Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
This article explains a method for determining how semi-continu- deflection, natural frequency and distribution of the inter-
ous joints influence the deflection, natural frequency and bending nal forces in a single-span floor beam with constant bend-
moment distribution of single-span beams with constant inertia ing stiffness and subjected to a uniformly distributed load.
under uniformly distributed load. The method is adequate for sim- The formulae derived can help engineers, practitioners and
ple hand calculations, allowing the structural engineer to assess students to reach a better understanding of the influence
potential savings already in the pre-design phase. Further, the of semi-continuous joints on the beam behaviour at ULS
economical potential of semi-continuous joints according to and SLS. The analytical equations given were used to de-
EN 1993-1-8 [1] is demonstrated by an application example. termine factors, thus allowing quick, easy and safe applica-
tion. Further contributions are planned, covering the use
of semi-continuous joints for beams with partially constant
stiffness (composite beams) and composite beam-to-col-
1 Introduction umn joints.
© Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin · Steel Construction 9 (2016), No. 1 1
Table 1. Type of joint model for global analysis according to [1]
Method of global analysis Classification of joint
Elastic Nominally pinned Rigid Semi-rigid
Rigid-Plastic Nominally pinned Full-strength Partial-strength
Semi-rigid and partial-strength
Elastic-Plastic Nominally pinned Rigid and full-strength Semi-rigid and full-strength
Rigid and partial-strength
Type of joint model Simple Continuous Semi-continuous
q = const.
Sj,A Sj,B
MEd = 3 qL2/24
L
MEd = qL2/24
Fig. 2. Bending moment distribution for nominally pinned and rigid joints
Cost K
Mj Sj,ini ≥ Kb EIb/Lb
Rigid
Fig. 3. Total cost as a function of the joint stiffness accord- Fig. 5. Classification of beam-to-column joints by stiffness
ing to [4]
where:
Mj Sj,ini Kb = 8 for frames where the bracing system reduces the
Mj,Rd horizontal displacement by at least 80 %
Mj E elastic modulus of beam material
Ib second moment of area of beam
2/3 Mj,Rd Lb beam span (distance between centres of supporting col-
umns)
[5]. The rules given in [1] are valid for steel grades S235, The equations for estimating the influence of semi-contin-
S275 and S355 and for joints for which the design value of uous beam-to-column joints on the overall beam behaviour
the axial force NEd in the connected member does not ex-
ceed 5 % of the plastic design resistance Npl,Rd of its
cross-section. Table 2. Approximate determination of joint stiffness Sj,app
according to [6]
4.3 Simplified prediction of the initial joint stiffness Joints with extended, unstiffened end-plate Factor C
Table 3. Factors a and b for determining the maximum bending moment in the span and its position
kA
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
kB
a = 1.50
0.00 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
b= 0.50
1.45 1.40
0.10 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.51 0.50
1.40 1.35 1.30
0.20 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.52 0.51 0.50
1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20
0.30 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.31 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10
0.40 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.26 1.21 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00
0.50 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.54 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.22 1.16 1.11 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90
0.60 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.55 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.17 1.12 1.06 1.01 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80
0.70 Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.13 1.07 1.02 0.96 0.91 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70
0.80 Sym. Sym.
0.57 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.08 1.03 0.97 0.92 0.86 0.81 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60
0.90 Sym.
0.58 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.04 0.98 0.93 0.87 0.82 0.76 0.71 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50
1.00
0.58 0.58 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.50
1.00 0.94 0.88 0.83 0.77 0.72 0.66 0.61 0.55
1.10 / /
0.59 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.53
0.96 0.90 0.84 0.78 0.73 0.67 0.62
1.20 / / / /
0.60 0.59 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.56 0.55
0.92 0.86 0.80 0.74 0.68
1.30 / / / / / /
0.61 0.60 0.59 0.58 0.58
0.88 0.82 0.76
1.40 / / / / / / / /
0.62 0.61 0.60
0.84
1.50 / / / / / / / / / /
0.63
q ⋅ L2 q ⋅ L2 q ⋅ L2
With M A = − ⋅ k A; MB = − ⋅ kB; max. MSpan = ⋅ a at x max = b ⋅ L
12 12 12
Table 4. Factors c and d for determining the maximum beam deflection and its position
kA
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
kB
c = 5.00
0.00 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
d= 0.50
4.80 4.60
0.10 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.50 0.50
4.60 4.40 4.20
0.20 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.51 0.50 0.50
4.40 4.20 4.00 3.80
0.30 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
1.35 0.51 0.50 0.50
4.20 4.00 3.80 3.60 3.40
0.40 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.51 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.50
4.01 3.80 3.60 3.40 3.20 3.00
0.50 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.52 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.50
3.81 3.61 3.40 3.20 3.00 2.80 2.60
0.60 Sym. Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.52 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.50
3.61 3.41 3.21 3.00 2.80 2.60 2.40 2.20
0.70 Sym. Sym. Sym.
0.53 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.50
3.42 3.21 3.01 2.81 2.60 2.40 2.20 2.00 1.80
0.80 Sym. Sym.
0.53 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.50
3.22 3.02 2.81 2.61 2.41 2.21 2.00 1.80 1.60 1.40
0.90 Sym.
0.54 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.50
3.03 2.82 2.62 2.42 2.21 2.01 1.81 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00
1.00
0.54 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.50
2.83 2.63 2.43 2.22 2.02 1.81 1.61 1.41 1.20
1.10 / /
0.55 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52
2.64 2.44 2.23 2.03 1.82 1.62 1.42
1.20 / / / /
0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.54
2.45 2.25 2.04 1.84 1.63
1.30 / / / / / /
0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56
2.27 2.06 1.86
1.40 / / / / / / / /
0.57 0.57 0.57
2.08
1.50 / / / / / / / / / /
0.58
c q ⋅ L4
With max . w = ⋅ at x w = d ⋅ L
384 E ⋅ I
5.2 Determination of bending moment distribution For n → ∞ and m → 0, then kA → 1.5 and kB → 0.
This presents the standard case of a single-span beam with
The bending moments at supports A and B can be ex- a hinged support on one side and rigid support on the
pressed as follows: other.
q ⋅ L2
q ⋅ L2 The well-known solution M A = − and MB = 0 is ob-
MA = − ⋅ kA (2) 8
12 tained.
where q ⋅ L2
M A = MB = − .
12
m+6 n+6
kA = ; kB =
m 12 n 12 The vertical support reaction A as a function of kA and kB
m+4+4⋅ + n+4+4⋅ +
n n m m can be expressed as follows:
S j,A ⋅ L S j,B ⋅ L
and n =
E ⋅I
;m=
E ⋅I
A=
q⋅L q ⋅L
2
+
12
(
⋅ k A − kB ) (4)
π2 E ⋅I
With f1 = e ⋅ ⋅ , with m = uniform mass
2 ⋅ π ⋅ L2 m
3 1
( 1
) ( )
2
and the bending moment as a function of x: where a = + ⋅ k A − kB + ⋅ k A − kB − kA
2 2 24
()
M x = A ⋅ x + MA −
1
2
⋅ q ⋅ x2 (5) x max = b ⋅ L (10)
Values for factors a and b, as a function of stiffness coeffi-
Using Eqs. (2) and (4) with Eq. (5), the following expres- cients kA and kB, are given in Table 3.
sion is derived for the bending moment as a function of x
and the stiffness coefficients kA and kB: 5.3 Influence of semi-continuous joints on beam deflection
()
M x =
q⋅L
2
⋅x +
q⋅L
12
(
⋅ k A − kB ⋅ x ) The beam deflection is expressed by the well-known linear
differential equation
q ⋅ L2 1
−
12
⋅ kA − ⋅ q ⋅ x2
2
(6)
()
w′′ x = −
M x () (11)
E ⋅I
The position of the maximum bending moment can be cal-
culated with M′(x) = 0, which leads to After applying Eq. (5) in place of M(x), Eq. (11) takes the
following form:
()
M′ x = 0 ⇒
q⋅L q⋅L
2
+
12
(
⋅ k A − kB − q ⋅ x = 0 ⇒ ) () ()
−E ⋅ I ⋅ w′′ x = M x = A ⋅ x + M A −
1
2
⋅ q ⋅ x2
⇒x=
L L
+
2 12
(
⋅ k A − kB ) (7) () 1 1
−E ⋅ I ⋅ w′ x = A ⋅ ⋅ x 2 + M A ⋅ x − ⋅ q ⋅ x 3 + C1
2 6
q = const. Eq. (15) has three real solutions. The solution gives the
position of the maximum beam deflection and can be ex-
Sj,A Sj,B pressed as a factor d. By using the now known position of
the maximum vertical beam deflection with Eq. (14), the
EI = constant value of the maximum deflection can be calculated. Hence,
x the maximum vertical beam deflection w can be calculated
A B using
L
Sj,A Sj,B c q ⋅ L4
max. w = ⋅ (17)
384 E ⋅ I
w,v(x)
x and the position of the maximum deflection with
Fig. 8. Simply supported beam with rotational springs at the xw = d ⋅ L (18)
supports
Pre-calculated values for factors c and d as a function of
the stiffness coefficients kA and kB are given in Table 4.
Finally, the beam deflection as a function of the stiffness of 5.4 Influence of semi-rigid joints on the natural frequency of
the rotational springs is defined as follows: the beam
()
−E ⋅ I ⋅ w x =
1
6
( 1
)
⋅ A ⋅ x 3 − L2 ⋅ x + ⋅ M A ⋅ x 2 − L ⋅ x
2
( ) The natural frequency of the beam is of significant interest
for the structural engineer. Based on the differential equa-
−
1
24
(
⋅ q ⋅ x 4 − L3 ⋅ x ) (13) tion of the harmonic vibration, a factor e, which allows a
quick determination of the natural frequency, is given in
Table 5.
()
−E ⋅ I ⋅ w x =
1
( )(
⋅ q ⋅ k A − kB + 6 ⋅ L ⋅ x 3 − L3 ⋅ x −
1
) x x
72 24
()
v x = C1 ⋅ cos λ ⋅ + C 2 ⋅ sin λ ⋅
(
⋅ q ⋅ k A ⋅ L2 ⋅ x 2 − L3 ⋅ x −
1
24
) (
⋅ q ⋅ x 4 − L3 ⋅ x (14) ) L L
x x
+ C 3 ⋅ cosh λ ⋅ + C 4 ⋅ sinh λ ⋅ (19)
The design value and position of the maximal vertical de- L L
flection is of key interest for the designer. It is derived from
λ x x
()
v′ x = ⋅ − C ⋅ sin λ ⋅ + C 2 ⋅ cos λ ⋅
() () 1
−E ⋅ I ⋅ w′ x = ϕ x = 0 ⇒ A ⋅ ⋅ x 2 + M A ⋅ x
2
L 1 L L
x x
1 + C 3 ⋅ sinh λ ⋅ + C 4 ⋅ cosh λ ⋅ (20)
− ⋅ q ⋅ x + C1 = 0
3 (15) L L
6
λ2 x x
This equation of the third order is solved by using the for- ()
v′′ x = 2
L
⋅ − C1 ⋅ cos λ ⋅ − C 2 ⋅ sin λ ⋅
L L
mulae from Cardan:
x x
L + C 3 ⋅ cosh λ ⋅ + C 4 ⋅ sinh λ ⋅ (21)
3
() (
ϕ x = x 3 + x 2 ⋅ ⋅ kB − k A − ⋅ L
4
2
) L L
λ3 x x
()
r
v′′′ x = ⋅ C1 ⋅ sin λ ⋅ − C 2 ⋅ cos λ ⋅
+ x⋅
L2
2
⋅ kA +
12
L3
(
⋅ 3 − 2 ⋅ k A − kB = 0
) (16) 3
L L L
x x
s t + C 3 ⋅ sinh λ ⋅ + C 4 ⋅ cosh λ ⋅ (22)
L L
Substituting x = y – r/3, the reduced form is obtained:
The constants are determined with the boundary condi-
3 ⋅ s − r2 2 ⋅ r3 r ⋅ s tions:
y 3 + p ⋅ y + q = 0 with p = and q = − +t
3 27 3
( )
v x = 0 = 0 ⇒ C1 + C 3 = 0
The discriminant D can be expressed as
v ( x = L) = (
0 ⇒ C1 ⋅ cos λ − cosh λ )
3 2
p q + C 2 ⋅ sin λ + C 4 ⋅ sinh λ = 0
D= +
3 2
S j,A ⋅ L
For the given application range of the rotation (0 ≤ x ≤ L)
(
– v′′ x = 0 ) +
n
L
∙ v′ (x = 0) = 0 ⇒ 2 ⋅ C1 ⋅ λ +
E ⋅I
⋅ C2
HE320A
C30/37
(
– v′′ x = L – ) m
L
∙ v′ (x = L) = 0 ⇒ C1 ⋅ [λ ⋅ (cos λ + cosh λ) S355 a
40
130
S j,B ⋅ L
+ ⋅ (sin λ + sinh λ)]
E ⋅I
350
310
S j,B ⋅ L
+ C 2 ⋅ λ ⋅ sin λ – ⋅ cos λ
220
E ⋅I
S j,B ⋅ L
– C4 ⋅ ⋅ cosh λ + λ ⋅ sinh λ = 0 25 25
450x25, S355
E ⋅ I Cofraplus 220 50 300 50 a [mm]
450
B ∙ C = 0 mit (23)
130
b b b C
11 12 13 1
B = b21 b22 b23 und C = C C30/37 Cofraplus 220
220
2
b b b C
31 32 33 4
b11 = cos λ – cosh λ 80
b12 = sin λ 160
beff = 750 [mm]
b13 = sinh λ
b21 = 2λ
Fig. 9b. Application example – SFB cross-section with slab
b22 = b23 = n
b31 = λ (cos λ + cosh λ) + m (sin λ + sinh λ)
b32 = λ sin λ – m ∙ cos λ
b33 = – m cosh λ – λ sinh λ Note: As Eq. (24) is non-algebraic, it had to be solved
by numerical iteration. Therefore, the given values for the
The equation system is solved if the determinant of ma- factor e are an approximation. The given factors a, b, c and
trix B = 0. The lowest value for li for which the above d (described in the previous sections) are precise results,
equation system is solved (the trivial solution λ = 0 is rounded to two digits.
forbidden) is required. The determinant of matrix B is
expressed with 6 Application example – single-span slim-floor beam with
semi-continuous joints
( ) (
Det B = n ∙ m ∙ 1 − cos λ ∙cosh λ + λ ∙ n ∙ ) 6.1 Structural system and loading
(cosh λ ∙sin λ − cos λ ∙sinh λ ) + λ ∙ m ∙ The use of semi-continuous joints using elastic–plastic
(cosh λ ∙sin λ − cos λ ∙sinh λ ) + 2∙ λ 2 ∙ global analysis is demonstrated for a single-span slim-floor
sin λ ∙sinh λ = 0 (24) beam (SFB) with a beam span L = 9.00m and a beam dis-
tance a = 8.10 m (axis-to-axis). The beam is loaded with a
Solutions for λ as a function of stiffness coefficients kA and uniformly distributed constant load q, has a constant bend-
kB are given in Table 5. ing stiffness EI and it is symmetrically supported in an in-
The natural frequency can be calculated with ternal bay, see Fig. 9a. The SFB cross-section consists of an
HE320A hot-rolled section in grade S355 and a welded
λ 2i E ⋅I π2 E ⋅I bottom plate, see Fig. 9b. The SFB section has an inertia Iy
f1 = ∙ = e⋅ ⋅ (25)
2∙ π ∙L 2 m 2⋅π ⋅L2 m = 39 560cm4 with zel,top = 23.445 cm (measured from top
of upper flange downwards); possible participation of the
where m = uniformly distributed constant mass. concrete is not taken into account. The slab consists of
Cofraplus 220 metal decking with 13 cm in situ concrete
[7]. It is shown that the use of semi-continuous joints leads
q = const.
to an economical beam design for the ultimate limit state
Sj,A Sj,B (ULS) and to improved deflection and vibration behaviour
of the beam at the serviceability limit state (SLS).
=
(
c 0.5 ⋅ 300 − 9 − 2 ⋅ 27
=
118.5 )
= 2.93 < 7.43
Σg k = [1.1 ⋅ 4.29 kN/m 2 ⋅ (8.10 − 0.45 + 2 ⋅ 0.05) m t 25.0 + 15.5 40.5
+ 1.1 ⋅ 1.20 kN/m 2 ⋅ 8.10 m]
235
+ 4.57 kN/m = 51.83 kN/m = 9⋅ = 9 ⋅ ε ⇒ class 1
355
Live load (category B1, office use, ψ0 = 0.70): 2.00 kN/m2 ⇒ At the supports the SFB section is classified as a class 1
Partitions: 1.20 kN/m2 section, which can form a plastic hinge with the rotational
∑qk = 1.1 · (2.00 + 1.20) kN/m2 · 8.10 m = 28.51 kN/m capacity required from plastic analysis without a reduction
in the resistance.
5 10 m 2
Reduction factor: α A = ⋅ψ + = 0.64
7 0 9 ⋅ 8.10 m 2 6.3 Semi-continuous beam-to-column joint
Reduced live load: The design of the joint is not presented in detail in this
q′k = ∑qk · aA = 28.51 kN/m · 0.64 = 18.17 kN/m article. The joint can be designed using standard software
or even by hand calculation; reference is made to [1]. The
The additional load on the beam due to continuity of the joint is designed as semi-continuous with an extended end
slab – perpendicular to beam span – is taken into account plate, see Fig. 10. Both beam ends are connected sym
by a factor of 1.10. metrically to the columns with end plates (Sj,A = Sj,B, n =
m, kA = kB).
Load combinations: The design moment–rotation characteristic of the
Total characteristic load: Ek = qSLS = ∑gk + q′k joint is presented in Fig. 11a and was calculated according
= 51.83 kN/m = 18.17 kN/m to [1]. The initial stiffness Sj,ini is within the boundaries for
= 70.0 kN/m a semi-rigid joint (see also Fig. 5). Its design moment resis
Design load: Ed = qULS = 1.35 · ∑gk + 1.50 · q′k tance Mj,Rd = 360 kNm is within the limits given in Fig. 6
= 1.35 · 51.83 kN/m + 1.50 · 18.17 kN/m for a partial-strength joint (0.25 ∙ Mpl,Rd ≤ Mj,Rd ≤ Mpl,Rd
= 97.2 kN/m with Mpl,Rd = Mb,pl,Rd = 732 kNm). Therefore the joint is
classified as semi-rigid and partial-strength and is modelled
6.2 Section classification in design as semi-continuous joint.
45 S355
Upper flange in compression:
10
9⋅ε = 9⋅
235 c
= 7.32 < =
(
0.5 ⋅ 300 − 9 − 2 ⋅ 27 )
189
355 t 15.5 5
450x25
S355
118.5 235
= = 7.65 < 8.14 = 10 ⋅ = 10 ⋅ ε ⇒ class 2
15.5 355 10
450x300x20 [mm]
S355
Web in compression:
Fig. 10. Application example – basic components of
semi-continuous joint
For the following analysis of the SFB for SLS and Calculation of qj,el
2
ULS, a tri-linear approximation of the moment–rotation Up to a bending moment M j,Ed ≤ ⋅ M j,Rd , the initial joint
3
characteristic is used in accordance with 5.1.1(4) of [1], see
Fig. 11b. It is divided into three areas: stiffness Sj,ini can be used in the calculation, see 5.1.2(3) in
– An elastic area for a joint rotation φj within the range [1].
0 ≤ φj ≤ φj,el
– A second area for a joint rotation φj within the range φj,el 2 2
⋅ M j,Rd = ⋅ 360 kNm = 240 kNm
≤ φj ≤ φXd 3 3
– A plastic area for a joint rotation φj within the range φXd ⇒ S j,ini = 51.6 MNm/rad
≤ φj ≤ φCd
Using the equations given in section 5, it is possible to
Note: Using Eq. (1) and Table 2 of section 4.3, an approx- calculate the values for n = m and kA = kB:
imate joint stiffness Sj,app could be calculated as follows:
S j,ini ⋅ L 51.6 MNm/rad ⋅ 9.0 m
( ) n=m = =
2
E ⋅ z2 ⋅ t fc 210000 MN/m 2 ⋅ 0.307 m ⋅ 0.0215 m E ⋅I 210000 MN/m 2 ⋅ 39560 ⋅ 10−8 m 4
S j,app = =
C 7.5
[− ]
= 5.59
= 56.7 MNm/rad = 56.7 kNm/mrad rad
Based on the given SFB section, the structural system and m+6 5.59 + 6
k A = kB = =
the design moment–rotation characteristic (Fig. 11b), the m 12 5.59 12
m+ 4+ 4⋅ + 5.59 + 4 + 4 ⋅ +
corresponding load levels qj,el and qj,Rd are calculated for n n 5.59 5.59
the joint rotations φj,el and φXd. = 0.74
Mj
ϕj
ϕj,el = 4.6 mrad ϕj,SLS ϕj,Ed ϕXd = 20.9 mrad ϕCd
First, factors n2 = m2 and kA,2 and kB,2 have to be calcu- represents a sufficiently precise approximation of the real
lated: joint behaviour.
Mj
Mj,Rd
ϕj
ϕj,el ϕj,Hz = 6.6 mrad ϕXd ϕCd
Fig. 12. Application example – idealized joint stiffness for vibration analysis Sj,Hz
( )
4
−2
5 qSLS ⋅ L4 5 70 ⋅ 10 kN/cm ⋅ 900 cm 21000 kN/m 2 ⋅ 39560 cm 4 ⋅ 10−4
⇒w = ⋅ = ⋅
384 E ⋅I 384 21000 kN/cm 2 ⋅ 39560 cm 4 55.5 kN/m/9.81 m/s2
which is 1.92 times the deflection of the semi-continuous The value of 2.60 Hz as a minimum acceptable natural
beam! frequency of the floor beams is found in [8]. Even though
A basic assumption of the calculation of the beam the natural frequency is commonly used to assess floor vi-
deflection is an elastic material behaviour; the strains in brations, the authors recommend using more precise meth-
the cross-section do not exceed the yield strain. To verify ods that take into account the natural frequency of the
this assumption, the bending moment of the joint Mj,SLS whole floor and its modal mass. For further information
at SLS and the bending moment at mid-span MSLS are see [9] and [10].
calculated and compared with the elastic bending resis- Note: With simple, hinged beam-to-column joints, the
tance of the SFB cross-section: natural frequency of the SFB would be only 2.35 Hz!
( ) (q )
2
qSLS ⋅ L2 70 kN/m ⋅ 9 m q j,el ⋅ L2 − q j,el ⋅ L2
MSLS = − M j,SLS = − 283 kNm M j,Ed = ⋅ kA +
Ed
⋅ k A,2
8 8 12 12
= 426 kNm < Mel,Rd = 599 kNm
( )
2
48 kN/m ⋅ 9 m
= ⋅ 0.74
12
⇒ The SFB cross-section remains fully elastic at SLS, the
( 97.2 − 48) kN/m ⋅ ( 9 m )
2
assumption is correct.
+ ⋅ 0.29
12
Calculation of the natural frequency of the SFB
The natural frequency of the SFB is determined based = 240 kNm + 96 kNm = 336 kNm < M j,Rd
on the equations in section 5. The load qHz is in “area 2”
( )
2
(qj,el ≤ qHz = 55.5 kN/m ≤ qj,Rd), and so an idealized joint 97.2 kN/m ⋅ 9 m
q ⋅ L2
stiffness Sj,Hz is used, see Fig. 12. For q Hz, the corre- MEd = Ed − M j,Ed = − 336 kNm
8 8
sponding values of the joint rotation Φj,Hz and the bend-
ing moment M j,Hz are: Φj,Hz = 6.6 mrad and M j,Hz = = 984 kNm − 336 kNm = 648 kNm
254.5 kNm ⇒ Sj,Hz = Mj,Hz/Φj,Hz = 254.5 kNm / 6.6
mrad = 38.5 kNm/mrad
300x300x20 [mm]
S355
MEd = 984 kNm > Mpl,Rd = 732 kNm! Rotational capacity of the joint
Elastic–plastic global analysis was used in the given ex-
Verification of the SFB cross section at the supports: ample. The joint is not located at the position of a plastic
hinge, and the acting design moment does not reach the
Bending: M j,Rd = 336 kNm ≤ Mpl,Rd = 732 kNm value of the design moment resistance, Mj,Ed < Mj,Rd.
Therefore, the rotation φEd does not reach φXd and the
Shear: rotational capacity of the joint does not have to be
checked.
VEd = qEd ⋅ L/2 = 97.2 kN/m ⋅ 9 m/2
6.6 Economic evaluation of semi-continuous joints
A vz
= 437.4 kN ≤ Vpl,Rd = ⋅ fyd
3 This section compares the cost of the SFB designed with
semi-continuous joints with a beam design using simple
41.13 cm 2
= ⋅ 35.5 kN/cm 2 = 843 kN joints. The design of the simply supported SFB was carried
3 out with the software [12] and was based on the same as-
sumptions as the design of the semi-continuous SFB (same
⇒ Verification is fulfilled! load assumptions and L = 9.0 m, a = 8.10 m, hSlab = 350 mm).
With a load ratio VEd/Vpl,Rd = 437.4 kN/843 kN = The basic components of the simple joint are shown in Fig.
0.52 > 0.50, the bending resistance has to be reduced due 14. The cost difference for the basic components is presented
to the presence of a shear force. According to 6.2.8 of [11], in Table 6. Only the direct costs of the non-identical parts are
this may be done by reducing the yield strength of the given; the possible influence of the joint design on the foun-
shear area by dations, columns etc. was not taken into account.
7 Conclusion and outlook [7] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik: Allgemeine bauaufsicht-
liche Zulassung – ArcelorMittal Systemdecke Cofraplus 220,
This article outlines the advantage of semi-continuous approval No. Z-26.1-55, Berlin, 2013.
beam-to-column joints for the design of single-span beams [8] AFNOR: National annex to NF EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3:
Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules
(with constant inertia and subjected to a uniformly distrib-
for buildings.
uted constant load) at ULS and SLS. Factors for use in
[9] Sedlacek, G., et al.: Generalization of criteria for floor vibra-
combination with standard design formulae were derived tions for industrial, office, residential and public building and
analytically. They allow the structural engineer to deter- gymnastic halls. European Commission, final report, 2006,
mine the influence of the joint stiffness on the beam deflec- EUR 21972 EN, ISBN 92-79-01705-5.
tion, its natural frequency and the distribution of the bend- [10] Hicks, S., Peltonen, S.: Design of slim-floor construction for
ing moment quickly and easily. Further, the application is human induced vibrations. Steel Construction, 8 (2015), No.
shown in a design example for a slim-floor beam (SFB), 2. DOI:10.1002/stco.201510015
which shows the economic potential of semi-continuous [11] CEN/TC250: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part
joints. Overall, such joints lead to a more economic, more 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings, European Commis-
sustainable structure. The influence of semi-continuous sion.
[12] CTICM France, ArcelorMittal R&D: ArcelorMittal Beam
joints on the design of single-span beams with partially
Calculator (ABC), version 3.30, ArcelorMittal Belval & Differ-
constant inertia will be investigated in a second article.
dange S.A. http://sections.arcelormittal.com/down-
load-center/design-software.html
References
Keywords: semi-continuous steel beam-to-column joints; global
[1] CEN/TC250: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part analysis; approximate determination of the joint stiffness; eco-
1-8: Design of joints, European Commission. nomical design; slim-floor construction
[2] Braun, M., Hechler, O., Obiala, R.: Untersuchungen zur Ver-
bundwirkung von Betondübeln. Stahlbau, 83 (2014), No. 5.
DOI:10.1002/stab.201410154
[3] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik: Allgemeine bauaufsicht- Authors:
liche Zulassung – CoSFB-Betondübel. ArcelorMittal Belval & Matthias Braun
Differdange S.A., approval No. Z-26.4-59, Berlin, 2014. ArcelorMittal Europe – Long Products
[4] Ungermann, D., Weynand, K., Jaspart, J.-P., Schmidt, B.: Mo- 66, rue de Luxembourg
mententragfähige Anschlüsse mit und ohne Steifen. Stahl- L-4009 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
bau-Kalender 2005, Kuhlmann, U. (ed.), Ernst & Sohn, Ber-
lin, ISBN 3-433-01721-2. Job Duarte da Costa
[5] Jaspart, J.-P., Demonceau, J.-F.: European Design Recom- Renata Obiala
mendations for simple joints in steel structures. ArGEnCo Christoph Odenbreit
Dept., Liège University. University of Luxembourg, FSTC
[6] Maquoi, R., Chabrolin, B.: Frame Design including joint be- ArcelorMittal Chair of Steel & Façade Engineering
haviour. European Commission, contract No. 7210- 6, rue de Richard Coudenhove Kalergi
SA/212/320, 1998. L-1359 Luxembourg, Luxembourg