 × m = 42.83 mm therefore n = 42.83 mm
ΣFt.Rd is the total value of Ft.Rd for all the bolts in the T-stub
Ft.Rd = 141.12 kN Sheet 3
ΣFt.Rd = 2 × Ft.Rd = 282.24 kN
Therefore,
FT.2.Rd = ((2 × Mpl.2.Rd) + (n × ΣFt.Rd)) / (m + n) = 196.73 kN Table 6.2
Mode 3
FT.3.Rd = ΣFt.Rd = 282.24 kN Table 6.2
The design tension resistance of the T-stub flange is the smaller value for Mode 1, 6.2.4.1(6)
2 or 3. Therefore the design tensile resistance is:
FT.endplate.Rd = FT.1.Rd = 179.70 kN

3.1.3. Column Flange
Calculate the resistance of the column flange, as for the end plate, but with revised
values.
90 mm
Figure 4. Equivalent T-stub


CR/December 2004
For a bolted connection an equivalent T-stub in tension may be used to model the 6.2.4.1(1)
design resistance of the column flange in bending.
For an unstiffened column flange the dimension emin and m should be determined 6.2.6.4(1)
from Figure 6.8
As in section 2.1.2 for the endplate, emin = 45mm Figure 6.8
m = ((90 – 12.7) / 2) – ( 0.8 × 10.2 × √(2)) = 27.11 mm Figure 6.8
leff (per bolt) is the smallest value obtained from considering a number of possible Table 6.4
yield lines. (See also moment connection Green Book).
m leff.cp = 2 × π × m = 170.34 mm Table 6.4
e = 55.95 mm
e m leff.nc = (π × m) + (2 × e) = 197.07 mm Table 6.4
e m leff.nc = (4 × m) + (1.25 × e) = 178.38 mm
Therefore the critical value of leff is 170.34 mm
The T-stub length is used to determine a moment resistance (for bending of the end
plate over the length of the yield line). This is then used to calculate a potential
tensile resistance for three modes of failure:
• Mode 1 – End plate bending
• Mode 2 – Combined end plate bending and bolt failure
• Mode 3 – Bolt failure

CR/December 2004
Mode 1:
FT.1.Rd = ( 4 x Mpl.1.Rd ) / m Table 6.2
Where:
2
Mpl.1.Rd = (("l eff .1 x t f x f y ) / ! M0 ) / 4 Table 6.2
Σleff.1 is the value of Σleff for mode 1 Table 6.2

For mode 1
leff.1 = leff.nc, but leff.1 < leff.cp, therefore leff.1 = leff.cp = 170.34 mm Table 6.4
Therefore Σleff.1 = leff.cp = 170.34 mm
tf is the thickness of the flange of the equivalent T-stub tf = 20.5 mm
2
fy is the yield strength of the steel fy = 275 N/mm
γM0 = 1.0 (See note in section 3.1.2 sheet 6) EN1993-1-1
6.1(1)
Therefore,
2
Mpl.1.Rd = ((Σleff.1 × tf × fy) / γM0) / 4 = 4.92 kNm
and
FT.1.Rd = (4 × Mpl.1.Rd) / m = 726.14 kN Table 6.2
Mode 2
FT.2.Rd = ((2 x Mpl.2.Rd ) + (n x !Ft.Rd )) /(m + n) Table 6.2
Where:
m = 27.11 mm sheet 7
Mpl.2.Rd = Mpl.1.Rd = 4.921 kNm Table 6.2
n = emin = 45 mm but, n ≤ 1.25 × m = 33.89 mm therefore n = 33.89 mm
ΣFt.Rd is the total value of Ft.Rd for all the bolts in the T-stub
Ft.Rd = 141.12 kN Sheet 3
ΣFt.Rd = 2 × Ft.Rd = 282.24 kN
Therefore,
FT.2.Rd = ((2 × Mpl.2.Rd) + (n × ΣFt.Rd)) / (m + n) = 318.16 kN Table 6.2
Mode 3
FT.3.Rd = ΣFt.Rd = 282.24 kN Table 6.2
The design tension resistance of the T-stub flange is the smaller value for Mode 1, 6.2.4.1(6)
2 or 3. Therefore the resistance of the column flange is:
FT.cflange.Rd = FT.3.Rd = 282.24 kN

Note: The resistance of the column flange is associated with mode 3, which is actually
bolt failure with no column flange bending.

CR/December 2004
3.1.4. Beam web in tension
For a bolted endplate connection, the design tension resistance of the beam web is
determined from:
Ft.wb.Rd = b eff .t.wb x t wb x ( f y.wb / ! M0 ) 6.2.6.8(1) Eq. 6.22
Where:
beff.t.wb is the effective width of the beam web in tension, taken equal to the effective
length of the equivalent T-stub representing the endplate in bending. 6.2.6.8(2)
Therefore,
beff.t.wb = 136.65 mm Sheet 5
twb is the beam web thickness twb = 7.9 mm

2
fy.wb is the yield strength of the beam web fy.wb = 275 N/mm
6.1(1)
Therefore
Ft.wb.Rd = beff.t.wb × twb × (fy.wb / γM0) = 296.87 kN
3.1.5. Column web in tension
The design resistance of an unstiffened column web is determined from:

Ft.wc.Rd = (" x b eff .t.wc x t wc x f y.wc ) / ! M0 6.2.6.3(1) Eq. 6.15
Where:
beff.t.wc is the effective width of the column web in tension, for a bolted connection 6.2.6.3(3)
beff.wc should be taken as equal to the effective length of the equivalent T-stub
representing the column flange. Therefore beff.t.wc = 178.38 mm Sheet 7
ω is a reduction factor to allow for the interaction with shear in the column web. It is 6.2.6.3(4)
determined from Table 6.3 using beff.t.wc
The transformation factor β must be determined to calculate ω. Table 6.3
For a single sided connection β may be taken as 1. Table 5.4
Therefore:
! = !1 = 1 / ( 1 + (1.3 x ((b eff .c.wc x t wc ) / A vc ) 2 )) Table 6.3
Where:
beff.c.wc = beff.t.wc 6.2.6.3(4)
twc = tw = 12.7 mm
Avc is the shear area of the column
A v = A # (2 x b x t f ) + (( t w + (2 x r )) x t f ) " ! x hw x t w EN1993-1-1
2 2
A is the column cross-section area, A = 110×10 mm 6.2.6(3)
b is the breadth of the column, b = 209.1 mm

CR/December 2004
tf is the column flange thickness, tf = 20.5 mm

tw is the column web thickness, tw = 12.7 mm
r is the root radius of the column section, r = 10.2 mm
η = 1 (conservatively)
hw is the depth of the column web, hw = 160.8 mm
2
Avc = Av = A – (2 × b × tf) + ((tw + (2 × r)) × tf) = 3105.45 mm
2 2
η × hw × tw = 2042.16 mm therefore Avc = 3105.45 mm
2
ω = 1 / √(1 + (1.3 × ((beff.t.wc × twc)/Avc) )) = 0.769 Table 6.3
2
fy.wc = 275 N/mm
6.1(1)
Therefore,
Ft.wc.Rd = (ω × beff.t.wc × twc × fy.wc) / γM0 = 478.97 kN
Note: A weld in tension is not allowed to govern, it will be checked later (for shear and
tension).
3.2. Compression Resistance

3.2.1. Beam flange and web in compression
As noted above, the positioning and thickness of the endplate will ensure that the 6.2.6.7
lower beam flange does not contact the column flange. No explicit guidance is given
in EN1993-1-8 to allow the compressive resistance to be calculated when there is no
flange contribution.
However, for a ‘simple’ connection it should be remembered that the Eurocode
simply requires a check to ensure that the moment resistance (and stiffness) does
not exceed a certain value. It is therefore acceptable to simply assume that the
resistance in compression can balance the potential tensile resistance. If it were
greater, then the ‘excess’ would add nothing to the moment resistance. If it were
lower, the reduced tensile forces would need to be considered. This will enable
calculation of a moment resistance that is equal to, or greater than the true value.
3.2.2. Column web in crushing and bending
As for the beam flange and web in crushing, no checks are required for the column 6.2.6.2
web in crushing.
3.3. Column web panel in shear
Check column web slenderness 6.2.6.1(1)

Depth of web panel d = 160.8 mm
Thickness of column web tw = 12.7 mm
d / tw = 12.66

CR/December 2004
2
fy = 275 N/mm
ε = √(fy / 275) = 1.00
69 × ε = 69
d / tw ≤ 69 x ε , therefore OK
For a single sided joint, the design shear resistance, Vwp.Rd, is determined from: 6.2.6.1(2)
Vwp.Rd = (0.9 x f y.wc x A vc ) /( ( 3) x ! M0 ) Eq. 6.7
Where:
2
fwc is the yield strength of the column web, fy.wc = 275 N/mm
2
Avc is the shear area, Avc = 3105.45 mm (see section 3.1.5) Sheet 10
6.1(1)
Therefore
Vwp.Rd = (0.9 × fy.wc × Avc) / (√(3) × γM0) = 443.75 kN
Column web panel in shear is therefore not critical because the maximum tensile
Force in the connection (governed by end plate bending) is only 179.7 kN.
3.4. Moment resistance and classification

3.4.1. Resistance
It is assumed that the axial load in the beam does not exceed 5% of its design 6.2.7.1(2)
plastic resistance.
The design moment resistance of the joint (Mj.Rd), assuming no axial force is
determined from:
M j.Rd = z x FRd
Where:
z is the lever arm to the tension bolt row, z = 170 mm
Assuming the centre of compression is 20 mm above the lower edge of the endplate.
FRd is the design tensile resistance of the endplate (top bolt row)
FRd = FT.endplate.Rd = 179.70 kN Sheet 6
Therefore the design moment resistance of the joint is:
Mj.Rd = z × FT.endplate.Rd = 30.55 kNm
3.4.2. Joint classification by strength
To be classified as nominally pinned the joint must have a moment resistance not 5.2.3.2(3)
greater than 0.25 times the resistance required for a full strength joint, which must be
not less than that of the beam. 5.2.3.3(1)
The moment resistance of the connected 406 x 178 x 60 S275 UB is determined

From EN1993-1-1

CR/December 2004
Mpl.Rd = ( Wpl x f y ) / ! M0 6.2.5(2)

Where:
3 3
Wpl is the plastic modulus of the beam, Wpl = 1199×10 mm
2
fy is the yield strength of the beam, fy = 275 N/mm EN1993-1-1
γM0 = 1.0 (See note in section 3.1.2 sheet 6) 6.1(1)
Therefore:
Mpl.Rd = (Wpl × fy) / γM0 = 329.73 kNm
0.25 × Mpl.Rd = 82.43 kNm > Mj.Rd = 30.55 kNm
Therefore on the basis of moment resistance (which is relevant when rigid-plastic 5.1.3(1)
global analysis is being undertaken) the joint may be classified as nominally pinned.
4. Calculation of shear resistance

4.1. Bolts
The connection comprises of four M20 grade 8.8 bolts in 22mm diameter nominal 3.6.1
Clearance holes. These are assumed to comply with the various criteria listed
in 3.6.1.
For a ‘Category A: Bearing type’ bolted connection the shear and bearing resistance 3.4.1(1)a)
should be checked.
4.1.1. Shear resistance
The design resistance for an individual fastener subject to shear and/or tension is 3.6.1(1)
given in Table 3.4.
Shear resistance per shear plane (for bolts) is determined from:

Fv.Rd = (" v x f ub x A ) / ! M2 Table 3.4
Where the shear plane passes through the threaded portion of the bolts:
αv = 0.6 for grade 8.8 bolts
2
A is the tensile stress area of the bolt (As), As = 245 mm
2
fub is the ultimate tensile strength of the bolt, fub = 800 N/mm
γM2 = 1.25 Table 2.1
Note: Recommended value used for γM2. This value may be altered by the UK
Therefore, the design shear resistance of each bolt is:

Fv.Rd = (αv × fub × As) / γM2 = 94.08 kN

CR/December 2004
4.1.2. Bearing resistance
The bearing resistance per bolt is determined from:

Fb.Rd = (k 1 x " b x f u x d x t ) / ! M2 Table 3.4
Where:
EN1993-1-1
2
fu is the ultimate tensile strength of the endplate, fu = 430 N/mm Table 3.1
d is the bolt diameter, d = 20 mm
t is the endplate thickness, t = 8 mm
αb is the smaller of αd, fub / fu or 1.0
fub / fu = 1.86
For end bolts ! d = e 1 /(3 x d 0 )
Where:
e1 is the end distance, e1 = 40 mm Figure 3.1
d0 is the hole diameter, d0 = 22 mm
Therefore for end bolts
αd = e1 / (3 × d0) = 0.61
For inner bolts " d = (p 1 /(3 x d 0 )) ! (1 / 4)
Where:
p1 is the spacing of the bolts, p1 = 150 mm Figure 3.1
Therefore for inner bolts
αd = (p1 / (3 × d0)) – (1 / 4) = 2.02
Therefore for end bolts, αb = 0.61 and for the lower bolts, αb = 1.0
k1 for edge bolts is the smaller of 2.8 x (e 2 / d 0 ) ! 1.7 or 2.5
Where:
e2 is the edge distance, e2 = 45 mm Figure 3.1
2.8 × (e2 / d0) – 1.7 = 4.03
Therefore k1 = 2.5
All four bolts in this example are edge bolts, therefore value determined above for k1
is applicable to all bolts.
Therefore bearing resistance for the upper row of bolts is:
αb = 0.61
Fb.Rd = (k1 × αb × fu × d ×t) / γM2 = 83.94 kN Table 3.4
Therefore bearing resistance for the lower row of bolts is:
αb = 1.0
Fb.Rd = (k1 × αb × fu × d ×t) / γM2 = 137.60 kN Table 3.4

CR/December 2004
4.1.3. Influence of tension
Although tensile loads are small, the shear capacity of the upper bolts will be 6.2.2.(2)
affected by the tensile loads.
A combined shear and tension check should be carried out to determine the available
shear resistance of the upper bolts in the presence of a tensile force per bolt of
FT.endplate.Rd / 2 = 89.85 kN
Note: The simplified approach in EN1993-1-8 to allow for tension will be excessively
conservative for the low level of tensile load in a ‘simple’ joint.
For combined shear and tension check that

(Fv.Ed / Fv.Rd ) + (Ft.Ed /(1.4 x Ft.Rd )) ! 1.0 Table 3.4
Where:
Fv.Ed is the shear design load
Fv.Rd is the design shear resistance, Fv.Rd = 94.08 kN Sheet 12
Ft.Ed is the tensile design load, Ft.Ed = 89.85 kN
Ft.Rd is the design tensile resistance, Ft.Rd = 141.12 kN Sheet 3
Rearranging the expression given in Table 3.4 gives
Fv.Ed = 51.29 kN per upper bolt
Therefore the total resistance to shear is, (2 × Fv.Ed) + (2 × Fv.Rd) = 290.74 kN
4.2. Web to endplate weld

EN 1993-1-8 gives a simplified method whereby the resultant of the applied forces 4.5.3.3
(tension and shear) is compared with the resistance of the weld.
Taking the applied shear being equal to the calculated resistance of the bolt (290.74
kN) and the tension as being that limited by endplate bending (179.71 kN).
Therefore size the welds for a resultant of:
290.74 kN
Resultant = 341.80 kN
179.71 kN
The effective length (l) of the 6mm fillet weld is determined from:
l = L weld ! (2 x a) 4.5.1(1)
Where:
Lweld is the length of the weld, Lweld = 230 mm
a is the effective throat of the fillet weld, a = 0.7 × 6 = 4.20 mm 4.5.2(1)

CR/December 2004
Therefore
l = Lweld – (2 × a) = 221.60 mm
Therefore the design value of the weld force per unit length is:
Fw.Ed = 341.80 / l = 1.54 kN/mm
Simplified method for determining the design resistance of a fillet weld

The design weld resistance per unit length is determined from: 4.5.3.3(2)
Fw.Rd = f vw .d x a Eq.4.3
Where:
Fvw.d is the design shear strength of the weld
f vw .d = (( f u / ( 3)) /(" w x ! M2 ) 4.5.3.3(2), Eq.4.4
Where:
fu is the ultimate tensile strength of the weaker part joined , which is the endplate 4.5.3.2(6)
2
for this example, fu = 430 N/mm Table 3.1
βw is the appropriate correlation factor from Table 4.1
For S275 steel, β w = 0.85 Table 4.1
γM2 = 1.25 (See note in section 4.1.1, sheet 12) Table 2.1
Therefore:
2
fvw.d = ((fu / √(3))) / (βw × γM2) = 233.66 N / mm
a = 4.20 mm Sheet 14
Therefore the design weld resistance per unit length for each weld is:
Fw.Rd = fvw.d × a = 0.981 kN/mm
Therefore the design weld resistance per unit length for the connection is:
2 × Fw.Rd = 1.96 kN/mm
Fw.Ed = 1.54 kN/mm < 1.96 kN/mm

Therefore welds are OK
5. Calculation of rotational stiffness
Rotational stiffness, similar to moment resistance, is determined by considering the 6.3.1(1)

flexibilities of its basic components.
It has been assumed that the axial force in the connected member is less than 5% of
the design resistance of its cross-section. Therefore the rotational stiffness Sj of the
joint is obtained from 6.3.1(4)
S j = (E x z 2 ) /(µ x ! (1 / k i )) Eq.6.27
i
Where:
z is the lever arm, z = 170 mm Sheet 12

CR/December 2004
ki is the stiffness coefficient for basic joint component i

µ is the stiffness ratio Sj.int / Sj, determined from 6.3.1(6)
2
E is the Youngs Modulus, E = 210 kN/mm
Explicit rules are not given in section 6.3 for the type of connection considered in this
example, but the guidance may be applied with consideration.
µ depends on the level of moment utilisation of the joint. For a ‘simple’ connection 6.3.1(6)
assume that the design moment equals the design moment resistance (Mj.Ed = Mj.Rd)
(the connection will ‘plastify’ under relatively low levels of load).
As 2/3 Mj.Rd < Mj.Ed ≤ Mj.Rd

µ = ((1.5 x M j.Ed ) / M j.Rd ) ! 6.3.1(6), Eq.6.28b
ψ is determined from Table 6.8
For a bolted endplate, ψ = 2.7 Table 6.8
As Mj.Ed = Mj.Rd µ = 1.5 = 2.99
ψ
5.1. Determine the individual stiffness coefficients (ki)
Table 6.10 identifies the components to be considered in a bolted endplate

connection. For this example (single sided, one row of tension bolts) these are, k1,
k2, k3, k4, k5 and k10.
5.1.1. Column web panel in shear (k1)
k 1 = (0.38 x A vc ) /(! x z) Table 6.11

Where:
2
Avc is the shear area, Avc = 3105.45 mm (see section 2.1.5) Sheet 9
β is the transformation factor, for a single sided joint, β = 1.0 Table 5.4
z is the lever arm, z = 170 mm Sheet 12
Therefore
k1 = (0.38 × Avc) / (β × z) = 6.94 mm Table 6.11
5.1.2. Column web in compression (k2)
k 2 = (0.7 x b eff .c.wc x t wc ) / d c Table 6.11

Where:
twc is the thickness of the column web, twc = 12.70 mm
dc is the depth of the column cross-section, dc = 160.80 mm
beff.c.wc is the effective width from 6.2.6.2
For a bolted endplate connection

CR/December 2004
b eff .c.wc = t fb + (2 x ( 2) x a p ) + (5 x ( t fc + s)) + s p 6.2.6.2(1), Eq.6.11

For a flush or extended endplate with geometrical parameters defined in Figure 6.6.
For a partial depth endplate this value may be calculated as follows, remembering
that the purpose is to ensure that the connection is sufficiently flexible (low stiffness)
to be classified as a nominally pinned joint. It will therefore be conservative to over
estimate k2, as this will lead to a conservatively high level of stiffness.
Assume ‘seating width’ of stiff bearing is 40 mm (distance from centre line of the
lower bolts to the lower edge of the endplate). This may be taken to correspond to
the terms t fb , (2 x ( 2) x a p ) and s p in the above expression.
Therefore:
b eff .c.wc = 40 + (5 x ( t fc + s))
Where:
s is the root of the column cross-section, s = r = 10.20 mm
tfc is the column flange thickness, tfc = 20.50 mm
Therefore
beff.c.wc = 40 + (5 × (tfc + s)) = 193.50 mm Table 6.11
Therefore
k2 = (0.7 × beff.c.wc × twc) / dc = 10.70 mm Table 6.11
5.1.3. Column web in tension (k3)
k 3 = (0.7 x b eff .t.wc x t wc ) / d c Table 6.11
beff.t.wc is the effective width of the column web in tension. For a joint with a single
bolt row in tension, beff.t.wc, should be taken as equal to the smallest of the effective
lengths, leff, given for this bolt row in Table 6.4 (unstiffened column flange) or Table
6.5 (stiffened column flange).
Therefore, beff.c.wc = leff.nc = 136.65 mm (see section 3.1.3) Table 6.4
Therefore
k3 = (0.7 × beff.t.wc × twc)/ dc = 9.86 mm Table 6.11
5.1.4. Column flange in bending (k4)
3
k 4 = (0.9 x l eff x t fc ) / m 3 Table 6.11
Where:
leff is the smallest of the effective lengths, leff, given for this bolt row in Table 6.4
(unstiffened column flange) or Table 6.5 (stiffened column flange).
Therefore
leff = leff.nc = 178.38 mm (see section 3.1.3) Table 6.4
tfc is the column flange thickness, tfc = 20.50 mm

CR/December 2004
m = 27.11 mm (see section 3.1.3) Sheet 7

Therefore
3 3
k4 = ( 0.9 × leff × tfc ) / m = 69.42 mm Table 6.11
5.1.5. Endplate in bending (k5)
3
k 5 = (0.9 x l eff x t p ) / m 3 Table 6.11
Where:
tp endplate thickness, tp = 8 mm
leff is the smallest of the effective lengths, leff, given for this bolt row in Table 6.6
Therefore
leff = leff.nc = 136.65 mm (see section 3.1.2) Sheet 5
m = 34.26 mm (see section 3.1.2) Sheet 4
Therefore
3 3
k5 = ( 0.9 × leff × tp ) / m = 1.57 mm Table 6.11
5.1.6. Bolts in tension (k10)
k 10 = (1.6 x A s ) / L b Table 6.11

Where:
Lb is the bolt elongation length, taken as being equal to the grip length (total
thickness of material and washers), plus half the sum of the height of the bolt head
and the height of the nut.
Lb = 20.5 + 8 + (13.0 + 16.0) / 2 = 43.00 mm
2
As is the tensile stress area of the bolt, As = 245 mm
Therefore
k10 = (1.6 × As) / Lb = 9.12 mm Table 6.11
5.2. Rotational stiffness and Classification
Therefore the rotational stiffness Sj of the joint is obtained from 6.3.1(4)
S j = (E x z 2 ) /(µ x ! (1 / k i )) Eq.6.27
i
(See section 5.1 for definitions of terms.)

-1
Σ! (1/ k i ) = (1 / k1) + (1 / k2) +(1 / k3) + (1 / k4) + (1 / k5) + (1 / k10) = 1.10 mm
i
3 2
E = 210×10 N/mm
z = 170 mm Sheet 12
µ = 2.99 Sheet 16

CR/December 2004
Therefore
2 6
Sj = (E × z ) / (µ × !
Σ (1 / k 1) )) = 1.84×10 6.3.1(4) Eq.6.27
i
µ = S j.ini / S j 6.3.1(6)
Therefore the initial stiffness of the joint, Sj.ini is:
6
Sj.ini = µ × Sj = 5.51×10
The classification boundary for a nominally pinned joint is given in 5.2.2.1(1) and 5.2.2.5(1)
Figure 5.4.
Sj.ini ≤ 0.5 x (E x Ib) / Lb

Where:
4 4
Ib is the second moment of area of the beam, Ib = 21596×10 mm
Lb is the span of the beam, Lb = 7.00 m
Therefore:
6
0.5 × (E × Ib) / Lb = 3.24×10
6
Sj.ini > 3.24x10
So on the basis of rotational stiffness (which is relevant when elastic global analysis 5.1.3(1)
is being considered) the joint may be classified as semi-rigid. It should be noted that
if the option of ‘past experience’ was relied upon then this joint would clearly have
been classified as nominally pinned.
6. Calculation of rotation capacity
Given that there is less than 5% axial load in the connected beam use Clause 6.4.2.
For the single sided joint, the endplate capacity may be assumed to come from the
column web panel shear provided:
d / tw ≤ 69 x ε 6.4.2(1)
d / t w = 12.66 ≤ 69 x ε
Therefore it can be assumed that the endplate capacity comes from the column web
panel shear.
It is worth noting that as the tension resistance of the joint is generated by the
endplate bending this would normally ensure adequate rotation capacity even if the
joint were used in a double sided detail.

Connections in fire TL / November 2004
YW / December 2004
Connections in fire
prEN1992-1-1, Eurocode 2 – Design of concrete structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
December 2003
June 2004



YW / December 2004

In EN 1993-1-2 two methods are presented for bolted or welded joints. The first is numbers given
based on ensuring the fire resistance of the joint is greater than or equal to that of the relate to
connected members. In general this is a conservative method as the temperature of EN1993-1-2
the connection is generally less than that of the beams. However it is also necessary unless stated
to consider the utilisation of the joint compared to the utilisation of the member. As a otherwise.
simplification the utilisation of the joint and the connected members may be related to
the loading and the resistance at ambient temperature.
Alternatively the resistance of the joint may be assessed according to Annex D of

EN1993-1-2 whereby the temperature of the components are calculated and
reduction factors used to determine the resistance of the joint.
Consider the connection at location E1 on Figure 2.
2. Loading
The values of the actions at the fire limit state are given in Table 1.
Table 1. Actions at the fire limit state

Nature of loading Value (kN/m²)
Composite slab 2.06
Structural steel sections 0.25
Raised floor 0.4
Services 0.25
Ceiling 0.15
Partitions 1.0
Imposed 2.5
For the purpose of design the partition load is classed as imposed to account for
demountable partitions. For the fire limit state the partition load is included in the
dead load.
2
Uniformly Distributed Load Gk = 3.11 kN/m (ambient temperature design)
2
Gk.fi = 4.11 kN/m (fire limit state)
2
Uniformly Distributed Load Qk = 3.50 kN/m (ambient temperature design)
2
Qk.fi = 2.50 kN/m (fire limit state)
2.3. Loading factors – Ambient temperature


YW / December 2004
2.4. Loading factors – Fire limit state

specify the use of ψ1.For a more detailed explanation of the choice of partial load factors
see simply supported beam example for fire design.
3. Ambient temperature design values of actions

Ultimate limit state EN1990 Table
2
Design UDL FEd = (γG × Gk) + (γQ × Qk) = 9.45 kN/m A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
3.1. Design Moment – Primary beam

The design moment on the primary beam is equal to
MEd = (R x l ) / 4
Where:
R is the end reactions from the secondary beams framing into the primary beam
between gridlines E1 and E2
R = ((l / 2) × L × FEd) = 255.1 kN
Therefore:
MEd = (R × l) / 4 = 382.66 kNm
3.2. Design Shear Force – Primary beam

The design shear force is equal to the end reaction on the primary beam.
VEd = R / 2 = 127.6 kN
4. Fire limit state design values of actions

Ultimate Limit State Accidental design situation EN1990 Table
2
Design UDL FEd.fi = Gk.fi + (ψ1 × Qk.fi) = 5.36 kN/m A1.3 & Eq. 6.11b

YW / December 2004
4.1. Design Moment – Primary beam

The design moment on the primary beam is equal to
MEd.fi = (R fi x l ) / 4
Where:
Rfi is the end reactions from the secondary beams framing into the primary beam
between gridlines E1 and E2
Rfi = ((l / 2) × L × FEd.fi) = 144.72 kN
Therefore:
MEd.fi = (Rfi × l) / 4 = 217.08 kNm
4.2. Design Shear Force – Primary beam

The design shear force is equal to the end reaction on the primary beam.
VEd.fi = Rfi / 2 = 72.36 kN
5. Method 1
(d f / ! f ) c " (d f / ! f ) m 4.2.1 (6)
where:
(df/λf)c is the relationship between the thickness of the fire protection material and the
thermal conductivity of the fire protection material for the connection and
(df/λf)m is the relationship between the thickness of the fire protection material and the
thermal conductivity of the fire protection material for the connected member
5.1. Resistance of connection – Ambient temperature design

The connection (E1) is designed as simply supported at ambient temperature and it
is acceptable to carry out the utilisation check at ambient temperature. The shear
capacity of the connection is assessed using the method detailed in the SCI/BCSA
green book on simple connections. The shear capacity of the connection based on
the shear capacity of the bolt group, the shear capacity of the end plate, the block
shear capacity and the bearing capacity of the end plate is summarised in Table 2
below. As the column flange is much thicker than the end plate there is no need to
consider the resistance of the column flange in bearing.

YW / December 2004
Table 2. End plate shear and bearing capacity

Resistance check Formula Resistance Green
(kN) book
page
ref.
Shear capacity of bolt ΣpsAs (or 0.5kbs.e1.tp.pbs) for 699 93
group (Fv ≤ ΣPs) top bolt rows
Plain shear capacity of Min (0.6.py.Av, 0.7py.Ke.Avnet) 270 94
end plate (Fv/2 ≤ Pv)
Block shear (Fv/2 ≤ Pr) 0.6py.tp(Lv+Ke(Lt – k.Dh)) 320 94
Bearing (Fv /2 ≤ Pbs) kbs.d. tp. pbs 294 94
Note: Symbols used in Table 2 are taken from the SCI/BCSA green book. Fv is the design
shear force, which equals VEd given in EC3.
Therefore the utilisation of the connection is

(VEd / 2) / 270 = 0.236
This value needs to be compared to the degree of utilisation of the beam connected
to the column.
5.2. Resistance of Primary Beams – Ambient temperature design

The moment capacity of the composite primary beam is
Mc.Rd = 515 kNm
Note: This value has been determined following the method given in SCI publication
P055. The calculation process is not included in this worked example, as it is concerned
with the design of the connection at the fire limit state.
Therefore the utilisation of the beam is MEd / Mc.Rd = 0.74.
Where MEd is the design moment determined on sheet 4.
5.3. Determination of fire protection

The utlisation of the beam is greater than that of the connection therefore it is
sufficient to ensure that the fire protection is at least equivalent to that on the beam.
The selection of the appropriate beam protection thickness and thermal conductivity
can be made on the basis of the calculation procedure for protected steelwork in
4.2.5.2.

YW / December 2004
6. Method 2
Annex D of EN 1993-1-2 provides a method for determining the temperature profile

within the connection. This can then be used to derive reduction factors
corresponding to the location of the individual components.
The first step is to calculate the temperature rise of the bottom flange (at mid-span) of
the connected beam. For this example it is assumed that the required period of fire
resistance is 60 minutes and that the applied passive fire protection to be used is
20mm gypsum board applied to 3 sides of the beam.
The relevant formula for protected members is:
' p Ap / V # g ,t " # a ,t %
$# a ,t = $t " ( e10 " 1 ) $# g ,t $# a ,t ! 0 and
d p ca & a 1 + %
3
c p !p Ap
"= dp 4.2.5.2(1) eq. 4.27
c a !a V
where:
Ap / V is the section factor for protected steel member (136m-1)

ca is the specific heat of the steel (600 J/kgK)
cp is the specific heat of the protective material (1700 J/kgK)
dp is the thickness of fire protection (0.02m)
θa,t is the temperature of the steel at time t (°C)
θg,t is the temperature of the gas at time t (°C)
Δg,t is the increase in gas temperature over the time step t (°C)
λp is the thermal conductivity of the fire protection material (0.2 W/mK)
ρa is the density of the steel (7850 kg/m³)
ρp is the density of the protection material (800 kg/m³)
Φ = 0.7854
For the standard fire exposure and the specified protection material the temperature
of the steel beam is calculated as 445°C. The time-temperature relationship is
illustrated in Figure 3 below.
Note: This is not a particularly efficient design solution. The designer may wish to
consider rationalising the fire protection (by using a 15mm board for example) to
increase the maximum temperature in the steel beam.

YW / December 2004
1000
900
800
700
600
temperature (deg C)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
time (minutes)
atmosphere temperature steel temperature
Figure 3. Temperature of Primary Beam (356x171UB51)
Here the depth of the beam is less than or equal to 400mm, therefore:
# h = 0.88 x " o x (1 ! (0.3 x(h / D))) D 3.1 (4a)
Where
Θh is the temperature at height h (mm) of the steel beam

θo is the bottom flange temperature of the steel beam at mid-span (445°C)
h is the height of the component being considered above the bottom of the
beam (mm)
D is the depth of the beam (mm) (355mm)
The temperature of the critical components is illustrated graphically in Figure 3. The

values are summarised in Table 3.

YW / December 2004
Table 3. Temperature of critical components

Description Distance from bottom flange (mm) Temperature (°C)
Bottom flange of steel beam 0 445
at mid-span
Bottom flange of the steel 0 392
beam in the vicinity of the
connection
Bottom edge of end plate 75 367
Bottom bolt row 115 354
nd
2 bolt row from bottom 175 334
rd
3 bolt row from bottom 235 314
Top bolt row 295 294
Top edge of end plate 335 281
400
350
top edge of end plate
300
distance from bottom flange of beam (mm)
top bolt row
250
3rd bolt row from bottom
200
2nd bolt row from bottom
150
bottom bolt row
100
bottom edge of end plate
50
bottom flange
0
250 270 290 310 330 350 370 390 410
temperature (Deg C)
Figure 3. Temperature distribution through connection
The temperatures at each location are used to derive reduction factors for the individual components either
from Table D.1 for bolts or from Table 3.1 for the end plate and column.
The original checks are then repeated using the reduction factors for elevated temperature and compared
to the reduced load applied at the fire limit state. In this case the design shear force is reduced according
to the fire limit state load factors.

Column in simple construction – Fire Limit State TL / September 2004
YW / October 2004
Column in simple construction – Fire Limit State
December 2003
June 2004



YW / October 2004
3. Ambient temperature design

3.1. Load factors
3.2. Design values of actions – Ultimate Limit State
2
Area UDL per floor FEd = (γG × Gk) + (γQ × Qk)= 7.95 kN/m EN1990 Table
Design axial force NEd = 6m × 9m × FEd ×5 = 2146.50 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
3.3. Buckling resistance

The criteria to satisfy is that the design value of the compression force is less than
the design buckling compression resistance of the member. EN1993-1-1
NEd ≤ Nb.Rd 6.3.1.1(1)
The design buckling resistance Nb.Rd for Class 1 cross-sections is defined as: EN1993-1-1
(χ x A x fy) / γM1 6.3.1.1(3) Eq 6.47
Where:
χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode determined from 6.3.1.2 EN1993-1-1
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
EN1993-1-1
2
% = 1 /( $ + ( $ 2 # " )) ! 1.0 6.3.1.2(1) Eq 6.49
Where:
2
% = 0.5 # (1 + ($ # (! " 0.2)) + ! )
α is an imperfection factor corresponding to the buckling curve
! is the non-dimensional slenderness (determined from clause 6.3.1.3 for flexural
buckling)
For Class 1 cross-sections: EN1993-1-1

! = ( ( Axf y ) / N cr ) = (L cr / i) x (1 / ! 1 ) 6.3.1.3(1) Eq 6.50
Where:
Lcr is the buckling length in the plane considered Lcr = 3.5m
i is the radius of gyration about the relevant axis, determined using the gross
section properties
λ1 = 93.9 × ε = 86.80
Therefore
λ!bar = ( Lcr / iz) × (1 / λ1) = 0.62 EN1993-1-1
! > 0.2, therefore buckling check is required. 6.3.1.2(4)

YW / October 2004
Buckling curve EN1993-1-1

h / b = 1.02 ≤ 1.2 Table 6.2
tf ≤ 100mm
buckling about the minor (z-z) axis
Therefore consider buckling curve c
EN1993-1-1
Therefore, Imperfection factor α = 0.49 Table 6.1
EN1993-1-1
2
Φ = 0.5 × (1 + (α × (λbar – 0.2)) + λbar ) = 0.79 6.3.1.2(1)
Therefore EN1993-1-1
2 2
χ = 1 / (Φ + √(Φ - λbar )) = 0.78 ≤ 1.0 6.3.1.2(1) Eq 6.49
Design buckling resistance Nb.Rd is: EN1993-1-1

Nb.Rd = (χ × A × fy) / γM1 = 2417.93 kN 6.3.1.1(3) Eq 6.47
NEd = 2146.50 kN < Mb.Rd Sheet 3

YW / October 2004
4. Fire limit state design
The buckling resistance in the fire situation is based on the reduced effective length in the fire situation
and the reduced loading assessed against the relevant reduction in material strength. In multi-storey
construction compartmentation ensures that a fire is restricted to one floor level at a time. A column
within a fire compartment is therefore continuously connected to a cold column external to the fire
affected zone. This continuity will provide significant rotational restraint to the fire affected column.
The fire part of EC3 allows some reduction in the effective length of a column (from the pin ended case)
provided the column has some rotational fixity. Where the column on the fire floor is fully connected to
the column above and below, it may be considered to be fully built in provided that the resistance of the
separating elements (compartment walls and floors) is at least equal to the fire resistance of the column.
Reference should be made by the engineer to the fire safety strategy for the building to determine the fire
resistance of the floors and walls. The Eurocode recommends that for columns in intermediate storeys
the effective length in fire should be 0.5 times the system length and for the top storey the effective
length in fire should be 0.7 times the system length. This is illustrated in Figure 2 below.
l fi=0,7L
Bracing
system l fi=0,5L
Figure 2. Buckling lengths of columns in braced frames
However, it is likely that the National Annex will recommend values of 0.7 and 0.85 respectively. These
are the values adopted for this design example.

YW / October 2004
4.1. Design loading

4.1.1. Loading factors
specify the use of ψ1.
4.1.2. Design values of actions – Ultimate Limit State Accidental design

situation
2
Area UDL per floor FEd.fi = Gk + (ψ1 × Qk)= 3.75 kN/m EN1990 Table
Design axial force NEd = 6m × 9m × FEd.fi ×5 = 1012.50 kN A1.3 & Eq. 6.11b
5. Design resistance
The design buckling resistance of a compression member at time t for a Class 1
cross-section is given by:
Nb.fi.t.Rd = (" fi x A x k y.# ) / ! M.fi 4.2.3.2(1)
Where:
χfi is the reduction factor for the flexural buckling in the fire design situation
kyθ is the reduction factor from section 3 for the yield strength if steel at the steel
temperature θa reached at time t
χfi should be taken as the lesser of the values χy.fi and χ z.fi. In most cases this will
correspond to the minor axis buckling about z-z (see figure 1) 4.2.3.2(2)
2
$ fi = 1 /(# ! + ( # 2! + " ! ) Eq 4.6
Where:
2
$ ! = (1/ 2) x (1 + (# x " ! ) + " ! )
α = 0.65 × ε = 0.60

YW / October 2004
" ! = " x (k y.! / k E.! ) Eq 4.7
! = (L fi / i z ) x (1/ ! 1 )
λ1 = 86.80 (as determined for the ambient temperature condition) Sheet 3
Lfi = 0.7 × Lcr = 2.45 m
Therefore:
λbar = (Lfi / iz ) × (1 / λ1) = 0.43
At 20°C (time t= 0) the reduction factors are:

ky. θ = 1.00 Table 3.1
kE. θ = 1.00 Table 3.1
Therefore
λbar. θ = λbar = 0.43 4.2.3.2(2) Eq 4.7
ϕθ = (1 / 2) × (1 + (α × λbar. θ) + λ bar. θ
2
) = 0.72
Therefore
2
χfi = 1 / (ϕθ + √(ϕθ2 - λbar. θ )) = 0.77 4.2.3.2(2) Eq 4.6
γM.fi = 1.00 2.3(1)

Note: The National Annex may specify values to be used for γM.fi. In this example the
recommended value of 1.00 is used.
Therefore the buckling resistance at ambient temperature for the fire limit state is
Nb.fi.Rd = (χfi × A × ky. θ × fy) / γM.fi = 2393.02 kN 4.2.3.2(2) Eq 4.6
NEd = 1012.50 kN ≤ Nb.fi.Rd

Therefore section is OK time t = 0
From Table 3.1 of EN1993-1-2 the reduction factor for steel strength reduces to
approximately 40% of the ambient temperature strength at around 600°C. It is clear
that the capacity of the section will be exceeded once the steel temperatures have
reached over 600°C. Unprotected steel sections particularly those with a relative
high section factor (as in this case) will heat up rapidly and tend to follow the furnace
curve. For the required period of fire resistance an unprotected section will reach this
temperature in a little over 10 minutes. Therefore the column will require protection.
Verification may be carried out in the temperature domain. The first step is to
calculate the degree of utilisation µ0 is the ratio of the effect of actions at the fire limit
state compared to the capacity in the fire situation for time t = 0.
µ0 = NEd / Nb.fi.Rd = 0.42 4.2.4

Therefore the critical temperature is:
θa.cr = 612 °C Table 4.1

YW / October 2004
It is therefore necessary to keep the steel temperature below 612 °C for the
prescribed fire exposure.
As in the laterally restrained beam in fire example it is possible to calculate the rate of
temperature rise for a protected steel member given the relevant material properties.
Gypsum boards will be tried in the first instance. The temperature rise of the
insulated steelwork is calculated from:
!% a.t = ((& p x A p /( V x (% g.t " % a.t ))) / (dp x c a x $ a x (1 + (# / 3)))) x ( ! t " ((e ( # / 10 ) " 1) x ! g.t )) 4.2.5.2 Eq 4.27
With:
" = ((c p x ! p ) / (c a x ! a )) x (dp x ( A p / V ))
Where:
Ap / V is the section factor for the protected steel member
ca is the specific heat of the steel
cp is the specific heat of the protective material
dp is the thickness of fire protection
θa.t is the temperature of the steel at time t
θg.t is the temperature of the gas at time t
Δg.t is the increase in gas temperature over time step t
λp is the thermal conductivity of the fire protection material
ρa is the density of the steel
ρp is the density of the protective material
dp = 100 mm # p = 800 kg / m 3 c p = 1700J / kg ! K " p = 0 .2 W / m ! K
A p / V = 90.6 m #1 c a = 600 J / kg " K ! a = 7850 kg / m 3 Table 4.3
" = ((c p x ! p ) / (c a x ! a )) x (dp x ( A p / V )) = 0.261
Note: To determine the steel temperature at different time periods a simple spreadsheet
model is used to undertake an iterative calculation. The output from the model is
illustrated in Figure 3.
The critical temperature of 612 °C is not reached during the required fire resistance
period. The temperature of the steelwork at 60 minutes is 604 °C and therefore the
protection is adequate. The manufacturers of passive fire protection materials should
be consulted to determine the relevant properties of specific products.

YW / October 2004
temperature rise of insulated steel column
1000
900
gas
temperature
800
700
temperature (deg C)
600
steel
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
time (minutes)
Figure 3. Temperature rise of insulated column


Column with axial and bi-axial moments (due to simple GHC / October 2004
connection)
CR / November 2004
Column with axial and bi-axial moments (due to simple connection)
December 2003
DDENV 1993-1-1:1992, Eurocode 3 – Design of steel structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
buildings, November 1992
BS5950-1:2000 Structural use of steelwork in building – Part 1: Code of practice for design – Rolled and
welded sections, British Standards Institution, London, May 2001



connection)
CR / November 2004
Table & clause

1. Introduction numbers given
relate to
Design the outside column of a braced building (shown in Figure 1) in grade S275 EN1993-1-1
steel. unless stated
otherwise.
The beam connections with the column are assumed to be ‘nominally pinned’ flexible EN1993-1-8
end plates, so the joints may be assumed not to develop significant moments. 5.2.2.2(1)
Note that EN1993 requires ‘simple’ joints to have stiffness and strength within certain EN1993-1-8
limits, and provide ways of calculating these values. However, it also allows 5.2.2.1(2)
classification based on previous stiffness performance. ‘Pinned joints’ must also be and
capable of accepting the resulting rotation under the EN1993-1-8 design loads. 5.2.2.2(2)
The column must then be designed for the ‘resulting forces and moments’ due to the EN1993-1-8
eccentricity of the connections. 2.7(1)
Currently there is no guidance on what distance to assume for the eccentricity. The
face of the column would seem to be a logical assumption if beams are connected
using an endplate, but clearly this is less conservative than the approach given in BS
5950-1 where the beam reactions are assumed to occur at 100mm from the column
face (this does not represent any real physical dimension, but is used to ensure the
moment applied to the column is ‘reasonable’). For other types of connection the
designer may wish to adopt an alternative assumption for the line of action of the
beam reactions.
Further guidance on the choice of ‘nominal moments’ and effective length may
appear in the UK National Annex.
3
I
REd1
3.00 m
H
REd2
A A
2
I
Lateral restraint
provided at mid REd3
height
A-A
1
Figure 1. Layout of beams and column


connection)
CR / November 2004
2. Loading
Axial load for storeys above level 2 Gk1 = 143.0 kN
Beam reactions at level 2
Beam reaction 1 Gk2 = 14.0 kN

Axial load for storeys above level 2 Qk1 = 130.0 kN
Beam reaction 1 Qk2 = 13.0 kN
Note: Variable actions are not independent of each other.

2.4. Design values of beam reactions – Ultimate Limit State

Beam reaction 1 REd1 = (γG × Gk2) + (γQ × Qk2) = 38.40 kN EN 1990 Table
Beam reaction 2 REd2 = (γG × Gk3) + (γQ × Qk3) = 150.60 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
Beam reaction 3 REd3 = (γG × Gk4) + (γQ × Qk4) = 23.10 kN
Axial load for storeys above level 2 EN 1990 Table

NEd23 = (γG × Gk1) + (γQ × Qk1) = 388 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
Axial load in column between 1 and 2 EN 1990 Table

NEd12 = NEd23 + REd1 + R Ed2 + REd3 = 600.15 kN A1.2(B) & Eq. 6.10
2.5. Design moments

In this example the moments are caused due to the eccentric beam reactions (see
Introduction for discussion). The values for the design moments are determined later
in section 4.1.

connection)
CR / November 2004
The design buckling resistance Nb.Rd for Class 1 cross-sections is defined as:
(χ x A x fy) / γM1 6.3.1.1(3) Eq 6.47
Where:
χ is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode according to 6.3.1.2 and
determined in section 3.2.2
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
3.2.1. Slenderness for flexural buckling – Minor axis (z-z)

The non-dimensional slenderness ! for Class 1 cross-sections is:
! = ( ( Axf y ) / N cr ) = (L cr / i) x (1 / ! 1 ) 6.3.1.3(1) Eq 6.50
Where:
Lcr is the buckling length in the plane considered Lz.cr = 2.50 m
section properties (z-z axis considered here iz = 5.13 cm)
λ1 = 93.9 × ε = 86.80
Therefore
λ!
bar.z
z
= (L z.cr / iz) × (1 / λ1) = 0.56
! z > 0.2, therefore buckling check is required. 6.3.1.2(4)
3.2.2. Reduction factor for flexural buckling – Minor axis (z-z)

2
% = 1 /( $ + ( $ 2 # " )) ! 1.0 6.3.1.2(1) Eq 6.49
Where:
2
% = 0.5 # (1 + ($ # (! " 0.2)) + ! )
α is an imperfection factor corresponding to the buckling curve
Buckling curve obtained from Table 6.2

h / b = 1.00 ≤ 1.2 Table 6.2
tf = 11.00mm ≤ 100mm
buckling about the minor (z-z) axis
Therefore consider buckling curve c
Therefore, imperfection factor αz = 0.49 Table 6.1
22
Φz = 0.5 × (1 + (αz × (!
(λ z – 0.2)) + λ z ) = 0.75
!bar.z
bar.z 6.3.1.2(1)
Therefore
2 2
χ z = 1 / (Φz + √(Φ z - !
λ z )) = 0.81 ≤ 1.0
bar. z
2
6.3.1.2(1) Eq 6.49

connection)
CR / November 2004
3.2.3. Slenderness for flexural buckling – Major axis

Lcr is the buckling length in the plane considered Ly.cr = 5.00 m
section properties (y-y axis considered here iy = 8.82 cm)
λ1 = 93.9 × ε = 86.80
Therefore
λ! y
bar.y = (L y.cr / iy) × (1 / λ1) = 0.65 6.3.1.3(1) Eq 6.50
! y > 0.2, therefore buckling check is required. 6.3.1.2(4)
3.2.4. Reduction factor for flexural buckling – Major axis (y-y)

Buckling curve obtained from Table 6.2
h / b = 1.00 ≤ 1.2 Table 6.2
tf = 11.00mm ≤ 100mm
buckling about the minor (y-y) axis
Therefore consider buckling curve b
Therefore, Imperfection factor α y = 0.34 Table 6.1
2
Φy = 0.5 × (1 + (αy × (λ!bar.y
y
– 0.2)) + λ!bar.y
y ) = 0.79
2
6.3.1.2(1)
Therefore
2
χ y = 1 / (Φy + √(Φ y - λ! y 2 )) = 0.81 ≤ 1.0
bar. y
2
6.3.1.2(1) Eq 6.49
3.2.5. Torsional and torsional-flexural buckling

It is also necessary to ensure that the open cross-section will not fail due to either
torsional or torsional flexural buckling at a lower level than that corresponding with
flexural buckling. A non-dimensional slenderness of ! T must be calculated, as a
function of either the elastic torsional bucking force (Ncr.T) or the elastic
torsional-flexural buckling force (Ncr.TF). 6.3.1.4(1)
Unfortunately no guidance is given as to how to determine values for either Ncr.T or
Ncr.TF.
3.2.5.1. Elastic torsional and torsional-flexural buckling forces

One approach (to determine values for Ncr.T and Ncr.TF) that may be included in the
UK National Annex to EN1993-1-1 for doubly symmetrical cross-sections is:
2 2
Ncr.T = Ncr.TF = ((G x I t ) + ( ! 2 x ((E x I w ) / l T ))) / i 0 < N y.cr and N z.cr
Where:
3 2
G is the shear modulus (G = 81×10 N/mm ) 3.2.6(1)
4
It is the torsional constant of the gross cross-section (It = 22.15 cm )
3 2
E = 210×10 N/mm 3.2.6(1)

connection)
CR / November 2004
3 6
Iw is the warping constant fo the gross cross-section (Iw = 140×10 cm )
lT is the effective elastic torsional buckling length (lT = 5.00 m)
2 2 2 2 2
i0 = i y + i z + y 0 + z 0
iy is the radius of gyration of the gross cross-section about the y-y axis (iy = 8.82 cm)
iz is the radius of gyration of the gross cross-section about the z-z axis (iz = 5.13 cm)
y0 and z0 are the shear centre co-ordinates with respect to the centroid of the gross
cross-section (y0 = 0 cm and z0 = 0 cm for doubly symmetrical sections)
2 2 2 2
i0 = √(iy + iz + y0 + z0 ) = 10.205 cm
Therefore
2 2 2
Ncr.T = Ncr.TF = ((G × It) + (π × ((E × Iw) / lT ))) / i0 = 2861.50 kN
Check if this value is less than both Ny.cr and Nz.cr.
Ny.cr and Nz.cr are elastic critical forces for flexural buckling about the y-y and z-z axes
respectively
Rearranging equation (6.50) of EN1993-1-1 gives the following expression for
determining the elastic critical force for the relevant buckling mode based on the
gross cross-sectional properties (Ncr)
2
Ncr = ( A x f y ) / ! = ( A x f y ) / (((L cr / i) x (1/ ! 1 )) 2 ) (symbols defined earlier on sheet 5)
For the minor axis (z-z)

Nz.cr = (A × fy) / λ! z 2 = 5132.72 kN
bar.z
2
For the major axis (y-y)

Ny.cr = (A × fy) / !λ y 2 = 3785.89 kN
bar.y
2
Ncr.T = 2861.50 kN < Ny.cr

Therefore Ncr.T = Ncr.TF
3.2.5.2. Slenderness for torsional and torsional-flexural buckling

The non-dimensional slenderness for torsional or torsional-flexural buckling is
determined from:
! T = ( ( A x f y ) / Ncr ) For Class 1, 2 and 3 cross-sections 6.3.1.4(1) Eq6.50
Where:
Ncr = Ncr.TF but Ncr < Ncr.T
For doubly symmetrical cross-sections Ncr.TF = Ncr.T therefore
λ! T
bar.T = √((A × fy) / Ncr.T) = 0.75

connection)
CR / November 2004
3.2.5.3. Reduction factor for torsional and torsional-flexural buckling

! T is used in place of ! in the expressions used earlier to determine the reduction
factor for flexural buckling to determine the reduction factor for torsional and
torsional-flexural buckling.
For torsional or torsional-flexural buckling the appropriate buckling curve is 6.3.1.4(3)

determined from Table 6.2 considering the z-axis.
Therefore αT = αz = 0.49
22
ΦT = 0.5 × (1 + (αT × (λ! T – 0.2)) + !λ T ) = 0.92
bar.T bar.T
Therefore
2 2
χ T = 1 / (ΦT + √(Φ T - !
λ T )) = 0.69 ≤ 1.0
bar.T
2
6.3.1.2(1) Eq 6.49
3.2.6. Design buckling resistance

As the reduction factor for torsional or torsional-flexural buckling is less than that for
flexural buckling the design buckling resistance should be determined using χ T.
Design buckling resistance Nb.Rd is:

Nb.Rd = (χT × A × fy) / γM1 = 1118.84 kN 6.3.1.1(3) Eq 6.47
Design axial force between 1 and 2 N Ed12 = 600 kN Sheet 3
Therefore Utilisation is:

NEd12 / Nb.Rd = 0.54
Note: Whilst this level of utilisation suggests a smaller UC could be considered, the use of
a 152 x 152 section could present potential difficulties in the detailing at beam
connections. Therefore carry out full design on UC 203 x 203 x 46.
4. Resistance of cross-section
4.1. Moments due to eccentricity of beam reactions
Bending moment about the major axis (y-y) at 2 is due to the beam connected to the
column flange, therefore:
My = REd2 × (h / 2) = 15.30 kNm
Bending moment about the minor axis (z-z) at 2 is due to the beams connected to the
column web, therefore:
Mz = (REd1 – REd3) × (tw / 2) = 0.06 kNm


connection)
CR / November 2004
These moments need to be split above and below 2 according to the relative stiffness
of the column lengths. Therefore the design moments in the lower part of the column
(1-2) are:
My.Ed = (3 / 8) × My = 5.74 kNm
Mz.Ed = (3 / 8) × Mz = 0.02 kNm
4.2. Combined axial force and moments – Conservative check

As a conservative approximation for all cross-section classes linear summation of the
utilisation ratios for each stress resultant may be used.
For Class 1 cross-sections the following expression should be satisfied: 6.2.1(7)
(NEd / NRd) + (My.Ed / My.Rd) + (Mz.Ed / Mz.Rd) ≤ 1.0 Eq 6.2
Where:
NEd = NEd12 = 600.15 kN Sheet 3
My.Ed = 5.74 kNm
Mz.Ed = 0.02 kNm
NRd, My.Rd and Mz.Rd are the design values of resistance depending on the cross-
sectional classification and including any reduction that may be caused by shear.
The design resistance for a Class 1 cross-section for uniform compression Nc.Rd is: 6.2.4(2)
Nc.Rd = ( A x f y ) / ! M0 Eq 6.10
Where:
2
fy = 275 N/mm
γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Therefore:
NRd = Nc.Rd = (A × fy) / γM0 = 1615.12 kN
The design resistance for bending about one principal axis of a Class 1 6.2.5(2)
cross-section is:
Mc.Rd = ( Wpl x f y ) / ! M0
Where:
Wpl is the plastic section modulus for the axis being considered
3 3
Wpl.y = 497.44 cm Wpl.z = 230.86 cm

connection)
CR / November 2004
Therefore for the major axis:

My.Rd = My.c.Rd = (Wpl.y × fy) / γM0 = 136.80 kNm
Therefore for the minor axis:
Mz.Rd = Mz.c.Rd = (Wpl.z × fy) / γM0 = 63.49 kNm
By inspection the effect of shear is low enough not to effect the resistance. 6.2.8(2)
Therefore:
(NEd / N Rd) + (My.Ed / My.Rd) + (Mz.Ed / Mz.Rd) = 0.41 < 1.0

Therefore section is O.K.
5. Resistance of member to combined axial force and moments

For a Class 1 section there are no moments due to the shift of the centroidal axis.
Therefore the combined axial (compression) and bending moment check is carried
out using the following equations.
(NEd/((χy x NRk)/γM1))+(kyy x (My.Ed/(χLT x (My.Rk/γM1))))+(kyz x (Mz.Ed/(Mz.Rk/γM1))) ≤ 1.0 6.3.3(4) Eq 6.61
(NEd/((χz x NRk)/γM1))+(kzy x (My.Ed/(χLT x (My.Rk/γM1))))+(kzz x (Mz.Ed/(Mz.Rk/γM1))) ≤ 1.0 6.3.3(4) Eq 6.62
Where:
NEd, My.Ed and Mz.Ed are the design values of the compression force and the
maximum moments about the y-y and z-z axes along the member
χy and χz are the reduction factors due to flexural buckling (calculated in sections
3.2.2 & 3.2.4)
χLT is the reduction factor due to lateral torsional buckling
My.Rk and Mz.Rk are the characteristic resistance values to bending moments
about the y-y and z-z axes
kyy, kyz, kzy and kzz are interaction factors
χz =0.81 Sheet 5
χy =0.81 Sheet 6
5.1. Reduction factor for lateral torsional buckling

The reduction factor for lateral torsional buckling (χLT) is determined from 6.3.2. 6.3.3(4)
EN1993-1-1 gives two methods for determining χLT, the general case and one for
rolled sections or equivalent welded sections. The general case will be used here.

connection)
CR / November 2004
Determine χLT – General case 6.3.2.2(1)

2
$ LT = 1/(# LT + ( # LT " ! LT )) Eq 6.56
Where:
% LT = 0.5 # (1 + ($ LT # (! LT " 0.2)) + !2LT ) 6.3.2.2(1)
" LT = ( ( W Y ! f y ) / Mcr )
Unfortunately EN1993-1-1 does not contain expressions for calculating Mcr and
therefore designers must use textbooks to obtain the most appropriate equation for
Mcr. However, the value of ! LT can be calculated directly by modifying the method
given in BS5950: Part 1. Therefore as an alternative to calculating Mcr, ! LT can be
calculated from the following equation.
" LT = " LT /(" 1 ! C 1 )
Where:
λ1 = 93.9 × ε = 86.80 6.3.1.3(1)
# LT = u " v " # " ! w BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7

Lcr is the effective length for lateral torsional buckling (Lcr = 5.00 m)
i is the radius of gyration about the relevant axis
u is the buckling parameter BS5950-1, 4.3.6.8
v is the slenderness factor BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7
βw is a ratio given in clause 4.3.6.9 of BS5950: Part 1
C1 is the equivalent uniform moment factor for lateral torsional buckling. Tables of
this factor for different bending moment distributions and support conditions are
given in Annex F of DDENV1993-1-1.
Note: Other publications are currently (2004) being produced by ECSC and ECCS.
λ = Lcr / iz = 97.38 BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7
For a rolled I, H or channel section with equal flanges: BS5950-1, 4.3.6.8

x = D / T = h / tf = 18.47
Therefore u = 0.9
For a section with equal flanges BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7

η = 0.5
λx = λ / x = 5.27
Therefore v = 0.82 - (0.27 × ((0.82 – 0.79) / 0.5)) = 0.80 BS5950-1 Table19

connection)
CR / November 2004
For Class 1 cross-sections

βw = 1.0 BS5950-1, 4.3.6.9
λLT = u × v × λ × √(βw) = 70.45 BS5950-1, 4.3.6.7
C1 = 1.0 (conservative) DDENV1993-1-1

See note above for C1.
λLT_bar
! LT
= (λLT / λ1) × √(C1) = 0.81
As ! LT > 0.2 torsional buckling effects must be considered 6.3.2.2(4)
It is considered that a UC is classed as an I section for Table 6.4

h / b = 1.0 < 2.0
Therefore use buckling curve a Table 6.4
Therefore αLT = 0.21 Table 6.3
ΦLT = 0.5 × (1 + (αLT × (λ!LT_bar

LT – 0.2)) + λ! LT ) = 0.89
22
LT_bar 6.3.2.2(1)
2
χ LT = 1 / (ΦLT + √(ΦLT - λ! LT 2 )) = 0.79
LT_bar
2
6.3.2.2(1)
5.2. Interaction factors

Having determined the buckling reduction factors χy, χz, and χLT, it is then necessary
to determine the interaction factors kyy, kyz, kzz and kzy. Two methods are given in
EN1993-1-1 for determining values for these factors, Method 1 and Method 2. The
National Annex will specify which method should be used. Method 2 (Annex B of
EN1993-1-1) is considered to be easier and better aligned with BS5950-1 than
Method 1 (Annex A of EN1993-1-1). There is also some doubt over the applicability
of Method 1 to asymmetric sections. The UK National Annex may allow both
methods to be used but restrict Method 1 to bi-symmetric sections. Method 2 is used
in this example.
For members susceptible to torsional deformations Table B.2 should be used. Annex B
5.2.1. Interaction factor kyy

For kyy Table B.2 refers to Table B.1 Table B.2
For Class 1 and 2 cross-sections
k yy = C my x(1 + ((% y $ 0.2)x(NEd /((" y xNRk ) / ! M1 ))))
Table B.1
# C my x(1 + (0.8 x(NEd /((" y x NRk ) / ! M1 ))))

connection)
CR / November 2004
Where
λ! y
bar.y = 0.65 Sheet 6
NEd = NEd12 = 600.15 kN Sheet 3
χy = 0.81 Sheet 6
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
Cmy is the equivalent uniform moment factor determined from Table B.3.
For a pinned based column with no intermediate loads
ψ=0 Table B.3
Therefore
Cmy = 0.6 + (0.4 × ψ) = 0.60 > 0.4 therefore O.K.
NRk is the characteristic resistance to compression (determined from Table 6.7)
NRk = f y x A i Table 6.7
For Class 1 sections
2
Ai = A = 5873.148 mm
Therefore
NRk = fy × A = 1615.12 kN
Therefore
kyy = Cmy × (1 + ((λ! y – 0.2) × (NEd / ((χy × NRk) / γM1)))) = 0.72
bar.y Table B.1
Check value is less than limit
Cmy × (1 + (0.8 × (NEd / ((χy × NRk) / γM1)))) = 0.82 Table B.1
kyy < 0.82 therefore O.K
kyy = 0.72
5.2.2. Interaction factor kzz

For kzz Table B.2 refers to Table B.1 Table B.2
k zz = C mz x(1 + (((2x % z ) $ 0.6)x(NEd /((" z xNRk ) / ! M1 ))))
Table B.1
# C mz x(1 + (1.4 x(NEd /((" z x NRk ) / ! M1 ))))
Where
λ! z
bar.z = 0.56 Sheet 5
χz = 0.81 Sheet 5
Cmz is the equivalent uniform moment factor determined from Table B.3.
Cmz = Cmy therefore Table B.3
Cmz = 0.60

connection)
CR / November 2004
Therefore
kzz = Cmz × (1 + (((2 × λ! z ) – 0.6) × (NEd / ((χz × NRk) / γM1)))) = 0.74
bar.z Table B.1
Check value is less than limit
Cmz × (1 + (1.4 × (NEd / ((χz × NRk) / γM1)))) = 0.99 Table B.1
kzz < 0.99 therefore
kzz = 0.74
5.2.3. Interaction factor kyz

For kyz Table B.2 refers to Table B.1 Table B.2
kyz = 0.6 × kzz = 0.44 Table B.1
5.2.4. Interaction factor kzy

For Class 1 and 2 cross-sections Table B.2
λ! z
bar.z = 0.56 > 0.4, therefore
k zy = 1 # (((0.1x % z ) /(C mLT # 0.25))x(NEd /(" z x(NRk / ! M1 ))))

Table B.2
$ 1 # ((0.1/(C mLT # 0.25))x(NEd /(" z x(NRk / ! M1 ))))
Where
CmLT is the equivalent uniform moment factor determined from Table B.3.
CmLT = Cmy therefore Table B.3
CmLT = 0.60
Therefore
kzy = 1 – (((0.1 × !
λ z ) / (CmLT – 0.25)) × (NEd / (χz × (N Rk / γM1)))) = 0.93
bar.z Table B.2
Check value is greater than limit
kzy = 1 – ((0.1 / (C mLT – 0.25)) × (NEd / (χz × (NRk / γM1)))) = 0.87 Table B.2
kzy > 0.87 therefore
kzy = 0.93
5.3. Major axis check

The combined axial (compression) and bending moment check for the major axis is
(NEd/((χy x NRk)/γM1))+(kyy x (My.Ed/(χLT x (My.Rk/γM1))))+(kyz x (Mz.Ed/(Mz.Rk/γM1))) ≤ 1.0 6.3.3(4) Eq 6.61


connection)
CR / November 2004
Where:
kyy = 0.72 Sheet 13
kyz = 0.44 Sheet 14
NEd = 600.15 kN Sheet 3
NRk = 1615.12 kN Sheet 13
χy = 0.81 Sheet 6
χLT = 0.79 Sheet 12
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
My.Ed = 5.74 kNm Sheet 9
Mz.Ed = 0.02 kNm Sheet 9
My.Rk and My.Rk are determined from Table 6.7
Mi.Rk = f y x Wi Table 6.7
Consider My.Rk
3
Wi = Wpl.y = 497.44 cm (Plastic section modulus about the y-y axis)
Therefore
My.Rk = fy × Wpl.y = 136.80 kNm
Consider Mz.Rk
3
Wi = Wpl.z = 230.86 cm (Plastic section modulus about the z-z axis)
Therefore
Mz.Rk = fy × Wpl.z = 63.49 kNm
Therefore
(NEd/((χy × N Rk)/γM1))+(kyy × (My.Ed/(χLT × (My.Rk/γM1))))+(kyz × (Mz.Ed/(Mz.Rk/γM1))) = 0.50 6.3.3(4) Eq 6.61
< 1.0
Therefore major axis O.K.
5.4. Minor axis check

The combined axial (compression) and bending moment check for the minor axis is
(NEd/((χz x NRk)/γM1))+(kzy x (My.Ed/(χLT x (My.Rk/γM1))))+(kzz x (Mz.Ed/(Mz.Rk/γM1))) ≤ 1.0 6.3.3(4) Eq 6.62


connection)
CR / November 2004
Where:
kzy = 0.93 Sheet 14
kzz = 0.74 Sheet 13
NEd = 600.15 kN Sheet 3
NRk = 1615.12 kN Sheet 13
χz = 0.81 Sheet 5
χLT = 0.79 Sheet 12
γM1 = 1.00 6.1(1)
My.Ed = 5.74 kNm Sheet 9
Mz.Ed = 0.02 kNm Sheet 9
My.Rk = fy × Wpl.y = 136.80 kNm
Mz.Rk = fy × Wpl.z = 63.49 kNm
Therefore
(NEd/((χz × NRk)/γM1))+(kzy × (My.Ed/(χLT × (My.Rk/γM1))))+(kzz × (Mz.Ed/(Mz.Rk/γM1))) = 0.51 6.3.3(4) Eq 6.62
< 1.0
Therefore minor axis O.K.
Therefore section is O.K.


Simply-supported steel and concrete composite beam CGR/September 2004
GHC/October 2004
Simply Supported Steel and Concrete Composite Beam
prEN 1992-1-1, Eurocode 2 – Design of concrete structures – Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
December 2003
prEN 1994-1-1, Eurocode 4– Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part 1.1: General rules
and rules for buildings, January 2004
BS EN denotes a European Standard that has been published by BSi


GHC/October 2004
1. Design Data
1.1. Floor Layout
Span, L = 10.00 m, Effective length, Le = 10.00m, Beam spacing = 3.00 m
Slab Depth, h = 130.00 mm
Depth above profile, hc = 79.00 mm
Deck profile height, hp = 51.00 mm
Average trough width, bo = 140.00 mm
Note: Unpropped construction throughout
1.2. Materials
1.2.1. Steelwork
2
Grade S355, nominal yield strength, fy = 355 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1) EN1993-1-1
2
Design strength, fyd = fy/γM0 = 355 N/mm
2
Modulus of elasticity, Ea = 210 kN/mm 3.2.6(1)
EN1993-1-1
1.2.2. Concrete
Normal Weight concrete strength class C25/30
2
Characteristic cylinder strength, fck = 25 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γc = 1.5 Table 2.1N
Note: Recommended value for γc, given in Table 2.1N, EN1992-1-1. This value may be EN1992-1-1
altered by the UK National Annex to EN1992-1-1.
2
Design value of concrete cylinder strength, fcd = fck/γc = 16.7 N/mm
2
Secant modulus of elasticity, Ecm = 31.5 kN/mm Table 3.1
0.3
Note: alternatively the secant modulus can be calculated from, Ecm = 22[(fcm/10) ], EN1992-1-1
where fcm is the mean value of concrete cylinder compressive strength and is equal to
fck+8(MPa.)
3
Dry Density = 24.0 + 1.0 kN/m (for normal percentage reinforcement) Table A.1 Annex A
3
Wet Density = 24.0 + 1.0 + 1.0 kN/m (for normal percentage reinforcement) EN 1991-1-1
1.2.3. Shear Connectors

19mm diameter stud, dstud = 19.00 mm
Note: EN1994-1-1 uses d to denote the clear depth of the web of the structural section,
the overall diameter of a circular hollow section and the minimum transverse dimension of
a column, in addition to the shank diameter of a stud connector. The variable dstud has
been used in this example to differentiate between these definitions.
95mm length after welding hsc = 95mm
2
Ultimate tensile strength of stud, fu = 450.00 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γV = 1.25 2.4.1.2(5) and
Note: Recommended value used for γV. This value may be altered by the UK National 6.6.3.1(1)

GHC/October 2004
1.2.4. Reinforcement
2
Grade S460, yield strength, fsk = 460 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γs = 1.15 Table 2.1N
2
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 210 kN/mm
Note: for composite structures, the design value of the modulus of elasticity Es may be
taken as equal to the value for structural steel given in EN1993-1-1, 3.2.6 (from clause
3.2(2), EN1994-1-1).
2. Selection of Trial Beam Size

An approximate span to depth ratio for a composite beam is 22. Therefore given a
10.000 m span, try a 450 mm deep beam.
Try UB 406x178x60
ha = 406.4 mm b = 177.9 mm
d = 360.4 mm tw = 7.9 mm
tf = 12.8 mm r = 10.2 mm
2 4
Aa = A = 77 cm Iyy = 21596 cm
3 3
Wel.y = 1063 cm Wpl.y = 1199 cm
y y d ha
tw
tf
Figure 2: Steel Beam Cross-section


GHC/October 2004
For tf = 12.800 mm
2
Yield strength,fy = 355.00 N/mm EN 10025
ε = √((235)/ fy) = 0.814 7.3 & Table 4
c = (b–tw–2×r)/2 = 74.80 mm EN1993-1-1

c/tf = 5.84 < 9×ε = 7.32 Therefore flange is class 1 Table 5.2
d/tw = 45.62< 72×ε = 58.58 Therefore web is class 1
Note: The 72ε limit assumes the neutral axis is at mid depth of the steel section. This is
the case during execution, but will be conservative in the composite stage.
Therefore section is class 1
4. Actions
4.1. Execution Stage
4.1.1. Permanent Actions, gk
Concrete Slab area (per m width) Ac = [(h-hp)×1000 + (140×hp×(1000/153))]
2
Ac =125667 mm
2
Weight of Wet Concrete slab = 3.27 kN/m
2
Weight of Steel deck (allow) 0.17 kN/m
2
Weight of Reinforcement (allow) 0.04 kN/m
2
Weight of Steel beam (allow) 0.25 kN/m
2
Therefore, gexe = 3.73 kN/m
4.1.2. Variable Actions, qk

2
Execution loading = 0.50 kN/m
2
Therefore, qexe = 0.50 kN/m
4.2. Composite Stage

2
Weight of Cast Concrete slab = 3.14 kN/m
2
2
2
2
Services and Ceilings = 0.50 kN/m
2
Therefore, gcomp = 4.10 kN/m

2
Occupancy, (for category C2 ocupancy) = 4.00 kN/m Table 6.1
EN1991-1-1

GHC/October 2004
2
Moveable Partitions = 0.5 kN/m 6.3.1.2(8)
Note: Variable actions are not independent of each other. EN1991-1-1
2
Therefore, qcomp = 4.50 kN/m
4.3. Partial factors for Actions

Partial factor for permanent actions, γG = 1.35 Table A1.2(B)
Partial factor for variable actions, γQ = 1.50 EN 1990-1-1
Note: As the variable actions considered in this example are not independent ψ factors
5. Execution Stage Design

5.1. Design Value of Actions at the Ultimate Limit State
Total design action on beam, Fd.exe = 3×(γG×gexe + γQ×qexe)×L = 173.46 kN
Design moment (on steel section alone), Ma.Ed = (Fd.exe×L)/8 = 216.82 kNm
Design shear (on steel section alone), Va.Ed = (Fd.exe/2) = 86.73 kN
5.2. Plastic Resistance to Vertical Shear, VRd 6.2.2.2

The design plastic shear resistance of the structural steel section, Vpl.a.Rd, in the
absence of torsion is given by: 6.2.6 (2)
Vpl.a.Rd = Av×(fy/√(3))/γM0 EN1993-1-1
Where Av is the shear area given by:

2
Av = Aa – (2 × b × tf) + ((tw + (2 × r)) × tf) = 3460 mm 6.2.6(3)
2
But not less than η × hw × tw = 2634 mm EN1993-1-1
where hw is the clear web depth between flanges hw = ha - (2 × tf) = 381 mm
and η is conservatively taken as 1.0. 6.2.6(3)
EN1993-1-1
2
Av = 3460 mm
! Design shear resistance VRd = Vpl.a.Rd = 709.13 kN 6.2.2.2
Therefore as the applied shear is less than half the shear resistance, the effect of shear on
plastic moment resistance can be ignored 6.2.2.4(1)
5.3. Moment Resistance of Steel Section, Mpl.a.Rd

It is assumed that the beam is fully restrained against lateral torsional buckling,
since the decking spans perpendicular to the beam and is directly attached to it.
! Moment Resistance of steel section alone, Mpl.a.Rd = Wpl.y×fyd = 425.81 kNm
Beam is Satisfactory for positive moment resistance during execution of the Structure

GHC/October 2004
6. Composite Stage Design

6.1. Design Value of Actions at the Ultimate Limit State
Total design load on beam, Fd = 3×(γG×gcomp + γQ×qcomp)×L = 368.62 kN
Design moment (on steel section alone), MEd = Fd×L/8 = 460.77 kNm
Design shear (on steel section alone), VEd = Fd/2 = 184.31 kN

In this example the design plastic shear resistance of the composite section, VRd, is
that for the structural steel section alone, Vpl.a.Rd, in accordance with clause 6.2.6,
EN1993-1-1.
! Design shear resistance VRd = Vpl.a.Rd = 709.13 kN 6.2.2.2
6.3. Effective Width of Compression Flange, beff 5.4.1.2

For a simply-supported beam with a single central row of shear studs, beff = 2×L/8
beff = 2500 mm < beam spacing and therefore less than the slab available between adjacent
beams
6.4. Moment Resistance with full Shear Interaction, Mpl.Rd 6.2.1.2

Compressive Resistance of Slab, Nc.f, neglecting the contribution of any
reinforcement in compression in accordance with clause 6.2.1.2(1)c, is:
Nc.f = 0.85×fck×beff×hc/γc = 2797.92 kN
Tensile Resistance of Steel Section, Npl.a, is:

Npl.a = fyd×Aa = 2716.41 kN
Since Npl.a<Nc.f the plastic neutral axis (pna) lies within the concrete flange,
therefore the moment resistance of the composite beam assuming full shear
interaction is given by:
Mpl.Rd = Npl.a ×[(ha/2)+hc+hp - (Npl.a×hc)/ (Nc.f×2)]

Mpl.Rd = 800.94 kNm > MEd therefore OK
6.5. Shear Connector Resistance 6.6.3.1

The design shear resistance of a single shear connector welded in accordance with
EN14555 is given by:
2
PRd = [0.8×fu×(π×dstud )/4]/γV equation (6.18)
or

GHC/October 2004
6.7. Longitudinal Shear Force Transfer, Rq

Shear force that can be transferred by 32 shear studs, Rq = 32×PRd = 2378.32 kN
6.8. Degree of Shear Connection, η 6.6.1

Minimum degree of shear connection, ηmin, for beam of length less than 25.00m is
given by:
ηmin = 1-[(355/fy)×(0.75-0.03×L)] = 0.550 or 0.4 (whichever is greater) 6.6.1.2
actual degree of shear interaction, η, is given by:

η = Nc/Nc.f = Rq/Npl.a = 0.876 > ηmin therefore OK
6.9. Moment Resistance with Partial Shear Connection MRd 6.2.1.3

Moment resistance of the composite beam is obtained using the linear interaction
method in accordance with clause 6.2.1.3(5) as follows:
MRd = Mpl.a.Rd + (Nc/Nc.f)×(Mpl.Rd – Mpl.a.Rd) equation (6.1)
where:
Nc, is the compressive normal force in the concrete flange
Nc.f is the compressive normal force in the concrete flange if full shear connection is
provided and the ratio η = Nc/Nc.f is the degree of shear interaction. Therefore the
moment resistance with partial shear interaction is:
MRd = Mpl.a.Rd + η×(Mpl.Rd – Mpl.a.Rd) = 754.25 kNm > MEd therefore OK

Beam is satisfactory for positive moment resistance in service
6.10. Transverse Reinforcement and Longitudinal Shear Resistance Check

Check resistance of the concrete flange to splitting. To prevent concrete failure the
longitudinal shear stress should satisfy the following inequality:
vEd < υ×(fck/γc)×sin(θf)×cos(θf) equation (6.22)
EN1992-1-1
where:
υ = 0.6×(1-fck/250) 6.2.3(3) & 6.2.2(6)
θf is the angle between the diagonal strut assumed in the Eurocode 2 model and
the longitudinal axis of the slab, which is chosen (within limits) by the designer.
Note: the recommended range of θf may be found within the National Annex to EN1992,
o o
but in the absence of more rigourous calculation, the limits are 45 >θf >26.5 , for 6.2.4(4)
o o
compression flanges or 45 >θf >38.6 for tension flanges. EN1992-1-1
The design shear stress, vEd, for one stud per trough, is given by:

GHC/October 2004
2
vEd = PRd/(2×0.153×hf) = 3.07 N/mm 6.6.6.1(5)
using hf = hc = 79 mm; 6.6.6.4(1)
If we choose the angle, θf = 26.5° (which leads to a lower bound)
2
υ×(fck/γc)×sin(θf)×cos(θf) = 3.59 N/mm
therefore vEd < υ×(fck/γc)×sin(θf)×cos(θf)is satisfied
In addition, the area of transverse reinforcement within the slab, Asf, should satisfy
the following:
Asf×(fsk/γs)/sf > vEd×hf/cot(θf) equation (6.21)
EN1992-1-1
where:
Asf is the area of the transverse reinforcing bars at spacing sf
Note: in this example the contribution of the profiled metal sheeting has been
conservatively neglected, although clause 6.6.6.4(4) allows the contribution of sheeting
with ribs transverse to the beam and continuous over it to be taken.
When considering simply-supported beams in buildings, where the slab is 7.4.1(4)

continuous and the control of crack width is of no interest, the minimum longitudinal
slab reinforcement, As.min, provided within the effective width of slab should be 0.2%
of the concrete area, for un-propped construction.
2
therefore, As.min = 0.2/100×Ac = 251 mm /m
2
Try A393 mesh reinforcement to the top face of the slab, so Asf = 78.53mm and sf =
200mm
Hence, Asf×(fsk/γs)/sf = 157 N/mm

and vEd×hf/cot(θf) = 121 N/mm
therefore Asf×(fsk/γs)/sf > vEd×hf/cot(θf) is satisfied and no additional reinforcement is

required.
7. Serviceability Limit State Design

7.1. Elastic Stress Check
No stress checks are required for normal conditions and consequently no limits are
outlined in EN1994-1-1. 7.2.2(1)
7.2. Deflections
7.2.1. Execution Stage Deflections
Deflection of the bare steel beam during execution is given by:
4
Second moment or area of the steel section, Iyy = 21596 cm

GHC/October 2004
The deflection due to variable actions, wvar.exe, during execution is given by:
Unfactored variable action on beam, Fvar.exe = 15.00 kN
3
wvar.exe = (5×Fvar.exe×L )/(384×Ea×Iyy) = 4.31 mm < L/360 therefore OK Draft UK National
Annex EN1993-1-1
The deflection due to both permanent and variable actions, wtot.exe, during execution
is given by:
Total unfactored design action on beam, Ftot.exe = 126.82 kN
3
wtot.exe = (5×Ftot.exe×L )/(384×Ea×Iyy) = 36.41 mm < L/250 therefore OK
Note: The above limit corresponds with current British practice, and may change during
the development of the National Annex. It should also be noted that the SCI publication
P300 suggests an absolute limit of 25mm in the non-composite stage to limit ponding of
the wet concrete.
7.2.2. Composite Stage Deflections

The deflection of the composite section due to variable and total actions is given by:
Second moment of area of the composite section based on elastic (uncracked )

properties, Ic, is given by:
2 3
Ic = [Aa×(ha+2×hp+hc) ]/[4×(1+nL×R)] + (beff×hc )/(12×nL) + Iyy
where:
R = Aa/(beff×hc) = 0.039
The effects of creep may be taken into account by using a modular ratio, nL, given 5.4.2.2(2)
by:
nL = n0×(1+ψL×ϕt) = 17.67
where:
n0 = Ea/Ecm where Ecm is the secant modulus of elasticity for short term loading
ϕt is the creep coefficient taken as 1.5 from Figure 3.1, EN 1992-1-1, for loading at
28 days
ψL is a creep multiplier depending upon the type of loading, taken as 1.1 for
permanent loads.
Note: For simplification in building structures, the effects of creep may alternatively be 5.4.2.2(11)
taken into account by replacing the concrete area, Ac, by effective steel areas Ac/n for
both short and long term loading, where n is the nominal modular ratio corresponding to
an effective modulus of elasticity for concrete of Ec,eff taken as Ecm/2.
Appropriate allowance should also be made for the effects of concrete shrinkage in 7.3.1(8)

GHC/October 2004
accordance with clause 5.4.2.2(1), but unless specifically required by the client, the
effect of curvature due to the shrinkage of normal weight concrete need not be
included when the ratio of span to overall depth of composite beam is not greater
than 20.
The overall depth of composite beam is 536 mm and the ratio of span to overall
depth is therefore 18.643 and the effect can be ignored.
In addition, the effects of incomplete interaction may be ignored for most cases, 7.3.1(4)
provided that the shear interaction is greater than 0.50.
4
Therefore the second moment of area of the composite section, Ic = 61362 cm
The deflection due to variable actions, wvar.comp, is:

Unfactored variable action on beam, Fvar.comp = 135.00 kN
Note: The total variable action on the beam includes both permanent and short term
actions. As a result the effects of creep are overestimated and it may be advisable to
differentiate between these when considering the deflection due to variable actions.
3
wvar.comp = (5×Fvar.comp×L )/(384×Ea×Ic) = 13.64 mm < L/360 therefore OK
Therefore the deflection due to both permanent and variable actions, wtot.comp, is
given by:
Total unfactored load on beam, Ftot.comp = 243.05 kN
3
wtot.comp = (5×Ftot.comp×L )/(384×Ea×Ic) = 24.56 mm < L/250 therefore OK
Note: The above limits correspond with current British practice, and may change during
the development of the National Annex.
7.2.3. Composite stage vibration check

The dynamic property of the floor beam should satisfy criteria outlined in clause
A1.4.4, EN1990-1-1. This clause states that the natural frequency of vibrations of
the structure or structural member should be kept above appropriate values which
depend upon the function of the building and the source of the vibration. It does not
provide any guidance regarding the magnitude of this value, but does suggest that
the value be agreed with the client and/or the relevant authority.
A natural frequency limit of 4Hz has been used in this example, assuming that
walking is the main source of the vibration.

GHC/October 2004
Consider the weight of the floor in the dynamic calculations to include the self
weight of the slab and beam, 10% of the imposed load (excluding partitions) and
ceilings and services.
therefore, Fvib = 135.05 kN
Deflection of the composite beam subject to instantaneously applied self weight (as
above), is:
3
wvib = (5×Fvib×L )/(384×Ea×Ic) = 13.65 mm
and the natural frequency of the beam, f, (subject to uniformly distributed loading) is
given by:
f = 18/√(wvib) = 4.873 Hz > 4.0Hz therefore OK
Note: Whilst the 4Hz natural frequency limit is an almost universally accepted industry
standard for vibrations, satisfying the limit will not guarantee that the element or structure
as a whole will perform adequately.

Concrete Filled CHS Composite Column JM/September 2004
GHC/October 2004
Concrete Filled CHS Composite Column
December 2003
The following design guidance document has been used for this worked example:
T.T.Lie and V.K.R. Kodur (1996), Fire Resistance of Steel Columns Filled with Bar-Reinforced Concrete,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 122, Jan 1996, ASCE


GHC/October 2004
Design Example of a concrete filled composite column to EN1994-1-1 Tables and clause
numbers relate to
Consider the 4.5m high column shown EN1994-1-1
subject to an axially applied point unless stated
load, and an applied moment. This otherwise
mimics the common situation where a
column is subject to axially applied
load from storeys above and a
moment induced by a floor beam at NG+NQ
the storey considered.
The column section is circular and

therefore doubly symmetric. It is
MG+MQ
assumed to be pinned top and
bottom.
It has been designed using the
simplified method of analysis in
accordance with clause 6.7.3
4.50 m
EN1994.
The design is based on first order
analysis with appropriate amplification
to the design moments to account for
second order effects.
The required fire resistance is 60
minutes.
1. Design Data Figure 0: Overview of Composite Column

L = 4.50 m
Effective or buckling length, Le = 4.50 m
Note: The Eurocodes do not give any guidance regarding effective or buckling lengths of
members subject to compressive axial load. Reference should be made to textbooks for
this information.
1.1. Loading
1.1.1. Permanent Actions (G)
NG = 3000 kN
MG = 50.00 kNm
1.1.2. Variable Actions (Q)

NQ = 1300 kN
MQ = 45.00 kNm

GHC/October 2004

Partial loading factor for permanent actions, γG = 1.35 EN 1990 Table
Partial loading factor for variable actions, γQ = 1.50 A1.2(B) & N.A
1.3. Materials
1.3.1. Steelwork
2
Grade S355, nominal yield strength, fy = 355 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γM0 = 1.00 6.1(1) EN1993-1-1
2
Design strength, fyd = fy/γM0 = 355 N/mm
2
Modulus of elasticity, Ea = 210 kN/mm 3.2.6(1)
EN1993-1-1
1.3.2. Concrete
Normal Weight concrete strength class C40/50
2
Characteristic cylinder strength, fck = 40 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γc = 1.5 Table 2.1N
2
Design value of concrete cylinder strength, fcd = fck/γc = 26.7 N/mm
2
Secant modulus of elasticity, Ecm = 35.0 kN/mm Table 3.1
0.3
Note: alternatively the secant modulus can be calculated from, Ecm = 22[(fcm/10) ], EN1992-1-1
fck+8(MPa.)
2
2
Design strength, fsd = fsk/γs = 400.0 N/mm
2
Note: for composite structures, the design value of the modulus of elasticity Es may be
taken as equal to the value for structural steel given in EN1993-1-1, 3.2.6 (from clause
3.2(2), EN1994-1-1).
2. Global Analysis
The effects of deformed geometry (second-order effects) must be considered. In
addition, appropriate allowances must be incorporated within the structural analysis
to cover the effects of imperfections, including geometrical imperfections such as
lack of verticality.

GHC/October 2004
Second-order effects will be included indirectly by using a first-order analysis 5.2.2(2)

modified with appropriate amplification. The amplification considered in this example
is in accordance with clause 6.7.3.4(5). See section 12 for details.
In accordance with clause 5.3.2.3(1), a design value for initial bow for the composite
column has been taken from Table 6.5. Assuming a reinforcement ratio of less than
3%, the design value of initial bow should be taken as L/300. Therefore, the member
imperfection should be taken as 15.00 mm
The effects of the applied support moment and the moment due to the initial member
imperfection have been combined and the maximum combined moment at either the
support or mid-span has been used as the design bending moment.
2.1. Design Value Actions

NEd = NG× γG + NQ× γQ = 6000 kN
MEd = 0.5×(MG× γG + MQ× γQ) + NEd×0.015 = 158 kNm (at mid height)
VEd = (MG× γG + MQ× γQ)/L = 30 kN
3. Trial Column size

Trial column size assumed considering axial load only, given the required fire
resistance is (from Lie and Kodur (1996)):
0.4
Trial diameter = [(tfire×(Le-1000)) /(0.08×(fck + 20)) × √(N Ed)]
where: tfire = required fire resistance in minutes = 60 minutes
! trial column diameter = 409 mm
Try CHS 406.4 section

determine minimum wall thickness to prevent local buckling:
maximum (d/t) = 90×(√(235/fy)) = 73.225 Table 6.3
minimum t = 5.550mm therefore min 6 mm thick wall required
Try CHS 406.4x10.0 section

d = 406.4 mm
2
t = 10.0 mm Aa = 124.5 cm
4 3
Ia = 24476 cm Wpa = 1572 cm
Assume 1.5% reinforcement, based on concrete area. Approximate reinforcement

required is:
2 2
minimum reinforcement = ((π×(d-2×t) )/4)×1.5/100 = 1759 mm
A minimum of 6 bars should be adopted, therefore try 10 No. 16 dia bar(s)

2 2
As = 2010 mm drebar = 16 mm Abar = As/10 = 201 mm

GHC/October 2004
4. Composite Cross Section Properties

2 2 2 2
Aa = 124.5 cm As = 20.1 cm Ac = ((π×d )/4)-Aa-As=1153 cm
concrete diameter, dc = d - 2×t = 386 mm
Second Moment of Area of Steel Section, Ia

4
= 24476 cm
R y1
y2
Second Moment of Area of Reinforcement,
Is given by:
Assume 8mm links around main
reinforcement and 50mm cover.
therefore R = dc/2-50–drebar/2 - 8 = 127 mm
y1 = 121 mm y2 = 75 mm
therefore,
2 2
Is = 4×Abar×y1 + 4×Abar×y2 = 1629 cm
4 Figure 0: Composite column cross-
section
4 4
Second Moment of Concrete, Ic = (π×(d-2×t) )/64 = 109425 cm
4.1. Reinforcement Ratio

The ratio of reinforcement area to concrete area should not exceed 6%. In concrete 6.7.3.1(3)
filled hollow sections no longitudinal reinforcement is normally necessary unless
required for fire resistance.
actual reinforcement ratio = (As/Ac) = 1.744 %

Therefore reinforcement ratio is less than 6%
5. Simplified Method of Design

A simplified axial load - moment (N-M) interaction curve is produced in order to
determine the resistance of a composite cross-section to combined compression and
bending. The simplified interaction curve is illustrated in Figure 6.19. A modified
version, indicating a CHS column example, has been reproduced below.

GHC/October 2004
N fcd fyd fsd

A - - Npl.Rd
A -
-
fcd fyd fsd

B - - hn 2hn -
+ hn + Mpl.Rd
fcd fyd fsd
C C Mpl.Rd
- - hn 2hn -
+ hn + Npm.Rd
D
D fcd fyd fsd
B - - - MMax.Rd
M + + Npm.Rd /2
Figure 1: Simplified Interaction Curve and Corresponding Stress Distributions
In order to produce the N-M interaction curve the cross-sectional capacities at points
A to D should be determined assuming the stress distributions indicated.
In addition, it should be noted that the Simplified Method of design is subject to the
following limitations:
• The column cross-section must be prismatic and symmetric about both axes
over its whole height
• The relative contribution of the steel section to the design resistance of the
composite section must be between 0.2 and 0.9
-
• The relative slenderness of the composite column, λ, must not be greater
than 2.0
The limitations noted have been considered at the appropriate location within this
calculation.
The following sections outline the calculation of points A to D on the simplified N-M
interaction curve for the cross-section considered.
5.1. Point A on Simplified N-M Interaction Curve

The plastic resistance to compression Npl.Rd of a composite cross-section should be
calculated by adding the plastic resistances of its components: 6.7.3.2
Npl.Rd = Aa×fyd + 0.85×Ac×fcd + As×fsd equation (6.30)
Note: for concrete filled sections the 0.85 factor can increase up to 1.0 (as shown in
-
Figure3). A further increase in concrete strength may also be taken in accordance with
clause 6.7.3.2(6) with a concrete filled tube of circular cross section if λ does not exceed
0.5 and e/d is less than 0.1 (where e is the eccentricity of loading given by MEd/NEd and d

GHC/October 2004
is the external diameter of the column). An iterative process is therefore required to

determine whether this additional increase in concrete strength can be used.
The plastic resistance to axial force, Npl.Rd, of a concrete filled section is therefore:
Npl.Rd = Aa×fyd + Ac×fcd + As×fsd = 8298 kN
5.1.1. Check Applicability of Simplified Method

At this point we have sufficient data to check the steel section contribution ratio and
the relative slenderness of the column to confirm that the simplified method is
applicable. In addition, the value of relative slenderness may allow a further increase
in concrete strength to be taken:
The steel section contribution ratio, δ, should fufill the following condition: 0.2<δ<0.9. 6.7.1(4)
The ratio, δ, is defined in clause 6.7.3.3(1), and is given by:
δ=(Aa×fyd)/ Npl.Rd = 0.533 equation (6.38)
Therefore 0.2 < δ < 0.9 limits are satisfied and the use of the simplified method is applicable
as far as the steel section contribution is concerned
-
The relative slenderness, λ, for the plane of bending considered is given by: 6.7.3.3 (2)
-
λ=√( Npl.Rk /Ncr) equation (6.39)
where:
Npl.Rk is the characteristic value of plastic resistance to compression using
characteristic values within equation (6.30).
Ncr is the elastic critical normal force for the relevant buckling mode calculated with
the effective flexural stiffness EIeff
Therefore Npl.Rk = Aa×fy + Ac×fck + As×fsk = 9956 kN
For the determination of the relative slenderness and the elastic critical force, the
effective flexural stiffness, EIeff, is given by: 6.7.3.3(3)
EIeff = Ea×Ia + Es×Is + Ke×Ecm×Ic equation (6.40)
where Ke is a correction factor that should be taken as 0.6 6.7.3.3(3)
In addition, account should be taken of the influence of long-term creep effects on

the effective elastic stiffness, in accordance with clause 6.7.3.3(4). The modulus of
elasticity of the concrete should be reduced to the value Ec.eff in accordance with
equation (6.41):
Ec.eff = Ecm×1/[1+(γG×NG/NEd)×φt]

GHC/October 2004
where φt is the creep coefficient according to clause 5.4.2.2(2), taken as 1.5 from
Figure 3.1, prEN 1992-1-1, for loading at 28 days
NEd is the total design normal force
NG.Ed is the part of this normal force that is permanent, therefore, NG.Ed = γG×NG
! Ec.eff = 17.4 kN/mm2
2
and EIeff = Ea×Ia + Es×Is + Ke×Ec.eff×Ic = 66239 kNm
The elastic critical normal force, Ncr, for a pin ended column is given by:
2 2
Ncr = π ×EIeff/Le = 32284 kN
-
Therefore the relative slenderness, λ is:
-
λ=√( Npl.Rk /Ncr)
-
λ=0.555 < 2.0 therefore it is OK to use simplified method of design
-
however, as λ is now greater than 0.5 no further enhancement of the concrete
strength due to confinement is allowed.
The plastic resistance to axial force, Npl.Rd, remains 8298 kN
5.2. Point D on Simplified N-M Interaction Curve

Plastic Bending Capacity, MmaxRd, is given by:
MmaxRd =Wpa×fyd + Wpc×fcd + Wps×fsd
3
Plastic modulus of steel section is Wpa = 1572 cm
3
Plastic modulus of the reinforcement is W ps = 4×y1×Abar + 4×y2× Abar = 158 cm
3 3
Effective plastic modulus of concrete is Wpc = (dc )/6 – Wps = 9458 cm
! Mmax.Rd = Wpa×fyd + 0.5×Wpc×fcd + Wps×fsd
Mmax.Rd = 747 kNm
The axial load at the point of maximum bending is ½ Npm.Rd

therefore 0.5 × Npm.Rd = 1564 kN
5.3. Point C on Simplified N-M Interaction Curve

The plastic resistance moment of the composite section, Mpl.Rd, is given by:
Determination of position of neutral axis depth, hn, when axial load is zero:
hn = (Npm.Rd – Asn×(2×fsd – fcd)) /(2×d×fcd + 4×t×(2×fyd – fcd)) = 57.463 mm

GHC/October 2004
where:
Asn is the reinforcement area within hn, therefore (initial guess) Asn = 2×Abar = 402
2
mm
and Npm.Rd is the compressive resistance of the whole area of concrete (see below).
Generally, Wpsn = Wps but as the worst case is where only two bars occur within hn,
3
and these are on the centre line; W psn = 0 cm
2 3
Wpcn = (d-2×t)×hn – Wpsn = 1276 cm
2 3
Wpan = d×hn – Wpcn – Wpsn = 66 cm
Determine the plastic resistance of composite section, Mpl.N.Rd, taking into account
the compressive normal force:
Mpl.N.Rd = Wpan×fyd + 0.5×Wpcn×fcd + Wpsn×fsd
Mpl.N.Rd = 40.456 kNm
Mpl.Rd = Mmax.Rd – Mpl.N.Rd

Mpl.Rd = 707 kNm
The design value of the resistance of the concrete to compression, Npm.Rd, is given
by:
2
Npm.Rd = (π×dc )/4 × fcd = 3127 kN
5.4. Point B on Simplified N-M Interaction Curve

The value of Mpl.Rd has previously been determined in order to define point C on the
N-M interaction curve.
Mpl.Rd = 707 kNm
6. Plastic Resistance to Vertical Shear, VRd

As a simplification, shear may be assumed to be resisted by the steel section alone. 6.7.3.2(4)
In the absence of torsion, the design plastic shear resistance, Vpl.a.Rd, is given by: 6.2.6 (2)
Vpl.a.Rd = Av×(fy/√(3))/γM0 EN1993-1-1
where Av is the shear area given by:

2
Av = 2×Aa/π = 79.28 cm 6.2.6(3)
EN1993-1-1
! Design shear resistance of composite section,Vpl.a.Rd = 1625 kN 6.2.2.2
the plastic moment resistance can be ignored 6.2.2.4(1)

GHC/October 2004
7. Resistance of Column to Buckling under Axial Loads

For simplification for composite members in axial compression, the design value of
the normal force, NEd, should satisfy the following:
NEd/xNpl.Rd ! 1.0; 6.7.3.5(2)
where:
Npl.Rd is the plastic resistance of the composite section determined using the material
factor γM1 instead of γM0 to determine the steel strength, fyd (Note: in this case γM1 =
γM0 therefore there is no change in the value of Npl.Rd).
x is the reduction factor for the relevant buckling mode given in clause 6.3.1.2
-
EN1993-1-1, in terms of the relative slenderness λ. The relevant buckling curve for
cross-sections of composite columns are given in Table 6.5, EN1994, where ρs is the
reinforcement ratio As/Ac = 1.744% therefore from Table 6.5, buckling curve ‘a’
should be used.
For the determination of the internal forces the design value of the effective flexural
stiffness, EIeff.II, used to determine the relative slenderness of the member, should be
determined from: 6.7.3.4(2)
EIeff.II = Ko×(Ea×Ia + Es×Is + Ke.II×Ec.eff×Ic) equation (6.42)
where Ke.II is a correction factor which should be taken as 0.5
and Ko is a calibration factor which should be taken as 0.9
Note: The value Ec.eff has been used in place of Ecm in equation (6.42) in order to allow for
long term effects (in the same way as calculated in section 6.).
-2
therefore EIeff.II = 579.×106 kN/cm
and the elastic critical normal force, Ncr, for a pin ended column is then given by:
2 2
Ncr.II = π ×EIeff.II/Le = 28221 kN
-
Therefore the relative slenderness, λ is:
-
λ = √( Npl.Rk /Ncr.II) = 0.594
The reduction factor x is given by:

2 -2
x = 1/(Φ+√(Φ -λ ));
-2
where: Φ = 0.5×[1 + α×(λ-0.2) + λ ] where α=0.21 for buckling curve ‘a’
! x = 0.89;
and x×Npl.Rd = 7404 kN

therefore NEd/(x×Npl.Rd) = 0.81 < 1.0 therefore buckling resistance is OK

GHC/October 2004
8. Resistance of Column to Bending Moments

st
For non-sway columns the use of the 1 order moments calculated may be permitted
by multiplying the design bending moment, MEd, by a correction factor, k, given by: 6.7.3.4 (5)
k = β/(1-NEd/Ncr.eff) ! 1.0 equation (6.43)

where:
Ncr.eff is the critical normal force for the relevant axis, corresponding to the effective
flexural stiffness given in clause 6.7.3.4 (2), with the effective length taken as the
column length. In this case, Ncr.eff = Ncr.II = 28221 kN
β is an equivalent moment factor given in Table 6.4, which is equal to 0.66, for a
column with a moment diagram corresponding to end moments and 1.0 for moment
diagram produced from lateral load or member imperfection.
Two values of k must therefore be calculated, corresponding to the applied moment

and the moment due to member imperfections. The design moment, MEd, should
then be modified if appropriate.
when considering the applied end moment, k1 = β1/(1-N Ed/Ncr.eff) = 0.838 < 1.0
therefore k1 = 1.0
for the moment due to member imperfection, k2 = β2/(1-NEd/Ncr.eff) = 1.270
! the design moment at mid-height, MEd = 0.5×k1×(MG× γG + MQ× γQ) +

k2×(NEd×0.015) = 181.80 kNm
9. Plot Simplified Interaction Curve (Figure 6.19 EN1994).

The points A-D, calculated above should now be plotted to produce the simplified N-
M interaction curve (Figure 6.19, EN1994):

GHC/October 2004
Npl.Rd=8298kN A
xNpl.Rd=7404kN
NEd=6000kN
µd×Mpl.Rd
Npm.Rd=3127kN C
½Npm.Rd=1564kN D
MMax.Rd = 747kNm
B
Mpl.Rd = 707kNm M
Figure 2: Simplified N-M Interaction Curve.

Using this simplified N-M interaction curve, the design value of the plastic moment of
the composite member taking into account the relevant compression normal force,
termed Mpl.N.Rd, can be determined. The value of Mpl.N.Rd, is defined as: 6.7.3.6(1)
Mpl.N.Rd = µ d×Mpl.Rd
and the following inequality should be satisfied:
MEd/Mpl.N.Rd = MEd/µd×Mpl.Rd ! αM
where the coefficient αM is taken as 0.9 for steel grades between S235 and S355
and 0.8 for steel grades between S420 and S460.
when NEd = 6000 kN, µd is:
µd = (Npl.Rd – NEd)/(Npl.Rd – Npm.Rd) = 0.444
! MEd/(µd×Mpl.Rd)= 0.579 < 0.9 therefore the bending resistance taking into account the
normal force NEd is OK

Continuous steel and concrete composite beam CGR/September 2004
GHC/October 2004
Continuous Steel and Concrete Composite Beam
December 2003


GHC/October 2004
Design Example of a 20m span continuous composite beam to EN1994-1-1. Table and clause
Consider the internal composite beam A-A between edge columns and a numbers relate to
central support. Beam is subject to uniform floor loading and is assumed to EN1994-1-1
be fully continuous. unless stated
otherwise
A
L = 10.00m
Composite Beam
Composite
Deck Span
L = 10.00m
b = 3.00m b = 3.00m b = 3.00m b = 3.00m
Figure 1: Floor Layout


GHC/October 2004
fck+8(MPa.)
3
Dry Density = 24.0 + 1.0 kN/m (for normal percentage reinforcement) Table A.1 Annex A
3
Wet Density = 24.0 + 1.0 + 1.0 kN/m (for normal percentage reinforcement) EN 1991-1-1
1.2.3. Shear Connectors

19mm diameter stud, dstud = 19.00 mm
Note: EN1994-1-1 uses d to denote the clear depth of the web of the structural section,
the overall diameter of a circular hollow section and the minimum transverse dimension of
a column, in addition to the diameter of a stud connector. The variable dstud has been used
in this example to differentiate between these various definitions.
95mm length after welding hsc = 95mm
2
Ultimate tensile strength of stud, fu = 450.00 N/mm
Partial Safety Factor, γV = 1.25 2.4.1.2(5) and
Note: Recommended value used for γV. This value may be altered by the UK National 6.6.3.1(1)
2
2
z Note: for composite structures, the design
value of the modulus of elasticity Es may be
taken as equal to the value for structural steel
given in EN1993-1-1, 3.2.6 (from clause
r 3.2(2), EN1994-1-1).
2. Selection of Trial Beam Size

An approximate span to depth ratio for
y y d ha
the steel section for a continuous
composite secondary beam is 25.
tw Therefore given a 10.0 m span, try at
least a 400 mm deep beam.
tf
Try UB 457x191x89
z
ha = 463.4 mm b = 191.9 mm
d = 407.6 mm tw = 10.5 mm
b tf = 17.7 mm r = 10.2 mm
2 4
Aa = 114 cm Iyy = 41015 cm
3 3
Figure 2: Steel Beam Cross-section Wel.y = 1770 cm Wpl.y = 2014 cm
iz = 4.29 cm

GHC/October 2004
For tf = 17.700 mm
2
Yield strength, fy = 275.0 N/mm EN 10025
ε = √((235)/ fy) = 0.924 7.3 & Table 4
During the execution stage the neutral axis will be at mid depth of the steel section
and classification of the section is based on sheet 1 of Table 5.2, EN1993-1-1:
c = (b–tw–2×r)/2 = 80.50 mm
Flange: c/tf = 4.55 < 9×ε = 8.32 Therefore flange is class 1 EN1993-1-1
Web: d/tw = 38.82 < 72×ε = 66.56 Therefore web is class 1 Table 5.2
Therefore section is class 1 during execution
In the composite stage it is possible for a distance c of the web to be in

compression over the central support. Assuming the neutral axis is at least 100mm
below the top surface of the upper flange of the beam, c = d-100 = 307.60 mm
Web: c/tw = 29.30 < 33×ε = 30.51 Therefore web is class 1 EN1993-1-1
Table 5.2
Therefore the web of section is class 1 during the composite stage
Note: This classification assumes a neutral axis depth. A more detailed check should be
carried out once the depth of the web in compression is calculated (see section 6.3.3).
4. Actions
4.1. Execution Stage
Concrete Slab area (per m width) Ac = [(h-hp)×1000 + (140×hp×(1000/153))]
2
Ac =145667 mm
2
Weight of Wet Concrete slab = 3.79 kN/m
2
2
2
2
Therefore, gexe = 4.25 kN/m

2
Execution loading = 0.50 kN/m
2
Therefore, qexe = 0.50 kN/m

GHC/October 2004
4.2. Composite Stage

2
Weight of Cast Concrete slab = 3.64 kN/m
2
2
2
2
Services and Ceilings = 0.50 kN/m
2
Therefore, gcomp = 4.60 kN/m

2
Occupancy, (for category C2 ocupancy) = 4.00 kN/m Table 6.1
EN1991-1-1
2
Moveable Partitions = 0.5 kN/m 6.3.1.2(8)
Note: Variable actions are not independent of each other. EN1991-1-1
2
Therefore, qcomp = 4.50 kN/m
4.3. Partial factors for Actions

Partial factor for permanent actions (where unfavourable), γG.sup = 1.35 Table A1.2(B)
Partial factor for permanent actions (where favourable), γG.inf = 1.00 EN 1990-1-1
Partial factor for variable actions (where unfavourable), γQ = 1.50
Partial factor for variable actions (where favourable), γQi = 0.00
Note: As the variable actions considered in this example are not independent ψ factors
5. Execution Stage Design

5.1. Global Analysis
The moments and forces within the section are determined using elastic analysis
methods.
It has been assumed that the rotational stiffness and moment resistance of the
beam/column connection will provide full continuity.
The resistance of the steel beam is determined using plastic section analysis.
Maximum uniformly distributed design load per span

Fexe.max = 3×(γG.sup×gexe + γQ×qexe) = 19.45 kN/m
Minimum uniformly distributed design load per span, Fexe.min = 0.00 kN/m

GHC/October 2004
5.1.1. Load Case 1 – Maximum Design Load on both spans

19.45 kN/m
10.00 m 10.00 m
Figure 3: Design loading
-243.28 kNm
136.85 kNm
Figure 4: Bending Moments with full design load on both spans.
5.1.2. Load Case 2 – Maximum Design Load on one span only
19.45 kN/m
10.00 m 10.00 m
-121.64 kNm
186.26 kNm
Figure 6: Design Bending Moments with maximum load on one span only.
Considering both loadcases, the maximum design moments on the steel section
during the execution stage are:
Design negative moment, Ma.Ed.negative = 243.28 kNm
Design positive moment, Ma.Ed.positive = 186.26 kNm

GHC/October 2004
In addition, the maximum shear force on the steel section is:

Design shear, Va.Ed = 121.64 kN

The design plastic shear resistance of the structural steel section, Vpl.a.Rd, in the
absence of torsion is given by: 6.2.6 (2)
Vpl.a.Rd = Av×(fy/√(3))/γM0 EN1993-1-1
Where Av is the shear area given by:

2
Av = Aa – (2 × b × tf) + ((tw + (2 × r)) × tf) = 5130 mm 6.2.6(3)
2
But not less than η × hw × tw = 4494 mm EN1993-1-1
where hw is the clear web depth between flanges hw = ha - (2 × tf) = 428 mm
and η is conservatively taken as 1.0. 6.2.6(3)
EN1993-1-1
2
Av = 5130 mm
! Design shear resistance Vpl.a.Rd = 814.53 kN 6.2.2.2
5.3. Plastic Moment Resistance of Steel Section

It is assumed that the beam is fully restrained against lateral torsional buckling
under positive moments, since the decking spans perpendicular to the beam and is
directly attached to the top flange.
! Positive moment Resistance of steel section, Mpl.a.Rd = Wpl.y×fyd = 553.75 kNm
Beam is Satisfactory for positive moment resistance during execution of the

Structure
5.4. Lateral Torsional Buckling resistance of the Steel Beam 6.3.2.1

Considering the negative design moment, the design buckling resistance of a
laterally unrestrained beam is taken as: EN1993
Mb.Rd = χLT× Wpl.y ×fy/γM1 equation (6.55)
where:
Wy= Wpl.y for a class 1 section
χLT is the reduction factor for lateral torsional buckling, which for a rolled section, is
given by:
2 2
χLT = 1/(φLT+√(φLT -β×λLT )) 6.3.2.3(1)

GHC/October 2004
where:
2
φLT = 0.5×[1+αLT×( λLT –λLT.0)+ β×λLT ]
the parameters λLT.0 and β may be given in the National Annex. Recommended
values of, λLT.0 = 0.4 and β = 0.75 are given in EN1993-1-1.
αLT is given in Table 6.3, EN1993 using the appropriate buckling curve, determined
using Table 6.5, EN1993. For ha/b = 2.415, use buckling curve c and αLT = 0.49
The non-dimensional slenderness, λLT, is defined as √(Wpl.y×fy/Mcr) where Mcr is the

elastic critical moment for lateral torsional buckling. Unfortunately EN1993-1-1 does
not give expressions for calculating Mcr and therefore designers must use textbooks
to obtain the most appropriate equation for Mcr. However, the non-dimensional
slenderness, λLT, can more conveniently be found using the following relationship:
0.5
λLT = [λLT/λ1]×β
0.5
where λ1 = π×[Ea/fy]
Note: This is equation (F.12) in Appendix F.2 of the draft Eurocode DD ENV1993-1-1,
published in 1992. This information has been removed from the latest draft EN1993-1-1,
presumably as it is considered to be ‘textbook’ information.
For a beam with uniform doubly symmetric cross-sections λLT can be obtained from:
0.5 2 0.25
λLT = 0.9×(L/iz)/[C1 ×[1+0.05×[(L/iz)/(ha/tf)] ] ] = 124.067
where C1 = 1.285 (corresponding to the shape of the bending moment diagram with
load on both spans)
Note: This is equation (F.20) in Appendix F.2 of the draft Eurocode DD ENV1993-1-1,
published in 1992. This information has been removed from the latest draft EN1993-1-1,
presumably as it is considered to be ‘textbook’ information.
Therefore, λLT = 1.238

and φLT = 1.280
which gives χLT = 0.505
! Mb.Rd = 279.86 kNm > Ma.Ed.negative therefore OK
Beam is stable without further restraint during the execution stage
6. Composite Stage Design

6.1. Global Analysis
The moments and forces within the section are determined using linear elastic
global analysis methods. Moment redistribution, in accordance with clause 5.4.4
has been carried out.
The cross section over the support is class 1, and therefore the support moments
(determined for the ‘uncracked’ section) have been reduced by 40%, the maximum
permitted for this class in Table 5.1.

GHC/October 2004
The resistance of the steel beam and composite section are determined using
plastic section analysis.
Maximum uniformly distributed design load on beam, Fcomp.max = 3×(γG.sup×gcomp +

γQ×qcomp) = 38.89 kN/m
Minimum uniformly distributed design load on beam, Fcomp.min = 3×γG.inf×gcomp =
13.80 kN/m
6.1.1. Load Case 1 – Maximum Design Load on both spans
38.89 kN/m
10.00 m 10.00 m
-486.00 kNm
273.38 kNm
Figure 8: Design Bending Moments with full design load on both spans (with no
moment redistribution)
6.1.2. Load Case 2 – Maximum Design Load on one span only
38.89 kN/m
13.80 kN/m
10.00 m 10.00 m


GHC/October 2004
-329.25 kNm
335.32 kNm
Figure 10: Design Bending Moments with load on one span only (with no moment
redistribution)
Therefore considering both loadcases and adopting the maximum 40% reduction in
support moment permitted, the maximum moments on the composite section are:
Design hogging moment, MEd.negative = 486.00×0.6 = 291.600 kNm (loadcase 1)
Design sagging moment, MEd.positive = 335.32+0.5×(0.4×329.25) = 401.170 kNm
(loadcase 2)
Note: This redistributed design positive moment is an approximate value, assuming the
positive moment at mid-span increases by approximately ½ the decrease in negative
moment over the support.
The maximum elastic shear force on the section is 242.00kN. The redistributed
shear force is given by:
VEd = Fcomp.max × L/2 + MEd.negative/L = 223.594 kN
! Design shear, VEd = 223.59 kN

In this example, because the contribution of the reinforced concrete part of the
beam has not been established, the design plastic shear resistance of the
composite section, VRd, is conservatively taken as that for the structural steel
section alone, Vpl.a.Rd, in accordance with clause 6.2.6, EN1993-1-1.
! Design shear resistance (as previously calculated in section 5.2), VRd = Vpl.a.Rd =
814.53 kN 6.2.2.2
6.3. Moment Resistance with full Shear Interaction, Mpl.Rd 6.2.1.2

6.3.1. Effective Widths of Compression Flange, beff 5.4.1.2
Effective length of beam span between supports, Le.1 =0.85×L = 8500 mm Figure 5.1

GHC/October 2004
Effective length of beam over support, Le.2 = 0.25×(2×L) = 5000 mm Figure 5.1
Midspan effective breadth, beff.1 = 2× Le.1/8 = 2125 mm < beam spacing

and support effective breadth, beff.2 = 2× Le.2/8 = 1250 mm < beam spacing
6.3.2. Midspan Moment Resistance

In the midspan region of the beam, the moment resistance of the composite section
is calculated in the same way as for a simply-supported composite beam.
Compressive Resistance of Slab, Nc.f, neglecting the contribution of any

reinforcement in compression in accordance with clause 6.2.1.2(1)c, is:
Nc.f = 0.85×fck×beff.1×hc/γc = 4768.50 kN
Tensile Resistance of Steel Section, Npl.a, is:

Since Npl.a<Nc.f the plastic neutral axis (pna) lies within the concrete flange,
therefore the moment resistance of the composite beam assuming full shear
interaction is given by:
Mpl.Rd.positive = Npl.a ×[(ha/2)+hc+hp - (Npl.a×hc)/ (Nc.f×2)]

Mpl.Rd.positive = 1092.57 kNm > MEd.positive therefore OK
6.3.3. Support Moment Resistance

At the internal support the negative (hogging) moment resistance is obtained by
considering the tensile resistance of the reinforcement within the slab.
2
Assume T16 bars at 200mm centres (1005mm /m) with 25mm cover to the top of
the slab.
2 2 2
dbar = 16mm Abar = π×dbar /4 = 201 mm As = beff.2 × 1005 = 1256 mm
Axial capacity of the steel section, Npl.a, is:

Axial capacity of the slab reinforcement, Ns, is:

Ns = fsk×As/γs = 502.50 kN
Depth of the neutral axis below the top surface of upper flange , zcw, is given by:
zcw = ha/2 - Ns /(2×tw×fyd) = 145 mm
therefore, Mpl.Rd.negative is given by:

2
Mpl.Rd.negative = Mpl.a.Rd + Ns×(ha/2 + z) – Ns /(4×tw×fyd)

GHC/October 2004
where z is the distance from the top of the steelwork to the centreline of the slab
reinforcement, z = 117 mm
Therefore Mpl.Rd.negative = 707.11 kNm > MEd.negative, therefore OK
6.3.4. Lateral Torsional Buckling of Composite Section

In accordance with guidance outlined in clause 6.4.3, the lateral torsional buckling
resistance of this continuous beam (within a building structure), has not been
checked. This is because the relevant conditions outlined in clause 6.4.3(1) have
been satisfied.
6.4. Moment Resistance with Actual Shear Interaction

6.4.1. Shear Connector Resistance 6.6.3.1
The design shear resistance of a single shear connector welded in accordance with
EN14555 is given by:
2
PRd = [0.8×fu×(π×dstud )/4]/γV equation (6.18)
or
2
PRd = [0.29×α×dstud ×√(fck×Ecm)]/γV equation (6.19)
whichever is the smaller, with:

α=0.2×(hsc/dstud + 1) if 3 < hsc/ dstud < 4 equation (6.20)
or
α=1 if hsc/ dstud > 4 equation (6.21)
hsc/dstud = 5.00 therefore α=1
therefore:
2
PRd = [0.8×fu×(π×dstud )/4]/γV = 81.66 kN equation (6.18)
or
2
PRd = [0.29×α×dstud ×√(fck×Ecm)]/γV = 99.10 kN equation (6.19)
The deck spans perpendicular to the beam and is therefore transverse. The effect
of a reduction factor, kt, on the shear connector resistance should be checked. 6.6.4.2
There is one stud per trough of the deck, therefore nr = 1

kt = (0.7×bo)/(√(nr)×hp)×(hsc/hp – 1) = 1.66 equation (6.23)
> 1.0 therefore no reduction in the shear connector resistance
therefore PRd = 81.66 kN


GHC/October 2004
6.4.2. Shear Stud Layout – Loadcase 1
250 24 studs at 153mm centres 41 studs at 153mm centres
10.0 m
CL Column CL Column
Figure 12: Shear Stud Layout corresponding to loadcase 1

The maximum positive moment is at a point approximately 3.75m away from the far
left hand support. Therefore, 24 troughs are available for the positioning of the
shear stud connectors between this support and the point of maximum negative
moment. Between the internal support and the point of maximum negative moment,
there are 41 shear stud positions.
6.4.3. Shear Stud Layout – Loadcase 2
250 26 studs at 153mm centres 39 studs at 153mm centres
10.0 m
CL Column CL Column
Figure 13: Shear Stud Layout corresponding to loadcase 2
The point of maximum sagging moment is approximately 4.0m away from the far
left hand support. Therefore 26 troughs are available for the positioning of the shear
stud connectors. There are 39 shear stud positions between the internal support
and the point of maximum sagging moment.
6.4.4. Degree of Shear Connection, η 6.6.1

The longitudinal shear force transfer, Rq, between the left hand support and the
point of maximum positive moment, is:
Rq.positive = 24×PRd = 1959.84 kN (loadcase 1)

GHC/October 2004
Rq.positive = 26×PRd = 2123.16 kN (loadcase 2)
Note: It has been assumed that the area between the left hand support and the point of
maximum positive moment is critical as there are significantly more shear studs between
the point of maximum positive moment and the internal support, even if those within the
hogging region of the beam are ignored. This should be checked when the number of
shear studs required to yield the slab reinforcement in the hogging region of the beam is
determined (see section 6.4.5).
Minimum degree of shear connection, ηmin, for beam of length less than 25.00m is
given by:
ηmin = 1-[(355/fy)×(0.75-0.03×L)] = 0.419 or 0.4 (whichever is greater) 6.6.1.2
actual degree of shear interaction, η, is given by:

ηpositive = Nc/Nc.f = Rq.positive/Npl.a = 0.626 (loadcase 1)
ηpositive = Nc/Nc.f = Rq.positive/Npl.a = 0.679 (loadcase 2)
both of which are greater than η min and are therefore OK
6.4.5. Moment Resistance, MRd 6.2.1.3

The negative plastic moment resistance in hogging bending should be determined
in accordance with clause 6.2.1.2, assuming there is full interaction between the
structural steel, reinforcement and concrete. Appropriate shear connection should
be provided to ensure yielding of the reinforcement in tension.
In other words, sufficient shear studs should be provided in the hogging region of
the beam to yield the reinforcement in tension prior to failure of the shear
connectors.
The number of studs required to yield the reinforcement, Ns/PRd = 6
There are therefore sufficient shear studs in the hogging region of the beam to yield
the reinforcement in tension. Therefore, MRd.negative is given by:
MRd.negative = Mpl.Rd.negative = 707.11 kNm > MEd.negative, therefore OK
Beam is satisfactory for negative moment resistance in service
The positive moment resistance of the composite beam is obtained using the linear
interaction method in accordance with clause 6.2.1.3(5) as follows:
MRd = Mpl.a.Rd + (Nc/Nc.f)×(Mpl.Rd-Mpl.a.Rd) equation (6.1)

where:
Nc is the compressive normal force in the concrete flange

GHC/October 2004
Nc.f is the compressive normal force in the concrete flange if full shear interaction is
provided, where the ratio η = Nc/Nc.f is the degree of shear interaction.
The degree of shear interaction varies between loadcase 1 and loadcase 2, as the
number of shear studs between the supports and the point of maximum positive
bending moment varies between the two loadcases. The separate values of
positive moment resistance corresponding to the two loadcases should,
theoretically, be considered.
In practice, however, it would normally be acceptable to conservatively calculate the
positive moment resistance of the composite section using the minimum shear
interaction (corresponding to loadcase 1) and compare this with the maximum
positive design moment (corresponding to loadcase 2 in this example). This
approach has been adopted.
Therefore the moment resistance with partial shear interaction, for the sagging
regions of the composite beam (using the minimum shear interaction) is:
MRd.positive = Mpl.a.Rd + ηpositive×(Mpl.Rd.positive – Mpl.a.Rd) = 891.28 kNm > MEd.positive,

therefore OK
Beam is satisfactory for positive moment resistance in service
6.5. Transverse Reinforcement and Longitudinal Shear Resistance Check

Check resistance of the concrete flange to splitting. To prevent concrete failure the
longitudinal shear stress should satisfy the following inequality:
vEd < υ×(fck/γc)×sin(θf)×cos(θf) equation (6.22)
EN1992-1-1
where:
υ = 0.6×(1-fck/250) 6.2.3(3) & 6.2.2(6)
θf is the angle between the diagonal strut assumed in the Eurocode 2 model and
the longitudinal axis of the slab, which is chosen (within limits) by the designer.
Note: the recommended range of θf may be found within the National Annex to EN1992,
o o
but in the absence of more rigourous calculation, the limits are 45 >θf >26.5 , for 6.2.4(4)
o o
compression flanges or 45 >θf >38.6 for tension flanges. EN1992-1-1
The design shear stress, vEd, for one stud per trough, is given by:
2
vEd = PRd/(2×0.153×hf) = 2.70 N/mm 6.6.6.1(5)
using hf = hc = 99 mm 6.6.6.4(1)
If we choose the angle, θf = 26.5° (which leads to a lower bound)
2
υ×(fck/γc)×sin(θf)×cos(θf) = 5.37 N/mm
therefore vEd < υ×(fck/γc)×sin(θf)×cos(θf)is satisfied

GHC/October 2004
In addition, the area of transverse reinforcement within the slab, Asf, should satisfy
the following:
Asf×(fsk/γs)/sf > vEd×hf/cot(θf) equation (6.21)
EN1992-1-1
where:
Asf is the area of the transverse reinforcing bars at spacing sf
Note: in this example the contribution of the profiled metal sheeting has been
conservatively neglected, although clause 6.6.6.4(4) allows the contribution of sheeting
with ribs transverse to the beam and continuous over it to be taken.
The minimum slab reinforcement, As.min = ks×kc×k×fct.eff×Act/σs 7.4.2(1)

where:
2
fct.eff is the mean value of tensile strength which can be taken as fctm = 2.60 N/mm
k is a coefficient which allows for the effect of non-uniform self-equilibriating
stresses and is equal to 0.8
ks is a coefficient which allows for the effect of the reduction of the normal force of
the concrete slab due to initial cracking or local slip and is taken as 0.9
kc is a coefficient which takes account of the stress distribution within the section
immediately prior to cracking and is given by:
kc=1/(1+hc/(2×zo)) + 0.3; <1.0

where zo is the vertical distance between the centroids of the un-cracked concrete
flange and the un-cracked composite section, calculated using the modular ratio n0.
therefore; n0 = 6
The depth from the bottom of the steel section to the centroid of the un-cracked
section, yna, is:
yna = [(ha/2)×Aa×n0 + hc×beff.2×((hc/2)+ha+hp)]/(Aa×n0+ hc ×beff.2) = 446 mm
Therefore the distance between the centroid of the un-cracked composite section
and the centroid of the un-cracked concrete flange, zo, is:
zo= ha+hp+hc/2 – yna = 118 mm
σs is the maximum stress permitted in the reinforcement after cracking. This may be
taken as the characteristic yield strength, fsk
Act is the area of the tensile zone immediately prior to cracking. For simplicity the
area of concrete section within the effective width may be used.;
therefore; kc = 1.005
2
and As.min = 506 mm

GHC/October 2004
2
Try T12-200 reinforcement to the top face of the slab, so Asf = 113.1 mm and sf =
200mm
Hence, Asf×(fsk/γs)/sf = 226 N/mm

and vEd×hf/cot(θf) = 133 N/mm
therefore Asf×(fsk/γs)/sf > vEd×hf/cot(θf) is satisfied and no additional reinforcement is

required.
7. Serviceability Limit States

7.1. Elastic Stress Check
No stress checks are required for normal conditions and consequently no limits are
outlined in EN1994. 7.2.2(1)
7.2. Deflections
7.2.1. Execution Stage Deflections
Deflection of the bare steel beam during execution is given by:
4
Second moment or area of the steel section, Iyy = 41015 cm
The deflection due to variable actions, wvar.exe, during execution is given by:
Unfactored variable action on beam, Fvar.exe = 15.00 kN
The critical loadcase for deflection is where only one span is fully loaded, the
deflection (determined using a commercial software package) is:
wvar.exe = 1.63 mm <L/360 therefore OK Draft UK National
Annex EN1993-1-1
it may change during the development of the National Annex.
The deflection due to both permanent and variable actions, wtot.exe, during execution
is given by:
Total unfactored design action on beam, Ftot.exe = 142.42 kN
The deflection (determined using software package) is:
wtot.exe = 15.50 mm < L/250 therefore OK
Note: The above limit corresponds with current British practice, it may change during the
development of the National Annex. It should also be noted that the SCI publication P300
suggests an absolute limit of 25mm in the non-composite stage to limit ponding of the wet
concrete.

GHC/October 2004
7.2.2. Composite Stage Deflections

The deflection of the composite section due to variable and total actions has been
determined using commercially available software, using the second moment of
area of the composite section based on elastic (uncracked) properties to the
sagging regions of the beam. Appropriate allowance must be made for the effects
of cracking of concrete and in accordance with clause 5.4.2.3(3), a reduced flexural
stiffness has been used over 15% of the span on each side of the internal support.
Second moment of area of the composite section based on elastic (uncracked )

properties, Ic , is given, from first principles, by:
2 3
Ic = [Aa×(ha+2×hp+hc) ]/[4×(1+nL×R)] + (beff.1×hc )/(12×nL) + Iyy
where:
R = Aa/(beff.1×hc) = 0.054
The effects of creep may be taken into account by using a modular ratio, nL, given 5.4.2.2(2)
by:
nL = n0×(1+ψL×ϕt) = 15.90
where:
ϕt is the creep coefficient taken as 1.5 from Figure 3.1, EN 1992-1-1, for loading at
28 days
ψL is a creep multiplier depending upon the type of loading, taken as 1.1 for
permanent loads.
Note: For simplification in building structures, the effects of creep may alternatively be 5.4.2.2(11)
taken into account by replacing the concrete area, Ac, by effective steel areas Ac/n for
both short and long term loading, where n is the nominal modular ratio corresponding to
an effective modulus of elasticity for concrete of Ec,eff taken as Ecm/2.
Appropriate allowance should also be made for the effects of concrete shrinkage in 7.3.1(8)
accordance with clause 5.4.2.2(1), but, unless specifically required by the client, the
effect of curvature due to the shrinkage of normal weight concrete need not be
included when the ratio of span to overall depth of composite beam is not greater
than 20.
The overall depth of composite beam is 613 mm and the ratio of span to overall
depth is therefore 16.303 and the effect can be ignored.
In addition, the effects of incomplete interaction may be ignored for most cases, 7.3.1(4)
provided that the shear interaction is greater than 0.50.
4
Therefore Ic = 109601 cm
Over the central support a reduced flexural stiffness, EaI2, is used, where Ea is the
Youngs modulus of steel and I2 is the second moment of area of the effective steel 1.5.2.12

GHC/October 2004
section calculated neglecting concrete in tension but including reinforcement.

Over the support the concrete is within the tensile zone of the composite section
and I2 is therefore the second moment of area of the steel section and slab
reinforcement, given by:
The depth from the bottom of the steel section to the neutral axis, yna1 = [(ha/2)×Aa +
(ha+h-25-dbar/2)×As]/(Aa+As) = 266 mm
Therefore the distance between the neutral axis and the centroid of the steel
section, ya = yna1 - (ha/2) = 35 mm and to the centroid of the reinforcement, ys =
(ha+h-25-dbar/2) – yna = 135 mm
Number of reinforcing bars in the effective width of slab = As/Abar = 6 (approx) and
4 4
the second moment of area of the reinforcement, Is = 6×π×dbar /64 = 1.930 cm
2 2 4
Therefore, I2 = Aa×ya +Iyy + As×ys +Is = 44661 cm
Therefore the deflection due to variable actions, wvar.comp, is given by:

Unfactored variable action on beam, Fvar.comp = 135.00 kN
wvar.comp = 5.95 mm < L/360 therefore OK Draft UK National
Annex EN1993-1-1
it may change during the development of the National Annex.
Therefore the deflection due to both permanent and variable actions, wtot.comp, is
given by:
Total unfactored load on beam, Ftot.comp = 273.05 kN

wtot.comp = 10.02 mm< L/250 therefore OK
Note: The above limit corresponds with current British practice, it may change during the
development of the National Annex.
7.2.3. Composite stage vibration check

The dynamic property of the floor beam should satisfy criteria outlined in clause
A1.4.4, EN1990-1-1. This clause states that the natural frequency of vibrations of
the structure or structural member should be kept above appropriate values which
depend upon the function of the building and the source of the vibration. It does not

GHC/October 2004
provide any guidance regarding the magnitude of this value, but does suggest that
the value be agreed with the client and/or the relevant authority.
A natural frequency limit of 4Hz has been used in this example, assuming that
walking is the main source of the vibration.
Consider the weight of the floor in the dynamic calculations to include the self
weight of the slab and beam, 10% of the imposed load (excluding partitions) and
ceilings and services.
therefore, Fvib = 150.05 kN
It is necessary to consider the mode shape of vibration when calculating the natural
frequency of a continuous beam. Due to the influence of the asymmetric inertial
forces, the natural frequency is approximately the same as that of a simply-
supported beam.
! The deflection of the composite beam subject to instantaneously applied self

weight is:
3
wvib = (5×Fvib×L )/(384×Ea×Ic) = 8.49 mm
and the natural frequency of the beam, f, (subject to uniformly distributed loading) is
given by:
f = 18/√(wvib) = 6.178 Hz > 4.0Hz therefore OK
Note: Whilst the 4Hz natural frequency limit is an almost universally accepted industry
standard for vibrations, satisfying the limit will not guarantee that the element or structure
as a whole will perform adequately.

Worked Examples in EC3 and EC4 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Worked Examples in EC3 and EC4 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Steel and Steel and Concrete

Department for Communities and Local Government

© Crown Copyright, 2007

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

If you require this publication in an alternative format please email

Product Code: 06 BD 04021 (f)

CHAPTER 2 EUROCODES SYSTEM 10

CHAPTER 3 GENERAL DESIGN ISSUES 14

CHAPTER 4 EN1993 STEEL STRUCTURES 17

CHAPTER 5 EN1994 STEEL AND CONCRETE

CHAPTER 6 EFFECTS ON UK STRUCTURAL

• An overview of the impact that Eurocodes 3 and 4 will have in the UK

The objectives of the Eurocodes are

1.1 Steel Structures

Part 1 General rules and rules for buildings

Part 4-1 Silos

1.2 Composite steel and concrete structures

Part 1 General rules and rules for buildings

1.3 Aim and scope of this publication

To keep this document concise detailed design guidance is not presented.

The structural Eurocode system will contain the following codes:

BS EN 1990 — Basis of Structural Design

EN1991 Actions on structures

EN1992, EN1993, EN1994 Design & detailing

Geotechnical & Seismic

ETAs Product harmonised

Figure 1. Links between the individual Eurocodes

• National title page

2.1 Eurocodes Terminology

• Imposed floor & roof loads

Variable actions are sub-divided into two groups:

• Leading variable actions

• Accompanying variable actions

2.1.1 Types of clause used in the Eurocodes

3 General Design Issues

3.1 Convention for member axes

3.2 The explicit use of factors

3.2.1 Symbols used in the Eurocodes

Symbol used in design code

Terms Latin upper case letter used

Table 3. Examples of symbols with multiple subscripts used in the Eurocodes

Terms Eurocode symbol

3.3 Documents required when designing with the Eurocodes

• Calculation of buckling lengths for members in compression.

The above list should not be considered as exhaustive.

4 EN1993 Steel Structures

4.1 Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings

4.1.1 Material Properties

4.1.2 Ductility requirements for structural steel

4.1.3 Fracture toughness

4.1.4 Structural stability of frames

αcrcr ≥ 10 for elastic analysis

αcrcr ≥ 15 for plastic analysis

4.1.5 Structural imperfections

4.1.6 Buckling – members in compression

slenderness ratio λ of the compression member. λ is a function of the slenderness ratio of

4.1.7 Buckling – uniform members in bending

• The general case, and

4.1.8 Buckling – uniform members in bending and axial compression

4.2 Part 1-2: General rules – Structural fire design

4.2.1 Material properties

Prescriptive Rules Performance Based Code

Member Analysis of Part Analysis of Selection of Simple or Advanced