Purpose: The horizontal stabilization of a building is of great importance in the design of its structural system. Insufficient counteraction of horizontal loads can lead to problems where columns and beams deflect more than the allowable margins. One common horizontal load arises from wind hitting an exterior wall. In this study, four bracing types were analyzed using software to evaluate and compare them, taking various factors into account. The building upon which the study is based is an industrial four-story structure located in Västerås. The building is designed with hinged column bases, which require a stabilization system to maintain its stability. This study aimed to determine the optimal solution for the stabilization system by comparing multiple proposals (X, V, inverted V, and diagonal) considering all factors that significantly influence stabilization. The different proposals were compared in terms of material usage, horizontal displacement, and the number of spans required for steel bracing. Method: Hand calculations were used in this report to design various structural components such as columns, beams, and bracing, which were compared with FEM (Finite Element Method) designs. Additionally, different perspectives were considered within the relevant subject framework, including steel properties, general loads, characteristics, and descriptions of the examined models. Results: After conducting the calculations, it was found that the optimal number of spans required for bracing the industrial steel structure was 32 diagonal braces, placed in the outermost bays on all sides of the building at each floor. This proposal resulted in reduced material usage with a secure horizontal displacement, ensuring stability and durability of the building. Conclusions: In conclusion, this report provides a deep understanding of the importance of stability in buildings, especially when it comes to the safety of occupants and the structural integrity of the building. Proposal 1 has likely met the requirements based on all the calculations and analyzed models that have been conducted, and therefore, diagonal bracing has been chosen as the optimized solution.

La présente thèse procède à une analyse archéologique des discours sur le « romantisme politique » sous la République de Weimar pour mettre en évidence que ce paradigme constitue un idéologème fondamental de l’univers intellectuel et politique de l’époque. Par le recours à une conception de la « réception » qui met entre parenthèses la fonction « auteur » il s’agit d’analyser les stratégies discursives qui se structurent autour du paradigme « romantique » entre 1918 et 1933. A partir de l’étude d’un corpus d’auteurs pour qui la référence romantique est centrale (Sigmund Rubinstein, Carl Schmitt, Hans Freyer, Othmar Spann, Karl Mannheim, Wilhelm von Schramm, Paul Tillich) ainsi que des réseaux sociaux qui s’organisent autour d’eux, il est possible d’affirmer l’existence d’une sensibilité « romantique » centrale au monde weimarien, qui transcende les oppositions politiques traditionnellement conçues comme imperméables (gauche/droite, conservateur/progressiste, nationaliste/universaliste, etc.) et qui se construit dans l’opposition fondamentale à l’individualisme matérialiste du libéralisme capitaliste. / This PhD thesis offers an archeological analysis of the discourses on « political romanticism » in the Weimar Republic. It shall endeavour to analyze the discursive patterns which revolved around the « romantic » paradigm between 1918 and 1933 by resorting to a concept of « reception » which minimizes the importance of the « author ». By studying the works of thinkers who explicitly refer to « political romanticism » (Sigmund Rubinstein, Carl Schmitt, Hans Freyer, Othmar Spann, Karl Mannheim, Wilhelm von Schramm, Paul Tillich) and the social networks they belong to one may assert the existence of a romantic « sensibility » which is at the core of the intellectual universe of the Weimar Republic, transcends political differences traditionally considered as essential (left/right, conservative/progressive, nationalist/universalist etc.) and is fundamentally opposed to the materialist individualism of capitalist liberalism.