Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No.

xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

Case study regarding the design of a wide span steel structure roof
for Palas Complex - Iasi

Daniel I. Suciu*1, Ionut Vasilescu2, Dragos Marcu3

1
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Faculty of Civil Engineering, 28 Memorandumului Str., 400114,
Cluj-Napoca, Romania
2,3
S.C. “Popp & Asociatii Consulting Engineers”, 39A Clinicilor Str., Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Abstract

This paper presents aspects and results regarding the structural design of a wide span roof that
will be placed and supported on nine distinct existing or under construction reinforced concrete
buildings, that are part of the Palas Complex located in Iasi city. The paper shows the structural
system as a result of the design process and also points out the atypical character of the structure
and the particular aspects related to it.

Rezumat

Lucrarea prezintă aspecte ale elaborării proiectului de rezistenţă a structurii unui acoperiş de mari
dimensiuni amplasat si rezemat pe noua courpuri distincte de cladiri de beton armat existente sau
in curs de construire, ce fac parte din Complexul Palas din municipiul Iaşi. Este prezentat sistemul
structural stabilit în urma procesului de proiectare, cu sublinirea caracterului atipic al structurii şi
al aspectelor particulare legate de acesta.

Keywords: 3D steel structures, modeling, trusses, base isolators, LRB, wind tunnel, damping ratio.

1. Introduction

In the city of Iasi, on Stefan cel Mare si Sfant Bd. an assembly of buildings is under construction -
Palas Complex. The buildings that are part of this complex will have different destinations or
functions (residential, commercial, cinemas, offices, parking, etc.).
The buildings A1, A2, A3 form an assembly that has an interior court with an unregular pentagon
shape. The surface of this pentagon is approximately 7200 sqm. These buildings are made of
reinforcede concrete and have been designed by a different designer based on a initial concept in
which the interior court was not covered. The Beneficiary asked for the design of a roof above the
interior court and above buildings A1, a roof that must represent a single architectural entity.
By the proposed architectural concept, the roof will have the shape of a spherical cap, with a big
radius (400 m).

The plan shape of the roof has the shape and dimensions schematically shown in Fig. 2. The total
surface of the roof is approximately 9000 sqm. The structural system is different for the roof above
buildings A1, because of a different function (offices above last existing concrete floor, under the
new roof).

1*
Corresponding author: Tel./ Fax.: 0743099866
E-mail address: daniel.suciu@mecon.utcluj.ro
 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

ROOF and A Buildings

Palas Complex
IASI

Palatul Culturii din Iaşi

Şt. cel Mare şi Sfânt Blvd.

Figure 1. Overall image of Palas Complex Iasi

Over the A1 Buildings, the roof is not „cut” at the limit of the interior court, it is extended by a
different structural body over those buildings. This body is made of concentrically braced frames
and is separated by a seismic joint (35 cm) from the structure of the central roof above the interior
court.

In this paper will will reffer only to the main roof, that covers the interior court.

Figure 2. Schemă de acoperire a corpurilor A

 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

2. Description of the structural system

Several solutions have been studied, analyzed and proposed to the Beneficiary for the roof
structure: a spatial reticular structure, a one way trusses structure and a two way trusses structure.
The clear span of the entire interior court was exceeding 84 m. The rational and most economical
solution that resulted was the spatial reticular structure. Following the conceptual design project
feed-back from the Beneficiary and his will to be able to subcontract the execution of the steel
structure to a local / Romanian company, the reticular structure had to be eliminated. Given these
conditions, we had to adopt a structure that could be fabricated in Romania and erected with local
labor force. The final structure consists in radial and concentrical planar trusses (two way trusses).
Because the spans were too big for a rational steel consumption, an additional steel frame has been
introduced in the center of the interior court, reducing the spans to max. 54 m.

The following structural system has been established by structural design:

- 38 main beams – steel trusses – radially placed, with a heigth 2,5 m (between bars axes;
approx. 2.75 m total height); they are made of rectangular tubes (250x250 mm, with
different thicknesses). The main trusses have rigid / stiff connections at the outer end (each
beam being connected to a column placed on the perimeter) and pinned connection at the
inner end, on the central frame.
- The main beams are supported on the outer perimeter on steel frames;
- The main beams are supported at the inner end on a central steel unbraced frame (MRF);
- 22 secondary beams - concentrical rings (ellipsoidal), made as steel trusses that connect the
main trusses; the top boom of the secondary trusses is placed above / on the top boom of the
main trusses, thus acting also as direct supports for the covering material of the roof ; the top
boom of the secondary trusses have rigid connections with the main trusses.
- The distance between the concentrical rings (secondary beams) is approx. 2.5 m;
- The distance between the bearing points of the main trusses is: 2,1 m on the central frame
and 8.0 – 11.5 m on the perimeter of the interior court;
- The highest point of the roof is at approx. 33 m above ground.

Special attention had to be payed to the bearing system of the roof on the perimeter. The roof will
be supported on 9 distinct concrete buildings, which are separated by seismic joints. The bearing of
the roof will be made by 42 columns; each columns will have a different top level (different length),
resulted from the spherical shape of the roof and also from different top levels of the concrete
structures.
The perimeter columns will be made of steel round tubes (457x16 mm) and are placed on the inside
(towards the interior court) concrete frame of each existing building. These perimeter columns will
be indirectly connected to the concrete buildings by anti-seismic devices that are base isolators.
These devices permit the relativ movement between the concrete buildings and the roof, in case of
seismic action.
The columns of perimeter frames are connected with „Vierendeel” type beams at the top (2.5 m
high) and with intermediate HEA-450 profiles at an intermediate height, forming rigid frames. The
lengths of the perimeter columns vary from 4.0 m to 12.0 m.
The main roof (above the interior court) will have its own structure, separated from the structure
above A1 blocks by a seismic joint. This resulted from the conditions of avoiding the contact
between the two structures in case of a seismic action, and will have a clear opening of 35 cm.
The central frame is made of 18 columns placed above existing concrete walls at 5.50 m distance
(round tube 508x25 mm) and beams made of HEB-450 profiles. The height of the central frame is
approx. 24 m.The columns of the central frame will be connected to the concrete structure by
unstiff / rotational connections, for avoiding transmitting bending moments to the existing concrete
elements.
 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

Figure 3. Structure scheme

Figure 4. Overall image of the roof structure over the interior court

After performing iterative analysis, the base isolators under the perimeter columns have been tuned
and resulted with the following characteristics:
In urma analizelor structurale efectuatea rezultat ca necesar următorul tip de izolator de bază de tip
”Lead Rubber Bearing” (LRB);
- Isolator type – Lead Rubber Bearing (LRB)
- Maximum vertical force under ULS combinations (without seismic action): 3100 kN
- Maximum vertical force under ULS, in combinations that include seismic action:
1050 kN;
- Effective horizontal stiffness of the isolator (Keff): 1.08 kN/mm;
- Vertical stiffness of the isolator: Kv=1052 kN/mm;
- Maximum needed displacement for the isolator : 300 mm
“Vierendeel” type beams
 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

Central frame – MRF, that support

the inner end of the main trusses

Base isolators under the

perimeter columns
Perimeter columns

Figure 5. Bearing system for the roof structure

Figure 6. Base isolator example – LRB

4. Particularities and key aspects

The roof structure is a special one, which cannot be integrated within typical steel constructions, not
even compared to other big roof structures (or domes) that are designed or constructed arround the
world. There are several reasons for this and they have studied, analyzed and consequently the
design has been carried out having them on the frontpage.

Given the shape and the dimensions of the roof, the wind action and the snow agglomeration could
not be correctly and accurately evaluated using the design codes. Therefore, based on the
requirements issued by the structural designer, a Wind Tunnel Study was carried out by the Gh.
Asachi Technical University in Iasi.
 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

4.1 Design key aspects and particularities

The wind tunnel study has shown significantly higher values for the pressure coefficients for wind
action, compared to the code values, but also very important snow agglomeration, with an
ununiform distribution. Even if the study did not provide specific values for the „shape
coefficients” (which quantify the ununiform distribution of the snow on the roof), the study did
provide values for heights of the snow, in case the wind is blowing from different angles. Based on
these heights, the structural designer could make interpolations and means, that provided in the end
values of the shape coefficients and of the characteristic snow load. The values of the snow load
turned out to be very heigh, even exceeding 6 kN/m2 (600 kgf/m2). This is a rather unusual situation
for a wide span roof and had to be treated very carefully in the design process. Six different snow
load schemes have been considered (one uniform and five according to the wind directions from the
wind tunnel study). In the Fig. 6a and 6b is shown the snow height provided in the wind tunnel
study and the afferent snow load scheme considered in the structural design.

Figure 6a. Snow agglomeration – wind acting at

180⁰ Figure 6b. Snow load scheme

Another very important design aspect was represented by the seismic conditions of the site. The
design level of peak ground acceleration Iasi is PGA=0.20g. But, because the roof is placed on top
of existing buildings, at heights exceeding 20 m above ground, the design acceleration at the roof
level is increased (amplified) and is significantly higher than the PGA. A peak roof acceleration
(PRA) has been calculated for the top of the concrete support buildings and this resulted with the
value of PRA=0.33g.

For the central frame, though, the design had to be made for a PGA, not for a PRA, as it is
supported on „zero level” slab, not on top of the buildings.

The seismic analysis has been performed using response spectrum. An important aspect for this
structure is the damping ratio (fraction of the critical damping).
The normalized response spectrum β (T) has been used, according to Romanian seismic design
code P100-1-2006, , and the maximum value of the dynamic amplification factor is:
- β 0 = 2.75, but this is valid for 5% ratio of the critical damping (reinforced concrete
structure);
- For the steel structure, the damping ratio was considered 2% (of the critical damping);
- The base isolators provide a significant increase of the damping. This can vary from one
suplier to another. It has been considered that low damping devices will be used, with 10%
damping ratio;
 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

- The correction factor for the response spectrum, for values of the critical damping that are
different from 5% is:
10
η=
5+ξ
where ξis the damping ratio (from the critical damping);
For our case ξ=12%, and the correction factor is η = 0.77 ;
- In conclusion, β 0 = 2.12
- The inelastic design spectra became:

Figure 7. Inelastic design spectra

The seismic action has been applied on 8 directions (at angles of 45⁰). The 8-angles seismic
action has been applied for each of the 6 snow load schemes. 48 seismic
combination resulted and high computation power and resources were needed.

4.2 Technological key aspects and particularities

The unregular shape led to an undesired but unavoidable fact: the relation / interface between a
main truss and a secundary truss is never the same 9not in one joint). Each secondary truss
intersects a main truss under different angles in space (on 3 axes). For this reason in each joint of
the main trusses some special pieces had to be provided; these pieces will be different for each
joint, but will be continued with similar / typical pieces that are used for the connection itself.

The curved shape of the roof led to curved main trusses. The curvature of the trusses is different, for
each of the 38 trusses. This curvature will be obtained not by curving the rectangular tubes, but by
connection straight (liniar) bar under different angle in each joint, by welded connections.

The height or thickness of the roof structure was also an issue in relation with the Architect and
Beneficiary. After different approaches and solution, the 2.5 m height has been adopted and
considered as the optimal, from all points of view (architecturally – visually, volume of air that
needs heating under the roof, visibility from the central frame under the roof, structurally, etc.)

Given the special character of the structure, the designer required deformation sensors to be
mounted in certain structural elements, in order to monitor the deformations and the tensions in the
roof.
Also, given the special conditions of bearing the roof on nine existing buildings, in a seismic area,
seismic monitoring has also been required (digital aquisition system, made of 5 tri-axial sensors).

5. Conclusions
 Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture Vol. xx, No. xx, (2011)
Journal homepage: http://constructii.utcluj.ro/ActaCivilEng

The roof will be supported on nine distinct concrete buildings. Each of these buildings has its own
behavour and dynamic response under seismic action. The roof itself will have its own behavour
and dynamic response under seismic action. The influence between the buildings and the roof, and
a possible coupling of the concrete buildings with the roof had to be avoided. For this reason base
isolators have to be used between the roof structure and the concrete buildings. In this case it is not
the base / the foundation of a building that is separated from the ground, it is a wide roof that is
separated from the building that it is supported on.

Iasi area has an imposed code value for the snow load of 2.50 kN/m 2, which is anyway a high value.
This value is significantly amplified by the shape, dimensions and location of the structure, and
reaches extremely high values (even 6.25 kN/m2) for shape coefficients that reach values of 2.5.
The spans of the roof vary between 25 m – 54 m.

Under all these conditions, the steel consumption for the entire structure over the interior court is
appox. 161 kg/sqm. If we reffer only to the roof itself (and not including the perimetral frames and
the central frame), the steel consumption is apporx. 126 kg/sqm.

The structure was designed in accordance with the present design codes. During these years the
Romanian design codes are being accorded and aligned with the Eurocodes, but some of the former
Romanian design codes are still in force. Therefore, in the design process the most severe of the
conditions given either in the Eurocodes or in the present Romanian codes have been considered.

Given the wide proportions of the project and the very many problems it involves, one paper is not
enough to present all the technical aspects that might interest the reader. Other results, maybe more
technically detailed, can be presented in a future paper, as a continuation of the present one.

Acknowledgements

The structural design process has been carried out within the company “Popp & Asociatii
Consulting Engineers” - Cluj-Napoca.

6. References
[1] Chilton John, Space Grid Structures
[2] Kelly E.Trevor., Seismic Base Isolation – Design Guidelines
[3] Naeim Farzad, Kelly M. James, Design of Seismic Isolated Structures, from theory to practice
[4] Seismic Design Code - P100/1-2006 – Design of Buildings, and National Appendix to Eurocode 8 (EC
1998 or the Romanian version SR EN 1998 - AN)
[5] Design of steel structures - Eurocode 3 (EC 1993 or the Romanian version SR EN 1993)
[6] Actions on buildings - CR0-2005
[7] Actions on structures - Eurocode 1 (EC 1991 or the Romanian version SR EN 1991)
[8] Design Code. Snow load on structures – CR1-1-3-2005
[9] SR EN 15129 – 2010: Antiseismic Devices