Military Technological College Oman

Civil & quantity surveying department

In collaboration with the
University of Portsmouth, UK

Coursework 1: Individual Report on Manual

Design

Module code: MTCC6060

Module name: Design of Structures

Module coordinator name: Dr. Morsaleen Chowdhury

Student name: Ibrahim Ali Al-Mughairi

Student ID: 1803061

1
Contents
1. Conceptual design: .................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 CAD drawing of Howe truss ................................................................................................................ 3
1 2. CAD drawing of Pratt truss ................................................................................................................. 3
1. 3 Specification of sections..................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Evaluation of Howe truss .................................................................................................................... 5
1. 5 Evaluation of Pratt truss..................................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Aesthetic appeal between Pratt and Howe truss ............................................................................... 6
1.7 Justification of optimum design .......................................................................................................... 6
1.8 Description of bracing system............................................................................................................. 6
1.9 Discussion on design challenges ......................................................................................................... 7
2. Detailed design of truss: ........................................................................................................................... 8
2.1. Design loads ....................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Computational modelling ................................................................................................................. 10
2.3 Analysis results .................................................................................................................................. 11
2.4 Load cases ......................................................................................................................................... 17
2.5 Compression resistance .................................................................................................................... 18
2.6 Buckling resistance............................................................................................................................ 18
2.7 Deflection check................................................................................................................................ 19

2
1. Conceptual design:
Assumptions:

L / d (span-depth ratio) =20

Layout of internal members = 40°

Truss length (L) =50 m so Spans <200ft, S= d = L /15 = 50 / 20 = 2.5 m

Members are joined together by gusset plates considered as pinned joints.

Self-weight of the truss is neglected

Cross-section of compression member is thicker than tension member.

Cross-section of tension member is thicker than zero force member.

1.1 CAD drawing of Howe truss

Assumption: Top chord members in compression, Bottom chord members in tension, Diagonal member
in compression, Vertical member in tension

1 2. CAD drawing of Pratt truss

Assumption: Top chord members in compression, Bottom chord members in tension, Diagonal member
in tension, Vertical member in Zero force.

3
1. 3 Specification of sections

4
 1.4 Evaluation of Howe truss
Table 1: shows Geometry and stability of Howe truss

Geometry, Stability
No. of members No. of No. of External Internal
Top chord Bottom Diagonal Vertical joins Members (m + r =
members chord members members End Total longer than 2𝑗)
members post 5m
18 20 18 19 2 78 40 0 stable 40 = 40,
stable
Table 2: shows Geometry and economic viability of Howe truss

data Geometry economic

viability
Members length = 2.5 m Members length = 3.889 m No. of Total
Sections W150*14 W150*22 W200*36 W250*80 W150*14 W150*22 W200*36 W250*80 gusset
plates
No. of 0 20 20 18 0 0 0 20 40 78
member
Cost 0 20*2.5*140 20*2.5*250 18*2.5*525 0 0 0 20*3.889 40*500 103959.5
(USD) *525
Wight 0 20*2.5*22 20*2.5*36 20*2.5*80 0 0 0 3.889 - 13122.4
(kg) *80*20

1. 5 Evaluation of Pratt truss

Table 3: shows Geometry and stability of Pratt truss

Geometry, Stability
No. of members No. of No. of External Internal
Top chord Bottom Diagonal Vertical joins Members (m + r =
members chord members members End Total longer than 2𝑗)
members post 5m
18 20 18 19 2 78 40 0 stable 40 = 40,
stable
Table 4: shows Geometry and economic viability of Pratt truss

data Geometry economic

viability
Members length = 2.5 m Members length = 3.889 m No. of Total
Sections W150*14 W150*22 W200*36 W250*80 W150*14 W150*22 W200*36 W250*80 gusset
plates
No. of 20 20 0 18 0 18 0 2 40 78
member
Cost 20*2.5*100 20*2.5*140 0 18*2.5*525 0 18*3.889 0 2*3.889 40*500 96459.5
(USD) *525 *525
Wight 20*2.5*14 20*2.5*22 0 20*2.5*80 0 18*22*3.889 0 3.889 - 7962.284
(kg) *80*2

5
1.6 Aesthetic appeal between Pratt and Howe truss
Pratt Truss: Known for its V-shaped diagonal members sloping downwards, offering an open and
airy appearance with asymmetry. Often associated with 19th and early 20th-century industrial
engineering, suitable for applications where visual transparency is valued.
Howe Truss: Features diagonal members sloping upwards, creating an inverted V-shaped
pattern, providing a solid and symmetrical appearance. Associated with mid-19th-century
engineering, ideal for structures where a robust and substantial aesthetic is desired, offering
historical authenticity.

1.7 Justification of optimum design

Pratt truss will be selected for the design because more economic and less weight compared to Howe
truss as shown on the table 2 and 3, total cost of Pratt truss were 96459.5 USD with 7962.284 kg, while
on the Howe truss were 103959.5 USD and 13122.4 kg. Which is be very important element in
construction process.

1.8 Description of bracing system

 Longitudinal bracing is one type of bracing system which provides resistance against lateral
forces that act parallel to the length of the truss. These forces can cause the truss to deform,
potentially compromising its stability and structural integrity. By adding longitudinal bracing, the
truss becomes more rigid and better able to withstand these forces.
 Longitudinal bracing is typically installed along the top and/or bottom chords of the truss,
running parallel to the span. The bracing members are positioned at regular intervals along the
length of the truss to provide uniform support and prevent buckling or deformation.
 The material used for longitudinal bracing is typically the same as that used for the main truss
members, such as steel or timber, to ensure compatibility and uniformity in strength and
stiffness.

Types of Longitudinal Bracing:

X-Bracing: Diagonal bracing members forming X-shaped patterns along the length of the truss, typically
installed between adjacent vertical posts or between the top and bottom chords.

K-Bracing: Similar to X-bracing but forming K-shaped patterns, providing additional stability and
resistance against lateral forces.

Portal Bracing: Vertical members installed at the ends of the truss to form portal frames, which resist
lateral forces by transferring them to the foundation or adjacent structures.

6
1.9 Discussion on design challenges
Incorporating measures to address the challenges posed by climate change, such as scouring
and differential settlement, into the conceptual design is crucial for ensuring the longevity and
stability of infrastructure. Here are some ways these challenges can be addressed within the
conceptual design:

Scouring Prevention:

Use erosion-resistant materials like riprap or gabions around bridge supports.

Build deeper foundations or install scour monitoring systems to detect erosion early.

Differential Settlement Mitigation:

Choose foundation designs that distribute weight evenly. Improve soil stability with compaction or
stabilization techniques.

Climate Resilient Materials and Practices:

Select durable materials and eco-friendly construction methods. Incorporate green infrastructure for
storm water management.

Continual Monitoring and Maintenance:

Implement regular inspections and use remote sensing technology.

Act promptly on maintenance needs to prevent climate-related damage.

By following these strategies, infrastructure projects can better withstand the effects of climate change,
ensuring long-term reliability and safety.

7
2. Detailed design of truss:

2.1. Design loads

LOAD ANALYSIS

Span of brigade truss = 50 m

Spacing of the truss = 3.0m

Nodal spacing of the trusses = 2.5 m

P/x = P/(X+1.45)

Permanent (dead) Loads

Permanent load (GK) = 14 KN/m × 2.5m = 35 KN

35 /x = 35/(X+1.45), X = 0.775 m

R= Nodal permanent load on truss (GK) = 35 KN

8
 Variable (Imposed) Load

Imposed load on Beam (Qk) = 29 KN/m

R = the nodal variable load (QK) = 29 KN/m × 2.5 m = 72.5 KN

72.5 /x = 72.5/(X+1.45), X = 0.775 m

Wind Load

Wind load on truss beam = 7 KN/m , Vertical component pev = qe cos 𝜃 = 7 x cos 0 = 7 KN/m acting
upwards ↑

Therefore R = the nodal wind load (WK) = 7 KN/m x 2.5 = 17.5 KN, 17.5 /x = 17.5 /(X+1.45), X = 0.775 m

9
2.2 Computational modelling
1) Go to truss category and start drawing defined truss with point and connecting members by using pen
tool

2) Go to support section and place pin and roller support at node 1 and last node

3) Add section properties in member as defined in selected drawing and then add load at nodes

10
2.3 Analysis results

Result of Permanent (dead) Loads applied on truss

11
4. Load cases

12
Result of Variable (Imposed) Loads applied on truss

13
14
Result of Wind load Loads applied on truss

15
16
2.4 Load cases

STRUCTURAL DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS

Fy (Yeild strength) = 275 N/mm²

Fu (ultimate tensile strength = 430 N/mm²)

Dead Load = 35 KN

Live load = 72.5 KN

Wind load = 17.5 KN

3.1 Design of the bottom chord (considering maximum effects)

Load case 1: 1.35*Dead Load + 1.5*Live load

Ned =1.35*(35) + 1.5*(72.5) = 156KN (TENSILE)

Load case 2: 1.35*Dead load + 1.5*Live load + 0.9*Wind load (uplift only)

NEA =1.35*(35) + 1.5*(72.5) - 0.9*(17.5) = 140.25 (TENSILE)

Load case 3: 1.0*Dead load + 1.5*Wind load (uplift only)

Ned = 1.0*(35) - 1.5*(17.5) = - 26.25 KN (COMPRESSIVE)

So, all bottom chord members should be able to resist an axial tensile load of 156KN and a possible
reversal of stresses with a compressive load of - 26.25 KN

17
2.5 Compression resistance

Thickness of section of top chord (W250 X 80) ,t = 9.40 mm. Since t < 16mm, Design yield strength Fy =
275 N/mm², h = 256 mm, A = 10200 mm^2

Section classification

235 ℎ 256
ε = √275 = 0.9244, = = 27.23404
𝑡 9.40

Referring to Table 5.2 (sheet 3) of Eurocode 3, Part 1-1, for class 3 classification, h/t≤158 and (h+b)/2t ≤
11.58* ε

(h/t ) 27.23404 >15 x 0.9244 (= 13.866) ok

( (h +b)/2t) 27.23404 > 10.93(11.58× 0.92) not OK

Thus, the section satisfies one of the conditions.

Section resistance

NC.Rd = AF y / Ymo = 10200*275 / 1 = 2805000 N = 2805 kN

NEd 26.25
= = 0.009358 < 1 Therefore section is ok for uniform compression
NC.Rd 2805

2.6 Buckling resistance

Buckling resistance of member in (clause 5.5 ENV 1993-1-1:1992)

For pin end Ler = 2500 mm

λ₁ = 93.9ε = 93.9 × 0.9244 = 86.800

Slenderness ratio = 2500 / 111 *86.800 = 0.259

For pinned column (k = 1), with no intermediate restraints: Ley = LE

18
2.7 Deflection check
Buckling curve b according to Table 6.2 of Eurocode 3

∅ = 0.5 [1 + 0.34(0.259 =0.2) + 0.259^2] = 0.577571

1
𝑥𝑧 = = 1.17 >1
0.577571+√0.5775712 −0.259
it.

4. CHECK FOR DEFLECTION

Employing W250 X 80 in all members of the truss; the deflection due to factored imposed load (Table
4.1 ENV 1993-1-1:1992) = L/250 = 5000/250 = 20 mm

1.028mm < 20 mm. Therefore deflection is ok

19