COURSEWORK BRIEF

DESIGN OF STEEL OFFICE BUILDING

You are to carry out the structural design of the principal components of a simple (i.e. pinned
connections) 4-storey braced frame. The geometry of the building is shown in Figures 1 and 2. The
height of the building is 12 m and the overall plan dimensions of the building are 20 m by 20 m. Figure
2 shows an elevation view of the building; note that all columns run the full height of the building. The
design of the vertical bracing system is out of the scope of this project. Characteristic actions
(unfactored loads) on the building are given below as well as further useful information.

Typical floor and roof loading:

- 200 mm precast reinforced concrete slab

- Floor finishes 0.5 kN/m2
- Services 1.0 kN/m2
- Partitions 1.0 kN/m2
- Imposed loading 2.0 kN/m2

Density of building materials

- Reinforced concrete 2500 kg/m3
- Density of steel 7850 kg/m3

Additional notes:
Design calculations should be conducted according to Eurocodes.
Use grade S355 steel throughout.
Make appropriate assumptions for any missing information.

1
 20 m N
A
5m 5m 5m 5m

C2 C1
10 m

B4

B3 C3

A
10 m

B1

B2

Slab span direction

Columns

Figure 1. Plan view of typical floor of building including roof.

EL. 12.0 m

EL. 8.0 m

EL. 4.0 m

EL. 0.0 m
C1 C2 Ground

10 m 10 m

Figure 2. Elevation of south façade.

2
REQUIRED STEPS

1. Design loads in beams. Calculate the vertical design loading (1.35  permanent actions + 1.50 
variable actions) on the marked beams B1, B2, B3 and B4 for a typical floor. Assume the beam self-
weight to be 250 kg/m.

2. Design loads in columns. Calculate the maximum design loading in columns C1, C2 and C3. Assume
the column self-weight to be 250 kg/m.

3. Beam design. Design the typical floor beams B1, B2, B3 and B4 using hot-rolled sections. All beams
may be assumed simply supported. Use a deflection limit of L/200 for unfactored variable loading.

4. Column design. Design the columns C1, C2 and C3 for the building. Assume columns are pin-ended
and concentrically loaded.

5. Cost estimate. Make an approximate estimate for the total cost of the steelwork in the building. Assume
that the cost of steelwork including supply, fabrication, transportation and erection is about £1500 per
tonne for hot-rolled sections and £2000 per tonne for fabricated sections.

6. Drawings. Prepare A4 professional technical drawings showing the following:

Drawing 001 - Unifiliar plan view of a typical floor.
Drawing 002 - Cross-section A-A of the building with structural elements in realistic scale.
Drawing 003 – West elevation of the building.

All drawings must include axes, dimensions, adopted cross-sections for all members and appropriate
technical notes for procurement and construction. All drawings must contain list of sections, material
properties, quantities per section and its estimated costs. Further details on drawing requirements are
shown within ‘submission requirements’.

7. Reflective report. Prepare a 300 to 500 words report responding to the following questions assuming
that you would have done this coursework in a group of three students (you and other two students).
Your report must be at the end of your calculation notes.
1. How would you have divided the coursework tasks in an equitable way? You should consider all
technical tasks including quality control processes specifically applicable to this project.
2. How would you have reacted in a case of conflict between other group members? Provide an
example applicable to your own work and explain how you would have resolved.
3. How would you have reacted in a case of a conflict between you and another group member?
Provide an example applicable to your own work and explain how you would have resolved.

Word count. Provide the number of words used in your reflection (+/- 10% tolerance to given limits).

3
FURTHER REFERENCES

SCI P387 (2017). Steel building design: worked examples for students.

SCI P358 (2014). Joints in steel construction: simple joints to Eurocode 3.

SCI P365 (2009). Steel building design: medium rise braced frames. (E.g. Figures 5.7)

These publications are available on StudyNET → “Online Library” → “A-Z list of search sources” → “The
Construction Information Service (CIS)”.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The final submission must consist of a single .pdf file (report) containing the following:

- Clear and legible handwritten calculations, ideally using the calculation paper (available in StudyNet module
page → Units → Auxiliary material → Templates). All calculation steps must be clear presented in detail in a
logical sequence, including appropriate reference to codes and standards. Note that the use of
spreadsheets is not encouraged, unless it is clearly required and it shows the step-by-step calculation,
including formulae of all cells in a professional and organized form. You must correctly label the briefing step
you are solving on each page of the report.

- Design assumptions must be clearly presented in the first page of the report.

- Technical engineering hand or CAD drawings in scale, including technical notes and quantity tables.
Technical drawings must be in A4 or A3 sheets and be attached at the end of the report. Sketches are welcome
throughout the report.

- Calculation paper and sketching paper are available in StudyNet module page → Units → Auxiliary material
→ Templates.

4
MARKING

The report will be marked against the grading criteria given in the table below. Assessment criteria
are aligned with the University of Hertfordshire grade descriptors in UPR AS14. The mark will be
based on the quality of the work submitted and will be moderated according to standard procedures.
Note that the criteria must be attended in its entirety to be awarded the corresponding grade.
The feedback comments will provide insights into the decision.

CALCULATION

Coursework 1 Calculation Reflection,

mark (CW1) = notes, + Step 7
(0-100 marks) Steps 1 to 6 (0-20 marks)
(0-80 marks)

MARKING SCHEME: CALCULATION NOTES (0-80 marks)

This is the marking criteria for the individual work submitted.

Descriptor, Criteria
Grade
Little or nothing Missing or copied from another source.
of merit, 0
Little or nothing Incoherent, fails to address requirements.
of merit, 10
No understanding of the brief and/or the brief has not been worked on in an appropriate way.
Irrelevant material and/or chaotic structure. Incorrect assumptions or conclusions.
No attempt or random use of design procedures with no connection to the brief.
Irrelevant technical engineering drawings.
Clear fail, 20 Not adequate. Performance below the minimum standards to be considered passing.
There are few detailed step-by-step calculations with clarity about assumptions, input values, adopted
design equations and reference to standards or design guides.
Limited or poorly designed structure, with many significant gaps or errors.
No development of a consistent and coherent design calculation procedure. Overdesigned or unsafe
solutions.
Work may not meet the brief. Little attempt to use standards and recommended design guides; may be
error-strewn and inconsistently applied.
Multiple inconsistent in technical engineering drawings. Lack of proportional sizes throughout.
Marginal fail, 30 Some briefing tasks have not been appropriately attempted.
Calculations have been presented in a detailed step-by-step manner including assumptions, input values,
adopted design equations with appropriate reference to standards or design guides, ideally using the
calculation sheet.
Some correct performance, emerging understanding but mastery not thorough and there are numerous
mistakes or omissions. Design tasks may be incomplete.
Overdesigned or unsafe solutions have been presented throughout (F Ed/FRd < 0.80), where FEd is the
factored design action and FRd is the critical design resistance.
Some technical drawings are in proportion but lack some important details.
Marginal pass, All design tasks have been attempted with reasonable success, including computational analysis (if
40
required by briefing).

5
 Calculations have been presented in a detailed step-by-step manner including assumptions, input values,
adopted design equations with appropriate reference to standards or design guides, ideally using the
calculation sheet.
Some conceptual mistakes and calculation (numerical) mistakes.
All required technical drawings have been presented in correct proportion in consistent with the design
calculation findings but with some information lacking.
Clear pass, 50 Approaching expectations but there exists some mistakes or omissions.
The entire briefing has been attempted with reasonable success, including computational analysis (if
required by briefing) and all technical drawings.
All required calculations have been presented in a detailed step-by-step manner including assumptions,
input values, adopted design equations with constant reference to standards or design guides, ideally
using the calculation sheet.
There are some mistakes or design step omissions (i.e. steps that are not clearly stated on the brief). Few
conceptual/critical mistakes. Some numerical mistakes.
Constant reference to design codes.
All sketches and technical drawings are of reasonable standards (i.e. clear and in proportion) but lack
some information.
Good, 60 All aspects of the work meet expectations, with solid performance and understanding.
No conceptual mistakes. Very few calculation mistakes.
Clear presentation of calculation notes in a detailed step-by-step manner including assumptions, input
values, adopted design equations with appropriate reference to standards or design guides, ideally using
the calculation sheet.
Design proposal not overdesigned by more than 10% (FEd/FRd > 0.90) or safe, where FEd is the factored
design action and FRd is the critical design resistance.
Sketches have been used to clarify design assumptions and design proposals throughout.
All required technical drawings are in proportion and consistent with the calculation notes, including table of
quantities, summary of quantities and notes.
Very good, 70 All aspects of the work meet expectations, many aspects of work exceed expectations, showing exemplary
performance and understanding.
The entire brief is met. Calculations notes are presented in detailed with no conceptual or numerical
mistakes.
Clear presentation of calculation notes in a detailed step-by-step manner including assumptions, input
values, adopted design equations with appropriate reference to standards or design guides, ideally using
the calculation sheet.
Design proposal has been optimized in terms of material costs and, perhaps, taking also into account
practical construction issues.
An innovative proposal might be adopted (e.g. design considering construction and deconstruction, design
of connections) that provides an economic design solution in terms of material or construction costs.
Technical drawings are of professional standard with required information for construction, including
standardized dimension lines, levels and appropriate scale.
Excellent, 80 Excellent. In addition, new insights into the brief or a truly innovative and unique solution have been
designed.
The entire brief has been met with creativity without any conceptual or numerical mistakes.
Clear presentation of calculation notes in a detailed step-by-step manner including assumptions, input
values, adopted design equations with appropriate reference to standards or design guides, ideally using
the calculation sheet.
The chosen design proposal has been optimized in terms of material costs and construction methods.
The final solution shows confidence on using the theory behind the design methods, with a clear focus on
constructability, costs and any other relevant engineering criteria.
It clearly demonstrates acquired knowledge through additional reading.

6
MARKING SCHEME: REFLECTIVE REPORT (0-20 marks)

This is the marking criteria for the submitted reflection.

No relevant No submission or no reflection based on your own report.

contribution,
o No relevant reflection to the technical content of the report.
0
o Student might have conducted parts of the report but lacks demonstration the reflective report.
o No evidence of reflection of a collaborative group work approach.
Clear fail, 5 Student failed to engage to satisfactory level.
o A few relevant suggestions on the division of tasks.
o Poor reflective division of tasks (an example: student perhaps only listed tasks and/or not referenced its
own calculation notes).
o Vague explanation of reaction to conflict with no practical measure to solve it.
Clear pass, Student engaged to a satisfactory level.
10
o Relevant division of tasks with brief reference to verification and approval tasks.
o Clear practical example of conflict between other group members and practical action to resolve it.
o Clear practical example of conflict between student and another group member and practical action to
resolve it.
Very Good, Student engaged to a satisfactory level.
15
o Good exploration of division of tasks with systematic reference to verification and approval procedures.
o Multiple practical examples of conflict between other group members and systematic actions to resolve it.
o Multiple practical examples of conflict between student and another group member and practical action
to resolve it.
Outstanding, Outstanding contribution to the report outcome.
20
o Excellent exploration of division of tasks that allows all group members to explore their own capabilities.
o Excellent division of verification and approval tasks with innovative way(s) of assigning such tasks.
o A few examples of possible conflicts between group members and between the student and another
group member. In all cases, innovative practical ideas on how to solve the conflict have been presented.