1

I. CHAPTER 1: Project Context

I.1 Introduction :

The metal framework is generally made of steel. Its design is based on the
the distribution of efforts requires a deep understanding of the implementation of
structural calculations, building standards (Eurocode Standards) and safety.
The metal frame is fully prepared, that is to say cut, drilled...
workshop. On-site operations are limited to the assembly of primary modules
after lifting or dragging operations, bringing the areas closer together
of assembly, This type of structure, thanks to the strength and flexibility of steel allows
of large spans and therefore an optimal use of space. It allows for a large
architectural freedom.
The metal structure is recommended for all types of buildings, whether they are
storage, industrial, agricultural or even garage, garden shed, office or housing...

The advantages of metal construction:

Whatever the type of construction, the metal framework offers a number of

of advantages.
The metal framework, an economical construction:

A metal frame construction allows for a financial gain of about 10% per
compared to a concrete or wood construction. This significant saving is largely related to
part of the manufacturing process of a steel structure.
In the long term, this type of construction is profitable. Thanks to external insulation.
optimal and with thermal inertia of these constructions, heating costs are reduced.
As for maintenance costs,
The metallic framework is more durable:

The metal structure forms a solid, stable, and durable framework. The problems of
cracking and distortion of the studs and beams are eliminated, along with them the reminders
fixes.
The flexibility of constructing a metal-framed dwelling:

The use of steel allows for maximum architectural flexibility as it adapts to

all the volumes. The steel beams, very strong, allow for the realization of
very large spans, which makes it possible to create large spaces.
Furthermore, the simplicity of extending a steel-framed building allows for this
the latest to consider housing that expands over the years.
The speed of assembly

The assembly of a metal framework is surprisingly easy and quick. Its design
In the workshop, the assembly on site is greatly facilitated.
Comfort, safety, and respect for the environment:

2
Metal construction allows for the creation of comfortable, economical buildings.
écologiques, de plus Les matériaux utilisés permettent l’économie des ressources
natural and steel is completely recyclable. Moreover, this construction, which is said to be
dry", avoids wasted drying time and waste on the construction site. Unlike,
for which it is necessary to use chemical products such as fungicides, here,
no treatment is necessary for better respect for the environment.

I.2 Project Presentation:

Figure 1: Project dimensions

Project data:

This structure has the following characteristics:

Profondeur : 70 m
Carried from a portico: 24 m.
Hauteur : h = 8.31 m (h1=1.4m, h2=1.6m, h3=2m)
Interest: 7%.
Cover: steel tray.
Région : Normal
Wind surcharge: Region 2;
Site: presentation

Permanent actions:
Weight of the bac-steel cover g1 = 16 daN/ 2
Estimated weight of a g2 panel = 9 daN/ 2
3
 Maintenance actions:
Maintenance Load FQ= 240 daN.
Actions variables :

Sand charge Qs = 20 daN/m2

Opening on the 4 walls: μ = 30.5 %

I.3 Work Organization:

Our work consists of conducting a complete study and sizing of the various
elements of this project with a manual calculation Then we verify these results with the software
The robot analyzes several variants of the different elements.
Our mission is then to:

Calculate the wind and determine the loads: we determine the loads
less favorable obtained for the two wind cases.

Sizing the beams and the struts: we are primarily concerned with the
determination of the spacings between the purlins then the sizing of
panels and the bindings.

Study the farm: we design and calculate the efforts in the bars then
we carry out the sizing while respecting the necessary checks
(checking the arrow and the assemblies).

Calculate the assemblies at the nodes.

Study of a pole: determination of the stresses then we do the

sizing of the column and we check for overturning.

I.4 Calculation hypothesis:

The regulation used for the calculation of metal structures is Eurocode 3, which benefits
of the elastoplastic behavior and the ductility of steel for reasons
economic.

Mechanical properties of steel:

The elastic limit: =235 MPa.
The ultimate limit: 360 MPa.

Safety factor The calculated value of a material property is obtained

by dividing the characteristic property by a material safety factor referred to as
material safety coefficient. This coefficient takes into account the difference between the
real property of a material and the characteristic property due to the gap in properties

4
construction materials compared to those of the samples used for the
trials.

The following table summarizes the safety values on the resistances

Table 1. Security Values on resistances

Characteristics of steel:

The framework of the structure will be made of S235 steel with the following characteristics:

Elasticity limit: = 235 MPa.

Elasticity modulus: E = 2.1 10 5 MPa.
Shear modulus: G = 81000 MPa.

5
 Poisson's ratio: = 0.3

II. CHAPTER 2: Sizing of faults and guiding lines

II.1 Introduction :

The beams are intended to transmit loads and overloads.

applying on the cover at the crossbeam or on the truss.
The beams are placed on the portals (or trusses) and assembled by bolting.
supports are considered as sliding or articulated supports. They are assembled to
girders through the brackets called braces.
Given the low transverse inertia of the rafter profiles and the spill in
This plan, the solution consists of reducing the cross-scope of failures by linking them.
between her by laths located at mid-range. Thus our failure is akin to a beam.
isostatic in its (x,z) plane and a continuous beam on 3 supports in its (x,y) plane.

Figure 2: Layout of the malfunction

II.2 Determination of stresses:

II.2.1 Hypotheses:

Working in a deviated bend due to the slope of the slopes at an angle α

Isostatic beam in the (x, z) plane of constant length equal to 6m, in IPE profile
160 and spacing e = 1.95m.
Steel sheet metal roofing weight = 25 / ².
The resultant linear loads transmitted to the beams are decomposed into
two loads: one load parallel to the web of the beam "Qz" and one load
perpendicular to the soul 'Qy'.

6
 Figure3: charge transmitted to failures

II.2.2Assessment of charges:

II.2.2.1 Permanent charges:

Estimated dead weight of the panel: Gbreakdown= 9 daN/m²

Self-weight of the cover: Gcover= 16 daN/square meter

G= Gbreakdown+ Gcover= 25 daN/m²

Operating expenses:

Operating charge:Q = 20 daN/m²

Point maintenance force: = 240 dAN

To maintain this force as a distributed load, it is divided by the product.

of the length of the failure and the spacing, we find: Qm 20.5 daN/m²

Qtotal=Q + Qm = 20 + 20.51 = 40.51 daN/m²

α = arctan(1,31
12
= 6.23°

II.2.2.3 Climate charges:

The most adverse action of the wind is that of the head/tailwind:W = −77.42 daN/m²

II.2.2.4 Combination of charges:

The load combinations established for the ULS and SLS are as follows:

Combination qy(daN/m²) qz(daN/m²)

ELU 1.35 G + 1.5 Q 94.5 (1.35 G+ 1.5 Q) 10.3 (1.35 G+ 1.5 Q) 94

sinα cosα

ELS G+ Q 45 (G+ Q)sinα 4.9 (G+ Q) cosα 44.73

Table 2. The combinations of loads

II.2.3 Pre-sizing:

II.2.3.1 Condition of the deflection:

The choice of profiles must be made according to the bowing condition to avoid cracking.
the roof in case of high demand. The deflection criteria to be respected generally concern the

7
descending charges. According to EC3 standards, the deflection of the coverings must not
exceed the allowable deflection.

< = =3 . Condition verified.

200

II.[Link] For the IPE 160 profile:

We present the characteristics of the IPE 160 profile:

( ) ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( )

869.3 68.28 123.9 26.1 12.8 9.7

Tableau 3. Caractéristiques du profilé IPE 160

2
= √ fz 2+ fy

Searching for fz and fy:

5.q .e.L 4 .3
fz= 384.I y.E
+ 48.E.I fz= 1.38cm
With:{
5.q .e.L 4 .3
{ f = 1.98cm = 2,37cm <3
fy= + y
384.I z.E 48. .

12 12.071
Length of the crossbeam: = = 12.071 = = 17 disaster
(
cthe6.23 ) 0.7

From where we choose 17 spaces for each crossbar.

The ridge and valley failures are offset from the end for reasons
of assemblies and to place the debris allowing for the drainage of rainwater.

12.071- 0.7 ×17 = 17.1

We're going to have an overflow:

7 cm minimum for the ridge beam.
1 0 cm at minimum for the edge beam.
II.[Link] For the IPE 140 profile:
We present the characteristics of the IPE 160 profile:

( ) ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( )

541.2 44.9 88.3 19.2 10.6 7.6

8
 Table 4. Characteristics of the IPE 140 profile

2
= √ fz 2+ fy

Looking for fz and fy:

5.q .e.L 4 .3
fz= 384.I y.E
+ 48.E.I fz= 30.29 cm
{ 5.q .e.L 4 .3
{ f = 3.86 cm = 5.071cm > 3
fy= + y
384.I z.E 48.E.I

So we cannot use the IPE 140 beam.

II.2.3.2 Verification at ELU: resistance condition:

The most unfavorable combination for ELU (1.35 G + 1.5 Q):

= . = 10,3× 1,95= 20.1 /

{
= . = 93,95× 1,95= 183,2 daN/m

Figure [Link] of bending moments and shear forces % Z-Z

9
 [Link] of bending moments and shear forces % Y-Y

Bending moments Cutting effort

My (daN.m) Mz (daN.m) Vy (daN) Vz (daN)

824.4 90 60 549.6

Table 5. Values of bending moments and shear forces

Verification at the ELU is done by section:

II.[Link] Mid-span section subjected to My, Mz, Vy:

Shear force verification: vpl ≤ 0.5 vy

5 5
On a = ×8 × 2×
= × 10.26×
8
3× 1.95= 37.51
2350
= 0.58× × = 0.58× 12.8× = 17446.4
ϒ 0 1
= 17.8 ≤ 0.5× = 8723.2 .

Verification of the bending moment:

Since the failure section is class 1, its verification under biaxial bending is done by
based on the following formula:
, ,
( )+( )≤1
, ,

We will adopt the combination (1.35 G+1.5Q) which is the most unfavorable.

× × ² 62
= = 10.3× 1.95× = 90.38 .
8 8

× × ² 62
= = 94× 1.95× = 428.85 .
8 8
10
With: =2 (sections in I) and =1 (no normal effort).
, ×
, = = 123,9× 2350= 2911,65 .
0

, ×
, = = 26,1× 2350= 613,35 .
0

Which gives:

824,4 2 90 1
( 2911,65) + (613,35) = 0,23< 1

OK verified

II.[Link] Verification of support sections:

≤
The following conditions must be checked:{
≤
With the most unfavorable constraints:
= 20.1 /
= 183.2 /
3 3
, = × ×= × 20.1× 3= 22.5
8 2 8
3 3
, = × ×= × 183.2× 3= 206.1
8 2 8

, = 22.5 < Vpl,y= 11721,8

0,58× fy× Av,z 0,58× 2350× 6,1

, = 206.1 < Vpl,z = = = 8314,3
0 1

≤
Finally{ OK verified
≤
Conclusion :aprèsl’affectation de tous les vérifications leprofil IPE 160 est bienqu’on
to be used with a spacing of ep = 1.95 m.

II.3Dimensionnement des liernes :

II.3.1 Introduction:
The tie beams are supports that work in tension. They are generally formed by
round bars or small angles. Their two main roles aim to prevent the
lateral deformation of the purlins and to ensure stability regarding the risk of
spilling. Given the low transverse inertia of the beams, the effect of the load qy
(perpendicular to the soul of the beam) becomes detrimental and leads to sections of
significant failures. The solution consists of reducing the cross-cutting scope of failures by them
reliant each other by struts (tension rods), located at mid-span.

11
II.3.2 The efforts in the liernes:

Figure 6. Diagram of effort in the struts

qy = 10.3 daN/m²
5 5 1.95
1= 4× 2× 2× = 4
× 2
× 26× 10.3= 37.66 daN

5 1.95
T2 = T1+ 45× × 2× = 4
× 2
× 26× 10.3= 112.46 dAN

5 1.95
3= T2 + 45× × 2× = 4
× 2
× 26× 10.3= 187.77 daN

5 1.95
T4 = T3 + 45× × 2× = 4
× 2
× 26× 10.3= 263.1

5 1.95
5= T4 + 45× × 2× = 4
× 2
× 26× 10.3= 338.42 daN

On a: Nc= -T1=-37.66 daN

With tgβ = 1.95 / 3 therefore β = 37.47 degrees

So T7 = 710.52 daN

Effort T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Nc T7

Value 37.66 112.46 187.77 263.1 338.42 -37.66 710.52

(dan)
Tableau 6. Values of efforts in lacing

3.1. Sizing of tie rods:

12
 The laces (L1, L2, L3, L4 …..) work under tension, we use rods.

Tmax = max (Ti) = T7 = 710.52 daN

≥ 6.2 =8
We then take rods of diameter∅=8 .

III. Chapter 3: Study of the Portico

III.1 Introduction :
The frame is the supporting system of this industrial building. This supporting system is made up of
the assembly of profiled bar-shaped elements namely the posts and the beams. This
The framework has the primary role of supporting the loads and actions acting on the building and
to pass them on to the foundations. It must then allow for the fastening of the envelope elements.
(roof, facade) and interior separation.

The vertical load will first affect the covering element resting on the purlins, which will go to
their turn to transmit the reactions on the beams of the portal. The latter resting on the
poles, the load is thus transmitted to the foundations.

13
 Figure 7. Plane portal diagram

III.2 Loading study on the gantry:

This portal is subject to:

A permanent distributed load G: self-weight, beams, purlins, roofing, cladding.

× 15.8×6
= = 195
= 48,62 daN/m
= × = 12 × 6 = 72 dN/m
o . = + = 31,2 + 72 = 103,2 dA/m
× 25.1×6
= = 3.5
= 43 /
= × = 6 × 6 =36 dAn/m
. = + = 43+ 36 = 79 daN/m

. An operating load Q due to the sand (dust) load = 6 × 25=

150 daN/m

. A point charge F, applied at the apex, due to the maintenance load with
a hypothesis of 3 people per square meter: F = 240 daN

. A wind load W

Vent G/D Vent Departure/Arrival. Vent Arr. /Av

(daN/m) (daN/m) (daN/m)
In the wind -533 447 128
Posts
Leeward 138 447 128
In the wind 138 436 -128
Traverses
Leeward -138 436 -128
Tableau 7. Wind charges W

III.3 The combinations of actions:

To size this gantry, it is necessary to study the combinations that can lead to
maximum sollicitations on its elements.

The combinations have been generated automatically.

14
III.3.1 Combinations of actions for ELECTED
The fundamental combination is written in the form:

∑ × + Q1× 1∑ × 0 ×

With G: the permanent actions.

Base operating charge
Operational support manager.

III.3.2 3.2. Action Combinations at ELS

They are used for the calculation and verification of deformations (deflections and displacements).
fundamental combination is written in the form:

G + 0.9 ∑ k

Interview Vent
1.5 1.5
ELU
0 0.7 0.6
1 1
ELS
0 0.7 0.6

III.3.3 Sizing of the elements of the standard portal:

III.4 After capturing the different cases of charge, we generated the wind
automatically (wind 2 snow C1) for all directions 0°, 90°, 180° and 270°
in both cases: overpressure and depression.

The combinations were generated automatically according to EC3 standards. These

combinations give the maximum loads of the different elements of the gantry.

Figure 7: The maximum and minimum constraints

15
 It can be noted from this table that the maximum constraint found ( = 239,12 MPa) east
slightly superior to fy= 235 MPa which is tolerable.

Once the above condition is verified, we then move on to the verification of plasticity.
EC3 portal profiles.

The results of the preliminary sizing at the Ultimate Limit State (ULS) are as follows:

Figure 8. Sizing results by Robot

Conclusion All the beams of the frame have been checked.

[Link] 4: Study of the farm

IV.1 Introduction :
We can manually size the steel elements where we must
check the stability of critical sections (stress verification) and the stability of
elements.
Verification of stability regarding buckling and regarding overturning.

[Link] of current portal elements:

IV.2.12.2. Sizing of the beam: (IPE360)

IV.2.1.1 Requests of the crossbar:

The requests are presented in the following table:

Effort Value
Normal effort (daN) 566.6
Sharp effort 595.9
(daN)

16
 Bending moment 1518.5
(daN.m)
[Link] from the crossbar

IV.2.1.2 Justification of the transversal section:

The section is subjected to a bending moment 'M', an axial force 'N', and a shear force.
shear "V". First, we check the effect of the shear force.

( ) ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( )

16265.6 1043 1019.1 191.1 45.3 35.1

Table 10. Characteristics of the IPE 360 profile

0.58× × 0.58× 2350 ×35,1

= = = 478,413
0 1

= 59.69 kN < 0,5 = 239.21 → ′ ℎ é

Thus, the section will be considered submitted to M + N.

. Class of the section

h (mm) b (mm) tf(mm) ( ) Area (cm²) ( / )

360 170 12.7 8 72.7 57.1

Tableau 11. Geometric characteristics of the IPE 360 profile

Sole class:

170 -8
2 235 235
= = 6.4 <10 epsilon =10√ = 10 √ = 10 →
12.7 235

Class of the soul

360 - 2 ×12.7
= = 41,83< 72ɛ = 72→ â
8

The section is therefore class 1.

We then check the axial effort regarding the effort of plasticization.

. 72,7 × 2350
= = = 1708,45 → 0.25 = 427,11
0 1

0.5× × 0.5× ( − 2 )× 0,5× (72.7 - 2 ×17 × 1,27) × 2350

= = = 346,86 KN
0 0 1

17
 0.5× ×
= 56.66 kN < min(0.25 ; ) Minimum( 427,11; 346,86 KN
) = 34686 KN
0

→ The normal effort is low.

So the plastic resistant moment is reduced by the effect of the axial force. will be taken equal at the moment
limit of plasticity = . = 1019,1× 2350 = 23948,[Link] = 239.48 .

= 151,85 . < = 239.48 . → é é

IV.2.1.3 Verification of the stability of the element regarding buckling:

IV.[Link] Buckling in the y-y plane:
The buckling length depends on the distance between two successive purlins.

The span of the beam (between two purlins) is:

1,95. 102× 1,00

= = = 13,04
14.95

13,04
= = = 0,138
1 93,9

2
Φ = 0,5[1+ (λ - 0.2) + ]

The profile is I-shaped, class 1, and the buckling axis is y-y.→ = 0.21

[ 0.210,138-
Φ = 0,5 1+ ( ) 0,503 2 ]
0.2+ 0,138=

The buckling coefficient is:

1 1
χ = = = 1,013
2 0,503+ √0,503² - 0,138²
Φ + √Φ − 2

IV.[Link] Buckling in the z-z plane:

1,95. 102× 1,00
= = = 51,45
3,79
51,45
= = = 0,548
1 93,9
The profile is I-beam, class 1, and the buckling axis is z-z.→ = 0,34
Φ = 0,5 [1+ 0,34 0,548-0.2+
( )
0,548= 0.7092 ]
1 1
χ = = = 0,863
2 0.709 √
+0.709² − 0548²
Φ + √Φ 2 −
→χ = 0,863and = 0,5480.2
5666
= = 0.042 < 0,1
χ / 0,863×
1 72.7 × 2350/1,1
→ .

18
 OK Verified.

IV.2.2 Sizing of the column: (HEA 280)

IV.2.2.1 Pulling from the pole:

Figure 9. Loadings of the column

The requests are presented in the following table:

Effort Value
Normal effort (daN) 80.77
Sharp effort 63.14
(daN)
Bending moment 159.63
(daN.m)
Tableau12. Requests from the pole

IV.2.2.2 Justification of the transversal section:

0.58× × 0.58× 2350 ×31,7

= = = 432.07 kN
0 1

V = 63,01KN < 0,5 = 216.03 → ′ ℎ é

Thus, the section will be considered submitted to M + N.

The column is an HEA profile subjected to a bending moment and a normal force, so it is therefore
of class 1.

97,3× 2350
= = equals 2286,55
0 1

0.5× × 0.5× (A - 2M ) × 0,5× (97,3- 2 × 28× 1,3)× 2350

= = = 287,87 KN
0 0 1

0.5× ×
= 80.77 kN < min(0.25 ; (
) = min571,64 ) 287,87 KN
; 287,87 KN=
0

→ The normal effort is low.

19
So the plastic resisting moment is reduced by the effect of the axial force. will be taken equal at the moment
plasticization limit = . = 1112.2 × 2350 = 26136.7 [Link] = 261,36 kN·m

= 15953 . < = 261,36 kN.m→ é é

IV.[Link] Buckling in the y-y plane:

13673,3 3
= = = 19,53
0 700

11= 21= 22= 0and 2→ ∞→ 2= 0perfect embedding

, û 8693
1= = = 5, 79 cm3
1 150

, 162656
12 = = = 13,47 cm3
11 1207

19,53+ 5,79
1= = 0.653
19,53+ 5,79 + 13,47

The nodes are fixed nodes because stability in the buckling direction is ensured by
bracing.

1+ 0,145 (1+ )
2-0.265 1 21+ 0,1450.653 ( )
= = 0.621
0 2 - 0364 eta1(+ ) 1
2-0.6 eta 2 (
2 - 0,364 0,653 )

0.621× 0= 0.621× 700 = 434.7 cm

434.7
= = = 36.65
11,86

36.65
= = = 0,39
1 93,9

2
Φ = 0,5[1+ (λ - 0.2) + ]

The profile is rolled in H, class 1 and the buckling axis is y-y→ = 0.21(curve a)

2]
Φ = 0,5 1[ + 0.210,39
( − 0,2 + 0,39
) = 0596

1 1
χ = = 0.955
2 √ 96 squared minus 0381
0,596 +0,5
Φ + √Φ − 2

IV.[Link] Buckling in the z-z plane:

0,5× 700
= = = 50
7

20
 50
= = 0,53
93,9

Le profilé est laminé en H, de classe 1 et l’axe de flambement est z-z→ = 0,34(curve b)

2]
Φ = 0,5 [1+ 0,34 0,53-0.2+
( )
0,530.696

1
χ = = 0,872
√
0.696 +0.696² - 0,53²

→ χ = 0,872and = 0,530.2

8077
= = 0.07 < 0.1
χ / 0,53×
1 97,3× 2350/1,1

→ .

Chapter 5: 3D Modeling

V.1Three-Dimensional Modeling:

Figure 10. 3D modeling

21
V.2 Entering the structure:
In this section, we are interested in modeling the 3D structure by following the steps.
cited below:

Insertion of the geometry of the portal frame into the module 'Study of a planar portal frame'

3D modeling in precision spacing of the girders, section and spacing of the purlins
and smooth and the wind parameters.
Insertion of the global structure while respecting the dimensions found after the analysis and
calculation of the planar frame structure.

V.3 3. Loading:
Entering the different load cases (self-weight, maintenance load, thermal effect, effect of
wind and the 8 convoys of rolling charges).
Generating combinations.

V.4 4. Input of families and instability parameters:

- Creation of families grouping the parts of our structure.

Input of buckling and overturning parameters, and deflection conditions.

Release of failures and smoothness.

Launch of the calculation.

V.5 5. Results at the ELU and ELS:

Figure 11: Verification result of the most stressed column

Figure 12: Verification result of the most stressed crossbar

Figure 13: Result of the verification of the most requested failure

22
 Figure 14: Result of checking the most stressed beam

V.6 Conclusion :

In the development of this mini-project, we took into account not only the
resistance criteria but also behavior in the state of service, as well as
requirements related to manufacturing, while ensuring the fundamental parameters: the
ease and speed of execution.
Finally, we note that this current project was a good opportunity to be able to
confront practical problems to leverage theoretical knowledge
acquired during our academic training at ENIS and a good opportunity
to practice with calculation and sizing software that have become, in our
Days, a basic factor for success in professional life.

23
24