MSc Design of Steel Buildings

Design of Portal Frames

INTRODUCTION

In most European countries, steel construction is used for the majority of non-domestic single-storey buildings. This is due to the ability to design relatively light, long span, durable structures in steel, which are easy to erect safely and quickly. The capacity to provide spans up to 60 m, but more commonly around 30 m, using steel has proved very popular for commercial and leisure buildings. The lightness and flexibility of this kind of steel structure reduces the sizes and the costs of foundations and makes them less sensitive to the geotechnical characteristics of the soil. The brief for the design of the majority of single storey industrial buildings is essentially to design a structure with a limited number of internal columns. In principle, the requirement is for the construction of four walls and a roof for a single or multi-bay structure. The walls can be formed of steel columns with cladding of profiled or plain sheet. The designer considers a system of beams or frameworks (latticed or traditional) in structural steel to support the cladding for the roof. Use is made of hot rolled hollow sections (circular, rectangular) and traditional sections (I sections, angles, etc.) and also cold formed sections which, in many cases, provide the most efficient and economic solution. In the following, after mentioning the main components of common single storey steel buildings, principles and detailed rules for designing traditional steel portal frames, which represent the main structural systems in about 50% of single storey structures in the UK, will be presented. Reference will be made to modern codes of practice, in particular to Eurocode 3 (EN 1993-1-1) and BS5950.

COMPONENTS IN SINGLE STOREY BUILDINGS

The skeleton of a typical single-storey building is shown in the Figure 1. It consists of three major elements: cladding for both roof and walls, secondary steel members to support the cladding and form framing for doors and windows and the main frame of the structure, including all necessary bracing.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

Figure 1: Components s of a portal st tructure.

2.1

C Cladding

The primary fun nction of th he cladding is to provide shade, shelter, s and an attractiv ve nce. The cla adding there efore represe ents one of f the most important el lement of th he appearan structure and it is lik kely to be som me 50% of t the total cost t. Cladding f formed from m metal shee ets rged as the most m popular r choice sinc ce its introdu uction in the e 1970's. Ste eel is the mo ost has emer usual sub bstrate with h aluminium m as a more expensive second choi ice. Steel-ba ased claddin ng sheets ar re formed fr rom a subst trate with la ayers of galv vanising, primer and co olour coating. There are e four main categories of o cladding systems: i) single s skin trapezoidal t cladding c (Fig g. 2a), ii) do ouble skin cladding c (Fig g. 2b), iii) st tanding seam m/secret fix c cladding (Fi ig. 2c) and iv v) composit te panels. Single-sk kin sheeting g is widely used in ag gricultural and a industri ial structure es, where no n insulation n is required d. The sheeti ing is fixed directly to th he purlins an nd side rails s, as shown in i Figure 2a a. The cladd ding is generally made fr rom 0,7 mm gauge pre-c coated steel with w a 32 mm m to 35 mm m trapezoida al profile dep pth. Double skin claddin ng consists o of a metal lin ner, a layer of o insulation n material, a spacer syst tem and an o outer metal sheet, s as illu ustrated in Figure 2b. Th he span of such s system ms is limited by the span nning capabi ility of the c cladding she eets, which is typically in the order r of 2 m to 2,5 m depen nding on the e applied loading. Stand ding seam or o ix systems use a specia ally designed d profile for r the weathe er (external) sheet, whic ch secret fi incorpora ates a clippe ed joint betw ween adjace ent sheets. This T elimina ates the need d for expose ed fasteners and improv ves the weath her tightness s of the clad dding system m. Consequen ntly, standin ng stems may be b used on very v low roo of slopes (do own to 1 co ompared to 4 4 for system ms seam sys with expo osed fastene ers). Insulate ed panel syst tems are also o available w with a standi ing seam join nt in the we eather sheet. Standing se eam sheeting g can be man nufactured fr rom steel or aluminium.

MSc Desi ign of Steel Buildings B De esign of Porta al Frames

(a)

(b)

(c) Figure 2: : Cladding sy ystems: (a) single s skin tr rapezoidal, (b b) double ski in trapezoida al, (c) standin ng seam/secr ret fix.

2.2

S Secondary elements

For steel portal framed fr indus strial type bu uildings with h low pitch r roofs, the cla adding pane els s are normal lly supported by a syste em of light steel purlins and side rails r spannin ng or sheets between the rafters and colum mns respectiv vely. The primary p func ction of the ese secondar ry s is to transf fer load from m the claddin ng to the pri imary steel f frame, includ ding claddin ng members
MSc Desi ign of Steel Buildings B De esign of Porta al Frames 3

self-weig ght, wind loa ads and, for r roofs, impo osed loads due d to snow and maintenance acces ss. The purli ins and side rails may al lso be used t to provide re estraint to the e rafters and d columns an nd to transfe er horizontal l loads into the t bracing s system. Cold-formed purl lins and side e rails are av vailable in a variety of sh hapes and a wide w range of o sizes (Fig g. 3). The de epth of the section s typic cally lies bet tween 120 m mm and 340 mm, with th he profile th hickness vary ying between n 1,2 mm an nd 3,2 mm. Purlins P and s side rails, be ecause of the eir high leng gth/thickness s values, are e typically cl lassed as Cla ass 4 section ns as defined d in EN 1993 31-3, henc ce section pr roperties will l be need to be based on n effective va alues.

Figure 3: Common typ pes of cold-fo ormed purlins s.

The purlins p and cladding c rails need to be designed to o carry all of f the loads ap pplied to them m from the e cladding, and to tran nsfer these loads l into the t structura al frame. Moreover M the ey provide restrain r to ra after and columns. In fac ct, to achieve savings in n material an nd therefore in i costs, it is i common practice p to use u the secon ndary steelw work (the pur rlins and rai ils) to restrai in the prima ary steelwor rk. It is gene erally accept ted that purlins and rails s need not be checked fo or forces ar rising from the lateral restraint of f rafters in either roof trusses or portal p frame es provided d that the following con nditions are met: i) the purlins are adequately restrained by b sheeting, ii) there is bracing of adequate sti iffness in the e plane of th he rafters or r alternativel ly f acting as a stressed-sk kin diaphrag gm, iii) the rafters carr ry the roof sheeting is capable of nantly roof loads. predomin

Figure 4: Details of co olumn and raf fter stay and c connection.

In ord der to provi ide the requi ired level of f torsional re estraint to th he rafters or columns, th he purlins or o cladding rails r must po ossess suffic cient flexura al stiffness. O Otherwise, there t is a ris sk that the restraining r m member will bend and all low the restr rained memb bers to rotate e, as shown in i Figure 5. . As a rule of o thumb, it is i normally a adequate to provide a pu urlin or cladding rail of at least 25% % of the dep pth of the me ember being g restrained. In practice, this general lly means that the purlin ns and side rails r will be sufficiently stiff for por rtal frames w with spans up p to 40 m an nd
MSc Desi ign of Steel Buildings B De esign of Porta al Frames 4

frame spa acings of 6 to t 8 m. How wever, as the span increa ases relative to the frame e spacing (an nd the rafter r size incre eases relative to that of f the purlins s), the purli in stiffness may becom me insufficie ent to provid de adequate torsional t restraint and sh hould, theref fore, be chec cked.

Figure 5: Purling stiffn fness effects.

Cold formed stee el purlins an nd cladding rails are ext tremely effic cient at carry ying loads by b bending action, but they are sus sceptible to failure thro ough lateral-t torsional bu uckling unles ss A the ec conomic and d safe desig gn of the cla adding and its i they are adequately restrained. Again ng steelwork k relies on th he interactio on between the t individu ual componen nts that mak ke supportin up the whole w system m. Purlins an nd cladding rails are no ormally selec cted from manufacturer m rs load/span n tables, wh hich are de erived from m analytical models sup pported by test data. In I producin ng their desig gn data, all purlin p manuf facturers hav ve to make a judgement regarding th he degree of restraint th hat is availa able from the e cladding system s unde er gravity an nd wind upli ift ns. These as ssumptions are a central t to the desig gn model an nd can have a significan nt condition effect on n the design resistance of o the purlin n or rail. It is i therefore essential tha at an equal or o greater le evel of restr raint is achie eved in prac ctice. This will w depend on o the choic ce of sheetin ng and the spacing of th he fasteners. In the gravit ty load case (or positive wind pressu ure in the cas se ), restraint is s provided directly d to the e top flange of the purlin n (or side rai il) by the line er of a wall) sheet or insulated pa anel, as sho own in Figur re 6. Built-u up cladding and insulated panels ar re y capable of f providing sufficient l lateral restra aint for the gravity loading case. In I generally general, perforated liners l are not n considere ed to be res straining an nd the suppo orting purlin ns herefore, be designed as s unrestrained members. should, th

Later ral

restraine ed

provided

to

compress sion flange by y cladding

ng provides lateral l restrain nt to 2 Claddin tension flange and partial torsional restraint

Figure 6: Purlin restra aint.

For wind w uplift (or negative e pressure o on a wall), the claddin ng cannot pr rovide later ral restraint directly to the compre ession flange. In this case, c the pu urlin (or clad dding rail) is d by a comb bination of la ateral restrai int to the ten nsion flange and torsiona al restraint, as a restrained shown in n Figure 6. As A an alterna ative to cold formed stee el, purlins an nd cladding rails r may als so
MSc Desi ign of Steel Buildings B De esign of Porta al Frames 5

be made e from hot-r rolled steel sections. In n the past, this t type of f purlin was s common in i industrial l buildings, often used in n conjunctio on with steel l roof trusses s. Hot-rolled d purlins hav ve a higher load-carryin ng capacity than largest t cold forme ed purlins. T This means that they ar re y used at mu uch greater sp pacings than n their cold formed f coun nterparts, typ pically 3 m or o generally more. Th his wide spac cing makes them t unsuita able for plas stically desig gned portal frames, f whic ch commonl ly require re estraint to the rafters at a approximately 1,8 m inte ervals. How wever, they ar re suitable for elastic frames f and also for sp pans beyond d the range of standard cold forme ed above 8 m). purlins (a

2.3

M Main fram me

Steel portal fram mes are wid dely used a as the main n structural system in single store ey buildings s, because they comb bine structu ural efficien ncy with fu unctional fo orm. Variou us configura ations can be e designed using u the sam me structural l concept as shown in Fig gure 7.

(a)

(b b)

(c)

(d d)

(e)

( (f)

Figure 7: : Various typ pes of portal frame: (a) P Pitch portal frame, fr (b) Cu urved portal frame f (cellular beam), (c) ) Portal with internal offices, (d) Portal with crane, (e) Two-span portal frame, , (f) Portal with external offices. o

The most m popula ar solutions are pitch portal frames s either with h pinned ba ases (Fig. 8a a), when the ere is no cr rane to be supported, o or the fully rigid version (Fig. 8b b), when it is necessary y to support crane loads and to obta ain smaller horizontal h displacements s. Less weigh ht of steel results, in any case, from fixed based fram mes, but the e additional l cost of th he ons of the su upports can be b higher tha an the saving g of steel. Th he frames ar re constructe ed foundatio
MSc Desi ign of Steel Buildings B De esign of Porta al Frames 6

from I-section (UKB, universal beam) rafters and columns with haunches at the connections at the eaves as illustrated in Figures 9-10 . The haunch length is approximately 10% of the span and can be formed from welded plate or more commonly a cutting from a rolled section. The depth at the column face is typically slightly deeper than the rafter section. Portal frames can be also built with tapered rather than haunched sections. Frames of this type are common in the USA and are being used more frequently in Europe. The sections are fabricated from plate on automated welding machines. The ability to vary web thickness, flange dimensions and section depth results in high material efficiency. Deep slender sections are used to maximise economy.

Figure 8: Arrangements for portal frames.

A single-span symmetrical portal frame (as shown in Figure 9) is typically of the following proportions: a span between 15 m and 50 m (25 m to 35 m is the most efficient). An eaves height (base to rafter centreline) of between 5 and 10 m (7,5 m is commonly adopted). The eaves height is determined by the specified clear height between the top of the floor and the underside of the haunch. A roof pitch between 5and 10 (6 is commonly adopted). A frame spacing between 5 m and 8 m (the greater frame spacing being used in longer span portal frames). Members are hot rolled I sections rather than H sections or UKB (universal beam), because they must carry significant bending moments and provide in-plane stiffness. Sections are generally S235 or S275. Because deflections may be critical, the use of higher strength steel is rarely justified. Haunches are provided in the rafters at the eaves to enhance the bending resistance of the rafter and to facilitate a bolted connection to the column. Small haunches are provided at the apex, to facilitate the bolted connection.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

Figure 9: Single-span symmetrical portal frame.

0: Details of beam-to-colum b mn connectio on with haunc ches. Figure 10

The portal p frame e in-plane st tability is pr rovided by frame f contin nuity. In the e longitudinal direction n, stability is provided by y vertical br racing in the elevations. The vertical l bracing ma ay be at bot th ends of th he building, or in one ba ay only (Fig. 11). Each frame f is con nnected to th he vertical bracing b by a hot-rolled member m at ea aves level.

(a)

b) (b Figure 11 1: (a) horizon ntal bracings, (b) longitudin nal vertical br racings.

MSc Desi ign of Steel Buildings B De esign of Porta al Frames

DESIGN OF PORTAL FRAMES

When designing portal frames, different steps are usually considered: i) determine possible loading conditions, ii) calculate factored design load combination(s), iii) estimate the element cross sections, iv) analysed the frame for each loading condition and select the sections and determine connections and v) check secondary modes of failure. In the following, after mentioning the main loads to be considered when designing portal frames (Fig. 12), different analysis methods, characterized by different levels of accuracy and complexity are reported. Then an effective design approach, which is based on the rigidplastic analysis, is described. This represents the current practice in the UK, which leads to the lightest and hence the most economical form for a portal frame. Simplified formulations for accounting for frame stability are considered in the last part of the note. As plastic design methods result in relatively slender frames, checking frame stability is a basic requirement; thus in-plane and out-of-plane stability of both the frame as a whole and the individual members must be considered.

3.1

Loading

External Gravity Loads The dominant gravity load is from snow. The general case is the application of a basic uniform load, but with sloping roofs having multiple spans and parapets, the action of drifting snow has to be considered. The design for main portal frames can be carried out using the uniform load case, but the variable loads caused by drifting are to be applied to cladding and purlins. For portal frames, the structure capacity is usually determined by the snow load case, unless the eaves height is large in relation to span.

Figure 12: In-plane loads to be considered in portal frames design.

Wind Loads With lightweight cladding and purlins and rails, wind loads are important. Cladding and its fasteners are designed for the local pressure coefficient. Care must be taken to include the total effect of both internal and external pressure coefficients.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

Internal Gravity Loads Service loads for lighting, etc., are reasonably assumed to be globally 0,6kN/m2. As service requirements have increased, it has become necessary to consider carefully the provision to be made. Most purlin manufacturers can provide proprietary clips for hanging limited point loads to give flexibility of layout. Where services and sprinklers are required, it is normal to design the purlins for a global service load of 0,1 - 0,2kN/m2 with a reduced value for the main frames to take account of likely spread. Particular items of plant must be treated individually. Cranes Where moving loads such as cranes are present, in addition to the gravity loads, the effects of acceleration and deceleration have to be taken into account in the design. A quasistatic approach is generally used in which the moving loads are enhanced and treated as static loads in the design. The enhancement factors to be used, depend on the particular plant and its acceleration and braking capacity. Manufacturers must be consulted where heavy, high speed or multiple cranes are being used. To take into account dynamic effects due to cranes, the maximum vertical loads and the horizontal forces are increased by specific factors. The repeated movement of a crane gives rise to fatigue conditions. Fatigue effects are restricted to the local areas of support, the crane beam itself, support bracket and the connection to main columns. It is not normal to design the whole frame for fatigue as the stress levels due to crane travel are relatively low. Other Actions In certain areas, the effects of earthquakes should be considered. In those countries affected, there are maps which identify the seismic level of each zone and standards to evaluate structural behaviour (Eurocode 8). In common practice, it is not necessary to take into account differential settlement of less than 2,5cm. If differential settlement exceeds 2,5cm, its effects must be examined, both from the structural and functional points of view. In less ductile structures, such as those constructed with sections not in Class 1 or 2, it is always important to evaluate the sensitivity of the structure in relation to possible differential settlement. It is also general practice not to take into account the effects of temperature when the maximum dimension of the building is less than 40 to 50 m, or when expansion joints have been used which separate the structure into zones which do not exceed this dimension. Elsewhere, it is important to evaluate the effects of variations in temperature. It is also necessary to ensure that the characteristics of the finished structure, both the systems of fastening and the seals in the envelope, are compatible with the inevitable deformations due to change in climate.

3.2

Methods of analysis

According to current codes of practice, structures must generally be checked at two different Limit States: at Ultimate Limit State (ULS) and at Serviceability Limit State (SLS). In the case of portal frames, ULS is the most critical condition.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

10

Figure 13: Curves representing the frame response determined using different approaches.

At ULS different methods can be employed for determining internal forces for each individual structural member or critical loads for the structural system as a whole. These techniques include first and second order approaches based on both elastic and plastic theory. In particular eight different procedures can be employed: i) first order elastic analysis, ii) first-order rigid-plastic analysis, iii) elastic critical load analysis, iv) second-order elastic analysis, v) second-order rigid-plastic analysis, vi) first-order, elastic-plastic theory and vii) second-order, elastic-plastic analysis and viii) second-order, plastic zone analysis. Conversely, when calculating deflections at working load levels for the purpose of checking serviceability (SLS), it is usual to employ only linear elastic analysis. First-Order Elastic Analysis In first-order elastic analysis a linear relationship between the applied loading F and the deformations () is considered. 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. The frame responds according to line 1 in Figure 11. First-Order Rigid-Plastic Analysis Rigid-plastic analysis neglects the effects of elastic deflections and assumes that all structural deformation takes place in discrete regions, called plastic hinges, where plasticity has developed. When using first-order, rigid-plastic theory only the collapse condition is addressed. This condition occurs when sufficient plastic hinges are assumed to have formed to convert the structure into a mechanism. Thus the path by which this stage is reached, i.e.
MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 11

the sequence of formation of the hinges and any intermediate distributions of internal forces, are not considered. Curve 2 in Figure 4 gives the frame response according to this approach. Due to the form of the analysis, no information is provided on the magnitude of the deflections. The analysis gives only that all stiffness is lost at the collapse load and deflections therefore (in theory) become uncontrolled. Elastic Critical Load Analysis Using elastic critical load analysis, it is possible to calculate the buckling loads for frames under specific loading conditions. Depending upon the content and complexity of the frame, several different buckling modes, each with its associated elastic vertical load, may be possible. Once again the analysis provides no information on the magnitude of the deflections; it simply identifies a particular load level. The curve 3 in Figure 4 gives the representation of the critical load obtained by an elastic buckling analysis. Second order elastic analysis In second-order elastic analysis the effect of elastic deformations on the internal force distribution is taken into account. The result is a transition from the linear analysis line 1 at low loads to the elastic critical line 3 at large deflections. For frames the second-order effects may be separated into 2 parts: i) reduction in the effective bending stiffnesses of individual members due to compressive loading, ii) a destabilising effect due to the overturning moment produced by the vertical loads acting through the horizontal deflections caused by the lateral loads. Second-order rigid-plastic analysis If the deformations, that may develop as a result of the formation of the plastic collapse mechanism are allowed for when formulating the equilibrium of the frame, then the result is the developing mechanism curve of line 5 in Figure 4. This curve shows that equilibrium can only be maintained with a reduction in the level of the applied loads. First-order, elastic-plastic theory If a linear elastic analysis is modified to allow for reductions in frame stiffness with the progressive formation of plastic hinges at increasing levels of the applied load, then the response curve of line 6 is obtained. This line exhibits progressive loss of stiffness as each plastic hinge is formed and eventually merges with the rigid-plastic line 2. Second-Order, Elastic-Plastic Analysis When the analysis that traces the formation of plastic hinges also allows for the effects of deformations in setting up the governing equations, then line 6 is modified somewhat into line 7. Line 7 initially follows the first-order elastic line 1, but diverges from this line to follow the second-order elastic line 4 as destabilising effects become more significant. Formation of the first plastic hinge - which occurs at a slightly lower applied load than is the case with the first-order, elasto-plastic analysis due to the larger deformation associated with second-order analysis - further reduces the stiffness, causing line 7 to diverge from line 4. This divergence becomes more pronounced as more plastic hinges form. The peak of this curve corresponds to the failure load predicted by this type of analysis. At large deformations line 7 tends to merge with the curve for the mechanism, line 5.
MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 12

Second-Order, Plastic Zone Analysis 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. 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. In the case single-storey pitch portal frames, it has been shown that the use of rigid-plastic analysis leads to significant saving in material. Therefore rigid plastic analysis can be easily and effectively used to determined the required capacity for rafter and stanchions. However, further checks are required to consider the second-order effects.

3.3

Rigid-plastic analysis

The rigid-plastic analysis allows us to calculate the plastic collapse load (p in Fig. 13) of structures when it is related to indefinite development of deflection under constant load. When the load at ULS is given, the rigid-plastic procedure can be used as a design method to determine the required plastic bending capacity for the beams and columns. The plastic collapse method does not assess deflections and does not deal with the stability of individual members or the structure as a whole. Therefore, it should be used as a design approach only when the strength is the overriding design criterion. Compared to the traditional elastic approach, plastic collapse analysis can lead to a more effective use of structural materials and cost savings, is more easily applicable to a wide range of common structures, and, unlike the elastic method, the results achieved are independent of initial imperfections (lack of fit, settlements etc.). The fundamental concepts of the plastic collapse approach were initially derived from observations of experimental tests (Fig. 14) and not from the application of a sound mathematical theory as in the case of elastic methods.

Figure 14: Fix-ended beam test: stress concentration and plastic hinge concept (Kazinczy, 1914).

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

13

Basic Hypotheses When using plastic methods for designing and analysing framed structures, we rely on the ability of the joints to transmit bending moments and on the resistance to bending of the members. Consequently, assuming that the flexural capacity of joints is always greater than that of the joined elements, the basic hypotheses for the plastic collapse theory refer to the relation between bending moment and curvature for beams and columns, which is closely associated with the behaviour of the component material. In this respect, the basic physical property exploited in the plastic method is ductility, in the sense that the material is assumed to be capable of deforming well into the plastic range without fracture and significant strength degradation under constant or slowly increasing loads (Fig. 15). High ductility must also characterize the behaviour of steel sections, which should experience large rotations without degradation in strength. Eurocode 3 introduces some restrictions on steel and cross sections to be used in structures designed by means of plastic methods of analysis. These restrictions are needed in order to guarantee that sections at least at the locations at which the plastic hinges may form, have sufficient rotation capacity to permit all the plastic hinges to develop throughout the structure. In particular, at plastic hinges, the code allows only for the use of structural steel with an elongation at failure 15% and Class 1 member sections. Conversely, in the other parts of the structure, section Class 2 may also be employed. Plastic hinge concept The plastic hinge concept can be explained by analysing the behaviour of a simply supported beam loaded by a vertical force (Fig. 15). When the load is increased until reaching the plastic moment Mp at midspan, plastic deformations extend over a region where the bending moment exceeds the elastic moment My.

Figure 15: Simply supported beam at collapse: distribution of plastic deformations, (M-) relation and load-displacement curve (W-).

Because of the shape of the M- diagram, the curvature k remains very small outside the elasto-plastic region. Conversely, close to the point where the load is applied, the curvature is
MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 14

very high. The beam therefore deforms very nearly as if it consisted of two rigid portions connected by a hinge, a plastic hinge. The plastic hinge behaves like a real but rusty hinge, needing (non-zero) moment M = M p to rotate it.

Figure 16: Plastic collapse mechanism for a simply supported beam loaded at midspan.

The plastic limit analysis is aimed at determining the plastic collapse loading condition, focusing on the evaluation of plastic mechanisms. Therefore, when using such approach in designing and analysing structures, a rigid-plastic approximation for the (M-) relationship can be considered (Fig. 16). The elasto-plastic law (Fig. 15) is fundamental only when analysing the nonlinear elasto-plastic structural response, for instance trough an incremental elasto-plastic procedure. Theorems of Plastic Collapse Analysis When calculating the collapse load of structures characterized by more than one potential mechanism, it becomes necessary to identify the actual collapse mechanism. The basic theorems for plastic collapse1 (Greeberg, Prager, Horne) give us the principles governing the plastic collapse in formal statements, which can be used to define the actual collapse mechanism and then to calculate the true collapse load, or, alternatively, determine the required plastic bending capacity. Static or lower bound theorem If, at any load factor , it is possible to find a statically admissible and safe BMD (satisfying equilibrium and yield conditions), then is either equal to or less than the load factor c at collapse. Corollary 1: the collapse load of a structure cannot be decreased by increasing the strength of any part.

Horne,M.(1971)PlasticTheoryofStructures,MITPress,Cambridge,Massachusetts.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

15

Kinematic or upper bound theorem If, for any assumed plastic mechanism (mechanism condition), the external work done by the loads (at a positive load factor ) is equal to the internal work at the plastic hinges, then is either equal or greater than the load factor c at collapse. Corollary 2: the collapse load of a structure cannot be increased by decreasing the strength of any part. The importance of the second theorem is obvious, for it follows that if the values of external loads (load factors) corresponding to all the possible collapse mechanisms are found, the actual collapse load (load factor) will be the smallest of these values. Uniqueness theorem If, at any load factor , a BMD can be found which satisfies the three conditions of equilibrium, mechanism, and yield, then that load factor is the collapse load factor c. Corollary 3: the initial state of stress has no effect on the collapse load. Corollary 4: if a structure is subjected to any programme of proportional or non-proportional loading, collapse will occur at the first combination of loads for which a BMD satisfying the conditions of equilibrium, mechanism, and yield can be found. Summary of basic theorems for plastic collapse analysis: MECHANISM CONDITION Uniqueness theorem
c - kinematic theor. c - static theorem

= c

EQUILIBRIUM CONDITION YIELD CONDITION

Static approach Collapse in statically determinate structures occurs when a plastic hinge forms in the most stressed section. Therefore the ultimate load assessment and plastic design can be carried out using simple equilibrium considerations and the static theorem. In the case of statically indeterminate structures, as the load increases beyond the elastic limit, which is attained when the first hinge forms, plastic hinges appear in succession at sections where the absolute value of bending moments has a local maximum equal to the plastic bending capacity (plastic moment), until the structure turns into a mechanism at collapse. Also in these situations, the ultimate load can be calculated using static methods, which investigate the collapse state considering equilibrium and yield conditions. In this respect, the equilibrium diagram method, which uses the graphical superposition of free and reactant bending moment diagrams, represents an effective strategy.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

16

Analysis (c unknown) by statics at collapse: c = M p WL Design (p unknown) by statics at collapse: M p = c WL Analysis (c unknown) by statics at collapse: c = 4M p WL Design (p unknown) by statics at collapse: M p = c WL 4
Figure 17: Collapse load for statically determinate structures calculated using the static approach.

Yield condition: MMp Equilibrium condition: BMD is in equilibrium with external loads. Mechanism condition: plastic hinges at critical sections. By inspection:
M A = M p M B = M p MC = 2WL M A + 2M B + = Mp 3 3 3M p 2WL = 2M p Wc = 3 L

Other examples:

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

17

M A = M p M B = M p MC = wL M A + M B + = Mp 8 2 16M p wL2 = 2M p w c = 8 L2
2

M A = M p MB = 0 MC = WL M A + M B + = Mp 4 2 6M p WL 3 = M p Wc = 4 2 L

Figure 18: Collapse load for simple statically indeterminate structures calculated using the static approach.

The same procedure can be used for investigating portal frames. In this case different collapse mechanisms, which define plastic hinge position, should be considered (Fig. 19). After fixing the position of plastic hinges (collapse mechanism), the moment diagram at collapse can be drawn and the yield condition can be checked. Consider the frame in Figure 20, it is made statically determined so that free bending diagram can be drawn. The reactant diagram may be constructed by considering the effect of redundant actions destroyed by cutting the frame. Assuming that mechanism 1 is the true collapse mechanisms, we can write the following simultaneous equations, which define plastic hinges at B,C,D, and E:
At B:

Vl Sl M + Rh 2 = Mp 4 2

At C: 0 M = M p

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

18

At D:

Vl Sl M + Rh 2 + = Mp 4 2 Vl Hh M + R h + h + Sl = M ( 1 2) 1 p 2 4
h1 Vl Hh 2 + 2 ; M=M p ; h1 + h 2 8 S=0; 1 Vl R= Hh1 h1 + h 2 8

At E:

It gives: M p =

Figure 19: Basic collapse mechanisms for a pitch frame.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

19

Figure 20: Free and reactant diagrams.

The calculated Mp is a safe value only is the bending moment diagram at collapse satisfies yield condition. It can be checked considering the value for bending moment at A:

MA =

Vl Sl M + R ( h1 + h 2 ) Mp 4 2

Substituting the values for S, R and M, we found the relation: 0 Hh1 Vl 4 , which is usually satisfied for frames of a wide range of span to height ration.

3.4

Graphical method for plastic design of portal frames

A simplified graphic procedure, based on the reactant and free moment distribution, can be effectively used in the case of pitch frame, when the snow load determines the collapse condition.

Figure 21: Pitch frames with pinned base columns.

For the governing load case we require a bending moment diagram that:

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

20

 satisfies mechanism, equilibrium and yield condition (Uniqueness Theorem). In practice this can be achieved by utilising hinges at: i) maximum moment near apex of rafter, ii) maximum moment in stanchion at the bottom of the haunch (Fig. 21); gives a haunch region that remains elastic. The haunch is usually a tapered section cut from the same UKB as the rafter, giving a maximum depth at the end plate connection of just less than twice the rafter depth. The rafter end of the haunch must remain elastic and therefore the moment at this point should remain less than Mpr/1.15 where Mpr is the moment resistance of the rafter. 1/1.15 comes from the shape factor for a UKB; gives a practical eaves bolted connection. This normally requires a limit on the moment at the rafter-stanchion connection. Typically the notional moment at this point should be around 1.5Mpr. In general the moment should be within the range: Mps/2.5 < Mpr < Mps, where Mps is the moment resistance of the stanchion. Well proportioned designs will be somewhere close to the middle of this range. We can adopt a graphical technique to determine the moments for design of members relying in the first instance on the application of a release to reduce the problem to a statically determinate one. We release the horizontal reaction at one of the column bases, this means there are no moments in the stanchions and the free bending moment in the rafter is the same as for a beam, thus giving the maximum free bending moment diagram: M = wL2 8 . Then applying a horizontal reactant force to the roller gives a bending moment diagram in the frame proportional to the height above the reactant force. This gives the reactant bending moment diagram. Figure 22 illustrates the concept.

Figure 22: Free and reactant bending moment.

Thus the practical application of the graphical method goes as follows:

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 21

 Draw the portal frame to scale and either back project the roof line to the horizontal to obtain the point A referred to in Figure 22. This point can also be determined using the relationship: L 2 = L1 h1 h 2 , where L1, h1 and h2 are defined in Figure 22.

On a separate diagram mark out the horizontal distances that you obtained from the first step. Now draw a parabola as accurately as possible to represent the free bending moment to a convenient vertical scale. The concept is illustrated in Figure 23. Project a line from point A with a clear ruler such that the difference between the reactant moment line and the free moment parabola satisfies the conditions of a haunched region that remains elastic and a practical eaves bolted connection as discussed previously. it is important to note that it is you who decides on the gradient of this line.

Figure 23: Graphical procedure to determine rafter and stanchions plastic bending capacity.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

22

Once the reactant moment line is established, pick off values for rafter and stanchion moment capacities and choose appropriate sections for both. From the figure you should also be able to check the minimum haunch length to ensure that the haunch tip remains elastic (Mpr/1.15). If using a haunch length of span/10 the check can still be applied to the tip of the haunch. It can also be checked that the moment in the stanchion is within the range discussed. Note that the position of the maximum moment near the apex varies as the slope of the reactant line varies. In practice it can only occur at one of the purlins - where load is transferred to the rafter - generally the first or second from the apex. However the error is insignificant and it is assumed to be capable of continuously variable location.

Approximate tabular method

Based on the assumptions introduced for the graphical design method, a number of design charts for estimating member sizes have been produced. They can be used to determine quickly the sizes of simple pinned based frame elements assuming that: i) ii) the depth of the rafter is approximately span/55 and the depth of the haunch below the eaves intersection is 1.5 times the rafter depth. The moment in the rafter at the tip of the haunch is 0.87Mp,r, so that it is assumed that the haunch remains elastic.

Figure 24: Rise/span versus horizontal base force for various values of span/eaves height.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

23

Figure 25: Rise/span versus required Mp of rafter for various values of span/eaves height.

The graphs in Figures 24,25,26, which can be used for the range of span/eaves height between 2 and 5 and rise/span of 0 to 0.2 (where 0 is a flat roof), give: i) the horizontal force at the base of the frame as a proportion of the total factored load wL, where w is the load per unit length of rafter and L (=2L1) is the span of the frame (Fig. 24), ii) the required moment capacity of the rafters as a proportion of wL2 and iii) the required moment capacity of the stanchions as a proportion of wL2. In practical calculations, after determining the ratios span/height (2L1/h1), rise/span (h2/2L1) and the total load (wL and wL2), tables in Figs 24, 25 and 26 can be used to calculate horizontal thrust at base, Mpr required for rafter and Mps required for stanchion respectively.

Figure 26: Rise/span versus required Mp of stanchion for various values of span/eaves height.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

24

Further considerations on rigid- plastic analysis

As it has been mentioned before, when designing pitched roof portal frames, attention is mainly paid on the snow load, because it determines the frame sizes. Therefore the frame is analysed under a uniformly distributed load, also neglecting the notional horizontal loads which account for practical imperfections such as lack of verticality (Fig. 27). Such simplification is admissible, as geometrical imperfections have a significant influence only on the design of structures which are sensitive to second-order sway effects. Typical portal frames are not particularly sensitive to such sway modes, and notional horizontal loads usually have a less than 1% effect on the required plastic moment of resistance and can be ignored in member sizing. The bending moment distribution considered in the analyses is therefore symmetrical, thus leading to a symmetrical collapse mechanism (Fig. 28). This mechanism is overcomplete and should not be analysed. However, if the constraint of symmetry is applied, so that the apex moves down vertically without rotating, this mechanism becomes 'complete' and can be considered in the calculations. Moreover even though the position of the rafter hinges is unknown, in practical design it can be assumed at the apex (see the graphical method in 3.4). In reality, as distributed load from the roof is usually applied to the frame as a series of point loads through purlins, the rafter hinges always form under the first or second purlin down from the apex (Fig. 28).

F1

F1 F1

F2
F2

F2

(F1+F2)/2

(F1+F2)/2

Sway imperfection

Equivalent forces (notional horizontal loads)

Figure 27: Frame imperfection and notional horizontal loads (EC3).

Figure 28: Symmetrical collapse mechanism. MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 25

After determining required Mpr and Mps by using the graphical approach or the approximate method with tables, actual sections for stanchions and rafters can be determined, choosing among Class I sections. A potential reduction in plastic bending capacity caused by axial forces should be considered, as well as the frame under wind loads should be analysed. However, both checks are generally not relevant for common pitch frames. Finally the actual plastic load factor p*, associated with the most critical load combination, which usually includes factored dead and snow loads (w) can be determined (Fig. 29). It is p* >1, as it reflects the excess capacity due to the choice of discrete member sizes in some arbitrary way. In the calculation, the actual plastic capacity of stanchions Mp,s* and rafters Mp,r* (in case reduced because of axial force) are considered, as well as it is assumed that plastic hinges at collapse form in the columns below the connections to the rafter first and then at the apex.

R=

M p,s*

( h1 b )
M p,r* + R ( h1 + h 2 ) w ( 2L1 ) 8
2

p* =

Figure 29: Calculation of the load factor p associated with rigid-plastic analysis.

3.5

Second-order effects

First-order rigid-plastic analysis provides only an unsafe assessment of the actual capacity of framed structures, as is does not account for second-order effects (Fig. 30). This is shown in Figure 13, where the maximum capacity f of a structure, calculated using an accurate second order elasto-plastic procedure, is compared against the load factor at collapse p, which is determined by means of a rigid-plastic approach. It appears that the load factor f falls always well below p, thus preventing the use of simple plastic theory in practical applications. However, many common structures, as single-storey portal frames, are not usually excessively slender and the strain hardening contribution, which ensures that plastic hinges do not rotate at a constant moment but rather have a rising moment-rotation relationship, is often sufficient to overcome the destabilising effect of axial compressive loads or at least to ensure that the shortfall of f below p is not excessive. However, in a safe assessment and design, there is a need for methods allowing for simple estimates of f, thus leaving the use of sophisticated nonlinear analysis procedures only for investigating unusual structures or for slender structures, where the difference between f and p is significant.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

26

P H x h H

M(x) = Hx M(h) = Hh

M(x) = Hx +P + P x / h M(h) = Hh + P

where: h is the height from the column base to the inflexion point is the sway relative to the column base of the inflexion point.
Figure 30: First and second order moments in a beam-column.

Merchant-Rankine approach
The Merchant-Rankine formula provides the most effective approximate method for estimating the load factor f at failure. It is employed by current codes of plastic (Eurocode 3, BS5950) and represents an extension of the Rankine equation for the failure load of a column under compression to frames:

1 1 1 = + f p cr
which leads to:
f = p 1 + p cr

(1)

(2)

where f is the actual load factor at collapse, p is the rigid-plastic load factor and cr is the elastic critical load factor. Equation (1) was initially suggested on a purely empirical basis and only later Horne showed that it has a theoretical justification provided that the critical buckling mode is similar to the plastic collapse mode. While, in other situations, it is likely to be conservative. In the case of single-story portal frames, which are relatively stocky structures, strain hardening in plastic hinges and a small amount of restraint from the cladding can be sufficient to overcome the destabilising effects of axial compressive loads. Recognising these factors, Wood suggested a modification of eq. (2) to give:

f =

p 0.9 + p cr

when 4

cr 10 p

f = p

when cr > 10 p

(3)

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

27

In the case of slender frames, when cr p < 4.6 according to BS5950, more accurate nonlinear second order elasto-plastic analyses should be carried out.

Figure 31: Critical load and buckling mode for a pitch frame.

It is evident that any approach based on the Merchant-Rankine formula requires a good estimate of the elastic critical load factor cr (Fig. 31). For multi-storey frames such value can be calculated quite easily, using different alternative methods. Conversely the evaluation of the critical load for pitched roof portal frames is not simple and requires a specific treatment. In this case, the destabilising effect of the axial thrust in the rafter must be considered. Davies developed an effective method, which is remarkably simple and give results that are sufficiently accurate for all practical purposes. According to this approach, the critical mode is assumed to be anti-symmetrical sway, with a corresponding deflection of the rafter (Fig. 31). Davies determined the critical load, solving the buckling problem in Figure 32, where a small disturbing moment M at eave which gives rise to a rotation initiates frame buckling.

1
Figure 32: Elastic critical load calculation for a pitched roof frame.

An explicit expression for cr can be derived as a function of the axial load in the column Pc and along the rafter Pf:
MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 28

 cr =

5E (10 + R ) 5Pr L2r 2RPc h 2 + Ir Ic 5E (10 + R ) L r ( Pc h + 0.3Pr L r )

with R =

Ic L r Ir h

for fixed base frames (4) for pinned base frames

cr =

where Ic and Ir are the second moment of era of columns and rafter respectively. An estimate of the axial loads Pc and Pr, which is sufficiently accurate for practical design can be obtained considering the notations in Figure 33 using the expressions:
Pc = wL M , H= 2 h and Pr = H cos + wL sin 2

(5)

Figure 33: Evaluation of the axial loads Pc and Pr at collapse.

Typical portal frames, when well-designed, are characterised by values of cr which are about 5, so the consideration of second-order effects is extremely important. Being in the rage of intermediate slenderness, the modified Merchant-Rankines formula (Eq. 3) can be employed. This required that the load factor for plastic design should be increased accordingly to the above equation for p and that all of the internal forces obtained by firstorder analysis should be amplified in proportion.

3.6

Member stability

At ULS, it is essential that all members of the frame remain stable. In general, the member stability checks should be carried out using final bending moment diagram for the loading combination used to the to determine the member sizes. In structures designed using elastic methods, this means ensuring that the frame elements are stable against both in-plane and out-of-plane (lateral torsional buckling) failure. While, when using plastic design, also different requirements need to be satisfied, to guarantee large rotational capacity at plastic hinge position. The first requirement implies to use only Class I (plastic) sections at plastic
MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 29

hinges location. This guarantees that the elements are sufficiently stocky for plastic hinges to develop, without premature loss of strength due to local buckling. Moreover codes of practice (e.g. Eurocode 3, BD5950) require to provided torsional restraints at all plastic hinge positions, with adjacent lateral restraints within a specific distance Lm from the hinge restraint. The Lm value can be calculated using the expression:
Lm = 38i z
2 Ed 1 Wpl,y + 2 57.4 756 C1 AI t 2 fy 235 1/ 2

(6)

where Ed is the average compressive stress [N/mm2] due to axial load, fy is the design strength [N/mm2], iz is the radius of gyration [mm] about the minor axis, It is torsional constant and C1 is a factor depending on the loading and end condition. In a portal frame, purlins and sheeting rails are assumed to provide lateral restraint to the flange to which they are connected. On their own, they do not provide either torsional restraint to the section or lateral restraint to the remote flange if this flange is in compression. Torsional restraints hold both flanges of a beam in position relative to each other (in the lateral direction). The most usual way of achieving either of these forms of bracing is to use a knee brace connected to a purlin or sheeting rail as shown in Figure 34. Past research indicates that each knee brace should be designed for a compression load equal to 2% of the compression flange yield load and should have a stiffness that is given by a slenderness ratio of at least 100.

Figure 34: Typical knee brace.

There are three different regions of the frame which require checking: the apex region, the haunch zone and the columns. The apex region of the rafter contains a length of almost uniform bending moment and this is the most difficult distribution to stabilise. However, the most critical load condition places the outer flange in compression and this is laterally restrained by the purlins. The requirements therefore depend critically on whether it has been possible to prove that this part of the frame is entirely elastic at the ultimate limit state. If this part of the rafter contains a plastic hinge, then the purlin spacing is limited to Lm. If this part of the rafter is elastic, and in any event for parts of the rafter remote from the plastic hinge, then the standard requirements for elastic design apply. The purlin spacing is then restricted to a value of LE (effective length depending upon the amount of end restraint and loading condition). In the haunch region of the rafter, the purlins restrain the tension flange. If this region contains a plastic hinge, then the purlin spacing in the vicinity of the hinge is again
MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames 30

limited by Lm. Provided that every length of purlin has at least two bolts in each purlin-rafter connection; and the depth of the purlin section is not less than 0.25 times the depth of the rafter, the bottom flange of the rafter can also be assumed to be restrained at the point of contraflexure. If the design procedure suggested in previous sections has been followed, then the haunch region of the rafter will generally be elastic. In this case the maximum purlin spacing can be increased to that which results in a value of LE which satisfies standard lateral torsional buckling checks.

Figure 35: Spacing for lateral and torsional restraints in columns and haunched rafter.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

31

Under the dominant load condition, the column will also usually be restrained at intervals along the tension flange by the sheeting rails. In a plastically designed frame, there will almost always be a plastic hinge below the haunch. This will, of course, require a torsional restraint. According to current codes, the distance to the next restraint should be Lm. However, this value should be modified to account for the actual bending moment profile, which is not constant.

MSc Design of Steel Buildings Design of Portal Frames

32