Description
A collar beam roof truss is stressed by three different load cases. The internal forces are calculated analytically and compared using RFEM 6.
Input Parameters and Structural System
The calculation is performed without considering self-weight and according to linear static analysis. The shear stiffness of the cross-section is neglected.
| Beam Geometry | Width / Height | b/h | 6/18 | [cm] | |||||
| System Geometry | Total Length | L | 12 | [m] | |||||
| Collar Beam Length | b | 4.5 | [m] | ||||||
| System Height | H | 4 | [m] | ||||||
| Height to Collar Beam | hu | 2.5 | [m] | ||||||
| Height from Collar Beam | ho | 1.5 | [m] | ||||||
| Rafter Angle | a | 33.69 | [°] | ||||||
| Load Situations | Distributed Load Rafter | g | 5 | [kN] | |||||
| Distributed Load – Collar Beam | gk | 5 | [kN] | ||||||
| Distributed Load – Wind Load | gw | 5 | [kN] | ||||||
Analytical Solution
Formulas from [1] were applied to the collar roof for the analytical solution.
Comparison of Analytical Solution with RFEM Solution
| Load Attack 1 Rafter | Comparison Value | Analytical Solution | RFEM 6 | Deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Az | 30.00 [kN] | 30.00 [kN] | 0.00 [%] |
| Ax | 33.61 [kN] | 33.56 [kN] | 0.15 [%] |
| N | -29.63 [kN] | -29.48 [kN] | 0.51 [%] |
| M | -6.68 [kNm] | -6.56 [kNm] | 2.10 [%] |
| Load Attack 2 Collar Beam | Comparison Value | Analytical Solution | RFEM 6 | Deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Az | 11.25 [kN] | 11.25 [kN] | 0.00 [%] |
| Ax | 16.88 [kN] | 16.84 [kN] | 0.24 [%] |
| N | -16.88 [kN] | -16.79 [kN] | 0.53 [%] |
| M | 0.00 [kNm] | 0.00 [kNm] | 0.00 [%] |
| Load Attack 3 Wind Load | Comparison Value | Analytical Solution | RFEM 6 | Deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Az | 19.17 [kN] | 19.17 [kN] | 0.00 [%] |
| Bz | 10.83 [kN] | 10.83 [kN] | 0.00 [%] |
| Ax | 4.27 [kN] | 4.24 [kN] | 0.70 [%] |
| Bx | 24.27 [kN] | 24.24 [kN] | 0.12 [%] |
| N | -21.40 [kN] | -21.20 [kN] | 0.93 [%] |
| M2 | 10.41 [kNm] | 10.60 [kNm] | 1.83 [%] |
| M4 | -20.06 [kNm] | -19.88 [kNm] | 0.90 [%] |
The analytical calculation corresponds well with the results from RFEM 6. The greatest relative deviation is 2.1%.
Literature
[1] Schneider, K.-J. (2012). Schneider - Bautabellen für Ingenieure: Mit Berechnungshinweisen und Beispielen, (20th ed.). A. Albert, Hrsg.