ASABE Technical Library - Abstract
Member and Access Notice
Comparative Study Of Different Steel Bay Typologies
Published by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan www.asabe.org
Citation: Paper number 024028, 2002 ASAE Annual Meeting . (doi: 10.13031/2013.10473) @2002Authors: Jesús Montero, Pablo Galletero, Carlos Neumeister
Keywords: Structural analysis, metallic structure, rigid frame, truss structure
Until the beginning of the 1980s, the most widely used metallic structure used in Spain for
building bays was a truss structure erected on pillars. Since then, we have seen a tendency towards
the use of rigid frames, which is the most common structure at present. Aside from the obvious
functional advantages of rigid frames, it is commonly thought that rigid frames are now more
economical to build.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether rigid frames are actually more economical to build
than trusses. For that, we have compared rigid frames and English trusses with a series of spans
ranging from 10 m to 30 m; and a series of pillar heights from 3 m to 6 m, calculating and evaluating
both their metallic structures and the foundations.
The following conclusion was reached: when only the cost of the steel structure is considered, a rigid
frame is more economical than a truss with spans up to 30 m. However, if foundation costs are also
taken into account, the rigid frame is more costly with spans of over 20 m, due to the enormous size
of rigid frame foundations. As spans increase, the truss structure becomes much more economical.