Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Structural Engineering
University of
Sheffield
CONTENTS
CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... 2
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 5
1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1
1.2
2.2
3.2
3.3
3.4
Material .............................................................................................................................. 7
5.1
Scopes......................................................................................................................... 7
5.2
Outline ........................................................................................................................ 8
6.2
6.3
6.3.1
6.3.2
6.4
7
P. effects ................................................................................................................. 11
7.2
P. effects ............................................................................................................... 12
7.3
7.3.1
7.3.2
Determination of cr ............................................................................................. 13
7.3.3
Outlines .................................................................................................................... 18
8.2
8.3
8.4
Procedures ................................................................................................................ 19
10
10.2
10.3
10.4
Purlins....................................................................................................................... 24
10.5
11
10.1
Bracing ............................................................................................................................. 25
11.1
11.1.1
11.3
12
11.2
12.2
12.3
Shear ......................................................................................................................... 29
12.3.1
12.3.2
12.4
13
12.4.1
12.4.2
13.2
13.3
13.4
14
13.1
Outline ...................................................................................................................... 35
3
14.2
14.3
14.4
14.5
15
Appendix .......................................................................................................................... 39
16
Reference .......................................................................................................................... 47
LIST OF FIGURES
1 multiple span frames
2 Single-span symmetrical portal frame (Malik SN051a-EN-EU)
3 Side Cladding (Malik SN051a-EN-EU)
4- P. effects
5- Magnification of sway displacements
6- Snap-through failure
7- Parameters required
8- Examples of Category A
9- Definition of horizontal displacements
10- Frame imperfections as column slopes
11- Force equivalent to frame imperfections
12- Apex and Eaves Connections
13- Stabilising of the column
14- Braces to rafter bottom flange
15- Braced portals
16- Effects of purlin flexibility on bracing
17- Bracing to inner flanges
18- Typical stiff torsional restraint
19- Bracing at plastic hinge
20- Bending moment diagram for uniform temperature rise
21- Probable positions of fire hinges in portal frame
22- Rafter collapse to eaves level
23- Moment Ratios
24- Dimensions defining taper factor
25- Value of Bt
26 Forces and moments acting on the column and rafters
1
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Outline of Portal Frames
Portal frame construction is a method of building and designing simple structures, primarily
using steel. The connections between the columns and the rafters are designed to be momentresistant, i.e. they can carry bending forces. Because of these very strong and rigid joints
some of the bending moment in the rafters is transferred to the columns. This means that the
size of the rafters can be reduced or the span can be increased for the same size rafters. This
makes portal frames a very efficient construction technique especially in steel being able to
make use of plastic methods. Portal frames construction is popular due to the following
reasons;
1) It provides large clear floor areas offering maximization of the site for
example in; retail stores, distribution warehouse, manufacturing
facilities, and leisure centers.
2) They are capable of being extended in the future if this is accounted
within design.
3) Multiple bays are possible where internal column can be eliminated
where required by using valley beam as shown if figure .1.
1.2
2
2.1
2.2
There are a number of differences between EC3 and previous UK practice, which need to be
clearly understood by the designers that used to BS5950 but intend to use EC3. The main
differences affecting the portal frame designing noted below (King, Technical Report P164).
3.1
Load Combinations
BS5950 uses one set of load factors for a combination of (dead + live) loads, but a
lower load factor for (dead + live + wind) loads. In principal, EC3 requires that all
variable actions (live loads, wind loads, ect.) are considered in the same load
combination, but includes a reduction factor on all variable actions, except the most
unfavorable.
3.2
3.3
Base fixity
It is common practice in the UK to assume that column bases are truly pinned for
ultimate limit state bending moment diagrams, where they are actually nominally
connected. EC3 requires consideration of the actual flexibility. In the case of
nominally pinned bases, the assumption of a truly pinned base is conservative, so it is
acceptable. However, for fixed bases the actual flexibility must be considered.
3.4
WORKED EXAMPLE
The worked example is aimed to provide guidance on method of designing a portal frame to
Eurocode for maximum vertical load combination; which is been used due to the fact that
most portal frame design is governed by gravity (dead + snow) loading. The required
designing steps where identified from (EN2005-1-1) and the following procedure where
developed for the worked example (see Appendix A for the flow chart);
(2) Calculate the Loading on the portal frame accurately based on the initial sizing of the
sections as follow (Gravity Load);
Snow loading.
Gravity loading.
(3) Choose a trial sections and a trial haunch length by selecting universal beam section that
have plastic modules as given by Wellers charts (The institutionof Structural Engineers,
TP/08/43 EC3/08/16). The haunch length should be chosen to optimize the overall portal
structure. A length of L/10 from the column face is a reasonable initial choice, but the
proportions of the haunch generally depend of the characteristics of each individual
building. A haunch length of L/10 will normally place the first hinge in the top of the
column.
(4) Calculate frame imperfection equivalent forces, referring to section 5.3.2 of EN1993-11:2005.
(5) Perform plastic analysis of the frame, assuming no reduction in plastic moment of
resistance from coexistent axial and shear force. This approach may need modifying,
where axial load are high.
(10)
(11)
(12)
5
5.1
MATERIAL
Scopes
EC3 covers design in steel to BSEN 10025 (grades Fe430 Fe510 only). For members, the
hunches, the end plates, the base-plated and any stiffeners an S275 steel to EN10025 with
yield 275N/mm2 and ultimate strength of 430N/mm2 is adopted
Table 1-Nominal values of yield Strength and ultimate tensile Strength (Baddoo, 1993 )
5.2
6.1
Outline
According to EC3 all actions that could occur at the same time are considered together, so
frame imperfection equivalent forces (which are discussed in section 9) as well as wind loads
should be considered as additives to permanent actions and other imposed loads with an
appropriate combination factor applied to them. Although several combinations exist, only the
least favourable combination of loads should be considered. Most general example is wind
load can act on both sides of portal frame but only combination need to be considered is the
least favourable direction with respect to each load combination.
6.2
A structure must have adequate resistance to internal forces and bending moments, known as
structural resistance. In addition it must exist in a state of static equilibrium under the action
of the applied loads, i.e. it must have adequate resistance to overturning, uplift ECT. Due to
fact that static equilibrium is rarely critical for portal framed buildings, so not considered in
details. The following are cases where static equilibrium might be critical:
6.3
obtain a considerable safety margin against uncertainties of load on structure and resistance of
the material. So that it reduces the resistance of the material and increase the applied load on
the structure.
> ( )
1.1
1.1
1.25
1.25
1.25
Those will have different values depending on wither the action is favourable or
unfavourable for the structure stability.
Table 3-Partial safety factors for actions in building structure (Baddoo, 1993 )
9
6.4
Load combination
EC3 normally consider all possible coincident actions but with the less unfavourable variable
action reduced by combination reduction factor (). The combination factor reduces the
intensity of loading, when several variable loads are considered to be acting together. There is
only low probability of all variable action occurring at full intensity at the same time, so the
combination factor is used.
All ULS load combinations must include the effect if any of imperfection forces (horizontal
forces) from any direction particularly in frame analysis. The Single expression for ULS load
combination is as follow (Baddoo, 1993 )
Characteristic value of the permanent action ( ) X
Note that there are different factors for different types of variable actions. The table below
from EN1990:2002 shows different factors.
exceedingly slender. The limitations are given below; where structures exceed these
limitations second order analysis must be used.
7.1
P. effects
P. effects are the effects on member behaviour due to displacements at right-angles to the
axial force in the member. These displacements may be enforced (by external load or
moments), most notably in the case of axial loading along a member with initial bow, or
maybe the result of the natural tendency to buckle under pure axial load. The displacements
are the sum if the initial deformation of the member and deflection due loading. The result of
such deflections is to reduce the effective stiffness when axial load is compressive, due to
increased bending moment see below figure 4. Conversely, when axial load is tensile, it
increases the effective stiffness, though the effect will generally be minimal in common single
storey portal frames.
7.2
P. effects
P. effects are the effects on overall frame behaviour due to the displacement at right-angles
to the applied forces, directly due to those same forces. The displacements are the sum of the
initial deformation of the frame and deflection due loading. For pitched roof portals, the prime
example is the effect of gravity loads on sway deflections. The effect is to magnify the sway
deflection due to overall inclination of the column which produces a reduction in effective
stiffness, see the figure 5,
7.3
cr
cr
Where:
cr
7.3.2 Determination of cr
For frames with pitched rafters,
cr,est= min (cr,r,est , cr,s,est)
-
Where
cr,s,est is the estimate of cr for sway buckling mode (see Section 3.3.1)
cr,r,est is the estimate of cr for rafter snap-through buckling mode
(see Section 3.3.2)
13
,
=
,
Where
HEHF
VULS
HEHFi
VULS,i
is factored vertical reaction at ULS at column i, calculated from firstorder plastic analysis
14
cr,s,est = 0.8 1 ,
Where:
,
,
, =
Ir
EHF,i
,
,
cr,r,est =
55.74+
1
275
tan 2
F0 =
maximum uniformly distributed load for plastic failure of the rafter treated as a
fixed end beam of span L =
16 , ,
Eurocode account to second order effects in the absence of elastic-plastic second order
analysis software by deriving loads that are amplified to account for the effects of deformed
geometry (second order effects). Application of these amplified loads through first order
analysis gives bending moment, axial forces and shear forces that include the second-order
effects approximately. The magnification factor is calculated by method called MerchantRankin method, which is as following:
7.3.3.1 Category A: Regular, symmetric and asymmetric pitched and mono-pitched frames
Regular, symmetrical and mono pitched frames are either single-span or multi span frames in
which there is only a small variation in height (h) or span (L) between different spans;
variation in height and span of the order of 10% may be considered sufficiently small.
1
Provided that 3
1
1
16
7.3.3.2 Category B: Frames that fall outside of Category A and excluding tied portals
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
1
1
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
Perform the rigid plastic analysis of portal frame using the Partial safety factors in
step (iii).
Check that collapse load factor of step (iv) analysis is greater one
( 1.0) where,
=
If the Collapse load factor in step (v) is less than one then increase the section size
and re-check if the increased section size can withstand second-order effects.
17
8.1
Outlines
The serviceability limit state (SLS) analysis should be performed using SLS load cases
mentioned below, to ensure that deflections are within acceptable limit at characteristic
loading. This is normally first-order analysis, where plasticity occurs under SLS loads, the
deflections from plastic deformations should be included in the analysis.
It is important to ensure that the deflections etc. are acceptable for the cladding and use of the
building, for example for brittle cladding such as brickwork, the limit of h/150 on horizontal
deflection may be unsuitable.
8.2
Load Combinations
Structural imperfections should not normally be considered. No partial safety factors
applied to actions for the SLS. The load combination as follow (BS EN 1991-1-3:2003):
Note that there are different factors for different types of variable actions, see section ULS
8.3
No specific deflection limits are set in Eurocode 1993-1-1 [1]. According to EN 1993-1-1,
7.2 and EN 1990 Annex A1.4 [2], deflection limits should be specified for each project and
agreed with the client. The National Annex to EN 1993-1-1 may specify limits for application
in individual countries. Where limits are specified they have to be satisfied. Where limits are
not specified, the following might be helpful when deciding relevant deflection limits.
18
h/150
h/300
8.4
19
FRAME IMPERFECTIONS
Frame imperfections are assumed in EC3 as a slope of the columns and can be induced in
EC3 allows the use of the equivalent horizontal forces, which are probably easier to use on
sloping roof structures such as portals. These forces may be calculated from the column axial
force using simply supported assumptions as below (BS EN 1993-1-1:2005);
= o h m
-
With
But
2
3
h 1.0
= 0.5(1 + )
20
Frame imperfections induce internal forces and moments that will increase or
decrease the effect of other actions depending on the direction. Therefore if the frame
imperfections is to be induced in geometry model of EC3 (discussed earlier) it is
require two versions to be considered; from each side, but are only considered in one
direction at a time.
It must be remembered that the horizontal forces due imperfections do not increase the
total horizontal load on the building as shown if figure below,
The following simplified approach to frame imperfection can be used for regular portal frame;
Frame imperfections induce internal forces and moments that will increase or decrease the
effects of actions, depending on the direction.
21
10 CONNECTION OF MEMBERS
The rafter and columns of I-section portal frames consist of rolled I-sections, with rafter end
being haunched and sit-bolted to the columns. The column section is heavier than the rafter
section, so that the relative column-haunch rafter strengths roughly follow the shape of the
bending moment diagram up the column and across the rafter. As a scope of plastic analysis,
moments referred to are plastic moments under gravity loading, with plastic hinges
developing either in the column top or in the rafter at the haunch and in the rafter near apex
(Position of maximum bending moments).
Figure 12- Apex and Eaves Connections ( The Southern African Institute of Steel
Construction,)
22
The transfer of moment at the apex is similar, except that here the moment is positive so the
forces are reversed. The haunch and apex regions are vitally important parts of the frame and
must be carefully proportioned. It is possible to achieve economy through simplification of
the connections, but only when every aspect of the transfer of direct, moment and shear forces
has been carefully considered.
Figure 13- Stabilising of the column ( The Southern African Institute of Steel
Construction,)
23
Figure 14- Braces to rafter bottom flange (King, Technical Report P164)
24
11 BRACING
Bracing is required to resist lateral loads, principally wind loads, and the destabilising effects
of the imperfections defined in Section 5.2.3 of EN 1993-1-1:2005. This bracing must be
correctly positioned and have adequate strength and stiffness to justify the assumptions made
in the analysis and member checks.
25
The bracing portals are designed to resist the total equivalent horizontal forces from all the
columns that rely on those portals for stability, plus the relevant wind load.
11.2 Bracing to inner flanges
Bracing to the inner flanges is often most conveniently formed by diagonal struts from the
purlins or sheeting rails or sheeting rails to gluts welded to the inner flange and web, as shown
in figure 17. The effectiveness of such bracing depends on the stiffness of the system,
especially the stiffness of the purlins. The effect of purlins flexibility on the bracing is shown
in figure 16.
Figure 16- Effects of purlin flexibility on bracing (King, Technical Report P164)
Figure 18- Typical stiff torsional restraint (King, Technical Report P164)
At each rotated plastic hinge location the cross section should have an effective lateral and
torsional restraint with appropriate resistance to lateral forces and torsion induced by local
plastic deformations of the member at this location. At each plastic hinge location, the
connection (e.g. bolts) of the compression flange to the resisting element at that point (e.g.
purlin), and any intermediate element (e.g. diagonal brace) should be designed to in its plane
and perpendicular to the web plane, without any combination with other loads.
27
1) Class 1 cross-sections are those which can form a plastic hinge with the required
rotational capacity for plastic analysis.
2) Class 2 cross-sections are those which, although able to develop a plastic moment,
have limited rotational capacity and are therefore unsuitable for structures designed by
plastic analysis.
3) Class 3 cross-sections are those in which the calculated stress in the extreme
compression fibre can reach yield but local buckling prevents the development of the
plastic moment resistance.
4) Class 4 cross-sections are those in which local buckling limits the moment resistance
(or compression resistance for axially loaded members). Explicit allowance for the
effects of local buckling is necessary.
28
The design value of the bending moments MEd at each cross-section shall satisfy:
1.0
,
1.0
,
For plastic design , is the design plastic shear resistance , which is given by;
, =
( /3)
0
Where is the shear area which is for rolled I and H sections given by;
Av = A2b + ( + 2)
Where
A
tf
Where the shear force is less than the half the plastic shear resistance its effect on the
moment resistance may be neglected.
Where high shear force exists reduced moment resistance should be taken as the design
resistance of the cross-section, calculated using reduced yield strength
2
=
1
,
and
(0.5 )/
Provided that the design value of shear force VEd does not exceed 50% of the design plastic
shear resistance Vpl,Rd no reduction of the resistance defined for bending and axial force need
to be made.
30
Where VEd exceeds 50% of Vpl,Rd the design resistance of the cross-section to combinations of
moment and axial force should be calculated using reduced yield strength.
(1 )
2
1
=
,
13 STABILITY CHECKS,
13.1
At a plastic hinge location both flanges should location both flanges should be provided with
lateral and torsional restraint by means of diagonal stays. If is not practical to provide such
restraint at actual hinge location, it is permissible to provide it within a distance along the
member equal to h/2. (See section 11.3) (King, Technical Report P147)
At the location of plastic hinges, all of the material of the cross-section is at yield. It is
therefore unable to resist any twisting action and therefore the restraint against lateral torsion
buckling is reduced. It is thus necessary to impose a more stringent limitation on the distance
to the next restraint than would otherwise be the case.
For members with restraints to the compression flange but without intermediate restraints to
the tension flange, the maximum distance to the next compression flange restraint Lm may be
found using either a conservative method based on the uniform moment equal to the most
31
adverse moment in the segment or using a method which takes some account of moment
gradient.
Lm, the distance from a plastic hinge to the next lateral restraint may conservatively be
calculated using the expression (BS EN 1993-1-1:2005)
Lm =
38iz
2
2
1 W pl,y f y
1 N Ed
In this equation
NEd is the design value of the compression force in the member
A
It
Rafter
Stability
(The
institutionof
Structural
Engineers,
TP/08/43
EC3/08/16)
The rafter should be checked to ensure that the stability is maintained in all load cases.
Unless there is wind uplift, the following checks should be made;
a) At the plastic hinge location near the ridge both flanges should be laterally restraint in
order to provide torsional restraint.
b) A purlin or other restraint is needed on compression flange at a distance determined in
the same way as mentioned above for plastic hinge (Spacing restraint < Lm).
32
c) In areas where there is a compression on the bottom flange the procedure given for
haunches in section 13.3 should be applied using constants applicable to haunch/depth
=1
13.3
Stability of haunch
Provided that the tension flange of the haunch is restrained, then the maximum length
between restraints to the compression flange of the haunch should be limited to Ls
obtained as shown below, provide that;
Where
-
Lk
is the length derived for a uniform member with a cross-section equal to the
shallowest section
33
Lk =
13.4
600 f y
5.4 +
t
f
i z
f y h
5.4 1
E t f
Near the top of the column a restraint should be provided at the location of the plastic hinge,
together with a further restraint at a distance below the position of the hinge restraint, based
on that given for the spacing of restraints at plastic hinges (Lm). If the column is restrained on
the tension flange then the distance to the nearest restraint on the compression flange may be
taken as, (The institutionof Structural Engineers, TP/08/43 EC3/08/16)
M pl , y , Rk
Ls = C m Lk
M
N , y , Rk + aN Ed
Where
Cm
is the distance between the centroid of the member with the plastic hinge
MN,y,Rk
34
35
Figure 20- Bending moment diagram for uniform temperature rise (Newman, Technical
Report P313)
The temperature raising causes a reduction in the yield strength of the steel and although the
loading is constant, the reduction in moment capacity causes the formation of plastic hinge at
a high temperature. Plastic hinges starts to form at in the rafter where the term fire hinge is
used to distinguish this type of plastic hinge from plastic hinges which can form at normal
temperatures. The moment resistance of fire hinge is slightly less corresponding value at
normal temperature, so the fire hinges tends to forms at the end of hunches and near to the
ridge see figure below.
Figure 21- Probable positions of fire hinges in portal frame (Newman, Technical Report
P313)
36
At this stage, the frame maintains its basic shape where the loading on the frame is its selfweight and purlins but with only proportion of the weight of cladding. The rafter continues to
collapse and falls to the eaves level but remains reasonably straight between fire hinges.
Torsion stability may occur as the purlins lose their strength. The rafter is acting partially as
centenary, creating a tension load, which pulls on the top of the column. The columns are still
upright and shows sign of distress.
The rafter continues to collapse as it loses stiffness and the section may rotate so that it sags
with the web horizontal. The moment at the end of the hunch still withstand an applicable
value. As the rafter further losses strength; it continue to sag to below eaves level and begin to
pull inward the tops of columns.
Figure 22- Rafter collapse to eaves level (Newman, Technical Report P313)
The mathematical model of the rafter collapse mechanism at this stage is given in Appendix.
It is the forces and moments at this stage that are used to determine the overturning moment.
14.5 Mathematical Model (Newman, Technical Report P313)
A full mathematical model of the collapse mechanism for symmetrical pitched portal frames
has been developed and presented in Appendix. The use of the full model is tedious to hand
calculations. Thus a more simplified version was recommended in SCI P087 which applies to
symmetrical pitched rafter of single or multi-bay. Also the columns on the boundary should
be adequately restrained in longitudinal direction. The requirement is for fire protection of
columns and requirement to resist the calculated forces and moments on the column bases are
applicable only to columns that support protected area of boundary wall. Columns which do
not support protected areas will not require fire protection or moment resisting column bases.
37
So the foundations, columns and column beams base should be designed to resist the
following moment s and reactions.
Vertical Reaction
=
Horizontal Reaction
1
+
2
10
Overturning moment:
In which
Where
= + 0.065
10
2 2
8
38
15 APPENDIX
A) Calculation of non-linear moment factor
12
(My,Ed + a NEd )
Where a is the distance between the centroid of the member and the centroid of the
fy Wy,pl
R1 to R5 are the values at the ends quarter points and centre numbered sequentially
along the member. Only positive values should be included.
39
For a non-uniform member with constant flanges, provided that h 1,2b and h /tf 20 then
for haunched members or segments,
hmax 2 / 3
c = 1+
1
h
hmin
9
tf
Where
hh
Lh
Ly
40
In which
0 =
1 =
-
Where:
2 =
a) =
1+10
0 + 1 + 2 2
1+20
5
+10
0.5
1+
0.5
1+20
2
2
= 2
b)
2 2
2
2
2
2 = 2 + 2 + 2
It is the ratio of the algebraically smaller end moment to the larger end moment.
see figure
41
42
D) Fire boundary
Figure 26 Forces and moments acting on the column and rafters (Newman, Technical
Report P313)
Considering vertical equilibrium, the vertical reaction on the base of column base is given as
follow:
VR=F1+F2
Considering rafter equilibrium, taking moments about apex:
Giving:
And
1 + 2 + 1 sin +
=
1 1 cos
= 1 1 cos
2
1 1 cos 2(1 + 2 )
21 sin
=
43
For the column equilibrium, the base overturning moment given by:
= + 1 1 + 1 1 + 1
Where:
R1 is the rafter length from end of hunch to apex including allowance for elongation
R2 is the haunch length from center line of column.
Y is the height of end of haunch
cos + 2 sin( )
L is the span.
E is the column height.
Is the initial rafter angle.
X1 is the horizontal distance from column base to end of haunch
sin + 2 cos
X2 is the horizontal distance from the column base to the end of haunch
1
2
sin + 2 cos .
21
cos1
21 + sin
For multi
21
cos1
44
bay frames
D2) Tables
45
Table 7- Percentage dead weight of roof cladding systems remaining at the time of the
rafter collapse (Newman, Technical Report P313)
46
16 REFERENCE
The Southern African Institute of Steel Construction, Economics of Steel Structures. [s.l.] : The Southern African Institute of Steel Construction. - Vol. First Edition 2001.
Baddoo Nancy R. C EC3 - concise Eurocode 3 for the design of steel buildings in the United
Kingdom [Book]. - [s.l.] : Ascot : Steel Construction Institute, 1993 .
BS EN 1991-1-3:2003 Eurocode 1 Actions on structures Part 1-3: General actions
Snow loads [Book]. - 389 Chiswick High Road, London, W4 4AL : Standards, Institution
British.
BS EN 1993-1-1:2005 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures BS EN 1993-1-1:2005 [Book]. 389 Chiswick High Road, London, W4 4AL : Standards, Institution British.
BUREAU Alain Practical deflection limits for single storey buildings [Online] //
www.access-steel.com. - Access Steel, SN035a-EN-EU. - 15 October 2008.
Chaffotec P. Le Scheme development: Purlin structure design [Online] // www.accesssteel.com. - Access Steel, SS049a-EN-EU. - 15 November 2008.
Eur.Ing Eur Ing Structural Steel Design e-Learning Portal [Online] // http://www.naktive.co.uk/. - Eur Ing Structural Steel Design e-Learning Portal. - 10 November 2008.
J.B.P.Lim C.M.King , A.J.Rathbone , J.M.Davies , V.Edmondson Eurocode 3 and the inplane stability of portal frames [Journal]. - [s.l.] : The Structure Engineering Journal,
November 2005. - p 43-49.
King C M Design of Steel Portal for Europe [Book]. - [s.l.] : The steel construction Institute,
Techhnnical Report P164.
King C M Plastic Design of Simgle-Storey Pitced-Roof Portal Frames to Eurocode 3
[Book]. - [s.l.] : The steel construction Institute, Techhnnical Report P147.
King Charles Flow chart: Plastic analysis of a portal frame [Online] // www.accesssteel.com. - Access Steel, SF019a-EN-EU. - 15 October 2008.
Malik SN051a-EN-EU A S, Scheme development: Details for portal frames using rolled
sections [Online] // www.access-steel.com. - Access Steel. - 20 October 2008.
Morris M.R. Horne and L.J. Plastic design of low-rise frames [Book]. - [s.l.] : London :
Granada, 1981.
Newman W I Simms and G M Single storey steel framed buildings in fire boundary
conditions [Book]. - [s.l.] : The steel construction Institute,, Thechnical Report P313.
Oppe Matthias Simple methods for second order effects in portal frames [Online] //
www.access-steel.com. - Access Steel, SN033a-EN-EU. - 15 October 2008.
47
Plum L J Morris & D R Structural Steelwrok Design to BS5950 2nd Edition [Book]. - [s.l.] :
Harlow : Longman, 1996.
The institutionof Structural Engineers Manual for the design of steelwork building
structures to Eurcode 3 [Book]. - TP/08/43 EC3/08/16.
Weare Alan Hayward and Frank Steel detailer's manual [Book]. - [s.l.] : Oxford : BSP
Professional, 1989.
48