ASSIGNMENT B

Expansion of steel portal frame building – RSAP analysis

STD4 Computer-aided Structural Analysis

Mukhammad-Sodik Karimov
291274
Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Question 1 – Existing structure .............................................................................................................. 3
Free body diagram .................................................................................................................................. 3
Geometry ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Support conditions .................................................................................................................................. 5
Loads ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Load combinations .................................................................................................................................. 6
Results ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
Differences .............................................................................................................................................. 8
Discussion on the output ...................................................................................................................... 13
Question 2 – Analysis of chosen proposal ........................................................................................... 13
Free body diagram ................................................................................................................................ 14
Geometry .............................................................................................................................................. 14
Support conditions ................................................................................................................................ 15
Loadings ................................................................................................................................................ 16
Load combinations ................................................................................................................................ 17
Comparison with qualitative solution ................................................................................................... 19
Discussion on the output ...................................................................................................................... 23
Other proposals .................................................................................................................................... 23
Question 3 – findings from computer analysis ..................................................................................... 27
3D Model .............................................................................................................................................. 28

Figure 1 Free body diagram .................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2 Dimensions ................................................................................................................................ 4
Figure 3 Profile section ........................................................................................................................... 4
Figure 4 Internal hinge ............................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 5 Support type ............................................................................................................................. 5
Figure 6 Self-weight ................................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 7 Wind load .................................................................................................................................. 6
Figure 8 Snow load .................................................................................................................................. 6
Figure 9 Snow load leading ..................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 10 Wind load leading ................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 11 Self-weight only ...................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 12 Reactions for snow leading ..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 13 Deformation for snow leading ................................................................................................ 8
Figure 14 Bending moment diagram for snow leading........................................................................... 8
Figure 15 Hand analysis of existing frame .............................................................................................. 9

1
Figure 16 Wind load leading reactions ................................................................................................. 10
Figure 17 Wind load leading deflection ................................................................................................ 10
Figure 18 Wind load leading bending moment .................................................................................... 10
Figure 19 Hand analysis of existing frame ............................................................................................ 11
Figure 20 Self-weight only reactions ..................................................................................................... 12
Figure 21 Self weight only deformation................................................................................................ 12
Figure 22 Self-weight only bending moment ........................................................................................ 12
Figure 23 Chosen proposal FBD ............................................................................................................ 14
Figure 24 Dimension of proposal .......................................................................................................... 14
Figure 25 Truss system in proposal ....................................................................................................... 15
Figure 26 Rigid connection in proposal................................................................................................. 15
Figure 27 Support type of proposal ...................................................................................................... 16
Figure 28 Support type of proposal ...................................................................................................... 16
Figure 29 Self weight of proposal ......................................................................................................... 16
Figure 30 Imposed load of proposal ..................................................................................................... 17
Figure 31 Snow load on proposal.......................................................................................................... 17
Figure 32 Snow leading proposal 1 ....................................................................................................... 17
Figure 33 Wind leading proposal .......................................................................................................... 18
Figure 34 Imposed leading proposal ..................................................................................................... 18
Figure 35 Reactions wind leading for proposal 3 .................................................................................. 19
Figure 36 Deformation wind leading for proposal 3 ............................................................................. 19
Figure 37 Moment diagram wind leading for proposal 3 ..................................................................... 19
Figure 38 Hand analysis chosen proposal ............................................................................................. 20
Figure 39 Reactions snow leading for proposal 3 ................................................................................. 21
Figure 40 Deformed shape snow leading proposal 3 ........................................................................... 21
Figure 41 Moment snow leading proposal 3 ........................................................................................ 21
Figure 42 Reactions imposed leading proposal 3 ................................................................................. 22
Figure 43 Deformed shape imposed leading proposal 3 ...................................................................... 22
Figure 44 Moment imposed leading proposal 3 ................................................................................... 23
Figure 45 Loads proposal 1 ................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 46 Deformation proposal 1 ........................................................................................................ 24
Figure 47 Bending moment proposal 1................................................................................................. 24
Figure 48 Hand analysis of proposal 1 .................................................................................................. 25
Figure 49 Loads proposal 2 ................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 50 Deformed shape proposal 2.................................................................................................. 26
Figure 51 Bending moment proposal 2................................................................................................. 26
Figure 52 Hand analysis of proposal 2 .................................................................................................. 27
Figure 53 3D Model............................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 54 3D view moments ................................................................................................................. 29
Figure 55 XZ view moments .................................................................................................................. 29
Figure 56 ZY view moments .................................................................................................................. 29
Figure 57 Extension part moments ....................................................................................................... 30
Figure 58 Truss system in action ........................................................................................................... 30
Figure 59 3D deformation ..................................................................................................................... 31

2
Introduction
In this assignment the portal frame from assignment A is considered, in order to perform analysis
using Robot Structural Analysis. It will be done to check manual 3-part solution, so that to be sure
about the behavior of the frame and exact numbers, e.g to start designing steel profile sections or
foundation etc.

Question 1 – Existing structure

Free body diagram

Static system of existing structure is 3 pinned portal frame

Figure 1 Free body diagram

3
 Geometry

Portal frame consists of columns 4.2m height with span 14.4m and rafters 7.6m and 20 degree slope

Column profiles are chosen to be IPE 330 and rafters IPE 270, but it is only an initial assumption and
may be changed corresponding to internal forces. (M,N and V)

Figure 3 Profile section

Figure 2 Dimensions

4
One internal moment release hinge is used in connection of two rafters

Figure 4 Internal hinge

Support conditions
Two pinned support, having 4 reactions are used. This type of support enables free rotation of
column around it.

Figure 5 Support type

Loads
If IPE section is used, then self weight of 1 meter of beam can be found using tables from
manufacturer. Snow load and wind load is chosen as approximate usual values, exact values can be
found by automatic calculation in Robot, but it is not done in this assignment.

Figure 6 Self-weight

5
Figure 7 Wind load

Figure 8 Snow load

Load combinations - Performed manually according to Teknisk Stabi table 4.4

Figure 9 Snow load leading

6
Figure 10 Wind load leading

Figure 11 Self-weight only

Results
• Snow load leading

7
Figure 12 Reactions for snow leading

Figure 13 Deformation for snow leading

Figure 14 Bending moment diagram for snow leading

Differences
o Wind uplift force is not considered in qualitative analysis

8
 o Bending moment on left side column and rafter on bottom part(positive)
o Deflected shape is more to the left side due to above mentioned reasons
o Reaction directions are the same

Robot showed that bending moment is on the top part of the column (negative) and changes from
compression to tension on left side rafter. Deflected shape does not swing that much to the left as in
qualitative analysis.

Figure 15 Hand analysis of existing frame

• Wind load leading

9
Figure 16 Wind load leading reactions

Figure 17 Wind load leading deflection

Figure 18 Wind load leading bending moment

Differences

o The wind uplift force is applied all along the roof, which was not reasonable load application
in Assignment A, in Robot it changed to pressure on right side and suction on left side.

10
 o As load application is changed slightly, deflected shape has also changed, but only on the
left side, causing first less deflection and secondly change from compression to tension in
both columns and rafter.
o Bending moment is changed due to changes mentioned above, left side had considerably
large positive moments in qualitative analysis, whereas Robot showed that moments are
smaller and change from top to bottom.

Figure 19 Hand analysis of existing frame

• Self-weight only – no qualitative analysis performed in Assignment A

11
Figure 20 Self-weight only reactions

Figure 21 Self weight only deformation

Figure 22 Self-weight only bending moment

12
Discussion on the output
Overall, three load combinations were checked, in each case deflected shape, moment diagram and
reactions direction were very close to expected/predicted in 3-part solution in Assignment A.

As the loads used are not calculated, but only taken as approximate values, it leads to the certain
numbers in moments/reactions/deflections. But even if applied forces will be changed in more
detailed design of the frame, it will not effect 3-part solution.

Question 2 – Analysis of chosen proposal

The chosen proposal was fully fixed frame, with truss system integrated in the extension part of the
structure, where bars have hinge connection. Loads applied on the structure are self-weight, snow
load, wind load and imposed load (new) in the canteen.

13
Free body diagram
Static system of proposal is fully fixed portal frame with truss system in the expansion part.

Figure 23 Chosen proposal FBD

Geometry
IPE 330 section is used for all three columns and sloped rafter, HEB 240 section for truss bars.

Figure 24 Dimension of proposal

Truss has pinned connection in each corner, allowing free rotation but there is not moment transfer
between elements.

14
Figure 25 Truss system in proposal

There is one rigid connection between sloped rafter and right-side column.

Figure 26 Rigid connection in proposal

Support conditions
Fixed support is used having 3 reactions, horizontal, vertical and moment reaction.

15
Figure 28 Support type of proposal Figure 27 Support type of proposal

Loadings
Self-weight, assumption made that self-weight load is not applied in truss bars.

Figure 29 Self weight of proposal

Imposed load is applied in canteen

16
Figure 30 Imposed load of proposal

Snow load

Figure 31 Snow load on proposal

Load combinations - Performed manually according to Teknisk Stabi table 4.4

Snow load leading

Figure 32 Snow leading proposal 1

17
Wind load leading

Figure 33 Wind leading proposal

Imposed load leading

Figure 34 Imposed leading proposal

18
Comparison with qualitative solution
• Wind load leading

Figure 35 Reactions wind leading for proposal 3

Figure 36 Deformation wind leading for proposal 3

Figure 37 Moment diagram wind leading for proposal 3

19
When output from Robot is compared to 3-part qualitative analysis, there mostly no differences in
reactions and moment diagrams. Deformed shape of the structure in the expansion part does not
deformed that much compared to what was shown in hand analysis.

Also, moment in the rigid connection on the right side joint is found out to be smaller from Robot
analysis.

Figure 38 Hand analysis chosen proposal

20
 • Snow load leading – was not considered in Assignment A

Figure 39 Reactions snow leading for proposal 3

Figure 40 Deformed shape snow leading proposal 3

Figure 41 Moment snow leading proposal 3

21
 • Imposed load leading

Figure 42 Reactions imposed leading proposal 3

Figure 43 Deformed shape imposed leading proposal 3

22
Figure 44 Moment imposed leading proposal 3

Discussion on the output

By checking 3 different load combinations, similar bending moment diagrams can be seen in each
case, also maximum moment point is remaining the same in each load combinations. It also means
that deflected shape is the same, having tension side in the place, but only changing the amount of
deformation depending on load combination.

Also bending moment is observed in bracing elements of the truss system, it is ignored in detailed
analysis, as they are assumed to act only in axial force.

The big bending moment is occurring in the sloped rafter, it can require bigger section compared to
other elements. As well as columns, because of the fixed support there bigger moments close to
support.

Other proposals – considered only load combination from Assignment A

Proposal 1

Figure 45 Loads proposal 1

23
Figure 46 Deformation proposal 1

Figure 47 Bending moment proposal 1

The main differences can be seen in moment diagram, where in hand analysis the size of it was not
close to real situation, whereas Robot showed that moments in some of the rafters are larger.

Deformation in Robot analysis is quite different from hand analysis, even if moment diagrams are
quite similar to each other. In hand analysis it was shown that right side top rafter deforms, but
robot shows that deformation is negligible.

24
Figure 48 Hand analysis of proposal 1

• Proposal 2

Figure 49 Loads proposal 2

25
Figure 50 Deformed shape proposal 2

Figure 51 Bending moment proposal 2

Bending moment diagram is only different on the right-side connection of rafter and column, robot
shows that moment changes from positive to negative twice in column.

Deformation is very similar, except in hand analysis it is over exaggerated in the expansion part.

26
Figure 52 Hand analysis of proposal 2

Question 3 – findings from computer analysis

The first difference from hand analysis, computer model presented results more accurate and closer
to reality, whereas in Assignment A bending moments and deflections were shown to be too large.

Also, in many situations, computer analysis showed that assumptions made in Assignment A were
not correct, for example bending moments that were ignored were actually present. So with the
help of RSAP it was possible to recheck and to be sure about the final shape of bending moments.

Finally, RSAP gave a possibility to check more load combinations than in hand analysis, making it
possible to see the behavior of extended frame under different loads.

27
3D Model

3D Model of chosen extension proposal is constructed in Robot choosing “shell design” option.
Object of the analysis are bending moment diagrams in y direction, axial forces in truss elements and
deformation of the whole structure.

• Structure has fixed supports in all columns.

• Bracing elements acting as truss are both on the roof and façade in both ends of the
building.
• Purlins are all have pinned connections in each end, as well as gable columns in the joint
with frame rafters have pinned connections.
• Extension is the 2 meter cantilever being supported on truss and portal frame itself.
• Loads applied are:
- Self weight of the structure
- Wind load on façade
- Snow load on the roof
• Load combination is decided to be WIND LOAD LEADING
1.5 WIND + 1.5 SNOW + 1.0 SELF WEIGHT

Figure 53 3D Model

28
Figure 54 3D view moments

Figure 55 XZ view moments

Figure 56 ZY view moments

29
Figure 57 Extension part moments

Figure 58 Truss system in action

30
Figure 59 3D deformation

31