Lightbox Stadium Structural Report by CAADESIGN

Contents

Christopher Andrews Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino

Structural Model

Dead Load Calculations

Live Load & Wind Calculations

Load Case Key

Self Weight Load Case

Dead Load Load Case

Live Load Load Case

Wind Load Load Case

Normal Load Load Case

Extreme Load Load Case

Findings & Conclusion

13+

Apendix

The proposed design for the new Perth basketball arena has been carefully considered and principally designed around the idea of enhancing the game (basketball) for the spectators. Numerous Architectural design considerations have been made whilst designing the Complex. The Extreme angles of the interior foyers, the translucent cladding, the compact nature of the building, the renewable energy focused roof and most importantly the carefully arranged seating all drive the building to perform as; a structure that enhances the game and a structure that declares its architectural language. The materials of Polycarbonate, steel and concrete have been chosen both to reflect the modernity of the building but also to ensure an strong environmental performance. The translucent cladding and ceiling strung with lights allow for the building itself to become a spectacle as the sport does and makes the building float ethereally at night whilst the polished concrete floors and steel structure ground the building with strength and a feeling of presence whilst ensuring a high performance The Arena has been sited and planned centrally on the site and with minimal footprint to create a park space around the building further enhancing the buildings presence and publicly sustainable focus.

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.2

Structural Model The structure for the new Perth basketball stadium consists of 4 elements ( The primary roof structure The roof substructure, The Horizontal supports and the Cladding system) which drive to create an incredibly rigid and versatile structure with out the need of support beams throughout the span of the building. To achieve a span of this level whilst having a structure with minimal height and footprint as desired for the aesthetic, a structural system of space frame trusses was devised. Like a truss system Small span trusses cross the distance with trans members bracing the weakest top chord points into the stronger bottom cord corner points from here a space frame ideology is used with these members on x,y and z points rigidly joined to create an almost mesh like structure.

CHS Cross section used Structure

The structure is symmetrical on all corners ensuring that the building is equally braced and strengthened from all sides. With the 9 bays on each side measuring in a pattern of 5250, 5500, 5500, 5250, 5000, 5250, 5500, 5500, 5250. At the point that measures 5000, a central spine runs the height and length of the building providing strength in the weakest part of the structure, the center. This spine combined with the large corner columns provide the strongest points of the building from which the other parts of structure brace from and too.

SHS Cross section used on roof substructure columns and girts 1500x1500 Spine Column

The maximum thickness of the roof primary structure is measured at 1.5 meters which provides what is hoped to be a lightweight appearing structure with a very thin and delicate profile albeit a lot of structure is used within the building With the design desire for high levels of energy efficiency and an ethos of using the building as a generator when not in use a system of solar panels placed at optimum angles with a potential auto angling system has been developed. These panels sit on the roof substructure and are north facing as per the sun whilst the south facing side is clad with danpalon to provide natural light. With this level of weight and type of system a substructure which rests on the primary structure has been created using a ‘sawtooth’ configuration. The saw teeth are placed on 100x100 SHS 350 lo steel purlins which bare the load onto the rest of the structure.

Roof Bracing modules detail, 1st is 5250 ,2nd & 3rd measure at 5500

The facade of the building is to be mounted to a series of girts placed evenly between the primary columns to provide additional support for the facade and load panels whilst the roof structure mounts to the columns by triangulated cross joints popular in Norman foster buildings. This type of member joint is useful as it converts what would otherwise a shear stress on the joints into a triangulated force giving a stronger member. The entire primary structure is constructed from 350lo CHS steel as it is Cost effective and extremely strong and resilient especially when used in a welded space frame trusses. The girts and purlins are constructed out of 350 lo SHS measuring 100x100 which provides more than adequate strength in this application.

Steel section usage *note measured drawings in appendix

Triangulated joint diagram

Dead Load Calculations

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.3 Self Weight & Other Dead load Considerations Whole Primary Structure

Roof Load Substructure

Roof Load Primary Structure

Wall Loads Primary Structure

Solar Panels Bosch Solar Module c-Si M 60

Insulation & Light Diffuser Danpalon DP30 HONEYCOMB Seamless

Facade Cladding Makarlon Platinum twin 10mm

Mechanical & Services

A principle idea for the building during its design was the inclusion of solar panels to ensure the building has a use when there are no games, Bosch Solar Module c-Si M 60 have been chosen for use as they provide stability and long life. The panels are ﬁxed to the secondary roof structure.

Danpalon DP30 Honeycomb Polycarbonate has been chosen as an interior cladding for the ceiling. This has been chosen as it further diffuses the light from the skylights through an translucent opal ﬁnish and creates a zone of low ﬂow air between the court area and ceiling space which acts as an insulation technique. The Danpalon is mounted to the underside of the Primary roof structure

To achieve the ethereal and translucent feel of the building Makarlon Platinum twin 10mm has been chosen as the facade material. This is rated for high wind speed and further provides a degree of insulation whilst still being transparent and able to be formed, the mounting system for this is included in the weight per square meter and it is mounted to both the primary structure and girts

Mg/m2

4333g/m2

Mg/m2

1700g/m2

As Outlined in the design brief allocations of Mechanical Electrical and hydraulic services must be made however given that currently what level of pipe work that is required is unknown the allocation of weight can not be made. It is assumed that the weight however would be negligible as the heaviest part of mechanical services has been accounted for (Cooling tower) and the heaviest roof load for electrical services has been accounted for (the solar panels) for these reasons it is safe to assume that all other services are of negligible weight in terms of this Primary Structure.

Area

3249m2

MTotal FTotal

14077.91kg 138.057kn

1xBlade Area =30.12m2 42xBlades Per Face 4x Faces 168 Blades = 5060.16m2 8602.272kg 84.359kn

Mkn.m

Area Total Fw

Standard Panel Dimension: 1660x990 (1.6434m2) Standard Weight: 21kg (12.778kg/m2) 0.125kn/m2 1200 Solar Panels 1200x(1.660x.990)=1971.08m2 1971.08x 0.125kn/m2 =247.12758kn

ATotal MTotal FTotal

Skylights SUNTUF Polycarbonate Sheeting SUNTUF polycarbonate sheeting has been chosen for use as it boasts a range of translucent options. Translucent roof sheeting has been chosen as it allows a controlled level of natural light in ensuring heat transmission is also at a reasonable level. The roof sheeting is mounted to the substructure Mkg/m MKn/m

MSS Length MSS Width M Total FTotal

1.1kg/m (760mm width) 0.01078 kn/m Sawtooth Section length= 2215mm 2.4365kg Sawtooth Section width=60m (79 sheets wide) 2.4365x79= 192.483kg 20 Sawteeth on roof 3849.67kg 37.752kn

Roof Substructure The roof substructure which acts on the Primary structure as a dead load has been calculated using Multi-frame. The Substructure is constructed from 50x50 SHS 350lo Steel. The Mass was calculated using multiframe Mkg/m FKn/m

Cooling Tower Baltimore Air Coil PCT1111-P3-N-2 Double Fan

Internal Cladding Makarlon Opal Triple16mm

As Outlined in the initial Design brief mechanical services for the building require a roof mounted cooling tower, under operational load (ﬁlled with water) the cooling towers weight becomes significant and has hence been calculated.

Makarlon has also been chosen as the internal cladding material however in the thicker triple layer version measuring 16mm. This version provides a higher level of insulation at the cost of greater thickness this however is not an issue on the inside of th e building. Similar to the roof an air pocket is created providing additional insulation. The Makarlon is mounted to the internal primary structure and the mounting system is included in the speciﬁed weight per m2

M1 M2 Ftotal2

4,200kg Shipping Weight 9,200kg Operating Weight 90.22118kn

Lighting Phillips ArenaVision MVF403 Despite having a strong daylight system integrated into the roof system artiﬁcial lighting is required for night time games. ArenaVision MVF403 by Phillips have been chosen however with a weight of 13.8 kg per unit and fewer than 100 being needed this weight is negligible compared to the weigh of the whole structure for this reason it has been left out of the weight calculations.

Mg/m2

2500g/m2

AIW AT

855m2 4xWalls 3420m2

M Total FTotal

8550kg 83.846kn

Guttering & Rain Management Fielders 2.4m Zinc Longline Gutter has been chosen as the guttering system of use, these run along the base of the roof sawteeth where rainwater collects. The roof is pitched at 1 degree to allow rain water to drain, this combined with hydraulic pressure created from the gutter assists in rain management. The weight of the guttering however given the small amount requited has been deemed negligible as there is less that one tonne distributed across the entire roof area

Purlins & Doors The calculated weight of the Purlins and Girts is included in the total self weight of the structure while the cladding material requited for both the internal and facade doors is included in there respective weight calculations. For this reason the weight of the door frames themselves is deemed negligible

Structure Self Weight Primary Structure By allocating and specifying the steel grade and section of each beam and running a self weight load case in Multiframe the overall weight of the entire structure is calculated. M Total 1008938.564kg

45632.784kg 447.504kn

Roof Substructure Sum of All Forces=732.383kn

Roof Primary Structure Sum of All Forces = 228.278kn

Wall Structure Sum of All Forces= 168.205kn

Primary Structure Sum of All Forces= 9894.307kn

Live Load Calculations When simulating the building for structural stability under real world conditions it is extremely important to consider the fact that the building is subject to other forces. The primary, most common and instantly foreseeable ones that exist include, Wind, Rain and Worker Forces. Multi-frame can be used to calculate these by applying loads to specific and appropriate joints ((known as joint-loads) and calculating them. Multi-frame also includes a specific functionality for calculating wind-loads but applying a blanket force to load panels which are placed on the entire structure. To ensure a efficient and long building life it is further necessary to calculate for exceptional weather events such as 1 in 100 year rainfalls and extreme wind conditions in the Perth region. During Simulation these select live loads will be applied onto of the calculated dead loads. The combination of these two allow for an insight into the real life workings of the buildings structure and further allow for the predictions of any failures and problems that could potentially occur

Rain 1 in 100 year According to the Beurea of meteorolgy a rainfall of 4.4mm in one minute has a 1% of occuring every year. The resultant force of this rainfall has been calculated and applied to the load points of the roof substructure mounting points to simulate this rainfall. It is assumed that the roof is capable of draining itseld in 1 minute. The load is as follows. Mkg FKn/m Mkg Am2

1kg per 1m2 x1mm 0.009kn 1:100 year 1 minute rainfall 4.4mm 4.4kg M2 60x60 = 3600m2

MTotal

15840kg

FTotal

155.337kn

Rain 1 in 50 year According to the Be-urea of meteorology a rainfall of 3.9mm in one minute has a 2% of occurring every year. The resultant force of this rainfall has been calculated and applied to the load points of the roof substructure mounting points to simulate this rainfall. It is assumed that the roof is capable of draining itself in 1 minMkg FKn/m Mkg Am2

1kg per 1m2 x1mm 0.009kn 1:50 year 1 minute rainfall 3.9mm 3.9kg M2 60x60 = 3600m2

MTotal

14040kg

FTotal

137.685kn

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.4

Rain Average Record Rain Per Year According to the Beurea of meteorolgy a rainfall of 1mm in one minute has a 100% of occuring every year. The resultant force of this rainfall has been calculated and applied to the load points of the roof substructure mounting points to simulate this rainfall. It is assumed that the roof is capable of draining itself in 1 minute. The load is as follows.

Mkg FKn/m Mkg Am2

1kg per 1m2 x1mm 0.009kn 1:1 year 1 minute rainfall 1.7mm 1.1kg M2 60x60 = 3600m2

MTotal

3960kg

FTotal

38.83kn

Rain load application diagram Loaded on secondary structure load points

Wind Wind forces Multiframe allows for the automatic calculation of wind forces by using weather data. After investigating the Bureau of Meteorology statistics and consulting AS1130 Pt2 a normal wind speed of 21m/s from both a South and Westerly direction and a high wind speed of 41m/s was determined for extreme cases. By Using load panels placed where cladding and facade material would otherwise be.

Wind Load application diagram Green panels are load panels

Workers It is important to consider that maintenance and routine checks are made to the building throughout its operation for this reason it is important to design the building with tolerance for workers on the roof. Assuming that a construction trade worker may be heavier than the average human due to the nature of there profession an assumption of an 85kg worker has been made as to not takes risks. no more than 20 people on the roof would be expected at any time and to allow for the worst case scenario the workers will be assumed to be standing in the centre of the roof, the weakest point. The load is as follows. No.Workers

M1xWorker

85kg

Mtotal

1700kg

FTotal

16.67130499996613kn

F1x Person

.8335kn

Workers load application blue arrows show .8355kn points

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.5

Load Cases: Key Load Case Self load

Load Case Wind load

Multi-frame has the ability to automatically do a self weight simulation. By doing this it uses the real world weight ands section properties to determine what impact on the structure the structure itself has. In this load case this is used.

To simulate the wind on the building under normal conditions this load case uses a 21ms wind coming from a southerly direction to forecast what occurs. To ensure that potential disasters are observable this case has a factor of 1 for each self weight, and dead load. Other load cases were also run for wind with a 21ms wind from a western direction also being run and a 41ms for south and west directions also available

Load Case Dead load The dead load load case simulates what occurs to the building structure when the addition of static forces are applied to the building. In this case all the calculated dead loads have been distributed evenly-to the points they affect and the simulation run. This case was run with self load as-well

Load Case Dead loads Force Distribution

Load Case Extreme load

With the addition of the live loads the structure can react in potentially unforeseen ways. In this load case all pevious loads cases are run with the inclusion of rain and workers on the roof for a more accurate result

Load Case Live loads Force Distribution

To assist in the analysis and simulation of building forces on the structure a series of labels have been applied to speciﬁc member types in the model. By doing this is allows a broader picture of what is occurring in the structure to be formed. The structural simulations and the results will feature the highest stresses received in each one of these labels. The labels are as follows:

Load Case Wind Force Distribution

To simulate how the building would react on a calculated average day the building was subjected to the following forces with these load factors: Dead loads .9, live loads .5, wind load normal speed, and self weight

Load Case Live Load

Member Type key

Load Case Normal load

To simulate how the building would react on a calculated extreme day the building was subjected to the following forces with these load factors: Dead loads 1.2, live loads 1.5, wind load extreme speed, and self weight

Load Case Extreme Force Distribution Forces Key Throughout the load cases the following stress measurements will be taken and recorded from the highest of each Member labels to help build an idea of what is happening within the structure of the building Displacement Dx- Overall movement in the X axis Dy- Overall movement in the Y axis Dz- Overall movement in the Z axis *note that the maximum span as per the AS1130 Building codes is total span/300 hence in this building case

LHT- Large horizontal trans members LHH - Large horizontal horizontals SHT- Small horizontal trans member LVT- Large vertical trans members LVV - Large Vertical Verticals SHH- Small Horizontal horizontals SVV- Small vertical verticals SVT - Small vertical trans members Girt - Girts (Vertical) Purlin -Purlins (Horizontal) *Please note that the ‘horizontal horizontals’ and vertical verticals first refer to the overall member and then the specific part of that member. For instance a LHH, Large horizontal horizontal refer to the spine members top and bottom chords as they are the large steel sections (500) and are horizontal in orientation and the specific member s are horizontal

the maximum is 60,000mm therefore a displacement of 300 can occur safely

Axial Sx- Total force pulling or pushing a member itself along its own axis measured in mpa Shear Sy- stress along the y axis of a member or joint pushing in one direction or another attempting to split a joint Sz - stress along the z axis of a member or joint pushing in one direction or another attempting to split a joint Bending Sbyleft - Force along the left side of a member ratios and measured against opposing side, thus measuring total bending moment Sbzbottom- Force along the left side of a member ratiod and measured against opposing side, thus measuring total bending moment Combined- Maximum stress in a single member

Load Case Results: Self Weight

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.6

Deﬂection D x,y,z mm

Shear Stress Sy mpa Sz mpa

DeflecƟon dy dx dz

Stress Sy

Joint Result (mm) Limit (mm) Pass 2545 3.628 200Y 3107 -60.642 200Y 680 3.238 200Y

Member Member Joint type Member type LVV 4043Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 8.874 < 300 Y

SVV

2976Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-2.221 < 300

Purlins LVT

9404Rigid 6717Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 508.0x16.0 CHS

-0.649 < 300 -6.614 < 300

Y Y

SVT

5313Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-6.241 < 300

LHH

8024Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

-10.331 < 300

SHH

5474Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-0.411 < 300

LHT

7835Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-51.743 < 300

SHT

7864Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-14.44 < 300

Girts

8553Rigid

100x100x9.0 SHS

-0.075 < 300

Deﬂection (mm) Sy(mpa)

Axial Stress Sx mpa Stress Sx

Sz(mpa)

Bending Stress SBy mpa SBz mpa

Member Joint Joint type Member type LHT 687Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 113.191 < 300 Y

LHH

7459Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

28.626 < 300

LVT

2530Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

35.585 < 300

LVV

4150Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

32.558 < 300

SVV

5295Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

36.111 < 300

SVT

7268Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

8.17 < 300

SHH

9081Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

SHT

6331Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins

8967Rigid

Girts

8554Rigid

Stress Sby LeŌ

Member Joint Joint type Member type LVV 2603Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS SVV

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -45.705 < 300 Y

1441Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

92.887 < 300

8853Rigid 463Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

17.329 < 300 19.916 < 300

Y Y

SVT

5293Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

14.75 < 300

LHH

7887Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

17.651 < 300

21.456 < 300

SHH

854Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

14.491 < 300

88.56 < 300

LHT

6097Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

94.672 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS

29.124 < 300

SHT

732Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

91.457 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

-14.846 < 300

Girts

8631Rigid

4.269 < 300

Purlins SBZ BoƩom LVT

Sby Left(mpa)

100x100x9.0 SHS

Sbz bottom(mpa)

Max Combined Stress mpa Axial Stress (mm)

Stress Member Joint Sx+Sby LeŌ 687LHT Sx+Sbz BoƩom 686LHT

Joint type Member type Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS 135.613 < 300 Y Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS 115.129 < 300 Y

Load Case Results: Dead Loads

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg. 7

Deﬂection D x,y,z mm dy dx dz

Shear Stress Sy mpa Sz mpa Stress Sy

Joint Result (mm) Limit (mm) Pass 3107 -74.727 200Y 2545 4.369 200Y 680 3.872 200Y

Member Member Joint type Member type LVV 4043Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -10.493 < 300 Y

SVV

2976Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-2.767 < 300

Purlins LVT

9325Rigid 6717Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 508.0x16.0 CHS

-4.039 < 300 7.748 < 300

Y Y

SVT

5313Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-7.396 < 300

LHH

8024Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

12.131 < 300

SHH

5912Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

0.832 < 300

LHT

7835Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

61.569 < 300

SHT

17.641Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

17.641 < 300

< 300

Girts

Rigid

Deﬂection (mm) Sy(mpa)

Axial Stress Sx mpa Stress Sx

Sz(mpa)

Bending Stress SBy mpa SBz mpa

Member Joint Joint type Member type LHT 687Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -131.409 < 300 Y

LHH

7459Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-33.852 < 300

LVT

8306Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

38.472 < 300

LVV

8320Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

36.892 < 300

SVV

3180Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

43.352 < 300

SVT

5293Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

6.222 < 300

SHH

7885Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

SHT

6331Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins

8967Rigid

Girts

8647Rigid

Stress Sby LeŌ

Member Joint LVV SVV

Joint type Member type 73Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -53.758 < 300 Y

1112Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-79.451 < 300

3107Rigid 351Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

-41.752 < 300 -23.297 < 300

Y Y

SVT

1906Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-17.537 < 300

LHH

2749Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-20.61 < 300

24.848 < 300

SHH

510Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

17.064 < 300

106.041 < 300

LHT

192Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-113.658 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS

33.938 < 300

SHT

394Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-107.679 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

-16.389 < 300

Girts

2857Rigid

-5.091 < 300

Purlins SBZ BoƩom LVT

Sby Left(mpa)

100x100x9.0 SHS

Sbz bottom(mpa)

Max Combined Stress mpa Axial Stress (mm)

Stress Member Joint Sx+Sby LeŌ 27LHT Sx+Sbz BoƩom 384LHT

Joint type Member type Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -158.14 < 300 Y Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -133.726 < 300 Y

Load Case Results: Live Load

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.8

Deﬂection D x,y,z mm dy dx dz

Shear Stress Sy mpa Sz mpa Stress Sy

Joint Result (mm) Limit (mm) Pass 3107 -77.842 200Y 2545 4.506 200Y 680 3.999 200Y

Member Joint Joint type Member type LVV 2840Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS SVV

650Rigid

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 7.787 < 300 Y

193.7x10.0 CHS

2.613 < 300

4.756 < 300 7.988 < 300

Y Y

Purlins LVT

3312Rigid 62Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 508.0x16.0 CHS

SVT

1860Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-7.623 < 300

LHH

2781Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

12.511 < 300

SHH

2045Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

0.97 < 300

LHT

2460Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

63.522 < 300

SHT

1713Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

18.216 < 300

Girts

926Rigid

0.09 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

Deﬂection (mm) Sy(mpa)

Axial Stress Sx mpa

Bending Stress SBy mpa SBz mpa

Stress

Member Joint

LHT

22Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-136.104 < 300

LHH

2598Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-34.903 < 300

LVT

999Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

43.094 < 300

LVV

1537Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

39.935 < 300

SVV

1901Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

45.14 < 300

SVT

2513Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

9.905 < 300

SHH

3192Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

SHT

2210Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins

3109Rigid 55Rigid

Girts

Sz(mpa)

Joint type Member type

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass

Stress Sby LeŌ

Member Joint Joint type Member type LVV 371Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS SVV

193.7x10.0 CHS

113.369 < 300

3271Rigid 351Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

49.424 < 300 -24.011 < 300

Y Y

SVT

2557Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

16.254 < 300

LHH

2752Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

21.096 < 300

26.137 < 300

SHH

510Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

17.631 < 300

109.129 < 300

LHT

2127Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-117.003 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

35.144 < 300

SHT

394Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-110.915 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

-18.086 < 300

Girts

2857Rigid

-5.253 < 300

Purlins SBZ BoƩom LVT

372Rigid

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 65.44 < 300 Y

Sby Left(mpa)

100x100x9.0 SHS

Sbz bottom(mpa)

Max Combined Stress mpa Axial Stress (mm)

Stress Member Joint Sx+Sby LeŌ 27LHT Sx+Sbz BoƩom 384LHT

Joint type Member type Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -164.697 < 300 Y Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -138.557 < 300 Y

Load Case Results: Wind Load

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.9

Deﬂection D x,y,z mm dy dx dz

Shear Stress Sy mpa Sz mpa Stress Member Joint Joint type Member type Sy LVV 2840Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS

Joint Result (mm) Limit (mm) Pass 3107 -85.465 200Y 2548 7.886 200Y 680 4.574 200Y

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 9.317 < 300 Y

SVV

1765Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

3.276 < 300

Purlins LVT

3312Rigid 62Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 508.0x16.0 CHS

4.765 < 300 0.217 < 300

Y Y

SVT

1809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

4.106 < 300

LHH

2131Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

13.904 < 300

SHH

2045Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

0.974 < 300

LHT

1809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-2.263 < 300

SHT

1713Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

21.532 < 300

Girts

2216Rigid

100x100x9.0 SHS

1.165 < 300

Deﬂection (mm) Sy(mpa)

Axial Stress Sx mpa Stress Sx

Member Joint LHT

Sz(mpa)

Bending Stress SBy mpa SBz mpa Joint type Member type 27Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -148.353 < 300 Y

LHH

2598Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-41.237 < 300

LVT

2809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

54.666 < 300

LVV

349Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

44.022 < 300

SVV

2552Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

52.71 < 300

SVT

865Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

13.757 < 300

SHH

507Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

SHT

2210Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins

3109Rigid

Girts

2926Rigid

Stress Sby LeŌ

Member Joint Joint type Member type LVV 371Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS SVV

193.7x10.0 CHS

125.802 < 300

3271Rigid 2829Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

49.641 < 300 -27.828 < 300

Y Y

SVT

1906Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-19.441 < 300

LHH

104Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-28.123 < 300

29.297 < 300

SHH

1389Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

20.372 < 300

119.494 < 300

LHT

2127Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-127.596 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS

38.739 < 300

SHT

394Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-125.932 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

10.881 < 300

Girts

2213Rigid

43.662 < 300

Purlins SBZ BoƩom LVT

372Rigid

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 72.31 < 300 Y

Sby Left(mpa)

100x100x9.0 SHS

Sbz bottom(mpa)

Max Combined Stress mpa Axial Stress (mm)

Stress Member Joint Sx+Sby LeŌ 27LHT Sx+Sbz BoƩom 384LHT

Joint type Member type Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -181.405< 300 Y Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -148.326< 300 Y

Load Case Results: Normal Load

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.10

Deﬂection D x,y,z mm Joint dy dx dz

Shear Stress Sy mpa Sz mpa Stress Sy

Result (mm) Limit (mm) Pass 3107 -81.273 200Y 2556 7.695 200Y 680 4.395 200Y

Member Joint LVV

Joint type Member type 41Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS

SVV

1765Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins LVT

3312Rigid 313Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

SVT

1809Rigid

LHH

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -10.919 < 300 Y 3.151 < 300

3.693 < 300 -8.747 < 300

Y Y

273.1x5.0 CHS

3.962 < 300

2131Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

13.385 < 300

SHH

2045Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

0.82 < 300

LHT

1809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

69.671 < 300

SHT

1713Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

20.664 < 300

Girts

2216Rigid

100x100x9.0 SHS

1.165 < 300

Deﬂection (mm) Sy(mpa)

Axial Stress Sx mpa

Bending Stress SBy mpa SBz mpa

Stress

Member Joint

LHT

22Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-142.625 < 300

LHH

2518Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-39.762 < 300

LVT

2809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

53.017 < 300

LVV

349Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

42.499 < 300

SVV

2552Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

50.681 < 300

SVT

865Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

13.359 < 300

SHH

3192Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

SHT

2210Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins

3108Rigid 9Rigid

Girts

Sz(mpa)

Joint type Member type

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass

Stress Sby LeŌ

Member Joint Joint type Member type LVV 371Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS SVV

1810Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

3271Rigid 351Rigid

SVT

28.189 < 300

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 69.598 < 300 Y 120.979 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

38.521 < 300 20.177 < 300

Y Y

2500Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

18.645 < 300

LHH

139Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

27.121 < 300

SHH

1389Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

19.669 < 300

115.008 < 300

LHT

2127Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-122.642 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS

37.252 < 300

SHT

395Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

113.104 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

-19.299 < 300

Girts

2213Rigid

43.623 < 300

Purlins SBZ BoƩom LVT

100x100x9.0 SHS

Sby Left(mpa)

Sbz bottom(mpa)

Max Combined Stress mpa Axial Stress (mm)

Stress Sx+Sby LeŌ Sx+Sbz BoƩom

Member Joint 27LHT 384LHT

Joint type Member type Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -173.959< 300 Y Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -142.467< 300 Y

Load Case Results: Extreme Load

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.11

Deﬂection D x,y,z mm Joint dy dx dz

Shear Stress Sy mpa Sz mpa Stress Sy

Result (mm) Limit (mm) Pass 3107 -125.161 200Y 2556 17.525 200Y 1582 7.209 200Y

Member Joint LVV

Joint type Member type 41Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS

SVV

1765Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

Purlins LVT

3312Rigid 313Rigid

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

SVT

1809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

LHH

17Rigid

SHH

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass -15.832 < 300 Y 6.345 < 300

5.604 < 300 -16.88 < 300

Y Y

7.12 < 300

508.0x16.0 CHS

20.848 < 300

1924Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

-1.546 < 300

LHT

1809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

112.29 < 300

SHT

1713Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

34.641 < 300

Girts

2216Rigid

100x100x9.0 SHS

4.892 < 300

Deﬂection (mm) Sy(mpa)

Axial Stress Sx mpa

Bending Stress SBy mpa SBz mpa

Stress

Member Joint

LHT

27Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-216.024 < 300

LHH

2598Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-66.434 < 300

LVT

2809Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

99.481 < 300

LVV

349Rigid

508.0x16.0 CHS

68.48 < 300

SVV

2552Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

84.757 < 300

SVT

2523Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

25.845 < 300

SHH

3046Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

SHT

2210Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

Purlins

3109Rigid 9Rigid

Girts

Sz(mpa)

Joint type Member type

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass

Stress Sby LeŌ

Member Joint Joint type Member type LVV 371Rigid 508.0x16.0 CHS SVV

1810Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

3271Rigid 2829Rigid

SVT

45.02 < 300

Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass 107.327 < 300 Y 189.684 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS 273.1x5.0 CHS

58.577 < 300 -45.04 < 300

Y Y

2500Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

36.887 < 300

LHH

104Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-61.311 < 300

SHH

1389Rigid

193.7x10.0 CHS

36.775 < 300

174.346 < 300

LHT

2778Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-195.533 < 300

100x100x2.5 SHS

57.221 < 300

SHT

394Rigid

273.1x5.0 CHS

-193.733 < 300

100x100x9.0 SHS

-31.045 < 300

Girts

2213Rigid

180.702 < 300

Purlins SBZ BoƩom LVT

Sby Left(mpa)

100x100x9.0 SHS

Sbz bottom(mpa)

Max Combined Stress mpa Axial Stress (mm)

Stress Member Joint Sx+Sby LeŌ 27LHT Sx+Sbz BoƩom 68LHT

Joint type Member type Result (Mpa) Limit (Mpa) Pass Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -267.506< 300 Y Rigid 273.1x5.0 CHS -217.907< 300 Y

Discussion and Conclusion Self Weight Case Under the Self weight load test it was found that the maximum deﬂection was on the y axis at -60mm this is a safe pass and shows that the structure can easily support itself. The largest deﬂection was found in joint 3107 which is found in the center of the structure as can be seen in the diagram. This is expected and the symmetry seen in the diagram further shows that the structure was successful all round in its intention to evenly distribute the load. In terms of axial shear and bending stresses under self weight the building falls well under any breaking moments. The highest axial stress was seen in an LHT member which is to be expected as a bracing member located in the center and the largest shear and bending stresses where also found in the LHT members as expected. I would expect to see these results to continue to grow as more load is placed on the structure. This is because the building is so symmetrical and evenly distributed that there would seem to be few points that take more load than others.

Dead load

Live load Weight case With live loads of workers, and rain now being applied to the building structure on top of the self weight and dead loads a gradual increase in Deflections and stresses has continued. The maximum deflection was found in the y axis at -77.842 which given the placement of the worker on this joint (3107) is to be expected in the central weakest point of the building. The seemingly linear result with the addition of the live loads however was slightly unexpected as live loads are notoriously unpredictable however this is possibly once again due to the symmetry in the building. Maximum Mpa stresses are still occurring in the LHT beams maxing out in the combined axial and bending moments of 164mpa which with a 300mpa rating for 350lo steel is well within safety standards. It is interesting to note as-well in this case the axial stresses occurring in the spine members which show the building to be placing its load into these members in a negative stress demonstrating a potential stretching moment which correlates to the deflections that are taking place.

Wind load case 21ms

Under dead load the largest deflection was -74.727 on the y axis where a maximum of 200 is allowable. As stated earlier this is a gradual increase in deflection with more load placed on the building. Within this load the roof substructure weight was broken up and evenly placed on top of the purlins in the structure, this decision was made to ensure stability and as demonstrated by the deflections this has worked.

When applying a wind force of 21ms to the south side of the building the structure has reacted in a much less dramatic way that formerly expected. Whilst designing this building structure wind loads would frequently topple the structure however with the addition of the spine which came in later in the process in response to this the overall result , a deﬂection max of 85 and a combined stress of 181 is better than expected.

The addition of the cooling tower has also seemed to make little impact despite a point load as high as 4kn in some points as demonstrated in the diagrams and stress graphs this has been achieved as it has been placed over the top of an LVV beam which prevents any bending or shear stresses from taking place.

Noticeable impacts have occurred in some of the girts however in a real world scenario the cladding may provide a degree of structural bracing not possible or noticeable from the load panels used in multi-frame. The girts deﬂected at maximum of the x axis at 7.886 which is a great result where the limit is 55mm.

The largest axial stress was 131 found in an LHT beam while the highest shear stress and bending stress was also found in an LHT beam as expected due to the bracing nature. As outlined in the Self weight case this is likely to continue to be the case with evenly distributed loads and has been proven in the case of the addition of dead load

Not shown in these results due to page restrictions is other wind loads that have been applied such as a 21ms from westerly winds which allowed for a broader picture of how the building behaved under wind forces. In these results the response from the structure was identical no matter which direction the wind approached and even when testing the building up to a Perth maximum of 41 ms little damage occurred. The primary structure itself even survived under world record winds of 113ms however naturally the girts and facade failed at this point.

Normal and Extreme load cases

Christopher Anderson 21293912 ARCT3030: Structural Report, Marco Vittino Pg.12 Conclusion

When applying the normal and extreme load cases to the structure which are outline in the load case key it becomes very apparent how the building acts and reacts under the varying pressures that it is being placed under. The maximum deﬂection under a normal load was 81 mm in the same joint as previous load, with a maximum combined stress of 173mpa in an LHT joint. When comparing this to the extreme case where the maximum deﬂection was 125 and largest combined stress was 267 in the same points the consistency of this building to perform under pressure becomes apparent even under extreme loading the building has stayed well in survivable limits and when viewing the beam stresses graphics particularly sby left the implementation of the triangulated roof to column joint is proved to be a smart decision due to the high stresses it is undertaking. The axial stresses the structure is surviving is both cases are also testament to the ideas that the space frame dictates with forces being cleanly distributed around the building and not being simply loaded in one location. With such consistent results and even under extreme forces an easily survivable rate where even the girts survived there maximum 55mm displacement this building and proposed structure works very well for the Perth location

From the results shown in the load cases the structure functions extremely well with no obvious week points or obvious structural flaws visible. The structure has performed to such a high level that it would be theoretically possible to include the internal structure into the primary structure allowing for a simpler structure to take place if the building where to be fully developed. The overall design however is not without it flaws. For a building which strives to be economical and environmentally friendly the amount of steel used within the building is unfeasible. A one thousand tonne structure for a 2000 seat basketball stadium is ambitious and given further development given how well the building has performed under load i would be able safely say that the structure could be thinned down considerably. This could be achieved by spacing the bays in 10 meter increments as opposed to the current 5 which would allow for a lighter structure to be used thus allowing lighter sections to be used which again lightens the structure. This may cause greater deflections but given some aesthetic re-designs it may be possible to have beams up to 2.5 meters high as opposed to 1.5 meters. Stresses would also increase given a lightening of the structure as less bracing would exist therefore the current structure as demonstrated is well withing stress limits and could safely operate. Overall however the building has easily and successfully survived all required tests and load cases. Some amendments to the weight of the structure are suggested but the principle of a truss space frame proved to be effective and stable under the highest loads