The Green document status indicator indicates that the document is: a current in the Construction Information Service and b the latest version - ie it does not have any other documents that replace or amend it and is promoted as a current document by the publisher. The Amber document status indicator indicates that some caution is needed when using this document - it is either: a current in the Construction Information Service but has a document or documents that replace or amend it, so please look at the "Newer Versions" tab or b not in the Construction Information Service but with another reason why it may be relevant to our customers such as being cited in NBS or in the Building Regulations Approved Documents. Again there may be more recent versions of the document. The Red document status indicator indicates that the document is an old version The document has likely been withdrawn by the publisher, also the meta data presented here may be out of date as it is no longer being maintained by the editorial teams at NBS.
|Published (Last):||4 September 2019|
|PDF File Size:||20.21 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.59 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Contact Us Excavation Support Training Groundforce Training Services offer a wide range of courses primarily for those working in utilities, construction and civil engineering.
From short duration health and safety awareness to more complex or specialist safety consultancy solutions, we can help. To get the grey matter ticking over again after the Christmas break, I thought I would return to a more technical subject matter and discuss one of the Eurocode transition issues facing us, namely circular hollow section CHS steel section classification under EC3 when compared to the more familiar BS Prior to the adoption of Eurocodes in the UK, all the load capacity verifications and charts for our standard CHS struts were determined from BS ; EC3 although on the face of it, being a limit state code, is a natural progression from BS however numerous detail changes exist within the document.
One specific change that we have felt particularly keenly in the last few months is the design and classification of circular hollow sections that we use in our long spanning struts.
As practising temporary works engineers looking for a better solution, we have investigated alternative methodology, which lies within the spirit of EC3, to provide a simpler means of classifying our equipment in terms of load capacity or resistance in Eurocode parlance. The first approach and the simplest was to simply side step the problem by downgrading the strength of our steel from S to S This reduces the epsilon factor.
The x 16mm section now just sneaks into the class 3 semi compact designation defined by the following expression: The design of class 3 sections is well defined within EC3 without resorting to section 6; so problem solved? We do like to work our equipment hard and get value for money so this solution is not really ideal. We decided to dig a little deeper to see what else we could come up with.
I appreciate that elliptical is not circular but the approach documented within the NCCI for dealing with slender class 4 sections seems much more logical, and certainly simpler to use. Basically the document suggests that for class 4 sections resistance properties for compression and bending can be calculated in a manner similar to that of a class 3 section but using effective section properties for area and modulus as defined by the equations below. By implementing this approach, the strength parameters of the super tube align much more closely with those calculated from BS; a code we have been using successfully for years and on many occasions.
Perhaps more importantly this simplified approach gives practising engineers a feel for what is going on within the code. Please feel to comment on this approach.
Once again best wishes for Tony Gould.
PUB 078 Commentary on BS 5950: Part 3: Section 3.1 'Composite beams'