DocumentA

1

5 storey office building Alvarez Anthony M.

Technological institute of the Philippines

Quezon City

2

Contents 5 storey office building .......................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. 2 THE PROJECT ..................................................................................................................................... 3 The Client ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Project Scope and limitations ................................................................................................................ 4 Project Development ............................................................................................................................. 5 CHAPTER 2 DESIGN INPUT ............................................................................................................... 6 GROUND FLOOR PLAN .................................................................................................................... 10 2ND TO 5TH FLOOR PLAN ................................................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 3 CONSTRAINT, TRADE-OFF AND STANDARDS .......................................................... 12 DESING CRITIREA ............................................................................................................................ 12 Initial estimate ..................................................................................................................................... 14 TRADE OFF SELECTED .................................................................................................................... 15 CODES AND STANDARDS ................................................................................................................ 15 DESIGN OF COMPRESION MEMBER .............................................................................................. 16 Member subjected to both axial compression and bending stress ...................................................... 17 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................ 19 STRUCTURAL DESIGN ..................................................................................................................... 19 STAAD STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 22 LOAD INPUTS .................................................................................................................................... 28 BEAM REACTION AND MOMENTS .................................................................................................. 29 Cost estimate ...................................................................................................................................... 31 Man hour estimate .............................................................................................................................. 31 Designers final choice ......................................................................................................................... 31 FINAL OUTPUT OF DESIGN ............................................................................................................. 32 BEAMS ............................................................................................................................................... 32 COLUMN ............................................................................................................................................ 33 TRUSS ................................................................................................................................................ 34 PURLINS ............................................................................................................................................ 35 COMPUTATION OF COLUMNS ......................................................................................................... 36 DESIGN OF BASE PLATE ................................................................................................................. 38 Design of purlins ................................................................................................................................. 40 Computation of beam(w flanged) ........................................................................................................ 42 Computation of beams(WT-section) ................................................................................................... 45

3

CHAPTER 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND THE PROJECT The project main goal is to develop the structural design a 5 office building located at loyala height subdivision

Alaminos Laguna. This building will be used a 2 rentablespace on the ground level and the rest of the floor

will be used as an office .. The building is owned by Rizalino G. Fule

The 5 storey building is a regular shahperd building with a footprint dimension of 18m x 18m

the total building area is 1620sqm. Each level of the building will have the area of 324 sqm. The height

level per floor will b 3 m. it has a main stair located at the center of the building. The project will be

designed as steel structure for the footing structural framing and flooring

4

The Client The client for this project is Rizalino G. Fule , a business man

Project Scope and limitations The scope and limitation is provided a desing as follow

To provide conceptual design plans to the client adhering to the relevant codes and standards

Analyze the structure using staad pro

Provide design drawings as well as structural member detail

the following were not covered in the design project

Detail activities in construction management

Detail computation of building cost estimates such as mechanical , electrical plumbing , sanitation ,

architectural , etc

5

Project Development

The

completion of the design had undergone various stages as shown in Figure 1-2. The project started with the

conceptualization of form and geometry of the structure, and structural layout such as framing of the structure,

seismic support design, and foundation design. Consideration of constraints, trade-offs, and standards then

followed. At this stage, the client and the designers explored design alternatives considering constraints in

cost of the entire structure and possible design aspects. The client expressed they want to use the training

facility right away. After careful planning, the client and designers agreed to use composite cast-in place

reinforced concrete slab design when compared with the composite slab design for speed of construction.

The design of the structure followed.

project proposal

evaluating multiple constraint and trade

of present in the project

creating multiple scheme base on the

project trade off

comparing and selecting the best

scheme base on the project constraint

Designing the structure base on

the selected scheme

final output of the project

6

CHAPTER 2 DESIGN INPUT The building will be comprises of steel framing. the structural will be regular across the longitudinal

direction the main stair will be located at the center of the building and two emergency stair are place on

corner of the building and the elevator is also place along the center of the building to reduce the effect of

eccentricity of the building.

10

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

11

2ND TO 5TH FLOOR PLAN

12

CHAPTER 3 CONSTRAINT, TRADE-OFF AND STANDARDS

DESING CRITIREA Among the possible constraint, the following will be considered to have relevant design of the project

1). Economic or cost- the project will be limited to specific amount of budget and the client also want to

make sure the that the cost of the project will be at minimal without sacrificing the quality of the construction

this involved consideration of proper mater to be used or the proper mythology of construction.

In this project w flange beam will be compared to truss beam initially booth values are still unknown until

detail computation are made.

2) Manufacturability or construction duration- in this criteria availability of the material is being consider and

and how will be those material be installed on the building. The duration of the construction can be

considered in here, comparing which material and method of construction

in comparing W flange to truss beam , W flange will have an obvious advantage on over truss beam

because the truss beam has to be fabricated on site will the W flange just need to be cut and installed on

the building

Design Trade-offs Design trade-off strategies are always present in a design process. Let us use the word conservative design strategy to describe a design strategy in trading off to improve the lower performing goals. The design overall preference will be based on the lowest one but good in quality. On the other hand, the designer may wish to slightly lessen the some weaker goals in a design if large gains can be made in other goals which would more than compensate for the slight cost. Trade-offs is needed to have options on which to use or which is more convenient. It is usually affected by costs and potential bias of sample design. By having trade-offs, the designer can properly rate which is more effective and remove his/her preferences. To have a proper design, the designer need to follow typical requirements for selecting a sample. This

includes:.

Minimize overall error. The use of conventional procedures for computation to deliver the minimum error.

Match the case distribution. This is needed in order to be exact on its design. The design is already a rough estimate so over-estimating or under-estimating, it will have a major gap in result.

Permit analysis using special software. It is conventional to use the software to help in the computation needed by the design.

There are two alternative patterns in order to accomplish the best design and mitigate future probable

conflicts. The designers used a ranking comparison to determine the accurate to use. The weight of each

criterion is based on the assessment of Otto and Anderson in 1991, which indicates zero (0) as least

13

important and five (5) as highly necessary parameter for the design of the project (Otto & Antonsson,

1991).

Equation 3-2 is a subordinate rank which corresponds to its percentage distance from the governing rank along the ranking scale. The governing rank is a personal choice of the designer which assign the value for the criterions importance and the ability to satisfy the criterion. It depends on the initial estimate on the decision criteria which the designer can initially select. In Table 3-1, the designer ranked the design considerations and constraints as an initial estimate to help them visualize the possible outcome. Raw ranking is to be used to assigned the design methodologys ability and satisfy the criterion (on a scale from -5 to 5, 5 with the highest ability to satisfy the criterion) was likewise tabulated. The designer set the criterions important for economic constraints (cost) as five (5) since the cost for the design is much observed. For constructability (duration), it is rank as four (4) because of its early completion of the project. After considering the constraints and the consideration for the proposed design, the initial estimate of the

trade-offs were made by the designer to help then to visualize the possible result.

14

Initial estimate:

The design for the initial estimate where base on the most common used size of beam based on the

structural section table(SST) of Canadian Institute of Steel construction(CISC) version 9.2

-MAN HOUR BASE ON TECHNICAL CALCULATION AND ESTIMATOR MANAUL BY MARKO BULIC

Structural Framing Schedule(TRUSS FRAME)

Family and Type Count Length A Mass C-Channel: C10X20 13 237.9 3787 7344256.491 WT-Structural Tee: WT5X56 65 270.49 10645.14 23472572.01 WT-Structural Tee: WT7X88 576 882 16709.64 120141698.4 Grand total: 1194 150958526.9 PHP 6,038,341,075.95

Structural Framing Schedule(W-BEAM FRAME)

Family and Type Count Length A Mass C-Channel: C10X20 13 237.9 3787 7344256.491 W-Wide flangge: w12x87 120 720 20128.99 118144244.4 WT-Structural Tee: WT5X56 65 270.49 10645.14 23472572.01 Grand total:231 148961072.9 PHP 5,958,442,916.89

% difference= PHP 6,038,341,075.95 - PHP 5,958,442,916.89 x10

PHP 5,958,442,916.89

subordinate rank= 5 - 0.134092346 = 4.865907654 Man HOUR

1900 HR 1500 HR

% difference= 1900 - 1500

x10 1900

subordinate rank= 5 - 2.105263158 = 2.894736842

15

DECISION CRITERIA CRITERION W-FLANGE TRUSS BEAM

ECONOMIC 5 4.86590765 2.894736842

CONSTRUCTABILIT 4 0.13409235 2.105263158

24.8659077 22.89473684

TRADE OFF SELECTED The tradeoff I selected will be W flange beam against Truss beam.

in initial in comparison of both design in terms of it advantages and disadvantage are equal

both trade off doesnt have a huge initial advantages over another.,

the design will be compared using the constraint of economical and manufacturability

in term of economical the final cost of the structure will be based on the weight of member w flange could

be much heavier than the truss beam but in truss beam it might be much lighter but hard to construct which

will be compared in the second constraint which is the manufacturability

Design Standards

CODES AND STANDARDS This design project conforms with the following codes and standards:

1. National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) vol. 1-2010 edition (PD1096) 2. Uniform Building Code (UBC) 3. National Building Code of the Philippines

The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096).The National Building Code of the Philippines, also

known as Presidential Decree No. 1096 was formulated and adopted as a uniform building code to embody

up-to-date and modern technical knowledge on building design, construction, use, occupancy and

maintenance. The Code provides for all buildings and structures, a framework of minimum standards and

requirements to regulate and control location, site, design, and quality of materials, construction, use,

occupancy, and maintenance.

A. Loading : UBC 97, ASCE 7-05 B. Reinforced Concrete : ACI 318M-05 C. Steel : A36

The National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010.This code provides minimum standards to safeguard

life or limb, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of

materials pertaining to the structural aspects of all buildings and structures within its jurisdiction. The provision

of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration, moving, demolition, repair, maintenance and use of

any building or structure within its jurisdiction, except work located primarily in a public way, public utility

16

towers and poles, hydraulic flood control structures, and indigenous family dwellings. Code used to design

the structure was attached in Appendix B.

DESIGN OF COMPRESION MEMBER 505.3 ALLOWABLE STRESS 505.3.1 On the gross section of axially loaded compression members whose cross sections meet the provisions of Table 502-1, when Kllr, the largest effective slenderness ratio of any unbraced segment is less than Cc, the allowable stress is:

505.2.2 On the gross section of axially loaded compression members, when KI/r exceeds Cc the allowable stress is:

17

Member subjected to both axial compression and bending stress 508.2.1 Members subjected to both axial compression and bending stresses shall be proportioned to satisfY the following requirements:

DESIGN OF MEMBER SUBJECTED TO BENDING STRESS

506.2 ALLOWABLE STRESS: STRONG AXIS BENDING OF I-SHAPED MEMBERS AND CHANNELS 506.2.1 Members with Compact Sections 506.2.1.1 For members with compact sections as defined in Section 502.6.1 (excluding hybrid beams and members with yield points greater than 448 MPa) symmetrical about, and loaded in, the plane of their minor axis the allowable stress IS:

Fb=0.66fy

provided the flanges are connected continuously to the web or webs and the laterally unsupported length of the compression flange Lh does not exceed the value of Le, as given by the smaller of:

18

Member with non compact sections

Meeting the requirements of section except that their flanges are non compact

the allowable bending stress is

Structural

Loadings.The forces acting on the structure are categorized into three, namely dead load, live load, and

environmental loads (wind and earthquake). The required lateral loads due to wind and earthquake forces

shall be separately calculated.

Seismic Loads.Seismic forces were determined based on the equivalent static force procedure and computed

following the provisions of NSCP 2001, section 2.2.

using the following combination:

1.2DL + 1.6LL

0.75(1.2DL + 1.6LL + 1.7WL)

0.75(1.2DL + 1.6LL + 1.87EL)

0.9DL + 1.3WL

Deformation Limits.Structures or structural members shall be checked such that the maximum deformation

does not exceed the following:

a. Beams and Girders. Beams and girders supporting floors and roof shall be proportioned with due regard to the deflection produced by the design loads. Considering then the total deflection, which is due to the additional live loads, occurring after attachment of non-structural elements shall not exceed L/360.

CHAPTER 4:DESIGN OF STRUCTURE

19

METHODOLOGY The whole structure is being governed by various standards and constraint, in this project STEEL is being

used to reinforce the whole structure. The design will be using working stress design (WSD)

STRUCTURAL DESIGN The design was of the structure where followed by the given flow chart., the program that was used is

Staadpro V8i.

GEOMETRIC MODEL OF THE STRUCTURE

GEOMETRIC SPECIFICATION

MATERIAL PROPERTIES

SUPPORT MODEL

LOAD MODEL

(Adding primary load

combination loads)

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

STRUCTURAL DESIGN

DESIGN DETAIL

GENERAL DESIGN PROCESS

The illustration below show the comparison between the two (2) trade-offs, beams made up up regular

rolled up section and beams made up of truss using the WT beam section.

20

Booth trade of has the same framing layout.

21

RIGHT

RIGHT

FRONT

FRONT

LEFT

LEFT

22

STAAD STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

W-flange frame beam

EARTHQUAKE

X DIRECTION

Z DIRECTION

23

Live load

DEAD LOAD

25

Truss framed beam

EQUAKE LOAD

26

DEADLOAD

27

LIVE LOAD

28

LOAD INPUTS

DEAD LOAD

CHB WALL 2.3 kpa

CERAMIC FINISH 1.53 kpa

CEILING FIBER BOARD 0.05 kpa

PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL 1 kpa

CONRETE FILL 0.21 kpa

PARTITION LOADS 1 kpa

SLAB WEIGHT 3.53 kpa

TOTAL DEAD LOAD 9.62 kpa

LIVE LOAD

SECOND TO FITH FLOOR 2.4 kpa

WIND LOAD

zone zone 2

zone location B(case 1)

exposure 1

importance factor 1

wind direction 1

occupancy importance standard occpancy

enclosure partally enclosed

Seismic analysis

Seismic zone factor-z 0.4

SMRF 0.0853

SEISMIC COEF. Ca .44NA

SESMIC COEF Cv .64NV

NEAR SOURCE , Na 1.6

NEAR SOURCE , Nv 1.2

IMPORTANCE FACTOR 1

29

BEAM REACTION AND MOMENTS

MAXIMUM FORCES EXPERIENCE BY THE STRUCTURE

AXIAL MX My

COLUMN 2186 40.1 61.95

BEAM W 117 168 9

TRUSS 567 122.75 99.693

FOR TRUSS FRAME

BEAM WT 115 47.4 1.2

Validation of trade offs

Provided by the initial ranking shown in chapter 3, this section made a scheme to select the best

performance for steel which if it is best to select beam made up or regular rolled up section or to have a

beam with a truss frame structure, both tradeoff are design with accordance with engineering codes and

standard with consideration to the design constraint evolving the economic and constructability constraint.

30

the following are the results:

Structural Framing Schedule(TRUSS FRAME)

Family and Type Count Length A Mass

C-Channel: C10X20 13 237.9 3787 7344256.491 WT-Structural Tee: WT7X60 65 270.49 11419.33 25179663.74

WT-Structural Tee: WT7X60 576 882 13548.36 97412211.21

Grand total: 1194 129936131.4 PHP 5,197,445,257.80

Structural Framing Schedule(W-BEAM FRAME)

Family and Type Count Length A Mass

C-Channel: C10X20 13 237.9 3787 7344256.491 W-Wide flangge: w12x136 120 720 25714.88 150929831.5

WT-Structural Tee: WT7x60 65 270.49 11419.33 25179663.74 Grand total:231

183453751.7 PHP 7,338,150,067.57

% difference= PHP 5,197,445,257.80 - PHP 7,338,150,067.57

PHP 7,338,150,067.57

subordinate rank= 5 - 2.917226808 = 2.082773192 Man HOUR

1900 HR 1500 HR

% difference= 1900 - 1500

1900

subordinate rank= 5 - 2.105263158 = 2.894736842

DECISION CRITERIA CRITERION W-FLANGE TRUSS BEAM

ECONOMIC 5 2.89473684 2.082773192

CONSTRUCTABILIT 4 2.10526316 2.917226808

22.8947368 22.08277319

31

Cost estimate The factor to be consider in the cost ,include the beams ,trusses with there corresponding prices. It is

presented that having truss bean is more economical compared to W-beam.

Man hour estimate the factor to be consider is the duration of the construction base on what material was used or specified. It

is presented that the truss beam took longer to install than the w flange beam.

Designers final choice In this chapter the designer is presented a choice to make the design of the structure to be a regular w-

flanged beam or to have a truss beam framing system . both are weighted to different constraint and using

the result from the raw designers ranking the structure is best fit for regular w flange section.

32

FINAL OUTPUT OF DESIGN BEAMS

W12X136

33

COLUMN W14X132

34

TRUSS WT7X60

35

PURLINS C10X20

36

COMPUTATION OF COLUMNS

My= 40.17 kn.m

Cm= 0.85

Cb= 1.5

d=373.38 T X k= 0.65

tw=16.383

bf=373.38 =

Ix = mm^4

A = mm^2 Sx = mm^3 Cc=

d = mm rx = mm

tw = mm Iy = mm^4

Bf= mm Sy = mm^3

tf = mm ry = mm

k = mm Zx = mm^3

k1 = mm Zy = mm^3

rt = mm J = mm^4

fy= mpa L= mm

Fa=

Fa=

= 65.22 Fb= < 0.6Fy

Fb= 0.6 fy 149 mpa

= 32.079

= 143.75

> check = Fb2

= Fb3

< ok

Fb2 = 148.8 mpa

Fb3 = 148.8 mpa

Fb = 148.8 mpa

Fb= 149 mpa Fby= 0.75 fy

186 mpa

GOVERNING Fb WEAK AXIS

(2/3)-(Fy(l/rt) 2)/10.55Cb)Fy

WHEN

Fb= larger of( Fb2 and Fb3)or .6fy

41.4020 39639188.87

39.6875 1853003.72

102.870 5119646.53

248 3300

WHEN

373.380 1221669.11

26.162 95.504

16.383 228094821.23

25032.21 3427232.80

373.380 159.512

W14x132 636834081.17

fa=

=

37

bf < 170 d < 1680 NOTE

2Tf fy tw fy SECTION IS compact

7.135922 < 10.79501 22.7906977 < 106.68

fa= p

fbx=

mx fby=

My

A sx Sy

= 2186

fbx= 40170000

fby= 61950000

25032.21 3427232.80 1221669.11

= 87.327494 = 11.7208262 = 50.70931207 mpa

Kl

= 13.447

kL =

22.45979 rx Ry Cc= 126.15825

GOVERNING 22.45979226

FS= 5

+ 3(Kl/r)

- (kl/r)^3

3 8Cc 8Cc^3 = 1.732722

Fa= (1-(Kl/r)^2/2(Cc^2)) Fy fa=

P

Fa= 140.85924 MpA Fa fa= 87.327 mpa fa/Fa = 0.62 > 0.15 large axial compresion

for large axial compression F'ex= 12^2/23(Kl/r)^2 F'ey= 12^2/23(Kl/r)^2 = 5695.364 = 2041.6

0.93005 < 1 ok strength criterion

0.938278 < 1 ok

Cc= 2

+

(

) +

(

)

. +

+

38

DESIGN OF BASE PLATE

P= 2186 Kn COLUMN W14x132 Mx= 40.17 Kn-m Bf= 373.38 My= 61.95 Kn-m D= 373.38

H= 3300 mm Fy= 248 mpa Bmin= 500 F'c= 20.7 mpa Nmin= 500 Fu= 485 mpa

Fb= 0.75 fy

allable bearing stress on steel = 186 mpa Fp= 0.35 F'c

7.245 Mpa 0.95d= 354.71 0.8b= 298.7

Area of base plate 120 +

A= P P

+ 6mx

+ 6my

=fp Fp A bd^2 bd^2

= 2186000 2186000

+ 241020000

+ 371700000

7.245 448900 300763000 300763000

= 301725.3 mm^2 4.86968 + 0.8013619 + 1.235856804 =fp

Asumme to be square

N^2= 301725.3 fp= 6.9069 mpa ok

N= 549.2953 mm or 550 mm

m= 157.64 550 mm n= 185.65 adjusted 670 mm x= 185.65

new area

= 448900 mm^2

=

39

t= 63.462 mm say= 65 mm FINAL OUTPUT 670 mm x 670 mm x 65 mm

PROPERTIES D= 22 mm

ASTM A325 BOLTS Le= 50 mm

Fu 620 Mpa Ft= 0.5fu mpa

Ft= 310 mpa e= 500 mm

T= M

T= 40170000

e 500 T= 80340 NUMBER OF ANCHOR BOLT T= AsFt

T= nd^2Ft

4 n= 0.681782

= 1 each side

40

Design of purlins

C Shapes

Y

tf=11.0744

DEGREE= 12.5

wind pressure= 3.9 kn/m

DEAD LOAD= 0.8215 kn/m

d=254 LIVELOAD= 1 kn/m

FACTORED= 7.2658 kn/m

something is wrong

Mx 21.281 kn.m

my= 4.7178 kn.m

Ix = mm^4

A = mm^2 Sx = mm^3

d = mm rx = mm

tw = mm Iy = mm^4

bf = mm Sy = mm^3

tf = mm ry = mm

k = mm L= mm

fy= mpa

248

bf 170 d 1680

2Tffy

twfy

69.596 170 254.000 1680

22.1488 15.748 9.627 15.748

3.1422 < 10.795 ok 26.38522427 < 106.68 ok

compact

Lc= 200Bf 137,900

fy

(d/af)fy

13919.2 USE 883.8700839 mm

15.748

137900

81.7299Lc2= = 1687.27 mm

Lc1= = 883.87 mm

< &

therefore section is

< Lc =

Fb= 0.6 fy

Fb= 148.8 mpa

Fb= 148.8 mpa

fbx= 148.8 mpa fby= 186 mpa

Mx My

sx Sx

21280687.4 4717814.807

259092.56 21481.72

= 82.1354642 mpa = 219.6199279 mpa

fbx < Fbx fby > Fby

ok change section

fbx fby

Fbx Fby

82.135 219.619928

148.8 148.8

MAX Vu= 85.1227495 KN

L

ALL. Fy = 0.4Fy 360

V = 16.66666667 MM

DtW

Wl 4

34.813 < 99.2 ok 384EI

= 3.644989727 mm

16.66666667 > 3.6449897

NOTE ok

ACTUAL DEF.=

ALL. DEF=

< 0.4FY

+ = 2.0279

DEFLECTION

change section

SHEAR DESIGN

note NOTE

+ = 1

= =

fby ==fbx

strong axis weak axis

therefore use

for compact section for non compact section

148.8

section is compact

42

Computation of beam(w flanged)

Y

k1=31.75 Fx= 117 Kn

k=46.99 tf=31.75 Mx= 168 kn.m

My= 9 kn.m

d=340.36 T X

tw=20.066

bf=314.96

Ix = mm^4

A = mm^2 Sx = mm^3

d = mm rx = mm

tw = mm Iy = mm^4

Bf= mm Sy = mm^3

tf = mm ry = mm

k = mm Zx = mm^3

k1 = mm Zy = mm^3

rt = mm J = mm^4

fy= mpa L= mm

bf 170 d 1680

2Tf fy tw fy

314.960 170 340.360 1680

63.5 15.748 20.066 15.74802

4.96 < 10.795 ok 16.96203 < 106.6801 ok

compact

Lc= 200Bf 137,900

fy (d/af)fy

62992 USE 3999.996 mm

15.74802

137900

8.440945

340.360 141.732

25741.88

20.066 165660107.39

314.960 1052767.20

31.7500 1607029.78

86.614 7700281.37

248 6000

< Lc =

Fb= 0.6 fy

Fb= 148.8 mpa

Fb= 148.8 mpa

fbx= 148.8 mpa fby= 186 mpa

Mx My

sx Sx

168000000 9000000

3050073.21 105276.72

= 55.08064515 mpa = 85.4889853 mpa

fbx > Fbx fby < Fby

ok ok

fbx fby

Fbx Fby

55.08065 85.48898529

148.8 148.8

MAX Vu = 672 KN

L

ALL. Fy = 0.4Fy 360

V = 16.66666667 MM

DtW

Wl 4

98.39 < 99.2 ok 384EI

= 1.830944824 mm

16.6666667 > 1.830945

NOTE ok

therefore use


148.8

section is compact

strong axis weak axis

fby ==fbx

NOTE

= =

note

+ = 1

DEFLECTION

ALL. DEF=

< 0.4FY

ok

SHEAR DESIGN

+ = 0.944688

ACTUAL DEF.=

44

I= 6.22E+09 mm

P fb= M

L S

117000 Fb= 1.68E+08

970.28 145814.8

= 120.5837 = 1152.147

R= 1158.44 N/m

R= Fv(0.707tL)

t= 11.26136

Welded connections

fv=

=

I=

+ A

= +

45

Computation of beams(WT-section)

WT, ST, MT Shapes

Y

bf=284.48

y=53.086

tf=33.528

d=247.396 X

tw=18.542

Fx= 115 Kn

Mx 47.4 kn.m

my= 0 kn.m

Ix = mm^4

A = mm^2 Sx = mm^3

d = mm rx = mm

tw = mm Iy = mm^4

bf = mm Sy = mm^3

tf = mm ry = mm

k = mm y = mm

fy= mpa

248 L= mm

bf 170 d 1680

2Tf

fy

tw

fy

284.480 170 247.396 1680

67.056 15.748 18.542 15.75

4.24242 < 10.795 ok 13.34246575 < 106.7 ok

compact

Lc= 200Bf 137,900

fy

(d/af)fy

56896 USE 3612.899613 mm

15.748

137900

6.43258

WT9x71.5

303367.87

59104862.44

66.040

13548.36

247.396

Lc2= = 21437.8 mm

248

therefore section is

< &

Lc1= = 3612.9 mm

Fbx fby < Fby

ok ok

fbx fby

Fbx Fby

156.25 0

163.68 163.68

MAX Vu= 189.6 KN

L

ALL. Fy = 0.4Fy 360

V = 16.66666667 MM

DtW

Wl 4

41.332 < 99.2 ok 384EI

= 4.511050174 mm

16.66666667 > 4.5110502

NOTE ok

Fbx =


148.8

section is compact

therefore use

strong axis

=Fby

=

NOTEnote

ACTUAL DEF.=

SHEAR DESIGN

< 0.4FY

DEFLECTION

ALL. DEF=

+ = 0.9546 ok

+ = 1

weak axis

=

Documents

DocumentA