1

FRAME DESIGN AND ECONOMY

ir C.M. Steenhuis TNO Building and Construction Research, Lange Kleiweg 5, 2288 GH, Rijswijk, P.O. Box 49, 2600 AA, Delft, the Netherlands 1. Summary Eurocode 3 contains design rules which enable economic design of steel structures. In this respect, the connection design plays an important role. A restriction is however, that suitable software should be available for the calculation of both mechanical properties of a structure and the costs. In this paper, attention is paid to a model for the determination of costs and an optimisation procedure, which could be the basis of such software. 2. Introduction It is a common approach in practice to design steel structures with stiff and full-strength connections or nominally pinned connections. In the last two decades, the University of Technology in Deft [Zoetemeijer, 1985] investigated the mechanical behaviour of flexible beamto-column connections, both welded and bolted end plate connections. These flexible connections are actually a third class of connections. The purpose of the research performed in Delft was to develop and verify calculation methods which enable the determination of the mechanical properties of these connections. Meanwhile, the research has been used as backgr ound to parts of the Dutch Steel Codes and Eurocode 3 (i.e. annex J). With help of Eurocode 3 annex J two basic questions can be answered:

When is a connection full-strength and stiff? What are the mechanical properties of flexible connections (strength, stiffness and rotation capacity, see figure 1)?

One of the reasons to carry out research to flexible connections is the potential economical benefit of these connections. The connections can be designed without expensive stiffeners, which will reduce production costs. When a designer can use tools to evaluate the overal costs (members and connctions) of a steel structure, he will be able to compare and make an economical choice out of several design solutions. In the late eighties both the Universities of Technology in Delft and Eindhoven (the Netherlands) carried out research to the question how to determine the costs of a steel structure with help of the computer. This paper will pay attention to this research. Published in Proceedings of the State of the Art Workshop on Semi-Rigid Behaviour of Civil Engineering Structural Connections, ed. by A. Colson, COST C1, Strasbourg, France, 1992, pp 549-559.

Figure 1.

Mechanical properties of a connection

A second research, carried out at the University of Technology, Eindhoven in co-operation with TNO-Building and Construction Research, Rijswijk, was focussed at the question how to design with respect to economy in a systematically way. 3. A model to determine costs A starting point for the model (as developed in Eindhoven) to the determine the costs of a steel structure is the analysis of material costs and productions costs. Production costs consists of the costs of the production of the connections, the cambering of the sections and the costs of corrosive protection. Other costs, like engineering costs are not taken into account. The aim of the model is to determine the cost of a steel structure in the design phase. In that stage, the geometry of beams, columns and connections should be known. Determination of material costs is then a minor problem: price-lists for sections, angles and plates provide sufficient information [Dikema et al 1986]. For the determination of the production costs it is necessary to analyse the production process of the different components in a steel structure. These components are in an orthogonal frame for example: beams, columns, plates and cleats. For each component, it is analysed what activities should be carried out for the production. Figure 2 shows for example the production process of a member. Based on the gained information in the previous analysis, an IDEF-0 [ICAM, 1986] model has been developed. This is a model of the costs build up of a steel structure. IDEF-0 (ICAM

definition, where Icam is Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing) is functional modelling technique, suitable for software development. Figures 3, 4 and 5 show a part of the model as developed in Eindhoven. Each box in the model represents an activity, that can consists of several activities at a more detailed level. At the lowest level of IDEF-0 diagrams, all activities have been specified such that it is clear how to perform the function. Starting point for the cost model is that the costs can be determined based on geometry. The way of predicting the costs will be identical for all steel-fabricators (e.g. the costs of welding is dependent on the amount welding material). The height of costs however will be dependent on the production means (e.g. hand welding, robot welding). In other words, the height is dependent on the company producing the structure.

Figure 2: Schematically representation of the production process of a member.

Figure 3.

IDEF-0 model for costs, diagram A0

Figure 4.

IDEF-0 model for costs, diagram A1

Figure 5.

IDEF-0 model for costs, diagram A11

In principle, two different approaches exist to determine the costs based on geometry. First of all, one could follow the common practice of using tables e.g. tables for drilling costs of holes in plates with a certain diameter and depth. An other approach however describes the dependancy of costs and geometry in a rather mathematical format. In that case, the price of for example drilling a hole is a function of the number of holes, the depth of the holes and the diameter. Price = function (number of holes, hole diameter, depth ). The first approach has been worked out in Delft [Jansen & Maatje, 1988], and has the advantage that it fits closely with the common practice. Disadvantages are that tables will be largely company dependent, require a heavy database management system and will be difficult to maintain in case production methods or wages change. The second approach [Steenhuis, 1988] has been worked out in Eindhoven in co-operation with TNO and Evers Staalconstructies, a steel fabricator in the Netherlands, and has the advantage that the number of company dependent cost parameters is small, which means a good maintainability. A disadvantage is that it requires the introduction of a new method of calculating costs in the company. This can be solved by using the new method some time simultaneously with the tables, and to adjust the costs-parameters in the model to the specific situation in the company. This second approach has been used to develop commercial available software [Jansen & Maatje, 1989].

4. Design and economy There exist a lot of literature [Farkas, 1984; Eschenauer, 1990; Brebbia et al 1989] about automatic design of steel structures based on minimal costs. The given methods mostly assume the following two simplifications: The costs of a structure are minimal if the weight is minimal; The problem is a mathematically continuous problem, i.e. the result of the process is for example a minimum value for the plastic design moment resistance of the sections, and not a given section like HEA 200. Van Douwen [van Douwen, 1979] showed with some examples that the first simplification nowadays is not very valid, because of high production costs. The second simplification means that the result of the optimisation process is a number and not a section. The designer still has to make a choice of the section. This choice can make the difference between "an ordinary" solution and the "optimal" solution. Therefore, this simplification is not really practical. In Eindhoven a interactive design method is developed. This method integrates the design of the overall structure and the connections. Figure 6 shows a flow chart of the procedure. The start of the process (0, 1, 2) is the design of the members in a structure based on van "minimal weight" with help of first order plastic analysis [Massonet & Save, 1965] For this first step, also elastic or elastic-plastic frame analysis can be used [Farkas, 1984; Eschenauer, 1990; Brebbia et al 1989]. An important assumption for this step is that the connections are rigid and full strength. Based on the results of the analysis the propertie s of the members will be chosen. Then a code-check of the members is performed (3). In case the structure or a part of the structure doesn't satisfy the code requirements (4), the properties of (some) members will be increased (6). Finally, a solution can be found which fulfils the requirements of strength, stiffness and stability (7). A next step is the design of the connections, so that they fulfil the original assumptions. These connections are mostly stiffened. Then follows an interactive process (6), (5), (3), (4) (7), (8), where stiffeners are removed from the connections, and the properties of the members increase. The mechanical properties of the connections decrease and simultaneously, the properties of the members increase. Every time it is verified if the found solution still satisfies the requirements for strength, stiffness and stability. If so, the costs are evaluated. These steps will be repeated until the optimum is passed (8), (9).

Figure 6.

Representation of the design process of a steel structure.

The presented method is suitable for un-braced frames. In case of braced frames, a similar approach can be adopted. In that case, it is however faster to start with nominally pinned connections, and to decrease the size of the beams with the introduction of moment connections [Dol & Steenhuis, 1991]. After some iterations, the optimum will be found. 5. Conclusions when applying the design method In a prototype system the design method has been tested. The TNO/CASTA-programs were used in combination with special modules developed in Eindhoven to evaluate the costs and to design the connections. These latter modules are not commercial available, because it concerned a pilot version. Based on a test, which involved an un-braced tree storey frame, the following conclusions could be drawn with respect to the design method:

The design methode is feasable, because it leads within a restricted number of iterations to a number of solutions, among which the most economical. The designer gets information out of the design process to evaluate a solution at applicability. This is important, because it supplies the designer with information to control the process. Moreover, the designer gets the possibility to chose an other solution than the most economical.

At the current level of prices, it is better not to start the process with full strength and stiff connections. Full-strength and stiff connections are difficult and expensive to produce and therefore will not lead to an economical solution; The example [Steenhuis, 1988] showed that a solution with semi-rigid connection was 5% cheaper compared with a solution with stiff connections, see figure 7 for a detail. The advantage was due to application of un-stiffened and almost un-stiffened connection with higher beam dimensions; In the design process, there is a lot of transfer of data between different modules. This transfer should be made automatically, otherwise engineering costs will increase substantially.

In an example [Dol & Steenhuis, 1991] of a braced frame, it appeared that the solution with partial-strength connections was 11% cheaper than a solution with web cleat connections (nominally pinned), see figure 8 for a detail. The advantage was due to application of short end plate connections in combination with lower beam dimensions, compared to the solution with nominally pinned connections.

Figure 7.

Two functional equivalent solutions in an un-braced frame, the right one is cheaper.

Figure 8.

Two functional equivalent solutions in a braced frame, the right one is cheaper.

Literature Zoetemeijer P.(1985): Summary of the research to bolted beam column connections (in Dutch), Report 6-85-7, University of Technology, Delft. R. Bjorhovde (1991): Proceedings of the second Conference on Connection Design, Pittsburgh W.Ph.Jansen & F.Maatje (1989): Calculation of the costs of steel structures with help of the computer (in Dutch), Bouwen met Staal 22 p. 45-47 Farkas J.(1984): Optimum design of metal structures, Ellis Horwood Ltd Eschenauer H.(1990): Multi criteria Design Optimization, Springer Verlag Brebbia C.A. & Hernandez S (1989): Computer Aided Optimum Design of Structures, Springer Verlag van Douwen A.A.(1979): Connection Design and Economy (in Dutch), Bouwen met Staal no. 47. Massonet C.E. & Save M.A (1965): Plastic Analyses vol.1, 1965 C.M.Steenhuis (1988): Optimisation of costs for orthogonal frames (In Dutch), Technische Universiteit Eindhoven Dol C. & Steenhuis C.M (1991):, Use of the Dutch Steel Codes in the Design Process of a Steel-Structure (in Dutch), Bouwen met Staal, November 1991, Staalbouwkundig Genootschap, Rotterdam ICAM architecture part II volume IV (1981): Function modelling manual (IDEF-0), softech Inc. Dikema & Chabot, Prijscourant nr. 243 a (1986) W.Ph.Jansen & F.Maatje (1988): Calculation of the costs of steel structures with help of the computer (in Dutch), Technische Universiteit Delft