Chapter 1

Philosophy of design

This chapter is concerned with the philosophy of struc- the supervision of engineers and architects, can con-
tural design. The chapter describes the overall aims of struct the scheme.
design and the many inputs into the design process. There are many inputs into the engineering
The primary aim of design is seen as the need to ensure design process as illustrated by Fig. 1.1 including:
that at no point in the structure do the design loads
1. client brief
exceed the design strengths of the materials. This can be
2. experience
achieved by using the permissible stress or load factor
3. imagination
philosophies of design. However, both suffer from draw-
4. a site investigation
backs and it is more common to design according to
5. model and laboratory tests
limit state principles which involve considering all the
6. economic factors
mechanisms by which a structure could become unfit
7. environmental factors.
for its intended purpose during its design life.
The starting-point for the designer is normally
a conceptual brief from the client, who may be a
1.1 Introduction private developer or perhaps a government body.
The conceptual brief may simply consist of some
The task of the structural engineer is to design a sketches prepared by the client or perhaps a detailed
structure which satisfies the needs of the client and set of architect’s drawings. Experience is crucially
the user. Specifically the structure should be safe, important, and a client will always demand that
economical to build and maintain, and aesthetic- the firm he is employing to do the design has pre-
ally pleasing. But what does the design process vious experience designing similar structures.
involve? Although imagination is thought by some to
Design is a word that means different things to be entirely the domain of the architect, this is not
different people. In dictionaries the word is de- so. For engineers and technicians an imagination
scribed as a mental plan, preliminary sketch, pat- of how elements of structure interrelate in three
tern, construction, plot or invention. Even among dimensions is essential, as is an appreciation of
those closely involved with the built environment the loadings to which structures might be subject
there are considerable differences in interpretation. in certain circumstances. In addition, imaginative
Architects, for example, may interpret design as solutions to engineering problems are often required
being the production of drawings and models to to save money, time, or to improve safety or quality.
show what a new building will actually look like. A site investigation is essential to determine the
To civil and structural engineers, however, design is strength and other characteristics of the ground
taken to mean the entire planning process for a new on which the structure will be founded. If the struc-
building structure, bridge, tunnel, road, etc., from ture is unusual in any way, or subject to abnormal
outline concepts and feasibility studies through loadings, model or laboratory tests may also be used
mathematical calculations to working drawings to help determine how the structure will behave.
which could show every last nut and bolt in the In today’s economic climate a structural designer
project. Together with the drawings there will be must be constantly aware of the cost implications
bills of quantities, a specification and a contract, of his or her design. On the one hand design should
which will form the necessary legal and organiza- aim to achieve economy of materials in the struc-
tional framework within which a contractor, under ture, but over-refinement can lead to an excessive
3

9780415467193_C01 3 9/3/09, 12:36 PM

 Philosophy of design

Fig. 1.1 Inputs into the design process.

number of different sizes and components in the many generations of engineers, and the results of
structure, and labour costs will rise. In addition research. They help to ensure safety and economy
the actual cost of the designer’s time should not be of construction, and that mistakes are not repeated.
excessive, or this will undermine the employer’s For instance, after the infamous disaster at the
competitiveness. The idea is to produce a workable Ronan Point block of flats in Newham, London,
design achieving reasonable economy of materials, when a gas explosion caused a serious partial col-
while keeping manufacturing and construction costs lapse, research work was carried out, and codes of
down, and avoiding unnecessary design and research practice were amended so that such structures could
expenditure. Attention to detailing and buildability survive a gas explosion, with damage being con-
of structures cannot be overemphasized in design. fined to one level.
Most failures are as a result of poor detailing rather The aim of this book is to look at the procedures
than incorrect analysis. associated with the detailed design of structural
Designers must also understand how the struc- elements such as beams, columns and slabs. Chap-
ture will fit into the environment for which it is ter 2 will help the reader to revise some basic the-
designed. Today many proposals for engineering ories of structural behaviour. Chapters 3–6 deal with
structures stand or fall on this basis, so it is part of design to British Standard (BS) codes of practice
the designer’s job to try to anticipate and recon- for the structural use of concrete (BS 8110), struc-
cile the environmental priorities of the public and tural steelwork (BS 5950), masonry (BS 5628) and
government. timber (BS 5268). Chapter 7 introduces the new
The engineering design process can often be Eurocodes (EC) for structural design and Chapters
divided into two stages: (1) a feasibility study in- 8–11 then describe the layout and design principles
volving a comparison of the alternative forms of in EC2, EC3, EC6 and EC5 for concrete, steel-
structure and selection of the most suitable type and work, masonry and timber respectively.
(2) a detailed design of the chosen structure. The
success of stage 1, the conceptual design, relies
to a large extent on engineering judgement and 1.2 Basis of design
instinct, both of which are the outcome of many
years’ experience of designing structures. Stage 2, Table 1.1 illustrates some risk factors that are asso-
the detailed design, also requires these attributes ciated with activities in which people engage. It
but is usually more dependent upon a thorough can be seen that some degree of risk is associated
understanding of the codes of practice for struc- with air and road travel. However, people normally
tural design, e.g. BS 8110 and BS 5950. These accept that the benefits of mobility outweigh the
documents are based on the amassed experience of risks. Staying in buildings, however, has always been
4

9780415467193_C01 4 9/3/09, 12:36 PM

 Basis of design

Table 1.1 Comparative death risk per 108 critical points, as stress due to loading exceeds the
persons exposed strength of the material. In order for the structure
to be safe the overlapping area must be kept to a
Mountaineering (international) 2700 minimum. The degree of overlap between the two
Air travel (international) 120 curves can be minimized by using one of three dis-
Deep water trawling 59 tinct design philosophies, namely:
Car travel 56
Coal mining 21 1. permissible stress design
Construction sites 8 2. load factor method
Manufacturing 2 3. limit state design.
Accidents at home 2
Fire at home 0.1 1.2.1 PERMISSIBLE STRESS DESIGN
Structural failures 0.002 In permissible stress design, sometimes referred to
as modular ratio or elastic design, the stresses in the
structure at working loads are not allowed to exceed
a certain proportion of the yield stress of the con-
regarded as fairly safe. The risk of death or injury struction material, i.e. the stress levels are limited
due to structural failure is extremely low, but as we to the elastic range. By assuming that the stress–
spend most of our life in buildings this is perhaps strain relationship over this range is linear, it is pos-
just as well. sible to calculate the actual stresses in the material
As far as the design of structures for safety is concerned. Such an approach formed the basis of the
concerned, it is seen as the process of ensuring design methods used in CP 114 (the forerunner of
that stresses due to loading at all critical points in a BS 8110) and BS 449 (the forerunner of BS 5950).
structure have a very low chance of exceeding the However, although it modelled real building per-
strength of materials used at these critical points. formance under actual conditions, this philosophy
Figure 1.2 illustrates this in statistical terms. had two major drawbacks. Firstly, permissible design
In design there exist within the structure a number methods sometimes tended to overcomplicate the
of critical points (e.g. beam mid-spans) where the design process and also led to conservative solutions.
design process is concentrated. The normal distribu- Secondly, as the quality of materials increased and
tion curve on the left of Fig. 1.2 represents the actual the safety margins decreased, the assumption that
maximum material stresses at these critical points stress and strain are directly proportional became
due to the loading. Because loading varies according unjustifiable for materials such as concrete, making
to occupancy and environmental conditions, and it impossible to estimate the true factors of safety.
because design is an imperfect process, the material
stresses will vary about a modal value – the peak of 1.2.2 LOAD FACTOR DESIGN
the curve. Similarly the normal distribution curve Load factor or plastic design was developed to take
on the right represents material strengths at these account of the behaviour of the structure once the
critical points, which are also not constant due to yield point of the construction material had been
the variability of manufacturing conditions. reached. This approach involved calculating the
The overlap between the two curves represents a collapse load of the structure. The working load was
possibility that failure may take place at one of the derived by dividing the collapse load by a load factor.
This approach simplified methods of analysis and
allowed actual factors of safety to be calculated.
It was in fact permitted in CP 114 and BS 449
but was slow in gaining acceptance and was even-
tually superseded by the more comprehensive limit
state approach.
The reader is referred to Appendix A for an ex-
ample illustrating the differences between the per-
missible stress and load factor approaches to design.

1.2.3 LIMIT STATE DESIGN

Originally formulated in the former Soviet Union
Fig. 1.2 Relationship between stress and strength. in the 1930s and developed in Europe in the 1960s,
5

9780415467193_C01 5 9/3/09, 12:36 PM

 Philosophy of design

limit state design can perhaps be seen as a com- the design on the most critical limit state and then
promise between the permissible and load factor check for the remaining limit states. For example,
methods. It is in fact a more comprehensive ap- for reinforced concrete beams the ultimate limit
proach which takes into account both methods in states of bending and shear are used to size the
appropriate ways. Most modern structural codes of beam. The design is then checked for the remain-
practice are now based on the limit state approach. ing limit states, e.g. deflection and cracking. On
BS 8110 for concrete, BS 5950 for structural the other hand, the serviceability limit state of
steelwork, BS 5400 for bridges and BS 5628 for deflection is normally critical in the design of con-
masonry are all limit state codes. The principal crete slabs. Again, once the designer has determined
exceptions are the code of practice for design in a suitable depth of slab, he/she must then make
timber, BS 5268, and the old (but still current) sure that the design satisfies the limit states of bend-
structural steelwork code, BS 449, both of which ing, shear and cracking.
are permissible stress codes. It should be noted, how- In assessing the effect of a particular limit state
ever, that the Eurocode for timber (EC5), which is on the structure, the designer will need to assume
expected to replace BS 5268 around 2010, is based certain values for the loading on the structure and
on limit state principles. the strength of the materials composing the struc-
As limit state philosophy forms the basis of the ture. This requires an understanding of the con-
design methods in most modern codes of practice cepts of characteristic and design values which are
for structural design, it is essential that the design discussed below.
methodology is fully understood. This then is the
purpose of the following subsections. [Link] Characteristic and design values
As stated at the outset, when checking whether a
[Link] Ultimate and serviceability particular member is safe, the designer cannot be
limit states certain about either the strength of the material
The aim of limit state design is to achieve accept- composing the member or, indeed, the load which
able probabilities that a structure will not become the member must carry. The material strength may
unfit for its intended use during its design life, that be less than intended (a) because of its variable
is, the structure will not reach a limit state. There composition, and (b) because of the variability of
are many ways in which a structure could become manufacturing conditions during construction, and
unfit for use, including excessive conditions of bend- other effects such as corrosion. Similarly the load
ing, shear, compression, deflection and cracking in the member may be greater than anticipated (a)
(Fig. 1.3). Each of these mechanisms is a limit state because of the variability of the occupancy or envir-
whose effect on the structure must be individually onmental loading, and (b) because of unforeseen
assessed. circumstances which may lead to an increase in the
Some of the above limit states, e.g. deflection general level of loading, errors in the analysis, errors
and cracking, principally affect the appearance of during construction, etc.
the structure. Others, e.g. bending, shear and com- In each case, item (a) is allowed for by using a
pression, may lead to partial or complete collapse characteristic value. The characteristic strength
of the structure. Those limit states which can cause is the value below which the strength lies in only a
failure of the structure are termed ultimate limit small number of cases. Similarly the characteristic
states. The others are categorized as serviceability load is the value above which the load lies in only
limit states. The ultimate limit states enable the a small percentage of cases. In the case of strength
designer to calculate the strength of the structure. the characteristic value is determined from test re-
Serviceability limit states model the behaviour of the sults using statistical principles, and is normally
structure at working loads. In addition, there may defined as the value below which not more than
be other limit states which may adversely affect 5% of the test results fall. However, at this stage
the performance of the structure, e.g. durability there are insufficient data available to apply statist-
and fire resistance, and which must therefore also ical principles to loads. Therefore the characteristic
be considered in design. loads are normally taken to be the design loads
It is a matter of experience to be able to judge from other codes of practice, e.g. BS 648 and BS
which limit states should be considered in the 6399.
design of particular structures. Nevertheless, once The overall effect of items under (b) is allowed
this has been done, it is normal practice to base for using a partial safety factor: γ m for strength

9780415467193_C01 6 9/3/09, 12:36 PM

 Basis of design

Fig. 1.3 Typical modes of failure for beams and columns.

9780415467193_C01 7 9/3/09, 12:36 PM

 Philosophy of design

and γ f for load. The design strength is obtained by These allow the designer to rapidly assess the suit-
dividing the characteristic strength by the partial ability of the proposed design. However, before
safety factor for strength: discussing these procedures in detail, Chapter 2
describes in general terms how the design loads
characteristic strength
Design strength = (1.1) acting on the structure are estimated and used to
γm size individual elements of the structure.
The design load is obtained by multiplying the
characteristic load by the partial safety factor for
load: 1.3 Summary
Design load = characteristic load × γ f (1.2) This chapter has examined the bases of three
philosophies of structural design: permissible stress,
The value of γ m will depend upon the properties load factor and limit state. The chapter has con-
of the actual construction material being used. centrated on limit state design since it forms the
Values for γ f depend on other factors which will be basis of the design methods given in the codes of
discussed more fully in Chapter 2. practice for concrete (BS 8110), structural steel-
In general, once a preliminary assessment of the work (BS 5950) and masonry (BS 5628). The aim
design loads has been made it is then possible to of limit state design is to ensure that a structure
calculate the maximum bending moments, shear will not become unfit for its intended use, that is,
forces and deflections in the structure (Chapter 2). it will not reach a limit state during its design life.
The construction material must be capable of Two categories of limit states are examined in
withstanding these forces otherwise failure of the design: ultimate and serviceability. The former is
structure may occur, i.e. concerned with overall stability and determining
the collapse load of the structure; the latter exam-
Design strength ≥ design load (1.3)
ines its behaviour under working loads. Structural
Simplified procedures for calculating the moment, design principally involves ensuring that the loads
shear and axial load capacities of structural ele- acting on the structure do not exceed its strength
ments together with acceptable deflection limits and the first step in the design process then is to
are described in the appropriate codes of practice. estimate the loads acting on the structure.

Questions
1. Explain the difference between conceptual 4. The characteristic strengths and design
design and detailed design. strengths are related via the partial safety
2. What is a code of practice and what is its factor for materials. The partial safety
purpose in structural design? factor for concrete is higher than for steel
3. List the principal sources of uncertainty in reinforcement. Discuss why this should be so.
structural design and discuss how these 5. Describe in general terms the ways in
uncertainties are rationally allowed for in which a beam and column could become
design. unfit for use.

9780415467193_C01 8 9/3/09, 12:36 PM