Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame
Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. These details include the basis and concept of design, specifications to be followed, design methods, safety factors, loading val...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2006
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.utm.my/2070/ http://eprints.utm.my/2070/1/ChanCheeHanMFKA2006.pdf |
| _version_ | 1848890279552090112 |
|---|---|
| author | Chan, Chee Han |
| author_facet | Chan, Chee Han |
| author_sort | Chan, Chee Han |
| building | UTeM Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. These details include the basis and concept of design, specifications to be followed, design methods, safety factors, loading values and etc. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI) claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. This study intends to testify the claim. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay, four-storey braced steel frames with spans of 6m and 9m and with steel grade S275 (Fe 460) and S355 (Fe 510) by designed using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.06% and moment capacity by up to 6.43%. Meanwhile, structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5.27% and 9.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However, serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. Therefore, Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.60% to 17.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However, with the application of partial strength connections, the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0.11% to 10.95%. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-15T20:39:33Z |
| format | Thesis |
| id | utm-2070 |
| institution | Universiti Teknologi Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-15T20:39:33Z |
| publishDate | 2006 |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | utm-20702018-06-13T07:05:12Z http://eprints.utm.my/2070/ Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame Chan, Chee Han TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) Reference to standard code is essential in the structural design of steel structures. The contents of the standard code generally cover comprehensive details of a design. These details include the basis and concept of design, specifications to be followed, design methods, safety factors, loading values and etc. The Steel Construction Institute (SCI) claimed that a steel structural design by using Eurocode 3 is 6 – 8% more cost-saving than using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. This study intends to testify the claim. This paper presents comparisons of findings on a series of two-bay, four-storey braced steel frames with spans of 6m and 9m and with steel grade S275 (Fe 460) and S355 (Fe 510) by designed using BS 5950: Part 1: 2000 and Eurocode 3. Design worksheets are created for the design of structural beam and column. The design method by Eurocode 3 has reduced beam shear capacity by up to 4.06% and moment capacity by up to 6.43%. Meanwhile, structural column designed by Eurocode 3 has compression capacity of between 5.27% and 9.34% less than BS 5950: Part 1:2000 design. Eurocode 3 also reduced the deflection value due to unfactored imposed load of up to 3.63% in comparison with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However, serviceability limit states check governs the design of Eurocode 3 as permanent loads have to be considered in deflection check. Therefore, Eurocode 3 produced braced steel frames which consume 1.60% to 17.96% more steel weight than the ones designed with BS 5950: Part 1: 2000. However, with the application of partial strength connections, the percentage of difference had been reduced to the range of 0.11% to 10.95%. 2006-11 Thesis NonPeerReviewed application/pdf en http://eprints.utm.my/2070/1/ChanCheeHanMFKA2006.pdf Chan, Chee Han (2006) Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame. Masters thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Faculty of Civil Engineering. |
| spellingShingle | TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) Chan, Chee Han Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| title | Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| title_full | Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| title_fullStr | Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| title_short | Comparison between BS 5950: part 1: 2000 & Eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| title_sort | comparison between bs 5950: part 1: 2000 & eurocode 3 for the design of multi-storey braced steel frame |
| topic | TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) |
| url | http://eprints.utm.my/2070/ http://eprints.utm.my/2070/1/ChanCheeHanMFKA2006.pdf |