Professional Documents
Culture Documents
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
1. INTRODUCTION
Frames of varying size and complexity represent one of the most frequent uses of structural steel. Whilst the most obvious application is in buildings, support frames for bridges, offshore platforms, falsework and industrial storage systems also constitute a significant usage. The main components of a rectangular arrangement are identified in Figure 1. Vertical loads on the roof and floors are transmitted by bending and shear into the columns, which, in turn, transfer load into the foundations by means of compressive, bending and shearing actions. Horizontal loading, e.g. due to wind, must also be transferred into the foundations and may, depending upon the frame geometry and the relative magnitudes of the vertical and lateral loads, induce tension in some columns and therefore uplift on the foundations.
1 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
In general, a 3-dimensional building frame may be separated into a set of planar frames with well-defined support or restraint conditions for out-of-plane deformations, see Figure 1. These planer frames should be investigated for two different limit state conditions: Ultimate limit state. Serviceability limit state. Details of these investigations are provided in later lectures. In this introductory lecture attention is focused on describing the main aspects of frame behaviour and the ways in which these aspects are linked to various techniques for predicting structural response. The lecture is a preparation for later more detailed treatments.
2. FRAMING SYSTEMS
For the purposes of analysis and design, steel frames have traditionally been regarded as belonging to one of two categories: pin-jointed (simple construction). rigid-jointed (continuous construction). Of course, examples exist for which elements of both types are present; the present discussion does not consider these cases in developing the subject. In Eurocode 3 this simple subdivision has been extended by including consideration of the method of analysis and including joints that behave as semi-rigid. This leads to the more complex classification system that is shown in Table 1. Type of framing Method of global analysis Simple Pin joints Nominally pinned Nominally pinned Continuous Elastic Rigid Types of connections
2 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
Nominally pinned Rigid-Plastic Full-strength Nominally pinned Elastic-Plastic Full-strength - Rigid Nominally pinned Semi-continuous Elastic Semi-rigid Rigid Nominally pinned Rigid-Plastic Partial-strength Full-strength Nominally pinned Elastic-Plastic Partial-strength - Semi-rigid Partial-strength - Rigid Full-strength - Semi-rigid Full-strength - Rigid Nominally pinned Table 1 Methods of framing and global analysis in Eurocode 3 This introductory lecture does not cover the cases where the joints are semi-rigid. Further information on this type of joint and their influence on frame design is given in Lectures 11.7 and 14.13.
3. SIMPLE CONSTRUCTION
Building frames designed and executed according to this principle require comparatively little analysis as the loads may be allocated to individual members on the basis of simple statics. Since the joints are assumed to be incapable of transmitting moments, lateral stability requires the use of bracing because a rectangular bay with pinned beam to column connections, of course, possess no lateral stiffness. The only exception to this condition is when the feet of the columns are rigidly fixed to a solid foundation so that they can function as vertical cantilevers. Figure 2 illustrates these points.
3 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
Once the forces in the members have been decided upon, design may be conducted by considering individual beams, columns and joints, using the procedures presented in Lectures 7 and 11 respectively. All horizontal loading is assumed to be resisted by the bracing system and, in the terminology of Eurocode 3 [1], the structure is designed as a braced frame.
4. CONTINUOUS CONSTRUCTION
When rigid joints are used, considerable interaction between beams and columns occurs due to transfer of moments around the frame. Various approaches to analysis and design may be employed; the most important consideration is the extent to which the effects of deflections on the response of the frame must be taken into account. Although rigid joints may be used in conjunction with bracing, construction economies make this arrangement an uncommon solution. Rigid joints are normally only used as an alternative to bracing so that lateral stiffness is provided by so-called frame action as illustrated in Figure 3.
5. METHODS OF ANALYSIS
5.1 First-Order Elastic Analysis
4 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
In first-order elastic analysis a linear relationship between the applied loading F and the deformations (d) is assumed. The internal force distribution in the frame is assumed to be unaffected by the displacements in the frame. Frame analysis can therefore be conducted according to linear elastic principles as outlined in Lecture 7.1. The frame responds according to line 1 in Figure 4.
5 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
6 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
7 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
If the spread of plasticity both through the cross-section and along the member length is taken into account, instead of assuming that it is concentrated into the desirable regions of the plastic hinges, then the resulting type of analysis is usually termed plastic zone theory. It provides an even closer representation of actual behaviour and leads to a curve similar to line 7.
6. COMMENTS
In principle, any of the above approaches to frame analysis may be adopted. In practice, some of the effects may be found to be of little real significance for certain classes of structure, e.g. for many low-rise frames second-order effects are very small and may reasonably be neglected. Certain cases may also arise where particular forms of response should be avoided, e.g. for buildings containing heavy cranes which will cause repeated loading, elastic design is normally employed. The more complex approaches will almost certainly require the use of suitable computer software to implement the volume of calculation. It is therefore important to select an approach which is compatible with both the accuracy required and the level of importance of the project under consideration. When calculating deflections at working load levels for the purpose of checking serviceability, it is usual to employ only linear elastic analysis.
7. FRAME CLASSIFICATION
In order to provide guidance on the most appropriate type of analysis to use in particular cases, Eurocode 3 has introduced the idea of frame classification [1]. A double condition is used: braced or unbraced. non-sway or sway.
where d is the horizontal displacement at the top of the storey, relative to the bottom of the storey.
8 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
h is the storey height. H is the total horizontal reaction at the bottom of the storey. V is the total vertical reaction at the bottom of the storey. Both requirements follow from the idea that, if satisfied, the load-carrying resistance determined by neglecting sway effects will be only a ten per cent less than that calculated by including such effects. This approach is, in turn, based upon the Merchant-Rankine concept for estimating the true ultimate load of a frame that fails by some from of inelastic instability from a knowledge of its elastic critical load and its first-order, rigid-plastic collapse load. Both loads are relatively straightforward to calculate. The original Merchant-Rankine formulae for the failure load Vsd is:
where: Vcr is the elastic critical load. Vpl is the first-order, rigid-plastic collapse load. From this it is clear that when Vcr >> Vpl, then Vsd ~ Vpl. Non-sway frames should be designed using first-order elastic or plastic theory to resist safely the arrangements of loads that lead to the most severe combinations of internal forces and moments in the individual members and connections. The effects of restraint to columns in improving their stability should be taken into account by using the concept of effective buckling length as explained in Lecture 7.7. Frames that do not meet the above requirements must be designed as sway frames.
9 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
First-order or second-order analysis may be used. If the analysis is first-order, second-order effects may be allowed for in an appropriate way when designing the columns by using the results of a first-order analysis and either: - using amplified sway moments, or - using the sway-mode buckling lengths. When second-order elastic global analysis is used, in-plane buckling lengths for the non-sway mode may be used for member design. In the amplified sway moments method, the sway moments found by a first-order elastic analysis should be increased by multiplying them by the ratio:
where VSd is the design value of the total vertical load. Vcr is its elastic critical value for failure in a sway mode. The amplified sway moments method should not be used when the elastic critical load ratio VSd/Vcr is more than 0,25. Sway moments are those associated with the horizontal translation of the top of a storey relative to the bottom of that storey. They arise from horizontal loading and may also arise from vertical loading if either the structure or the loading is asymmetrical. As an alternative to determining VSd/Vcr directly, the following approximation may be used in beam-and-column type frames:
where d, h, H and V are as defined previously. When the amplified sway moments method is used, in-plane buckling lengths for the non-sway mode may be used for member design. When first-order elastic analysis with sway-mode in-plane buckling lengths is used for column design, the sway moments in the beams and the beam-to-column connections should be amplified by at least 1,2 unless a smaller value is shown by analysis to be adequate. Rules for the application of plastic analysis procedures to sway frames are given in Clause 5.2.6.3 of Eurocode 3 [1].
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
Satisfying the verification rules for resistance and stability of frames has to assure that neither the frame as a whole, nor the isolated members in the frame on their own, will collapse under a load which is smaller than the design load. For the safety verification of the individual members, the members may be separated from the frames to be dealt with as independent isolated sub-structures. The end conditions of the members should then comply with the deformation conditions of the members in the special frame in a conservative way (e.g. by assuming nominally pinned end conditions) and the interaction effects at the ends of the members should be considered by applying equivalent end moments and end forces, see Figure 9.
In the safety verification of these separated members, the member imperfections must be taken into account; these imperfections have normally been included when formulating the member design rules as explained in other Lectures 7. In general, the isolated members by their loading and end-conditions represent simply supported beam-columns with or without restraints between their ends, see Figure 10. Beam-columns are members loaded by normal forces and moments about one or two axes.
11 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
If, in a second-order elasto-plastic calculation, the real behaviour of the frame has been approximated and local instability and out-of-plane buckling is prevented, then further verification is not needed. In this case the strength check - also called the cross-sectional check - is implicity satisfied by working with the actual distribution of forces and moments. This is also valid for the stability check. It has to be shown that the equilibrium is stable under the design load. In other words: VSd representing the design load, must be less than the elasto-plastic collapse load Vk. If the distribution of forces and moments, as a result of the design load, is calculated with a first-order elastic method, then it is quite possible that the actual elasto-plastic resistance Vk of the frame is exceeded. Verification rules to overcome this problem are therefore needed. On the one hand, crosssectional checks are needed, to show that each cross-section can offer enough resistance to withstand normal forces, shear forces and bending moments due to the design load. On the other hand, stability checks are necessary to show that every member and the frame as a whole are stable. In general, for each method of calculating the distribution of forces and moments, additional verification rules are necessary related to the specific method of calculating the distribution of forces and moments. All collapse mechanisms which are relevant for the frame and which have not been taken into account in calculating the distribution of forces and moments, should be checked by using adequate verification rules. If a frame can deform only in its own plane and plate buckling (of web and/or flange), torsion, torsional buckling and lateral-torsional buckling are not relevant, then there are only two types of verification rules of importance: cross-sectional checks and stability checks. Depending on the method of calculating the distribution of forces and moments, specific verification rules must be taken into account. Table 2 shows that these rules depend on the calculation method used. Table 2 Relation between global analysis and code check Method for calculation the forces and moment distribution Cross-sectional verification rules First-order elastic First-order plastic YES NO Stability checks YES YES
12 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19
ESDEP WG 7
file:///D:/str/SCOALA/2009-2010/PBP/lit/structural_analysis/l1100.htm
YES NO
NO NO
When the method of calculating the distribution of the forces and moments is relatively simple, the verification rules are complex and the other way around. In general verification rules for members are used in the step after the calculation of the distribution of forces and moments in a frame.
9. CONCLUDING SUMMARY
Frame behaviour and thus the approach which should be used in design has been shown to be crucially dependent upon the type of joints used. The 2 main forms of construction are: i. simple construction - assumed joints act as if pinned. ii. continuous construction - assumed joints act as if rigid. Simple statics is usually all that is needed to determine the distribution of internal forces in the individual members of frames designed according to the principles of simple construction. 8 different approaches - varying in precision and complexity - to the analysis of rigid jointed frames are possible. Eurocode 3 classifies frames as braced/unbraced and for the latter as either non-sway/sway. The basis for this classification is an assessment of the extent to which deformations influence the response of the frame. Different design approaches are necessary for the three classes: i. braced. ii. unbraced and non-sway. iii. unbraced and sway. Each approach has been outlined, including the treatment of imperfections and the link between the approach adopted to consider overall frame behaviour and that necessary when considering individual members.
10. REFERENCES
[1] Eurocode 3: "Design of Steel Structures": ENV 1993-1-1: Part 1.1, General rules and rules for buildings, CEN, 1992.
13 of 13
12.04.2010 19:19