SCI P341 Secure
SCI P341 Secure
SCI P341 Secure
Guidance on meeting
the Robustness Requirements in
Approved Document A
(2004 Edition)
A G J Way MEng, CEng, MICE
Published by:
The Steel Construction Institute
Silwood Park
Ascot
Berkshire SL5 7QN
Tel:
Fax:
01344 623345
01344 622944
ii
Printed 01/07/05
FOREWORD
Under the 2004 Amendment of the Building Regulations 2000, the changes to Part A
(Structure) include important changes to the limits on application for buildings designed
to avoid disproportionate collapse. The guidance given in the revised Approved
Document A on how to meet the requirements to avoid disproportionate collapse has also
changed.
This publication provides designers of hot-rolled steel framed buildings with the
necessary guidance to enable them to ensure compliance with the disproportionate
collapse requirements of the Regulations.
The author is indebted to his colleagues at the SCI for their input and advice, in
particular to Charles King and Tom Cosgrove. In addition, a number of other
individuals have contributed to this guide and their input is gratefully acknowledged:
Stuart Alexander
WSP Group
Chris Dolling
Geoff Harding
Roger Pope
Consultant
David Moore
The preparation of this guide was funded entirely by Corus Construction and Industrial,
and their support is gratefully acknowledged.
iii
Printed 01/07/05
iv
Printed 01/07/05
Contents
Page No.
FOREWORD
iii
SUMMARY
vi
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Robustness, Integrity, Disproportionate collapse, and Tying
1.2
The Building Regulations Part A and Approved Document A
1.3
BS 5950
1.4
Eurocode 1
1.5
Disproportionate collapse
1
1
1
2
2
2
CLASSIFICATION OF BUILDINGS
2.1
Introduction
4
4
CLASS 1 BUILDINGS
3.1
The requirements for Class 1 buildings
3.2
How BS 5950-1:2000 applies to Class 1 buildings
3.3
Practical solutions for Class 1 buildings
11
11
11
12
CLASS 2A BUILDINGS
4.1
The requirements for Class 2A buildings
4.2
How BS 5950-1:2000 applies to Class 2A buildings
4.3
Practical solutions for Class 2A buildings
13
13
13
13
CLASS 2B BUILDINGS
5.1
The requirements for Class 2B buildings
5.2
How BS 5950-1:2000 applies to Class 2B buildings
5.3
Practical solutions for Class 2B buildings
15
15
17
26
CLASS 3 BUILDINGS
6.1
The requirements for Class 3 buildings
6.2
Risk Assessment
6.3
Critical Situations for Design
6.4
Hazards
6.5
Risk Reduction Measures
6.6
Sources of further guidance
6.7
Unclassified Buildings
27
27
27
28
28
29
30
31
REFERENCES
32
APPENDIX
A.1
A.2
A.3
A WORKED EXAMPLE
Introduction
Member sizes
Disproportionate collapse checks using fin plate
beam-to-column connections
A.4
Disproportionate collapse checks using flexible end plate
beam-to-column connections
35
36
39
40
43
Printed 01/07/05
SUMMARY
This publication provides guidance on designing hot-rolled steel framed buildings to avoid
disproportionate collapse. Consideration of disproportionate collapse is required for all
buildings in order to satisfy Requirement A3 of Part A of the Building Regulations.
Guidance for each of the four classes of building specified in Approved Document A
(2004 edition) is provided. The guidance includes explanation of the requirements,
advice on which Clauses of BS 5950-1:2000 are applicable to each building type, and
practical guidance concerning tying of the structural frame to provide robustness.
A worked example of the calculations for a Class 2B building is also included.
vi
Printed 01/07/05
Building Classification
Table 2.1
Class
2A
2B
All buildings defined above as Class 2A and 2B that exceed the limits on
area and/or number of storeys
Grandstands accommodating more than 5000 spectators
Buildings containing hazardous substances and/or processes
Note 1: For buildings intended for more than one type of use the Class should be that
pertaining to the most onerous type.
Note 2: In determining the number of storeys in a building, basement storeys may be
excluded provided such basement storeys fulfil the robustness requirements of Class
2B buildings.
Printed 01/07/05
BUILDING TYPE
BUILDING CLASS
Agricultural
Class 1
Class 1
Is building height times
Yes
1.5 less than the distance
to another building or area
No
where people go?
Building where
people rarely go
Yes
Class 2A
Is building multi
occupancy?
Residential
No
No
Class 1
Yes
Class 2A
Yes
No
Yes
Is building less than or
equal to 4 storeys?
Hotel or Office
No
Retail
Class 2B
No
Yes
Class 3
Class 2A
Class 3
Yes
Class 2A
Yes
No
Is building less than or
equal to 15 storeys?
Car park
Class 2A
Yes
Is building less than or
equal to 15 storeys?
Class 3
No
Yes
Is building less than or
equal to 3 storeys?
Class 2B
Class 2B
No
Hospital
Class 3
No
Yes
Educational
Class 3
Yes
No
Class 2B
Class 2A
No
Industrial
Yes
Is building less than or
equal to 15 storeys?
Class 2B
No
Class 3
Yes
Class 2B
No
Class 3
Class 2A
Public
Yes
Class 2B
No
Grandstand
Yes
Class 3
No
Yes
Class 2B
No
Class 3
Class 3
Building containing
hazardous
substance and/or
processes
Note 1: For buildings intended for more than one type of use the Class should be that pertaining to the
most onerous type.
Note 2: In determining the number of storeys in a building, basement storeys may be excluded provided
such basement storeys fulfil the robustness requirements for Class 2B buildings.
Figure 2.1
Printed 01/07/05
2.1.2
Mezzanine floors
2.1.3
2.1.4
For buildings with varying numbers of storeys that fall into more than one class,
the robustness measures for the more onerous class may need to continue until a
structural discontinuity (such as a movement joint) is reached. However, each
case should be considered on its merits, even where the only areas of more
onerous class are common parts such as stairwells.
Example
Figure 2.2 shows a block of flats partly of 4 storeys and partly of 5 storeys.
Class 2B robustness measures should be applied to the 5-storey areas and
extending to a suitable structural discontinuity in the 4-storey area and Class 2A
robustness measures may be applied to the remaining 4-storey area.
2A
2B
Movement
joint
Flats
Figure 2.2
2.1.5
Flats
For buildings intended for more than one type of use the class should be that
pertaining to the most onerous type. Where different occupancies are in
horizontally adjacent parts of the same building, the same approach to
robustness measures may be adopted as described in Section 2.1.4 for buildings
with varying numbers of storeys,. i.e. the robustness measures for the more
onerous class may need to continue horizontally until a structural discontinuity
(such as a movement joint) is reached. Each case should be considered on its
merits.
Printed 01/07/05
2A, or 2B if retail
premises>2,000 m
Flats
Shop
Figure 2.3
2 storeys of flats over 2 storeys of retailing premises (as shown in Figure 2.4)
should be taken as 4 storeys of retailing premises. Therefore, apply Class 2B
robustness measures to the whole building.
Flats
Shop
2B
Shop
Figure 2.4
2B
Movement
joint
Flats
Figure 2.5
Offices
Printed 01/07/05
2.1.6
2A
1 or
2A
2B
3 storey over
basement
Figure 2.6
2B
2B
4 storey over
basement
5 storey over
basement
6 storey over
basement
Figure 2.7 shows examples of flats above basements and the classes of
robustness measure to be applied.
Printed 01/07/05
2B
2A
2A
Flats
2B
Flats
Flats
Flats
5 storey over
basement
15 storey over
basement
16 storey over
basement
Flats
2B
3 storey over
basement
Figure 2.7
4 storey over
basement
10
Printed 01/07/05
CLASS 1 BUILDINGS
3.1
3.2
BS 5950-1 states that Clause 2.4.5.2 Tying of buildings should be applied to all
buildings (which includes Class 1) and recommends that:
All ties (along the edges of the building and along each column line) and
their end connections should be capable of resisting a factored tensile load
of at least 75 kN
11
Printed 01/07/05
Secondary beams
are not ties
Figure 3.1
3.3
Bolt Diameter
Nominal tension
capacity
Shear capacity
Bearing capacity
(8 mm plate)
M16
70 kN
58.9 kN
58.9 kN
M20
110 kN
91.9 kN
73.6 kN
12
Printed 01/07/05
CLASS 2A BUILDINGS
4.1
Class 2A buildings are medium consequence buildings such as low rise flats,
offices, hotels, industrial buildings and relatively small public buildings. The
robustness requirements for Class 2A buildings are given in Approved
Document A, Clause 5.1.c as:
For Class 2A buildings - Provide effective horizontal ties, or effective
anchorage of suspended floors to walls, as described in the Codes and
Standards listed under paragraph 5.2 for framed and load-bearing wall
construction.
The guidance in Approved Document A for Class 2A buildings does not
mention notional removal of members if effective horizontal ties are not
provided. This is in contrast to the requirements for Class 2B buildings, see
Section 5.1. If effective horizontal ties or anchorage of floors to walls can not
be provided (for whatever reason) then an acceptable approach may be to reclassify the building as Class 2B and use the notional removal of members
approach (see Section 5.2).
4.2
4.3
As explained in Section 3.3, ordinary beam connections are easily able to meet
the requirement for tying.
4.3.1
Floor systems
13
Printed 01/07/05
14
Printed 01/07/05
CLASS 2B BUILDINGS
5.1
Class 2B buildings are high consequence buildings and as such the robustness
requirements are significantly more stringent than those for Class 2A buildings.
Typical Class 2B buildings include residential, office and retail buildings
between four and fifteen storeys, hospitals less than four storeys and car parks
less than seven storeys. The robustness requirements for Class 2B buildings are
given in Approved Document A, Clause 5.1.d. However, the typographical
presentation in Approved Document A is misleading as it gives the impression
that horizontal ties are invariably required. The ODPM intend to reprint the
Approved Document to clarify the intention. The following is the text as it is
expected to be reprinted.
For Class 2B buildings:
a) Provide effective horizontal ties, as described in the Codes and
Standards listed under paragraph 5.2 for framed and load-bearing
wall construction, together with effective vertical ties, as defined in
the Codes and Standards listed under paragraph 5.2, in all
supporting columns and walls,
or alternatively
b) Check that upon the notional removal of each supporting column and
each beam supporting one or more columns, or any nominal length
of load-bearing wall (one at a time in each storey of the building)
that the building remains stable and that the area of floor at any
storey at risk of collapse does not exceed 15% of the floor area of
that storey or 70 m2, whichever is smaller, and does not extend
further than the immediate adjacent storeys (see Diagram 25).
Where the notional removal of such columns (or beams supporting one
or more columns) and lengths of walls would result in an extent of
damage in excess of the above limit, then such elements should be
designed as a "key element" as defined in paragraph 5.3 below.
Note: The requirements for Class 2B buildings are very similar to the
requirements for buildings over four storeys given in the 1992 Edition
of Approved Document A.
The principle of providing horizontal ties notionally allows for the removal of
the support provided by a column and the remaining beam members to support
the loads by forming catenaries, as shown in Figure 5.1. The robustness rules
are not meant to fully describe systems of structural mechanics but are
considered as prescriptive rules intended to produce structures that perform
adequately in accidental circumstances.
15
Printed 06/02/07
Column removed
Figure 5.1
Column
notionally
removed
Plan
Section
Note:
Three storeys may be affected by the notional removal of one column section but no more than
two floors.
Figure 5.2
16
Printed 01/07/05
5.2
Provision of tying
Notional removal
BS 5950-1, Clause 2.4.5.3 states that if any of the first three sub-clauses a) to
c) are not met then, the building should be checked, each storey in turn, to
ensure that disproportionate collapse would not be precipitated by the notional
removal, one at a time, of each column (or beam supporting one or more
columns). The guidance for Class 2B buildings in light of the 2004 edition of
Approved Document A may be re-expressed as:
1) If any of the sub-clauses a), b) or c) are not met, then each storey in turn
should be checked to ensure that disproportionate collapse would not be
precipitated by the notional removal, one at a time, of each column (or
transfer beam).
2) If sub-clause d) is not met then, each storey in turn should be checked to
ensure that disproportionate collapse would not be precipitated by the
notional removal, one at a time, of each element of the systems providing
resistance to horizontal forces.
3) If heavy floor or roof units are used, sub-clause e) should be satisfied.
Clause 2.4.5.3 of BS 5950-1 further states
If the notional removal of a column, or of an element of a system
providing resistance to horizontal forces, would risk the collapse of a
greater area [than 15% of the floor area or 70 m2], that column or
element should be designed as a key element, as recommended in
Clause 2.4.5.4.
The design process for considering the notional removal of elements is
described in Section 5.2.6.
The requirements of BS 5950-1 for Class 2B buildings are essentially the same
as the requirements were for buildings with greater than four storeys under the
1991 Building Regulations.
Appendix A presents a fully worked example for the tying checks and design to
avoid disproportionate collapse for a Class 2B building.
17
Printed 01/07/05
5.2.1
General Tying
Where
gk
is the specified dead load per unit area of the floor or roof
is the span
qk
st
Table 5.1
Reduction factor, n
5 or more
1.0
0.75
0.50
0.25
The use of a reduction factor recognises that for lower rise buildings there are
fewer floors potentially available to collapse onto the structure below.
In Class 1 and Class 2A buildings, only the beams along the column lines need
to be designed for general tying. For Class 2B buildings, the members which
may be ties when designing to avoid disproportionate collapse are shown in
Figure 5.3. The beams not on the column lines (e.g. A to B) do not have to be
designed as ties provide that the beams on the column lines are designed for the
additional share of tying force.
18
Printed 01/07/05
B
All beams may be ties
Figure 5.3
5.2.2
Edge columns
Tying to edge columns is required to ensure that the edge columns cannot
become separated from the building. Clause 2.4.5.3 b) Tying of edge columns,
states that ties connected to edge columns should be capable of resisting the
larger of the following forces:
1% of the factored vertical dead and imposed load in the column at that
level.
By observation, 1% of the factored load in the column only becomes the more
critical load if there are a great many storeys (100 storeys if all floors are
identical, and this would then be a Class 3 building). Columns carrying transfer
trusses or similar massive loads may have high axial loads, and 1% of the
factored axial load should always be considered in such cases.
For any member also acting as a restraint to a column, a force of 1% of the
column load needs to be resisted by the restraint members in each restraint
direction, in accordance with Clause 4.7.1.2 of BS 5950-1.
5.2.3
Vertical tying
19
Printed 01/07/05
Splice
A
Column removed
Figure 5.4
Division
plate
Air gap
Bearing
Figure 5.5
Non-bearing
20
Printed 01/07/05
Table 5.2 gives indicative tensile axial capacities for standard bearing-type
column splices with cover plates.
Typical bearing type column splice tensile capacities (with
flange cover plates)
Table 5.2
Upper Column
Lower Column
203 UC
203 UC
254 UC
254 UC
736
305 UC
305 UC
1588
203 UC
254 UC
500
736
The capacities quoted in Table 5.2 are limited by bolt shear, and adding
additional bolts can easily increase capacities. Detailed design checks for
bearing and non-bearing column splices are provided in SCI publication P212[10].
Note: It is likely to be more difficult to provide the necessary tensile capacities
with cap and base type column splices.
5.2.4
Bracing systems
Figure 5.6
BS 5950-1 allows moment resisting joints, cantilever columns, shear walls and
stair and lift cores, as well as triangulated bracing, to be used as systems for
resisting horizontal force.
5.2.5
Floor units
Clause 2.4.5.3 e) Heavy floor units requires that precast concrete or other heavy
floor or roof units are effectively anchored in the direction of their span, either
to each other over a support, or directly to their supports as, recommended in
BS 8110. The tying forces between floor units may be calculated from
BS 8110-1:1997 [13] Clause 3.12.3.4.
The intention of this clause is to prevent floor units simply falling through the
steel frame if the steelwork is moved or removed, or the floor units are uplifted
as a result of accidental loading (e.g. explosion).
BS 5950-1 only requires anchorages in the direction of the span of the precast
units, as the steel beams provide ties in the orthogonal direction.
21
Printed 01/07/05
Tying of the floor units to the beams may be necessary for purposes other than
reducing sensitivity to disproportionate collapse, such as to mobilise floor
diaphragm action against wind loading. Further guidance on the use and design
of precast units is provided in SCI publication P287[12].
Tying across internal supports
If the precast units have a structural topping, it may be possible to use the
reinforcement in the topping to carry the tie forces, as shown in Figure 5.7 a),
or to provide additional reinforcing bars. Alternatively, it may be possible to
expose the voids in the pre-cast planks and place reinforcing bars between the
two units prior to concreting, as shown in Figure 5.7 b).
Reinforcement in topping
Figure 5.7
Reinforcement in core
with concrete infill
Special measures will be needed where precast planks are placed on shelf
angles, as shown in Figure 5.8, and with Slimflor construction, unless the tie
forces can be carried through the reinforcement in topping, above the top flange
of the steelwork. When it is not possible to use reinforcement in the topping,
straight reinforcement bars tying the precast units together are usually detailed
to pass through holes in the steel beam web.
Reinforcing
bar
Figure 5.8
22
Printed 01/07/05
U-bar
U-bar
Plank castellated
around shear studs
Minimum flange
width = 230 mm
(a)
Minimum flange
width = 120 mm
(b)
Figure 5.9
It should be noted that loading a beam on only one side produces significant
torsion in the beam itself, which may well be the critical design case. The
eccentricity must be accounted for in design of the member and its connections.
In some circumstances, the floor units cantilever past the edge beam. Tying in
these situations is not straightforward, and a solution should be developed in
collaboration with the frame supplier and floor unit manufacturer.
5.2.6
23
Printed 01/07/05
floors below should be checked for the debris loading from the collapsed floors.
It is not necessary to consider the impact loading of the debris. The load
combinations given above may be used with the dead load component modified
to include the debris.
Notional removal of elements of the system for resisting horizontal
forces
If the notional removal of any element of the system for resisting horizontal
forces causes that system to fail (e.g. because a mechanism forms), then that
part of the building stabilised solely by the system should be considered to have
collapsed. In most cases this is likely to constitute disproportionate collapse.
Providing redundancy in the bracing (e.g. cross-bracing in which both members
can resist forces in compression) may be used to increase the robustness of the
system. Also note that at least two bracing systems are required, see
Section 5.2.4.
If a system for resisting horizontal forces is moment resisting connections (i.e.
frame action), then each element of the frame with a moment resisting joint is
part of that system and should be notionally removed, one at a time.
If the system for resisting horizontal forces is a concrete core, then each storey
high segment of wall forming part of the core should be considered as an
element of that system and notionally removed, one at a time. The length of
load-bearing wall to be considered as one element, is defined in Approved
Document A, as 2.25 times the storey height or the length between lateral
supports (e.g. returns), whichever is greater.
If the system for resisting horizontal forces is triangulated bracing (as shown in
Figure 5.10), then each element of the bracing system should be notionally
removed, one at a time. This includes the beam and column members forming
part of the bracing truss.
5.2.7
Key elements
24
Printed 01/07/05
etc.) having regard to the ultimate strength of such components and their
connections. Such accidental design loading should be assumed to act
simultaneously with 1/3 of all normal characteristic loading (i.e. wind
and imposed loading).
From this requirement and from BS 5950-1 it can be determined that the design
load for a key element is:
= 1.0 Accidental load + 1.05 (1.0 Dead load + 0.33 Imposed
Load + 0.33 Wind Load)
For the value of accidental loading to be applied, BS 5950-1 refers to
BS 6399-1[14], where the accidental loading is also given as 34 kN/m2.
BS 5950-1 recommends that any other structural component that provides
lateral restraint vital to the stability of a key element should also be designed
as a key element. The design of a key element is demonstrated in the worked
example in Appendix A.
When considering the accidental loading on a large area (e.g. on a floor slab
supported by a transfer beam), it is reasonable to limit the area that is subjected
to the 34 kN/m2 load because a blast pressure is unlikely to be this high on all
the surfaces of a large enclosed space. The maximum area is not defined in the
code or in Approved Document A, but could be inferred from the length of
load-bearing wall to be considered (Approved Document A, Section 5.3), which
is 2.25 times the storey height, say 2.25 2.9 = 6.5 m. Therefore, a
maximum area that would be subjected to the 34 kN/m2 could be a 6.5 6.5 m
square.
For the design of a key element, it is necessary to consider what components,
or proportion of components, will remain attached to the element in the event of
an incident. The application of engineering judgement will play a major part in
this process. For framed construction the walls and cladding will normally be
non-structural. Therefore, it is likely that the majority of these will become
detached from the key element during an incident, as shown in Figure 5.11.
For the column member key element shown in Figure 5.11, an accidental load
of 34 kN/m2 should be applied over a width of B for accidental loading about
the major axis. The column section should be checked for the combination of
moments and axial load using the design load case given above. The accidental
loading about the minor axis over a width of D (in this case) also needs to be
considered. The accidental loading should only be considered as acting in one
direction at a time and there is no requirement to consider a diagonal loading
case i.e. at angle to the major and minor axes.
B
Part of component
that remains attached
to key element
after an incident
Key element
Part of component
that is detached
from key element
during an incident
Plan view
25
Printed 01/07/05
5.3
5.3.1
Connections
In most situations, horizontal ties will require end connections that have tying
capacities similar to their shear load. Table 5.3 gives approximate tying
capacities for commonly used nominally pinned connections. Exact tying
capacities for these connections can be obtained from P212[10].
Table 5.3
Connection type
Tying capacity
(as a percentage of its shear capacity)
Fin Plate
100 210 %
60 230 %
*Note:
Percentages given are for connections with end plates of 10 mm and 12 mm thick.
Standard end plates are 8 mm or 10 mm, but to improve tying capacities end plates of
10 mm or 12 mm may be used. These can still be considered as simple connections
(i.e. nominal pins) for the analysis and design.
When the tying capacities of the connections given in Table 5.3 are used in
combination with the tying reduction factors given in Table 5.1, it can be seen
that all standard fin plate and angle cleat connections will be sufficient for
buildings up to three storeys.
Tying capacities do not need to be provided entirely by the steel frame. For
example, in composite construction a certain amount of the required horizontal
tying can be provided by the concrete slab reinforcement, provided that it is
designed and detailed for this purpose. SCI publication P213[15] provides
guidance on utilising slab reinforcement in the connection design.
26
Printed 01/07/05
CLASS 3 BUILDINGS
6.1
6.2
Risk Assessment
27
Printed 01/07/05
1.
Identify hazards (see Section 6.4) to form the basis of a risk register.
This is an absolute minimum for Class 3 buildings, to demonstrate that
the possible hazards have at least been thought about by the designer.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
6.3
The guidance given in Approved Document A states that critical situations for
design should be considered. This consideration is partly covered by the
creation of a risk register (step 1, Section 6.2). However, having identified the
possible hazards, their possible effects on the building need to be addressed and
whether or not they are likely to cause disproportionate collapse.
The effect on the building of hazards will be difficult to judge accurately
because by their very nature they are unexpected actions. A possible solution to
this problem could be to consider the effect on the building of the notional
removal of a group of columns, provided that a hazard which could cause this
can be foreseen. For example, a building at the bottom of a railway
embankment could be hit by a derailed locomotive causing the removal of more
than one external column. If this damage caused disproportionate collapse to
part of the building, then action would need to be taken (see Section 6.5). It
could also be argued that a Class 3 Building should not be located where such
an incident is possible.
Determining whether collapse is disproportionate, is not a straightforward issue.
The only guidance which is given in Approved Document A is for the notional
removal of one column where damage not exceeding 70 m2 or 15% of the floor
area (whichever is less) is considered proportionate. Therefore, if a hazard
causes the removal of two columns, it seems reasonable to double this limit and
so forth for more columns up to the recommended 200 m2 limit from prEN
1991-1-7[5].
6.4
Hazards
Hazards are events that cause undesired affects i.e. harm to people, loss of life,
damage to property or environmental damage. However, Part A of the Building
Regulations is mainly concerned with the safety of people in and around
buildings. Hazards may be accidental or deliberate. Approved Document A
states that normal and abnormal hazards should be considered.
Reference 16 includes a list of possible hazards that may be considered, along
with proposals for designing to comply with the guidance in Approved
Document A.
28
Printed 01/07/05
6.5
6.5.1
Totally preventing hazards from occurring is not possible for all types of
hazard. However, significantly reducing the consequences (see 6.5.3) or their
probability (see 6.5.2) is often achievable.
The overall building concept can have significant influence on the type and
magnitude of hazards that need to be addressed. This includes the building
location and proximity to specific hazards. For example, should a hospital be
located near a railway or chemical works? The building structural form must
also be considered. Large parts of the building should not be reliant on one or
two critical members, where possible loads should be distributed between many
members and alternative load paths should be present which could be utilised in
the event of an incident.
Some hazards can be avoided. Deliberate or accidental vehicular impact on the
building may be prevented by the installation of suitable external barriers.
Excluding explosive materials from a building will avoid the hazard of their
explosion.
29
Printed 01/07/05
of fire and venting panels can be installed to reduce the blast loading from
explosions. Traffic calming measures can be used to reduce the speed of
accidental vehicular impact.
Failure of beams supporting one or more columns and structure providing
lateral stability is likely to have particularly severe consequences and standard
tie forces may prove inadequate in this particular situation. It is recommended
that either element removal or key element design is used.
6.6
The following references offer further guidance when a risk assessment for
Class 3 Buildings is necessary.
pr EN 1991-1-7[5]
This document contains a great deal of helpful information and guidance that
can be applied to Class 3 Buildings. Annex B provides guidance on risk
assessment methods, acceptance criteria and mitigation measures. Section 3
includes guidance on identifying accidental actions. Sections 4 (Impact) and 5
(Internal Explosions) provide guidance on the size of loads that accidental
actions might cause. This is likely to be a key source of guidance for engineers
designing Class 3 buildings.
SCI publication P244
[18]
[19]
This code of practice provides a framework for developing a rational method for
designing buildings using fire safety engineering. However, there are several
aspects that could be applied more generally to Class 3 Buildings, particularly
the Qualitative Design Review (QDR).
ISO 2394:1998
[20]
This International Standard specifies general principles for the verification of the
reliability of structures subjected to known or foreseeable types of action.
Section 8 provides guidance on the principles of probability-based design and
Annex B provides examples of permanent, variable and accidental actions. The
information contained within this standard is similar to that contained in
EN1990 Eurocode: Basis of Structural Design[21].
A theory of structural vulnerability
[22]
30
Printed 01/07/05
Engineering Safety
[23]
This publication provides information on many issues relating to safety and risk.
Subjects of particular interest for dealing with Class 3 buildings are risk
assessments and acceptability of risk. Descriptions of how the theory may be
applied to different civil engineering projects are included.
6.7
Unclassified Buildings
Both of these reports (available from the ODPM website) provide methods for
determining the risk category of buildings. They may be used to classify
buildings which do not fall into the descriptions listed in Table 11 (Table 2.1 of
this publication). However, no risk assessment guidance or recommendations
for design are provided, which means their usefulness is limited.
For (b), it is recommended that buildings should be considered as Class 3
buildings and the guidance given in Section 6 of this publication should be
followed.
26
31
Printed 01/07/05
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
32
Printed 01/07/05
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
ALEXANDER, S.qq
The New Approach to Disproportionate Collapse
The Structural Engineer, vol. 82, Issue 23, December 2004
17.
ENV 1998-1-1:1996
Eurocode 8: Design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures.
General rules. Seismic actions and general requirements for structures
British Standards Institution, 1996
18.
19.
20.
21.
BS EN 1990:2002
Eurocode 0: Basis of structural design
British Standards Institution, 2002
22.
23.
BLOCKLEY, D.
Engineering Safety
McGraw-Hill, 1992
33
Printed 01/07/05
24.
25.
26
34
Printed 01/07/05
APPENDIX A
WORKED EXAMPLE
35
Printed 01/07/05
Job No.
BCB987
Job Title
Worked Example
Subject
Client
SCI
Sheet
CALCULATION SHEET
of
13
Rev.
Made by
MDH
Date
Jun 2003
Checked by
ASM
Date
Oct 2003
BS 59501:2000
Introduction
The ten-storey building shown in Figure A.1 has been designed on the basis of
Simple Design in accordance with the recommendations of BS 5950-1:2000.
All storeys are 4.0 m high, apart from the ground to first floor, which has a
height of 5.0 m. The columns are laid out on a 6 m 9 m grid with the
primary beams spanning 6 m and the secondary beams spanning 9 m as shown
in Figure A.2. The spacing of the secondary beams is 3.0 m. A composite
flooring system is used with steel decking spanning between the secondary
beams. All the secondary and primary beams are assumed to act compositely
with the floor slab. The steel frame is of simple construction, with two braced
bays on each of the four sides providing lateral stability.
Check that the building meets the requirements of Approved Document A and
BS 5950-1:2000 in terms of structural integrity and the avoidance of
disproportionate collapse.
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
4.0
6.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
5.0
6.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
Figure A.1
36
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
In the first instance, check that integrity is achieved by ensuring that the five
conditions listed in sub-Clause 2.4.5.3 of BS 5950-1:2000 are satisfied. Where
this is not possible, the designer must check that the removal of any individual
member does not lead to disproportionate collapse as defined in BS 5950-1:2000
and Approved Document A. Finally, if the removal of a member would cause
disproportionate collapse, this member must be designed as a key element. All
three stages of this process are demonstrated in this example.
In practice, these checks must be carried out on all members to ensure adequate
robustness throughout the structure. However, in this example, the checks are
only performed on a typical secondary beam, an edge column and an internal
column. These columns are denoted B and E respectively in Figure A.2.
6.0
6.0
3.0 (typ.)
6.0
Secondary beams
(also acting as tie beams)
6.0
G
I
Primary beams
(also acting as tie beams)
6.0
D
6.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
Figure A.2
The composite floor system comprises steel decking spanning between the
secondary beams, as shown in Figure A.3, with a 125 mm thick slab in grade
C30 concrete.
Composite decking
panel
Secondary beams
6.0
Primary beam
9.0
Figure A.3
37
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
= 3.49 kN/m2
Imposed load
Roof: 1.0 kN/m2
Floor: 5.0 kN/m2 + 1.0 kN/m2 (partitions)
= 6.0 kN/m2
38
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
= 581 kN
Internal column E
Column E supports 2 internal secondary beams and 2 internal primary beams
and carries half the load from each beam.
WNfloor,E = (2 0.5 391.5) + (2 0.5 391.5)
A.2
= 783 kN
Member sizes
The composite beams were designed using the BDES* software and the column
sizes were estimated using the member capacity tables in SCI publication
P202[26]. In sizing the beams, the final composite condition and the construction
stage non-composite condition were both checked. Since the internal and
external beams experience similar loading, only the internal beams were
considered. For simplicity, the columns were sized for compression only. In
practice, they would have to be designed as columns in simple construction,
following the procedure outlined in Example 14.
*Available from www.corusconstruction.com/page_679.htm
39
Printed 01/07/05
Factored load
ex. column
s/w (kN)
Selected section
(all S355)
Factored load
inc. column
s/w (kN)
of
13
Rev.
Resistance
(kN)
Roof-9
4.0
175
30530597UC
175
3310
9-8
4.0
756
30530597UC
761
3310
8-7
4.0
1337
30530597UC
1348
3310
7-6
4.0
1918
30530597UC
1934
3310
6-5
4.0
2499
30530597UC
2520
3310
5-4
4.0
3080
30530597UC
3107
3310
4-3
4.0
3661
305305137UC
3693
4620
3-2
4.0
4242
305305137UC
4282
4620
2-1
4.0
4823
305305198UC
4870
6780
1-0
5.0
5404
305305198UC
5462
5920
Table A.2
Edge column B
Leff
(m)
Column
location
Sheet
P202
Page D-6
Internal column E
Column Leff
location (m)
Factored
load ex.
column s/w
(kN)
Selected section
(all S355)
Factored
load inc.
column s/w
(kN)
Resistance
(kN)
Roof-9
4.0
350
30530597UC
350
3310
9-8
4.0
1133
30530597UC
1138
3310
8-7
4.0
1916
30530597UC
1927
3310
7-6
4.0
2699
30530597UC
2716
3310
6-5
4.0
3482
305305137UC
3504
4620
5-4
4.0
4265
305305137UC
4295
4620
4-3
4.0
5048
305305198UC
5085
6780
3-2
4.0
5831
305305198UC
5879
6780
2-1
4.0
6614
305305283UC
6674
9200
1-0
5.0
7397
305305283UC
7473
8030
P202
Page D-6
It is assumed that the columns are spliced every two storeys and that lateral
restraint is provided at every floor. It is further assumed that the columns may
be treated as pin-ended between the floor levels.
A.3
40
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
P212
Table H.30
P212
Table H.30
P212
Table H.29
P212
Table H.29
41
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
Consider the lowest level, where the load in the column is greatest.
From Table 23.1, the load in the column = 5462 kN
1% of 5462 kN = 54.62 kN
The tying force specified in A.3.1 = 196 kN.
Therefore, the general tying requirement is critical in this case.
A.3.6 Conclusion
Having satisfied the five conditions in Clause 2.4.5.3 of BS 5950-1:2000, it may
be assumed that this building meets the requirements of the regulations for the
avoidance of disproportionate collapse.
42
Printed 01/07/05
A.4
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
P212
Table H.21
P212
Table H.21
Now consider the situation in which the designer is unable to use such a deep
secondary beam and opts instead for the slightly heavier 305 165 54 UB in
S355.
Try 220 x 150 x 8 mm flexible end plate in S275 with 3 rows of bolts.
Basic requirement 1: Reaction Shear capacity
Reaction under factored loads = 196 kN
Shear capacity = 333 kN
196 kN < 333 kN
Therefore the shear capacity is adequate.
P212
Table H.21
43
Printed 06/12/06
Sheet
of
13
Rev.
The checks performed in Section A.4.1 have already established that the tying
capacity of the flexible end plate connections is inadequate, so the current check
becomes one of measuring the area supported by the column. In this case, the
removal of column E would lead to the collapse of a section of floor measuring
12 m 18 m, i.e. 216 m2 (and possibly more as the floor areas directly above
could also collapse). Therefore, there is a risk of disproportionate collapse
and the member should be designed as a key element using the accidental
loading specified in BS 6399-1, i.e. 34 kN/m2.
Figure A.4
In the design of key elements, the accidental loading should be applied in all
directions, but only in one direction at a time. This means checking column E
in bending about both the major and minor axes. The ordinary dead and
imposed loads must also be taken into account (there is no wind loading on
column E) and should be applied simultaneously with the accidental loading. 2.4.5.3
However, the imposed load can be reduced to one third of its normal value for
this check, with a f factor of 1.05. The same f should also be applied to the
dead load, but the accidental load should be factored by 1.0.
All of the calculations below relate to the column length between ground and
first floor levels. In practice, all levels should be checked.
Section properties
The size of the internal column between ground and first floor levels is
305 x 305 x 283 UC, grade S355.
44
Printed 06/12/06
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
Sheet
10
of
365.3 mm
322.2 mm
26.8 mm
44.1 mm
246.7 mm
360 cm2
5110 cm3
2340 cm3
4320 cm3
1530 cm3
14.8 cm
8.27 cm
13
Rev.
P202
Page B 8
P202
Page B 9
3.1.1
Table 9
Floor
WN
Column self-weight
Unfactored column s/w
= ((44.097)+(24.0137)+(24.0198)+(4.0283)) 9.81/1000
= 52.6 kN
Factored column s/w
Section classification
According to P202[26], the compact F/Pz limit for a 305 305 283UC in grade P202
Page D 126
S355 is 1.0. Therefore, the section is at least compact.
Major axis bending
Loading
The accidental loading about the major axis is applied to the section of
partitioning shown in Figure 23.4.
B
45
= 522.2 mm
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
11
of
13
Rev.
4.2.5
P202
Page D 126
4.3.6
P202
Page D 127
Fc
Ag p y
Mx
M cx
My
M cy
4.8.3.2. a)
55.6
+ 0 = 0.254 + 0.033
1710
= 0.29 <1
Fc
Pc
mx Mx
py Z x
my My
py Z y
4.8.3.3.1
P202
Page D 126
4.8.3.3.4
Table 26
mx = 0.95
46
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
12
of
Fc
Pcy
m LT M LT
Mb
py Z y
Rev.
P202
Page D 127
= 0.42 <1
my My
13
4.8.3.3.1
= 55.6 kNm.
= 1640 kNm
= 0.925
P202
Page D 127
Table 18
The accidental loading about the minor axis is applied to the column and an
assumed thickness of partitioning, say 50 mm.
D = 365.3 mm. Therefore, the total loaded width = 415.3 mm,
say 415 mm.
Accidental loading
= 0.415 34
= 14.1 kN/m.
4.2.5
Page D-126
47
Printed 01/07/05
Sheet
13
of
13
Rev.
Fc
Ag p y
Mx
M cx
My
M cy
4.8.3.2. a)
Fc
Pc
mx Mx
py Z x
my My
py Z y
Basic requirement:
Fc
P cy
m LT M LT
Mb
my My
py Z y
0.95 44.1
3074
+ 0+
= 0.383 + 0.082 = 0.47 <1
8030
512
Therefore, the column is also adequate when subjected to the accidental load
causing bending about the minor axis.
Note: The calculations given above demonstrate the procedure for designing a
key element. However, in the vast majority of circumstances, the recommended
approach is to satisfy the tying requirements in Clause 2.4.5.3 of BS 5950-1:
2000. The key element route should only be followed as a last resort.
48
Printed 01/07/05
Printed 01/07/05
Typeset and page make-up by The Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, Berks., SL5 7QN
Printed in Europe by the Alden Group, Oxford.
1,350
07/05 BCB987