IN-COURSE ASSESSMENT (ICA) SPECIFICATION

Module Title: Module Leader: Dr Gatheeshgar Perampalam

Structural Analysis and Design

Module Code: ENG2032-N

Assignment Title: Deadline Date: Friday, 15th December 2023

ICA – Multi-storey building project Deadline Time: 4:00 pm

Submission Method:

Online (Blackboard) 
Middlesbrough Tower 

Online Submission Notes:

• Please follow the instructions given on the Assignment Specification carefully

• When Extenuating Circumstances (e.g. extension) has been granted, a fully completed and signed
Extenuating Circumstances form must be submitted to the School Reception or emailed to scedt-
assessments@tees.ac.uk.

Central Assignments Office (Middlesbrough Tower M2.08) Notes:

• All work (including DVDs etc) needs to be secured in a plastic envelope or a folder and clearly marked
with the student name, number and module title.

• An Assignment Front Sheet should be fully completed before the work is submitted.

• When Extenuating Circumstances (e.g., extension) has been granted, a fully completed and signed
Extenuating Circumstances form must be submitted to the School Reception or emailed to scedt-
assessments@tees.ac.uk .

FULL DETAILS OF THE ASSIGNMENT ARE ATTACHED

INCLUDING MARKING & GRADING CRITERIA

Page 1 of 7
 SCHOOL OF COMPUTING, ENGINEERING AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES

MEng/ BEng (Hons) Civil Engineering

Module Title: Structural Analysis and Design

Module Code: ENG2032-N
Module Leader: Dr Gatheeshgar Perampalam
Assignment: In – Course Assessment
Weighting: 40% of module mark
Due Date: Friday, 15th December 2022 (Week 12) (16:00)

Main Learning Outcomes Assessed

Personal and Transferrable Skills

On successful completion of this module students will be able to:
1. Demonstrate a detailed knowledge of the application of European standards for structural
design.
Research, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills
2. Demonstrate a detailed knowledge of structural analysis and design techniques.
3. Select and use structural analytical techniques to solve structural engineering design
problems.

Contact Details
If you have a problem with either part of the assignment, please contact

Dr Gatheeshgar Perampalam
Senior Lecturer in Civil Engineering
g.perampalam@tees.ac.uk

Dr Thadshajini Suntharalingam
Lecturer in Civil Engineering
t.suntharalingam@tees.ac.uk

Page 2 of 7
Assignment Description
Imagine you are a junior structural engineer tasked with designing and analysing a 6-storey
residential mid-rise building for a real-world project. The building has six bays in the longitudinal
direction (X-direction) and five bays in the transverse direction (Y-direction), as shown in Fig. 1.
The height of the building is the same for all floors. Shear walls are used in the building that are
responsible for taking all the lateral loads. The columns in the building are made of concrete, and
the beams are made of steel, as shown in Fig. 2. Assume the roof is flat. In this assignment, you
will apply your knowledge of structural analysis and design principles to complete the task given
by your senior structural engineer. As a designer, you are free to make necessary and reasonable
assumptions required for the design. Any assumption made in the design process must be stated
clearly.

Y X

Fig. 1: The 6-storey residential building in 3D view.

Fig. 2: Beam-to-column connection.

20p kN/m

Fig. 3: Two-span continuous steel beam and the unsymmetrical I-section of the beam.

When you are performing the analysis and design, consider the following values for p:
• For a student ID with odd last digit: p =1
• For a student ID with even last digit: p= 2

Page 3 of 7
Project deliverables

(1) In a particular location of the building, for a two-span continuous beam an unsymmetrical steel
I-section has been used. It is made of an elastic perfectly plastic material having tensile and
compressive yield stress of σy = 275 MPa. By calculating elastic moment (My) and plastic
moment (Mp), determine shape factor for this beam. [20 marks]

(2) The beam AC carries (Fig. 3) a uniformly distributed design load of 20p kN/m while there is a
design point load of 100 kN applied at mid-span of AB. Assume EI is constant for both spans
AB and BC. Using the moment distribution method, determine the moments at supports A, B,
and C. Draw a neat sketch of the bending moment and shear force diagram for the beam AC.
[20 marks]

(3) The client has requested to consider symmetric universal beams (UB) for span AC. Design a
suitable UB according to Eurocode 3 based on the results obtained in Q(2), assuming that the
beam is fully laterally restrained along the length to prevent lateral torsional buckling.
[20 marks]

(4) It has been identified that the critical column of 3 m height carries an axial compression design
load of 150p kN. Design a suitable concrete column according to Eurocode 2 to safely carry the
applied axial compression load. Assume there is no eccentricity. Take Concrete Grade: C30/37;
Aggregate: Maximum size 20mm; High yield Steel grade H460 for reinforcement, f yk =
460N/mm2.
[20 marks]

(5) Using academic literature, briefly discuss the suitability of using steel as the design material to
build the column members. Your discussion should make comparisons in terms of structural,
technical and economic efficiency, sustainable and environmental potentials (Limit your
discussion to fewer than 200 words).
[15 marks]

Submission Instructions
• All candidates must submit an individual report for this assignment.
• The assignment must include relevant sketches and calculations to support the structural
analysis and design calculations.
• The calculations in your assignment can be written either manually in calculation sheets (an
example sheet is given on Blackboard Ultra) or electronically using a software.
• The length of the report should not exceed 2000 words (does not include references,
figure/table captions. Please name your reports follows ‘Student surname_name.pdf or
.docx’

References
1. European Committee for Standardization, EN1991-1-1 ‘Eurocode 1: Actions on structures –
Part 1-1: General actions – Densities, self-weight, imposed loads for buildings’, 2002.
2. Teesside University (2019) Referencing (Teesside University – Harvard style). Available at:
https://libguides.tees.ac.uk/ld.php?content_id=32508385. (Accessed: 08 October 2019).

Page 4 of 7
Refer to Level 5 Assessment Criteria for guidance on marking.

Assessment Criteria

Assessment Criteria Level 5

90%-100%
Exceptional work with presentation of the highest standard. The work contains coherent arguments and ideas.
There is a detailed understanding of subject matter and critical analysis of issues/problems. Points are made
clearly and concisely, always substantiated by appropriate use of source material. There is evidence of a sound
ability to critically interrelate theories with examples from practice where appropriate.
80%-89%
Outstanding work with presentation of a very high standard. There is comprehensive understanding of key
concepts and knowledge and evidence of critical analysis and insight. Accurate interpretation of data with
arguments, ideas and solutions presented effectively and based on strong research and reading.
70%-79%
Extremely good work with presentation of a high standard. Evidence of strong knowledge and understanding
together with some critical analysis and insight. Source material is used effectively to support arguments, ideas
and solutions.
60%-69%
Very good presentation. Sound knowledge and understanding with an emerging ability to critically engage with
and apply the concepts involved linking them to practice where appropriate. Good use of source material which
supports most points clearly. Content is wholly relevant and is coherently structured.
50%-59%
Presentation is of a good standard but some shortcomings. Evidence of a sound knowledge base but limited
critical and practical application of concepts and ideas. Content is largely relevant although points may not
always be clear and structure may lack coherence. Contains some critical reflection and some use of source
material to illustrate points.
40%-49%
Adequate presentation. The work is descriptive and/or lacks critical analysis where required but is relevant with
limited though sufficient evidence of knowledge and understanding. There is some evidence of reading although
arguments/ proposals/solutions often lack coherence and may be unsubstantiated by relevant source material
or partially flawed. Links to practice are made where appropriate.
30%-39% – Fail
Poorly structured, incoherent and wholly descriptive work. Evidence of a weak knowledge base with some key
aspects not addressed and use of irrelevant material. Flawed use of techniques. Limited evidence of appropriate
reading and no evidence of critical thought. Little reference to practice where appropriate.
20-29% – Fail
Very poorly structured, incoherent and wholly descriptive work. Evidence of a very weak knowledge base with
many key omissions and much material irrelevant. Use of inappropriate or incorrect techniques. Very little
evidence of appropriate reading and no evidence of critical thought. No links to practice where appropriate. To
obtain a mark of 20% the work must show evidence of a genuine attempt to engage with the assessment
requirements and with the subject matter.
0-19 % - Fail
The work is extremely poorly structured and presented. It demonstrates no real knowledge or understanding of
key concepts and principles. Much material is irrelevant, incorrect or omitted. No evidence of critical thought.
No effective use of supporting material. No links to practice where appropriate. Not a genuine attempt to engage
with the assessment requirements and/or subject matter.

Page 5 of 7
 School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies
Assessment Feedback Sheet

TECHNICAL REPORT
STUDENT
ID Name
MODULE
Code ENG2032-N Leader Dr Gatheeshgar Perampalam
Title Structural Analysis and Design
ASSESSMENT
Title ICA assignment Weighting 40%
GRADE/CLASSIFICATION
HIGH QUALITY INDICATORS POOR QUALITY INDICATORS
A B C D F
Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Fail
Good

Shape factor for an unsymmetrical steel

No calculation provided or the calculations
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
beam (20%)
are based on wrong procedure and
Calculations are based on correct procedure.
patently inappropriate.
No mistakes. Easy to follow.

Bending Moment and Shear Force (20%)

No calculation provided or the calculations
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Calculations are based on correct procedure.
are based on wrong procedure and
No mistakes. Easy to follow. Correct BM and
patently inappropriate.
SF diagrams.
Beam design (20%)
Highly creative structural analysis and
No calculation provided or the calculations
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
design. Calculations are based on correct
are based on wrong procedure and
procedure. No mistakes. Easy to follow. All
patently inappropriate.
relevant design assumptions are clearly
documented.
Column design (20%)
Highly creative structural analysis and
No calculation provided or the calculations
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
design. Calculations are based on correct
are based on wrong procedure and
procedure. No mistakes. Easy to follow. All
patently inappropriate.
relevant design assumptions are clearly
documented.
Material replacement: Steel (15%) No arguments concerning the material

☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Clear discussion in terms of structural, replacement or no consideration of
technical, economic efficiency and structural, technical, economic efficiency
sustainability aspects. and sustainability aspects.
Structure and Presentation (5%)
Clearly structured report with appropriate Poorly structured report with inappropriate
use of tables, graphs, diagrams, subsections or missing tables, graphs, diagrams. Poor
and reference. Excellent layout, conforms to
all technical specifications with clear
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ layout, does not conform to technical
specifications with no clear expression of
expression of ideas and appropriately ideas and inappropriately presented.
presented.

A = 100-70%, B = 69-60%, C = 59-50%, D = 49-40%, F= 39-0%

ENGLISH AND PRESENTATION (The following areas need care and attention)
Grammar ☐ Paragraphing ☐ Citation ☐
Spelling ☐ Figures and Tables ☐ References ☐

Further Comments

Marked by: Dr Gatheeshgar Perampalam

Final Mark Dr Thadshajini Suntharalingam
Date: