©Civil-Comp Press, 2012

Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference

Paper 31 on Computational Structures Technology,
B.H.V. Topping, (Editor),
Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire, Scotland

Local and Global Stability Analysis of a

Large Free Span Steel Roof Structure
Z. Nagy1, M. Cristutiu2 and Z. Kiss1
1
Engineering Structures Department
Technical University of Cluj, Romania
2
Department of Architecture
“Politehnica” University of Timisoara, Romania

Abstract
The global stability checks and specific local stability problems of a large span steel
space truss made by square hollow sections (SHS) are presented in this paper. For
the fabrication of the space truss, welded joints between the SHS profiles were
designed. As a result of the fact that for characteristic failure checks of the welded

developed for Φ=90 degrees (the angle between the diagonal planes), for the design
TT and KK joints analytical methods are based only on a semi-empirical formulae,

of joints finite element modelling was used. Good agreement between the results of
the developed finite element joint model and the analytical method for TT and KK

analysed truss which had Φ=50 degrees.

joints has been found, even though the semi-empirical formulae are applied for the

Keywords: large span space trusses, hollow sections, TT and KK welded joints,
local and global stability analysis, finite element joint modelling.

1 Introduction
In 2010 the local authority of the city of Cluj launched the selection based on a
Feasibility Study for the new City Sports Centre with a capacity more than 7000 fixed
seats, to be located near to the new city stadium. Following the selection process,
which included a new structural solution proposal, a designer association was
selected including architects, structural engineers, mechanical and electrical
engineers. Based on the new structural concept, Plan RO31 Ltd. was appointed for
the design of the building structure.
The architectural design process started in March 2011, whilst some changes
were produced on the level of facilities to be included within the Sports Centre, in
particular whether or not an ice rink to be included. The structural design process of
the roof structure started in July 2011 and was completed in September 2011.

1
 The article describes the applied structural solutions and gives details about the
local and global stability analysis of the structural members and the joints under
different load combinations. The paper content is limited only to the large span roof
structure made by steel SHS profiles with welded joints and summarizes the results
of the numerical study performed by the authors.

2 Building description
2.1 Architectural facts
The City Sports Centre with a capacity more than 7000 fixed seats is organized on five
levels: one underground level, ground level and three stories (Figure 1, 2).
Underground level is exclusively for parking with 447 car capacities. Ground
level, first and second level includes public, officials, media, shopping and
administration area. Ground level also includes the reserved area for sport players,
second level includes a conference centre. The third level is reserved for media,
special equipment and installations.
To allow multiple use of the playing area, the surface can be changed from 30×47
meter to 38×56 meter using extensible / retractable tribune structure on ground level.
In this way basketball, handball, volley, box, gymnastics championship are possible
to take place in the City Sports Centre.

Figure 1: Transverse section through the building

Figure 2: Longitudinal section through the building

2
2.2 Design loads of the roof structure
In order to evaluate the structural response, in the design process were considered

− Roof loads (EN1991-1-1): dead load + technological load qk = 1.0 kN / m2

the following loads (characteristic values):

− Concentrated technological loads (media box) applied in mid span, Pk= 60 kN

− Temperature variation effects between erection phase (-15 to -20 degrees in

− Snow loads on the roof according to CR 1-1-3-2005 (EN1991-1-3), s0,k=1.5

winter) and service phase (+15 to +20 degrees during lifetime)

kN/m2
− Wind loads on building envelope according to NP-082-04 (EN1991-1-4),
qref=0.4 kN/m2
− Seismic action according to P100-2006 [1] (EN1998-1), with peak ground

− Load combination for ultimate limit state (ULS) and serviceability limit state
acceleration ag=0.08g and control period of seismic motion Tc=0.7 sec

(SLS) according to CR-0-2005 [2] (EN 1990).

2.3 Structural solution and conceptual design of steel structure

The sports centre scheme features one main hall with free roof span of up to 63.90
m, having the total width of 76.10 m. Selection of the most appropriate roof
structure has been driven by a number of factors including the span, roof geometry,
load to be supported, economy and aesthetics and the use of sustainable construction
materials.
Triangular shaped spatial trusses at 10.60 m centres were design (Figure 2). The
truss section is 3600 mm wide by approximately 4000 mm deep (variable along the
span). The steel trusses of this size are able to span such distances as simply
supported elements, but large vertical deformations and horizontal reactions were
necessary to be managed. Several options were investigated to keep the sizes to a
minimum including arch action (which would have required stiff concrete structure)
and cantilevered truss structure (which would have resulted in vertical tie elements
at both ends). The system that was decided combines both: the advantage of this
system is that the end cantilever with the vertical tying elements of the truss
effectively reduces the vertical deformations and axial forces in mid span, as well as
allowing for continuity of the roof structure over the lateral annexes. The principle
was successfully used by the authors in a similar project [3]. Pinned supports were
provided on the top of the concrete columns, with limited horizontal displacement
set up possibility for the erection phases. Longitudinal trusses were placed in mid
span, at the supports and near the supports, where the inner flange of the truss
compression effort change in tension.
The design of the steel structure was performed following the European
standards. For strength, stability and stiffness requirements of the structural elements
the prescription of SR-EN1993-1-1 [4], SR-EN1993-1-8 [5] and P100/2006 [1] were
used. For the design of the structural elements, linear elastic structural analysis was
performed. The design checks of the structural elements for ULS include persistent

3
or transient design situations (fundamental combinations), where snow loads in
combination with technological loads play the key role. For global stability checks
Consteel software (www.consteel.hu) was used, which calculation procedure is
based on the general method of EN1993-1-1 [4]. For individual member checks,
both method A and B of EN1993-1-1 was also performed. Good agreement between
the used methods was found. For the design of spatial truss joints the following
failure modes have been considered: local brace failure (yielding, local buckling),
chord face plastification, chord punching shear, chord side wall failure, chord shear
failure [6]. Alternative checks using finite element modeling was also used.
For SLS design checks of the structural elements, fundamental and exceptional
load combinations were used. The computed maximum vertical deflection of the
space truss for SLS check under snow and technological load is:
f = 165mm ≤ f a = = 213mm
L
(1)
300

Figure 3: The structural model of the transverse frame

3 Particular problems in the design process

3.1 Connection between the steel and concrete structure
Providing pinned supports for the roof trusses, beneficial effects in the internal effort
distribution and the highest horizontal reactions over the concrete structures was
obtained. The use of simply supports for the roof trusses eliminates the horizontal
reaction over the concrete structure, but has a negative influence over the roof
trusses in terms of vertical deflection and effort distribution. Final solution for the
connection (Figure 4) considered a combination of both effects: a limited sliding
possibility of the support, used only for the erection phase of the structure (mainly
deformations caused by the permanent actions are consumed), after that the support
is transformed in a perfect hinge. In this way a lower horizontal support reaction
resulted, consuming around 30 mm horizontal displacement by the sliding
possibility of the support, from the total of 80 mm, calculated under permanent,
technological and snow loading.

4
 Figure 4: Sliding possibility of the support and view at support level

3.2 Global stability checks of the space truss structure

The global stability checks of the space truss were performed using Consteel
software [7]. Buckling analysis according to the general method of EN 1993-1-1,
including only the 3D effects of the structural members were performed (stressed
skin beneficial action of the roof was neglected).

To have an overview about the global behaviour of the structure, the space trusses
were calculated and checked using the full 3D model of the structure, including also
the concrete structure. According to the buckling analysis, a critical load
multiplication factor of αcr,op=3.63 was computed (Figure 5), corresponding to the
stability loss of first compressed diagonals. Improving the model, considering the
effects of additional braces of the compressed diagonals (Figure 6), the critical load
multiplication factor increased at αcr,op=6.81.

Alternate design checks of the space truss were performed, using in a

conservative way the simply supported configuration of the roof structure (concrete
structure was not considered in this model), only the stabilizing effect of the
longitudinal trusses placed over the support and in mid span.

A fair agreement between the 3D full model and simplified model was found.
According to the buckling analysis, a very similar buckling shape and the associated
critical load multiplication factor of αcr,op=4.04 was computed. Improving the
simplified model, considering the effects of additional braces of the compressed
diagonals, the critical load multiplication factor increased only at αcr,op=5.05, due to
the stability loss of upper compressed chord in mid span, which was not present in
3D model, due to the moving possibility of the neglected concrete structure. The
resulted degree of utilization for the members, following the general method of EN
1993-1-1 resulted less than 80% in this way, while considering the simply supported
configuration of the roof truss structure the level of almost 100% is achieved.

5
 Figure 5: Compressed diagonal buckling in the space truss (αcr,op=3.63)

Figure 6: Improved space truss (αcr,op=6.81)

3.3 Joint checks using FEM of the space truss structure

The main concern after global stability analysis was to find out which is dominant:
the global stability loss of the chords or the local stability issues in the welded joints
of the truss? Local brace failure (yielding, local buckling), the chord face
plastification, chord punching shear, chord side wall failure, chord shear failure
checks are necessary according to [6] for TT and KK joints. The analytical methods

empirical formulae are developed for Φ=90 degree (the angle between the diagonal
given by [6] for TT and KK joints have limited range of validity, because the semi-

planes). To have a satisfactory response, finite element modelling of the heaviest

loaded truss joint was used.
For an accurate analysis including geometrical and material nonlinearities of the
selected joint (Figure 7), a specific finite element model was developed (see Figure
8). Nonlinear elastic-plastic analysis considering geometric nonlinearities (GMNA
and GMNIA) has been applied. The model was developed in ABAQUS [8] finite
element program, using S4R-type elements (4-node shell elements with reduced
integration) with 6 degrees of freedom on each node (translation and rotation with
regard to the x, y and z-axis).
All strengthening plates and SHS sections were modelled in their mid-plane and
the connections between chords and truss flanges were defined as a surface-to-
surface tie between SHS section end – strengthening plates (Figure 8). The model’s

6
materials were defined as elastic – linear plastic (E = 210000 N/mm2, υ = 0,3) with a
yield strength of fy = 275 N/mm2 for all the rectangular hollow sections. The loads
from permanent, technological and snow actions were introduced as point loads,
relationship between the magnitudes was considered according to the statical model.
First buckling shape with the amplitude according to EN1993-1-6 was used as initial
imperfection in the nonlinear-elastic analysis (GMNIA).
According to the analysis results, the local stability loss of the compressed
diagonal members connected in the joint will define the joint capacity. This is
associated with the brace failure (BF) in the analytical method. The computed load
multiplication factor according to the level of dominant load case (permanent +
technological + snow loads) resulted αcr,op=8.18, which is higher than those obtained
in the global stability analysis of the truss structure.

Figure 7: Analyzed truss joint

Figure 8: FEM of the selected joint and material model

Figure 9: First buckling mode of the joint (αcr,op=8.18)

7
3.4 Joint checks using analytical method
Analytical models for the checking of the space truss joints were also applied. The
chord face plastification (FP), chord punching shear (PS), brace failure (BF) and
chord shear failure (CS) checks according to [6] for TT and KK joints have been
evaluated. Strengthening plates were neglected in the evaluation. Table 1 centralizes
the evaluated results for the first low chord joint from the main support, similar with
the one used in the FEM. It can be seen that dominant component of the compressed
brace BR1-2 is the brace failure (BF) mode, closely followed by chord face
plastification (FP).

Failure type BR1-2 BR5-6 BR3-4

[kN] [kN] [kN]
FP 781.5 780.1 999.6
BF 752.4 475 1274.4
CS 1685.8 1861 2173.4
PS 1164.1 1824 1384.7
Design efforts NEd 563.0 94.0 588.1

Table 1: Analytical results on low chord joint

3.5 Discussions
Comparing the analytical results with those obtained from the FE analysis with
strengthening plates applied on the chord face, similar failure mode (brace failure
due to local buckling) has been identified: Figure 9 shows the brace failure due to
local buckling of the SHS profile walls, in Table 1 we can see the lowest capacity of
the brace BR1-2 is given by the same failure mode as identified in FE analysis. Due
to this failure mode, the supplementary stiffener plates are not contributing to the
global capacity of the analysed joint; it helps only to obtain accurate perimeter
welding for all the connected braces. The chord can carry the design efforts safely,

According to evaluated results semi-empirical formulae, developed for Φ=90 degree

even without stiffener plates, but more complicated execution details will result.

Φ=50 degree.
which is the angle between the diagonal planes gives satisfactory results also for

A FEM was performed for the joint without strengthening plates. Comparing the
analytical results with those obtained from the FE analysis without strengthening
plates, similar failure mode (brace failure due to local buckling) has been identified.
Increasing the applied loads, the brace failure was followed by the chord face
plastification (FP) (Figure 10).
As a conclusion we can say that FEM results and used analytical models for KK

Φ=50 degree, even the analytical models were developed for space trusses with
and TT welded joint design gives fair agreement for this particular space truss with

Φ=90 degree (Φ is the angle between the diagonal planes).

8
 Figure 10: Analysis result without strengthening plate

4 Fabrication and erection of the space truss structure

The transportation of any truss from the steel shop - where the assembly is produced
– to the site to be used, can be a very expensive process. The global dimension of
one truss (76.1 m), imposed to be cut in five pieces (Figure 11). Due to the
expensive transportation of the first truss, for the next six only the assembly parts
were cut in the shop, the truss assembly welding was switched on site. The erection
process started when the first two trusses were ready.
In the erection phase the end parts was positioned first, followed by the
intermediate three subassemblies positioning as a single one (Figure 12). For all
these intermediate phases, the stability of the parts has been checked. Without any
significant loads (only self weight), the truss only with end lateral supports had a
comfortable computed critical load multiplication factor of αcr,op=9.58.

Figure 11: Truss splicing for transport

9
 Figure 12: Truss erection on site

Figure 13: All trusses on the final position

5 Conclusions
This paper describes the key aspects of the local and global stability design checks
for a large free span roof truss structure. The use of Consteel software based on the
general method of EN1993-1-1, gave the possibility to the designer to use simple –
step by step design strategies to improve the critical load multiplication factor,
identifying and improving the weakest element in the truss structure and to make
stability checks for intermediate technological phases, in which the truss is only
partially fixed.

10
 Using the finite element method, complex welded joint configuration specifically
used in space trusses made by SHS tubular steel sections were analysed. Fair
agreement between finite element method and analytical methods according to [6]

developed for trusses with Φ=90 degree where Φ is the angle between the diagonal
for TT and KK welded joints have been found, even semi-empirical formulae,

which had Φ=50 degrees.

planes, to give satisfactory results also for the analysed joints of the particular truss

References
[1] P100-2006: Romanian Earthquake Design Code
[2] CR-0-2005: Cod de proiectare pentru bazele proiectarii structurilor in
constructii (Design Code. Basis of design. Romanian design code).
[3] Zs. Nagy, I. M. Cristutiu: Advanced nonlinear investigations of a 50 m span
frame case study: The steel structure of the ice rink, city of Târgu Mureş,
Romania, Stability and Ductility of Steel Structures, SDSS-2010, Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 8-10 September 2010, pp 649-655 (2010);
[4] SR EN 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures Part 1.1: General rules
and rules for buildings;
[5] SR-EN1993-1-8: Eurocod 3: Design of steel structures Part 1.8: Design of
joints
[6] J. Wardenier, J.A. Packer, X.L. Zhao, G.J. van der Vegte: Hollow Sections in
Structural Applications, Comité International pour le développement et l'Etude
de la Construction Tubulaire, ISBN 978-90-72830-86-9
[7] Consteel v.6.0 user manual (2011), Developed by Consteel Ltd. Budapest
[8] Abaqus, v.6.5.1, Dassault Systems/Simulia, Providence, RI, USA (2008)

11