4CSS584 Building Technology 2

Steel In Construction :
Paddington Trainshed & Broadgate Exchange House

Mark Lomas
w10711488

Fig.1. Paddington Trainshed prior to the 1920's with original cast
iron columns.
Fig.2. Longitudinal and cross-sect ions showing the main components.
Fig.3. Wrought iron lattice valley girder, supported by
cast iron columns.
Fig 4. Lattice girder with cast iron decorative grille,
supported by the wall of the adjacent offices.
Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction
Paddington Trainshed
The Trainshed at Paddington Railway Station
is the oldest surviving example of the 'high-
tech shed.' Designed by Isambard Kingdom
Brunel in 1850, it combined both wrought and
cast iron. Moreover, since the structure has
been maintained and upgraded several times
in the intervening years using contemporary
materials, it is an excellent example of
progress in iron and steel technology.
Brunel was joined in the project by the
architect and contractors who had worked with
him on Paxton's Crystal Palace for the 1851
Great Exhibition. Paddington Trainshed uses
many techniques developed for the Crystal
Palace, bringing standardised parts and
mass-production efficiencies to site.
The Trainshed was conceived as three spans
formed from wrought iron elliptical arched ribs.
The central nave of 31.09m was flanked by
side-aisles of 21.3 and 20.7m. The arched
ribs, at 3.05m centres, were sprung from
wrought iron lattice valley girders bolted
together to run the full 213m length, supported
on cast iron columns at 9.145m centres. The
original design included offices along the
southwestern side, and the first span was
sprung from a lattice girder built in to the
brickwork structure of these offices.
Fig.5. View along the full 213m length of Brunel's Trainshed.
Page 1
 Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Fig 7. Skew Joint photograph.

Fig 6. Detail of Rib to Column Joint. 1:10 sc ale.

Those arch ribs coinciding with columns were bolted to an iron
'skewback' cast ing (with oak packing to ease adjustment during
construction), and the two ribs between centres were seated on the
lattice valley girders. Rainwater was collected in the valleys between
spans, and the hollow cast iron columns acted as downpipes for
disposal to underground drains.

Page 2
 Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Fig 8. Section of original Trainshed. 1:100 scale. Brunel's original sketches show that the 3-span design was favoured from the st art, and that the
springing of the arches was a major design consideration. Brunel designed the roof to carry its thrust without ties, with the thrust carried vertically down
to the lattice girder and columns. Where pairs of ribs meet at a valley, the opposing thrusts are balanced out. Along either edge, the offices and sheds
provided a reactive force to balance any lateral thrust from unequal loads (eg. wind loading).

The lower section of each roof was originally

clad in corrugated iron. The crown of each
arch was glazed using Paxton's Ridge and
Furrow system, developed for the Crystal
Palace. Using sash bar machines and glazing
trolleys, the process perfectly illustrated the
revolutionary ethos of the Trainshed.

Brunel knew that cast iron was good in

compression. Wrought iron, on the other hand,
was preferred for tensile and shear stresses.
Although more difficult and expensive to
produce by the 'puddling' method, it could be
bolted and forge-welded, and became the
established choice for beams, trusses and tie-
bars. And so there arose this combination of
wrought iron for tensile strength and general
toughness, with cast iron sustaining
compressive loads.
Fig 9. Original Cast Iron column, bolted to concrete
foundation pad. The Trainshed's arch ribs are not in direct
tension, in the way that a cross-tie would be,
and in fact loads in an arch exert a
compressive force into the arch and
subsequently to its supports. Wrought iron
was used in this application not for its tensile
strength but for its stiffness, ductility and, most
importantly, toughness. When the stresses in
cast iron approach the material's Ultimate
Stress value, it fails in a brittle manner with no
visible warning and perhaps catastrophic
results. Wrought iron, on the other hand,
reaches a Yield Point at the limit of Hookean
elasticity, but then continues to deform in a
plastic manner, reaching its Ultimate Stress
point before eventual fracture. The
deformation is visible and gradual. Cast iron
used in this application, therefore, would have
induced dangerous stress concentrations at
the bolt positions, leading to a chain reaction
of component failure.

Fig 10. Steel replacement column.

Hooke's Law and Young's Theory of Elasticity
predate this period, and Brunel would have
well understood the behaviour of his materials,

Page 3

Fig 11. Decorative wrought iron tracery at gable.
Fig 12. Comparison of the strengths of Iron and Steel at the end of the
19th.Century.
The combination of wrought iron trusses supported on cast iron columns
was, by 1850, well established. Cast iron became popular for columns
from the 1770's onwards, and was mass-produced from the 1790's. It is
strong in compression. However, concern over its weakness in tension
reached a head in 1847 when Robert Stephenson's bridge over the River
Dee at Chester collapsed due to failure of cast iron girders. Brunel had
had his own misf ortunes with cast iron when girders on his skew bridge
at Hanwell failed, and he wrote later, “I never use cast iron if I can help
it; but, in some cases it is necessary, and to meet these I have had
girders cast of a particular mixture of iron... The number I have is but
few, because, as I have before said, I dislike them.”
Fig 13.
Analys is of the wrought iron ribs during 1990's renovations showed a UTS of 266
N/mm 2 and a Yield of 220 N/mm 2, indicating that the wrought iron was of fairly low
quality and from Staffordshire. Despite wrought iron's reputation for durability and
corrosion-resistance, renovation work in the 1990's required specialist welding to
repair corroded arch ribs and girders.
Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction
even without the advanced computer
calculations available to the engineers of
Exchange House. He was recorded as
commissioning sample structural elements (eg.
for his proposed Dome for the Great
Exhibition, unbuilt), and his instinctive
understanding of his materials was due as
much to empirical observation, testing and
experience as to calculation and theory.
The Trainshed has been adapted and
renovated at various points in its lifetime, and
these works highlight the long-term properties
of the original materials. In 1909-15, a fourth
span was added at the northeastern side of
the station, with arch ribs and lattice girder
made from mild steel. The wider span imposed
a lateral thrust on Brunel's arches, with
movements of up to 125mm at the columns,
and so the new span had to be stabilised with
cross-ties. The cast iron columns were found
to be cracking and so in the 1920's all the cast
iron columns were replaced with steel. In the
1990's renovations, the decorative cast iron
capitals were found to be concealing corrosion
of the columns. The difficulty of removing the
capitals meant that they were all replaced with
new castings.
Page 4

Fig 14. Broadgate Exchange House. Railway sym bolism is evident
in arch, tie members and in the functionality and materiality. Brunel
would, no doubt, have appreciated the advances that modern steel
allows engineers and designers.
Fig 15. A parabolic arch resembles the
shape of a chain suspended from two side-
supports. A building similar to this example
(Federal Reserve Bank, Minneapolis) was
considered, but was rejected due to the
complex and costly erection sequence
required above the rail tracks at Broadgate.
Fig 16. Identification of major st ructural components. Main
elevation. 1:1000 scale.
Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction
Broadgate Exchange House
Broadgate Exchange House owes much to the
legacy of Brunel and Paddington Trainshed.
Clear spanning 78m over the tracks from
adjacent Liverpool Street Station, it proudly
sports its 'structure as architecture' with an
'independence of meretricious and
adventitious ornament' which would have
pleased Brunel.
All loads from the 10-storey office block are
transmitted via four segmented, tied, parabolic
arches to eight hand-mined pile foundations at
either side of the railway tracks. Iyengar states
that, “The functional hierarchy of the arch
system was expressed in layering components
on the system to depict clear channels of load
flow.” This is achieved by making the two
outermost arches an external feature, and
leaving the internal arches visible from the
atria. Fire engineering calculations meant that
the separation of 2m between the main
structural framework and the smooth wall
facade added further clarity to this concept.
A parabolic arch is the most efficient shape for
transmitting uniform loads by axial
compression. By making the parabolic arch
resemble the bending moment diagram of the
load that it supports, the bending moment is
eliminated, and the compressive load is carried
efficiently within the shape of the arch.
Page 5
 Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Fig 17. Side elevation, showing End Truss. 1:1000 scale.

The End Truss provides stability against 'racking' in the plane
perpendicular to the arches. It comprises a series of X-braces
and works by triangulation.

The elevation drawings (Figs 16 & 17) illustrate the major st ructural components. A storey-height truss supports a parking level
within, and the open plaza level above. These loads are transmitted direct to the foundation piers at either side, with random
columns placed where the rail tracks allow. This st ructure is independent of the office block and the painted steel st ructure
above which supports it.

The main structure comprises the 4 tied

parabolic arches creating 3 bays of 18.5, 15
and 18.5m. On the longer sides the arches
support columns at nodes. These nodes were
set out to correspond in most cases with
separate floor levels, and consist of a joint
between two arch segments with the column
passing through the node. Each node is also
braced diagonally in plane with the floor slabs
by a pair of 150mm diameter pipe sections
(see Fig.18).

Above the nodes (ie. above the arch), the

columns are in compression, and are spliced
together with end-bearing plates. To resist
buckling loads, these upper columns are
braced at each floor by a pair of horizontal
bracing rods. Below the nodes, the joints are in
tension and are joined with splice-plates bolted
to the webs. Since the hangers here are in
tension, buckling is not an issue and the
bracing rods are omitted.

Composite floor trusses at 3m centres form the

floor framing, and alternate floor trusses (ie. at
the 6m column spacing) extend through the
Fig 18. Main arch node

Page 6

Fig 19. Rear detail of main arch node, showing horizontal
diagonal bracing.
Fig 21. Main end bearing node.
Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction
curtain wall and connect into the columns.
Perpendicular spandrel beams at the wall
plane act both as floor girders and
intermediate ties.
The arch segments are formed from back-to-
back builtup channel sections 320mm apart ,
connected with batten plates to create
openings for the columns to pass through at
nodes, and to increase the moment of inertia.
The arches are in compression, and so their
inplane buckling strength is increased by pairs
of 200mm fascia arch diagonals connecting
the 6th. floor nodes back to the centre of the
primary horizontal tie.
The horizontal ties (Fig.20) connect the main
bearing nodes at either side, and are in
tension. The primary tie is below the first floor
level, in order to articulate it visually, with the
secondary tie above supporting the first floor
framing. The primary tie consists of 4 parallel
plates joined with 3 stainless steel shear pins
at each joint. The secondary tie is shaped like
an I-beam, with similar pinned joints.
These ties join the ends of the parabolic
arches at the main bearing joints which sit on
the foundations (Figs 21 & 22). The main
loading from the arches imposes an outward
thrust, and the ties provide a reaction to this
thrust, containing the forces within the shape
of the arches. Because the secondary ties are
subject to thermal growth and tie stretch, the
first floor slab was poured last, after the
structure had settled to its own self-loading,
and differential movement was avoided by
separating the slab from the interior tie by
removing the shear studs that would normally
tie these elements together. The main bearing
nodes are designed to allow for this
movement in the ties.
Fig 20. Primary and secondary horizontal tie members
provide a tension reaction to the lateral outwards thrust at
the base of the arches.
Page 7
Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Fig 23. Diagram showing the nature of the forces

resist ed by the main structural members.

Page 8
 Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Fig 24. Drawings of main structural components. 1:20

scale

Page 9
 Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Fig 25. Oblique view of main elevation, identifying further components.

Summary

There are many similarities between the two

buildings. Each is a celebration of its structure
and materiality, with minimal ornamentation.

Both buildings are designed to be self-

contained structurally, in that the main loads
are contained within the structure and
transferred to ground with no lateral thrust.

In both buildings, matters of buildability and

efficiency of construction were major
considerations in the early stages of the
design process.

Modern steel has many advantages over the

iron that was available to Brunel. Modern
manufacturing ensures a consistency and
predictability to the material, in addition to its
higher performance in axial, torsional and
shear stress.

In terms of long term performance, Exchange

House will probably outshine Paddington. The
lack of horizontal ties in the Trainshed, whilst
aesthetically pleasing, has made access for
maintenance difficult over the years, whereas

Page 10
 Mark Lomas w10711488 Iron & Steel in Construction

Exchange House benefits from modern paint

treatments, and includes measures to shed
water away from points where it might cause
deterioration. The newer structure can be
inspected safely from within the building, whilst
much of the deterioration in the Trainshed
went unnoticed for many years due to difficulty
of access for inspection.

From Rolt\s depiction of Brunel, one suspects

that this Master of Iron would have been
delighted by the achievements of Exchange
House, and somewhat envious of the
possibilities that modern steel provides.

Bibliography :

Connell, G.S., (1993) The Restoration of Brunel's Paddington Station Roof. Proc.Instn Civ.Engnrs – Civil
Engineering. Feb 93, 93 10-18 Paper 10084, 10-18.

Thorne R., (1985) Masters of Building – Paddington Station. Architects Journal. 13 November 1985, 44-58.

Richardson, C., (2005) An Iron Will. Building Conservation Directory 2005, 52-55.

Rabenek, A., (1990) Broadgate and the Beaux Arts. Architects Journal. 24 October 1990, 37-51.

Iyengar, H., (1993) Broadgate Exchange House: Structural Systems. The Structural Engineer, Vol 71, No.9, 4
May 1993, 149-159

Rolt, L.T.C., (1957) Isambard Kingdom Brunel. 1986 Ed. UK: Penguin Books.

Gere, J.M. & Timoshenko, S.P. (1999) Mechanics of Materials 4th Ed., UK: Stanley Thornes Publishing Ltd.

Garrison, P.. (2005) Basic Structures for Architects & Engineers. UK : Blackwell Publishing.

Alexander, W.,& Street, A. (1944) Metals in the Service of Man. 1951 Ed. UK : Pelican Books.

Gordon, J.E., (1978) Structures – Or Why Things Don't Fall Down. UK : Penguin Books.

Gordon, J.E., (1968) The New Science of Strong Materials. 1991 Ed. UK : Penguin Books.

Cowan, H.J., (1971) Architectural Structures – An Introduction to Structural Mechanics. 1976 Ed. UK : Pitman

Page 11