Structural Robustness of Steel Framed Buildings

Structural
robuStneSS of Steel
framed buildingS
Structural
robuStneSS of Steel
framed buildingS
iii
A G J WayMEngCEngMICE
Structural
robuStneSS of Steel
framed buildingS
In accordance with Eurocodes and UK National Annexes
SCI PublICatIon P391
iv
2011 SCI. All rights reserved.
Publication Number: SCI P391
ISBN: 978-1-85942-198-7
Published by:
SCI, Silwood Park, Ascot,
Berkshire. SL5 7QN UK
T: +44 (0)1344 636525
F:

+44 (0)1344 636570
E: reception@steel-sci.com
www.steelsci.com
To report any errors, contact:
publications@steel-sci.com
SCI (The Steel Construction Institute) is the leading, independent provider of technical expertise
and disseminator of best practice to the steel construction sector. We work in partnership with
clients, members and industry peers to help build businesses and provide competitive advantage
through the commercial application of our knowledge. We are committed to offering and promoting
sustainable and environmentally responsible solutions.
Our service spans the following five areas:
Membership
Individual & corporate membership
Advice
Members advisory service
Information
Publications
Education
Events & training
Consultancy
Development
Product development
Engineering support
Sustainability
Assessment
SCI Assessment
Specification
Websites
Engineering software
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of
research or private study or criticism or review,
as permitted under the Copyright Designs and
Patents Act, 1988, this publication may not be
reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form
or by any means, without the prior permission
in writing of the publishers, or in the case of
reprographic reproduction only in accordance
with the terms of the licences issued by the UK
Copyright Licensing Agency, or in accordance
with the terms of licences issued by the
appropriate Reproduction Rights Organisation
outside the UK. Enquiries concerning
reproduction outside the terms stated here
should be sent to the publishers, SCI.
Although care has been taken to ensure, to
the best of our knowledge, that all data and
information contained herein are accurate to
the extent that they relate to either matters of
fact or accepted practice or matters of opinion
at the time of publication, SCI, the authors and
the reviewers assume no responsibility for any
errors in or misinterpretations of such data and/or
information or any loss or damage arising from or
related to their use.
Publications supplied to the members of the
Institute at a discount are not for resale by them.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
A catalogue record for this book is available from
the British Library.
The text paper in this publication is totally
chlorine free. The paper manufacturer and
the printers have been independently certified
in accordance with the rules of the Forest
Stewardship Council.
v
IntheUK,thedesignofhot-rolledsteel-framedbuildingsforavoidanceofdisproportionate
collapseandrobustnesshas,since1990,generallybeeninaccordancewiththeBritish
StandardBS5950-1.However,thatStandardwaswithdrawninMarch2010andreplaced
bythecorrespondingPartsoftheEurocodes.ThemainEurocodePartthatwillneedto
beconsultedfordesigntoresistaccidentalactionsandstrategiestoachievestructural
robustnessisBSEN1991-1-7anditsNationalAnnex.
Thisguidewaspreparedtodescribethedesignofhot-rolledsteelbuildingsforstructural
robustnessinaccordancewiththeEurocodes.ItsscopeissimilartothatofSCIpublication
P341,Guidance on meeting the Robustness Requirements in Approved Document A,
whichfocussedontheUKRegulationsandofferedguidanceinrelationtoBS5950-1.
Thispublicationdoesnotspecifcallydealwithaccidentalactionscausedbyexternal
explosions,warfareandterroristactivities,ortheresidualstabilityofbuildingsorother
civilengineeringworksdamagedbyseismicactionorfre.
ThispublicationwaspreparedbyAndrewWayofSCI.Theauthorwouldliketothank
thefollowingindividualsfortheircontributionsandthecommentsreceivedduringthe
preparationofthisguide:
StuartAlexander WSPGroup
MikeBanf Arup
JohnCarpenter SCOSS
RogerDavies Gifford
ChrisDolling BCSA
GeoffHarding FormerlyofCLG
AllanMann JacobsEngineeringGroupInc
DavidMoore BCSA
RogerPope Consultant
WalterSwann BCSA
ThepreparationofthisguidewasfundedbyBCSAandTataSteel;theirsupportis
gratefullyacknowledged.
foreword
vii
contentS
Foreword v
Contents vii
summary ix
IntroduCtIon 11
1.1 Scope 11
1.2 Eurocodes 11
1.3 Robustness 12
BuIldIng regulatIons 15
2.1 The Requirement 15
2.2 Guidance documents 15
2.3 Approved Document A 16
euroCode roBustness
requIrements 19
3.1 BS EN 1990 19
3.2 BS EN 199311 22
3.3 BS EN 199117 22
3.4 Robustness strategies 26
BuIldIng ClassIFICatIon 29
4.1 Consequences classes 29
4.2 Practical cases 29
4.3 Conversions, alterations and extensions 35
BuIldIngs In ConsequenCes
Class 1 37
5.1 Structural requirements 37
5.2 Minimum horizontal tying 37
5.3 Practical application of design rules 38
Class 2a 41
6.2 Horizontal ties 42
Class 2B 55
7.2 Horizontal ties 56
7.3 Vertical ties 56
7.4 Vertical bracing 57
7.5 Anchorage of heavy floor units 58
7.6 Notional removal design strategy 59
7.7 Key element design 63
Class 3 79
8.2 Risk assessment 80
transFer Beams 91
9.1 General 91
9.2 Class 1 buildings 91
9.3 Class 2a buildings 92
9.4 Class 2b buildings 92
9.5 Class 3 buildings 93
summary oF roBustness
requIrements 95
reFerenCes 97
appendIx a 101
ix
Thispublicationprovidesdesignguidanceforhot-rolledsteel-framedbuildingson
theEurocodestrategiesforstructuralrobustnessanddesigningfortheavoidanceof
disproportionatecollapseasrequiredbytheUKBuildingRegulations.
DesignguidanceinaccordancewiththeEurocodesispresentedforthefourbuilding
classesintheEurocodesandtheUKRegulations.Guidanceonrecommendedgood
practiceispresentedwheretheEurocodesdonotgiverequirementsorwheretheyare
notspecifcandareopentointerpretation.Thescopeofthispublicationislimitedto
applicationintheUKandreferenceismadetotheUKNationalAnnexesasappropriate.
Inadditiontothedesignguidance,sixworkedexamplesareincludedtodemonstrate
theapplicationofrobustnessstrategiestodifferentclassesofbuilding.Detailed
guidanceonthebuildingclassifcationprocessisalsopresented.
Summary
11
introduction
1.1 Scope
ThispublicationprovidesdesignguidanceontheEurocodeandUKBuildingRegulation
requirementsforprovidingrobustnessandtheavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapse
inhot-rolledsteelframedbuildings.Guidanceisprovidedonhowtherequirements
relatetocommonstructuralsolutions.Recommendedpracticeispresentedwherethe
Eurocodesdonotgiverequirementsorwheretherequirementsarenotspecifcorare
opentointerpretation.
ThemajorityoftherobustnessrelatedclausesaregiveninBSEN1991
[1]
andinparticular
Part1-7.However,referenceisalsomadetoBSEN1993
[2]
andBSEN1990
[3]
,asappropriate.
ThescopeofthispublicationislimitedtoapplicationintheUK.Referenceismadetothe
UKNationalAnnexesasappropriate.
Thispublicationdoesnotaddresstheotherlegalobligationsthatarerelatedtorobustness.
However,designersshouldbeawareofsuchobligationsandtheimplicationsfordesign.The
relevantreferencesinclude;BuildingAct
[4]
,HealthandSafetyatWorkAct
[5]
,Construction
(DesignandManagementRegulations)
[6]
andWorkplace(Health,SafetyandWelfare)
Regulations
[7]
.GuidanceontheseisprovidedinReference24.
1.2 Eurocodes
TherearetenEurocodes,whichtogetherprovideacomprehensivesetofStandards
coveringallaspectsofstructuraldesignusingthenormalconstructionmaterials.
ThetenEurocodesare:
BSEN1990-Eurocode:Basisofstructuraldesign;
BSEN1991-Eurocode1:Actionsonstructures;
BSEN1992-Eurocode2:Designofconcretestructures;
BSEN1993-Eurocode3:Designofsteelstructures;
BSEN1994-Eurocode4:Designofcompositesteelandconcretestructures;
BSEN1995-Eurocode5:Designoftimberstructures;
BSEN1996-Eurocode6:Designofmasonrystructures;
BSEN1997-Eurocode7:Geotechnicaldesign;
BSEN1998-Eurocode8:Designofstructuresforearthquakeresistance;
BSEN1999-Eurocode9:DesignofAluminiumStructures.
12
IntroduCtIon
EachEurocodeiscomprisedofanumberofParts,whicharepublishedasseparate
documents.ForageneralintroductiontotheEurocodesinrelationtothedesignof
steelbuildings,seeSCIpublicationP361
[8]
.
National Annexes
WithinthefulltextofaEurocode,nationalchoiceisallowedinthesettingofsome
factorsandinthechoiceofsomedesignmethods.Thechoicesaregenerallyreferred
toasNationallyDeterminedParameters(NDP)andthesearepublishedinaNational
Annex.EachpartoftheEurocodeshasaseparateNationalAnnex.
TheguidancegiveninaNationalAnnexappliestostructuresthataretobeconstructed
withinthatcountry.NationalAnnexesarelikelytodifferbetweencountrieswithin
Europe.TheNationalAnnexforthecountrywherethestructureistobeconstructed
shouldalwaysbeconsultedinthedesignofastructure.
Withinthispublication,thevaluesandchoicesrecommendedintheUKNational
Annexesareused.
1.3 Robustness
Thetermrobustnessisoftenusedgenericallytoinferpropertiessuchassturdiness,
strength,solidityanddurability.However,inEurocodes,robustnesshasaprecise
defnitionanditisinthecontextoftheEurocodedefnitionthatthetermrobustness
isusedinthispublication.RobustnessisdefnedinBSEN1991-1-7Actions on
structures. General actions. Accidental actions,asfollows:
Robustness is the ability of a structure to withstand events like fre, explosions,
impact or the consequences of human error, without being damaged to an extent
disproportionate to the original cause.
Fromthisdefnitionitcanbeconcludedthatastructuredesignedandconstructedtohave
robustnesswillnotsufferfromdisproportionatecollapse.Designforavoidanceofdispro-
portionatecollapseisarequirementofBuildingRegulationsintheUK(seeSection2).
AccidentaldesignsituationsaredefnedinBSEN1990,reproducedbelow;fromthisit
canbeseenthattheeventsreferredtointheBSEN1991-1-7defnitionofrobustness
areaccidentaldesignsituations.
Accidental design situations are design situations involving exceptional conditions of
the structure or its exposure, including fre, explosion, impact or local failure.
Inessence,theobjectiveistoensurethatbuildingsdonotsufferdisproportionate
collapseunderaccidentalloading.Largely,thisisassuredinsteelframedbuildingsby
designingconnectionsappropriately.
13
Thetermsdisproportionatecollapseandprogressivecollapseareoftenused
interchangeablybutitispossibletomakeadistinction.Progressivecollapseis
thespreadofstructuralcollapsefromtheinitialfailureofoneorafewlocalised
structuralelements.Ifprogressivecollapseoccursitdoesnotnecessarilyresult
indisproportionatecollapse.However,theRonanPointcollapseillustratesacase
whereprogressivecollapsedidresultindisproportionatecollapse(seeFigure1.1).
TheRonanPointcollapsewasthemotivationforintroducingdisproportionate
collapseregulationsintheUKandiswelldocumented;forfurtherinformationsee
References9and10.
Figure 1.1
Ronan Point 1968
- Partial collapse of
a concrete structure
due to a gas explosion
15
building
regulationS
2.1 The Requirement
IntheUK,therearethreedifferentsetsofBuildingRegulations,oneforeachofthe
followingjurisdictions:
1. EnglandandWales;
2. Scotland;
3. NorthernIreland.
Althoughthewordingvariesslightly,theRequirementconcerningdisproportionate
collapseisessentiallythesameinallthreejurisdictions.
RequirementA3fromPartAoftheEnglandandWalesBuildingRegulations
[11]
isgivenbelow.
The building shall be constructed so that in the event of an accident the building
will not suffer collapse to an extent disproportionate to the cause.
Thephrasein the event of an accidentfromtherequirementgivenabove,ties
upneatlywiththephraseconsequences of human errorfromthedefnitionof
robustnessgiveninBSEN1991-1-7.Bothofthesephraseshelptoemphasizethatwe
arenotdealingwithdeliberateactsintendedtocausedamageorcollapse.However,
allbuildingsshouldberobustandtheengineerhasaresponsibilitytoconsiderall
loadsincludingthoseduetomaliciousaction.Inmostcases,maliciousactshavea
verylowriskofoccurrenceandcanreasonablybediscounted.However,theremightbe
occasionswheretheirconsiderationiswarranted.Thismatterwillbepartoftheoverall
considerationofhazardandriskandshouldbediscussedwiththeclient.
Atthetimeofwriting,theavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapserequirementunder
theBuildingRegulationsisapplicableasfollows:
1. InEnglandandWales-Applicabletoallbuildings.
2. InScotland-Applicabletoallbuildings.
3. InNorthernIreland-Applicabletoallbuildingswithfveormorestoreys.
2.2 Guidance documents
Ineachofthethreejurisdictionslistedabove,offcialguidancedocumentsarepublished
toexplainhowcompliancewiththeregulatoryrequirementsmaybeachieved.
16
buIldIng regulatIonS
InEnglandandWales,theguidancedocumentsaretermedApprovedDocuments
andthereisoneforeachpartoftheRegulations.ApprovedDocumentA
[12]
includes
guidanceonhowthekeyrobustnessrequirementA3shouldbeappliedtodifferent
typesandsizesofbuilding.
InScotland,guidanceonsatisfyingtheregulationsisgiveninTheScottishBuilding
StandardsAgency(SBSA)TechnicalHandbooks
[13]
.
InNorthernIreland,guidanceonsatisfyingtheregulationsisgiveninTheBuilding
Regulations(NorthernIreland),TechnicalBookletD
[14]
.
Induecourse,theseoffcialguidancedocumentswillbeupdatedtoreference
theEurocodes,whereguidanceondesigningsteelframedstructurestoavoid
disproportionatecollapseisgiven(seeSection3).
2.3 Approved DocumentA
2.3.1 Building classes
ApprovedDocumentA(2004Edition)
[12]
setsoutdifferentrequiredlevelsofrobustness
fordifferenttypesandsizesofbuildings.Therearefourclassesofbuilding;Class1,
Class2A,Class2BandClass3.ThebuildingclassifcationpresentedinApproved
DocumentAisthesameasthatpresentedintheSBSATechnicalHandbooks
[13]
andthereisonlyasmalldifferencefromthatpresentedinBSEN1991-1-7.The
classifcationofbuildingsisdescribedindetailinSection4.
TherobustnessrequirementsspecifedinApprovedDocumentAforeachclassof
buildingaresummarisedbelow.Detailedguidanceandexplanationsofthestructural
provisionsthatshouldbeprovidedforeachofthebuildingclassesaregivenin
Sections5,6,7and8.
For Class1 buildings
Providedthatthebuildinghasbeendesignedandconstructedinaccordancewiththe
rulesgiveninApprovedDocumentAfornormaluse,noadditionalmeasuresarelikely
tobenecessary.
For Class2A buildings
Effectivehorizontaltiesshouldbeprovidedforframedconstruction.
For Class2B buildings:
Therearethreemethodsbywhichtherobustnessrequirementsmaybesatisfedfor
Class2Bbuildings.
1. Provideeffectivehorizontalties,togetherwitheffectiveverticaltiesinall
supportingcolumns.
2. Checkthatuponthenotionalremovalofasupportingcolumnorabeam
supportingoneormorecolumns(oneatatimeineachstoreyofthebuilding)
17
thatthebuildingremainsstableandthattheareaoffooratanystoreyatriskof
collapsedoesnotexceed15%ofthefoorareaofthatstoreyor70m
2
,whichever
issmaller,anddoesnotextendfurtherthantheimmediateadjacentstoreys.(Note:
Thelimitis100m
2
inBSEN1991-1-7anditisexpectedthatatitsnextrevision
thelimitinApprovedDocumentAwillberevisedtoagreewithBSEN1991-1-7.)
3. Wherethenotionalremovalofsuchcolumns(orbeamssupportingoneormore
columns)wouldresultindamageinexcessoftheabovelimit,thensuchelements
shouldbedesignedaskeyelements.
Note:Atthetimeofwriting,thereisongoingdebateaboutwhetherApproved
DocumentAshouldbeamendedsuchthattheprovisionofhorizontaltiesis
recommendedinallcasesofClass2Bbuildingsirrespectiveofwhichmethodis
adoptedtosatisfytherobustnessrequirements.Reference24makesthepointthat
thenotionalremovalandkeyelementmethodsareprincipallyconcernedwithvertical
structureorelementssupportingverticalstructure.Therefore,whenapplyingthe
notionalremovalorkeyelementmethods,thedesignermuststillensurethatthe
structureisrobustinorthogonalhorizontaldirections,whichisgenerallyachievedby
providinghorizontalties.
For Class 3 buildings
Asystematicriskassessmentofthebuildingshouldbeundertaken,takinginto
accountallthenormalhazardsthatcanreasonablybeforeseen,togetherwithany
abnormalhazards.Criticalsituationsfordesignshouldbeselectedthatrefectthe
conditionsthatcanreasonablybeforeseenaspossibleduringthelifeofthebuilding.
2.3.2 Eurocodes and Approved DocumentA
ApprovedDocumentApermitsanymethodofdesigntobeused,providingitsatisfes
thefunctionalrequirementsoftheBuildingRegulations.
Thecurrent2004versionofApprovedDocumentAreferstonationaldesignstandards,
i.e.BS5950,forthedesignofsteelframedbuildingsanddoesnotrefertoEurocodes.
ApprovedDocumentAisscheduledforrevisionin2013,atwhichpointitwillinclude
referencetotheEurocodes.
InJanuary2010,CLG(DepartmentofCommunitiesandLocalGovernment)issueda
circularletterthatconfrmedthesuitabilityoftheEurocodestomeettherequirements
oftheBuildingRegulations.
Thefollowingsectionsofthispublicationexplainhowsteelframedbuildingscanbe
designedforstructuralrobustnessinaccordancewiththeEurocodes.Whereitis
deemedappropriate,additionalstructuralprovisionshavebeenrecommended.
19
3.1 BSEN 1990
BSEN1990canbeconsideredasthecoredocumentofthestructuralEurocode
system,asitestablishestheprinciplesandrequirementsforthesafety,serviceabilityand
durabilityofstructures.Italsodescribesthebasisforstructuraldesignandverifcation.
ThemainsectionsofBSEN1990include:
Requirements.
Principlesoflimitstatedesign.
Basicvariables.
Structuralanalysisanddesignassistedbytesting.
Verifcationbythepartialsafetyfactormethod.
3.1.1 Basic requirements
BSEN1990,2.1(1)Pand(2)Psetsoutseveralbasicrequirementsforthedesignof
structures,including:thestructureshallsustain all actions and infuences likely to
occur during execution and use;thestructureshallbe designed to have adequate
structural resistance, serviceability and durability.
TheprinciplegiveninBSEN1990,2.1(4)Phasparticularrelevancetostructural
robustness;itstatesthat:
A structure shall be designed and executed in such a way that it will not be
damaged by events such as: explosion, impact, and the consequences of
human errors, to an extent disproportionate to the original cause.
Note 1 - The events to be taken into account are those agreed for an individual
project with the client and the relevant authority.
Note 2 - Further information is given in EN 1991-1-7.
ThewordinginBSEN1990,2.1(4)Pisverysimilartothedefnitionofrobustness
giveninBSEN1991-1-7.Inessence,theprinciplesetsouttheoverridingrequirement
toprovideabuildingthatisdesignedandexecutedtohaverobustness.
eurocode
robuStneSS
requirementS
20
euroCode requIrementS
TheprinciplegiveninBSEN1990,2.1(5)Palsohasparticularrelevancetostructural
robustnessandstatesthat:
Potential damage shall be avoided or limited by appropriate choice of one or more
of the following:
avoiding, eliminating or reducing the hazards to which the structure
can be subjected;
selecting a structural form which has low sensitivity to the hazards considered;
selecting a structural form and design that can survive adequately the
accidental removal of an individual member or a limited part of the structure,
or the occurrence of acceptable localised damage;
avoiding as far as possible structural systems that can collapse
without warning;
tying the structural members together.
Thesemethodsarestructuralphilosophiesratherthandetaileddesignguidance.
DetailedguidanceisprovidedinBSEN1991-1-7.
3.1.2 Design situations
ThedesignsituationsthatshouldbeconsideredaregiveninBSEN1990,3.2.
Theconsiderationofaccidentalactionsasaseparatedesignsituationisshownin
BSEN1990,3.2(2)P,whichgivesthefollowingdesignsituations:
Persistent duringnormaluseofthestructure.
Transient temporaryconditionse.g.duringexecutionorrepair.
Accidental exceptionaleventse.g.exposuretofre,impact,explosionor
consequencesoflocalisedfailure.
Seismic conditionsduetoseismicevents.
Informationonspecifcdesignsituationswithineachoftheseclassesisgivenin
theotherPartsoftheEurocodes.Structuralrobustnessisconsideredaspartofthe
Accidentaldesignsituation.
FromBSEN1990,3.2(1)Pand(3)P,itisclearthatallrelevantdesignsituations
shouldbeselectedandtheseshouldbesuffcientlyseveretoincludeallreasonably
foreseeableconditionsduringtheintendeduseofthestructure.Therefore,accidental
designsituationsshouldbeconsideredforallbuildingsdesignedinaccordancewith
theEurocodes.
3.1.3 Ultimate limit states
BSEN1990givesdetailsoftheultimatelimitstatesthatmustbeverifedandhow
designvaluesoftheeffectsoftheactionsshouldbecombined.Detailedexplanationof
thelimitstatesandloadcombinationsforgeneralapplicationtosteelbuildingdesign
isgiveninSCIpublicationP362
[15]
.
21
FromBSEN1990,6.4.3.3,Eq.(6.11b)andTableNA.A1.3oftheUKNationalAnnex,
thecombinationofactionsforaccidentaldesignsituationscanbeexpressedas:
G A Q Q
j
j
i i
i
k,
1
d 1, k,1 2, k,
1

+ + + " " " " " "
1
where:
+ impliestobecombinedwith
impliesthecombinedeffectof
G
k,j
arethecharacteristicvaluesofthepermanentactions
A
d
isthedesignvalueofanaccidentalaction
Q
k,1
isthecharacteristicvalueoftheleadingvariableactions
Q
k,i
arethecharacteristicvaluesoftheothervariableactions
y
1,1
isthefactorforthefrequentvalueoftheleadingvariableaction Q
k,1
(seeTable3.1)
y
2,i
isthefactorforthequasi-permanentvalueofthei-thvariableactionQ
k,i
(seeTable3.1).
Thevaluesfory
1
andy
2
factorsforbuildingsaregiveninTable3.1.Thevalues
presentedaretakenfromTableNA.A1.1oftheUKNationalAnnextoBSEN1990.
Theaccidentalcombinationofactionsisusedwhenverifyingtherobustnessof
astructure,particularlywiththenotionalremovalandkeyelementmethods.The
yfactorsareusedinthecalculationoftherequiredtyingresistanceofconnectionsfor
effectivehorizontalties,seeSection6.2.Theapplicationofthecombinationofactions
fortheaccidentaldesignsituationisexplainedinSection7.
Table 3.1
Values of y
1
and y
2

factors for buildings
(from the UK NA to
BS EN 1990)
aCtIon y
1
y
2
Imposed loads in buildings (see bS en 199111)
Category A: domestic, residential areas 0.5 0.3
Category B: office areas 0.5 0.3
Category C: congregation areas 0.7 0.6
Category D: shopping areas 0.7 0.6
Category E: storage areas 0.9 0.8
Category H: roofs* 0 0
Snow loads on buildings (see en 19913)
For sites located at altitude H > 1000 m a.s.l. 0.5 0.2
For sites located at altitude H 1000 m a.s.l. 0.2 0
Wind loads on buildings (see en 199114) 0.2 0
temperature (nonfire) in buildings (see en 199115) 0.2 0
*Onroofs,imposedloadsshouldnotbecombinedwitheitherwindloadsorsnowloads.
22
3.2 BSEN 1993-1-1
BSEN1993istheEurocodefordesignofsteelstructures:BSEN1993-1-1givesgeneric
designrulesforsteelstructuresandspecifcguidanceforstructuralsteelworkusedin
buildings.BSEN1993-1-1givesnospecifcguidanceforthedesignofsteelbuildings
forstructuralrobustness.AlthoughBSEN1993-1-1,2.1.3isentitledDesignworking
life,durabilityandrobustnessandstatesthatsteelstructuresshallbedesignedfor
accidentalactions,itsimplyrefersthereadertoBSEN1991-1-7
[1]
.
Theabsenceofdirectusefulguidancecontrastswiththemoredetailedprovisionsin
BS5950-1.Eurocodesaregenerallylessspecifcandgivegeneralprinciples.
3.3 BSEN 1991-1-7
Therequirementtodesignandconstructbuildingstohaverobustnessandavoid
disproportionatecollapseunderaccidentaldesignsituationsisestablishedfrom
BSEN1990(asdescribedinSection3.1).Detailsofhowtherequirementshouldbemet
aregiveninBSEN1991-1-7.
3.3.1 Scope
BSEN1991-1-7providesstrategiesandrulesforsafeguardingbuildingsandothercivil
engineeringworksagainstaccidentalactions.However,thescopeofthispublicationis
limitedtobuildings.
Localisedfailureduetoaccidentalactionscanbeacceptableprovidedthat:itwillnot
endangerthestabilityofthewholestructure;theoverallload-bearingresistanceofthe
structureismaintained;thenecessaryemergencymeasuresareabletohappen.
Theminimumperiodthatmostbuildingsneedtosurvivefollowinganaccidentshould
bethatperiodneededtofacilitatethesafeevacuationandrescueofpersonnelfromthe
buildinganditssurroundings(i.e.theemergencymeasures).Longerperiodsofsurvival
mightberequiredforbuildingsusedforhandlinghazardousmaterials,provisionof
essentialservices,orfornationalsecurityreasons.
BSEN1991-1-7doesnotspecifcallydealwithaccidentalactionscausedbyexternal
explosionsandterroristactivities,ortheresidualstabilityofbuildingsorothercivil
engineeringworksdamagedbyseismicactionorfre.
Ifbuildingsarerequiredtobedesignedtoresistexternalexplosions,warfareactivitiesor
terroristactivitiestheseareadditionaldesignrequirementsoutsidethescopeof
BSEN1991-1-7andofthispublication.SCIPublicationP244
[16]
Protection of buildings
against explosionsprovidesgeneralguidanceontheprotectionofcommercialpropertyand
personnelfromtheeffectsofexplosionscausedbythedetonationofhighexplosives.
Part1ofBSEN1998
[17]
Design of structures for earthquake resistanceprovidesgeneral
rulesonseismicactionsandrulesforbuildings.BSEN1993-1-2
[18]
Eurocode 3, Design
23
of steel structures, General rules, Structural fre designprovidesgeneralrulesfor
structuralfredesignofsteelbuildings.
3.3.2 Design strategies
Twogenerictypesofstrategyfordesigningstructuresforaccidentalactionsare
providedinBSEN1991-1-7:
a. Strategiesbasedonidentifedaccidentalactions.
b. Strategiesbasedonunidentifedaccidentalactions.
ThesestrategiesareillustratedinFigure3.1ofBSEN1991-1-7,reproducedhere
inFigure3.1.
BSEN1991-1-7,3.2and3.3outlinethestrategiesforidentifedaccidentalactions
andforlimitingtheextentoflocalisedfailure,respectively.
Strategiesbasedonunidentifedaccidentalactionscoverawiderangeofpossible
eventsandarerelatedtostrategiesbasedonlimitingtheextentoflocalisedfailure.
Theadoptionofstrategiesforlimitingtheextentoflocalisedfailuremightprovide
adequaterobustnessagainstthoseaccidentalactionsnotspecifcallycoveredby
BSEN1991-1-7suchasexternalexplosionsandterroristactivities,oranyotheraction
resultingfromanunspecifedcause.However,theadequacyoftherobustnesswillbe
greatlydependantontheaccidentalactionthatisexperienced.
Strategiesbasedonidentifedaccidentalactionsarenaturallymorespecifc.However,
dependingontheexactnatureofthestrategy,thestructuremightalsopossess
adequaterobustnessagainstsomeunidentifedactions.
Forthemajorityofsteelframedbuildings,thepotentialaccidentalactionswillremain
unidentifedandthereforetheapproachoflimitingtheextentoflocalisedfailureis
likelytobethegeneralstrategyadopted.
Figure 3.1
Strategies for
accidental design
situations
Accidental Design Situations
robustness accidental
action
Strategies based on identifed
accidental actions
Strategies based on limiting
extent of localised failure
Design for
sufcient
minimum
Prevent or
reduce
action
Design to
sustain
action
Enhanced
redundancy
Design to
resist
notional
Prescriptive
rules e.g.
tying
24
Strategies for identifed accidental actions
ThestrategyforidentifedaccidentalactionsissetoutinBSEN1991-1-7,3.2.The
mainfeaturesare:
A localised failure due to accidental actions may be acceptable, provided it will
not endanger the stability of the whole structure and that the overall load-bearing
capacity of the structure is maintained and allows the necessary emergency
measures to be taken.
Measures should be taken to mitigate the risk of accidental actions and
these measures should include, as appropriate, one or more of the
following strategies:
preventing the action from occurring
protecting the structure against the effects of the accidental action
ensuring that the structure has suffcient robustness, by adopting one or more
of the following approaches:
by designing certain components of the structure upon which stability
depends as key elements
designing structural members, and selecting materials, to have suffcient
ductility, capable of absorbing signifcant strain energy without rupture.
incorporating suffcient redundancy in the structure to facilitate the
transfer of actions to alternative load paths following an accidental event.
Strategies for limiting the extent of localised failure
Whereaccidentalactionsareunidentifed,strategiesforlimitingtheextentoflocalised
failuremaybeapplied.BSEN1991-1-7,3.3(1)Psetsoutthefollowingprinciple:
In the design, the potential failure of the structure arising from an unspecifed
cause shall be mitigated.
The mitigation should be reached by adopting one or more of the following
approaches:
Designing key elements, on which the stability of the structure depends, to
sustain the effects of a model of accidental action Ad;
Designing the structure so that in the event of a localised failure
(e.g. failure of a single member) the stability of the whole structure or
of a signifcant part of it would not be endangered;
Applying prescriptive design/detailing rules that provide acceptable robustness
for the structure (e.g. three dimensional tying for
additional integrity, or a minimum level of ductility of structural
members subject to impact).
ExamplesrelatingtotheuseoftheapproachesforbuildingsaregiveninAnnexAof
BSEN1991-1-7(seeSection3.3.3).
25
Consequences classes
BSEN1991-1-7,3.4permitsthestrategiesforaccidentaldesignsituationstobe
basedonconsequencesclassessetoutinBSEN1990.Theguidancegivenis
summarisedinTable3.2.
TheclassifcationofbuildingsisdescribedindetailinSection4.
Table 3.2
Consequences class
design strategies
3.3.3 AnnexA
AnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7presentsmoredetailedguidancethanthatgivenin
Section3ofBSEN1991-1-7.AnnexAisaninformativeannexratherthannormative
meaningthatitisforinformationandtheguidancedoesnothavetobefollowed.
However,theUKNationalAnnexdecisiononthestatusoftheinformativeAnnexAisto
recommendtheapplicationofAnnexAbystatingthat:
Guidance in Annex A of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006 should be used in the absence
of specifc requirements in BS EN 1992-1-1 to BS EN 1996-1-1 and
BS EN 1999-1-1 and their National Annexes.
TherearenospecifcrequirementsgiveninBSEN1993-1-1.Therefore,itis
recommendedthattheguidanceinAnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7shouldbefollowedfor
steelframedbuildings.
CompliancewithBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexAcanbeusedtodemonstratecompliance
withtherequirementtoensuretheavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapseintheUK
BuildingRegulations.
ThescopeofBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexAistogiverulesandmethodsfordesigning
buildingstosustainanextentoflocalisedfailurefromanunspecifedcausewithout
disproportionatecollapse.Whileotherapproachesmightbeequallyvalid,adoptionof
theAnnexAstrategyislikelytoensurethatabuildingissuffcientlyrobusttosustaina
limitedextentofdamageorfailurewithoutexcessivecollapse.
ConSequenCeS
ClaSS
ConSIderatIonS for aCCIdental deSIgn SItuatIonS
CC1
No specific consideration is necessary for accidental actions except
to ensure that the robustness and stability rules given in EN 1990 to
EN 1999, as applicable, are met.
CC2
Depending upon the specific circumstances of the structure,
a simplified analysis by static equivalent action models may be
adopted or prescriptive design/detailing rules may be applied.
CC3
An examination of the specific case should be carried out to
determine the level of reliability and the depth of structural analyses
required. This might require a risk analysis to be carried out and the
use of refined methods such as dynamic analyses, non-linear models
and interaction between the load and the structure.
26
ThemaintopicsforwhichAnnexAprovidesguidanceare:
Consequencesclassesforbuildings.
Recommendedstrategies.
Effectivehorizontalties.
Effectiveverticalties.
Keyelements.
ExplanationandapplicationoftheguidanceofAnnexAtohot-rolledsteelframed
buildingsisprovidedinthefollowingSectionsofthispublication.
ItisimportanttounderstandthattherulesinAnnexAarebestconsideredas
prescriptiverulesintendedtostrikeabalancebetweencostandsafetyandwhich
experiencesuggestsproducestructuresthatgenerallyperformadequatelyinextreme
circumstances.Therulesarenotmeanttobefullydescribedsystemsofstructural
mechanics.Itisimportantthatdesignersarenotexcessivelytheoreticalabout
providingasolutiontorobustnessdesign.
3.4 Robustness strategies
Therecommendedstrategiestoprovideanacceptablelevelofrobustnessforeach
consequencesclassarepresentedinBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,A.4.Thestructural
requirementsareprogressivelymorestringentfromClass1throughtoClass3,which
refectstheincreaseinconsequencesifcollapseweretooccur.
AdoptionoftherecommendedstrategiesgiveninBSEN1991-1-7,A.4(1)isintended
toprovideabuildingwithanacceptablelevelofrobustnesstosustainlocalisedfailure
withoutadisproportionatelevelofcollapse.
Sections5to8ofthispublicationdescribethestructuralrequirementsofthe
BSEN1991-1-7recommendedrobustnessstrategiesforeachconsequencesclass.
Sections5to8alsoadviseofadditionalstructuralprovisionsthatcanbeapplied
togetherwiththerecommendationsofBSEN1991-1-7.
27
29
4.1 Consequences classes
TableA.1inAnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7providesamethodtocategorisebuildingsin
fourconsequencesclasses.Thebuildingcategorisationconsidersthebuildingtype,
occupancyandsize.
ThemethodofbuildingclassifcationgiveninAnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7isverysimilar
tothatgiveninApprovedDocumentAguidancefortheEnglandandWalesBuilding
Regulations,exceptthatAnnexAusesClasses2aand2bwhereasthenotation2Aand
2BisusedinApprovedDocumentA.
InBSEN1990andBSEN1991-1-7,3.4therearethreeconsequencesclasses.In
AnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7consequencesclass2hasbeensubdividedintoCC2a
(Lowerriskgroup)andCC2b(Upperriskgroup),creatingatotaloffourclasses.The
categorisationfromAnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7isshowninTable4.1.
Thebuildingclassifcationisasimplifcationofacomplexrisk-basedbuilding
classifcationsystem.Theclassesareonlypartlyrelatedtothebuildingsize,theother
mainfactoristhebuildingusewhichtakesaccountofsocio-economicfactors.Hence,
hospitalsandschools,forexample,generallyhaveahigherclassifcationthanother
buildingsofasimilarsize.Therisk-basedapproachcalculatesariskfactorforeach
typeofbuildingbasedonthefollowingvariables:
Thenumberofpeopleatrisk.
Thelocationofthestructureanditsheight.
Theperceptioninsocietyofdamagetothestructure.
Thetypeofloadandlikelihoodthattheloadwilloccuratthesametimeasalarge
numberofpeoplebeingpresentwithinornearthestructure.
Thestructuraltypeandnatureofthematerial.
FurtherinformationontheclassifcationprocessisprovidedinReference19.
4.2 Practical cases
Inpractice,manybuildingswillnotfallsimplyintooneofthedescriptionsgivenin
Table4.1.Therearemanyreasonswhythiscouldbethecase,forexamplemixeduse,
basementsandvaryingnumberofstoreys.
building
claSSification
30
buIldIng ClaSSIfICatIon
ConSequenCeS
ClaSS
buIldIng tyPe and oCCuPanCy
1
Low consequences
of failure
Single occupancy houses not exceeding 4 storeys.
Agricultural buildings.
Buildings into which people rarely go, provided no part of the
building is closer to another building, or area where people do go,
than a distance of 1.5 times the building height.
2a
(Lower risk group)
Medium
consequences of
failure
5 storey single occupancy houses.
Hotels not exceeding 4 storeys.
Flats, apartments and other residential buildings not exceeding
4 storeys.
Offices not exceeding 4 storeys.
Industrial buildings not exceeding 3 storeys.
Retailing premises not exceeding 3 storeys of less than 1000 m
2
floor
area in each storey.
Single storey educational buildings.
All buildings not exceeding two storeys to which the public are
admitted and which contain floor areas not exceeding 2000 m
2
at
each storey.
2b
(Upper risk group)
Medium
consequences of
failure
Hotels, flats, apartments and other residential buildings greater than
4 storeys but not exceeding 15 storeys.
Educational buildings greater than single storey but not exceeding
15 storeys.
Retailing premises greater than 3 storeys but not exceeding
15 storeys.
Hospitals not exceeding 3 storeys.
Offices greater than 4 storeys but not exceeding 15 storeys.
All buildings to which the public are admitted and which contain floor
areas exceeding 2000 m
2
but not exceeding 5000 m
2
at each storey.
Car parking not exceeding 6 storeys.
3
High consequences
of failure
All buildings defined above as Class 2 Lower and Upper
Consequences Class that exceed the limits on area and number
of storeys.
All buildings to which members of the public are admitted in
significant numbers.
Stadia accommodating more than 5000 spectators.
Buildings containing hazardous substances and /or processes.
Notes:
1. Forbuildingsintendedformorethanonetypeofuse,theconsequencesclassshouldbethatrelating
tothemostoneroustype.
2. Indeterminingthenumberofstoreys,basementstoreysmaybeexcluded,providedthatsuch
basementstoreysfulfltherequirementsofConsequencesClass2bUpperRiskGroup.
Table 4.1
Categorisation
of consequences
classes
AdditionalguidanceonclassifcationofbuildingshasbeenpublishedinReferences20,
21and24.TheadditionalguidancewasoriginallyproducedforusewithApproved
DocumentA,butsincetheclassifcationsysteminAnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7is
31
almostexactlythesameasinApprovedDocumentAtheadditionalguidanceisequally
applicableforusewithBSEN1991-1-7.
TheonlydifferencebetweenthebuildingclassifcationsysteminApprovedDocumentA
andinBSEN1991-1-7isthefoorarealimitforClass2aretailingpremises.In
ApprovedDocumentA,thedefnitionofClass2aretailingpremisesispremises
not exceeding 3 storeys of less than 2000 m
2
foor area in each storeywhereas
inBSEN1991-1-7thedefnitionispremises not exceeding 3 storeys of less than
1000 m
2
foor area in each storey.
GuidanceonbuildingclassifcationissuesisgiveninSections4.2.1to4.2.6.Itis
importantthatguidanceisnotfollowedwithoutalsojudgingeachcaseonitsmerits.
4.2.1 Mezzanine foors
TheclassifcationinAnnexAofBSEN1991-1-7requiresthenumberofstoreysinthe
buildingtobecounted;whetheramezzaninefoorshouldbecountedasastoreyor
notdependsonitssizeanditsuse.Eachsituationneedstobejudgedonitsmerits.
However,asanapproximateguide,amezzaninefoorshouldbeconsideredasa
storeyifitisgreaterthan20%ofthebuildingfootprint.Ifpersonnelarenotaccessing
themezzaninefoordailythenitmightbereasonabletoincreasethelimit.Guidance
onthedesignofmezzaninefoorsforlateralstabilityisprovidedinAdvisoryDesk
NoteAD267
[22]
.
4.2.2 Habitable roof spaces
Habitableareasofroofspaceshouldgenerallybecountedasastorey,irrespectiveof
theslopeoftheroof.Roofspacesinresidentialbuildingsthatareusedtohouseonly
plantandwatertanksneednotbeconsideredasastorey.
Forloftconversions,acasecanbedevelopedfornotcountingtheloftaccommodation
asanadditionalstoreyincircumstanceswhere:
Theoccupancyofthebuildinghasnotincreasedsignifcantly(e.g.wheretheloft
conversionprovidesadditionalspaceforthecurrentinhabitantsratherthanasa
self-containedapartment).
Theexistinglineoftheroofismaintained,exceptperhapsfortheadditionofdormer
windowsononeelevation.
Thesecircumstancesshouldbeconfrmedwiththebuildingcontrolauthority.
4.2.3 Buildings with a varying number of storeys
Buildingswithavaryingnumbersofstoreysthatfallintomorethanoneconsequences
classshouldbeclassifedasthemoreonerousclass.Therobustnessmeasuresfor
themoreonerousclassshouldcontinueuntilastructuraldiscontinuity(suchasa
movementjoint)isreached,providedthatthebuildingeithersideofthemovement
jointisstructurallyindependentandrobustinitsownright.
32
Example
Figure4.1showsablockoffatspartlyof4storeysandpartlyof5storeys.Class2b
robustnessstrategiesshouldbeappliedtothe5storeyareasandextendingtoa
suitablestructuraldiscontinuityinthe4storeyareaandClass2arobustnessstrategies
maybeappliedtotheremaining4storeyarea.
4.2.4 Mixed use buildings
Forbuildingsintendedformorethanonetypeofusetheclassshouldbethat
pertainingtothemostoneroustype.Wheredifferentoccupanciesareinhorizontally
adjacentpartsofthesamebuilding,thesameapproachtoconsequencesclassesmay
beadoptedasdescribedinSection4.2.3forbuildingswithvaryingnumbersofstoreys,
i.e.theconsequencesclassforthemoreonerousclassshouldcontinuehorizontally
untilastructuraldiscontinuity(suchasamovementjoint)isreached.
Thefollowingexamplesillustratetheclassifcationofmixedusebuildings.
Examples
Figure4.2shows2storeysoffatsover1storeyofretailingpremises.Thiscaseshould
beconsideredas3storeysofretailingpremises.Therefore,applyClass2arobustness
strategiestothewholebuilding,orapplyClass2brobustnessmeasurestothewhole
buildingiffoorareaofretailingpremisesis1000mormore(perstorey).
(Note:The1000m
2
limitusedhereistakenfromBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,the
equivalentlimitinApprovedDocumentAis2000m
2
.)
Figure 4.1
Classifcation of 4
and 5 storey fats
Figure 4.2
Classifcation of
2 storey fats over
1 storey retail
2a, or 2b if retail
premises > 1,000 m
Shop
Flats
Flats Flats
2b 2a
Movement joint
33
Figure4.3shows2storeysoffatsover2storeysofretailingpremises.Thiscase
shouldbetakenas4storeysofretailingpremises.Therefore,applyClass2b
robustnessstrategiestothewholebuilding.
Figure4.4shows4storeysoffatsadjacentto5storeysofoffces.Class2brobustness
strategiesshouldbeappliedtothe5storeyoffceareaandextendingtoasuitable
structuraldiscontinuityinthe4storeyresidentialareaandClass2arobustness
strategiesshouldbeappliedtotheremaining4storeyresidentialarea.
4.2.5 Buildings with basements
Toqualifyasabasementstoreyforthepurposeofbuildingclassifcation,theexternal
groundlevelshouldbeatleast1.2mabovethetopsurfaceofthebasementfoorfora
minimumof50%oftheplanareaofthebuilding(seeReference20).
Therobustnessstrategiesthatarerequiredtobeappliedtothepartofthebuilding
abovethebasementdependonthetotalnumberofstoreysandtherobustness
strategiesappliedtothebasementstorey.
Indeterminingthenumberofstoreysforclassifcation,basementstoreysmaybe
excludediftheyfulfltherobustnessrequirementsofClass2bbuildings.Otherwise,
thebasementstoreysmustbeincludedindeterminingthenumberofstoreysfor
buildingclassifcation.
Thebasementcanbeforhabitableaccommodationorparking.Thefollowingexamples
illustratetheappropriateclassifcationtobeapplied.
Shop
Flats
2b
Shop
Figure 4.3
Classifcation of
2 storey fats over
2 storey retail
Figure 4.4
Classifcation of
4 storey fats attached
to 5 storey offces
Ofces Flats
2b 2a
Movement joint
34
Examples
Figure4.5showsbuildingswithstoreysoffatsabovebasementsandtheclassof
robustnessstrategytobeapplied.
4.2.6 Ground foor storey
Indeterminingthenumberofstoreysforclassifcation,thegroundfoorstoreymay
generallybeexcludedifallthestructuralelementsofthegroundfoorstorey,and
theirconnections,aredesignedaskeyelements(seeReference20).Section7.7gives
guidanceonthedesignofkeyelements.
Whereusedforparking,thegroundfoorstoreymayonlybeexcluded(asdescribed
above)ifallofthefollowingconditionsapply:
i. Parkingisexclusivelyforusersofthebuilding.
ii. Thegroundfoorstoreymustnotbeaccessibletoorcontainarightofwayforthe
generalpublic.
iii. Allthestructuralelementsofthegroundfoorstorey,andtheirconnections,are
designedaskeyelements.
Thefollowingexamplesillustratetheappropriateclassifcationtobeapplied.
Examples
Figure4.6showsblocksoffatsandtheclassofrobustnessstrategytobeapplied
fromusingtheoptiontodesignthegroundfoorstoreymembersaskeyelements.
Figure 4.5
Classifcation of fats
over basements
4 storey over
basement
Flats Flats
5 storey over
basement
Flats
15 storey over
basement
Flats
16 storey over
basement
2b
2a 2b
2b
3
35
Figure4.7showsblocksoffatsaboveagroundfoorstoreyusedasacarparkandthe
consequencesclasstobeappliedforrobustnessfromusingtheoptiontodesignthe
groundfoorstoreymembersaskeyelements.Inthisexampleitisassumedthatthe
parkingisexclusivelyforusersofthebuildingandthatthegroundfoorstoreyisnotbe
accessibletoanddoesnotcontainarightofwayforthegeneralpublic.
Reference24providesadditionalguidanceontheclassifcationofbuildingswherea
mixofstructuralmaterialshasbeenused,particularlywhereagroundfoorpodium
hasbeenused.
4.3 Conversions, alterations and extensions
Buildingsthatundergoconversions,alterationsorextensions(oracombinationof
these)canhavechangedconsequencesclassasaresultofthework.Wherethe
workhascausedthebuildingtobecategorisedintoamoreonerousclass(e.g.due
toarooftopextension)thepotentialrequirementtoapplytherobustnessstrategy
appropriatetothemoreonerousclassthroughoutthebuildingmaybeeconomically
prohibitive.Thestructuralrequirementsinsuchcasesshouldbeclarifedandagreed
withthelocalbuildingcontrolbody.OnesolutionmightbetousetheCamdenRuling,
whichhasbeenusedinthepastintheUK
[23]
.TheCamdenRulingallowsthedesigner
toadoptasolutionthatdemonstratesthatanydamageoccurringwithinthestoreys
ofarooftopextensionwouldbecontainedbythefoorformingtheroofoftheoriginal
buildingi.e.theroofoftheoriginalbuildingcansupportthedebrisloadingofthe
rooftopextension.Ifthiscanbeachieved,thealterationappearsnottochangethe
risktotheoccupantsoftheoriginallowerfoors.However,theCamdenRulingmethod
isnotuniversallyacceptedandcanbeconsideredascontroversialbecauseadditional
storeyswillalmostcertainlyincreasetheriskonthelowerstoreys.Furtherdiscussion
onthemethodisgiveninReference24.
Figure 4.6
Classifcation
options for fats
Figure 4.7
Classifcation of
fats with ground
foor car park
Flats
2a
2a
Flats
Flats
Flats
Flats
Flats
Key
element
Key
element
2b 2b 2b
Flats
2a
Car park
Flats
Car park
Flats
Car park
Key
element
2b
2b
Key
element
2b
2a
Key
element
2b
37
5.1 Structural requirements
5.1.1 Robustness strategy
TherecommendedstrategyinBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,A.4forConsequencesClass1
buildingsstates:
Provided a building has been designed and constructed in accordance with the
rules given in EN 1990 to EN 1999 for satisfying stability in normal use, no
further specifc consideration is necessary with regard to accidental actions from
unidentifed causes.
Hence,forsteel-framedbuildingsdesignedinaccordancewiththerulesgiven
inBSEN1993noadditionalrulesneedtobeappliedforcompliancewith
BSEN1991-1-7fortheconsiderationofavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapse.
5.1.2 Additional structural provisions
Inadditiontoadoptingtheabovestrategy,itisrecommendedthataminimumlevel
ofhorizontaltyingisprovidedwithintheframe.Therecommendedminimumlevel
ofhorizontaltyingisthatallfoorbeam-to-columnconnectionsaredesignedtobe
capableofsustainingadesigntensileforceof75kN.
5.2 Minimum horizontal tying
5.2.1 Benefts of providing a minimum level of horizontal tying
Thepurposeofprovidingaminimumlevelofhorizontaltyingistoensurethatbeam-to-
columnconnectionsarenotimpairedbyrelativelysmallhorizontalorupwardactions
appliedtothebeamsthatcouldcausebeamstocollapseontofoorsbelow.
Ifonlygravityandhorizontalactionsweretobeconsidered,itwouldbetheoretically
possibletodesignbeam-to-columnconnectionswithinabracedframethatonlyhave
averticalshearresistance,e.g.abeamseatedonabearingblockweldedtoacolumn.
ThesetypesofconnectionarenotnormallyusedintheUK,sincethebeamcould
easilybedislodged.Itisgoodengineeringpractisetodetailallconnectionstohavea
minimumlevelofhorizontalresistance.
buildingS in
conSequenceS
claSS 1
38
ConSequenCeS ClaSS 1
5.2.2 Design rules
Foraminimumlevelofhorizontaltyingthefollowingdesignrulesarerecommended:
a. Allfoorbeam-to-columnconnectionsshouldbedesignedtobecapableof
sustainingadesigntensileforceof75kN.
b. The75kNtieforceneednotbecombinedwiththeeffectsofanyotheractions.
Therecommendationshouldalsobeappliedatrooflevel,exceptwherethesteelwork
onlysupportsroofcladdingthatweighsnotmorethan0.7kN/m
2
andcarriesonly
imposedroofloadsandwindloads.
Itisnotnecessarythatbeam-to-beamconnectionsaredesignedforaspecifctying
forceinordertosatisfyarobustnessstrategyforClass1buildingsastheminimum
tyingrecommendationappliesonlytobeam-to-columnconnections.Hence,itisnot
necessarytodesignsecondarybeamsasties,asshowninFigure5.1.
Figure 5.1
Ties recommended in
Class 1 buildings
5.3 Practical application of design rules
Inordertodesigncolumnsasrestrainedinpositionforeachaxisateachfoorand
rooflevel,thecolumnsshouldgenerallybeconnectedtobeams,approximatelyatright
angles,ateachprincipalfoorlevel.
Providingresistancetothe75kNtyingforcewillgenerallynotbeanonerous
requirementforconnectionsinhot-rolledsteelframes.Allstandardbeam-to-column
connectionsforsimplysupportedbeamshaveatyingresistancethatexceeds75kN.
Designtablesforstandardsimpleconnectiontypes(seeFigure5.2)areprovidedinSCI
publicationP358
[25]
.
Secondary beams
are not ties
Beams between
columns are ties
39
a.
b.
c.
Partial depth end plate
Flush end plate
Fin plate
Tying resistance with:
3 rows of 2 bolts = 296 kN
3 bolts = 308 kN
4 bolts = 428 kN
Note: Values for 3 rows of bolts are for a 356 x 171 x 67 S275 UKB
Values for 3 rows of bolts are for a 356 x 171 x 67 S275 UKB
BSEN1993-1-8
[26]
doesnotgiveanyguidanceonthetyingresistanceofconnections.
Largestrainsandlargedeformationsareacceptableintheaccidentaldesignsituation.
Therefore,forthecalculationofconnectiontyingresistance,SN015
[27]
recommends
thatultimatetensilestrengths(f
u
)beusedandthepartialfactorfortying
M,u
betaken
as1.1.ExamplesshowingthecalculationofconnectionresistancesareincludedinSCI
publicationP364
[28]
.
DesignresistancesforM16andM20class8.8boltsinS275steelaregivenin
Table5.1.Anyreasonableconnectionwithatleasttwoboltswillprovideatying
resistanceinexcessofthe75kNrequirement.
Figure 5.2
Types of simple
connection with typical
tying resistance
bolt dIameter
tenSIon
reSIStanCe
SIngle Shear
reSIStanCe
bearIng
reSIStanCe
(8 mm Plate)
M16 90.4 kN 60.3 kN 54.5 kN
M20 141 kN 94.1 kN 67.4 kN
Note: TheabovevalueshavebeencalculatedinaccordancewithBSEN1993-1-8
[26]
.
Table 5.1
Design resistances
for class 8.8 bolts in
S275 steel
41
TherecommendedstrategyinBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,A.4forConsequences
Class2abuildingsstates:
In addition to the recommended strategies for Consequences Class 1, the provision
of effective horizontal ties, or effective anchorage of suspended foors to walls,
as defned in A.5.1 and A.5.2 respectively for framed and load-bearing wall
construction should be provided.
Note 1: Details of effective anchorage may be given in the National Annex.
Load-bearingwallconstructionisoutsidethescopeofthispublicationandthe
requirementforeffectiveanchorageisnotdiscussed.Therequirementsofeffective
horizontaltiesforframedstructuresassetoutinA.5.1ofBSEN1991-1-7,are
describedinSection6.2.
Approved Document A
Thewordingoftherecommendedstrategyissimilartotheguidancegivenin
ApprovedDocumentA(2004)forClass2Abuildings.However,itshouldbenotedthat
interpretationofwhatconstituteseffectivehorizontaltiesisconsiderablydifferentin
magnitude.TheApprovedDocumentA(2004)interpretationisthat75kNconstitutesan
effectivehorizontaltieforhot-rolledsteelframeconstruction.InBSEN1991-1-7,75kN
isaminimumtensileloadthatthetieshouldsustain.Theactualtieforceiscalculated
andinmanycaseswillbesignifcantlygreaterthan75kN(seeSection6.3.8).
InadditiontotherobustnessstrategyfromBSEN1991-1-7,bearingdetailsforfoor,
roofandstairunitsshouldconformtoBSEN1992andmakedueallowancefor
construction,fabricationandmanufacturingtolerances.
buildingS in
conSequenceS
claSS 2a
42
ConSequenCeS ClaSS 2a
6.2 Horizontal ties
6.2.1 Benefts of providing horizontal ties
Horizontaltyingcanbebenefcialtoastructureinanaccidentalactionsituationby:
enablingcatenaryactiontodevelop;
holdingcolumnsinplace.
Thesetwopotentialrolesofhorizontaltyingarediscussedbelow.
Catenary action
Theprincipleofprovidinghorizontaltiesnotionallyallowsforbeammemberstosupport
loadsbyformingcatenariesoverdamagedareasofstructure.Theprovisionofhorizontal
ties,designedtotheEurocoderules,hasnocomplementaryrequirementsrelating
tojointductilityorjointrotationcapacity.Therobustnessrulesarenotmeanttofully
describesystemsofstructuralmechanicsbutareconsideredasrulesintendedto
producestructuresthatperformadequatelyinaccidentalcircumstances.Nonetheless,
applyingtherulescontributestowardssupportoverdamagedareasofstructurewhere
thesupportprovidedbyacolumnhasbeenlost,asshowninFigure6.1.
Figure6.1showsforcesredistributedverticallyaswellashorizontally.However,
forConsequencesClass2abuildings,verticaltyingisnotarequirementof
BSEN1991-1-7orApprovedDocumentA
[12]
.Therefore,Figure6.1doesnotshow
forcesbeingredistributedverticallypastthefrstcolumnspliceabovethedamaged
columnsection.Columnmembersaregenerallysplicedeverysecondorthirdstoreyso,
dependingonthelocationofthedamage,therewillusuallybesomeupwardtransferof
forcesatleastasfarasthefrstcolumnsplice.
Figure 6.1
Catenary action with
horizontal ties
Splice
Holding columns in place
Accidentalactionscancausehorizontalforcestoactoncolumnsections:ensuringthat
beam-to-columnconnectionshavetyingresistancehelpstoholdthecolumninplace
andthereforethatitcancontinuetosupportverticalloads,asshowninFigure6.2.The
accidentalactionshowninFigure6.2isdepictedasaninternalblastbuttheprinciple
appliestoanyaccidentalactionthatcancausehorizontalforces.Holdingcolumnsin
43
placealso,importantly,helpstopreventfoorunitsfallingduetothespreadofbeams
thatcouldoccurifcolumnswerenotheldinposition.
6.2.2 Design forces
Therequirementsforeffectivehorizontalties,asdefnedinA.5.1ofBSEN1991-1-7,
aregivenbelow.
Eachtiemember,includingitsendconnections,shouldbecapableofsustaininga
designtensileloadofT
i
fortheaccidentallimitstateinthecaseofinternalties,andT
p
,
inthecaseofperimeterties.ThemagnitudesofT
i
andT
p
arecalculatedaccordingto
equationsA.1andA.2fromBSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1,reproducedbelow:
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+y q
k
)s L or75kN,whicheveristhegreater
T
p
=0.4(g
k
+y q
k
where:
g
k
isthepermanentaction
q
k
isthevariableaction
s isthespacingoftheties
L isthespanofthetie
y istherelevantfactorintheexpressionforcombinationofactioneffectsfor
theaccidentaldesignsituation(i.e.y
1
ory
2
inaccordancewithexpression
(6.11b)ofEN1990).
Note:Thereferencetoexpression(6.11b)ofEN1990inthedefnitionofyisspecifc
totheyfactor.Expression(6.11b)ofEN1990isnotusedtodeterminethetieforce.
Notethatthepermanentactionofcladdingloadsdoesnotneedtobeincludedinthe
expressionforT
p
asthecladdingloadwouldnolongerbepresentonthememberin
thisdesignsituation.
Internal blast
Blowing out of columns
resisted by tie forces at
foor levels T
Figure 6.2
Columns held
in position with
horizontal ties
44
TheUKNationalAnnextoBSEN1990specifesthaty
1
shouldbeusedfor
combinationswithaccidentalactions(see3.1.3).Valuesfory
1
,takenfrom
TableNA.1.1,aregiveninTable3.1.Valuesofy
1
forfoorloadsinbuildingsvaryfrom
zeroforroofsto0.9forstorageareas.Forthecommonsituationsofoffceareasand
residentialareas,y
1
shouldbetakenas0.5.
Itisnotnecessaryforthetieforcetobecombinedwithanyotherloads.Therefore,the
connectiondoesnotneedtobedesignedtoresistashearloadandatensileloadfrom
thetiessimultaneously.
6.2.3 Provision of ties
Thehorizontaltiesshouldbe:
a. Providedaroundtheperimeterofeachfoor.
b. Providedaroundtheperimeteroftherooflevel.
c. Providedinternallyintworightangledirectionstotiethecolumnssecurelytothe
structureofthebuilding.
d. Incontinuouslines.
e. Forperimeterties,arrangedascloselyaspracticabletotheedgesoffoors.
f. Fortiesintendedtobeoncolumnlines,arrangedascloselyaspracticabletothe
linesofcolumns.
g. Arrangedsothatatleast30%ofthetiesarelocatedwithintheclosevicinityofthe
gridlinesofthecolumns.
Figure6.3showsthelocationofhorizontaltiesinafoorofaClass2abuilding.
Thehorizontaltiescancomprisethefollowingelementsoracombinationofthem:
a. Rolledsteelsections(i.e.foorbeammembers).
b. Steelbarreinforcementincompositesteel/concretefoors.
c. Steelfabric(mesh)reinforcementincompositesteel/concretefoors.
d. Profledsteelsheetingincompositesteel/concretefoors.
e. Precastunits,ifeffectivelytiedtothesteelbeams.
Figure 6.3
Location of
horizontal ties in
Class 2a buildings
Internal tie All beams
designed to
act as ties
Perimeter tie
Tie anchored
to column
45
Note:Items(b),(c)and(d)mayonlybeutilisedastiesifthecompositesteel/concrete
foorsareconnecteddirectlytothesteelbeamswithshearconnectors.Item(d)may
onlybeutilisedastiesactinginthesamedirectionofthespanoftheprofledsteel
sheetingandwherethesheetingisdirectlyfxedtothesupportingsteelbeam.
6.3.1 Chasing loads
ThereisnorequirementinbuildingregulationsorBSEN1991-1-7tochasethetie
forcesaroundthestructure.Therequirementisonlytodesignthememberanditsend
connectionforthetieforce;thedesignerisnotrequiredtoconsidertheconsequences
ofthetieforcesanyfurther.ThispointisillustratedbyreferencetoFigure6.4which
showsahorizontaltieforceactingonanexternalcolumn.Theexternalcolumnsection
ABdoesnotneedtobedesignedforalateralforce.
Figure 6.4
Tie force on
external column
A
B
Tie force
Unequal tie
forces due to
unequal spans
Theoretical
catenary
Figure 6.5
Tie force with
unequal spans
Forabeamconnectedtoacolumnwebwithanendplateconnection,thecolumnweb
shouldbecheckedtoensurethatitcansustainthetyingforce(largedeformationsare
acceptable)butthecolumnsectionasamemberdoesnotneedtobechecked.
6.3.2 Unequal spans
Asstatedpreviously,providinghorizontaltiesnotionallyallowsforbeammembers
tosupportloadsbyformingcatenaries.Wherealineoftiesconsistsofbeamswith
differentspans(asshowninFigure6.5)thedesigntieforceswillbedifferentalong
thelineofties.Thisisatoddswiththetheoreticaltensileforceinacatenarywhich
46
isconstantthroughoutitslength.However,whenconsideringunidentifedaccidental
actions,thedesignerisnotrequiredtoconsiderthistheoreticalinconsistencyandno
rationalisationofdesigntieforcesalongalineoftiesisrequired.Thesametheoretical
inconsistencycanoccurwhenbeamsaresupportingdifferentlevelsofload.
6.3.3 Continuous lines
BSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1statesthatthehorizontaltiesshouldbearrangedincontinuous
lines.Wherethereareirregularcolumngridsorbeamarrangementsresultinginan
offsetbetweenlinesofties(asshowninFigure6.6),thebeamsarenotincontinuous
lines.Thedesignerneedstobesatisfedthatthetieforcecanbetransferredfromone
beamtothenext.Alternativeelementssuchasthefoorslabmaybeused,orinextreme
cases,anadditionalmembercanbeaddedtotransferthetieforce.Dependingonthe
sizeofthetieforce,andiftheoffsetordiscontinuityissmall,itispossibletojustifythat
thetieforcecanbetransferredthroughbendingandshearofconnectedmembers.
6.3.4 Voids
Anothersituationwhereitcouldbearguedthatthetiesarenotcontinuousiswhere
alineoftiesisinterruptedduetoavoidinabuildingsuchasanatrium.Inthiscase
thereisnorequirementtomakeadditionalallowanceforthevoidinthefoor.The
voidoratriumshouldbetreatedinthesamewayasanyotherfoororroofedgeinthe
building.Hence,horizontaltiesshouldbeprovidedaroundtheperimeterofeachfoor
androoflevel,whichincludestheperimeteradjacenttovoidsinthefoorsuchasatria.
6.3.5 Beams not on column lines
BSEN1991-1-7isambiguousaboutwhetherbeamsthatarenotoncolumnlines
shouldbedesignedastiesornot.BSEN1991-1-7A.5.1(1)statesthathorizontalties
shouldbeprovidedascloselyaspracticabletolinesofcolumnsandatleast30%of
thetiesshouldbelocatedwithinclosevicinityofthegridlinesofcolumns.Incontrast,
Beam designed as tie
Ofset
Figure 6.6
Discontinuity in
line of ties
47
L /4 L /4 L /4 L /4 L /4 L /4
L L
A B C
T
1
T
1
T
2
T
2
T
3
T
3
T
4
T
4
T
5
T
5
T
6
T
6
T
7
T
7
T
8
T
8
T
9
T
9
At least 30% of tie
capacity in this zone
At least 30% of tie
At least 30% of tie
Figure 6.7
Distribution of
horizontal tie forces
label(b)ofFigureA.2indicatesthatallbeamsshouldbedesignedtoactasties.
Therefore,itisconcludedthatequationsA.1(orA.2)shouldbeappliedtoallbeams
whetherornottheyareonthecolumnlines.Theexpression30%ofthetiesisthen
interpretedtomean30%ofthetotalrequiredtieresistance.Hence,thedesignermust
alsocheckthatatleast30%oftherequiredtieresistanceisinclosevicinitytothe
columnline.NoguidanceisprovidedinBSEN1991-1-7astothedefnitionofclose
vicinity.Forthepurposesofthispublication,closevicinityistakentomeanaquarterof
thecolumnspacing.
Figure6.7showsanarrangementofinternalfoorbeams.EquationA.1of
BSEN1991-1-7A.5.1shouldbeappliedtoeachbeaminFigure6.7todetermine
therequiredminimumtyingresistance(T
i
)ofthebeamanditsendconnections.
Dependingontheloadingandbeamspacing,eachbeamcanhaveadifferent
minimumtyingresistance.Inadditiontoverifyingthatthememberanditsend
connectionscanresistthecalculatedtyingload,thedesignermustalsoverifythatat
least30%ofthetieresistanceiswithinadistanceofaquarterofthecolumnspacing
eithersideofthecolumnline.Therefore,consideringthebeamoncolumnlineBin
Figure6.7,thefollowingrequirementshouldbesatisfed:
T
5
0.3(T
4
+T
5
+T
6
)
EquivalentexpressionsshouldalsobesatisfedforbeamsoncolumnlinesAandC.
6.3.6 Tie resistance provided by slab components
AsdiscussedinSection6.2.2,BSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1allowstherequiredtying
resistancetobeprovidedbycompositeslabcomponentssuchassteelreinforcement
orsteelsheeting.
48
Itisimportanttonotethatthepurposeofprovidingthehorizontaltiesspecifedin
BSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1istoholdtheverticalmembersoftheframeinplaceandto
enablethebeamstoactincatenary.Thehorizontaltyingisnotprovidedtoholdthe
foorslabsinplaceonthesupportingstructure,althoughtheywillinmanycaseshave
thiseffect.Thepurposeofthehorizontaltiesisemphasisedbytheconditiongivenin
BSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1(2)thatslabcomponentsshouldonlybeusedtoprovidetying
resistanceifthecompositesteel/concretefoorsaredirectlyconnectedtothesteel
beamswithshearconnectors(asshowninFigure6.8).Thetiesmusttiethestructural
frametogether,notjusttiefoorslabstoadjacentfoorslabs.Forthearrangement
showninFigure6.8,thetransversereinforcement,fabricreinforcementandprofled
steeldeckingmayallbeusedtocontributetotherequiredtieforceresistance.General
guidanceoncompositeslabsandbeamsisprovidedinSCIpublicationP300
[29]
.
Whenthetyingresistanceisprovided,entirelyorinpart,bycompositeslab
componentsthereisscopeforthetieforceresistancetobedistributedacrossthe
widthoftheslabandnotlocatedoncolumnlines.
6.3.7 Beam-to-beam connections
Asexplainedin6.3.1,BSEN1991-1-7andApprovedDocumentAonlyrequirea
tiememberanditsendconnectionstobedesignedfortherequiredtieforce.This
requirementcanbediffculttointerpretwhentwotiemembers(beams)connectto
thewebofatransversesupportingbeamfromoppositesides,asshowninFigure6.9.
Inthissituation,thesupportingbeamwebispartoftheconnectionandshouldbe
designedtoresistthetieforces.Dependingonthebeamspansandloading,thetie
forcesoneachsideofthesupportingbeamcanbeofdifferentmagnitudes.However,
thetieforcesarenotadditivebecauseitisnotnecessarytoconsiderbothtieforces
actingsimultaneously.Hence,thebeamwebneedonlybedesignedforthelargerof
Profled steel
decking
Shear stud
connector
Transverse
reinforcement
In-situ concrete
Figure 6.8
Tying with slab
components
49
thetwotieforces,asshouldtheothercommoncomponentsofeachconnectione.g.
theboltsshouldalsobedesignedforthelargertieforce.AsdiscussedinSection6.3.1,
thebeammemberdoesnotneedtobedesignedtoresistlateralbendingduetothe
tieforce.TheconnectionshowninFigure6.9isanendplateconnectionbutthesame
principleswouldapplytofnplateordoubleanglecleatconnections.
SCIpublicationP358
[25]
givesdetaileddesignchecksforeachcomponentof
nominallypinnedconnections,includingthoserequiredtocalculatetheconnection
tyingresistance.
6.3.8 Beam arrangements
ThetieforceequationsgiveninBSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1onlyneedtobeappliedto
horizontalmembersthatcarryfoorloads.Membersalongwiththeirendconnections
thatdonot,intheory,carryanyfoorloadonlyneedtobedesignedforatieforceof
75kN.Therefore,differentbeamarrangementscanresultindifferenttyingresistance
requirements,eventhoughthecolumngridmightbeverysimilar.
Genericexpressionsfortyingresistancerequirements,basedonthetieforceequations
giveninBSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1,fordifferentbeamarrangementsareshowninFigure6.10
andFigure6.11.Figure6.10showstieforceexpressionsforabeamarrangementthat
couldbeusedwithlongspanslabsolutionssuchasdeepcompositedeckingorprecast
units.Figure6.11showstieforceexpressionsforabeamarrangementthatcouldbe
usedwithshortspanslabsolutionssuchasshallowcompositedecking.
Table6.1givestyingrequirementsbasedontheexpressionsgiveninFigure6.10.The
maximumtieforcecalculatedforthetwoscenariosconsideredinTable6.1is270kN.
Tie force Tie force
Figure 6.9
Tie force on
beam web
loadIng tIe forCe requIrementS
g
k
kN/m
2
q
k
kN/m
2
T
1
kN
T
2
kN
T
3
kN
3.0 2.5 75 191 96
4.0 4.0 75 270 270
Note: is taken as 0.5, L and B are taken as 7.5 m.
Table 6.1
Tie forces for beam
arrangement shown
in Figure 6.10
50
B B B
L
L
L
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
3
T
1
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
= 75 kN
T
2
= 0.8(g
k
+ q
k
) LB but 75 kN
T
3
= 0.4(g
k
+ q
k
) LB but 75 kN
where:
g
k
characteristic dead load
combination factor for accidental loading
q
k
characteristic imposed load.
Figure 6.10
Generic tie forces
for a long span slab
beam arrangement
51
B B B
L
L
L
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
4
T
4
T
4
T
4
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
3
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
2
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
5
T
4
T
4
T
4
T
4
T
4
T
4
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
T
1
= 0.8(g
k
+ q
k
) LB/2 but 75 kN
T
2
= 0.8(g
k
+ q
k
) LB but 75 kN
T
3
= 0.8(g
k
+ q
k
)3LB/4 but 75 kN
T
4
= 0.4(g
k
+ q
k
) LB but 75 kN
T
5
= 0.4(g
k
+ q
k
) LB/2 but 75 kN
where:
g
k

q
k
characteristic dead load
combination factor for accidental loading
characteristic imposed load.
Figure 6.11
Generic tie forces
for a short span slab
beam arrangement
52
a.
b.
c.
Partial depth end plate
Flush end plate
Fin plate
3 rows of 2 bolts = 296 to 281 kN
3 bolts = 308 to 197 kN
4 bolts = 428 to 289 kN
5 bolts = 535 to 429 kN
Note: Tying resistances are for standard connection details with S275 beams, taken from SCI-P358
[25]
loadIng tIe forCe requIrementS
g
k
kN/m
2
q
k
kN/m
2
T
1
kN
T
2
kN
T
3
kN
T
4
kN
T
5
kN
3.0 2.5 96 191 143 96 75
4.0 4.0 135 270 203 135 75
Note: is taken as 0.5, L and B are taken as 7.5 m
Table 6.2
Tie forces for beam
arrangement shown
in Figure 6.11
Figure 6.12
Types of simple
connection with typical
tying resistances
Table6.2givestyingrequirementsbasedontheexpressionsgiveninFigure6.11.The
maximumtieforcecalculatedforthetwoscenariosconsideredinTable6.2is270kN.
TyingresistancesforstandardconnectionsaregiveninFigure6.12;itcanbeseenthat
thetieforceof270kNcaneasilybesatisfedbystandardconnectiondetails.
53
55
TherecommendedstrategyinBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,A.4forConsequences
Class2bbuildingsstates:
In addition to the recommended strategies for Consequences Class 1, the provision of:
Horizontal ties, as defned in A.5.1 and A.5.2 respectively for framed and load-
bearing wall construction (see 1.5.11), together with vertical ties, as defned in
A.6, in all supporting columns and walls should be provided.
Or, alternatively:
The building should be checked to ensure that upon the notional removal of
each supporting column and each beam supporting a column, or any nominal
section of load-bearing wall as defned in A.7 (one at a time in each storey of
the building) the building remains stable and that any local damage does not
exceed a certain limit.
Where the notional removal of such columns and sections of walls would result
in an extent of damage in excess of the agreed limit, or other such limit specifed,
then such elements should be designed as a key element (see A.8).
In the case of buildings of load-bearing wall construction, the notional removal of a
section of wall, one at a time, is likely to be the most practical strategy to adopt.
Thescopeofthispublicationishot-rolledsteelframesi.e.framedconstruction,and
notload-bearingwallconstruction.
Approved Document A
ThewordingoftheEurocodeRecommendedStrategyissimilartotheguidancegiven
inApprovedDocumentA(2004)forClass2Bbuildings.Bothdocumentsprovide
thefollowingthreemethodsfordesigningClass2BBuildingsforavoidanceof
disproportionatecollapse:
Tying.
Notionalremoval.
Keyelement(ifnotionalremovalrequirementsarenotsatisfed).
buildingS in
conSequenceS
claSS 2b
56
ConSequenCeS ClaSS 2b
Itispossibletomixmethodswithinthesamebuilding,i.e.abuildingmaygenerally
satisfythetyingmethodbutdealwithlocalareasthatdonotsatisfythetyingmethod
byapplyingthenotionalremovalorkeyelementmethods.
InadditiontotherobustnessstrategyfromBSEN1991-1-7,thefollowinggoodpractice
isrecommended:
Bracedbaysorothersystemsforresistinghorizontalforcesshouldbedistributed
throughoutthebuildingsuchthat,ineachoftwodirectionsapproximatelyatright
angles,nosubstantialportionofthebuildingisconnectedtoonlyonesystemfor
resistinghorizontalforce.
Whereprecastconcreteorotherheavyfoor,stairorroofunitsareused,theyshould
beeffectivelyanchoredinthedirectionoftheirspan,eithertoeachotherovera
supportordirectlytotheirsupports.
Wherethenotionalremovalorkeyelementmethodsareused,thedesignermust
ensurethatthestructureishorizontallyrobustinbothdirections,whichisgenerally
achievedbyprovidinghorizontalties
[24]
.
7.2 Horizontal ties
Wherethetyingmethodisusedforavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapse,the
requirementsinBSEN1991-1-7forhorizontaltiesinClass2bbuildingsareexactlythe
sameastherequirementsforhorizontaltiesinClass2abuildings;theseareexplained
inSection6.2.
7.3 Vertical ties
7.3.1 Benefts of providing vertical ties
Verticaltyingresistanceisbenefcialtoastructureinanaccidentalactionsituationby
allowingloadstoberedistributedthroughthestructureviaalternativeloadpaths,away
fromlocallydamagedareas.ThisprincipleisshowninFigure7.1.Verticaltiesalsohelp
tolimittheriskoftheupperfoorbeingblownupwardsinanexplosion.
Figure 7.1
Vertical tying
allowing loads to fnd
alternative load paths
57
7.3.2 Design rules
Therequirementsofverticalties,asdefnedinBSEN1991-1-7,A.6,aregivenbelow.
Verticaltiesshouldbe:
a. Providedincolumns,suchthateachcolumnistiedcontinuouslyfromthe
foundationstotherooflevel.
b. Capableofresistingatensileforceequaltothelargestdesignverticalpermanent
andvariableloadreactionappliedtothecolumnfromanyonestorey.Such
accidentaldesignloadingshouldnotbeassumedtoactsimultaneouslywith
permanentandvariableactionsthatmightbeactingonthestructure.
Verticaltyingisprovidedbythetensionresistanceofcolumnsplices.Thevertical
tyingresistancethatisrequiredforcolumnsplicesisthelargesttotalofthebeamend
reactionsappliedtothecolumnatasinglefoorlevel.Thebeamendreactionsusedto
calculatetheverticaltyingrequirementarethosefromthenormaldesigncase(notthe
accidentalloadcase).Forbuildingswithregularcolumngridsandthesamefoorloading
oneachstorey,therequiredcolumnsplicetensionresistanceisequaltothefoorarea
supportedbythecolumnmultipliedbythedesignvalueofthefoorloadingatULS.
Guidanceonthepracticalapplicationofthedesignrulesforverticaltyingisgivenin
Sections7.8.1and7.8.2.
7.4 Vertical bracing
7.4.1 Benefts of providing vertical bracing
Fornominallypin-jointedframes,verticalbracingisrequiredtoprovidestabilitytothe
buildingandtoresisthorizontalactions.Verticalbracingcantaketheformofbraced
baysorshearwallsformingastructuralcore(e.g.concreteorsteelandconcrete
composite).Verticalbracingisrequiredintwoapproximatelyorthogonaldirectionsso
thathorizontalactionsfromanydirectioncanberesisted.
TheadvantageoffollowingtheadviceinSection7.1.2onverticalbracingisrelatively
clearinthat,ifonebracingsystemisdamagedbyanaccidentalaction,thenthere
willbeatleastonemorebracingsystemtoresisthorizontalactions.Toreducethe
likelihoodofallthebracingsystemsbeingdamaged,thesystemscanbedistributed
throughoutthestructureandnotgroupedinonelocation.Gooddistributionofbracing
systemsisalsobenefcialtoavoidtwistingofthestructureonplanwhensubjectedto
horizontalactions,inadditiontoassistingtoproviderobustnesstothestructure.
Theremustbeconsiderationofplanloadpathssothathorizontalloadshavea
credibleroutebacktothestabilitysystem.Thefoorsysteminasteel-framedbuilding
iscommonlyusedtotransmithorizontalloadstothestabilitysystems.Onedesigner
shouldberesponsibleforoverallstability.Ifloadshavetobechasedthoughfoorsto
getbacktocores,itshouldbeclearwhatthatrouteisandthatthefoorsarecapable
58
ofdiaphragmaction.Itisequallyimportantthattheresponsibilityforerectionisclear,
sincethosediaphragmsmightnotexistduringtheerectionstage.
7.4.2 Design advice
Itisadvisedthatverticalbracingtoassistintheprovisionofrobustnessshouldcomply
withthefollowing:
a. Verticalbracingshouldbedistributedthroughoutthebuildingsuchthateach
substantialportionofthebuildingisconnectedtomorethanonesystemfor
resistinghorizontalforceineachoftwodirectionsapproximatelyatrightangles.
b. Atleasttwosystemsofverticalbracingshouldbeprovidedineachdirectionin
eachsubstantialpartofthebuilding.Thecombinedresistanceofthevertical
bracingsystemsshouldbesuffcienttoprovidelateralstabilityforthenormal
designcase.
Framesthatusemomentresistingbeamtocolumnconnectionstoprovidelateral
stabilitywillcomplywiththeabovebracingsystemrequirementsbecause,bythe
natureoftheframe,thesearedistributedthroughoutthestructure.Therefore,the
lateralstabilityofthebuildingisnotvulnerabletolocaliseddamage.
Guidanceonthepracticalapplicationofthedesignrulesforverticalbracingisgivenin
Sections7.8.3,7.8.4and7.8.5.
7.5 Anchorage of heavy foor units
7.5.1 Benefts of anchorage of heavy foor units
Theintentionistopreventheavyfoorunitsorfoorslabssimplyfallingthroughthe
steelframe,ifthefoorismovedorifthesupportingsteelworkismovedorremoved
duetoaccidentalaction.Fallingfoorunitsorslabscouldcausefurtherstructural
damageandwouldalsocauseharmtopeopleinthevicinity.Positiveanchorageof
foorunitspreventsthemfrombeingdisplacedduetouplift.Theguidancealsoapplies
toheavyroofandstairunits.Itisparticularlyimportanttoensurethatstairunitsare
suitablyanchoredtothesupportingframe,toensuretheyarestillinplaceafteran
incident,asthestairswillformthemeansofescapeforpeopleinsidethebuilding
andalsotheprimaryroutefortheemergencyservicestogainaccesstotheupper
foorsofthebuilding.
7.5.2 Design advice
Itisadvisedthatanchorageofheavyfoor,roofandstairunitsshouldcomplywith
thefollowing:
a. Heavyfoor,roofandstairunitsshouldbeanchoredinthedirectionoftheirspan.
b. Anchorageshouldeitherbedirectlytothesupportingframeoroverthesupporting
frametoanadjacentfoor,rooforstairunit.
59
c. BSEN1992-1-1
[30]
doesnotcoveranchorageofprecastfoorandroofunits
andstairmembers.PD6687
[31]
advisesthatthesamerequirementsasgiven
inBS8110
[32]
shouldbeused.Precastfoor,roofandstairmembersshouldbe
effectivelyanchored,whetherornotsuchmembersareusedtoprovideotherties
requiredbyBSEN1992-1-1,9.10.2.
d. Theanchorageshouldbecapableofcarryingtheself-weightofthemembertothat
partofthestructurethatcontainstheties.
ThetermheavyfoorunitswasinitiallyusedinBS5950-1andwasinterpretedto
meanprecastconcreteunits.However,theguidanceisapplicabletoaunitmadefrom
anymaterialthatcouldcausesignifcantdamageorharmifitweretofall.Hence,there
isnodefnitionforwhatconstitutesheavy.Typically,theanchoragerequirements
areappliedtoconcreteunitsbutdesignersshouldalsoconsiderthattheycanbe
applicabletounitsmadefromothermaterials.
Theadvicetoanchorheavyfoorunitsappliesequallytoprecastconcretefoorsand
tocompositebeamfoors.However,bytheirnature,compositebeamfoorswithfabric
(mesh)reinforcementwillgenerallybeadequatelyanchored.
Thesafesecuringofheavyunitsduringthetemporaryconditionshouldbeconsidered.
Reference33providesusefuladviceonmetalanchorfxings.
Guidanceonthepracticalapplicationofthedesignrulesforanchorageofheavyfoor
androofunitsisgiveninSections7.8.6to7.8.8.
7.6 Notional removal design strategy
7.6.1 Benefts of notional removal
ThenotionalremovaldesignstrategyforrobustnessinBSEN1991-1-7,A.4is
presentedasanalternativetotheprovisionofhorizontalandverticaltying.The
beneftsofthisdesignstrategyarethatinsteadoffollowingprescriptiverules(e.g.
tying),morespecifcdamagescenariosareconsidered,wherebythedesigneris
requiredtoassesstheareaofthedamage,i.e.thebuildingsabilitytolocalise
damage.Thenotionalremovaldesignstrategyisstillsomewhatprescriptiveinthatthe
damagescenariosthatthedesignerisrequiredtoassessinvolvetheremovalofone
supportingmember(beamorcolumn)atatime.
Thenotionalremovaldesignstrategywillgenerallyonlybesuccessfulforsmallcolumn
spacings(seeSection7.6.4).
Inpracticalterms,theadvantageisthatifthestructurehasreasonablysmallbeam
spansandifthestructureiswellinterconnected,thennotionalremovaloffersthe
designeranopportunityforsatisfyingrobustnessruleswithanacceptanceoflocal
damage.Thiscanbeusefulifforsomereasonitisnotpossibletocomplyfully
withtyingrules.
60
7.6.2 Design strategy
TherequirementsofthenotionalremovaldesignstrategyasdefnedinA.4of
BSEN1991-1-7aregivenbelow.
a. Eachsupportingmembershouldbenotionallyremovedoneatatimetoensure
thatthelimitofadmissiblelocaldamageisnotexceededandthatthebuilding
remainsstable.
b. Fornotionalremovalasupportingmemberisacolumnsection(alengthbetween
adjacentstoreys)orabeamsupportingoneormorecolumns.
c. ThelimitofadmissiblelocaldamagerecommendedinBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,
isshowninFigure7.2.TherecommendationisadoptedbytheUKNationalAnnex.
ApprovedDocumentAsetsaslightlylowerlimitbutislikelytobebroughtinlinewith
BSEN1991-1-7atitsnextamendment;untilthatpointthelowerlimitfromApproved
DocumentAisapplicableforcompliancewiththeUKBuildingRegulations.
d. Uponthenotionalremovalofanysinglemember,thestructuremustremain
stableasawhole.
e. Ifthenotionalremovalofanysupportingelementwouldresultinthecollapseofan
areagreaterthantheadmissiblelocaldamagethatelementshouldbedesignedas
akeyelement.
f. Ifthenotionalremovalofanysupportingelementwouldresultinthebuildingbeing
unstablethatelementshouldbedesignedasakeyelement.
Figure 7.2
Recommended
limit of admissible
damage (taken
from Figure A.1 of
BS EN 1991-1-7
b. Section a. Plan
A
B
B
Key
A Local damage not exceeding 15% of the floor area, or 100 m
2
, whichever is smaller, in each of two adjacent storeys.
B Notional column to be removed.
Note: The limit of admissible damage in Approved Document A is 70 m
2
.
7.6.3 Application of the notional removal strategy
Thelimitofadmissibledamageallowsforfoorareacollapseontwoseparatefoors
butthisshouldnotbetakentomeanthatfoorareacollapsewillnecessarilyoccuron
twofoors,orthatfoorareacollapsewillnotoccuronmorethantwofoors.Formulti-
storeybuildingstherecanberobustnessbeneftsofhavingdesignatedstrongfoors
positionedperiodicallyatdifferentheightswithinthebuilding.
61
Figure7.2showsanedgecolumnbeingnotionallyremovedbuttheprincipleofnotional
removalshouldalsobeappliedtointernalcolumnsandcornercolumns.Reference24
suggeststhatallcolumnswithinaplancirculararea,withadiameterequalto2.25
timesthestoreyheight,shouldbenotionallyremoved.Thebasisforthissuggestionis
thatanaccidentaleventcouldaffectallcolumnswithinthelocalvicinityoftheevent.
Furtherguidanceonthepracticalapplicationofthenotionalremovaldesignstrategyis
giveninSections7.6.4and7.6.5.
7.6.4 Assessment of damage
Thedesignerisrequiredtodeterminethedegreeofstructuraldamagefollowingthe
notionalremovalofanelement.
Todeterminetheamountoffoorareathatwillcollapseononestoreyitisnormalfor
arelativelysimpleapproachtobeadopted.Forthecaseofacolumnbeingnotionally
removed,allthebeamssupportedbythecolumnareassumedtocollapseandallthe
foorslabssupportedbythecollapsedbeamsareassumedtocollapse.Thesmallest
columngridthatmightbeexpectedinasteelframebuildingis6m6m(asshownin
Figure7.3)whichwouldresultina144m
2
areaoffoorcollapseandthusexceedthe
limitofadmissiblelocaldamage.Therefore,notionalremovalofinternalcolumnsis
unlikelytobeaviabledesignstrategyforsteelframebuildings.However,thestrategy
couldbesuccessfulforedgeorcornercolumnswheretheresultingareaoffoor
collapseisless.
Ifthetotalareaoffoorslabthatisassumedtocollapseisgreaterthantheadmissible
localdamage(i.e.minimumof15%or100m
2
)thenthenotionalremovaldesign
strategycannotbeusedforthiscolumnsection.
Ifthetotalareaoffoorslabthatisassumedtocollapseislessthantheadmissible
localdamagethenthedesignershouldcheckthatfoorareacollapseoccursonno
morethantwofoors.
Figure 7.3
Beam arrangement
for 6 m x 6 m
column grid
3 m 3 m
6

m
62
Toensurethedamagedoesnotspreaddownthebuilding,thefoorbeneaththe
collapsedfoorshouldbecheckedtoensurethatitdoesnotcollapseduetothedebris
loadfromthefoorabovefallingontoit.Theloadcaseforthischeckshouldbethesame
astheloadcaseusedforallthenotionalremovalchecks(seeSection7.6.5).Thereisno
needtoincludeadynamicamplifcationfactorforthedebrisloadingbecausethisisa
notionaldesigncheckandtheloadcanbetakenasevenlydistributed(i.e.notheaped).
Toensurethedamagedoesnotspreadupthebuilding,thefoorsabovethenotionally
removedcolumnshouldbecheckedtodeterminewhethertheycanbridgeoverthe
removedcolumn.Withouthorizontalandverticaltyingandsuffcientsystemscapable
ofresistinglateralforcesthefoorsabovewillalsocollapse.
Thestagesofthenotionalremovaldesignapproachareshowndiagrammatically
inFigure7.4.
Whenthenotionalremovalofasupportingmemberresultsindamageexceedingthe
admissiblelimit,thedesignerhasthreeoptions:
a. Designthesupportingelementasakeyelement(seeSection7.7).
b. Modifythestructuresothattheamountofresultingdamageisreducedbelowthe
admissiblelimit.
c. Adoptthetyingmethodthroughtheprovisionofhorizontaltying,verticaltying,
verticalbracingandanchorageofheavyfoor,roofandstairunits.
Figure 7.4
Notional removal
design approach
1. Column section
notionally removed
4. Check floor can
support debris from
collapsed floor
2. Check area of floor
slabs that collapse
3. Check floors can
bridge over
removed column
7.6.5 Combination of actions for notional removal
Thecombinationofactionsforaccidentaldesignsituationsisgiveninexpression
BSEN19906.4.3.2,6.11bas:
G P A Q Q
j
j
i
i
i k,
1
d 1,1 2,1 k,1 2,
1
k,
or
>

+ + + + ( )
Thiscombinationincludesthesameactionsasforthefundamentalcombinationand
alsothedesignvalueoftheaccidentalactionA
d
.Forthesituationafteranaccidental
63
eventA
d
=0.Thepartialfactorsontheotheractionsareallequaltounityandare
thereforenotshown.Allvariableactionsaretakentobeaccompanyingactionsand
thefactorsforfrequentvalues(
1
)orquasi-permanentvalues(
2
)areapplied.Forthe
optionof
1,1
or
2,1
,theUKNationalAnnex
[34]
saysthat
1
shouldbeused.Valuesfor
1
and
2
aregivenintheNationalAnnex.
Thecombinationofactionsforthenotionalremovaldesignapproachcheckis
expressedas:
G Q Q
j
j
i
i
i k,
1
1,1 k,1 2,
1
k,
>

+ +
where:
G
k,j
Q
k,1
isthecharacteristicvalueofoneofthevariableactions
Q
k,i
1,1
isthefactorforthefrequentvalueofthevariableactionQ
k,i
(seeTable3.1)
2,i
isthefactorforthequasi-permanentvalueofthevariableactionQ
k,i
(seeTable3.1).
7.7 Key element design
7.7.1 Benefts of key element design
Thekeyelementdesignapproachmaybeappliedwherethenotionalremovalofa
supportingmemberwouldresultinthelimitofadmissibledamagebeingexceeded.
Thekeyelementapproachisfundamentallydifferentfromthetyingapproachandthe
notionalremovalapproach.Boththetyingapproachandthenotionalremovalapproach
arefocusedonlimitingthespreadofdamage,orcollapse,followinganeventthathas
causedasupportingelementtobedamaged.Incontrast,thekeyelementapproachis
focusedonpreventingthesupportingelementbeingdamaged(toanextentthatitcan
notprovidetherequiredsupport)followinganaccidentaleventandthuspreventing
excessivefailure.
7.7.2 Design rules
TherequirementsofkeyelementdesignasdefnedinA.8ofBSEN1991-1-7are
givenbelow:
a. KeyelementsshouldbecapableofsustaininganaccidentaldesignactionofA
d
appliedinhorizontalandverticaldirections(inonedirectionatatime)tothe
memberandanyattachedcomponents.
b. TherecommendedvalueofA
d
forbuildingstructuresis34kN/m
2
.
c. Theaccidentaldesignactionshouldbeappliedtothekeyelementandany
attachedcomponentshavingregardfortheultimatestrengthofattached
componentsandtheirconnections.
64
d. Theaccidentaldesignloadingshouldbeappliedinaccordancewithexpression
(6.11b)ofEN1990.
Guidanceonthepracticalapplicationofthedesignrulesforkeyelementdesignis
giveninSections7.8.10,7.8.11,7.8.12and7.8.13.
7.8.1 Continuous vertical tying
TherequirementsinA.6refertotyingcolumnsfromfoundationstorooflevel.Inthe
majorityofordinarybuildings,columnswillbepresentfromfoundationstorooflevel.
However,insomebuildings,notallthecolumnswillrunfromfoundationstoroof
levelduetotheuseoftransferbeams(i.e.beamssupportingoneormorecolumns),
cantileverbeamsandchangesincolumngrids;someexamplesareshownintheframe
elevationinFigure7.5.Guidanceforprovidingrobustnessinframeswithtransfer
structuresisgiveninSection9.
ColumnsinClass2bbuildingsshouldbetiedverticallyfromtheirbasetotheirtop
whetherornotthesecoincidewiththefoundationandrooflevel.Wherethebaseofa
columnisnotatthefoundationlevel,thebaseofthecolumnshouldbetiedvertically
tothestructuralframeatthatlevel.Wherethetopofacolumnisnotattherooflevel,
thetopofthecolumnshouldbetiedverticallytothestructuralframeatthatlevel.
Figure 7.5 Columns
not from foundations
to roof level
7.8.2 Column splice tying resistance
Inpractice,providingverticaltyingisunlikelytobeanonerousobligation,asmostsplices
designedforadequatestiffnessandrobustnessduringerectionarelikelytobesuffcient
tocarrytheaxialtyingforce.SCIpublicationP358
[25]
givesdetailsofstandardsplices
andquotesaxialtensionresistancestosimplifythedesignchecks.Eitherbearingornon-
bearingcolumnsplices(asshowninFigure7.6)canbedesignedtosatisfythevertical
tyingrequirements.Non-bearingspliceswillgenerallyhavehighertensionresistance
becausetheyrequirethickercoverplatesandmoreboltsfornormaldesign.
65
Division
plate Air gap
Table7.1givesindicativetensileaxialresistancesforstandardbearing-typecolumn
spliceswithcoverplates.
TheresistancesquotedinTable7.1arelimitedbyboltshear;addingadditionalbolts
willincreasetheresistances.Detaileddesignchecksforbearingandnon-bearing
columnsplicesareprovidedinReference25.
Itislikelytobemorediffculttoprovidethenecessarytensileresistancewithcap
andbasetypecolumnsplices,suchasshownFigure7.7.Designofsuchconnections
shouldensurethattheverticaltyingrequirementissatisfed.Ifnecessary,the
connectiontypeshouldbechangedtoprovidegreatertensileresistance.
Figure 7.6
Column splice details
Figure 7.7
Cap and base
column splice
uPPer Column loWer Column tenSIle reSIStanCe
152 152 UC 152 152 UC 244 kN
203 203 UC 203 203 UC 312 kN
254 254 UC 254 254 UC 319 kN
305 305 UC 305 305 UC 632 kN
356 368 UC 356 368 UC 797 kN
356 406 UC 356 406 UC 529 kN
Source:Reference25
Table 7.1
Typical bearing type
column splice tensile
resistances (with
fange cover plates)
66
Figure 7.8
Location of
vertical bracing
7.8.3 Design of bracing systems
Theadviceonbracingsystems,giveninSection7.4.2,relatestothenumberand
distributionofsystems,nottotheirdesignresistance.Inotherwords,theadvicegiven
doesnotsuggestthatadditionaldesignresistanceshouldbeprovided;justthatthe
requiredbracingresistanceshouldbesuitablydistributed.
AsstatedinSection7.4.1,thereasonfordistributingthebracingsystemsthroughout
thestructureistoreducethelikelihoodofmorethanonesystembeingdamagedby
oneaccidentalevent.Therefore,inthepost-accidentaleventsituation,thereareother
bracingsystemsthatcouldprovidelateralstability.Generallyallthebracingsystems
willbeneededtoprovidesuffcientlateralstabilitytothestructureforthenormal
designcase.However,intheaccidentaldesigncasethestructurecanhavesuffcient
lateralstability,evenifoneofthebracingsystemsisdamaged,becausetheload
factorsarelowerintheaccidentaldesignsituation.
Itisnotintended,oradvised,thatdesignersshouldbeconsideringscenarioswhere
onebracingsystemisdamagedandthecombinedresistanceoftheremainingbracing
systemsischeckedforadequacyagainstanaccidentaldesigncase.
7.8.4 Location of bracing systems
Figure7.8showstheplanviewoftwobuildings;eachbuildingsatisfestheadvicefor
havingatleasttwosetsofverticalbracingineachorthogonaldirection.Thebracing
arrangementshowninFigure7.8bislessvulnerabletodamageduetoanaccidental
actionthanthearrangementshowninFigure7.8abecausethebracingsarenot
locatedclosetothecorners.Oneaccidentalactionneartooneofthecornerswith
verticalbracinginFigure7.8acouldcausedamagetotwosetsofverticalbracing,
whereasitwouldrequireamuchlargeraccidentalactiontocausedamagetotwosets
ofverticalbracinginFigure7.8b.Hence,thearrangementshowninFigure7.8bwill
generallyprovideamorerobuststructurethanthearrangementshowninFigure7.8a.
Inpractice,theexactlocationofpossibleaccidentalactions(e.g.themovement
ofvehiclecloseto,orinside,thebuilding)willbeafactorindeterminingtheleast
vulnerablelocationforbracingsystems.
Plan
Vertical bracing
Vertical bracing
Plan
Vertical bracing
a. Vulnerable location for bracing
near to corners
b. Less vulnerable location for bracing
remote from corners
67
Notethat,intheadviceonbracingsystemsinSection7.1.2,itsaysthatno substantial
portion of the building is connected to only one system for resisting horizontal force.
Adefnitionforwhatconstitutesasubstantialportionisdeliberatelyomittedbecause
thiswillbedifferentforeachbuilding.Someexamplesandsuggestionsofwhatcould
beasubstantialportionarediscussedbelowandshowninFigure7.9.
ThebuildingplanshowninFigure7.9acanbedividedintotworectangularpartseach
representingasubstantialportionofthebuildingandthereforeeachshouldhaveat
leasttwosetsofverticalbracingineachorthogonaldirection.Ifoneoftheportions
wasdrasticallysmallerinsizethantheother,asshowninFigure7.9b,thenitcouldbe
consideredthatthesmallerpartwasanonsubstantialportionandthereforeitwould
notneedtohaveatleasttwosetsofverticalbracingineachorthogonaldirection.
ThebuildingplanshowninFigure7.9ccanbedividedintothreerectangularparts.
Thetwolargerparts,AandC,eachrepresentasubstantialportionofthebuildingand
thereforeeachshouldhaveatleasttwosetsofverticalbracingineachorthogonal
direction.Thesmallerpart,B,couldbeclaimedtobeanonsubstantialpartand
thereforewouldnotneedtohaveatleasttwosetsofverticalbracingineach
orthogonaldirection.WhetherPartBwouldbeasubstantialportionwoulddependon
itsrelativesizetotheothertwoparts.
ThebuildingplanshowninFigure7.9dcanbedividedintothreerectangularparts,
eachrepresentingasubstantialportionofthebuildingandthereforeeachshouldhave
atleasttwosetsofverticalbracingineachorthogonaldirection.
A
B
B
A
B C A
B
C
A
a. Building with two substantial portions
c. Building with two substantial portions
and one non-substantial portion
b. Building with one substantial portion and
one non-substantial portion
d. Building with three substantial portions
Note: Shaded areas show substantial portions, non-shaded areas show non-substantial portions.
Figure 7.9
Examples of
building portions
68
Figure 7.10
Anchorage of
precast units over
supporting beams
Whenconsideringthenumberofbracingsystemsrequiredforrobustness,theplan
dimensionsofthebuildingcanbereasonablyconsideredasafactor.Forabuilding
withsmallplandimensionsitcouldbereasonablenottoprovidetwosetsofvertical
bracingineachdirection.However,itisimportanttoconsidereachcaseonitsmerits.
7.8.5 Concrete cores
Thefunctionsofverticalbracingsystemscanbeprovidedpartiallyorentirelybyone
ormorereinforcedconcretecoresorbyCorefast
[35]
cores.Aconcretecorenormally
consistsoffourwalls;eachwallhasthecapabilitytoprovidelateralstabilityinthe
directionoftheplaneofthewall.Itisusualfortheretobeopeningsinthewallsof
concretecores(e.g.toprovideaccesstolifts).Openingswillreducetheabilityofthe
walltoresistlateralstability.Itisunlikelythattheentirewallwillbeomittedforan
opening;theremainingpartsofthewallwillprovidesomeresistancetolateralloads.
Dependingonthedetailingoftheconcretecoreandthenumberandsizeofopenings,
itmayormaynotconstitutetwobracingsystemsineachofthetwoorthogonal
directions.Hence,inordertosatisfytherecommendationtoprovideatleasttwosets
ofverticalbracingineachorthogonaldirectionitmightbenecessarytoprovidemore
thanoneconcretecore.
7.8.6 Anchorage of precast units
Anchorage across internal supports
Toanchorprecastunitsoverinternalsupportingbeamsitispossibletoexposethe
voidsintheprecastplanksandplacereinforcingbarsbetweenthetwounitspriorto
concreting,asshowninFigure7.10.
Reinforcement in core
with concrete infill
Specialmeasureswillbeneededwhereprecastplanksareplacedonshelfangles,
asshowninFigure7.11,andwithasymmetricbeams(seeFigure7.12),unlessthe
anchorageforcescanbecarriedthroughthereinforcementinthescreed,assumingthis
isabovethetopfangeofthesteelwork.Whenitisnotpossibletousereinforcementin
thescreed,straightreinforcementbarsanchoringtheprecastunitstogetherareusually
detailedtopassthroughholesdrilledinthesteelbeam.Thepracticalplacementofbars
throughholesinthebeamwebneedscarefulconsideration.
69
Figure 7.11
Anchorage of precast
units on shelf angles
Reinforcing bar
Anchorage to edge beams
Anchorageisbestaccomplishedbyexposingthevoidsintheplank,andplacing
U-shapedbarsaroundstudsweldedtothesteelwork,asshowninFigure7.13.Inthis
Figure,thestudshavebeenprovidedinordertoachieveadequateanchorage,not
forcompositedesignoftheedgebeam.Figure7.13bisamorecomplicatedsolution
involvingcastellationoftheplankedge,(oftenonsite)sothattheplankftsaroundthe
stud,andsimilarU-barslocatedinthevoidspriortoconcreting.Theminimumwidths
showninFigure7.13aretypicalbuttheactualdimensiondependsonthetypeofplank
(solidorhollowcore),theenddetailoftheplank(squareendorchamfered),thespanof
theplankandwhetherthestudsonthebeamhavebeenshoporsitewelded.Guidance
ontheminimumdimensionsforthevaryingsituationsisgiveninReference36.
Itshouldbenotedthatloadingabeamonlyononesideproducessignifcanttorsionin
thebeamitself,whichmightwellbethecriticaldesigncase.Theeccentricitymustbe
accountedforinthedesignofthemember,connectionsandcolumns.
Specialconsiderationmayneedtobegiventofoorunitsthatcantileverpasttheedgebeam.
Figure 7.12
units on ASB
Reinforcing bar
Figure 7.13
planks to edge beams
Minimum fange
width = 120 mm
Minimum fange
width = 180 mm
Plank castellated
around shear studs
U-bar
b. a.
U-bar
70
7.8.7 Anchorage of composite slabs with metal decking
Internalbeamssupportingcompositeslabsaregenerallydesignedascomposite
beams.Insuchcases,theanchoragerequirementwillbesatisfedbytheformof
construction,withouttheneedforadditionalmeasurestoensureanchorage.
Whereedgebeamsaredesignedascompositebeamsthefoorslabanchorage
requirementswillgenerallybesatisfedwithouttheneedforadditionalreinforcement
orshearstuds.
Whereedgebeamsofcompositeslabsaredesignedasnon-compositebeams,the
foorslabmuststillbeanchoredtothesupportingedgebeam.Thereareseveral
methodsthatcanbeusedtoanchortheslabtothebeam.TheplacementofU-shaped
barsaroundstudsweldedtotheedgebeammaybeusedtoanchortheslab.Ifthrough
deckweldinghasbeenusedtofxthestudstotheedgebeam,theresistanceofthe
connectionbetweenthedeckandbeamalonemaybesuffcientforanchoragewithout
theneedforU-bars.Theanchorageprovidedineachcaseshouldbequantifed,sothat
itsadequacycanbeverifed.
7.8.8 Anchorage of Slimdek foor slabs
TheSlimdekfoorsystemcomprisescompositefoorslabsformedondeepmetal
deckingthatissupportedonthebottomfangeofasymmetricbeamsections(see
Figure7.14).FurtherdetailsofthefoorsystemareprovidedinReference37and
SCIpublicationP392
[38]
.
TheconstructionoftheSlimdeksystemandinparticulartheintegrationofthefoor
beamsintothedepthofthecompositeslabmeansthatthereareadvantagesinterms
ofrobustness.SCIreportRT1215
[39]
examinestheSlimdekfoorsystemandpresents
modifedrobustnessrules.AsthatreportrelatestostructuraldesignusingBS5950,
theguidancepresentedbelowhasbeenadaptedfromthatgiveninthereportsoasto
suitEurocodedesignrequirements.
Thereinforcementprovidedtoanchorslabstogetheroversupportsmustbecapable
ofsupportingtheweightoftheslabintheeventofacollapsebutitcanbethesame
reinforcementasthatusedtopreventcrackingintheslabs,providedthereinforcement
iscontinuousoverorthroughthebeamortiemember.A142fabricisusuallyprovided
inSlimdekslabsasaminimum,whichisadequateforthemajorityofsituations.
Theanchoragerequiredatedgebeamsdependsontheanchoragethatisprovidedto
theslabontheotheredges:
71
Slabsspanningontoanedgebeam(butnotcornerslabs)neednotbeanchoredtothe
edgebeamprovidedthatanchorageisprovidedontheotherthreesidesoftheslab.
Cornerslabsneednotbeanchoredtotheedgebeamprovidedthatanchorageis
providedalongthetwointernaledgesoftheslab.
Anchoragerequiredatedgebeamscanbeachievedindifferentways,depending
ontheedgebeamsectiontype.Figure7.15showsthreepossiblesolutionsforedge
beamanchorage:
AcompositeRHSedgebeamwithanchorageprovidedbyUbarsaround
shearconnectors.
AcompositeASBedgebeamwithanchorageprovidedbyLbarsovertheASB.
AdownstandedgebeamwithanchorageprovidedbyUbarsaroundshearconnectors.
Figure 7.14
Slimdek foor system
Tying reinforcement
Tying reinforcement
a. Anchorage over the supporting beam
b. Anchorage through the supporting beam
72
7.8.9 Slab anchorage requirements
SlabanchoragerequirementsaresummarisedinFigure7.16.TheFigureisapplicable
tofoorslabsformedfromprecastunitsorconcreteandmetaldecking.
Figure 7.15
Typical anchorage
provision in edge
beams with Slimdek
6
U bar, 10 mm dia. (min)
85
100
L bar
>125
150
End diaphragm
L bar
a. Composite RHS
b. Composite ASB
c. Downstand beam
73
Figure 7.16
Slab anchorage
requirements
B B B
L
L
L
Notes: Where there are two alternative anchorage values presented, the selection must be consistent within each slab (i.e.,
if the first option is selected for one side of the slab the first option must be selected for all other sides of the slab).
Where the slab anchorage requirements are different on either side of the interface between two slabs, the
anchorage provided across the interface must be capable of resisting the larger of the two anchorage forces.
A1 = gLB
A2 = gLB/2
A3 = gLB/3
A4 = 0 (no anchorage required)
where:
g characteristic self-weight of floor slab / m
2
A4 A4 (A2) A4 (A2)
A3 (A4) A2 A2
A1 (A4) A1 (A2) A1 (A2)
A4 A4 (A2) A4 (A2)
A3 (A4) A2 A2
A1 (A4) A1 (A2) A1 (A2)
A
4

(
A
2
)
A
4

(
A
2
)
A
4

(
A
2
)
A
3

(
A
4
)
A
4
A
3

(
A
4
)
A
1

(
A
4
)
A
4
A
1

(
A
4
)
A
1

(
A
2
)
A
1

(
A
2
)
A
1

(
A
2
)
A
3

(
A
4
)
A
4
A
3

(
A
4
)
A
4
A
4
A
4
7.8.10 Key element accidental design action
Therecommendedvalueoftheaccidentaldesignaction(A
d
)forkeyelementsisgiven
inBSEN1991-1-7,A.8as34kN/m
2
.
Theaccidentaldesignactionisintendedtorepresentarangeofpossibleaccidental
eventsincludingimpactsandexplosionsandisusedasatoolfordesigningkey
elementstobemorerobustthanisrequiredfornormaldesigncases.Theoriginofthe
74
Figure 7.17
Component attached
to a key element
(column)
34kN/m
2
relatestotheRonanPointcollapseinLondon,1968,whereadomesticgas
explosioncausedthedisproportionatecollapseofa23storeyprecastconcreteblock
offats.Postcollapseanalysisofthestructureestimatedthatthemaximumstatic
equivalentpressurefromtheexplosionwas34kN/m
2
.
Forsomekeyelementsitcouldbeappropriatetoconsiderotheraccidentalactions
thatmightoccure.g.vehicleimpactforperimetercolumns.Guidanceonvehicleimpact
forcesisgiveninBSEN1991-1-7,4.3.
7.8.11 Components attached to key elements
BSEN1997-1-7,A.8clearlystatesthattheaccidentaldesignaction(A
d
)shouldbe
appliedtothekeyelementandanyattachedcomponentshavingregardfortheultimate
strengthofattachedcomponentsandtheirconnections.Therefore,the34kN/m
2
should
beappliedtothekeyelementandanycomponentsattachedtothekeyelement,unless
theattachedcomponentsortheirconnectionscannotsustainthe34kN/m
2
.Hence,for
thedesignofakeyelement,itisnecessarytoconsiderwhatcomponents,orproportion
ofcomponents,willremainattachedtotheelementintheeventofanincident.The
applicationofengineeringjudgementwillplayamajorpartinthisprocess.
Forframedconstruction,thewallsandcladdingwillnormallybenon-structural.
Therefore,itislikelythatthemajorityofthesewillbecomedetachedfromthekey
elementduringanincident,asshowninFigure7.17.Forthecolumnmemberkey
elementshowninFigure7.17,anaccidentalloadof34kN/m
2
shouldbeappliedover
awidthb
eff
foraccidentalloadingaboutthemajoraxis.Thecolumnsectionshouldbe
checkedforthecombinationofmomentsandaxialforceusingthedesigncasegiven
inSection7.8.13.Theaccidentalloadingabouttheminoraxisoverawidthofh(inthis
case)alsoneedstobeconsidered.Theaccidentalloadingshouldonlybeconsidered
asactinginonedirectionatatimeandthereisnorequirementtoconsideradiagonal
loadingcasei.e.atanangletothemajorandminoraxes.However,inreality,an
accidentalactioncouldoccurinanydirectionandpotentiallyinmorethanone
directionatatimedependingonthecauseoftheaction.
eff
h
b
Part of component
that remains attached
to key element after
an incident
Part of component
that is detached
from key element
during an incident
Key element
Plan view
75
Determiningthewidthb
eff
isverysubjective.Anestimationofwhatwillremainattached
tothekeyelement(duringaloadof34kN/m
2
)willobviouslydependonwhatis
attachedandhowitisfxedtotheelement.
Anycomponentsnormallyattachedtothekeyelementbutwhichcannotsustainthe
34kN/m
2
cannotbeusedtorestrainthekeyelementinanywayfortheaccidental
designcase.Therefore,anystructuralcomponentthatprovidesrestraintvitaltothe
stabilityofakeyelementfortheaccidentaldesigncaseshouldalsobedesignedasa
keyelement.However,thekeyelementisunlikelytorequirethesamelevelofrestraint
fortheaccidentaldesigncaseasitdoesforthenormaldesigncasebecausethe
factorsonthepermanentandvariableactionsarelower.
Whereplanarelementsconnectedtoakeyelementwouldbecomedetachedfromthe
keyelementataloadlessthan34kN/m
2
,aloweraccidentaldesignactionshould
alsobeconsideredbythedesignerasthiscouldrepresentamoreseveredesign
caseforthekeyelement.Thisisdemonstratedbythekeyelementcolumnsection
showninFigure7.18.ThekeyelementshowninFigure7.18isa3mhighcolumn,
whichisconnectedtoawallwithcolumnsspaceda6mcentres.Forthecasewhere
theaccidentaldesignactionistakenastherecommendedvalueof34kN/m
2
itis
assumedthatthewallcannotresisttheaccidentalactionandanominal1mwidestrip
isassumedtoremainconnectedtothekeyelement.Therefore,thetotalaccidental
forceonthekeyelementis34kN/m
2
1m3m=102kN.However,foralower
accidentaldesignactionof10kN/m
2
itcouldbeassumedthatthewallcanresistthe
accidentalactionandthecompletewallremainsconnectedtothekeyelement.Then,
thetotalaccidentalforceonthekeyelementis10kN/m
2
6m3m=180kN,which
isamoreseveredesigncaseforthekeyelement.
6 m 6 m
3

m
Complete wall remains
connected to key
element for accidental
action of 10 kN/m
Key element column
1 m wide strip of wall
remains connected to key
element for accidental
action of 34 kN/m
Figure 7.18
Wall connected to key
element column
7.8.12 Accidental loading on large areas
Whenconsideringtheaccidentalloadingonalargearea(e.g.onafoorslabsupported
byatransferbeam),itisreasonabletolimittheareathatissubjectedtothe34kN/m
2
loadbecauseablastpressureisunlikelytobethishighonallthesurfacesofalarge
enclosedspace.Themaximumareaisnotdefnedbutcouldbeinferredfromthe
76
lengthofload-bearingwalltobeconsidered(seeBSEN1991-1-7,A.7),whichis2.25
timesthestoreyheight,say2.252.9=6.5m.Therefore,amaximumareathatwould
besubjectedtothe34kN/m
2
couldbea6.56.5msquare.
Note:Reference24suggestsamaximumareaof6m6m,butalsomakesthepoint
thateachcaseshouldbeconsideredinlightofthespecifccircumstances.
7.8.13 Combination of actions for key element design
Keyelementsandattachedcomponentsmustbedesignedforanaccidentaldesign
casethatisthesameasthedesigncaseforthenotionalelementdesignstrategy
exceptthatitincludesanaccidentalactionof34kN/m
2
.
Thecombinationofactionsforthedesignofkeyelementsandattachedcomponentsis
expressedas:
G A Q Q
j
j
d i
i
i k,
1
1,1 k,1 2,
1
k,
>

+ + +
where:
G
k,j
A
d
istheaccidentalaction,basedontherecommendedvalueof34kN/m
2
Q
k,1
isthecharacteristicvalueofoneofthevariableactions
Q
k,i
1,1
isthefactorforthefrequentvalueofthevariableactionQ
k,i
(seeTable3.1)
2,i
isthefactorforthequasi-permanentvalueofthevariableactionQ
k,i
(seeTable3.1).Note:
2
iszeroforallactionslikelytobeaccompanying.
Thecombinationofactionsfortheremainingpartsofthestructurethatarenot
subjectedtotheaccidentalactionof34kN/m
2
isasforthenotionalremovaldesign
strategy(seeSection7.6.5).
77
79
TherecommendedstrategyinBSEN1991-1-7,AnnexA,A.4forConsequencesClass3
buildingsstates:
A systematic risk assessment of the building should be undertaken taking into
account both foreseeable and unforeseeable hazards.
Guidance on risk analysis is included in Annex B.
AnnexBofBSEN1991-1-7providesaninformativeannexthatoffersguidanceforthe
planningandexecutionofriskassessments.TheUKNationalAnnextoBSEN1991-1-7
declaresthatAnnexBmaybeusedwherealternativeprovisionsarenotincludedinthe
bodyofBSEN1991-1-7andtherefore,AnnexBistherecommendedstrategyforClass3
buildingsintheUK.
Approved DocumentA
ThewordingofAnnexA,A.4issimilartotheguidancegiveninApprovedDocumentA(2004)
forClass3buildingsexceptthatApprovedDocumentAgoesalittlefurtherbysaying:
For Class 3 buildings - A systematic risk assessment of the building should be
undertaken taking into account all the normal hazards that may reasonably be
foreseen, together with any abnormal hazards.
Critical situations for design should be selected that refect the conditions that can
reasonably be foreseen as possible during the life of the building. The structural
form and concept and any protective measures should then be chosen and the
detailed design of the structure and its elements undertaken in accordance with
the recommendations given in the Codes and Standards given in paragraph 5.2.
InadditiontotherobustnessstrategyfromBSEN1991-1-7,itisadvisedthatallthe
provisionsofrobustnessthatarerecommendedforClass2bbuildingsshouldalsobe
appliedtoClass3buildings,unlesstherearespecifcreasonswhytheyarenotappropriate.
buildingS in
conSequenceS
claSS 3
80
8.2 Risk assessment
AsystematicriskassessmentisthemajordifferencebetweentheEurocode
robustnessstrategyofClass3buildingsandthatofClass2bbuildings.Thepurpose
ofariskassessmentistodeterminewhetherthereareanyhazardscenariosthat
haveanunacceptablelevelofriskandifsotosuggeststepstomitigatethoserisks.
AreasonablebasisfortheriskassessmentisthattherobustnessstrategyforClass2b
buildingshasbeenappliedasaminimumrequirement.
FigureB.1ofBSEN1991-1-7(reproducedhereasFigure8.1)presentsafowdiagram
oftheoverallriskanalysisprocedure.
Figure 8.1
Overview of risk
analysis (from
BS EN 1991-1-7)
Defnition of scope and limitations
Qualitative risk analysis
Source identifcation
Hazard scenarios
Description of consequences
Defnition of measures
Reconsideration
Scope and assumptions
Mitigating measures
Quantitative risk analysis
Inventory of uncertainties
Modeling of uncertainties
Quantifcation of consequences
Risk estimation
Risk evaluation
Risk treatment
Accept risk
Risk communication
Bothqualitativeandquantitativeapproachestoriskanalysisarepresentedin
Figure8.1.Theriskassessmentmethodologythatisusedshouldbeofsuffcient
detailtoenablethehazardrelatedriskstoberankedinorderforthesubsequent
considerationofwhatriskreductionmeasuresmightberequired.Therigourof
assessmentshouldbeproportionatetothecomplexityoftheproblemandthe
magnitudeofrisks.Withtheexceptionofthenuclearandchemicalindustry,itis
unusualforabuildingtohaveaquantitativeriskassessment.
81
BSEN1991-1-7,B.4impliesthatariskanalysisforaClass3structureshouldhavea
descriptive(qualitative)partand,whererelevantandpracticable,alsoshouldhavea
numerical(quantitative)part.
GuidanceonselectinganappropriateriskassessmentmethodisprovidedbytheHSE
inReference40.AlthoughtheHSEdocumentisforoffshoreinstallationstheprinciples
canbeappliedtoClass3buildings.Thelevelofriskassessmentshouldbesuffcient
toenablethedecisionmakingprocesstobeconductedandthoseresponsibleforthe
decisionmakingshouldbesuitablyqualifed,experiencedandofsuffcientseniorityto
becompetent.
ForordinaryClass3buildings(i.e.thosethatmarginallyexceedthelimitsofa
Class2bbuilding)aqualitativeriskassessmentshouldgenerallybeused.Aquantifed
assessmentmightberequiredforcertainhazardsiffurtherdetailisrequiredtoassess
theacceptabilityoftherisk.However,alackofaccuratedataonthelikelihoodof
hazardeventscanmeanthataquantitativeassessmentisrarelypossible.Therefore,
theengineerwillberequiredtoapplyprofessionaljudgement.
Qualitativeandquantitativeriskassessmentscanbebrokendownintothebasicsteps
showninFigure8.2.Thefollowingsectionsexplaineachofthesestepsinturn.
Defne scope
Hazard
identifcation
Level of risk
Is level
of risk
acceptable?
Accept risk
Likelihood of
hazard event
occuring
Consequences
of hazard event
occurring
Defne
acceptance
criteria
Risk mitigation
measures
NO
YES
Figure 8.2
Risk assessment
process
82
NotethattheterminologyusedinBSEN1991-1-7regardingrisksandhazards
isdifferentfromtheterminologythathascommonlybeenusedintheUK(e.g.in
HSEguidance).InBSEN1991-1-7,riskisa measure of the combination of the
probability or frequency of occurrence of a defned hazard and the magnitude of the
consequences of the occurrence.Incontrast,theHSEdefnesriskasthe likelihood
that a hazard will actually cause its adverse effects, together with a measure of the
effect
[41]
.Inthispublication,theEurocodeterminologyhasbeenused.
8.2.1 Defning the scope
Thedefnitionoftheriskassessmentshouldincludethepurposeoftherisk
assessment(e.g.todemonstratecompliancewithregulationsandanyclient
requirements),thetimeframetobeconsidered(e.g.thelifeofthebuilding)andthe
typesofhazardstobeincluded(e.g.accidentalactions).TheBuildingRegulationsare
intendedtoguardagainstaccidentaleventsandBSEN1991-1-7repeatedlyrefers
toaccidentalactions.Therefore,itwouldseemreasonableinmostcasestoexclude
deliberateormalicioushazardousactionsfromthescopeoftheriskassessment.
However,thedesignerhasanobligationtoconsiderallhazardsandforeseeable
resultantrisks,fromwhateversource.Occasionallyamaliciousactionmightneed
consideration;thisshouldbediscussedwiththeclient.Theappropriaterobustness
strategywillneedtobedeterminedonacasebycasebasis.
Ifthebuildingisrequiredtobedesignedtoresistmaliciousactionssuchasaterrorist
attack,thisshouldbeaddressedandconsideredinanintegratedmanneralongwiththe
otherhazardscenarios.Designingbuildingstoavoiddisproportionatecollapsedueto
accidentalactionscanprovidesomerobustnessagainstdeliberateandmaliciousactions.
8.2.2 Hazard identifcation
BSEN1991-1-7statesthatforeseeableandunforeseeablehazardsshouldbe
considered.ApprovedDocumentAstatesthattheriskassessmentshouldinclude;
normalhazardsthatcanreasonablybeforeseenandanyabnormalhazards.Hazards
ingeneraltermsareeventsthathaveunwantedconsequences,whichforbuildingsis
structuraldamage(andtheconsequentialharm).
Inpractice,thefocusoftheriskassessmentshouldbeonlikelyhazardsandclear
mitigationmeasuresthatcanbetakenagainstthem.Belowisalistofhazardsthat
shouldbeconsideredintheriskassessment.Certainbuildingsmighthaveadditional
specifchazardsthatalsoneedtobeconsidered:
Aircraftimpact
Externalexplosion
Floodingorextremetides
Internalexplosion
Landslide
Rockfall
83
Shipimpact
Trainimpact
Vehicleimpact
Fire
Vandalism
Extremeweather
Usebeyondoriginaldesign(e.g.fooroverloading).
Otherhazardssuchasdesignorconstructionerrorsandmaterialfaultsshouldbe
addressedbyconventionaldesignandconstructionpractice.However,therecanbe
situationswhereadditionalmeasuresarejustifed,e.g.additionaltestingtoensure
adequatematerialproperties.
Astructuressensitivitytochangesindesignassumptionshouldbeconsidered
togetherwiththeassociatedmodeoffailure.Failuremodesshouldbeductile.
ThecreationofahazardregistershouldbetheabsoluteminimumforClass3
buildings,todemonstratethatthepossiblehazardshaveatleastbeenthoughtabout
bythedesigner.Oftenthisshouldbebasedonconsultationwithotherexpertsina
QualityDesignReview(QDR)
[42]
.
Inadditiontothedisproportionatecollapseconsiderations,itcanbearequirement
ofcertainbuildingsthattheyareseparatelydesignedtoresistspecifchazards
(e.g.maliciousactions).Comprehensiveguidancefordesigningsteelbuildingsto
resistterroristexplosionsisgiveninSCIpublicationP244
[16]
.Reference43provides
specifcguidanceaimedatimprovingthesafetyoftallbuildings.Anyhazardthathas
beenspecifcallyaddressedasaclientrequirementoutsidethedisproportionate
collapserequirementsneednotbereconsideredintheriskassessmentrequiredfor
Class3buildings.
8.2.3 Likelihood of hazard events
Evenforapurelyqualitativemethod,thelikelihoodofeachhazardeventneedsto
beestimatedandassignedtoapredeterminedcategoryoflikelihood.Thenumber
ofcategoriesneedstobesuffcienttodifferentiatebetweenhazardeventswith
signifcantlydifferentprobabilities.Fiveorsixcategoriesareusuallyappropriatefor
aqualitativeriskassessment.Reference44suggeststhelikelihoodcategories
presentedinTable8.1.
lIkelIhood frequenCy
Frequent More than 10 per year
Likely Between 1 and 10 per year
Occasional Between 1 every year and 1 every 10 years
Unlikely Between 1 every 10 years and 1 every 100 years
Rare Between 1 every 100 years and 1 every 1000 years
Improbable Between 1 every 1000 years and 1 every 10000 years
Table 8.1
Likelihood categories
84
Foraquantifedriskassessment(QRA),varioustechniquescanbeusedtoobtaina
probabilityofoccurrenceformanyoftheforeseeablehazardevents.Someaccidental
impactscanbecalculatedbasedonhistoricaldata.Apaperongasexplosions
[45]
includesusefulinformation(albeithistorical)onyearlyprobabilitiesofexplosionsin
dwellingsintheUK(1in500,000probabilityofcausingstructuraldamage).However,
thatonlyconsiderstheriskofonehouseamongsttheUKstockbeingaffected.It
doesnotinformoftherisktoanyparticularhouse.Overall,abalancehastobestruck
betweenexpenditureonallhousestofullyprotectthemasagainstthetolerabilityof
acceptingtheoccasionalsevereloss.
Someprobabilitiesaresolowastobeignored,eventhoughtheconsequencescanbe
huge.ThustheHSEpublication
[46]
includesdataontheprobabilityofcertainhazard
eventsoccurringe.g.anaeroplanecrashingintoanemptyfootballstadiumintheUK
isquotedas1inamillionperannum.Theprobabilityofcrashingintoafullstadiumis
evenless;theprobabilityissolowitiscustomarilyignored.Itisimpossibletocomeup
withameaningfulpredictionofterroristattackoroftheformthatattackmighttake;
itissimplyajudgement.
CarryingoutQRAforanyparticularprojectispossibleformanyhazardsbutisbest
lefttospecialists.
8.2.4 Consequences of hazard events
Foraqualitativeanalysismethodtheconsequencesofhazardeventsaredealtwith
inasimilarmannertothelikelihoodofhazardeventsinthattheyareassignedtoa
categoryrefectingtheirseverity.Thenumberofcategoriescanvarybutfveorsix
categoriesareusuallyappropriateforaqualitativeriskassessment.Engineering
judgement,experienceandapproximatecalculationscanbeusedtoestimatethe
consequencesforaqualitativeassessment.Reference44suggeststheseverity
categoriespresentedinTable8.2.
Foraquantifedriskassessmenttheconsequencescanbemeasuredinvarious
units.Theamountofstructuraldamageisoftenthemostappropriatemeasurefor
buildings;alternativelyanestimateofthenumberofcasualtiescanbeused.Itcanbe
appropriatetoconsiderhumanconsequencesandstructuralconsequencesseparately.
Structuralcalculationswillbenecessarytodeterminetheamountofdamagecaused.
Table 8.2
Severity categories
SeverIty ConSequenCeS
Disastrous 20% to 100% collapse
Extreme 15% collapse of floor to 20% collapse of building
Serious Up to 15% collapse of floor
Significant Loss of structural member local to event but no floor collapse
Minor Local structural damage but no loss of structural members
Negligible No structural damage
85
Guidanceregardingthecalculationofimpactforcesandexplosionloadsduetovarious
causesisgiveninAnnexesCandDofBSEN1991-1-7.
Theperformanceofthedamagedstructurethenneedstobeassessedtodetermine
iffurthercollapsewilloccur.Thesensitivityofthebuildingtovariationsindesign
assumptionsshouldbeconsidered.
ItmustbekeptinmindthattheBuildingRegulationsonlyrequirethatbuildingsare
designedtoavoiddisproportionatecollapsenotdesignedtosurviveallpossibleevents.
Determiningwhethercollapseisdisproportionateisnotastraightforwardissue.
GuidancegiveninApprovedDocumentAsuggeststhatforthenotionalremovalofone
column,damagenotexceeding70m
2
or15%ofthefoorarea(whicheverisless)is
proportionate.Note:Thelimitis100m
2
or15%inBSEN1991-1-7.However,because
thedamageshouldnotbedisproportionatetothecause,theamountofdamagethat
isacceptableisrelatedtothesizeoftheoriginalaccidentalaction.Hence,thelarger
theoriginalcausethemorecollapsebecomesacceptableintermsofdisproportionate
collapse.Iftheinitialeventislargeenough,totalcollapseofabuildingmaynotbe
considereddisproportionate.
8.2.5 Level of risk
Thelevelofriskassociatedwitheachhazardisusuallyexpressedasafunctionofthe
severityandthelikelihoodofthehazardevent.
Foraqualitativeassessment,ariskmatrixasshowninFigure8.3isaconvenient
methodofrankingtherisks.Eachhazardeventisplottedontheriskmatrixaccording
totheappropriateseverityandlikelihoodcategory.Theacceptabilityofrisksshouldbe
evaluatedinorder,startingwiththehighestrisk.
A B C D
I
II
III
IV
V
Severity
L
i
k
e
l
i
h
o
o
d
Unacceptable risk
Apply engineering judgement
Acceptable risk
Figure 8.3
Risk matrix for
hazard events
Wherethelikelihoodiscategorisedbyeventsthataremoreorlesslikelytooccur
withinthedesignlifeofthebuilding,andtheseverityofdamageisassessedasbeing
moreorlessthanthecollapseof15%ofafoor(thenotionallimitgiveninApproved
DocumentAandBSEN1991-1-7),itisoftenpossibletosimplifytheconsiderations
intoasimple2by2matrix(asshowninFigure8.4).Twoboxesinthismatrixrequire
86
theapplicationofengineeringjudgement.Asexamplesofthese,aClass3building
beingbuiltnearasteepslopemightbeexpectedtoexperienceminorrockfalls
occasionallywithinitsdesignlifebutamajorlandslidemightbeexpectednomore
frequentlythan,say,oncein500years(wellbeyondthedesignlife).Thelatterevent,
althoughrare,couldhaveextremeordisastrousconsequences,whereastheformer
event,whileoccasional,wouldhavefarlessseriousconsequences.Inthelattercase
itmightbeassessedthat,byapplystructuraltyingasrecommendedforClass2b
buildings,thestructurewassuffcientlyrobust.Fortheformerevent,tyingalone
wouldnotbesuffcientasthewholestructurecouldbesubjectedtooverturning
inalandslide.Itwouldgenerallybeunrealistictodesignthestructuretoresistthe
landslideevent.Hence,dependingonthenatureofthebuildinguseandoccupancy,
theriskcouldbeaccepted,reduced(e.g.byplacingaheavydiversionarystructure
betweenthebuildingandtheslope)orremoved(e.g.bystabilisingtheslopeor
relocatingthebuilding).
Severity
L
i
k
e
l
i
h
o
o
d
Not likely within
design life of
building
Likely within
design life of
building
More than 15%
of foor area
Less than 15%
of foor area
Acceptable
Unacceptable
Engineering
judgement
Engineering
judgement
Figure 8.4
Simplifed risk matrix
8.2.6 Acceptance criteria
Theacceptabilitycriteriaofriskforeachbuildingshouldbeagreedwiththebuilding
controlauthoritiesandtheclient.Indicativeinformationonwhatlevelsofriskcanbe
acceptablecanbeobtainedfromvarioussources.Forexample,thenuclear
[46]
and
theoffshore
[40]
industrieshaveguidanceregardingacceptablelevelsofriskbutthese
aregenerallyexpressedintermsofriskofdeathperindividualperyear.Reference47
discussessomeoftheissuesconcerningacceptabilityofriskinstructuralengineering.
BSEN1991-1-7presentstheriskacceptanceprincipleofALARP(aslowasreasonably
practicable).Accordingtothisprinciple,tworisklevelsarespecifed:iftheriskis
belowthelowerboundofthebroadlytolerable(i.e.ALARP)regionnomeasuresneed
87
tobetaken;ifitisabovetheupperboundofthebroadlytolerableregiontheriskis
consideredasunacceptable.Iftheriskisbetweentheupperandlowerboundan
economicaloptimalsolutionshouldbesought.
BSEN1991-1-7suggeststhatriskacceptancecriteriashouldbebasedonthe
followingtwocriteria:
Theindividualacceptablelevelofrisk.Individualrisksareusuallyexpressedasfatal
accidentrates.Theycanbeexpressedasanannualfatalityprobabilityorasthe
probabilitypertimeunitofasinglefatalitywheninvolvedinaspecifcactivity.
Thesociallyacceptablelevelofrisk.Thesocialacceptanceofrisktohumanlife,
whichcanvarywithtime,isoftenpresentedasanF-Ncurve,indicatingamaximum
yearlyprobabilityFofhavinganaccidentwithmorethenNcasualties.
Inreality,formanyrisksitwillbeaninformedjudgement.
8.2.7 Risk mitigation
Riskscanbemitigatedinoneoftwoways:
Byeliminatingthehazardevent.
Byreducingtheprobabilityofthehazardeventand/ortheseverityoftheconsequences.
Totallyeliminatingthehazardeventisnotpossibleorpracticalinmanysituationsbut
signifcantlyreducingtheprobabilityortheconsequencesisoftenachievableatvery
littleadditionalcost.
Eliminating hazards
Theoverallbuildingconceptcanhaveasignifcantinfuenceonthetypeandmagnitude
ofhazardsthatneedtobeaddressed.Thisincludesthebuildinglocationandproximity
tospecifchazards.Thebuildingstructuralformmustalsobeconsidered.Largepartsof
thebuildingshouldnotbereliantononeortwocriticalmembers.Wherepossible,loads
shouldbedistributedbetweenmanymembersandalternativeloadpathsshouldbe
presentwhichcouldbeutilisedintheeventofanincident.
Somehazardscanbeavoided.Deliberateoraccidentalvehicularimpactonthe
buildingcouldbepreventedbytheinstallationofsuitableexternalbarriers.Excluding
explosivematerialsfromabuildingwillavoidthehazardoftheirexplosion.
Reducing the probability of hazard events
Reducingtheprobabilityofhazardeventswilloftenbebeyondthecontrolofthe
structuralengineerforaparticularbuilding.ForClass3buildings,areviewofthe
proposeddesignshouldbecarriedoutthatspecifcallyfocusesonrobustnessand
reliability.Partofthatreviewistoconsiderthepossibilityandimplicationsoferror.
Notallriskreductionmeasureswillinvolveastructuralsolution.Asimplebuteffective
methodofreducingthelikelihoodofterroristattackistohavesecuritycheckson
peopleenteringthebuilding.
88
Reducing the consequences of hazard events
Therearemanymeasuresthatcanbeadoptedtoreducetheconsequencesofhazard
events.Providingincreasedlevelsofrobustness(e.g.providingreservesofstrength,
alternativeloadpaths,andresistancetodegradation)isthemostobvious.
Introducingductilityintothestructuralsystemisameansofreducingthe
consequencesofthehazards.Ductilityisthestandarddemandinearthquake
protectionanditisoftenachievedbyincreasingthejointresistancessothattheyare
strongerthanthemembers.Strengtheningthemembersbutnottheconnectionsmight
enforceanundesirablebrittlefailureunderextremeloadingiftheconnectionfailure
modeisnotductile.
Sub-dividinglargerbuildingswithmovementjointscanbeusedtorestrictthespread
ofcollapse.Sprinklerscanbeinstalledtocontrolthespreadoffreandventingpanels
canbeinstalledtoreducetheblastloadingfromexplosions.Traffccalmingmeasures
canbeusedtoreducethespeedofaccidentalvehicularimpact.
Failureofbeamssupportingoneormorecolumnsorsystemsprovidinglateralstability
islikelytohaveparticularlysevereconsequencesandthetyingdesignmethodcould
proveinadequateinthisparticularsituation.Itisrecommendedthateitherelement
removalorkeyelementdesignisused.
8.2.8 Risk acceptance and communication
Thefnalstageofthesystematicriskassessmentistoaccepttheresidualrisksand
reportthefndings.Thereportshouldincludeallthehazardsandtheirassociatedlevel
ofrisk,withexplanationsofthebasisonwhichtherisksareconsideredacceptable
anddescribingthereductionmeasuresthathavebeenadoptedtoachieveacceptable
levels.Optionaladditionalreductionmeasurescanalsobesuggestedtofurther
reducetherisks.Thefndingsoftheriskassessmentwillfeedbackintothedecision-
makingprocessforthedesignandoperationofthebuilding.Allthesourcesofdata,
assumptionsanduncertaintiesintheassessmentshouldbeincludedinthereport.
89
91
9.1 General
Atransferbeamisabeamthatsupportsoneormorecolumns,asshowninFigure9.1.
Frombasicengineeringitisclearthatatransferbeamismorecriticalthanafoor
beamandpotentiallymorecriticalthanacolumnmember,simplybyexamining
thefoorareathatisdependentonthetransferbeam.Therefore,whendesigning
structurestoresistaccidentalactions,transferbeams,theirconnectionsandthe
membersthatsupportthemneedcarefulconsideration.
Inviewoftheirpotentialcriticality,alltransferbeams,inwhateverClassofstructure,
shouldbesubjecttoanassessmenttodeterminewhetherthestandardapproachesof
Class1,2aor2bareappropriate.Class3requiressuchanassessmentinanyevent.
tranSfer beamS
Transfer beam,
supporting one or
more columns
Columns supported
by transfer beam
Figure 9.1
Transfer beam
9.2 Class1 buildings
InBSEN1991-1-7thereisnospecifcmentionoftransferbeamsinrelationto
Class1buildings.Therefore,itisrecommendedthattransferbeamsinClass1
buildingsshouldbedesignedtosatisfytheminimumlevelofhorizontaltyingstatedin
Section5.1.2,i.e.thetransferbeamanditsendconnectionsshouldbedesignedto
resistaminimumdesigntensileforceof75kN.
92
Transfer Beams
9.3 Class2a buildings
ThereisalsonospecifcmentioninBSEN1991-1-7oftransferbeamsinrelation
toClass2abuildings.Therefore,itisrecommendedthattransferbeamsinClass2a
buildingsshouldbedesignedtosatisfythespecifedminimumlevelofhorizontaltying
forClass2abuildings.
Transferbeams,includingtheirendconnections,shouldbecapableofsustaininga
designtensileloadofT
i
forinternalbeams,andT
p
,inthecaseofperimeterbeams.
ThemagnitudesofT
i
andT
p
arecalculatedaccordingtoEquationsA.1andA.2
fromBSEN1991-1-7,A.5.1,withtheadditionofthetermsV
c
torepresenttheload
fromsupportedcolumns,i.e.:
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+yq
k
)s L+0.5V
c
or75kN,whicheveristhegreater
T
p
=0.4(g
k
+yq
k
)s L+0.5V
c
InwhichsandLarethespacingandlengthofthetransferbeamandV
c
isthesum
ofthepointloadsfromthecolumnssupportedbythetransferbeam.TheV
c
termis
calculatedfortheaccidentaldesigncase,asgiveninSection7.6.5.(SeeSection6.2.2
forthedefnitionofotherterms.)
Thelossofatransferbeamwillgenerallymeanthelossofasubstantialpartofa
buildingso,irrespectiveofapureinterpretationofBSEN1991-1-7,soundengineering
wouldsuggestthatrobustconnectionsshouldbeprovidedtotransferbeams.The
endconnectionsshouldgenerallyhaveatyingresistanceapproachingthefullshear
resistanceofthetransferbeam.
9.4 Class2b buildings
AsexplainedinSection7,therearethreealternativemethodsfordesigningClass2b
buildingsforrobustness;tying,notionalremovalandkeyelement.Itispossibleto
includetransferbeamswithinanyofthesemethods.However,thetyingorkeyelement
approachesareusuallythemostappropriate.
9.4.1 Notional removal
TransferbeamsarespecifcallymentionedforClass2bbuildingsinBSEN1991-1-7in
thenotionalremovalapproach.However,asdiscussedinSection7.6.4,thenotional
removalapproachisunlikelytobeaviabledesignstrategyformoststeelframe
buildings,evenlesssowheretransferbeamsareused.
9.4.2 Tying approach
ThetyingapproachpresentedinBSEN1991-1-7doesnotgiveanyspecifc
requirementsfortransferbeams.Thegeneralrequirementsofthetyingapproachare
93
presentedinSections7.2to7.5.Fortransferbeamsthehorizontalandverticaltying
requirementsshouldbemodifedfromthegeneralrequirements.
Thehorizontaltyingrequirementshouldbemodifedandappliedasdescribed
inSection9.3.
Theverticaltyingrequirementsshouldbemodifedsothatcolumnssupportedby
transferbeamsareverticallytiedtothetransferbeam.Thetensileresistanceofthe
connectionshouldbedesignedforthemaximumtensionthatwouldoccurinthe
accidentalloadingcaseifeitheroneofthecolumnssupportingthetransferbeamwas
removed.Theintentionofthisrequirementisthatthetransferbeamcould,inpart,be
supportedfromthestructureaboveifoneofitssupportingcolumnswerelostdueto
anaccidentalevent(seeFigure9.2).
Transfer beam
Column support, lost
due to accidental event
Figure 9.2
Transfer beam
supported from above
9.4.3 Key element approach
BSEN1991-1-7doesnotrequiretransferbeamsinClass2bbuildingstobedesignedas
keyelementsbuttransferbeamsmaybedesignedaskeyelementsinsteadofapplying
thetyingmethod(asmodifedinSection9.4.2)orthenotionalremovalmethod.
ThegeneralguidanceonthedesignofkeyelementsgiveninSection7.7shouldbe
appliedtokeyelementtransferbeams.
Inadditiontodesigningthetransferbeamasakeyelement,thecolumnsthatsupport
thetransferbeamsshouldalsobedesignedaskeyelements.
9.5 Class3 buildings
Asaminimumrequirement,transferbeamsinClass3buildingsshouldbedesigned
followingtheguidancefortransferbeamsinClass2bbuildings(seeSection9.4).
However,itmustberecognisedthatinsomeClass3buildingsthelossofatransfer
beamcouldbecatastrophicwhichwouldjustifymorestringentrobustnessprovisions.
TheriskassessmentprocessforaClass3buildingwillidentifywhetheranyadditional
measuresareneededwithregardtothetransferbeam.
95
Table10.1providesasummaryoftherobustnessrequirementsforthedifferent
buildingclasses.Therequirementsaredividedintotwocategories,therequirements
oftheEurocodesandthoserequirementsthatarerecommendedinadditiontothe
Eurocoderequirements.Detailedexplanationsofalltherequirementsaregiveninthe
previoussectionsofthispublication.
Summary of
robuStneSS
requirementS
Table 10.1
Summary of
robustness
requirements
robuStneSS requIrementS
buIldIng ClaSS
1 2a
2b
t
2b
nr
2b
ke
3
Eurocode
No additional robustness requirements if
designed to BS EN 1993

Provide horizontal ties
Provide vertical tying
Notional removal method
Key element method
Systematic risk assessment
Recommended additional
Minimum horizontal tying resistance of 75 kN for
beam to column connections

Bearing details for floor, roof and stair units
should conform to BS EN 1992 and include
allow for tolerances

Multiple bracing systems
Anchorage of heavy floor/roof/stair units
Apply rules for class 2b as a minimum
Note:
2bT =Tyingdesignmethod
2bNR =Notionalremovaldesignmethod
2bKE =Keyelementdesignmethod
97
[1] BS EN 1991-1-7:2006,
Eurocode 1: Actions on structures. General
actions. Accidental actions (incorporating
corrigendum February 2010).
BSI,2006
[2] BS EN 1993-1-1:2005,
Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures. General
rules and rules for buildings (incorporating
corrigenda February 2006 and April 2009).
BSI,2005
[3] BS EN 1990:2002 + A1:2005,
Eurocode: Basis of structural design
(incorporating corrigenda December 2008 and
April 2010).
BSI,2002
[4] Building Act 1984.
Chapter55.
HMSO,1984
[5] Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
Chapter37.
HMSO,1974
[6] Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations 2007 (including correction slip
issued July 2008).
TheStationeryOffce,2007
[7] The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare)
Regulations.TheStationeryOffce,1992
Asamendedby:TheHealthandSafety
(MiscellaneousAmendments)Regulations.
[8] BRETTLE,M.E.Steel Building Design:
Introduction to the Eurocodes (P361).
SCI,2009
[9] ReportoftheInquiryintotheCollapseofFlats
atRonanPoint,CanningTown.
HMSO,1968
[10] The Structure of Ronan Point and other Taylor
Woodrow Anglian Buildings.
BRE,1985
[11] The Building Regulations 2010.
referenceS
[12] Approved Document A.
The Building Regulations 2000. Structure.
Approved Document A (2004 Edition).
[13] SBSA Technical Handbooks 2011.
Domestic and Non-Domestic.
ScottishBuildingStandardsAgency,2011
[14] The Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000.
Technical booklet D Structure/Departmentof
FinanceandPersonnel.
TheStationeryOffce(Ireland),2009
[15] BRETTLE,M.E.andBROWN,D.G.
Steel Building Design: Concise Eurocodes -
In accordance with Eurocodes and the
UK National Annexes (P362).
SCI,2009
[16] YANDZIO,E.andGOUGH,M.
Protection of Buildings against Explosions (P244).
SCI,1999
[17] BS EN 1998-3:2005,
Eurocode 8. Design of structures for earthquake
resistance. Assessment and retroftting of buildings
(incorporating corrigendum March 2010).
BSI,2005
[18] BS EN 1993-1-2:2005,
Eurocode 3. Design of steel structures. General
rules - Structural fre design (incorporating
corrigenda December 2005, September 2006
and March 2009).
BSI,2005
[19] Guidance on robustness and provision against
accidental actions.
ThecurrentapplicationofrequirementsA3of
theBuildingRegulations.Finalreportincluding
backgrounddocumentation.
AvailablefromUKGovernmentPlanning
Portalwebsite
[20] NHBC Technical Guidance Note: C13
The Building Regulations 2004 Edition
England and Wales.
Requirement A3 Disproportionate Collapse.
NHBC,2011
98
referenCes
[21] WAY,A.
Guidance on meeting the Robustness
Requirements in Approved Document A (P341).
SCI,2005
[22] AdvisoryDeskNote267. Notional horizontal
forces and industrial platform.
NewSteelConstruction,vol.11(5),Sep/Oct2003
[23] Guidance on achieving compliance on
disproportionate collapse in existing buildings
for Class 2B cases in single/multiple occupancy.
InternalDocumentavailabletolocalauthorities.
LondonDistrictSurveyorsAssociation
[24] Practical Guide to Structural Robustness and
Disproportionate Collapse in Buildings.
October2010
TheInstitutionofStructuralEngineers,2010
[25] Joints in Steel Construction - Simple Joints to
Eurocode 3 (P358).
SCI,2011
[26] BS EN 1993-1-8:2005,
Eurocode 3. Design of Steel Structures. Design of
Joints (incorporating corrigenda December 2005,
September 2006, July 2009 and August 2010).
BSI,2005
[27] NCCI: Tying resistance of a simple end plate
connection (SN015).
www.steel-ncci.co.uk
[28] BRETTLE,M.E.
Steel Building Design: Worked Examples - Open
Sections - In accordance with Eurocodes and the
UK National Annexes (P364).
SCI,2009
[29] Composite Slabs and Beams using Steel
Decking: Best Practice for Design and
Construction (Revised Edition)
MCRMATechnicalPaperNo.13/SCI
PublicationNo.P300.
TheMetalCladding&RoofngManufacturers
AssociationinpartnershipwithSCI,2009
[30] BS EN 1992-1-1:2004,
Eurocode 2. Design of Concrete Structures.
General rules and rules for buildings
(incorporating corrigendum January 2008).
BSI,2004
[31] PD 6687-1:2010
Background paper to the National Annexes to
BS EN 1992-1 and BS EN 1992-3
BSI,2010
[32] BS 8110-1:1997
Structural use of concrete. Code of practice for
design and construction
BSI,1997
[33] Code of Practice for the Design and
Installation of Anchors.
HealthandSafetyAuthority,Ireland,2010
[34] UK National Annex to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006:2008.
National annex to Eurocode 1: Actions on
structures. Accidental Actions.
BSI,2008
[35] Corefast.InformationaboutCorefastisavailable
fromtheTataSteelEuropewebsite:
www.tatasteeleurope.com/en/products/
construction_products_and_services/structural_
steelwork/corefast
[36] HICKS,S.J.andLAWSON,R.M.
Design of Composite Beams using Precast
Concrete Slabs (P287).
SCI,2003
[37] The Slimdek Manual.
Corus,2008
[38] RACKHAM,J.W.
Design of Asymmetric Slimfor Beams to
Eurocodes (P392).
SCI,2011
[39] WAY,A.
Robustness Rules for Slimdek (SCI Report RT1215).
SCI,2008
[40] Guidance on Risk Assessment for Offshore
Installations(OffshoreInformationSheet3/2006)
HSE,2006
[41] HSE Risk Management Guidance, Expert
Guidance, ALARP at a Glance.
www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarpglance.htm
[42] PD 6688-1-7: 2009
Recommendations for the Design of Structures to
BS EN 1991-1-7.
BSI,2008
[43] Safety in Tall Buildings and other Buildings with
Large Occupancy.
TheInstitutionofStructuralEngineers,2002
[44] HARDING,GandCARPENTER,J.
Paper:Disproportionate Collapse of Class 3
Buildings: The Use of Risk Assessment.
TheStructuralEngineer,Vol.87,Issue15,2009
[45] ELLIS,B.R.andCURRIE,D.M.
Paper:Gas Explosions in Buildings in the UK:
Regulation and Risk.
[46] The Tolerability of Risk from Nuclear Power Stations.
H.M.S.O.,London,1988
[47] MANN,A.P.
Risk in Structural Engineering.
99
creditS
10 CourtesyofNewSteel
Construction
13 Sourceunknown
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Cover CourtesyofNewSteel
Construction
100
101
appendix a
example 1 Class 1 BuIldIng 103
Brief 103
Building classification 103
Robustness requirements 103
example 2 Class 2a BuIldIng 104
Brief 104
Additional structural provisions 107
example 3 Class 2B BuIldIng
tyIng method 108
Brief 108
notIonal removal method 113
Brief 113
Key element method 116
Brief 116
transFer Beam 119
Brief 119
Tying method 122
Key element design method 122
Robustness strategy 122
Sixshortworkedexamplesarepresented:
102
103
Example 1 Class 1 building
Brief
WhataretherobustnessrequirementsforthebuildingshowninoutlineinFigure1?
Thebuildingisasinglestoreyagriculturalbuildingofportalframeconstruction.Itis15m
wide,30mlongandheighttoeavesis6m.Thecladdingweightislessthan0.7kN/m
2
.
Figure 1
Agricultural building
6 m
15 m
30 m
Building classifcation
AllagriculturalbuildingsareclassifedasClass1.(Althoughagriculturalbuildingsare
notcoveredbyUKBuildingRegulations,theyareclassifedinBSEN1991-1-7.)
Robustness requirements
Robustness strategy
ThebuildingisdesignedinaccordancewiththerulesgiveninBSEN1993.Therefore
noadditionalrulesneedtobeappliedfortheconsiderationofavoidanceof
disproportionatecollapse.
Additional structural provisions
Itisrecommendedthataminimumlevelofhorizontaltyingisprovidedwithin
theframe.Therecommendedminimumlevelofhorizontaltyingisthatallfoor
beam-to-columnconnectionsaredesignedtobecapableofsustainingadesigntensile
forceof75kN.
Theroofonlysupportsroofcladdingthatweighsnotmorethan0.7kN/m
2
andcarries
onlyimposedroofloadsandwindloads.Therefore,theminimumlevelofhorizontal
tyingshouldalsobeappliedtoroofbeams.
Takingtheaboveintoaccount,theconnectionsbetweencolumnsandroofbeams
(rafters)shouldbecapableofsustainingadesigntensileforceof75kN.
BS EN 1991-1-7,
Table A.1
Section 5.1.1
Section 5.1.2
Section 5.2.2
104
Worked examples
Example 2 Class 2a building
Brief
Whataretherobustnessrequirementsforthesteel-framedbuildingwiththebeamand
columnconfgurationshowninFigure1?
Thebuildingisathreestoreyhotelofbracedframeconstruction.Thecolumnsarelaidout
ona7.5mx7.5mgridwithASBsspanninginonedirectionandinvertedTsections
connectingthecolumnsintheorthogonaldirection.TheASBssupportcompositeslabs
formedfromin-situconcreteanddeepdeckingsupportedonthebottomfangeoftheASBs.
Thefoorloadingis:
Permanentaction, g
k
=4.0kN/m
2
Variableaction, q
k
=3.5kN/m
2
Theroofloadingis:
Permanentaction, g
k
=4.0kN/m
2
Variableaction, q
k
=1.0kN/m
2
7.5 m
7.5 m
ASBs
Inverted Tees
Figure 1
Floor arrangement
AhotelnotexceedingfourstoreysisclassifedasClass2a.
Robustness strategy
ThebuildingisClass2athereforeeffectivehorizontaltiesshouldbeprovided.
Effectivehorizontaltiesshouldbeprovidedinthefollowinglocations:
BS EN 1991-1-7,
Table A.1
Section 6.1.1
Section 6.2.3
105
aroundtheperimeterofeachfoorlevel;
aroundtheperimeterofeachrooflevel;
internallyintworightangledirectionstotiecolumns;
allbeamsdesignedtoactasties.
Therequiredtieresistancesaregivenbythefollowingequations:
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+y q
k
T
p
=0.4(g
k
+y q
k
where:
g
k
q
k
isthevariableaction
s isthespacingofties
L isthespanofthetie
y istherelevantfactory
1
ory
2
.AccordingtotheNAtoBSEN1990,y
1
should
beusedand,forhotels,CategoryC:congregationareasapplies,soy
1
=0.7.
Floor internal ASB (perpendicular to span)
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+y
1
q
k
T
i
=0.8(4.0+0.7 3.5)7.5 7.5
T
i
=290kN
Themember,includingitsendconnections,shouldbecapableofsustainingadesign
tensileloadof290kN.
Floor internal tee (parallel to span)
Theinternalteesectionparalleltospandoesnotcarryanyfoorloads.Therefore,the
tieforceequationsdonotneedtobeconsideredandtheminimumtieforceof75kN
shouldapplyforthismember.
tensileloadof75kN.
Floor edge beam (perpendicular to span)
T
p
=T
3
=0.4(g
k
+y
1
q
k
T
p
=0.4(4.0+0.7 3.5)7.5 7.5
T
p
=145kN
Section 6.2.2
Section 6.3.8
Section 6.3.8
Section 6.3.8
Figure 6.11
106
Worked examples
tensileloadof145kN.
Floor edge beam (parallel to span)
Thememberdoesnotsupportanyfoorloads.Therefore,thetieforceequationsdonot
needtobeappliedandtheminimumtieforceof75kNshouldbeappliedtothismember.
tensileloadof75kN.
Roof internal beam (perpendicular to span)
Thevalueofy
1
takenfromTableNA.A1.1intheNAtoBSEN1990appropriatetoroofs
applies,soy
1
=0.
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+y q
k
T
i
=0.8(4.0+ 0 1.0)7.5 7.5
T
i
=180kN
tensileloadof180kN
Roof internal tee (parallel to span)
Theinternalteesectionparalleltospandoesnotcarryanyroofloads.Therefore,the
tieforceequationsdonotneedtobeappliedandtheminimumtieforceof75kN
shouldbeappliedtothismember.
tensileloadof75.0kN.
Roof edge beam (perpendicular to span)
T
i
=0.4(g
k
+yq
k
T
i
=0.4(4.0+0 1.0)7.5 7.5
T
i
=90kN
tensileloadof90kN.
Roof edge beam (parallel to span)
Thememberdoesnotsupportanyroofloads.Therefore,thetieforceequationsdonot
needtobeconsideredandtheminimumtieforceof75kNshouldapplyforthismember.
Section 6.3.8
Section 6.3.8
Section 6.3.8
107
tensileloadof75kN.
ThebearingdetailsofthefoorandroofslabsshouldconformtoBSEN1992and
makedueallowanceforconstruction,fabricationandmanufacturingtolerances.
ThefoorisformedfromdeepdeckingsupportedonthebottomfangeofASBsandinsitu
concrete,seeFigure2.Therefore,theslabsandbeamsareintegratedandthebearing
detailsarenotdependentonconstruction,fabricationandmanufacturingtolerances.
Figure 2
Slab bearing detail
108
Worked examples
Example 3 Class 2b building Tying method
Brief
Whataretherobustnessrequirementsforthesteel-framedmulti-storeybuilding
outlinedinFigure1?
Thebuildingisa10storeyoffcebuildingofsteelbracedframeconstruction.All
storeysare4.0mhigh,apartfromthegroundtofrstfoor,whichhasaheightof5.0m.
Thecolumnsarelaidoutona6m9mgridwiththeprimarybeamsspanning6m
andthesecondarybeamsspanning9m,asshowninFigure2.Thespacingofthe
secondarybeamsis3.0m.Acompositefooringsystemisusedwithsteeldecking
spanningbetweenthesecondarybeams.Allthesecondaryandprimarybeamsare
assumedtoactcompositelywiththefoorslab.Thesteelframehastwobracedbayson
eachofthefoursidesprovidinglateralstability.
Figure 1
Offce building
B
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
A C
Inpractice,therobustnesschecksmustbecarriedoutonallmemberstoensure
adequaterobustnessthroughoutthestructure.However,inthisexample,thechecks
areonlyperformedoninternalfoorbeams(primaryandsecondary),anedgecolumn
andaninternalcolumn.ThesecolumnsaredenotedBandErespectivelyinFigure2.
Thecompositefoorsystemcomprisessteeldeckingspanningbetweenthesecondary
beams,asshowninFigure3,witha125mmthickslabingradeC25/30concrete.
109
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
3.0 (typ.)
Secondary beams
(also acting as tie beams)
Primary beams
G H I
D
A
E
B
F
C
9.0
6.0
Secondary beams
Primary beam
Composite decking panel
Figure 2
Beam arrangement
Figure 3
Slab arrangement
Thefoorloadingis:
Permanentaction, g
k
=3.5kN/m
2
Variableaction, q
k
=6.0kN/m
2
Offcebuildingsgreaterthanfourstoreysbutnotexceeding15storeysareclassifed
asClass2b.
Robustness strategy
ThebuildingisclassifedasClass2b,thereforetherearethreealternativemethods
thatcouldbeapplied:
BS EN 1991-1-7
Table A.1
Section 6.1.1
110
Worked examples
Tying.
Notionalremoval.
Keyelement.
Forthisexamplethetyingmethodwillbeapplied.Forthetyingmethodthefollowing
shouldbeprovided:
Horizontalties.
Verticalties.
Horizontal ties
Therequiredhorizontaltieresistancesaregivenbythefollowingequations:
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+ q
k
T
p
=0.4(g
k
+ q
k
)sL or75kN,whicheveristhegreater
where:
g
k
q
k
isthevariableaction
L isthespanofthetie
istherelevantfactor
1
or
2
.AccordingtotheNAtoBSEN1990,
1
should
beusedand,foroffces,CategoryB:offceareasapplies,so
1
=0.5.
Floor internal primary foor beam
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+ q
k
T
i
=0.8(3.5+0.56.0)9.06.0
T
i
=281kN
tensileloadof281kN.
Floor internal secondary foor beam
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+q
k
T
i
=0.8(3.5+0.5 6.0)3.0 9.0
T
i
=140kN
tensileloadof140kN.
Section 6.2.3
Section 6.3.9
Section 6.3.9
111
Vertical ties
Verticaltiesshouldbe:
providedincolumnssuchthateachcolumnistiedcontinuouslyfromthe
foundationstotherooflevel;
capableofresistinganaccidentaldesigntensileforceequaltothelargestdesign
verticalpermanentandvariableloadreactionappliedtothecolumnfromanyone
storey.Suchaccidentaldesignloadingshouldnotbeassumedtoactsimultaneously
withpermanentandvariableactionsthatmaybeactingonthestructure.
Internal column
Therequiredtieresistanceforaninternalcolumnspliceisgivenbythefollowingequation:
T
v
=(
g
g
k
+
q
q
k
)sL
where:
g
k
q
k
isthevariableaction
s isthecolumnspacing(direction1)
L isthecolumnspacing(direction2)
isareductionfactorforunfavourablepermanentactions,=0.925
g
isapartialfactorforpermanentactions,
g
=1.35
q
isapartialfactorforvariableactions,
q
=1.5.
Therefore,
T
v
=(
g
g
k
+
q
q
k
)sL
T
v
=(0.925 1.35 3.5+1.5 6.0)6.0 9.0
T
v
=722kN
Thecolumnsplicesshouldbecapableofsustainingadesigntensileloadof722kN.
Edge column
Therequiredtieresistanceforanedgecolumnspliceisgivenbythefollowingequation:
T
v
=(
g
g
k
+
q
q
k
)sL/2
T
v
=(0.925 1.35 3.5+1.5 6.0)6.0 9.0/2
T
v
=361kN
Thecolumnsplicesshouldbecapableofsustainingadesigntensileloadof361kN.
Section 7.3.2
BS EN 1990,
Eq. 6.10b
SCI-P362 Appendix C
112
Worked examples
Therecommendedadditionalstructuralprovisionsareconcernedwith:
Verticalbracing.
Anchorageofheavyunits.
Vertical bracing
Thebracedbaysshouldbedistributedthroughoutthebuildingsuchthat,ineachof
twodirectionsapproximatelyatrightangles,nosubstantialportionofthebuildingis
connectedtoonlyonesystemforresistinghorizontalforce.
InthisExample,theverticalbracingrequirementissatisfedbyhavingtwobracedbays
oneachofthefoursides.
Anchorage of heavy units
Thefoorandroofslabsshouldbeeffectivelyanchoredinthedirectionoftheirspan,
eithertoadjacentslabsoverasupport,ordirectlytotheirsupports.
Theanchorageshouldbecapableofcarryingtheself-weightofthefoororroofunit.
Thecompositefoorslabsspan3mbetweensupports.ForthisExampleitisassumed
thattheirdeadweightisequaltothefoorpermanentaction,g
k
=3.5kN/m
2
.The
requiredanchorageateachslabsupportiscalculatedbelow.
Requiredanchorage =3.5 3/2 =5.25kNpermwidth.
UsingaproperlyanchoredA142meshreinforcement(crosssectionareaof
142mm
2
/mandyieldstrengthof500N/mm
2
)willprovideatensileanchorage
resistanceof71kNpermwidth.
Note:Forrobustness,thematerialpartialfactorfortheaccidentaldesignsituationmay
beusedwhichis1.0forreinforcingsteel.
Fortheslabsspanningontoedgebeamsasuitabledetailwillbeneedtoanchorthe
foorslabdirectlytotheedgebeam.
Ifedgebeamsaredesignedascompositewiththeuseofweldedshearstuds,the
anchoragerequirementswillgenerallybesatisfed.
Ifedgebeamsaredesignedasnon-composite,weldedshearstudsmaybeused
toprovidetherequiredanchorage,eventhoughtheedgebeamisnon-composite.
Alternatively,theshotfredpinsthatareusedtoconnectthedecktothesupporting
steelworkmaybeutilised.Theresistanceofashotfredpinconnectionisdependent
onthefxingusedanddeckingthickness.Forashotfredpinconnectionwitha
resistanceof2.7kN,suffcientanchorageisachievedforthisExamplewithshotfred
pinsspacedat500mmalongthebeam.
Section 7.1.2
Section 7.5.2
BS EN 1992-1-1,
Table 2.1N and
Table NA.1
113
Example4 Class2b building Notional removal method
Brief
ThisexampleusesthesamebuildingandfoorarrangementasdescribedinExample3.
Insteadofapplyingthetyingmethodtodesignforavoidanceofdisproportionate
collapse,thisexampleconsiderswhetherthenotionalremovalmethodcanbeapplied
tothisClass2bbuilding.
Robustness strategy
Thebuildingshouldbecheckedtoensurethatuponthenotionalremovalofeach
supportingcolumnandeachbeamsupportingacolumn(oneatatimeineachstorey
ofthebuilding)thebuildingremainsstableandthatanylocaldamagedoesnotexceed
acertainlimit.
ThelimitofadmissiblelocaldamageaccordingtoBSEN1991-1-7,A.4is15%ofthe
foorareaor100m
2
,whicheverissmaller.
Note:ForcompliancewithApprovedDocumentAthelowerlimitof70m
2
shouldbeapplied.
Inthisexampletherearenobeamssupportingcolumnssoonlythenotionalremovalof
columnsectionsneedstobeconsidered.Inpractice,thenotionalremovalchecksmust
becarriedoutonallcolumnstoensureadequaterobustnessthroughoutthestructure.
However,inthisexample,thechecksareonlyperformedonanedgecolumnandan
internalcolumn.ThesecolumnsaredenotedBandErespectivelyinFigure1.
Itisassumedthatthefoorslabdoesnothaveanyresistancetoactasacantileveror
toholdupbeamsdesignedtosupporttheslab.
Section 7.1.1
Figure 7.2
Ref.12
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
3.0 (typ.)
Secondary beams
Primary beams
G H I
D
A
E
B
F
C
Figure 1
Beam arrangement
114
Worked examples
Internal column
IfcolumnEwerenotionallyremoved,theprimarybeamsBEandEHwouldcollapse,
leadingtothecollapseofthesecondarybeamstheysupport(seeFigure2).
ThetotalfoorareathatwouldcollapseifcolumnEwerenotionallyremoved
=9262=216m
2
,whichexceedsthelimitof100m
2
.
6.0
6.0
6.0
9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
Secondary beams
Primary beams
Area of collapse
for column E
G H I
D
A
E
B
F
C
Figure 2
Column E area
of collapse
Figure 3
Column B area
of collapse
Theareaofcollapsecouldbeevengreaterthancalculated,asthecalculatedvalue
doesnotincludethepossiblecollapseoffoorareaonthestoreysabovewherethe
columnsectionisnotionallyremoved.
Therefore,thenotionalremovalapproachcannotbeusedforinternalcolumnsinthis
building.Thetyingmethodorthekeyelementdesignmethodshouldbeappliedto
designforavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapse(seeExamples3and5).
Edge column
IfedgecolumnBwerenotionallyremoved,theedgebeamsABandBCwouldcollapse
andprimarybeamBEwouldcollapse,leadingtothecollapseofthesecondarybeams
itsupports(seeFigure3).ThetotalfoorareathatwouldcollapseifcolumnBwere
notionallyremoved=926=108m
2
,whichexceedsthelimitof100m
2
.
6.0
6.0
6.0
9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
Secondary beams
Primary beams
Area of collapse
for column B
G H I
D
A
E
B
F
C
115
Theareaofcollapsecouldbeevengreaterthancalculatedasthecalculatedvalue
doesnotincludethepossiblecollapseoffoorareaonthestoreysabovewherethe
columnsectionisnotionallyremoved.
Therefore,thenotionalremovalapproachcannotbeusedforedgecolumnsinthis
building.Thetyingmethodorthekeyelementdesignmethodshouldbeappliedto
designforavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapse(seeExamples3and5).
116
Worked examples
Example5 Class2b building Key element method
Brief
Thisexampleusesthesame10storeybuildingandfoorarrangement(9m6m
columngrid)asdescribedinExample3.InExample4itwasshownthatthenotional
removalmethodcannotbeappliedtothisbuilding(asanalternativetothetying
methodforavoidanceofdisproportionatecollapse).Thisexamplethereforeconsiders
thekeyelementmethodasanalternativetothetyingmethodforavoidanceof
disproportionatecollapse.
Allstoreysare4.0mhigh,apartfromthegroundtofrstfoor,whichhasaheightof
5.0m.Nonload-bearingpartitioningisconstructedbetweencolumnsandhasablast
resistanceof2.0kN/m
2
.Thecolumnsfromgroundtofrstfoorhaveacross-section
of300mm300mm.Thetotalweightofaninternalcolumnforthefullheightofthe
buildingis50kN.
Theloadingis:
Floor:Permanentaction, g
k
=3.5kN/m
2
Floor:Variableaction, q
k
=6.0kN/m
2
Roof:Permanentaction, g
k
=3.5kN/m
2
Roof:Variableaction, q
k
=1.0kN/m
2
Robustness strategy
Wherethenotionalremovalofcolumnsorbeamssupportingcolumnswouldresult
inanextentofdamageinexcessofthelimit(whichwasshowninExample4),such
elementsshouldbedesignedaskeyelements.
KeyelementsshouldbecapableofsustaininganaccidentaldesignactionofA
d
applied
inhorizontalandverticaldirections(inonedirectionatatime)tothememberandany
attachedcomponents.TherecommendedvalueofA
d
2
.
Inthisexampletherearenobeamssupportingcolumns,soonlythekeyelementdesignof
columnsectionsneedstobeconsidered.Inpractice,thekeyelementdesignchecksmust
becarriedoutonallcolumnstoensureadequaterobustnessthroughoutthestructure.
However,inthisexample,thechecksareonlyperformedonaninternalcolumn.
Twoloadingcaseswillbeconsideredinthisexample:
Maximumaccidentalblastloadoverapartialwidthofwall.
Reducedaccidentalblastloadoverafullyloadedwidthofwall.
Internal column
Theareatowhichtheaccidentalloadingisappliedisdependentonwhatisattached
tothekeyelementand,inparticular,itsintegrityunderblastloading.Inthisexample
Section 7.1.1
Section 7.7.2
BS EN 1991-1-7, A.8
117
thereispartitioningrunningbetweencolumns.Asthepartitioningisnotload-bearing,
itisreasonabletoassumethatitismostlyblownoutbytheblast,leavingonlyasmall
sectionattachedtothekeyelementasshowninFigure1.Inthiscase,thebreadthof
partitioningremainingaftertheblastisestimatedtobeb+200mm.
b + 200
b
Figure 1
Column section with
some partitioning
attached
Inthedesignofkeyelements,theaccidentalloadingshouldbeappliedinall
directions,butonlyinonedirectionatatime.Thismeanscheckingthekeyelement
columninbendingaboutboththemajorandminoraxes.Theordinarypermanentand
variableactionsmustalsobetakenintoaccountandshouldbeappliedsimultaneously
withtheaccidentalloading.However,thevariableactionsarereducedbyapplying
factors,asshownbelow.
Thekeyelementdesignshouldalsoconsiderareducedaccidentalactionthat
correspondstotheblastresistanceofthecomponents(i.e.thepartitioning)thatare
attachedtothekeyelements.
Thecombinationofactionsforthedesignofkeyelementsandattachedcomponentsis
expressedas:
G A Q Q
j
j
d i
i
i k,
1
1,1 k,1 2,
1
k,
>

+ + +
Allofthecalculationsbelowrelatetothecolumnlengthbetweengroundandfrstfoor
level(5mstoreyheight).Inpractice,alllevelsshouldbechecked.Thecolumnsection
forthefrststoreyis300300mm.Thetotalcolumnself-weightis50kNforthefull
heightofthebuilding.
Actions
AccidentalactionMaximumblastload:
A
d
=Blastpressure(b+200)/1000columnheight
A
d
=34(300+200)/10005=85kN
Section 7.8.13
Section 7.8.12
BS EN 1990
Eq. 6.11b
118
Worked examples
Maximummoment, M
Ed
=855/8=53kNm
AccidentalactionReducedblastload:
Forthisexample,itisassumedthatthepartitioningcanresistablastloadingof
2.0kN/m
2
.Atthisloading,thewholeofthepartitioningremainsattachedtothekey
element.Thetotalaccidentalload,appliedtothekeyelementisgivenby:
A
d
=Blastpressurecolumnspacingcolumnheight
A
d
=2.095=90kN
Variableaction:
Inthisexamplethereisonlyonevariableactiontoconsider.
Foroffcefoorloading,
1
=0.5
Forroofloading,
1
=0
Therefore,thereisnocontributionfromtheroofvariableaction.
Design efects on column
Bendingmoment:
Thetotalaccidentalactionis90kNwiththelowerblastpressurecomparedto85kN
whenthefull34kN/m
2
blastpressureisused.Therefore,theaccidentalactionfrom
thelowerblastpressureshouldbeusedtodesignthekeyelement,asthiswillbethe
criticaldesignsituation.
Maximummoment,M
Ed
=905/8=56kNm
Axialforceduetopermanentaction:
N
G,Ed
= G
k,j
=foorpermanentactionfoorareasupportednumberofstoreys
+columnselfweight
G
k,j
=3.59610+50=1940kN
Axialforceduetovariableaction:
N
Q,Ed
=
1,1
Q
k,1
=
1,1
foorloadfoorareasupportednumberofstoreys
N
Q,Ed
=
1,1
Q
k,1
=0.56.0969=1460kN
Totalaxialforce, N
Ed
=1940+1460=3400kN
Thekeyelementcolumnmustbedesignedtoresistthefollowingcombinedeffects:
Axialforce,N
c,Ed
=3400kN plusMajoraxismoment,M
y,Ed
=56kNm and
Axialforce,N
c,Ed
=3400kN plusMinoraxismoment,M
z,Ed
=56kNm
Table 3.1
119
Example 6 Class2b building Transfer beam
Brief
Whataretherobustnessrequirementsforthetransferbeamsinthefoorarrangement
showninFigure1?
Thebuildingisa3storeyschoolbuildingwithtransferbeamsatthefrstfoorlevel.
Thecolumnsinthebuildingarelaidoutona6m7.5mgrid.Thetotalweightofan
internalcolumnsupportedbyatransferbeamis8kN.Thedimensionsofthetransfer
beamare:Depth=1036mm,Width=310mm,Webthickness=30mmandFlange
thickness=54mm.Allstoreysare4.0mhigh,apartfromthegroundtofrstfoor,
whichhasaheightof5.0m.
Transfer beams at
first floor level
6.0 m
7.5 m
Figure 1
Beam arrangement
Thefoorloadingis:
Permanentaction, g
k
=3.5kN/m
2
Variableaction, q
k
=6.0kN/m
2
Theroofloadingis:
Permanentaction, g
k
=3.5kN/m
2
Variableaction, q
k
=1.0kN/m
2
Schoolbuildingsgreaterthan1storeybutnotexceeding15storeysareclassifed
asClass2b.
BS EN 1991-1-7,
Table A.1
120
Worked examples
ForClass2bbuildingstherearethreealternativemethodsthatcouldbeappliedfor
robustnessdesign;tying,notionalremoval,orkeyelement.Onlythetyingandkey
elementmethodswillbeconsideredinthisexample.
Tying method
Robustness strategy
Forthetyingmethod,horizontaltiesandverticaltiesshouldbeprovided.Fortransfer
beams,thehorizontalandverticaltyingrequirementsshouldbemodifedfromthe
generalrequirementspresentedinBSEN1991-1-7.
Horizontal ties
Transferbeams,includingtheirendconnections,shouldbecapableofsustaininga
designtensileforceT
i
fortheaccidentallimitstateinthecaseofinternalbeams.
ThevalueofT
i
isgivenbythefollowingequation:
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+q
k
)s L +0.5V
c
where:
g
k
q
k
isthevariableaction
L isthespanofthetie
istherelevantfactor
1
or
2
.AccordingtotheNAtoBSEN1990.
1
shouldbeused
V
c
isthedesignloadsfromthecolumnssupportedbythetransferbeam.
ThecolumnloadsthatareincludedinthecalculationofT
i
arebasedontheaccidental
loadingcondition,givenbelow.
G A Q Q
j
j
d i
i
i k,
1
1,1 k,1 2,
1
k,
>

+ + +
Inthiscase,thereisnoaccidentalactionA
d
andthereisonlyonevariableactiontoconsider.
Forschools,foorloading(categoryC),
1
=0.7
Forroofloading,
1
=0
Therefore,thereisnocontributionfromtheroofvariableaction.
Floor2loadingintocolumn:
N
col,foor
=((g
k
+
1
q
k
)sL)
N
col,foor
=((3.5+0.76.0)67.5)
Section 9.4.2
Section 7.8.13
Table 3.1
121
N
col,foor
=346.5kN
Roofloadingintocolumn:
N
col,roof
=((g
k
+
1
q
k
)s L)
N
col,roof
=((3.5+0.01.0)67.5)
N
col,roof
=157.5kN
Totalforceincolumn:
V
c
=N
col,foor
+N
col,roof
+selfweight
V
c
=346.5+157.5+8
V
c
=512.0kN
TherequiredhorizontaltieresistanceT
i
is:
T
i
=0.8(g
k
+q
k
)sL +0.5V
c
T
i
=0.8(3.5+0.76.0)67.5+0.5512
T
i
=533kN
Thetransferbeams,includingtheirendconnections,shouldbecapableofsustaininga
designtensileforceof533kN.
Vertical ties
Fortransferbeams,theverticaltyingrequirementsshouldbemodifedsothatcolumns
supportedbytransferbeamsareverticallytiedtothetransferbeam.Thetensile
resistanceoftheconnectionshouldbedesignedforthemaximumtensionthatwould
occurintheaccidentalloadingcaseifeitheroneofthecolumnssupportingthe
transferbeamwereremoved.
TherequiredverticaltieresistanceT
v
is:
T
v
=(g
k
+
1
q
k
)sL
T
v
=(3.5+0.76.0)67.5
T
v
=347kN
Section 9.4.2
122
Worked examples
Theconnectionbetweenthetransferbeamandthebaseofthecolumnthatitsupports
shouldbecapableofsustainingadesigntensileforceof347kN.
Tying method
Therecommendedadditionalstructuralprovisionsrelatingtoverticalbracingand
anchorageofheavyunitsshouldbeappliedtothisbuilding.Thesedonotdirectlyrelate
tothetransferbeamthereforetheyarenotincludedinthisExample.SeeExample3for
theapplicationoftheseadditionalstructuralprovisions.
Key element design method
Robustness strategy
BSEN1991-1-7doesnotrequirealltransferbeamsinClass2bbuildingstobedesigned
askeyelements.Ifthetyingorthenotionalremovalmethodsofrobustnessdesigndo
notdemonstrateadequacy,thedesignermaychosetousethekeyelementmethod.
Inadditiontodesigningthetransferbeamasakeyelement,itisalsorecommended
thatthecolumnsthatsupportthetransferbeamsaredesignedaskeyelements.An
exampleofcolumnkeyelementdesignispresentedinExample5.ThisExamplewill
onlyconsiderthekeyelementdesignofthetransferbeam.
KeyelementsshouldbecapableofsustaininganaccidentaldesignactionofA
d
applied
inhorizontalandverticaldirections(inonedirectionatatime)tothememberandany
attachedcomponents.TherecommendedvalueofA
d
2
.
Forthedesignofatransferbeamkeyelement,theaccidentalactionmustbeapplied
in3directions:
1. actinghorizontallyagainstthesideofthetransferbeam;
2. actingverticallyupwardsontheundersideofthetransferbeamandthefoorslab
thatitsupports;
3. actingverticallydownwardsonthetopofthefoorslabthatthetransferbeamsupports.
Horizontal accidental action
Thehorizontalaccidentalactiononthe
transferbeamisshowninFigure2.Thefrst
stepistodeterminewhethertheaccidental
actioncausesthebeamtobecomedetached
fromtheslab.
Resistance of beam slab connection
Thetransverseresistanceoftheshear
connectiondependsonthestud
diameterheightandconfgurationof
Section 7.1.2
Section 9.4.3
Section 7.2.2
34 kN/m
2
Figure 2
Horizontal accidental
action on
transfer beam
123
thesurroundingconcrete.Forthisexample,theresistanceistakenas50kN.
Formoveexactvalues,refertoEC4,notingthedirectionoftheforce.Thestuds
arepositionedat300mmspacingalongthebeam.Therefore,theconnection
resistance=501000/300=167kNpermlength.
Lateral force on beam slab connection
Thebeamdepthis1036mm.Therefore,thetotallateralforceis
341036/1000=35.2kNpermlength.
Therefore,thebeamwillremainattachedtotheslab.
Thebeamshouldbecheckedtodeterminewhethertheaccidentalactioncausesyielding
oftheweb.Thewebthicknessis30mm,thedesignstrengthofthesteelis345N/mm
2
.
Theelasticbendingresistanceofthebeamweb(permlength)isgivenby:
M
c,Rd
=f
y
t
2
/6
M
c,Rd
=(34530
2
/6)10
-3
M
c,Rd
=51.8kNmpermlength
Thedesignmomentappliedtotheweb(permlength)isgivenby:
M
c,Ed
=34h
2
/2
M
c,Ed
=(34(1036/1000)
2
/2)
M
c,Ed
=18.2kNmpermlength
Therefore,thebeamwebcanresisttheeffectsoftheaccidentalaction.
Downwards Accidental Action
Thedownwardsaccidentalactiononthetransferbeamisappliedtothetopoftheslab
supportedbythetransferbeam.Itisassumedthattheslabwillremainattachedtothe
transferbeamforthisloadingsituation.
Thetransferbeammustbedesignedforalltheloadsappliedinthisaccidental
situation,asgivenbythecombinationbelow.
G A Q Q
j
j
d i
i
i k,
1
1,1 k,1 2,
1
k,
>

+ + +
Loadsfromsecondarybeams:
V
1
=(g
k
+
1
q
k
)sL
Section 7.8.13
124
Worked examples
V
1
=(3.5+0.76.0)67.5/2
V
1
=173kN
Loadsfromcolumnduetofoorload:
V
2
=(g
k
+
1
q
k
)sL
V
2
=(3.5+0.76.0)67.5
V
2
=347kN
Loadsfromcolumnduetoroofload:
V
3
=(g
k
+
1
q
k
)sL
V
3
=(3.5+06.0)67.5
V
3
=158kN
Loadsfromcolumnduetocolumnself-weight:
V
4
=8kN
Totalloadsfromcolumn:
V
col
=347+158+8
V
col
=513kN
Tocalculatetheloadonthetransferbeamfromthe34kN/m
2
accidentalload,
theareathattheaccidentalloadisappliedtomaybereducedfromthefullarea
supportedbythetransferbeam.Thereducedloadedareamaybetakenas
2.25storeyheightsquared.Inthiscase2.254=9msquaredi.e.81m
2
.
(Thefullareawouldbe26m7.5m=90m
2
).
Thearealoadedbytheaccidentalactionisappliedinthemostseverepositionalong
thetransferbeam.Inthiscase,theloadisappliedatthecentreofthetransferbeam
asshowninFigure3.
Totalloadsfromaccidentalaction:
A
d
=3481
A
d
=2754kN
Section 7.8.13
125
12 m
9 m
Figure 3
Accidental action
applied to the
transfer beam
Momentontransferbeamduetoaccidentalaction:
M
y,Ed,1
=A
d
(1.5m+0.259m)/2
M
y,Ed,1
=2754(1.5+2.25)/2
M
y,Ed,1
=5164kNm
Momentontransferbeamduetosecondarybeams:
M
y,Ed,2
=V
1
12m/4+V
1
3m
M
y,Ed,2
=17312/4+1733
M
y,Ed,2
=1038kNm
Momentontransferbeamduetocolumnload:
M
y,Ed,3
=V
col
12m/4
M
y,Ed,3
=51312/4
M
y,Ed,3
=1539kNm
Totaldesignmomentontransferbeam:
M
y,Ed
=5164+1038+1539
M
y,Ed
=7741kNm
Thetransferbeammustbedesignedtoresistamajoraxismomentof7741kNm.
Thetransferbeamisrestrainedbythefoorslabandsecondarybeams.
126
Worked examples
Upwards accidental action
Theupwardsaccidentalactiononthetransferbeamisappliedtotheundersideof
thetransferbeamandtheslabsupportedbythetransferbeam.Thiscasecanonly
bemorecriticalthanthedownwardsaccidentalactionifthetransferbeambecomes
detachedfromtheslabandbecomesunrestrained.Thefrststepistodetermine
whethertheaccidentalactioncausesthebeamtobecomedetachedfromtheslab.
Resistance of beam slab connection
Theupwardpush-outvalueoftheshearstudisassumedtobe10kN.Thestuds
arepositionedat300mmspacingalongthebeam.Therefore,theconnection
resistance=101000/300=33.3kNpermlength.
Load on beam slab connection
Theloadonthebeamtoslabconnectionduetotheaccidentalactionisgivenby:
F
1
=347.5=255kNpermlength
Thepermanentactionofthefoorslabactsintheoppositedirectiontoaccidental
actionanditsvalueisgivenby:
F
2
=g
k
7.5
F
2
=3.57.5
F
2
=26.3kNpermlength
Theresultantloadonthebeamslabconnectionis25526.3=229kN/mwhichis
greaterthantheconnectionresistanceof33.3kN/m.Therefore,thebeamwillbecome
detachedfromtheslab.
Theloadonthetransferbeamwillbetheaccidentalactionappliedtobeamwidth.
Thebeamwidthis310mm.Therefore,thetotalloadappliedtothetransferbeamis
34310/1000=10.5kN/m.
Theresultantmomentonthetransferbeam,neglectingtheloadsfromthecolumnand
slabisgivenby:
M
cy,Ed
=10.512
2
/8=190kNm
Thetransferbeammustbedesignedtoresistamajoraxismomentof190kNm.
Thetransferbeamisunrestrained.
Sci
Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire. SL5 7QN UK
T: +44 (0)1344 636525
F:

+44 (0)1344 636570
E: reception@steel-sci.com
www.steel-sci.com
SCI Ref: P391
ISBN: 978-1-85942-198-7
Structural robustness is an important consideration for the design of buildings so that the
likelihood of disproportionate collapse, as a result of accidental actions, is limited. This
publication provides design guidance for hot rolled steel framed buildings on the Eurocode
strategies for structural robustness and designing for the avoidance of disproportionate
collapse as required by the UK Building Regulations. Guidance on recommended good practice
is offered where the Eurocodes do not include requirements or where they are not specifc
and are open to interpretation. The scope of this publication is limited to application in the UK
and reference is made to the UK National Annexes as appropriate. In addition to the design
guidance, six worked examples are included to demonstrate the application of robustness
strategies to different classes of building.
Structural robuStneSS of Steel framed buildingS
SCI Membership
Technical Information
Construction Solutions
Communications Technology
SCI Assessment

Structural Robustness of Steel Framed Buildings

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Structural Robustness of Steel Framed Buildings

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Structural

S-ar putea să vă placă și