KONTROLLBERÄKNING AV ETT TAKRAS PÅ EN TENNISHALL I NYKÖPING : En jämförelse mellan Eurokod och BKR

“Boverket” the Design Regulations in Sweden, also called BKR has for a long time been the mandatory standard that has guided and regulated construction design. But at the end of 2010 BKR was replaced with Eurocode. This report deals with the comparison of these two standards when it comes to wood construction. During winter 2009/2010 there were many roof collapses due to excessive loads on the roofs across Sweden. The majority of these roofs were made during 1980 when BKR was the existing norm, therefore, this report will investigate whether there is a big difference between designing of such roofs according to Eurocode instead of BKR. These two norms were compared by looking at the design of roof structures that consist of beams and columns. The roof beam was checked for buckling which is designed to support the tennis center in Nyköping, and also a centrally loaded pillar holding up the roof beam and superimposed loads. The result of this investigation showed that to design according to Eurocode would be more substantively economically because the design load bearing capacity becomes slightly larger. It was also observed that, there isn’t a big difference between designing according to BKR or Eurocode, therefore these roof collapses couldn’t occur due to designing according to BKR. Designing according to BKR is even safer, but not substantively economically as Eurocode. A comparison between the results indicate that the slight difference is mostly caused by the the differences between the parameters/coefficients used for design. The roof collapse in Nyköping was caused by carelessness or ignorance, this tennis center is undersized