sciP363 Example 1 - Unrestrained beam with eccentric point load 1 Configuration A simply supported beam spans 4 m without intermediate restraint. It is subject to @ permanent concentrated load of 74 kN at mic-span, which is attached to the bottom flange at an eccentricity of 75 mm, Verify the trial section 25 4UKC73 (5275) 4 74kN Any restraint provided by the end plate connections against werping is partial, unreliable ‘and unguantifiable, The ends of the member will therefore be assumed to be free to warp. Note: This example is similar to Example 6 in SCI publication P364. That example only uses a simplified assessment of torsional effects. 1.2 Section properties For 254 UKC 73 in S275 b a t, % 4 4 r vrBS EN 1025-2, Table 7 BS EN 1990 Table NA.AL.2(6) BS EN 1990 6.4.3.2 NA2232 3:14/§627(7) For ¢< 16 mm end $275 ia 275 Nim? 13 Actions 1.3.1 Partial factor for actions Permanentactions y= 135 1.3.2 Combination of actions at ULS BS EN 1990 presents two options for determining the effect due to combination of actions to be used for the ultimate limit state verification. Here the less favourable combination from Expression (6.108) and (6.108) is determined Expression (6.106) will usually be the governing case in the UK, except for cases where ‘the permanent actions are greater than 4.5 times the variable actions. However, as there are only permanent actions present, 6 10a will be more onerous ‘than 6.10b and so governs the design. For the concentrated load acting at mid-span with en eccentricity of 75 mm. Fr, = 7,6, = 135 x 74 = 100 EN 1, = 0.079F,=0.075 x 100=7.5kNm For the beam self weight: fi = 1g6,= 135 0.716 =0.97 kN 1.4 Design value of bending moment and shear force At mid-span: xg = 100 4/4 +0.97 x 45/8 = 102 EN At the support: vr, rs = 1002+0.97%4/2 =52kN 1.5 _ Design values of torsional effects at ULS 1.5.1 Simplified assessment of effects As a simplification, for members with open cross sections, the effects of St Venant torsion may be neglectedne wrque snow uien be conswered as & CoUpIE, applied wo ne wanges, wien une force is given by: F, ra — 4) = 751(0.254 ~ 0.014) = 31.3EN The bending momentin a flange at mid-span is thus: Mas G13 x4y4=313 Nm 1.5.2 Assessment of effects, allowing for elastic interaction between ‘St Venant torsion and warping torsion The flanges are unrestrained against warping at their ends and the beam is subject to. point torque: graphs A and B in Appendix D and the expressions in Case 3 in Appendix Care thus applicable, For this beam: L 4 a 5 52 In this case, the torque acts at mic-span and thus a= 0.5 Rotation From Graph A, for a= 0.5 and Lia = 2.52: $4, co Ta Therefore 02175159 é 51d 057.6510" 053 nd GB) Minor exis moment induced by rotation: Magy = 6Mygy=0.053 x 102 = 54 kN Warping moment From Graph B, for a: 5 end Lia = 2.52: #Gha T 0425 0425475 OTS ___ 9043 radi? DAO VS7.6x10 1.59Warping moment due point torque The warping moment at mid-span is thus: Ma = a(S) where = 1/2 Therefore: ad _ 21010 19.5510" x(0.254—0.014) 0.043, a re This moment occurs in each flange (in opposite cirections). "Note: Only in the top flange does warping moment act in the same direction as the minor axis moment induced by rotation. Commentary: Evaluation of the expressions in Appendix C, Case 3, along the length of the beam would give the following bending moment clagram: Warping moment M,N) g Distance dongbean,x/L It may be noted thet the interaction with St Venent torsion has reduced the peak warping moment (relative to that in the simplified assessment, by approximately 33% (21.1 kNm compared to-31.3 kNm). ‘StVenanttorsional moment The St Yenent torsional momentis gen by GI, (see Section 2.3), No graphs ere provided in Appendix for g, butts value may be obtained from expressions in Appendix ©. Fora =0.5 the expression for a point tor simples to: ¢ + jae ntoVariation of sional ‘moment along ‘tho team 31.1/§6.25(2) ‘at the member ena, x= 0 and ‘ ELL Lee 2s]osio = 0238 ay 2am a Tg =O =T,< 0288-02382 750= 178m Further evaluation ofthe expressions in Appendic would reves! the sharing of torsional moment between St Venant tersion and warping torsion along the length of the beam. The following plet shows the variation, Teal onal moment ping trsiend moment “Teena mement (iim DDitancesiong the beam a/L 1.6 Cross sectional resistance 1.6.1 Bending resistance For this Glass 4 section, the bending resistance about the major axis Is Tw fy Yow Mos Ty = 1.0, according to the UK NA 992%104 «275x107? mm 10 (2 KNm M,,= 21.1 EN ucwa Consider the plastic interaction criterion, as given in Section 3.1.2: feb oof, 211 $4 mal a 14+0,33+0.04=05151 ok In this example, the loading at mic-span is applied through @ tension rod that passes through @ 27 mm diameter hole in the bottom flange. Itis therefore necessary to find out whether the bending resistances need to be reduced to take account of the hole. According to 6.2.5 (4), fastener holes in @ tension flange may be ignored provided that: Shy A ta Tow For $275 steel, f,= 430 Nim? he 10, according to the UK NA 4, 54x 142 ggg 24g 2714.2 = 3220 mum? 3220 0.9% 4301653 _sy30 4 gna 3019%275 19 = 993 kA So, the hole may be ignored for bending about the major axis. For lateral bending of the bottom flange, there is no simple criterion to permit, neglecting the hole. The value of the section modulus for transverse bending should therefore be evaluated for the flange with the hole, although the calculation of an appropriate plastic modulus for a flange with a hole on one side is not straightforward. Considering here that the hole removes approximately 20% of the area of one flange outstand, that the utilization of the top flange calculated above is only 51% and that ‘the warping moment and minor axis moment are in opposite directions in the bottom ‘flange, the adequacy of the bottom flange is judged satisfactory1.6.2 Shear resistance Plastic shear resistance Without torsion, the plastic shear resistance of the beem is given by: re Abell = hw Foran Lsecton: 4, A= 2bi, + (t, + 2nfy but not less than hy, 9310 ~2 x (254 x 142) + (8.6 +2 x 12.7) x 14.2 =2560 mt a, =h-2,=254—-Q« 142) =226 mm B15/NA24 = 1.0 (eccording to UK NA to BS EN 1993-15) Thus hf, = 1.0226 x 8.6= 1940 mm? 2560 > 1940 Therefore 4, = 2560 mm? r. = 256027515 49-9 = 406 kN a 10 Reduced shear resistance in the presence of torsion ‘The shear resistance is reduced by the presence of St Venant torsional shear stress inthe web. In order to calculate the reduction in available resistance due to torsion, itis necessary ‘to evaluate the torsional shear stress in the web. This is given by: fa Tat = 1.78 « 10° x 8.6/57.6 x 10 = 26.6 Nimm? 3:11/6.2.7(9) The reduction factor = Ta 26693 o95 1255/08 V" 1250275 Vigega = 0.93% 406 = 378 KN Tyg = S2KN< Tigeqy = 37BEN OK Note that, with this level of sheer stress there would be no reduction in plastic bending, resistance, even f the two effects were coexistent. In this case, there is no St Venant torsional moment at mid-span. 1 Buckling resistance 1.7.1 Lateral torsional buckling resistance The buckling resistance moment is determined from: 321963212) My, = WH Ta321/g6.32.10) SLY/NADIT Buctiing curve b 314/96.32.1(0) 3-11/TableB3 hq = 1.0, according to the UK NA For this Class 4 section, 17,= 7, ‘The value ofthe reduction fector 7, is determined from a buckling curve ascording to the non dimensionel slenderness 2, whichis gen by: z, ~ fA in mn For the configuration of this beam, the elastic critical moment MM, is given by LTBeam as M, = 1049 Nm (ae \ioag “9% Therefore, 7, For a doubly symmetric rolled section with hb <2, the UK NA directs that buckling curve bof 6.3.2.3 should be usee St, Hye 095 Mga ng the < OPED 9 0 1.7.2. Interaction of LTB with minor axis bending andtorsion As discussed in Section 3.2, use the formula in AnnexA of BS EN 1993-6. FOF Too = Yq this may be re-expressed as: Mas Cable Fk Mass cy Mos May Mans Here: C. =0.9 (neartriangular bending moment diagram) i, =07-02 Mem 07-02% 24 =063 ioe @ 5A 7 a1-34 =096 M, 102 ava Mom a1) - a =u - SF) Wa - Se) Lu The criterion is evaluated as: U2 , 0954, 063x0.96x1.11x21.1 29" 128, a = 0.39 + 004 +0.23 =0.66 0k Therefore, the buckling resistance is satisfactory,1.8 Serviceability limit state The pattial factor 7, at SLS is 4.0, compared with its value of 1.35 at ULS. Hence the SLS action effects are as for ULS x 1/1.35 6. = 0.053/1.35 = 0.039 rad 2.25") There are no commonly agreed limits for permanent defiections at SLS and the matter is for the designer's judgement In this example, the designer might need to consider the effect of such a rotation on the suspension rod, unless itis attached in @ way which permits rotation. if, instead of @ suspension rod, the load were connected via a cable attached to an eye bolt, @ rotation in excess of two degrees might be judged less of a concer.