Structural Engineering Art

and Approximation

A Talk
By
Hugh Morrison
Any Questions?

Please Speak Up!

And turn off mobile

phones….
 Summary of Talk

‘Why’ and ‘How’ the book came to be written

Illustration: Historic and Contemporary structure.

Samples from the book

Conclusion: the benefits of sketching and

approximation.
‘WHY’ and ‘HOW’ the book came to be written

Teds
Ram
STAAD
GSA
NO COMPUTER

Desert Island Engineering?

I’m an engineer
get me out of here!
“ENGINEERING IS THE ART OF APPROXIMATION”

ART APPROXIMATION

PROPOSE and
C R E AT I V E T H O U G H T TEST OPTIONS:
and self-expression s ke t c h e s a n d r o u g h
calculations

Culminating in a ‘wholesome’, DESIGN is finding a solution

‘pleasing’ solution within acceptable limits
Ove Arup Quote
Engineering problems are under-defined,
there are many solutions, good,
bad and indifferent.
The art is to arrive at a good solution.

This is a creative activity, involving

imagination, intuition and deliberate choice.”
SUMMARY
With simplified methods one can be assured that:

THE PROBLEM IS DEFINED

THE ASSUMPTIONS ARE CLEAR

THERE IS A ROUGH SOLUTION

THE COMPUTER MODEL IS VERIFIABLE

ONE KNOWS APPROXIMATELY
HOW THE STRUCTURE WILL BEHAVE
One thing to be sure,
I will not be
presenting anything
like this…
A REVIEW OF AN HISTORIC AND A
CONTEMPORARY STRUCTURE
GOOD EXERCISE: Look at Built Structures
UNFAMILIAR STRUCTURES:
To avoid preconceptions
SKETCHES

ASSUMPTIONS LISTED

APPROXIMATE CALCULATIONS
R100 AIRSHIP

Chief designer: Barnes Wallis

Lead Stress Engineer: Neville Norway Shute
DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURE
Hydrogen filled buoyancy
bags top centre.

Powered by 3 16 side polygon with steel

diesel gondolas radial ties – circa. 25-35mm dia.

Duralumin transverse and longitudinal frames

Trussed approx. 680mm deep

Circa 15 transverse frames at 13.5m (45ft)

 Maximum net pressure
Transverse Frames Assumed 1kPa

Transverse Frame
Max 40m diameter
ASSUMPTIONS

UNIFORM SUCTION: RING INEFFECTIVE

Radial Cables Resist Load
UNIFORM INWARDS PRESSURE: RADIAL CABLES INEFFECTIVE
Ring Resists Load

ASYMMETRICAL LOADING:
(SUCTION AREA) CABLES IN TENSION
RING IS INEFFECTIVE IN BENDING
HAND CALCULATIONS IN EASY STEPS

CONSTANT SUCTION 1kPa CONSTANT PRESSURE 1kPa UNEQUAL PRESSURE 1kPa

R100 CONCLUSION

STAGE 2: MORE DETAILED DESIGN CHECKS

LEVEL OF REFINEMENT: DECIDE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE?

FOR EXAMPLE:

Cable stress close to yield – examine further 35m diameter?

Check Ring with combined bending/cable tension.

Computer analysis of a 2D half frame linear/non-linear

Buckling checks?
Longitudonal Frame checks?
NEVILLE SHUTE: A Delighted Engineer...

After literally months of labour, having filled

perhaps fifty foolscap sheets with closely
pencilled figures, after many
disappointments and heartaches, the truth
stood revealed, real, and perfect, and
unquestionable; the very truth.”
ISTRUCTE STAIR HQ BASTWICK STREET

Expedition Engineers
Hugh Broughton Architects

June/July 2015: Design Feature

IstructE magazine

REVIEW OF DESIGN: alternative load path

CONSIDERED
ISTRUCTE STAIR BASTWICK STREET
Torsion Increases
down the stair
Torsion and
Shear resisted
By wall
Tread loads
No cantilever bending
accumulate

Traditional Cantilever Stair – Load path

ASSUMPTIONS
1. GLASS balustrade ineffective

2. BARS transfer shears/torsion into wall

3. 50% STAIR loaded onto wall
4. 50% STAIR and balustrade load
cumulatively onto outer stringer

5. LOCAL TORSION resisted at

each tread by STRINGER
DOES NOT ACCUMULATE

6. LANDING supports upper half of FLIGHT

 Alternative Load Path
FREE BODY DIAGRAM
Balustrade/stringer/half tread each 1kN

Cumulating loads onto stringer/landing

x10 treads max = 10kN

Local applied Torsion (over tread width)

= (10-9)x0.25 = 0.25kNm 1OkN

Resolving Shears at support

R1= T/0.08m+0.8/2=3.6kN (down)

R2=-T/0.08m+0.8/2=-2.7kN(up)
INITIAL MODEL - VERIFICATION
Concrete treads 40mm thick (plates)
75x30mm stepped stringer (steel)

‘LIKE WOBBLY TEETH’ – WALL

SUPPORTS with VERY LOW PULL OUT
STIFFNESS

REACTIONS +3.7/2.8 – OK

STRINGER AXIAL FORCE 10.6kN – OK

INITIAL MODEL DEFLECTIONS

DEFLECTIONS HIGH NO GLASS – 10mm ADDING GLASS – DEFLECTION 0.50mm

REVISED MODEL – FIXED SUPPORTS
By fixing supports shears at support model corresponded to Expedition design

EXPEDITION MODEL
HORIZONTAL SHEARS

EXPEDITION MODEL
NO GLASS –
DEFLECTION 1mm
REVISED MODEL – NATURAL FREQUENCY

Natural Frequency at 14.9Hz similar

to Expedition site observations

EXPEDITION MODEL
14.9Hz
DOES THE ALTERNATIVE LOAD PATH MODEL
HELP?

POST DRILLED ANCHORS POSSIBLE

(pre-forming holes complicated construction)

SINCE GLASS BALUSTRADE

INCLUDED – natural frequency >
14.9Hz
CONCLUSION

Sketches and hand calculations used to

understand problem

Support loads may be estimated

Elements may be Initially Sized and Checked

Initial COMPUTER MODEL built from

FIRST APPROXIMATIONS
EXAMPLES FROM THE BOOK
Structural Engineering: Efficacy, Balance and Grace
Simply Supported Beams Learning from Failure

Cantilever Beams
Continuous Beams

Framed Structures
Trusses and Vierendeel Structures
Tension and Suspension Structures
Arches, Vaults and Domes
Torsion Structures and Ring Beams
Plate Structures
Deep Beams, Load Carrying Walls and Diaphragms
Dynamics
TRIANGULAR LOADING – ASSUMING UDL 2/3 PEAK
Classic Bending Moments/Shears UDL in place of Triangular Loading

Equivalent
UDL 2/3 peak

+33% Bending

+0% max shear

+33% deflection
ASSUMING CENTRAL POINT LOAD – WHEN ACTUAL LOAD OFF CENTRE
Classic Bending Moments/Shears Use When Point Load off-centre (up to Middle Third Zone)

Equivalent
Assume Central Point Load

+11% Bending

-140% max shear – calculate separately!

+15% deflection
CANTILEVERS
Comparison of Cantilever with Cantilever with Backspan Cantilever with Backspan
Simply Supported Point Load UDL

Increasing backspan Increasing backspan

To 4L 4xencastre UDL backspan increased influence
FRAME STRUCTURES
Wind Frame Traditional Wind Loading – Virtual Pins Columns
Design

Design Beams Assuming

Simply Supported
Quick estimation of Wind Bending
TRUSSES AND VIERENDEELS – KING POST TRUSS
Kingpost Truss
Statically Indeterminate
Combination of Beam
and Truss Action
TENSION STRUCTURES – FABRIC TENSION ROOF STRUCTURE
NON LINEAR ANALYSIS

Form Finding
(dynamic relaxation)

LINEAR ESTIMATION
POSSIBLE

Assume line load in

Fabric (say 3kN/m)
Cable loads from T=PR
Goodwood Racecourse - 1991 (utilise railway curves)

External reactions from

collected cable loads
TENSION STRUCTURES – FABRIC TENSION ROOF STRUCTURE
Internal Force Diagram

External Forces Net Effect on

Supporting Structure
COMPRESSION - CATHEDRAL BUTTRESSING – THE MIDDLE THIRD RULE!

Cathedral Section
Estimate Buttress
(and Pinnacle) weight

Check Foundation thrust

-line in middle third

Simple thrust from

vaulted roof

Geometric check
– resolved buttress
counterweight
DEEP BEAMS
Quick Check Table

Reinforcement Estimate
Lever Arm 0.62d
Check Shear overall rectangular section
Or resolve by STRUT-TIE model
DYNAMICS – DISCOMFORT/PERCEPTION ASSESSMENT
Fundamental Natural Frequencies – tendency for slender structures to resonance

Summary of terms

Fundamental
Frequencies

Damping Ratios

Simple Excitation
Calculations

Discomfort Criteria

Lateral Frequencies
Tall Buildings
FOOTBRIDGE/RAMP 10m SPAN
Actual 10m span structure with screed floor
fn 2.6Hz

NATURAL FREQUENCY
2.6Hz. Resonance – LIVELY!

GLASS BALUSTRADE DAMPING

STADIUM CANTILEVER TIER RESPONSE

CALCULATION based
DYNAMIC MAGNIFICATION

STADIUM tier 3.5Hz

NATURAL FREQUENCY

Check further < 6 Hz

Response Chart Simplified

EXERCISE BOOK
A POCKET COMPANION

15 EXERCISES RELATED TO
REALISTIC PROBLEMS

FOLLOWS DESIGN PROCESS

CROSS REFERS TO MAIN BOOK

AND FINALLY…STRUCTURAL CURIOSITIES….

WHAT NO SPREAD?!
STABLE?
 THE TALK…..

‘Why’ and ‘How’ the book came to be written

Illustration: Historic and Contemporary structure.

Samples from the book

Conclusion: the benefits of sketching and

approximation.
 THANK YOU

ANY QUESTIONS?