NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

07-Str-A2 · May 2014

Question 2 of 7: Moments of resistance of the built-up bridge section

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

Paper format. National Examinations, May 2014 — 07-Str-A2 Elementary Structural Design, 3 hours, closed book (handbooks and textbooks permitted). Seven questions in three parts: Part A steel (three questions), Part B reinforced concrete (three questions), Part C timber (one question). Candidates answer two from A, two from B and the one in C — five solutions in all, every question of equal value (20 marks). All seven are worked below.

Reference texts for 07-Str-A2.

  • CSA S16:19, Design of Steel Structures — named on the paper.
  • CSA A23.3:19, Design of Concrete Structures — named on the paper.
  • CSA O86:19, Engineering Design in Wood — named on the paper.
  • CISC, Handbook of Steel Construction (section tables and beam-diagram formulae; the paper directs the candidate to it in question A1).
  • CWC, Wood Design Manual (O86 specified strengths and modification factors).
  • MacGregor & Bartlett, Reinforced Concrete: Mechanics and Design (Canadian edition).
  • Kulak & Grondin, Limit States Design in Structural Steel (CISC).
  • NBCC 2020 Part 4 for the load combinations.

Check — load factors, stated once for the whole paper. Page 1 note 6 says “All loads shown are unfactored”, and the paper nowhere splits dead load from live. Every applied load below is therefore taken as specified live load with $\alpha_L = 1.5$ (NBCC 2020 Table 4.1.3.2, principal-load case 2); member self-weight is small against the applied actions and is neglected except where noted. A candidate who instead assumed a dead/live split would obtain proportionally different factored actions but identical method and identical section proportions.

Question A2: Moments of resistance of the built-up bridge section (20 marks: 6 + 7 + 7)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given.

QuantityValue
Plate thickness (all plates)$t = 20$ mm
Bottom flange2500 mm wide
Top flanges500 mm long, one at the head of each web, centred on the web
Overall depth900 mm
Web slope300 mm horizontal run over the 900 mm depth (1 : 3, outward)
SteelG40.21-350W, $F_y = 350$ MPa, $E = 200\,000$ MPa
Resistance factor$\phi = 0.90$

Find. $M_{rx}$ and $M_{ry}$, the factored moments of resistance of the trough section about its own centroidal axes.

5005002 500300300900x–xy–yc.g.C80c.g. 325.8 above soffitAll plates 20 mm thick, G40.21-350W
The trough cross-section of Figure A2. The two 500 mm top plates sit symmetrically on the head of each inclined web (the exam drawing shows the web meeting the plate at its mid-length), and C — the load point used in question A3 — is 80 mm below the centroid on the y–y axis.

Check — how the outline was idealised. The figure is hand-drawn and dimensioned only at the plate boundaries, so the following reading is adopted and used consistently: the bottom plate is a $2500 \times 20$ rectangle at the soffit; the two top plates are $500 \times 20$ rectangles with their top face at 900 mm, each centred on its web (the drawing shows a clear T-junction at the middle of the 500 mm dimension, not at its end); and each web is a 20 mm plate spanning the clear 860 mm between the flanges on the drawn 1 : 3 slope, so its sloping length is $\sqrt{860^2 + 286.7^2} = 906.5$ mm. Taking the webs over the full 900 mm depth instead changes the area by under one per cent and $I_x$ by under two, so no result below turns on the choice.

Approach. Build the section from four component rectangles, locate the centroid, accumulate $I_x$ and $I_y$ using the rotated-rectangle formulae for the inclined webs, classify every plate element against S16 Table 2, and then take $M_r = \phi F_y S$ on whatever section — gross or effective — the classification allows.

  1. Web geometry. Clear depth between flanges $h_w = 900 - 2(20) = 860$ mm; horizontal run over that depth $300 (860/900) = 286.7$ mm; sloping length $$L_w = \sqrt{860^2 + 286.7^2} = 906.5\ \text{mm},\qquad \cos\theta = \frac{860}{906.5} = 0.9487,\quad \sin\theta = 0.3162$$ so the webs stand at $\theta = 18.4^{\circ}$ from the vertical.
  2. Areas. Bottom flange $A_1 = 2500(20) = 50\,000$ mm$^2$; each top flange $A_2 = 500(20) = 10\,000$ mm$^2$; each web $A_3 = 906.5(20) = 18\,130$ mm$^2$. Hence $$A_g = 50\,000 + 2(10\,000) + 2(18\,130) = 106\,261\ \text{mm}^2$$
  3. Centroid above the soffit. Taking first moments about the soffit, with the component centroids at 10, 890 and 450 mm, $$\bar y = \frac{50\,000(10) + 2(10\,000)(890) + 2(18\,130)(450)}{106\,261} = \frac{34.617 \times 10^6}{106\,261}$$ $$\boxed{\bar y = 325.8\ \text{mm above the soffit},\qquad y_{\text{top}} = 900 - 325.8 = 574.2\ \text{mm}}$$ The centroid sits low because the 2500 mm bottom plate is half the area of the section — the “varies” dimension on the exam figure is this quantity.
  4. Second moment about x–x. For a thin rectangle of length $L$ and thickness $t$ inclined at $\theta$ to the vertical, the own centroidal value is $I = \tfrac{1}{12}L^3 t\cos^2\theta + \tfrac{1}{12}L t^3 \sin^2\theta$, giving $1.118 \times 10^9$ mm$^4$ per web. Adding the parallel-axis terms, $$I_x = \underbrace{4.985 \times 10^9}_{\text{bottom flange}} + \underbrace{6.367 \times 10^9}_{\text{two top flanges}} + \underbrace{2.795 \times 10^9}_{\text{two webs}}$$ $$\boxed{I_x = 14.16 \times 10^9\ \text{mm}^4}$$
  5. Second moment about y–y. The bottom plate now bends about its own strong direction, and the top flanges sit 1550 mm off the axis (1250 + 300), the web centroids 1393 mm off it: $$I_y = \frac{20(2500)^3}{12} + 2\left[\frac{20(500)^3}{12} + 10\,000(1550)^2\right] + 2\left[0.125 \times 10^9 + 18\,130(1393)^2\right]$$ $$\boxed{I_y = 144.9 \times 10^9\ \text{mm}^4}$$ Ten times $I_x$ — the section is a wide, shallow trough, which is exactly what a footbridge deck wants.
  6. Elastic section moduli. $$S_{x,\text{top}} = \frac{14.16 \times 10^9}{574.2} = 24.66 \times 10^6\ \text{mm}^3, \qquad S_{x,\text{bot}} = \frac{14.16 \times 10^9}{325.8} = 43.46 \times 10^6\ \text{mm}^3$$ About y–y the extreme fibre is the outer tip of a top plate at $1250 + 300 + 250 = 1800$ mm, so $$S_y = \frac{144.9 \times 10^9}{1800} = 80.51 \times 10^6\ \text{mm}^3$$
  7. Classify every plate element (S16 Table 2, $\sqrt{F_y} = 18.71$). This is the step the marks turn on, because a 20 mm plate is thin relative to these widths.
    • Top-flange outstand, supported along one edge: $b/t = (500 - 20)/2 \div 20 = 12.0$ against a Class 3 limit of $200/\sqrt{F_y} = 10.7$ — Class 4 (marginally).
    • Webs in flexure, supported along two edges: $h/w = 860/20 = 43.0$ against a Class 1 limit of $1100/\sqrt{F_y} = 58.8$ — Class 1.
    • Bottom flange, supported along two edges: $b/t = 125$ against a Class 3 limit of $670/\sqrt{F_y} = 35.8$ — grossly Class 4, but it lies in the tension zone for sagging bending about x–x, where classification does not apply.
    The section is therefore Class 4 and S16 Cl.13.5(c)(iii) applies: reduce the Class 4 compression elements to an effective width of $200t/\sqrt{F_y}$ where supported along one edge and $670t/\sqrt{F_y}$ where supported along two, then use the elastic modulus of the reduced section.
  8. Effective section for bending about x–x (top flanges in compression). The effective outstand is $200(20)/18.71 = 213.8$ mm each side, so each top plate reduces from 500 mm to $2(213.8) + 20 = 447.6$ mm. Repeating steps 3 to 6 on the reduced section gives $\bar y_e = 314.4$ mm, $I_{xe} = 13.47 \times 10^9$ mm$^4$ and $S_{xe,\text{top}} = 23.00 \times 10^6$ mm$^3$, whence $$M_{rx} = \phi F_y S_{xe} = 0.90 \times 350 \times 23.00 \times 10^6 \times 10^{-6}$$ $$\boxed{M_{rx} = 7245\ \text{kN}\cdot\text{m}}$$ Had the flanges satisfied Class 3, the gross value would be $0.90(350)(24.66 \times 10^6) = 7768$ kN·m — the Class 4 penalty is only 7 per cent, because the flanges are barely over the limit and the section is web-and-bottom-plate dominated.
  9. Bending about y–y. Now the whole of one web is in near-uniform compression, a plate supported along two edges with $L_w/t = 45.3$ against the Class 3 limit of 35.8, so it too reduces — to $670(20)/18.71 = 716.3$ mm effective, taken adjacent to the two supported edges. With the top flanges reduced as before, $I_{ye} = 125.1 \times 10^9$ mm$^4$ and $S_{ye} = 69.50 \times 10^6$ mm$^3$: $$M_{ry} = 0.90 \times 350 \times 69.50 \times 10^6 \times 10^{-6}$$ $$\boxed{M_{ry} = 21\,893\ \text{kN}\cdot\text{m}}$$

Check — sense of bending about x–x. The values above are for sagging bending, the only case a simply supported footbridge sees under gravity. If the section were ever hogged, the 2500 mm bottom plate would be the compression flange at $b/t = 125$; its effective width collapses to 716 mm and, with the top plates then in tension and fully effective, the effective section gives $I_x = 8.804 \times 10^9$ mm$^4$ with its centroid 485.3 mm above the soffit, $S_{e,\text{bot}} = 18.14 \times 10^6$ mm$^3$ and $M_{rx} = 0.90(350)(18.14 \times 10^6) \times 10^{-6} = 5715$ kN·m — about 79 per cent of the sagging value. This is not only a pier or uplift case: question A3 applies its load below the centroid, which bends the section in exactly this sense, so A3 must use 5715 kN·m, not 7245.

ResultValue
Gross area $A_g$106 261 mm$^2$
Centroid above soffit $\bar y$325.8 mm
$I_x$ (gross)$14.16 \times 10^9$ mm$^4$
$I_y$ (gross)$144.9 \times 10^9$ mm$^4$
$S_{x,\text{top}}$ / $S_{x,\text{bot}}$$24.66 \times 10^6$ / $43.46 \times 10^6$ mm$^3$
$S_y$$80.51 \times 10^6$ mm$^3$
ClassificationClass 4 (top-flange outstand $b/t = 12.0 > 10.7$); webs Class 1
$M_{rx}$ (sagging, effective section)7245 kN·m
$M_{rx}$ (bottom plate in compression, used in A3)5715 kN·m
$M_{ry}$ (effective section)21 893 kN·m