Sie sind auf Seite 1von 535

Software Verification Examples

Software Verification Examples


For ETABS 2013

ISO ETA032913M5 Rev. 1


Berkeley, California, USA June 2013
Copyright

Copyright Computers & Structures, Inc., 1978-2013


All rights reserved.

The CSI Logo and ETABSare registered trademarks of Computers & Structures, Inc.

The computer program ETABS and all associated documentation are proprietary and
copyrighted products. Worldwide rights of ownership rest with Computers & Structures, Inc.
Unlicensed use of these programs or reproduction of documentation in any form, without
prior written authorization from Computers & Structures, Inc., is explicitly prohibited.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or
stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior explicit written permission of the
publisher.

Further information and copies of this documentation may be obtained from:

Computers & Structures, Inc.


www.csiberkeley.com

info@csiberkeley.com (for general information)


support@csiberkeley.com (for technical support)
DISCLAIMER

CONSIDERABLE TIME, EFFORT AND EXPENSE HAVE GONE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT
AND DOCUMENTATION OF THIS SOFTWARE. HOWEVER, THE USER ACCEPTS AND
UNDERSTANDS THAT NO WARRANTY IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED BY THE
DEVELOPERS OR THE DISTRIBUTORS ON THE ACCURACY OR THE RELIABILITY OF
THIS PRODUCT.

THIS PRODUCT IS A PRACTICAL AND POWERFUL TOOL FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN.


HOWEVER, THE USER MUST EXPLICITLY UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF
THE SOFTWARE MODELING, ANALYSIS, AND DESIGN ALGORITHMS AND
COMPENSATE FOR THE ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT ADDRESSED.

THE INFORMATION PRODUCED BY THE SOFTWARE MUST BE CHECKED BY A


QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER MUST
INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE RESULTS AND TAKE PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE INFORMATION THAT IS USED.
Contents

Introduction

Methodology

Conclusions

Problems
Analysis Problems

1 Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads, Static Gravity Load Analysis

2 Three-Story Plane Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

3 Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specific Static Lateral Load Analysis

4 Single Story Three-Dimensional Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum


Analysis

5 Three-Story Three-Dimensional Braced Frame, Dynamic Response


Spectrum Analysis

6 Nine-Story Ten-Bay Plane Frame, Eigenvalue Analysis

7 Seven-Story Plane Frame, Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

8 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum


Analysis

9 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Unsymmetrical Building Frame, Dynamic


Response Spectrum Analysis

10 Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements, Nonlinear Time History


Analysis

i
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

11 Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements, Nonlinear Time


History Analysis

12 Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

13 Base Isolated Two-Story 3D Frame, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

14 Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame, Nonlinear Time History


Analysis

15 Wall Object Behavior, Static Lateral Loads Analysis

Design Examples

Steel Frame

AISC 360-05 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC 360-05 Example 002 Build-up Wide Flange Member Under


Compression

AISC 360-10 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC 360-10 Example 002 Build-up Wide Flange Member Under


Compression

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Compression

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Combined


Compression & Biaxial Bending

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 Wide Flange Member Under Combined


Compression & Bending

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 Square Tube Member Under Compression &


Bending

CSA S16-09 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression &
Bending

ii
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CSA S16-09 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Compression &
Bending

EC 3-2005 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Combined


Compression & Bending

EN 3-2005 Example 002 Wide Flange Section Under Bending

EN 3-2005 Example 003 Wide Flange Section Under Combined


Compression & Bending

IS 800-2007 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression

IS 800-2007 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Bending

IS 800-2007 Example 003 Wide Flange Member Under Combined


Compression & Biaxial Bending

NTC 2008 Example 001 Wide Flange Section Under Combined


Compression & Bending

NTC 2008 Example 002 Wide Flange Section Under Combined


Compression & Bending

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002


Wide Flange Member Under Bending
NZS 3404-1997 Example 003
Wide Flange Member Under Combined
Compression & Bending

Concrete Frame

ACI 318-08 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

ACI 318-08 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
ACI 318-11 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

ACI 318-11 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

iii
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

EN 2-2004 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

EN 2-2004 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

HK CP-2004 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

HK CP-2004 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

IS 456-2000 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

IS 456-2000 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

NTC 2008 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

NTC 2008 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

KCI 1999 Example 001 Beam Moment Strength Using Equivalent


Rectangular Stress Distribution

KCI 1999 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

RCDF 2004 Example 001 Beam Moment Strength Using Equivalent


Rectangular Stress Distribution

RCDF 2004 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

TS 500-2000 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

TS 500-2000 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

Shear Wall

ACI 318-08 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 318-08 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for Wall


ACI 318-11 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for Wall

iv
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ACI 318-11 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 530-11 MasonryWALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 530-11 MasonryWALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for Wall

AS 360-09 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

AS 360-09 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

BS 8110-97 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

BS 8110-97 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

CSA A23.3-04 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

CSA A23.3-04 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

EC 2-2004 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

EC 2-2004 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Hong Kong CP-04 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Hong Kong CP-04 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Indian IS 456-2000 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Indian IS 456-2000 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Mexican RCDF-04 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Mexican RCDF-04 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

NZS-3103-2006 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

NZS-3103-2006 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Singapore CP65-99-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Singapore CP65-99-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Turkish TS 500-2000 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Turkish TS 500-2000 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Composite Beam

AISC 360-05 Example 001 Composite Girder Design

v
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC 360-10 Example 001 Composite Girder Design

AISC 360-10 Example 002 Composite Girder Design


BS 5950-90 Example 001
Steel Designers Manual Sixth Edition Design of
Simply Supported Composite Beam

CSA S16-09 Example 001 Handbook of Steel Construction Manual Tenth


Edition Composite Beam

EC 4-2004 Example 001 Steel Designers Manual Seventh Edition


Design of Simply Supported Composite Beam

Composite Column

AISC 360-10 Example 001 Composite Column Design

AISC 360-10 Example 002 Composite Column Design

AISC 360-10 Example 003 Composite Column Design

References

vi
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ETABS Software Verification Log


Revision
Number Date Description
0 19 Apr 2013 Initial release of ETABS 2013, Version 13.0.0

i
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

INTRODUCTION
This manual presents a set of simple building systems that have been analyzed using
ETABS 2013. The examples demonstrate some of the analytical capabilities of the ETABS
system.

The examples demonstrate the adequacy of the program for use in all applications,
including safety-related nuclear, as governed by 10CFR50 requirements as well as other
international QA standards, such as ISO 9000:2000 requirements.

METHODOLOGY
A series of test problems, or examples, designed to test the various elements and analysis
features of the program were created. For each example, this manual contains a short
description of the problem; a list of significant ETABS options tested; and a comparison of
key results with theoretical results or results from other computer programs. The
comparison of the ETABS results with results obtained from independent sources is
provided in tabular form as part of each example.

To validate and verify ETABS results, the test problems were run on a PC platform that
was a Dell machine with a Pentium III processor and 512 MB of RAM operating on a
Windows XP operating system.

Acceptance Criteria
The comparison of the ETABS validation and verification example results with
independent results is typically characterized in one of the following three ways.

Exact: There is no difference between the ETABS results and the independent results
within the larger of the accuracy of the typical ETABS output and the accuracy of the
independent result.

Acceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the
ETABS results and the independent results does not exceed five percent (5%). For internal
force and stress values, the difference between the ETABS results and the independent
results does not exceed ten percent (10%). For experimental values, the difference between
the ETABS results and the independent results does not exceed twenty five percent (25%).

Unacceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the
ETABS results and the independent results exceeds five percent (5%). For internal force
and stress values, the difference between the ETABS results and the independent results
exceeds ten percent (10%). For experimental values, the difference between the ETABS
results and the independent results exceeds twenty five percent (25%).

The percentage difference between results is typically calculated using the following
formula:

INTRODUCTION 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

E T A B S 2 0 1 3 R esu lt
P ercen t D ifferen ce 1 0 0 1
In d ep en d en t R esu lt

Summary of Examples
The example problems addressed plane frame, three-dimensional, and wall structures as
well as shear wall and floor objects. The analyses completed included dynamic response
spectrum, eigenvalue, nonlinear time history, and static gravity and lateral load.

Other program features tested include treatment of automatic generation of seismic and
wind loads, automatic story mass calculation, biaxial friction pendulum and biaxial
hysteretic elements, brace and column members with no bending stiffness, column pinned
end connections, multiple diaphragms, non rigid joint offsets on beams and columns, panel
zones, point assignments, rigid joint offsets, section properties automatically recovered
from the database, uniaxial damper element, uniaxial gap elements, vertical beam span
loading and user specified lateral loads and section properties.

Analysis: Of the fifteen Analysis problems, eight showed exact agreement while the
remaining seven showed acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and the cited
independent sources.

Design Steel Frame: Of the 26 Steel Frame Design problems, 17 showed exact
agreement while the remaining nine showed acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013
and the cited independent sources.

Design Concrete Frame: Of the 28 Concrete Frame Design problems, 16 showed exact
agreement while the remaining 12 shoes acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and
the cited independent sources.

Design Shear Wall: All 26 of the Shear Wall Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS 2013 and the cited independent sources.

Design Composite Beam: The 6 Composite Beam Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS 2013 and the cited independent sources.

Design Composite Column: The 3 Composite Column Design problems showed


acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and cited independent sources.

Summary of Examples 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CONCLUSIONS
ETABS 2013 is the latest release of the ETABS series of computer programs. Since
development, ETABS has been used widely for structural analysis. The ongoing usage of
the program coupled with continuing program upgrades are strong indicators that most
program bugs have been identified and corrected.

Additionally, the verification process conducted as described in this document


demonstrates that the program features tested are operating reliably and with accuracy
consistent with current computer technology capabilities.

CONCLUSIONS 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 1
Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis

Problem Description
This is a one-story, two-dimensional frame subjected to vertical static loading.

To be able to compare ETABS 2013 results with theoretical results using prismatic members
and elementary beam theory, rigid joint offsets on columns and beams are not modeled, and
axial and shear deformations are neglected. Thus, the automatic property generation feature
of ETABS 2013 is not used; instead, the axial area and moment of inertia for each member
are explicitly input.

Geometry, Properties and Loading


The frame is a three-column line, two-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are used. The
modulus of elasticity is 3000 ksi. All columns are 12"x24"; all beams are 12"x30".

The frame geometry and loading patterns are shown in Figure 1-1.

50k 100k 100k 100k 50k


Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq.
Case 1

Case 2 10k/ft
Pinned
Connection

10

Origin

Figure 1-1 Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis 1-1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

Vertical beam span loading

No rigid joint offsets on beams and columns

Column pinned end connections

Results Comparison
The theoretical results for bending moments and shear forces on beams B1 and B2 are easily
obtained from tabulated values for propped cantilevers (American Institute of Steel Construc-
tion 1989). These values for beam B1 are compared with ETABS 2013 results in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case 1


Load Case I
(Concentrated Load)
Quantity Location ETABS Theoretical
Bending Moments End I 0.00 0.00
Point 1,687.50 1,687.50
point 3,375.00 3,375.00
point -337.50 -337.50
End J -4,050.00 -4,050.00
Shear Forces End I -31.25 -31.25
Point -31.25 -31.25
point 68.75 68.75
point 68.75 68.75
End J 68.75 68.75

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case II


Load Case II
(Uniformly Distributed Load)
Quantity Location ETABS Theoretical
Bending Moments End I 0.00 0.00
Point 2,430.00 2,430.00
point 2,430.00 2,430.00
point 0.00 0.00

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis 1-2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case II


Load Case II
(Uniformly Distributed Load)
Quantity Location ETABS Theoretical
End J -4,860.00 -4,860.00
Shear Forces End I -67.50 -67.50
Point -22.50 -22.50
point 22.50 22.50
point 67.50 67.50
End J 112.50 112.50

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX1.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.

Conclusion
The comparison of results shows an exact match between the ETABS 2013 results and the
theoretical data.

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis 1-3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 2
Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

Problem Description
This is a three-story plane frame subjected to the El Centro 1940 seismic response spectra, N-S
component, 5 percent damping.

Assuming the beams to be rigid and a rigid offset at the column top ends of 24 inches (i.e.,
equal to the depth of the beams), and neglecting both shear deformations and axial defor-
mations, the story lateral stiffness for this example can be calculated (Przemieniecki 1968).

The example then reduces to a three-spring, three-mass system with equal stiffnesses and
masses. This can be analyzed using any exact method (Paz 1985) to obtain the three natural
periods and mass normalized mode shapes of the system.

The spectral accelerations at the three natural periods can then be linearly interpolated from
the response spectrum used.

The spectral accelerations can in turn be used with the mode shapes and story mass infor-
mation to obtain the modal responses (Paz 1985). The modal responses for story displace-
ments and column moments can then be combined using the complete quadratic combination
procedure (Wilson, et al. 1981).

Geometry, Properties and Loading


The frame is modeled as a two-column line, single bay system. Kip-inch-second units are
used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:

All columns are W14X90

All beams are infinitely rigid and 24" deep

Modulus of elasticity = 29500 ksi

Typical story mass = 0.4 kip-sec2/in

The column is modeled to have infinite axial area, so that axial deformation is neglected. Al-
so, zero column shear area is input to trigger the ETABS 2013 option of neglecting shear de-
formations. These deformations are neglected to be consistent with the hand-calculated model
with which the results are compared.

The frame geometry is shown in Figure 2-1.

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 2-1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 2-1 Three-Story Plane Frame

Technical Features in ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

Rigid joint offsets on beams and columns automatically calculated

Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
The three theoretical natural periods and mass normalized mode shapes are compared in Ta-
ble 2-1 with ETABS 2013 results.

Table 2-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes

Mode Period, secs. Mode Shape ETABS Theoretical

Roof Level 1.165 1.165


nd
1 0.4414 2 Level 0.934 0.934
st
1 Level 0.519 0.519
Roof Level 0.934 0.934
nd
2 0.1575 2 Level -0.519 -0.519
st
1 Level -1.165 -1.165
3 0.1090 Roof Level 0.519 0.519

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 2-2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 2-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes

Mode Period, secs. Mode Shape ETABS Theoretical


nd
2 Level -1.165 -1.165
st
1 Level 0.934 0.934

The story displacements and column moments thus obtained are compared in Table 2-2 with
ETABS 2013 results. The results are identical.

Table 2-2 Comparison of Displacements and Column Moments


Quantity ETABS Theoretical
Displacement at
Roof 2.139 2.139
nd
2 1.716 1.716
st
1 0.955 0.955
Moment, Column C1, at Base 11,730 11,730

Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX2.EDB. The response spectrum file is ELCN-RS1.
These files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.

Conclusion
The result comparison shows an exact match between the ETABS 2013 results and the theo-
retical data.

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 2-3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 3
Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis

Problem Description
The frame is modeled as a two-column line, single bay system. This three-story plane frame
is subjected to the following three code-specified lateral load cases:

UBC 1997 specified seismic loads (International Conference of Building Officials 1997)

IBC 2000 specified seismic loads (International Code Council, Inc. 2000)

UBC 1997 specified wind loads (International Conference of Building Officials 1997)

Geometry, Properties and Loads


Kip-inch-second units are used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:

All columns are W14X90


All beams are infinitely rigid and 24" deep
Modulus of elasticity = 29500 ksi
Poisson's ratio = 0.3
Typical story mass = 0.4 kip-sec2/in

The frame geometry is shown in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1 Three-Story Plane Frame

Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3-1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

For the UBC97 seismic load analysis, the code parameters associated with the analysis are as
follows:

UBC Seismic zone factor, Z = 0.40


UBC Soil Profile Type = SC
UBC Importance factor, I = 1.25
UBC Overstrength Factor = 8.5
UBC coefficient Ct = 0.035
UBC Seismic Source Type =B
Distance to Source = 15 km

For the IBC2000 seismic load analysis, the code parameters associated with the analysis are
as follows:

IBC Site Class =C


IBC Response Accel, Ss =1
IBC Response Accel, S1 = 0.4
IBC Response Modification, R =8
IBC Coefficient Ct = 0.035
IBC Seismic Group =I

For the UBC97 wind load analysis, the exposure and code parameters associated with the analy-
sis are as follows:

Width of structure supported by frame = 20 ft


UBC Basic wind speed = 100 mph
UBC Exposure type =B
UBC Importance factor, I =1
UBC Windward coefficient, Cq = 0.8
UBC Leeward coefficient, Cq = 0.5

Technical Features in ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

Section properties automatically recovered from AISC database

Automatic generation of UBC 1997 seismic loads

Automatic generation of IBC 2000 seismic loads

Automatic generation of UBC 1997 wind loads

Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3-2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Results Comparison
For each of the static lateral load analyses, the story shears can be computed using the formu-
lae given in the applicable references. For the seismic loads, the fundamental period comput-
ed by ETABS 2013 can be used in the formulae. From ETABS results, this fundamental peri-
od is 0.5204 second. (Note the difference between the calculated fundamental period for this
example and Example 2, which neglects shear and axial deformations.)

Hand-calculated story shears are compared with story shears produced by the ETABS 2013
program in Table 3-1 for UBC seismic loads, Table 3-2 for IBC seismic loads and Table 3-3
for UBC wind loads.

Table 3-1 Comparison of Results for Story Shears-UBC 1997 Seismic


Level ETABS (kips) Theoretical (kips)
Roof 34.09 34.09
nd
2 56.82 56.82
st
1 68.19 68.19

Table 3-2 Comparison of Results for Story Shears-IBC 2000 Seismic


Level ETABS (kips) Theoretical (kips)
Roof 19.38 19.38
nd
2 32.25 32.25
st
1 38.64 38.64

Figure 3-3 Comparison of Results for Story Shears-UBC 1997 Wind


Level ETABS (kips) Theoretical (kips)
Roof 3.30 3.30
nd
2 9.49 9.49
st
1 15.21 15.21

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX3.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.

Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3-3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Conclusion
The results comparison shows an exact match between the ETABS results and the theoretical
data.

Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3-4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 4
Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

Problem Description
This is a one-story, four-bay, three-dimensional frame. The frame is subjected to the El Cen-
tro 1940 N-S component seismic response spectrum, for 5 percent damping, in two orthogo-
nal directions. The columns are modeled to neglect shear and axial deformations to be con-
sistent with the assumptions of hand calculations with which the results are compared.

The example is a three-degree-of-freedom system. From the individual column lateral


stiffnesses, assuming rigid beams and rigid offsets at column top ends equal to 36 inches (i.e.,
the depth of the beams) and neglecting both shear deformations and column axial defor-
mations, the structural stiffness matrix can be assembled (Przemieniecki 1968).

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The frame geometry is shown in Figure 4-1.

Figure 4-1 Single-Story Three-Dimensional Frame

The structure is modeled as a single frame with four column lines and four bays. Kip-inch-
second units are used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:

Columns on lines C1 and C2: 24" x 24"

Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 4 -1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Columns on lines C3 and C4: 18" x 18"


All beams infinitely rigid and 36" deep

Modulus of elasticity = 3000 ksi


Story weight = 150 psf

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Three-dimensional frame analysis

Automatic story mass calculation

Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
From the stiffness and mass matrices of the system, the three natural periods and mass nor-
malized mode shapes of the system can be obtained (Paz 1985). These are compared in Table
4-1 with ETABS 2013 results.

Table 4-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes


Mode Quantity ETABS Theoretical
1 Period, sec. 0.1389 0.1389
Mode Shape
X-translation -1.6244 -1.6244
Y-translation 0.0000 0.000
Z-rotation 0.0032 0.0032
2 Period, sec. 0.1254 0.1254
Mode Shape
X-translation 0.000 0.000
Y-translation 1.6918 1.6918
Z-rotation 0.000 0.000
3 Period,sec. 0.0702 0.070
Mode Shape
X-translation 0.4728 0.4728
Y-translation 0.000 0.000
Z-rotation 0.0111 0.0111

Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 4 -2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX4.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.

Conclusion
The results comparison shows an exact match between the ETABS 2013 results and the theo-
retical data.

Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 4 -3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 5
Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis

Problem Description
This is an L-shaped building structure with four identical braced frames. All members (col-
umns and braces) carry only axial loads.

The structure is subject to the El Centro 1940 N-S component seismic response spectrum in
the X-direction. The structural damping is 5 percent. The structure is modeled by appropriate-
ly placing four identical planar frames. Each frame is modeled using three column lines. Kip-
inch-second units are used.

Geometry, Properties and Loading


The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29500 ksi and the typical member axial area as 6 in2. A
story mass of 1.242 kip-sec2/in and a mass moment of inertia of 174,907.4 kip-sec2-in are
used.

The geometry of the structure and a typical frame are shown in Figure 5-1.

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Three-dimensional structure analysis using planar frames

Brace (diagonal) and column members with no bending stiffness

Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
This example has been solved in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Peterson (1981). A
comparison of ETABS 2013 results for natural periods and key member forces for one
frame with these references is given in Table 5-1.

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 5 -1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

D2 D4
D1 D3

D2 D4
D1 D3

D2 D4
D1 D3

Figure 5-1 Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame Building

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 5 -2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 5-1 Comparison of Results


Wilson and
Quantity ETABS Habibullah Peterson
Period, Mode 1 0.32686 0.32689 0.32689
Period, Mode 2 0.32061 0.32064 0.32064
Axial Force 279.39 279.47 279.48
Column C1, Story 1
Axial Force 194.44 194.51 194.50
Brace D1, Story 1
Axial Force 120.49 120.53 120.52
Brace D3, Story 1

Computer File
The input data file is EX5.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.

Conclusions
The results comparison reflects acceptable agreement between the ETABS 2013 results and
reference data.

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 5 -3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 6
Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis

Problem Description
An eigenvalue analysis is completed.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The frame is modeled with eleven column lines and ten bays. Kip-ft-second units are used. A
modulus of elasticity of 432,000 ksf is used. A typical member axial area of 3ft2 and moment
of inertia of 1ft4 are used. A mass of 3kip-sec2/ft/ft of member length is converted to story
mass using tributary lengths and used for the analysis.

This is a nine-story, ten-bay plane frame, as shown in Figure 6-1.

Figure 6-1 Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame

Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis 6 -1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

Eigenvalue analysis

Results Comparison
This example is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Bathe and Wilson
(1972). There are two differences between the ETABS 2013 analysis and the analyses of the
references. The models of the references assign vertical and horizontal mass degrees of free-
dom to each joint in the structure. However, the ETABS 2013 model only assigns horizontal
masses and additionally, only one horizontal mass is assigned for all the joints associated
with any one floor level.

The eigenvalues obtained from ETABS 2013 are compared in Table 6-1 with results from
Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Bathe and Wilson (1972).

Table 6-1 Comparison of Results for Eigenvalues


Wilson and Bathe and
Quantity ETABS Habibullah Wilson
1 0.58964 0.58954 0.58954
2 5.53195 5.52696 5.52695
3 16.5962 16.5879 16.5878

Computer File
The input data filename for this example is EX6.EDB. This file is provided as part of the
ETABS 2013 installation.

Conclusions
Considering the differences in modeling enumerated herein, the results comparison between
ETABS and the references is acceptable.

Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis 6 -2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 7
Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

Problem Description
This is a seven-story plane frame. The frame is modeled with three column lines and two
bays. Kip-inch-second units are used. Because the wide flange members used in the frame
are older sections, their properties are not available in the AISC section property database
included with the ETABS program, and the required properties therefore need to be explic-
itly provided in the input data.

The example frame is analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) for gravity loads, static
lateral loads and dynamic response spectrum loads. DYNAMIC/EASE2 analyzes the ex-
ample frame under static lateral loads and dynamic response spectrum and time history
loads. A comparison of key ETABS results with Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and DY-
NAMIC/EASE2 results is presented in Tables 7-1, 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4. Note the difference in
modal combination techniques between ETABS and Wilson and Habibullah, which uses
complete quadratic combination (CQC), and DYNAMIC/EASE2, which uses square root
of the sum of the squares combination (SRSS).

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The gravity loads and the geometry of the frame are shown in Figure 7-1.

The frame is subjected to the following lateral loads:

Static lateral loads, shown in Figure 7-1

Lateral loads resulting from the El Centro 1940 N-S component seismic response spec-
tra, 5 percent damping

Lateral loads resulting from the El Centro 1940 N-S component acceleration time histo-
ry

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 -1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Vertical Loading,
typical for all
levels

Global Reference Point


All columns are W14s
All beams are W24s
Member weights are indicated
Typical story mass = 0.49 kip-sec 2/in

Figure 7-1 Seven-Story Plane Frame

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 -2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

User-specified section properties

User-specified lateral loads

Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Dynamic time history analysis

Results Comparison
The comparison of the results for all three analyses is excellent.
Table 7-1 Comparison of Results for Static Lateral Loads
Wilson and
Quantity ETABS Habibullah DYNAMIC/EASE2
Lateral Displacement 1.4508 1.4508 1.4508
at Roof
Axial Force 69.99 69.99 69.99
Column C1, at ground
Moment 2324.68 2324.68 2324.68
Column C1, at ground

Table 7-2 Comparison of Results for Periods of Vibration


Wilson and
Mode ETABS Habibullah DYNAMIC/EASE2
1 1.27321 1.27321 1.27321
2 0.43128 0.43128 0.43128
3 0.24204 0.24204 0.24204
4 0.16018 0.16018 0.16018
5 0.11899 0.11899 0.11899
6 0.09506 0.09506 0.09506
7 0.07951 0.07951 0.07951

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 -3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 7-3 Comparison of Results for Response Spectrum Analysis


Wilson and
ETABS Habibullah DYNAMIC/EASE2
CQC CQC SRSS
Quantity Combination Combination Combination
Lateral Displacement 5.4314 5.4314 5.4378
at Roof

Axial Force 261.52 261.50 261.76


Column C1 at ground

Moment 9916.12 9916.11 9868.25


Column C1 at ground

Table 7-4 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis


Wilson and
Quantity ETABS Habibullah
Maximum Roof Displacement 5.49 5.48
Maximum Base Shear 285 284
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at ground 263 258
Maximum Moment, Column C1 at ground 9104 8740

Computer Files
The input data file is EX7.EDB. The input history is ELCN-THU. Time history results are
obtained for the first eight seconds of the excitation. This is consistent with DYNAM-
IC/EASE2, with which the results are compared. These computer files are provided as part
of the ETABS installation.

Conclusions
Noting the difference in modal combination techniques between ETABS and Wilson and
Habibullah, which uses complete quadratic combination (CQC), and DYNAMIC/EASE2,
which uses square root of the sum of the squares combination (SRSS), the results of the
testing are acceptable.

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 -4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 8
Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional building frame subjected to a response spectrum of
constant amplitude. The three-dimensional structure is modeled as a single frame with nine
column lines and twelve bays. Kip-foot-second units are used.

For consistency with the models documented in other computer programs with which the
ETABS 2013 results are compared (see Table 8-1), no story mass moments of inertia are
assigned in the ETABS model.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 8-1.

B5 B6

B8 B10 B12
13'
B3 B4
B7
B9 B11
B1 B2 13'

C7 C8 C9

C4 C5 C6
25'
Z
Y
C1 C2 C3
X 25'

35' 35'

GLOBAL
STORY 1 CENTER OF MASS AT (38,27,13)
AND FRAME
STORY 2 CENTER OF MASS AT (38,27,26)
REFERENCE POINT
TYPICAL STORY MASS = 6.212 kip-sec 2 /ft

Figure 8-1 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Frame

Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 8-1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

A response spectrum with a constant value of 0.4g is used. Other parameters associated
with the structure are as follows:

Columns Beams
Axial area 4 ft2 5 ft2
Minor moment of inertia 1.25 ft4 1.67 ft4
Major moment of inertia 1.25 ft4 2.61 ft4
Modulus of elasticity 350000 ksf 500000 ksf

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Three-dimensional frame analysis

User-specified section properties

Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Comparison of Results
This example is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Peterson (1981). A
comparison of the key ETABS 2013 results with Wilson and Habibullah (Reference 1) and
Peterson (Reference 2) is shown in Table 8-1.

Table 8-1 Comparison of Results


Quantity ETABS Reference 1 Reference 2
Period, Mode 1 0.22708 0.22706 0.22706
Period, Mode 2 0.21565 0.21563 0.21563
Period, Mode 3 0.07335 0.07335 0.07335
Period, Mode 4 0.07201 0.07201 0.07201
X-Displacement
nd 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201
Center of mass, 2 Story

Computer File
The input data file is EX8.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installa-
tion.

Conclusion
The results comparison shows acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and the refer-
ences.

Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 8-2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 9
Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis

Problem Description
This is a two-story three-dimensional unsymmetrical building frame. The structure is sub-
jected to a seismic response spectrum along two horizontal axes that are at a 30-degree an-
gle to the building axes. The seismic excitation is identical to the one used in Wilson and
Habibullah (1992).

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 9-1. The three-dimensional structure is
modeled as a single frame with six column lines and five bays. Kip-foot-second units are
used. Typical columns are 18"x18" and beams are 12"x24". The modulus of elasticity is
taken as 432,000 ksf.

Figure 9-1 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Unsymmetrical Building Frame

Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 9 -1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Three-dimensional frame analysis

Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
The structure is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992). Key ETABS 2013 results
are compared in Table 9-1.

Table 9-1 Comparison of Results


Wilson and
Quantity ETABS Habibullah
Period, Mode 1 0.4146 0.4146
Period, Mode 2 0.3753 0.3753
Period, Mode 3 0.2436 0.2436
Period, Mode 4 0.1148 0.1148
Period, Mode 5 0.1103 0.1103
Period, Mode 6 0.0729 0.0729
X- Displacement
nd
Center of Mass at 2 Story for:
Seismic at 30 to X 0.1062 0.1062
Seismic at 120 to X 0.0617 0.0617

Computer File
The input data file is EX9.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installa-
tion.

Conclusions
The results comparison shows exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and the reference
material.

Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 9 -2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 10
Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis

Problem Description
This is a single bay three-story plane frame subjected to ground motion, as shown in Figure
10-1. The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis. Three
elements that absorb energy through hysteresis (ADAS elements as described in Scholl 1993
and Tsai, et al. 1993) are used to connect the chevron braces to the frame. Two models are
investigated. In the first model, the ADAS elements are intended to produce about 5% damp-
ing in the fundamental mode. In the second model, damping is increased to 25%. The manu-
facturer supplied the properties of the ADAS elements.

The ADAS elements are modeled in ETABS by assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the chevrons intersect the beams at each story.
The link properties use the uniaxial hysteretic spring property (PLASTIC1) and provide
beam-brace connectivity with nonlinear behavior in the U2 (shear in the 1-2 plane) direction.
Under this arrangement, displacements are transferred between the chevrons and the frame
via the link elements undergoing shear deformation.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The frame is modeled as a two-column line, one-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are used.
The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29000 ksi. Column, beam and brace section properties
are user-defined.

A single rigid diaphragm is allocated to each story level and connects all three point objects
(two column points and one mid-span point) at each story. Because of the rigid diaphragms,
no axial force will occur in the beam members. All members are assigned a rigid zone factor
of 1.

In both models the value of post yield stiffness ratio is taken as 5% and the time increment
for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second.

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 10 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

1 2

D1 D2

D1 D2

D1 D2

Figure 10-1 Planar Frame with ADAS Elements

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis
Panel zones
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Ritz vectors

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 10 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Results Comparison
Sample results are compared in Table 10-1 with results from the nonlinear analysis program
DRAIN-2DX (Prakash, et al. 1993) for both 5% and 25% damping cases.
Table 10-1 Results Comparison

5% Damping 25% Damping


Level ETABS DRAIN-2DX ETABS DRAIN-2DX
Comparison of Maximum Story Deflections
rd
3 4.57 4.57 2.10 1.92
nd
2 3.48 3.51 1.68 1.55
st
1 1.82 1.82 0.92 0.86
Comparison of Maximum Link Shear Force
rd
3 7.29 7.31 17.75 17.40
nd
2 13.97 13.92 36.70 36.20
st
1 17.98 18.00 47.79 47.10
Comparison of Maximum Brace Axial Force
rd
3 5.16 5.17 12.55 12.30
nd
2 9.88 9.84 25.95 25.60
st
1 12.71 12.70 33.79 33.28

Computer Files
The input data files for this example are EX10A.EDB (5% damping) and EX10B.EDB (25%
damping). The time history file is ELCN-THE. These files are provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.

Conclusions
The results comparison show acceptable to exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and
DRAIN-2DX.

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 10 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Example 11
Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History
Analysis

Problem Description
The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis. Three viscous
damper elements of the type described in Hanson (1993) are used to connect the chevron
braces to the frame. Two models are investigated. In the first model, the damper elements are
intended to produce about 5% damping in the fundamental mode. In the second model, damp-
ing is increased to 25%.

The ETABS viscous damper element (DAMPER) is a uniaxial damping device with a linear
or nonlinear force-velocity relationship given by F = CV.

The damper elements are modeled in ETABS by assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the chevrons intersect the beams at each story.
The link properties use the uniaxial damper property (DAMPER) and provide beam-brace
connectivity with nonlinear behavior in the U2 (shear in the 1-2 plane) direction. Under this
arrangement, displacements are transferred between the chevrons and the frame via the link
elements (dampers) undergoing shear deformation.

The time increment for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


This is a single-bay, three-story plane frame subjected to ground motion, as shown in Figure
11-1. The frame is modeled as a two-column line, one-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are
used. The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29000 ksi. Column, beam and brace section prop-
erties are user defined.

A single rigid diaphragm is allocated to each story level and connects all three point objects
(two column points and one mid-span point) at each story. Because of the rigid diaphragms,
no axial force will occur in the beam members. All members are assigned a rigid zone factor
of 1.

Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 11 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 11-1 Planar Frame with Damper Elements

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

Use of panel zones

Use of uniaxial damper elements

Point assignments

Nonlinear time history analysis

Ritz vectors

Results Comparison
Sample results for = 1 are compared in Table 11-1 with results from the nonlinear analy-
sis program DRAIN-2DX (Prakash, et al. 1993) for both 5% and 25% damping cases.

Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 11 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 11-1 Results Comparison

5% Damping 25% Damping


Level ETABS DRAIN-2DX ETABS DRAIN-2DX

Comparison of Maximum Story Deflections


rd
3 4.09 4.11 2.26 2.24
nd
2 3.13 3.14 1.75 1.71
st
1 1.63 1.63 0.89 0.87
Comparison of Maximum Link Shear Force
rd
3 6.16 5.98 14.75 14.75
nd
2 10.79 10.80 32.82 32.84
st
1 15.15 15.02 44.90 44.97
Comparison of Maximum Brace Axial Force
rd
3 4.36 4.23 10.43 10.43
nd
2 7.63 7.63 23.21 23.22
st
1 10.71 10.62 31.75 31.80

Computer File
The input data files for this example are EX11A.EDB (5% damping) and EX11B.EDB
(25% damping). The time history file is ELCN-THE. These files are provided as part of
the ETABS 2013 installation.

Conclusions
The comparison of results shows acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and DRAIN-
2DX.

Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 11 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 12
Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

Problem Description
A two-bay, seven-story plane frame is linked to a one-bay four-story plane frame using
ETABS 2013 GAP elements. The structure experiences pounding because of ground mo-
tion. The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis.

This example illustrates the use of gap elements to model pounding between buildings.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 12-1.

The combined structure is modeled as a single frame with five column lines and three beam
bays. Kip-inch-second units are used. The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29500 ksi. Col-
umn and beam section properties are user defined.

Through the joint assignment option, Column lines 4 and 5 are connected to Diaphragm 2.
Column lines 1 to 3 remain connected to Diaphragm 1 by default. This arrangement physi-
cally divides the structure into two parts. The interaction is provided via the gap elements,
which are used as links spanning Column lines 3 and 4. The local axis 1 of the links is in
the global X-direction.

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Two-dimensional frame analysis

Use of uniaxial gap elements

Point assignments

Nonlinear time history analysis

Use of multiple diaphragms

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS 2013 is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Com-
puters and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified inde-
pendently). A comparison of key ETABS 2013 results with SAP2000 is presented in Table
12-1.

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 12-1 Planar Frame with Gap Elements

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 12-1 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis


Quantity ETABS SAP2000
Maximum Lateral Displacement at Roof 5.5521 5.5521
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at ground 266.89 266.88

A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 12-2. It shows the variations
of the displacement of Column lines 3 and 4 and the link force at Story 4. It is clearly evi-
dent that the link force is generated whenever the two column lines move in phase and their
separation is less than the specified initial opening or if they move towards each other out
of phase. For display purposes, the link forces are scaled down by a factor of 0.01.

Figure 12-2 Variations of Displacement of Column Lines 3 and 4


and Link Force at Story 4

Computer Files
The input data for this example is EX12.EDB. The time history file is ELCN-THU. Both of
the files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Conclusions
The results comparison shows essentially exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and
SAP2000.

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 13
Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis

Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional frame with base isolation. The structure is subjected
to earthquake motion in two perpendicular directions using the Loma Prieta acceleration
records.

Hysteretic base isolators of the type described in Nagarajaiah et al. (1991) are modeled us-
ing the ETABS 2013 ISOLATOR1 elements, which show biaxial hysteretic characteristics.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The structure is modeled as a single reinforced concrete frame with nine column lines and
twelve bays. The floor slab is taken to be 8 inches thick, covering all of the specified floor
bays at the base and the 1st story level. At the second story level the corner column as well
as the two edge beams are eliminated, together with the floor slab, to render this particular
level unsymmetric, as depicted in Figure 13-1.

A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi is used. The self-weight of concrete is taken as 150 pcf.
Kip-inch-second units are used.

The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 13-1.

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Three-dimensional frame analysis

Use of area (floor) objects

Use of biaxial hysteretic elements

Point assignments

Nonlinear time history analysis using ritz vectors

Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 13 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 13-1 Base-Isolated Three-Dimensional Frame

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS 2013 is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Com-
puters and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified inde-
pendently). A comparison of key ETABS 2013 results with SAP200 is presented in Table
13-1.

Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 13 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 13-1 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis

Quantity ETABS SAP2000

nd
Maximum Uy Displacement, Column C9 at 2 Floor 3.4735 3.4736

Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at base 13.56 13.55

A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 13-2. It shows the load-
deformation relationship in the major direction for a typical isolator member.

Figure 13-2 Load Deformation Diagram


Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX13.EDB. The time history files are LP-TH0 and
LP-TH90. All of these files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.

Conclusion
The results comparison shows essentially exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and
SAP2000.

Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 13 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 14
Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis

Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional frame with base isolation using friction pendulum
base isolators. The structure is subjected to earthquake motion in two perpendicular direc-
tions using the Loma Prieta acceleration records.

Friction pendulum type base isolators of the type described in Zayas and Low (1990) are
modeled using the ETABS 2013 ISOLATOR2 elements.

It is important for these isolator elements that the axial load from other loads be modeled
before starting the nonlinear analysis. This is achieved by using a factor of unity on the
dead load (self weight) on the structure in the nonlinear analysis initial conditions data.

Geometry, Properties and Loads


The structure is modeled as a single reinforced concrete frame with nine column lines and
twelve bays. The floor slab is taken to be 8 inches thick, covering all of the specified floor
bays at the base and the 1st story level. At the second story level, the corner column and the
two edge beams are eliminated, together with the floor slab, to render this particular level
anti-symmetric, as depicted in Figure 14-1.

The isolator properties are defined as follows:

Stiffness in direction 1 1E3


Stiffness in directions 2 and 3 1E2
Coefficient of friction at fast speed .04
Coefficient of friction at slow speed .03
Parameter determining the variation
of the coefficient of friction with velocity 20
Radius of contact surface in directions 2 and 3 60

A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi is used. The self-weight of concrete is taken as 150 pcf.
Kip-inch-second units are used.

The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 14-1.

Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 14-1 Base-Isolated Three-Dimensional Frame

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested


Three-dimensional frame analysis

Use of area (floor) objects

Use of biaxial friction pendulum elements

Point assignments

Nonlinear time history analysis using ritz vectors

Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS 2013 is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Comput-
ers and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified independently). A
comparison of key ETABS results with SAP2000 is presented in Table 14-1.
Table 14-1 Comparison of Result for Time History Analysis
Quantity ETABS SAP2000
nd
Maximum Uy Displacement, Column C9 at 2 Floor 4.2077 4.2069
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at base 38.25 38.25

A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 14-2. It shows the variation of
the displacement of the second story at column line 1.

Figure 14-2 Variation of Displacement


Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX14.EDB. The time history files are LP-TH0 and
LP-TH90. All of the files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.

Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Conclusion
The results comparison shows acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and SAP2000.

Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE 15
Wall Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

Problem Description
This example analyzes a series of wall configurations to evaluate the behavior of the
ETABS 2013 shell object with wall section assignments. All walls are subjected to a static
lateral load applied at the top of the wall.

The following walls are included:

Planar shear wall, shown in Figure 15-1

Wall supported on columns, shown in Figure 15-2

Wall-spandrel system, shown in Figure 15-3

C-shaped wall section, shown in Figure 15-4

Wall with edges thickened, shown in Figure 15-5

E-shaped wall section, shown in Figure 15-6

Geometry, Properties and Loads


A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi and a Poisson's ratio of 0.2 are used for all walls. Kip-
inch-second units are used throughout. The following sections describe the models for the
different walls.

Planar Shear Wall , Example 15a


This shear wall is modeled with one panel per story. Three different wall lengths of 120",
360" and 720" are analyzed. Also, one-story and three-story walls are analyzed, together
with the six-story wall shown in Figure 15-1. A wall thickness of 12" is used.

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 15-1 Planar Shear Wall, Example 15a

Wall Supported on Columns, Example 15b


This wall is modeled with two column lines. Columns are used for the first story, and the
top two stories have a single shell object with end piers, as shown in Figure 15-2. End
piers are 40" by 12" in cross section and panels are 12" thick. Columns are 40" by 20" in
cross section.

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 15-2 Wall Supported on Columns, Example 15b

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall-Spandrel System, Example 15c


This wall is modeled with four column lines. The spandrels are modeled as beams. Two
different spandrel lengths of 60" and 240" are analyzed. Each wall is modeled with two
shell objects per story. Three-story walls are also analyzed together with the six-story wall
shown in Figure 15-3. A wall and spandrel thickness of 12" is used.

Figure 15-3 Wall-Spandrel System, Example 15c

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shaped Wall Section, Example 15d


This wall is modeled with six column lines and five shell objects per story, to model the
shape of the wall. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story wall, as
shown in Figure 15-4. A wall thickness of 6" is used.

POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
TH

TH

TH

RD

ND

ST

ELEVATION

GLOBAL
Y 100k
REFERENCE
POINT X
100k
C3 C4 80
C2 C5
40
C1 C6
80 120 80

PLAN

Figure 15-4 C-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15d

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall with Edges Thickened, Example 15e


This wall is modeled with two column lines and one shell object, with end piers, per story
as shown in Figure 15-5. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story
wall shown in Figure 15-5.

TH

TH

TH

RD

ND

ST

30 30

C1 C2
210

Y 8 18

X
Global
Reference
Point

Figure 15-5 Wall with Thickened Edges, Example 15e

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

E-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15f


This wall is modeled with six column lines and five shell objects per story to model the
shape of the wall. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story wall, as
shown in Figure 15-6. A wall thickness of 6" is used.

POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
6TH

120

5 TH

120

4 TH

120

3 RD

120

2 ND

120

ST
1

120

BASELINE
ELEVATION
GLOBAL
REFERENCE Y 100k
POINT

C1 100k C3

C2 X
120

C4 C5 C6

120 120

PLAN

Figure 15-6 E-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15f

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Technical Features of ETABS Tested


Use of area objects

Two-dimensional and three-dimensional shear wall systems

Static lateral loads analysis

Results Comparison
All walls analyzed in this example using ETABS 2013 were also analyzed using the gen-
eral structural analysis program SAP2000 (Computers and Structure 2002), using refined
meshes of the membrane/shell element of that program. The SAP2000 meshes used are
shown in Figures 15-7, 15-8, 15-9, 15-10, 15-11 and 15-12. For the SAP2000 analysis, the
rigid diaphragms at the floor levels were modeled by constraining all wall nodes at the floor
to have the same lateral displacement for planar walls, or by adding rigid members in the
plane of the floor for three-dimensional walls.

Figure 15-7 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15a

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 8


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 15-8 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15b

Figure 15-9 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15c

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 9


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 15-10 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15d

Figure 15-11 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15e

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 10


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 15-12 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15f

The lateral displacements from the ETABS 2013 and SAP2000 analyses are compared in
Tables 15-1, 15-2, 15-3, 15-4, 15-5 and 15-6 for the various walls.

Table 15-1 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches), Example 15a
Number Wall Height Wall Length
of Stories (inches) (inches) ETABS SAP2000
6 720 120 2.3926 2.4287
360 0.0985 0.1031
720 0.0172 0.0186
3 360 120 0.3068 0.3205
360 0.0169 0.0187
720 0.0046 0.0052
1 120 120 0.0144 0.0185
360 0.0024 0.0029
720 0.0011 0.0013

Table 15-2 Results Comparison for Displacements (Inches), Example 15b


Location ETABS SAP2000
Story 3 0.0690 0.0671
Story 2 0.0524 0.0530
Story 1 0.0390 0.0412

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 11


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 15-3 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (inches)


Example 15c (1-4)
Number of Sto-
ries Beam Length (inches) ETABS SAP2000
60 0.0841 0.0869
6
240 0.1443 0.1505
60 0.0186 0.0200
3
240 0.0311 0.0332

Table 15-4 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches) at Load


Application Point, Example 15d (1-2)
Number of Load Displacement
Stories Direction Direction ETABS SAP2000
X X 0.8621 0.8936
6 X Z-Rotation 0.0185 0.0191
Y Y 1.1427 1.1882
X X 0.1242 0.1337
3 X Z-Rotation 0.0024 0.0025
Y Y 0.1614 0.1733

Table 15-5 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches),


Example 15e(1-2)
Number of Stories ETABS SAP2000
6 0.2798 0.2899
3 0.0451 0.0480

Table 15-6 Results Comparison for Displacements at Load Application,


Example 15f (1-2)
Number of Load Displacement
Stories Direction Direction ETABS SAP2000
X X 0.3695 0.3655
6 X Z-Rotation 0.0042 0.0039
Y Y 0.7286 0.7490
X X 0.0596 0.0628
3 X Z-Rotation 0.0005 0.0005
Y Y 0.0989 0.1058

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 12


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Computer Files
The input data files for the planar shear walls are included as files EX15A1.EDB through
EX15A9.EDB. These and the following input data files are provided as part of the ETABS
installation.

The input data for the wall supported on columns is EX15B.EDB.

The input data files for the wall-spandrel system are 15C1.EDB through 15C4.EDB.

The input data files for the shaped wall section are included as files EX15D1.EDB and
EX15D2.EDB.

The input data for the wall with thickened edges are included as files EX15E1.EDB and
EX15E2.EDB.

The input data for the E-shaped wall section are included as files EX15F1.EDB and
EX15F2.EDB.

Conclusion
The results comparison show acceptable agreement between ETBAS 2013 and SAP2000.
In general, the comparisons become better as the number of stories increases.

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 13


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC 360-05 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with a uniform load of 0.45 klf (D) and 0.75 klf (L). The flexural
moment capacity is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 5 ft, 11.667 ft and 35 ft.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties Loading Geometry


W18X50 w = 0.45 klf (D) Span, L = 35 ft
E = 29000 ksi w = 0.75 klf (L)
Fy = 50 ksi

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section Compactness Check (Bending)
Member Bending Capacities
Unsupported length factors

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example F.1-2a from the
AISC Design Examples, Volume 13 on the application of the 2005 AISC
Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-05).

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%

Cb ( L b =5ft) 1.004 1.002 0.20%

b M n ( L b =5ft) (k-ft) 378.750 378.750 0.00%

Cb ( L b =11.67ft) 1.015 1.014 0.10%

b M n ( L b =11.67ft) (k-ft) 307.124 306.657 0.15%

Cb ( L b =35ft) 1.138 1.136 0.18%

b M n ( L b =35ft) (k-ft) 94.377 94.218 0.17%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-05 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W18x50
bf = 7.5 in, tf = 0.57 in, d = 18 in, tw = 0.355 in
h d 2 t f 18 2 0.57 16.86 in

h0 d t f 18 0.57 17.43 in

S33 = 88.9 in3, Z33 = 101 in3


Iy =40.1 in4, ry = 1.652 in, Cw = 3045.644 in6, J = 1.240 in4

I yC w 40.1 3045.644
rts 1.98 in
S 33 88.889

R m 1 . 0 for doubly-symmetric sections

Other:
c = 1.0
L = 35 ft

Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(0.45) + 1.6(0.75) = 1.74 k/ft


2
wu L
Mu = 1.74 352/8 = 266.4375 k-ft
8

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
bf 7 . 50
6 . 579
2t f 2 0 . 57

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

E 29000
p 0 . 38 0 . 38 9 . 152
Fy 50

p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


h 16.86
47.49
tw 0.355

E 29000
p 3 . 76 3 . 76 90 . 553
Fy 50

p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:


M p
F y Z 33 50 101 5050 k in

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:


Critical Lengths:
E 29000
L p 1.76 ry 1.76 1.652 70.022 in 5.835 ft
Fy 50

2
E Jc 0.7 F y S 33 ho
L r 1.95 rts 1 1 6.76
0.7 F y S 33 ho E Jc

2
29000 1.240 1.0 0.7 50 88.9 17.43
L r 1.95 1.98 1 1 6.76
0.7 50 88.9 17.43 29000 1.240 1.0

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

L r 16.966 ft

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:


For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification factor is
calculated using the following equation:

12 . 5 M
Cb max
R m 3 .0 Eqn. 1
2 .5 M max
3M A
4M B
3M C

Where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-span


moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum mid-span
moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
2
1 Lb
M A
M C 1
4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 5 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 5
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.995
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb
2.5 1.00 3 0.995 4 1.00 3 0.995

C b 1.002

Lb L p , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Mn M p
5050 k in

b M n 0.9 5050 / 12

b M n 378.75 k ft

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 11.667
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.972
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb
2.5 1.00 3 0.972 4 1.00 3 0.972

C b 1.014

L p Lb Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb L p
M C b M M 0 . 7 F y S 33 M
n p p
L L p
r p

11.667 5.835
M n 1.014 5050 5050 0.7 50 88.889 4088.733 k in
16.966 5.835

b M n 0.9 4088.733 / 12

b M n 306.657 k ft

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 35
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.750 .
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.750 4 1.00 3 0.750

C b 1.136

L b L r , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

2
C b E Lb
2
Jc
F cr 1 0 . 078
S 33 h o rts
2
Lb

r
ts
2
1.136 29000 1.24 1
2
420
Fcr 1 0.078 14.133 ksi
88.889 17.4 1.983
2
420

1.983

M n
F cr S 33 M p

M n 14.133 88.9 1256.245 k in

b M n 0.9 1256.245 / 12

b M n 94.218 k ft

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC 360-05 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
column shown below. An axial load of 70 kips (D) and 210 kips (L) is applied to
a simply supported column with a height of 15 ft.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression)
Warping constant calculation, Cw
Member compression capacity with slenderness reduction

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
Example E.2 AISC Design Examples, Volume 13.0 on the application of the 2005
AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-05).

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Slender Slender 0.00%

cPn (kips) 506.1 506.1 0.00 %

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-05 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi

Section: Built-Up Wide Flange


d = 17.0 in, bf = 8.00 in, tf = 1.00 in, h = 15.0 in, tw = 0.250 in.
Ignoring fillet welds:

A = 2(8.00)(1.00) + (15.0)(0.250) = 19.75 in2


3 3
2(1.0)(8.0) (15.0)(0.25)
Iy 85.35 in
3

12 12
Iy 85.4
ry 2.08 in.
A 19.8

Ix Ad I
2
x

3 3
(0.250)(15.0) 2(8.0)(1.0)
I x 2(8.0)(8.0) 1095.65 in
2 4

12 12
t t2 11
d ' d 1 17 16 in
2 2
2 2
Iy d ' (85.35)(16.0)
Cw 5462.583 in
4

4 4
2(8.0)(1.0) (15.0)(0.250)
3 3 3
bt
J 5.41 in
4

3 3
Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L = 15 ft

Loadings:

Pu = 1.2(70.0) + 1.6(210) = 420 kips

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification Section E7

Localized Buckling for Flange:


b 4.0
4.0
t 1.0
E 29000
p 0.38 0.38 9.152
Fy 50
p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


h 15.0
60.0 ,
t 0.250
E 29000
r 1.49 1.49 35.9
Fy 50
r , Localized web buckling

Web is Slender.
Section is Slender

Member Compression Capacity:


Elastic Flexural Buckling Stress
Since the unbraced length is the same for both axes, the y-y axis will govern by
inspection.

KL y 1 . 0 15 12
86 . 6
ry 2 . 08

E 29000
2 2

Fe = 38.18 ksi
KL
2
86 . 6 2

r

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress


Note: Torsional buckling will not govern if KLy > KLz, however, the check is included
here to illustrate the calculation.

2 EC w 1
Fe GJ
K z L Ix Iy
2

2 29000 5462.4 1
Fe 11200 5.41 = 91.8 ksi > 38.18 ksi
180 1100 85.4
2

Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.

Fe = 38.18 ksi

Section Reduction Factors

Since the flange is not slender,


Qs = 1.0

Since the web is slender,


For equation E7-17, take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0

E 29000 KLy
4.71 4.71 113 86.6
Q Fy 1.0 50 ry

So
Q Fy
1.0 50

f Fcr Q 0.658 e F y 1.0 0.658 38.2 50 28.9 ksi
F

E 0.34 E
be 1.92 t 1 b , w here b h
f b t f

29000 0.34 29000


be 1.92 0.250 1 15.0 in
28.9 15.0 0.250 28.9
be 12.5 in 15.0 in

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.


Aeff be t w 2 b f t f 12.5 0.250 2 8.0 1.0 19.1 in
2

where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.

Aeff 19.1
Qa 0.968
A 19.75
Q Q s Q a 1.00 0.968 0.968

Critical Buckling Stress


Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies

E 29000 KLy
4.71 4.71 115.4 86.6
Q Fy 0.966 50 ry

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

E KL
When 4.71
Q Fy r

Q Fy
1.0 50

Q 0.658 e F y 0.966 0.658 38.18 50 28.47 ksi
F
Fcr

Nominal Compressive Strength

Pn Fcr A g 28.5 19.75 562.3 kips


c 0.90
c Pn Fcr A g 0.90 562.3 506.1 kips > 420 kips
c Pn 506.1 kips

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC 360-10 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with a uniform load of 0.45 klf (D) and 0.75 klf (L). The flexural
moment capacity is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 5 ft, 11.667 ft and 35 ft.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties Loading Geometry


W18X50 w = 0.45 klf (D) Span, L = 35 ft
E = 29000 ksi w = 0.75 klf (L)
Fy = 50 ksi

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacities
Unsupported length factors

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example F.1-2a from the
AISC Design Examples, Volume 13 on the application of the 2005 AISC
Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-10).

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%

Cb ( L b =5ft) 1.004 1.002 0.20%

b M n ( L b =5ft) (k-ft) 378.750 378.750 0.00%

Cb ( L b =11.67ft) 1.015 1.014 0.10%

b M n ( L b =11.67ft) (k-ft) 307.124 306.657 0.15%

Cb ( L b =35ft) 1.138 1.136 0.18%

b M n ( L b =35ft) (k-ft) 94.377 94.218 0.17%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-10 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W18x50
bf = 7.5 in, tf = 0.57 in, d = 18 in, tw = 0.355 in
h d 2 t f 18 2 0.57 16.86 in

h0 d t f 18 0.57 17.43 in

S33 = 88.9 in3, Z33 = 101 in3


Iy =40.1 in4, ry = 1.652 in, Cw = 3045.644 in6, J = 1.240 in4

I yC w 40.1 3045.644
rts 1.98 in
S 33 88.889

R m 1 . 0 for doubly-symmetric sections

Other:
c = 1.0
L = 35 ft

Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(0.45) + 1.6(0.75) = 1.74 k/ft


2
wu L
Mu = 1.74 352/8 = 266.4375 k-ft
8

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
bf 7 . 50
6 . 579
2t f 2 0 . 57

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

E 29000
p 0 . 38 0 . 38 9 . 152
Fy 50

p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


h 16.86
47.49
tw 0.355

E 29000
p 3 . 76 3 . 76 90 . 553
Fy 50

p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:


M p
F y Z 33 50 101 5050 k-in

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:


Critical Lengths:
E 29000
L p 1.76 ry 1.76 1.652 70.022 in 5.835 ft
Fy 50

2
E Jc 0.7 F y S 33 ho
L r 1.95 rts 1 1 6.76
0.7 F y S 33 ho E Jc

2
29000 1.240 1.0 0.7 50 88.9 17.43
L r 1.95 1.98 1 1 6.76
0.7 50 88.9 17.43 29000 1.240 1.0

L r 16.966 ft

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:


For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification
factor is calculated using the following equation:
12 . 5 M
Cb max
R m 3 .0 Eqn. 1
2 .5 M max
3M A
4M B
3M C

where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-


span moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum
mid-span moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
2
1 Lb
M A
M C 1
4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 5 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 5
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.995
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb
2.5 1.00 3 0.995 4 1.00 3 0.995

C b 1.002

Lb L p , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Mn M p
5050 k-in

b M n 0.9 5050 / 12

b M n 378.75 k-ft

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 11.667
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.972
4 L 4 35

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

12.5 1.00
Cb
2.5 1.00 3 0.972 4 1.00 3 0.972

C b 1.014

L p Lb Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb L p
M C b M M 0 . 7 F y S 33 M
n p p
L L p
r p

11.667 5.835
M n 1.014 5050 5050 0.7 50 88.889 4088.733 k-in
16.966 5.835

b M n 0.9 4088.733 / 12

b M n 306.657 k-ft

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 35
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.750 .
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.750 4 1.00 3 0.750

C b 1.136

L b L r , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

2
C b E Lb
2
Jc
F cr 1 0 . 078
S 33 h o rts
2
Lb

r
ts
2
1.136 29000 1.24 1
2
420
Fcr 1 0.078 14.133 ksi
88.889 17.4 1.983
2
420

1.983

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

M n
F cr S 33 M p

M n 14.133 88.9 1256.245 k-in

b M n 0.9 1256.245 / 12

b M n 94.218 k-ft

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC 360-10 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
column shown below. An axial load of 70 kips (D) and 210 kips (L) is applied to
a simply supported column with a height of 15 ft.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression)
Warping constant calculation, Cw
Member compression capacity with slenderness reduction

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
Example E.2 AISC Design Examples, Volume 13.0 on the application of the 2005
AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-10).

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Slender Slender 0.00%

cPn (kips) 506.1 506.1 0.00 %

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-10 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi

Section: Built-Up Wide Flange


d = 17.0 in, bf = 8.00 in, tf = 1.00 in, h = 15.0 in, tw = 0.250 in.

Ignoring fillet welds:

A = 2(8.00)(1.00) + (15.0)(0.250) = 19.75 in2


3 3
2(1.0)(8.0) (15.0)(0.25)
Iy 85.35 in
3

12 12
Iy 85 . 4
ry 2 . 08 in .
A 19 . 8
Ix Ad I
2
x

3 3
(0.250)(15.0) 2(8.0)(1.0)
I x 2(8.0)(8.0) 1095.65 in
2 4

12 12
t1 t 2 11
d ' d 17 16 in
2 2
2 2
Iy d ' (85.35)(16.0)
Cw 5462.583 in
4

4 4
2 ( 8 . 0 )(1 . 0 ) (15 . 0 )( 0 . 250 )
3 3 3
bt
J 5 . 41 in
4

3 3
Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L = 15 ft

Loadings:
Pu = 1.2(70.0) + 1.6(210) = 420 kips

Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification Section E7

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Localized Buckling for Flange:


b 4.0
4.0
t 1.0
E 29000
p 0.38 0.38 9.152
Fy 50
p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


h 15.0
60.0 ,
t 0.250
E 29000
r 1.49 1.49 35.9
Fy 50
r , Localized web buckling

Web is Slender.
Section is Slender

Member Compression Capacity:


Elastic Flexural Buckling Stress
Since the unbraced length is the same for both axes, the y-y axis will govern by
inspection.

KL y 1 . 0 15 12
86 . 6
ry 2 . 08
E 29000
2 2

Fe = 38.18 ksi
86.6
2 2
KL

r

Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress


Note: Torsional buckling will not govern if KLy > KLz, however, the check is included
here to illustrate the calculation.

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 EC 1
Fe w
G J
K z L I x I y
2

2 29000 5462.4 1
Fe 11200 5.41 = 91.8 ksi > 38.18 ksi
180 1100 85.4
2

Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.

Fe = 38.18 ksi

Section Reduction Factors

Since the flange is not slender,


Qs = 1.0

Since the web is slender,


For equation E7-17, take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0

E 29000 KLy
4.71 4.71 113 86.6
Q Fy 1.0 50 ry

So
Q Fy
1.0 50

f Fcr Q 0.658 e F y 1.0 0.658 38.2 50 28.9 ksi
F

E 0.34 E
be 1.92 t 1 b , w here b h
f b t f

29000 0.34 29000


be 1.92 0.250 1 15.0 in
28.9 15.0 0.250 28.9
be 12.5 in 15.0 in

therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.


Aeff be t w 2 b f t f 12.5 0.250 2 8.0 1.0 19.1 in
2

where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Aeff 19.1
Qa 0.968
A 19.75
Q Q s Q a 1.00 0.968 0.968

Critical Buckling Stress


Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies

E 29000 KLy
4.71 4.71 115.4 86.6
Q Fy 0.966 50 ry

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

E KL
When 4.71
Q Fy r

Q Fy
1.0 50

Q 0.658 e F y 0.966 0.658 38.18 50 28.47 ksi
F
Fcr

Nominal Compressive Strength

Pn Fcr A g 28.5 19.75 562.3 kips


c 0.90
c Pn Fcr A g 0.90 562.3 506.1 kips > 420 kips

c Pn 506.1 kips

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC ASD-89 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The beam below is subjected to a bending moment of 20 kip-ft. The compression
flange is braced at 3.0 ft intervals. The selected member is non-compact due to
flange criteria.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties Loading Geometry


W6X12, M10X9, w = 1.0 klf Span, L = 12.65 ft
W8X10
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from Allowable Stress Design Manual of Steel
Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Page 2-6.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Non-Compact Non-Compact 0.00%

Design Bending Stress, fb 30.74 30.74 0.00%


(ksi)

Allowable Bending Stress, 32.70 32.70 0.00 %


Fb (ksi)

COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact match with the independent results.

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W8x10
bf = 3.94 in, tf = 0.205 in, d = 7.98 in, tw = 0.17 in
h h 2 t f 7.89 2 0.205 7.48 in

Member:
L = 12.65 ft
lb = 3 ft
Loadings:
w = 1.0 k/ft


2
wL
M = 1.0 12.652/8 = 20.0 k-ft
8
Design Bending Stress
f b M / S 33 20 12 / 7.8074

f b 30.74 ksi

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
bf 3.94
9.610
2t f 2 0.205

65 65
p 9.192
Fy 50

95 95
r 13 . 435
Fy 50

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

p , Localized flange buckling is present.

r ,

Flange is Non-Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


d 7.89
46.412
tw 0.17

P fa
No axial force is present, so f a 0 and 0 0.16, so
A Fy

640 fa 640 0
p 1 3.74 1 3.74 90.510
F y F y 50 50

p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.

Section is Non-Compact.

Section Bending Capacity


Allowable Bending Stress
Since section is Non-Compact
bf
Fb 33 0.79 0.002 Fy Fy
2t f


Fb 33 0.79 0.002 9.61
50 50

Fb 33 32.70 ksi

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 3.0 ft:


Critical Length, lc:
76 b 20 , 000 A f
f
l c min ,
F y dF y

76 3.94 20, 000 3.94 0.205


l c m in ,
50 7.89 50

l c m in 42.347, 40.948

l c 40.948 in

l 22 lb 3 12 36 in

l 22 l c , section capacity is as follows:

Fb 33 32.70 ksi

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC ASD-89 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The column design features for the AISC ASD-89 code are checked for the frame
shown below. This frame is presented in the Allowable Stress Design Manual of
Steel Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7. The
column K factors were overwritten to a value of 2.13 to match the example. The
transverse direction was assumed to be continuously supported. Two point loads
of 560 kips are applied at the tops of each column. The ratio of allow axial stress,
Fa, to the actual, fa, was checked and compared to the referenced design code.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression)
Member compression capacity

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from Allowable Stress Design Manual of Steel
Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%

Design Axial Stress, fa (ksi) 15.86 15.86 0.00%


Allowable Axial Stress, 16.47 16.47 0.00%
Fa (ksi)

COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: A36 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 36 ksi
Section: W12x120:
bf = 12.32 in, tf = 1.105 in, d =13.12 in, tw=0.71 in
A = 35.3 in2
rx=5.5056 in
Member:
K = 2.13
L = 15 ft
Loadings:
P = 560 kips
Design Axial Stress:
P 560
fa
A 35.3

f a 15.86 ksi

Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
bf 12.32
5.575
2t f 2 1.105

65 65
p 10.83
Fy 36

p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Localized Buckling for Web:


fa 15.86
0.44
Fy 36

d 13.12
18.48
tw 0.71

fa
Since 0.44 0.16
Fy

257 257
p 42.83
Fy 36

p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.

Section is Compact.

Member Compression Capacity


KL x 2 . 13 15 12
69 . 638
rx 5 . 5056

2 E 2 29000
2 2

Cc 126.099
Fy 36

KL x

rx 69 . 638
0 . 552
Cc 126 . 099

KL x
Cc
rx

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

1 KL x r x
2

1 . 0
Fy
2 Cc
Fa 3
5 3 KL x r x 1 KL x r x

8 C


3 8 Cc c

1 2
1 . 0 0 . 552 36
2
Fa
5 3 1
0 . 552 0 . 552
3

3 8 8

Fa 16.47 ksi

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with an ultimate uniform load of 1.6 klf. The flexural moment capacity
is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction, Lb = 4.375 ft,
11.667 ft and 35 ft.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties Loading Geometry


W18X40 wu = 1.6 klf Span, L = 35 ft
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity
Unsupported length factors

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example 5.1 in the 2nd
Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, pages 5-12 to 5-15.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%

Cb ( L b =4.375ft) 1.003 1.002 0.10%

b M n ( L b =4.375 ft) (k-ft) 294.000 294.000 0.00%

Cb ( L b =11.67 ft) 1.015 1.014 0.10%

b M n ( L b = 11.67ft) (k-ft) 213.0319 212.703 0.15%

Cb ( L b = 35ft) 1.138 1.136 0.18%

b M n ( L b = 35ft) (k-ft) 50.6845 50.599 0.17%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-93 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Fr = 10 ksi (for rolled shapes)
F L F y Fr 50 10 40 ksi

Section: W18x40
bf = 6.02 in, tf = 0.525 in, d = 17.9 in, tw = 0.315 in
hc d 2 t f 17.9 2 0.525 16.85 in

A = 11.8 in2
S33 = 68.3799 in3, Z33 = 78.4 in3
Iy = 19.1 in4, ry = 1.2723 in
Cw = 1441.528 in6, J = 0.81 in4
Other:
L = 35 ft
b = 0.9

Loadings:
wu = 1.6 k/ft


2
wu L
Mu = 1.6 352/8 = 245.0 k-ft
8

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
bf 6.02
5.733
2t f 2 0.525

65 65
p 9.192
Fy 50

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


hc 16.85
53.492
tw 0.315

640 640
p 90.510
Fy 50

p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity


M p
F y Z 33 50 78.4 3920 k-in

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:


Critical Lengths:
E G JA 29000 11153.85 0.81 11.8
X1 1806 ksi
S 33 2 68.3799 2
2 2
C S 1441.528 68.3799
X 2 4 w 33 4 0.0173 in
4

I 22 G J 19.1 11153.85 0.81

300 r22 300 1.2723


Lp 53.979 in 4.498 ft
Fy 50

X1
L r r2 2 1 1 X 2 FL
2

FL

1.27 1810
Lr 1 1 0.0172 40 144.8 in 12.069 ft
2

40

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:


For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification
factor is calculated using the following equation:
12 . 5 M
Cb max
R m 3 .0 Eqn. 1
2 .5 M max
3M A
4M B
3M C

where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-


span moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum
mid-span moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
2
1 Lb
M A
M C 1
4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4.375 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 4.375
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.996
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb
2.5 1.00 3 0.996 4 1.00 3 0.996

C b 1.002

Lb L p , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Mn M p
F y Z 33 50 78.4 3920 1.5 S 33 F y 1.5 68.3799 50 5128.493 k-in
b M n 0.9 3920 / 12

b M n 294.0 k-ft

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 11.667
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.972
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb
2.5 1.00 3 0.972 4 1.00 3 0.972

C b 1.014

L p Lb Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb L p
M n Cb M M F L S 33 M
p p
L L p
r p

11.667 4.486
M n 1.01 3920 3920 40 68.4 2836.042 k-in
12.06 4.486

b M n 0.9 2836.042 / 12

b M n 212.7031 k-ft

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:


M m ax M B 1.00
2 2
1L 1 35
M A
MC 1 b 1 0.750 .
4 L 4 35

12.5 1.00
Cb 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.750 4 1.00 3 0.750

C b 1.136

L b L r , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

M n
F cr S 33 M p

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2
Cb E
M cr E I 22 G J I 22 C W
Lb Lb

2
1.136 29000
M cr 29000 19.1 11153.85 0.81 19.1 1441.528
35 12 35 12

M n M cr 674.655 k-in

b M n 0.9 674.655 / 12

b M n 50.599 k-ft

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BIAXIAL BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A check of the column adequacy is checked for combined axial compression and
flexural loads. The column is 14 feet tall and loaded with an axial load,
Pu 1400 kips and bending, M u x , M u y = 200k-ft and 70k-ft, respectively. It is
assumed that there is reverse-curvature bending with equal end moments about
both axes and no loads along the member. The column demand/capacity ratio is
checked against the results of Example 6.2 in the 3 rd Edition, LRFD Manual of
Steel Construction, pages 6-6 to 6-8.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties Loading Geometry


W14X176 Pu = 1,400 kips H = 14.0 ft
E = 29000 ksi Mux = 200 kip-ft
Fy = 50 ksi Muy = 70 kip-ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity
Demand/capacity ratio, D/C

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
Example 6.2 in the 3rd Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, pages 6-6 to
6-8.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%

c Pn (kips) 1937.84 1937.84 0.00%

b M nx (k-ft) 1200 1200 0.00%

b M n y (k-ft) 600.478 600.478 0.00%

D/C 0.974 0.974 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-93 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A992 Grade 50 Steel
Fy = 50 ksi, E = 29,000 ksi

Section: W14x176
A = 51.8 in2,
bf = 15.7 in, tf = 1.31 in, d = 15.2 in, tw = 0.83 in
hc d 2 t f 15.2 2 1.31 12.58 in
Ix = 2,140 in4, Iy = 838 in4, rx = 6.4275 in, ry = 4.0221 in
Sx = 281.579 in3, Sy = 106.7516 in3, Zx = 320.0 in3 , Zy = 163.0 in3.

Member:
Kx = Ky = 1.0
L = Lb = 14 ft

Other
c 0.85
b 0.9

Loadings:
Pu = 1400 kips
Mux = 200 k-ft
Muy = 70 k-ft

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
b f
/ 2 15.7 / 2
5.99
tf 1.31
65 65
p 9.19
Fy 50
p, No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Localized Buckling for Web:


hc 12.58
15.16
tw 0.83
b Py b A g F y 0.9 51.8 50 2331 kips
Pu 1400
0.601
b Py 2331

Pu
Since 0.601 0.125
b Py

191 Pu 253
p 2.33
F y b Py
Fy
191 253
p 2.33 0.601 46.714 35.780
50 50
p,
No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.

Section is Compact.

Member Compression Capacity:

For braced frames, K = 1.0 and KxLx = KyLy = 14.0 ft, From AISC Table 4-2,

c Pn 1940 kips

Or by hand,

K yL Fy 1.0 14 12 50
c 0.552
ry E 4.022 29000

Since c 1.5,

c
50 0.658
2 2

Fcr F y 0.658 44.012 ksi


0.552

c Pn c Fcr A g 0.85 44.012 51.8


c Pn 1937.84 kips

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

From LRFD Specification Section H1.2,

Pu 1400
0 .7 2 2 0 .2
c Pn 1 9 3 7 .8 4

Therefore, LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a governs.

Section Bending Capacity


50 310
M px
Fy Z x 1333.333 k-ft
12
M py
Fy Z y
Zy 163
However, 1.527 1.5,
Sy 106.7516
So
Z y 1.5 S y 1.5 106.7516 160.1274 in
3

50 160.1274
M py
667.198 k-ft
12

Member Bending Capacity

From LRFD Specification Equation F1-4,

E
L p 1 . 76 r y
F yf

29000
L p 1.76 4.02 1 14.2 ft L b 14 ft
50 12

b M nx b M px

b M nx 0.9 1333.333
b M nx 1200 k-ft

b M ny b M py

b M ny 0.9 667.198
b M ny 600.478 k-ft

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending

From LRFD Specification section C1.2, for a braced frame, Mlt = 0.

M ux
B1 x M ntx
, where M ntx 200 kip-ft; and
M uy B 1 y M nty
, where M nty
70 kip-ft

Cm
B1 1
P
1 u
Pe 1

For reverse curvature bending and equal end moments:

M1
1 .0
M 2

M
C m 0 . 6 0 . 4 1

M2
C m 0 . 6 0 . 4 1 . 0 0 . 2
EI
2

p e1
KL
2

29000 2140
2

p e1 x 21, 702 kips


14.0 12
2

29000 838
2

p e1 y 8, 498
14.0 12
2

C mx
B1 x 1
P
1 u

Pe 1 x
0.2
B1 x 0.214 1
1400
1
21702

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

B1 x 1
C my
B1 y 1
P
1 u
Pe1 y

0.2
B1 y 0.239 1
1400
1
8498
B1 y 1

M ux
1 . 0 200 200 kip-ft;
and
M uy 1 . 0 70 70 kip-ft

From LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a,

1400 8 200 70
0.974 1.0 , OK
1940 9 1200 600.478
D
0.974
C

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AS 4100-1998 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 200 kN. This example


was tested using the AS4100-1998 steel frame design code. The design capacities
are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L
A A

Section A-A

L=6m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa N = 200 kN fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Section: 350WC197
G = 76923.08 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression)
Section compression capacity
Member compression capacity

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
also available through the program Help menu.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%


Section Axial Capacity,
6275 6275 0.00%
Ns (kN)
4385 4385 0.00%
Member Axial Capacity,
Nc (kN)

COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
r33 = 139.15 mm, r22 = 89.264 mm
Member:
le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame

Loadings:
N * 200 kN

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
(b f t w ) fy 350 20 250
e 5.89
2tf 250 2 28 250

Flange is under uniform compression, so:


ep 9, ey 16, ew 90

e 5 .8 9 ep 9 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is compact

Localized Buckling for Web:

h fy 331 250
e 16.55
tw 250 20 250

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Web is under uniform compression, so:


ep 30, ey 45, ew 180

e 16.55 ep 30 , No localized web buckling

Web is compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Compression Capacity:


Section is not Slender, so Kf = 1.0
N s K f An f y 1 25,100 250 / 10
3

N s 6275kN

Member Weak-Axis Compression Capacity:


Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 22 k e 33 1
le 22 6000 le 33 6000
67.216 and 43.119
r2 2 89.264 r3 3 139.15

Buckling will occur on the 22-axis.

l e 22 K f fy 6000 1 250
n 22 67.216
r22 250 89.264 250

2 1 0 0 ( n 2 2 1 3 .5)
a 22 2 0 .3 6 3
n 2 2 1 5 .3 n 2 2 2 0 5 0
2

b 22 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

22 n 22 a 22 b 22 67.216 20.363 0.5 77.398

22 0.00326( 22 13.5) 0.2083 0

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 2
22 77.398
1 22 1 0.2083
90 90
22 2
2
1.317
77.398
2 22 2
90 90


90
2

1 1
c 22 22

2 2 2 2

2

90
c 22 1.317 1 1 0.6988
1.317 77.398

N c 22 c 22 N s N s

N c 22 0.6988 6275 4385 kN

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AS 4100-1998 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object bending strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored moment Mx = 1000 kN-m. This


example was tested using the AS 4100-1998 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx

L
A A

Section A-A

L=6m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa Mx = 1000 kN-m fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Section: 350WC197
G = 76923.08 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Member bending capacity

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
also available through the program Help menu.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%


Section Bending Capacity,
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Ms,major (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Member Bending Capacity,
Mb (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
Z33 = 2,936,555.891 mm2
S33 = 3,350,000 mm2
J = 5,750,000 mm4
Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6
Member:
le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
M m * 1000 kN -m

This leads to:


M 2 * 250 kN -m

M 3 * 500 kN -m

M 4 * 750 kN -m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
(b f t w ) fy 350 20 250
e 5.89
2tf 250 2 28 250

Flange is under uniform compression, so:


ep 9, ey 16, ew 90

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

e 5.89 ep 9 , No localized flange buckling


Flange is compact

Localized Buckling for Web:

h fy 331 250
e 16.55
tw 250 20 250

Web is under bending, so:


ep 82, ey 115, ew 180

e 16.55 ep 30 , No localized web buckling


Web is compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:


Z e Z c min( S ,1.5 Z ) for compact sections

Z e 33 Z c 33 3, 350, 000 m m
2

M s 33 M s ,m ajor f y Z e 33 250 3, 350, 000 / 1000


2

M s 33 M s ,m ajor 837.5 kN -m

Member Bending Capacity:


kt = 1 (Program default)

kl = 1.4 (Program default)

kr = 1 (Program default)

lLTB = le22 = 6000 mm

l e k t k l k r l L T B 1 1.4 1 6000 8400 m m


2

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 EI EIw
2

M oa M o 2
22
G J 2
le le

2 2 10 5 2 10 8 2 10 4.59 10
2 5 12

M oa M o 2 76, 923.08 5, 750, 000 2
8, 400 8, 400

M oa M o 1786.938 kN -m

M 2
837.5 2
s 0.6 0.6
Ms 837.5
s
3 3
M oa M oa 1786.938 1786.938


s 0.7954

1.7 M m *
m 2.5
M 2 * M 3 * M 4 *
2 2 2

1.7 1000
m 1.817 2.5
250 500 750
2 2 2

M b m s M s 0.7954 1.817 837.5 M s

M b 1210.64 kN -m 837.5 kN -m

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AS 4100-1998 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object interacting axial and bending strengths are tested in this
example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N = 200 kN;


Mx = 1000 kN-m. This example was tested using the AS4100-1998 steel frame
design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand
calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx
N

L
A A

Section A-A

L=6m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa N = 200 kN fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Mx = 1000 kN-m Section: 350WC197
G = 76923.08 MPa

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending, compression)
Section bending capacity with compression reduction
Member bending capacity with in-plane compression reduction
Member bending capacity with out-of-plane compression reduction

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%


Reduced Section Bending Capacity,
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Mr33 (kN-m)
Reduced In-Plane Member Bending
Capacity, 823.1 823.1 0.00%
Mi33 (kN-m)
Reduced Out-of-Plane Member 837.5 837.5 0.00%
Bending Capacity, Mo (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
I33 = 486,000,000 mm4
J = 5,750,000 mm4
Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6

Member:
lz=le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
=0.9

Loadings:
N * 200 kN

M m * 1000 kN m

Section Compactness:
From example SFD IN-01-1, section is Compact in Compression
From example SFD IN-01-2, section is Compact in Bending
Section Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, N s 6275kN
Member Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, N c 22 4385 kN
Section Bending Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-2, M s 33 M s , m ajor 837.5 kN -m

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Interaction: Bending & Compression Capacity:


N* 200
M r 33 1.18 M s 33 1 1.18 837.5 1 M s 33 837.5
N s 0.9 6275

M r 33 953.252 837.5

M r 33 837.5kN -m

Member Strong-Axis Compression Capacity:


Strong-axis buckling strength needs to be calculated:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 33 1
le 3 3 6000
43.119
r3 3 139.15

l e 33 K f fy 6000 1 250
n 33 43.119
r33 250 139.15 250

2100( n 3 3 13.5)
a 33 19.141
n 3 3 15.3 n 3 3 2050
2

b 33 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

33 n 33 a 33 b 33 43.119 19.141 0.5 52.690

33 0.00326( 33 13.5) 0.1278 0


2 2
33 52.690
1 33 1 0.1278
90 90
33 2
2
2.145
52.690
2 33 2
90 90

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


90
2

c 33 33 1 1
33 33



2
90
c 33 2.145 1 1 0.8474
2.145 50.690

N c 33 c 33 N s N s

N c 33 0.8474 6275
N c 33 5318 kN

Member Interaction: In-Plane Bending and Compression Capacity:


M m in 0
m 0
M m ax 1000

Since the section is compact,


1 m
3
N* 1 m
3
N*
M i M s 33 1 1 1.18 1
2 N c 33 2 N c 33

1 0
3
200 1 0
3
200
M i 837.5 1 1 1.18 1
2 0.9 5318 2 0.9 5318

M i 823.11 kN -m

Member Interaction: Out-of-Plane Bending and Compression Capacity:


1
bc
1 1 m
3
N *

m
0 .4 0 .2 3
2 2 N c 2 2

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

1
bc
1 0 1 0 3
200
0.4 0.23
2 2 0.9 4385

bc 4.120

EIw
2
2 10 4.59 10
2 6 12

2
lz 6000
2
N oz G J 76923.08 5.75 10
6

I 33 I 22 4.86 2 10 8
Ag 25100

N oz 4.423 10
11
kN

M b 33 o m s M sx w/ an assumed uniform moment such that m =1.0


M b 33 o 1.0 0.7954 837.5 666.145 kN -m

N * N*
M o 33 bc M b 33 o 1 1 M r 33
N c 22
N oz

200 200
M o 33 4.12 666.145 1 1 11
2674 837.5
0.9 4385 0.9 4.423 10
M o 33 837.5 kN -m

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

BS 5950-2000 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example.

A simply supported beam is laterally restrained along its full length and is
subjected to a uniform factored load of 69 kN/m and a factored point load at the
mid-span of 136 kN. This example was tested using the BS 5950-2000 steel
frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L=6.5 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 205000 MPa W = 69 kN/m Ys = 275 MPa
v = 0.3 P = 136 kN Section: UB533x210x92
G = 78846.15 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Section shear capacity

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated based on the methods in Example 2 on


page 5 of the SCI Publication P326, Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950-1:2000
Volume 2: Worked Examples by M.D. Heywood & J.B. Lim.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%


Design Moment,
585.4 585.4 0.00%
M33 (kN-m)
Design Shear, Fv (kN) 292.25 292.25 0.00%
Moment Capacity,
649.0 649 0.00%
Mc (kN-m)
Shear Capacity, Pv (kN) 888.4 888.4 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-2000 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
E = 205000 MPa
Ys = 275 MPa
y 1.0 Y s 275 M P a

Section: UB533x210x92
Ag = 11,700 mm2
D = 533.1 mm, b = 104.65 mm
t = 10.1 mm, T = 15.6 mm
d D 2 t 533.1 2 10.1 501.9 mm

Z33 = 2,072,031.5 mm3


S33 = 2,360,000 mm3

Loadings:
Paxial = 0
wu = (1.4wd + 1.6wl) = 1.4(15) + 1.6(30) = 69 kN/m
Pu = (1.4Pd + 1.6Pl) = 1.4(40) + 1.6(50) = 136 kN
69 6.5 136 6.5
2 2
wu l Pu l
Mu
8 4 8 4

M u 585.4 kN -m

w u l Pu 69 6.5 136
Fv
2 2

Fv 292.25 kN

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compactness:
P
r1 0 (since there is no axial force)
dt y

P
r2 0 (since there is no axial force)
Ag y

275 275
1
y 275

Localized Buckling for Flange:


b 104.65
6.71
T 15.6

ep 9 9

6.71 p 9 , No localized flange buckling


Flange is Class 1.

Localized Buckling for Web:


d 501.9
49.69
t 10.1
Since r1 = r2 = 0 and there is no axial compression:
p 80 80

49.69 p 80 , No localized web buckling


Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 1.

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Shear Capacity:


Av 2 D t 533.1 10.1 5, 384.31 m m
2

Pv 2 0.6 y Av 2 0.6 275 5384.31

Pv 2 888.4 kN

Section Bending Capacity:


With Shear Reduction:
0.6 Pv 2 533 kN Fv 292.3 kN

So no shear reduction is needed in calculating the bending capacity.


M c y S 33 1.2 y Z 33 275 2, 360, 000 1.2 275 2, 072, 031.5

M c 649 kN -m 683.77 kN -m

M c 649 kN -m

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

BS 5950-2000 Example 002

SQUARE TUBE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N = 640 kN;


Mx = 10.5 kN-m; My = 0.66 kN-m. The moment on the column is caused by
eccentric beam connections. This example was tested using the BS 5950-2000
steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent
hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx
My

H
A A

Section A-A
H=5m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 205000 MPa N = 640 kN Ys = 355 MPa
v = 0.3 Mx = 10.5 kN-m
G = 78846.15 MPa My = 0.66 kN-m
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Section bending capacity

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from Example 15 on page 83 of the SCI Publication
P326, Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked Examples
by M.D. Heywood & J.B. Lim.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%


Axial Capacity,
773.2 773.2 0.00%
Nc (kN)
Bending Capacity, 68.3 68.3 0.00%
Mc (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-2000 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
E = 205000 MPa
G = 78846.15 MPa
Ys = 355 MPa
y = 1.0 Ys = 355 MPa
Section: RHS 150x150x6.3:
Ag = 3580 mm2
D = B = 150 mm, T=t = 6.3 mm
b = B 3 t = d = D 3 T = 150 2 6.3 = 131.1mm
r33 = 58.4483 mm
Z33 = 163,066.7 mm3
S33 = 192,301.5 mm3

Loadings:
N = 640 kN
Mx = 10.5 kN-m
My = 0.66 kN-m
Fv33 = Mx/H = 10.5 / 5 = 2.1 kN

Section Compactness:
P 640
=r1 = = 0.002183
dt y 131 6.3 355

275 275
= = = 0.880
y 355

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Localized Buckling for Flange:


b 131.1
= = = 20.81
T 6.3
d 131.1
p= 28 < 80 = 28 0.880 < 80 0.880
t 6.3
=
p 24.6 < 49.6

= 20.81 <=
p 24.6 , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:


d 131.1
= = = 20.81 :
t 6.3
64 64 0.88
=
p < 40
= < 40 0.88
= 56.3 > 35.2
1 + 0.6r1 1 + 0.6 0.002183
So p =35.2

= 20.81 <=
p 35.2 , No localized web buckling
Web is compact.

Section is Compact.

Member Compression Capacity:


l K l 1.0 5000
22 = 33 =e 33 = 33 33 = =85.546
r33 r33 58.4483

= max { 22 , =
33 } 85.546

2 E 2 205000
= o 0.2= 0.2 = 15.1
y 355

Robertson Constant: a = 2.0 (from Table VIII-3 for Rolled Box Section in CSI
code documentation)
=
Perry Factor: 0.001a ( =
0 ) 0.001 2 ( 85.546 15.1
= ) 0.141

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 E 2 205000
Euler Strength: = = = 276.5 MPa
2
E
85.5462
y + ( + 1) E 355 + ( 0.141 + 1) 276.5
= = = 355.215 MPa
2 2
E y 276.5 355
=c = = 215.967 MPa
+ 2 E y 335.215 + 335.2152 276.5 355

= g c
N c A= 3580 215.967

N c = 773.2 kN

Section Shear Capacity:


y = 1.0 Ys = 275 MPa

D 150
Av =
Ag =3580 =1790 mm 2
D + B 150 + 150
Pv = 0.6 y Av 2 = 0.6 355 1790

Pv = 381.3kN

Section Bending Capacity:


With Shear Reduction
0.6=
Pv 228.8 kN=
> Fv 2.1kN
So no shear reduction is needed in calculating the bending capacity.
Mc =
y S33 1.2 y Z 33 =
355 192,301.5 1.2 355 163, 066.7

=M c 68.3kN-m 69.5 kN-m

M c = 68.3kN-m

With LTB Reduction


Not considered since the section is square.

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CSA S16-09 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example.

A simply supported beam is (a) laterally restrained along its full length, (b)
laterally restrained along its quarter points, at mid-span, and at the ends (c)
laterally restrained along mid-span, and is subjected to a uniform factored load of
DL = 7 kN/m and LL = 15 kN/m. This example was tested using the CSA S16-
09 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
Handbook of Steel construction (9th Edition) results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L = 8.0 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E= 2x108 kN/m2 WD = 7 kN/m ASTM A992
Fy = 350 kN/m2 WL = 15 kN/m CSA G40.21 350W
W410X46
W410X60
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity, Mr (fully restrained)
Member bending capacity, Mr (buckling)
Member bending capacity, Mr (LTB)

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULT COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from Examples 1, 2 and 3 on pages 5-84 and 5-85
of the Hand Book of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by Canadian
Institute of Steel Construction.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%

Design Moment, Mf (kN-m) 250.0 250.0 0.00%

(a) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of 278.775 278.775 0.00%


W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 0 m

(b) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of 268.97 268.83 0.05%


W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 2 m

(c) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of 292.10 292.05 0.02%


W410X60 (kN-m) w/ lb = 4 m

COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-09 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: CSA G40.21 Grade 350W
fy = 350 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923 MPa
Section: W410x46
bf = 140 mm, tf = 11.2 mm, d = 404 mm, tw = 7 mm
h d 2 t f 404 2 11.2 381.6 m m

Ag = 5890 mm2
I22 = 5,140,000 mm4
Z33 = 885,000 mm3
J = 192,000 mm4
C w 1.976 10 m m
11 6

Section: W410x60
bf = 178 mm, tf = 12.8 mm, d = 408 mm, tw = 7.7 mm
h d 2 t f 408 2 12.8 382.4 m m

Ag = 7580 mm2
I22 = 12,000,000 mm4
Z33= 1,190,000 mm3
J = 328,000 mm4
C w 4.698 10 m m
11 6

Member:
L=8m
= 0.9

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Loadings:
wf = (1.25wd + 1.5wl) = 1.25(7) + 1.5(15) = 31.25 kN/m
2
31.25 8
2
wf L
M f

8 8

M f
250 kN -m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
145 145
C l .1 7.75
Fy 350

W410x46
bf 140
6.25
2t f 2 11.2

C l .1 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Class 1.
W410x60
bf 178
6.95
2t f 2 12.8

C l .1 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Class 1.

Localized Buckling for Web:

1100 C f 1100 0
C l .1 1 0.39 1 0.39 58.8

Fy Cy 350 5890 350

W410x46
h 381.6
54.51
tw 7

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

C l .1 , No localized web buckling

Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 1

W410x60
h 382.4
49.66
tw 7.7

C l .1 , No localized web buckling

Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 1

Calculation of 2:
2 is calculated from the moment profile so is independent of cross section and is
calculated as:
4 M m ax
2
M m ax 4 M a 7 M b 4 M c
2 2 2 2

where: Mmax = maximum moment


Ma = moment at unrestrained span
Mb = moment at unrestrained span
Mc = moment at unrestrained span

Section Bending Capacity for W410x46:


F y Z 33 350 885 , 000 / 10 309 . 75 kN-m
6
M p

M p
0.9 309.75 278.775 kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 0 mm (Fully Restrained):


Lb = 0, so Mmax = Ma = Mb = Mc = Mu = 250 kN-m and 2 = 1.000

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2
2 E
Mu E I 22 G J I 22 C w as L 0
L L

M p 33
M r 33 1.15 M p 33 1 0.28 M p 33
Mu

M
0 as M u
p 33
0.28
Mu

leading to M r 33 1.15 M p 33
M p 33

So

M r 33 M p 33
278.775 kN -m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 2000 mm:


L Lb Lb 82 2
M a @ xa 3.5 m
2 4 2 4

f L xa f xa
2
31.25 8 3.5 31.25 3.5
2

Ma 246.094 kN -m
2 2 2 2

Ma = Mc = 246.094 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm


Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm

4 250
2 1.008
250 4 246.094 7 250 4 246.094
2 2 2 2

2 = 1.008

2
2 E
Mu E I 22 G J I 22 C w
L L

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 10 5.14 10 76923 192 10


5 6 3

1.008

2
Mu 2 10 5
2000
2000
5.14 10 197.6 10
6 9

M u 537.82 10
6
N-mm = 537.82 kN-m

0.67 M p
0.67 309.75 208 M u 537.82 kN -m , so

M p 33
M r 33 1.15 M p 33 1 0.28 M p 33
Mu

309.75
M r 3 3 1.15 0.9 309.75 1 0.28 268.89 kN -m 278.775 kN -m
537.82

M r 33 268.89 kN -m

Section Capacity for W410x60:


F y Z 33 350 1190 , 000 / 10 416 . 5 kN-m
6
M p

M p
0.9 416.5 374.85 kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4000 m:


L Lb Lb 84 4
M a @ xa 3m
2 4 2 4

f L xa f xa
2
31.25 8 3 31.25 3
2

Ma 234.375 kN -m
2 2 2 2

Ma = Mc = 234.375 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm


Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm
4 250
2 1.032
250 4 234.375 7 250 4 234.375
2 2 2 2

2 = 1.032

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2
2 E
Mu E I 22 G J I 22 C w
Ly L

2 10 12 10 76923 328 10
5 6 3

1.032

2
Mu 2 10 5
4000
4000
12 10 469.8 10
6 9

M u 362.06 10
6
N-mm = 362.06 kN-m

0.67 M p
0.67 309.75 279 M u 362.06 kN -m , so

M p 33
M r 33 1.15 M p 33 1 0.28 M p 33
Mu

416.5
M r 3 3 1.15 0.9 416.5 1 0.28
362.06

M r 33 292.23 kN -m

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 8


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CSA S16-09 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments Cf = 2000 kN;


Mfx-top= 200 kN-m; Mfx-bottom= 300 kN-m. This example was tested using the CSA
S16-09 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with
Handbook of Steel Construction (9th Edition) results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


2000 kN

Mxf = 200 kN-m

A A
3.7 m

W310x118
Mxf = 300 kN-m
Section A-A

Material Properties Loading Design Properties

E= 200,000 MPa Cf = 2000 kN fy = 345 MPa


= 0.3 Mfx-top = 200 kN-m
G= 76,923.08 MPa Mfx-bottom = 300 kN-m

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity with no mid-span loading

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from Example 1 on page 4-114 of the Hand Book
of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by the Canadian Institute of Steel
Construction.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%

Axial Capacity, Cr (kN) 3849.5 3849.5 0.00%

Bending Capacity, Mr33 605.5 605.5 0.00%


(kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-09 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 345 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923.08 MPa
Section: W310x118
Ag = 15000 mm2
r33 = 135.4006 mm, r22 = 77.5457 mm
I22 = 90,200,000 mm4
Z33 = 1,950,000 mm3
J = 1,600,000 mm4
C w 1.966 10
12 6
mm

ro x o y o r22 r33 0 0 77.5457 135.4006


2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

ro 24346.658 m m
2 2

Member:
lz= le33 = le22 = 3700 mm (unbraced length)
kz=k33 = k22 =1.0
0.9

Loadings:
C f 2000 kN

Ma M xf , top
200 kN -m

Mb M xf , bottom
300 kN -m

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
145 145
C l .1 7.81
Fy 345

170 170
C l .2 9.15
Fy 345

bf 307
8.21
2t f 2 18.7

C l .1 C l .2 ,

Flange is Class 2.

Localized Buckling for Web:


345 15000
C y f y Ag 5175 kN
1000

1100 C f 1100 2000


C l .1 1 0.39 1 0.39 50.30

Fy Cy 345 5175

h 276.6
23.24
tw 11.9

C l .1 ,

Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 2

Member Compression Capacity:


Flexural Buckling
n = 1.34 (wide flange section)

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

k 22 l 22 fy 1.0 3700 345


m ax( 22 , 33 ) 22 0.6308
r22 E 77.5457 200000
1 1

C r Ag F y 1 2n
n
0.9 15000 345 1 0.6308 2 1.34
1.34

C r 3489.5 kN

Torsional & Lateral-Torsional Buckling


E 2 10
2 2 5

Fex 2
2
2643 M P a
k 33 l33 1 3700

r33 135.4006

E 2 10
2 2 5

Fey 2
2
867 M P a
k 22 l 22 1 3700

r22 77.5457

2 EC 1
Fez w
GJ
k l 2 A g ro 2
z z
2 2 10 5 1.966 10 12 1
Fez 76923.08 1.6 10
6

1 3700
2
15000 24347

FeZ 1113.222 M Pa

Fe m in Fex , Fey , Fez Fey 867 M P a

1 1

C r A g Fe 1 2n
n
0.9 15000 867 1 0.6308 2 1.34
1.34

C r 9674.5 kN (does not govern)

Section Bending Capacity:


M p 33
Z 33 F y 1, 950, 000 345 672.75 kN -m

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Bending Capacity:


2
M M
2 1.75 1.05 a 0.3 a 2.5
Mb Mb

2
200 200
2 1.75 1.05 0.3 2.583 2.5
300 300

So 2 2.5

2
2 E
Mu E I 22 G J I 22 C w
l 22 l 22
2
2.5 2 10 5
Mu 2 10 9.02 10 76923.08 1.6 10 9.02 10 1.966 10
5 7 6 7 12

3700 3700

M u 3163.117 kN -m

Since M u 0.67 M p 33

M p 33
M r 33 1.15 M p 33 1 0.28 M p 33
Mu

672.75
M r 3 3 1.15 0.9 672.75 1 0.28 0.9 672.75
3163.117

M r 33 654.830 605.475

M r 33 605.5 kN -m

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EN 3-2005 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example considering in-plane
behavior only.

A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 210 kN and My,Ed = 43


kN-m. This example was tested using the Eurocode 3-2005 steel frame design
code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

NEd
My,Ed

L
A A

Section A-A

L = 3.5 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 210x103 MPa N = 210 kN fy = 235 MPa
v = 0.3 My,Ed = 43 kN-m Section: IPE 200
G = 80770 MPa
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (beam-column)
Member interaction capacities, D/C, Method 1

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. This example was taken from "New
design rules in EN 1993-1-1 for member stability," Worked example 1 in section
5.2.1, page 151.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%

D/CAxial 0.334 0.334 0.00%

D/CBending 0.649 0.646 0.46%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S235
fy = 235 MPa
E = 210,000 MPa
G = 80,770 MPa
Section: IPE 200
A = 2848 mm2
h = 200 mm, bf = 100 mm, tf = 8.5 mm, tw = 5.6 mm, r = 12 mm
h w h 2 t f 200 2 85 183 m m

b f tw 2r 100 5.6 2 12
c 35.2 m m
2 2
Iyy = 19,430,000 mm4
Wel,y = 194,300 mm3
Wpl,y = 220,600 mm3
Member:
Lyy = Lzz = 3,500 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 1

M1 1

y = 0.21

Loadings:
N Ed 210, 000 N

M E d , y , Left
0 N -m

M E d , y , R ight
43000 N -m

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compactness:
235 235
1
fy 235

1 N Ed
1 1 1
2 2 ht w f y

1 210, 000
1 0.6737
2 2 200 5.6 235

Localized Buckling for Flange:


For the tip in compression under combined bending and compression
9 9 1
cl .1 13.36
0.6737
c 35.2
e 4.14
tf 8.5

e 4.14 cl .1 13.36

So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:


0.5, so

396 396 1
cl .1 51.05 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 0.6737 1
d 183
e 2 8 .3 9
tw 5 .6

e 32.68 cl .1 51.05

So Web is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Since Flange and Web are Class 1, Section is Class 1.

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compression Capacity:


3
N c , Rk Af y 2.848 10 235 10 669 kN
6

Member Compression Capacity:


6
E I 22 210000 10 19.43 10
2 2 6

N cr ,22 2
2
3287 kN
L 3.5

Section Bending Capacity:


6
W pl , y f y 220.6 10 235 10 51.8 kN -m
6
M pl , y , Rk

Interaction Capacities - Method 1:


Member Bending & Compression Capacity with Buckling
Compression Buckling Factors
3
2.858 10 235 10
6
Af y
y 0.451
3287 10
3
N cr , y

y 0.5 1 y y 0.2 y 0.5 1 0.21 0.451 0.2 0.451 0.628


2 2

1 1
y 0.939 1
2 2

y y y 0.628 0.628 0.451


2 2

Auxiliary Terms
N Ed
1 1
210
N cr , y 3287
y 0.996
N Ed 210
1 y 1 0.939
N cr , y 3287

6
W pl , y 220.6 10
wy 6
1.135 1.5
W el , y 194.3 10

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Cmo Factor
M 0
y 0
E d , y ,right

43 10
3
M E d , y ,left

N Ed
C m y ,0 0.79 0.21 y 0.36 y 0.33
N cr , y
210
C m y ,0 0.79 0.21 0 0.36 0 0.33 0.782
3287

C m y C m y ,0 0.782 because no LTB is likely to occur.

Elastic-Plastic Bending Resistance

Because LTB is prevented, bLT = 0 so aLT = 0


N
1 w y 1 2
1.6 1.6
C yy C m y 22
2
C my y
2 2

Ed
bLT
w w N c ,Rk
y y
M1



2 210 10
3
1.6 1.6
1 1.135 1 2 0.782 0.451 0.782 0.451
2 2
C yy 0
669 10
3
1.135 1.135
1.0

6
W el , y 194.3 10
C yy 1.061 6
0.881
W pl , y 220.6 10

210 10
3
N Ed
D / C A xial
669 10
3
N c ,Rk
y 0.939
M1 1

D / C Axial 0.334

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



0.782 43 10
3
C m y M E d , y ,right
D / C B ending y 0.996

M pl , y , R k 210 10
3
51.8 10
3
1 N Ed C 1 1.061
N cr , y 3287 10
yy 3
M1 1

D / C B ending 0.646

D / C T otal 0.980

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EN 3-2005 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

A beam is subjected to factored load N = 1050 kN. This example was tested
using the Eurocode 3-2005 steel frame design code. The design capacities are
compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

NEd
A

A
L/2 L/2 Section A-A

L = 1.4 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 210x103 MPa N = 1050 kN fy = 275 MPa
v = 0.3 Section: 406x178x74 UB
G = 80770 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness (beam)
Section shear capacity
Section bending capacity with shear reduction

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.5 on pp. 53-55 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%


Section Shear Resistance,
689.2 689.2 0.00%
Vpl,Rd (kN)
Section Bending Resistance,
412.8 412.8 0.00%
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Shear-Reduced Bending
386.8 386.8 0.00%
Resistance, Mv,y,Rd (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
fy = 275 MPa
E = 210000 MPa
Section: 406x178x74 UB
A = 9450 mm2
b = 179.5 mm, tf = 16 mm, h = 412.8 mm, tw = 9.5 mm, r = 10.2 mm
h w h 2 t f 412.8 2 16 380.8 m m

d h 2 t f r 412.8 2 16 10.2 360.4 m m

b tw 2 r 179.5 9.5 2 10.2


c 74.8 m m
2 2
Wpl,y = 501,000 mm3
Other:
M 0 1.0

1.2

Loadings:
N Ed 0 kN

N 1050 kN @ mid-span

Results in the following internal forces:


V Ed 525 kN

M Ed 367.5 kN -m

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compactness:
235 235
0.924
fy 275

Localized Buckling for Flange:


cl .1 9 9 0.924 8.32 for pure compression

c 74.8
e 4.68
tf 16

e 4.68 cl .1 8.32

So Flange is Class 1 in pure compression

Localized Buckling for Web:


cl .1 72 72 0.924 66.56 for pure bending

d 360.4
e 37.94
tw 9.5

e 37.94 cl .1 66.56

So Web is Class 1 in pure bending

Since Flange & Web are Class 1, Section is Class 1.

Section Shear Capacity


Av m in h w t w 1.2 380.8 9.5 4341 m m
2

Av A 2 bt f ( t w 2 r ) t f 9450 2 179.5 16 9.5 2 10.2 16


Av 4021.2 m m Av m in
2

So Av 4341 m m 2

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Av f y 4341 275
V pl , R d 689, 245 N
M0 3 1.0 3

V pl , R d 6 8 9 .2 k N

Section Bending Capacity


W pl , y f y 1501, 000 275
M c , y , Rd 412, 775, 000 N -m m
M0 1

M c , y , R d 412.8 kN -m

With Shear Reduction:


2
2V 2 525
2

Ed
1 1 0.27
V 689.2
pl , R d

A w h w t w 380.8 9.5 3617.6 m m


2

fy Aw 275
2
0.27 3617.6
2

M v , y , Rd pl , y
W 1, 501, 000
M0 4 t w 1.0 4 9.5

M v , y , R d 386, 829, 246 N -m m

M v , y , R d 386.8 kN -m

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EN 3-2005 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P = 1400 kN and


major-axis bending moment M = 200 kN-m. This example was tested using the
Eurocode 3-2005 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared
with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A M

A
L Section A-A

L = 0.4 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 210x103 MPa P = 1400 kN fy = 235 MPa
v = 0.3 M = 200 kN-m Section: 457x191x98 UB
G = 80769 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section bending capacity with compression reduction

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is also
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%


Section Compression Resistance,
2937.5 2937.5 0.00%
Npl,Rd (kN)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
524.1 524.5 -0.08%
Mpl,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Reduced Bending Resistance, -0.09%
341.9 342.2
Mn,y,Rd (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210000 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 10.2 mm
h w h 2 t f 467.2 2 19.6 428 m m

d h 2 t f r 467.2 2 19.6 10.2 407.6 m m

b tw 2r 192.8 11.4 2 10.2


c 80.5 m m
2 2
Wpl,y = 2,232,000 mm3
Other:
M 0 1.0

Loadings:
P 1400 kN axial load

Results in the following internal forces:


N Ed 1400 kN

M = 200 kN-m

Section Compactness:
235 235
1
fy 235

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

1 N Ed
1 1 1
2 2 ht w f y

1 1, 400, 000
1 2.7818 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235

1.0

Localized Buckling for Flange:


For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
9 9 1
cl .1 9
1
c 80.5
e 4.11
tf 19.6

e 4.11 cl .1 9

So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:


0.5, so

396 396 1
cl .1 33.00 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 1 1
d 407.6
e 35.75
tw 11.4

e 35.75 cl .1 33.00

456 456 1
cl .2 38.00
13 1 13 1 1

e 35.75 cl .2 38.00

So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity


Af y 12, 500 235
N pl , Rd
M 0 1

N pl , R d 2937.5 kN

Section Bending Capacity


W pl , y f y 2, 232, 000 235
M pl , y , Rd

M 0 1
M pl , y , R d
524.5 kN -m

Axial Reduction
N E d 1400 kN 0.25 N pl , R d
0.25 2937.5 734.4 kN

hw t w f y 428 11.4 235


N Ed 1400 kN 0.5 0.5 573.3 kN
M 0 1

So moment resistance must be reduced.

N Ed 1400
n 0.48
N pl , R d 2937.5

A 2 bt f 12, 500 2 192.8 19.6


a 0.40
A 12, 500
1 n 1 0.48
M N , y ,Rd
M pl , y , R d
524.5
1 0.5 a 1 0.5 0.4

M N , y ,Rd
342.2 kN -m

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

IS 800-2007 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 1 kN. This example was


tested using the Indian IS 800:2007 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

NEd

L
A A

Section A-A

L = 3m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa N = 1 kN fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 fu = 410 MPa
G = 76923 MPa Section: ISMB 350

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (column)
Member compression capacity

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 9.2 on pp. 765-766 in Design of Steel Structures by N. Subramanian.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Plastic Plastic 0.00%

Design Axial Strength, Ncrd 733.85 734.07 -0.03%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: Fe 250
E = 200,000 MPa
fy = 250 MPa
Section: ISMB 350
A = 6670 mm2
b = 140 mm, tf = 14.2 mm, d = 350 mm, tw = 8.1 mm, r = 1.8 mm
h =d 2 ( t f + r ) =350 2 (14.2 + 1.8 ) =318 mm

ry = 28.4 mm, rz = 143 mm


Member:
KLy = KLz = 3,000 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 =
1.1

Loadings:
N Ed = 1 kN

Section Compactness:
250 250
= = = 1
fy 250

Localized Buckling for Flange:


=
p 8.4= 8.4 =
1 8.4

b 70
e = = = 4.93
t f 14.2

=
e 4.93 <
= p 8.40
So Flange is Plastic in compression

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Localized Buckling for Web:


p= N / A & s= 42= 42 for compression

d 318
e = = = 39.26
tw 8.1
=
e 39.26 < =
s 42
So Web is Plastic in compression

Since Flange & Web are Plastic, Section is Plastic.

Member Compression Capacity:

Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:


h 350
= = 2.5 > 1.2
b f 140
and
=t f 14.2 mm < 40 mm
So we should use the Buckling Curve a for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve b
for the y-y axis (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7).

Z-Z Axis Parameters:


For buckling curve a, =0.21 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)

2 E 2 200, 000
=
Euler Buckling Stress: f cc = 2
= 2
4485 MPa
K z Lz 3, 000

rz 143

fy 250
=
z = = 0.2361
f cc 4485

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

= 0.5 1 + ( 0.2 ) + =
2 0.5 1 + 0.21( 0.2361 0.2 ) + 0.23612

=0.532

1 1
=
Stress Reduction Factor: = = 0.9920
+
2 2
0.532 + 0.5322 0.23612

fy 250
f cd , z =
=
0.992 =
255.5 MPa
M 0 1.1

Y-Y Axis Parameters:


For buckling curve b, =0.34 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)

2 E 2 200, 000
=
Euler Buckling Stress: f cc = 2
= 2
177 MPa
K z Lz 3, 000

rz 28.4

fy 250

= y = = 1.189
f cc 177

= 0.5 1 + ( 0.2 ) + =
2 0.5 1 + 0.34 (1.189 0.2 ) + 1.1892

=1.375

1 1
=
Stress Reduction Factor: = = 0.4842
+
2 2
1.375 + 1.3752 1.1892

fy 250
f cd , y =
=
0.4842 =
110.1MPa Governs
M 0 1.1

=
Pd Af=
cd , y 6670 110.1

Pd = 734.07 kN

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

IS 800-2007 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous beam is subjected to factored distributed load w = 48.74 kN/m.


This example was tested using the Indian IS 800:2007 steel frame design code.
The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Section A-A
L1 L2 L3 A
w

L1 = 4.9 m L2 = 6 m L3 = 4.9 m
Material Properties Loading Design Properties
E = 200x103 MPa w = 48.74 kN/m fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Section: ISLB 500
G = 76923 MPa

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (beam)
Section shear capacity
Member bending capacity

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 10.8 on pp. 897-901 in Design of Steel Structures by N. Subramanian.
The torsional constant, It, is calculated by the program as a slightly different
value, which accounts for the percent different in section bending resistance.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Plastic Plastic 0.00%


Section Bending Resistance,
157.70 157.93 0.14%
Md(LTB) (kN-m)
Section Shear Resistance,
603.59 603.59 0.00%
Vd (kN)

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: Fe 250
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76,923 MPa
fy = 250 MPa

Section: ISLB 500


(Note: In ETABS, the section is not available with original example properties,
including fillet properties. A similar cross-section with fillet r = 0 was used, with
similar results, shown below.)
A = 9550 mm2
h = 500 mm, bf = 180 mm, tf = 14.1 mm, tw = 9.2 mm
b f 180
=
b = = 90 mm
2 2
d =h 2 ( t f + r ) =500 2 (14.1 + 0 ) =471.8 mm

Iz = 385,790,000 mm4, Iy = 10,639,000.2 mm4


Zez = 1,543,160 mm3, Zpz = 1,543,200 mm3
ry = 33.4 mm
Member:
Lleft = 4.9 m
Lcenter = 6 m (governs)
Lright = 4.9 m
KLy = KLz = 6,000 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 =
1.1

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Loadings:
N Ed = 0 kN
= 48.75 kN/m

Section Compactness:
250 250
= = = 1
fy 250

r1 = 0 since there is no axial force

Localized Buckling for Flange:


=
p 9.4= 9.4 =
1 9.4

b 90
e = = = 6.38
t f 14.1

=
e 6.38 <
= p 9.40
So Flange is Plastic in pure bending

Localized Buckling for Web:


84 84 1
=
p = = 84
(1 + r1 ) (1 + 0)
d 471.8
e = = = 51.28
tw 9.2
=
e 51.28 <=
p 84.00
So Web is Plastic in pure bending

Since Flange & Web are Class 1, Section is Plastic.

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Shear Capacity:


fy 250
Vd= htw= 500 9.2
M 0 3 1.1 3

Vd = 603.59 kN

Member Bending Capacity


h f =h t f =500 14.1 =485.9

d t 3 2 180 14.13 485.9 9.23


3
bi ti 3 2b f t f
I t = = + iw = + =4.63 105 mm 4
3 3 3 3 3

From Roark & Young, 5th Ed., 1975, Table 21, Item 7, pg.302
t1= t2= t f and b1= b2= b f for symmetric sections

h f 2t1t2b13b23 485.92 14.1 14.1 1803 1803


=
Iw = = 8.089 1011 mm 6
(
12 t1b1 + t2b2
3 3
) (
12 14.2 180 + 14.2 180
3 3
)
C1 = 1.0 (Assumed in example and specified in ETABS)

2 EI y 2 EI w
=M cr C1 GI +
( KL ) ( KL )
2 t 2

2 200, 000 10, 639, 000.2 2 200, 000 8.089 1011


=M cr 1.0 76,923 462,508 +
( 6, 000 )
2
( 6, 000 )
2

M cr = 215,936,919.3 N-mm

LT =
0.21

b =1.0

b Z pz f y 1 1,543, 200 250


=
LT = = 1.337
M cr 215,936,919.3

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

LT 0.5 1 + LT ( LT 0.2 ) + LT
= = 2
0.5 1 + 0.21 (1.337 0.2 ) + 1.337 2

LT =
1.5127
1
= LT 1.0
LT + LT 2 LT 2
1
LT
= = 0.450 1.0
1.5127 + 1.5127 2 1.337 2
LT f y 0.450 250
=
fbd = = 102.3MPa
M 0 1.1

= Z pz fbd= 1543.2 103 102.3


M d , LTB = 157,925, 037.7 N-mm

M d , LTB = 157.93kN-m

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

IS 800-2007 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BIAXIAL BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

In this example a beam-column is subjected factored distributed load N = 2500


kN, Mz = 350 kN-m, and My = 100 kN-m. The element is moment-resisting in
the z-direction and pinned in the y-direction. This example was tested using the
Indian IS 800:2007 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared
with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Y-Axis Z-Axis
Y-Y
My,top
Mz,top

Z-Z
L N
A A
Mz,bot
My,bot Section A-A

L=4m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa N = 2500 kN fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Mz,top = 350 kN-m Section: W310x310x226
G = 76923.08 MPa Mz,bot = -350 kN-m
My,top = 100 kN-m
My,bot = 0

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section Compactness Check (Beam-Column)
Section Compression Capacity
Section Shear Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Section Bending Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Member Compression Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Member Bending Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Interaction Capacity, D/C, for Major & Minor Axes

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is also
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 13.2 on pp. 1101-1106 in Design of Steel Structures by N.
Subramanian.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference
Compactness Plastic Plastic 0.00%
Plastic Compression Resistance,
6520 6520 0.00%
Nd (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
6511 6511 0.00%
Pdz (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
5295 5295 0.00%
Pdy (kN)
Section Bending Resistance,
897.46 897.46 0.00%
Mdz (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance,
325.65 325.65 0.00%
Mdy (kN-m)
Buckling Resistance in Bending,
886.84 886.84 0.00%
MdLTB (kN-m)
Section Shear Resistance,
1009.2 1009.2 0.00%
Vdy (kN)
Section Shear Resistance,
2961.6 2961.6 0.00%
Vdz (kN)
Interaction Capacity, D/C 1.050 1.050 0.00%

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: Fe 410
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76,923.08 MPa
fy = 250 MPa
Section: W310x310x226
A = 28,687.7 mm2
bf = 317 mm, tf = 35.6 mm, h = 348 mm, tw = 22.1 mm, r = 0 mm
b f 317
=
b = = 158.5 mm ,
2 2
d =h 2 ( t f + r ) =348 2 ( 35.6 + 0 ) =276.8 mm

Iz = 592,124,221 mm4, Iy = 189,255,388.9 mm4


rz = 143.668 mm, ry = 81.222 mm
Zez = 3,403,012. 8 mm3, Zey = 1,194,040.3 mm3
Zpz = 3,948,812.3 mm3, Zpy = 1,822,502.2 mm3
It = 10,658,941.4 mm6, Iw = 4.611 1012 mm6

Member:
Ly = Lz = 4,000 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 = 1.1

Loadings:
P = 2500 kN
Vz = 25 kN

Vy = 175 kN

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

=
M z 1 350 kN m

M z 2 =
350 kN m
=
M y 1 100 kN m

M=
y 2 0 kN m

Section Compactness:
fy 250
= = = 1
250 250
P 2,500, 000
=r1 = = 2.01676
fy 2.5
dtw 246.8 22.1
mo 1.1
Localized Buckling for Flange:
p= 9.4= 9.4 1= 9.4
b 158.5
=
e = = 4.45
tf 35.6

e = 4.45 < p = 9.40


So Flange is Plastic in pure bending

Localized Buckling for Web:


84 84 1
=p = = 27.84
(1 + r1 ) (1 + 2.01676)
d 246.8
=
e = = 11.20
tw 22.1
e= 11.20 < p= 27.84
So Web is Plastic in bending & compression

Section is Plastic.

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compression Capacity:


Ag f y 28687.7 250
=
Nd =
M0 1.1
N d = 6520 kN

Section Shear Capacity:


For major z-z axis
Avz =htw =348 22.1 =7690.8 mm 2

fy 250
=
VPz = Avz 7690.8
M0 3 1.1 3

VPz = 1009.2 kN

For minor y-y axis

Avy =2b f t f =
2 317 35.6 =22,570.4 mm 2

fy 250
=
VPy = Avy 22570.4
M0 3 1.1 3

VPy = 2961.6 kN

Section Bending Capacity:


For major z-z axis
b Z pz f y 1 3,948,812.3 250 1.2Z ez f y 1.2 3, 403, 012.8 250
M dz = = =
M0 1.1 M0 1.1
=
M dz 897.46 kN m 933.54 kN m
=M dz 897.46 kN m

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

For minor y-y axis

b Z py f y 1 1,822,502.2 250 1.2 Z ey f y 1.2 1,194, 040.3 250


M dy = = =
M0 1.1 M0 1.1
=
M dy 414.21 kN m 325.65 kN m

=M dy 325.65 kN m

With Shear Reduction:


For major z-z axis
Vz =
25 kN < 0.6VPz =
0.6 1009.2 =
605.5 kN No shear reduction is needed.

For minor y-y axis

Vy =
175 kN < 0.6VPy =
0.6 2961.6 =
1777 kN No shear reduction is needed.

With Compression Reduction:


P 2500
=
n = = 0.383
N d 6520

For major z-z axis


M ndz = 1.11M dz (1 n ) = 1.11 897.46 (1 0.383) M dz

=
M ndz 614.2 kN m < 897.46 kN m

For minor y-y axis, since n > 0.2


M ndy = 1.56 M dy (1 n )( n + 0.6 ) = 1.56 325.65 (1 0.383)( 0.383 + 0.6 )

=
M ndy 308.0 kN m

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Compression Capacity:


Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
h 348
= = 1.1 < 1.2
b f 317
and
=t f 35.6 mm < 40 mm
So we should use the Buckling Curve b for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve c for the
y-y axis (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7).
Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, = 0.34 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)

K z = 0.65
K z Lz 2600
K z Lz =0.65 4000 =2600 mm, = =18.097
rz 143.668

2E 2 200, 000
=
Euler Buckling Stress: f cr , z = = 6027 MPa
(18.097 )
2 2
K z Lz

rz
fy 250
=z = = 0.2037
f cr , z 6022

z = 0.5 1 + z ( z 0.2 ) + z 2 = 0.5 1 + 0.34 ( 0.2037 0.2 ) + 0.2037 2

z = 0.5214

1 1
=
Stress Reduction Factor: z = = 0.9987
z + z z
2 2
0.5214 + 0.52142 0.2037 2

fy 250
f cd , z= = 0.9987 = 226.978 MPa
M0 1.1

=
Pdz f=
cd , z Ag 226.978 28, 687.7

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 8


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Pdz = 6511 kN

Y-Y Axis Parameters:


For buckling curve c, = 0.49 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)

K y = 1.00

K y Ly 4000
K y Ly =
1 4000 =
4000 mm, = =
49.25
ry 81.222

2E 2 200, 000
=
Euler Buckling Stress: f cr , y = = 813.88 MPa
( 49.25)
2 2
K y Ly

ry

fy 250
=y = = 0.5542
f cr , y 813.88

y = 0.5 1 + y ( y 0.2 ) + y 2 = 0.5 1 + 0.49 ( 0.5542 0.2 ) + 0.55422

y = 0.7404

1 1
=
Stress Reduction Factor: y = = 0.8122
y + y y
2 2
0.7404 + 0.74042 0.55422

fy 250
f cd , y= = 0.8122 = 184.584 MPa
M0 1.1

=
Pdy f=
cd , y Ag 184.584 28, 687.7

Pdy = 5295 kN

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 9


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Bending Capacity:


C1 = 2.7 (Program Calculation from AISC equation, where C1 < 2.7 )

2 EI y 2 EI w
=M cr C1 GI +
( KL ) ( KL )
2 t 2

2 200, 000 189,300, 000 2 200, 000 4.611 1012


=M cr 2.7 76,923.08 10, 658,941.4 +
( 4, 000 )
2
( 4, 000 )
2

=M cr 15,374, 789,309 N mm

LT = 0.21
b = 1.0

b Z pz f y 1 3,948,812.3 250
=LT = = 0.2534
M cr 15,374, 789,309

LT = 0.5 1 + LT ( LT 0.2 ) + LT 2 = 0.5 1 + 0.21 ( 0.2534 0.2 ) + 0.25342


LT = 0.5377
1
= LT 1.0
LT + LT 2 + LT 2
1
LT
= = 0.9882 1.0
0.5377 + 0.5377 2 + 0.25342
LT f y 0.9882 250
=
fbd = = 224.58 MPa
M0 1.1
M dLTB = Z pz fbd = 3,948,812.3 224.58 = 886,839, 489 N mm

=
M dLTB 886.84 kN m

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 10


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending


Member Bending & Compression Capacity with Buckling
Z-Z Axis
P 2500
=
nz = = 0.3839
Pdz 6511

K z = 1 + ( z 0.2 ) nz = 1 + ( 0.2037 0.2 ) 0.3839 1 + 0.8nz = 1 + 0.8 ( 0.3839 )


=
K z 1.0014 1.3072 so K z = 1.0014

M 2 350
z = = = 1
M1 350

= 0.6 + 0.4
Cmz = 0.6 + 0.4 =
1 0.2 > 0.4 so Cmz
= 0.4

Y-Y Axis
P 2500
=
ny = = 0.4721
Pdy 5295

K y = 1 + ( y 0.2 ) n y = 1 + ( 0.554 0.2 ) 0.4721 1 + 0.8n y = 1 + 0.8 ( 0.4721)

=
K y 1.167 1.378 so K y = 1.167

M2 0

= y = = 0
M 1 100

Cmy = 0.6 + 0.4 = 0.6 + 0.4 0= 0.6 > 0.4 so Cmy = 0.6

Lateral-Torsional Buckling
CmLT = 0.4

0.1LT n y 0.1n y
K LT = 1 1
CmLT 0.25 CmLT 0.25

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 11


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0

0.1 0.2534 0.4721 0.1 0.4721


K LT = 1 = 0.920 1 = 0.831
0.4 0.25 0.4 0.25

K LT = 0.920

Formula IS 9.3.2.2 (a)


D P K y Cmy M y K LT M z 2500 1.167 0.6 100 0.920 350
=+ + = + +
C Pdy M dy M dLTB 5295 325.65 886.84

D
= 0.472 + 0.215 + 0.363
C

D
= 1.050 (Governs)
C

Formula IS 9.3.2.2 (b)

D P 0.6 K y Cmy M y K z Cmz M z 2500 0.6 1.167 0.6 100 1.0014 0.4 350
= + + =+ +
C Pdz M dy M dLTB 6511 325.65 886.84

D
= 0.384 + 0.129 + 0.158
C

D
= 0.671
C

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 12


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NTC 2008 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In this example a continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P =
1400 kN and major-axis bending moment M = 200 kN-m. The beam is
continuously braced to avoid any buckling effects. This example was tested using
the Italian NTC-2008 steel frame design code. The design capacities are
compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A M

A
L Section A-A

L = 0.4 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 210x103 MPa P = 1400 kN fy = 235 MPa
v = 0.3 M = 200 kN-m Section: 457x191x98 UB
G = 80769 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section shear capacity
Section bending capacity with compression & shear reductions
Interaction capacity, D/C

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NTC-2008.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%


Section Compression Resistance,
2797.6 2797.6 0.00%
Nc,Rd (kN)
Section Shear Resistance,
719.2 719.2 0.00%
Vc,Rd,y (kN)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
499.1 499.1 0.00%
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Axially
Reduced, 310.8 310.8 0.00%
MN,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Shear
Reduced, 481.3 481.3 0.00%
MV,y,Rd (kN-m)
Interaction Capacity, D/C 0.644 0.644 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210000 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 10.2 mm
h w h 2 t f 467.2 2 19.6 428 m m

d h 2 t f r 467.2 2 19.6 10.2 407.6 m m

b tw 2r 192.8 11.4 2 10.2


c 80.5 m m
2 2
Wpl,y = 2,230,000 mm3
Other:
M 0 1.05

Loadings:
P 1400 kN axial load

M y
200 kN -m bending load at one end
Results in the following internal forces:
N Ed 1400 kN

V Ed 500 kN

M y ,Ed
200 kN -m

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Section Compactness:
235 235
1
fy 235

1 N Ed
1 1 1

2 2 ht w f y

1 1, 400, 000
1 2.7818 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235

1.0

Localized Buckling for Flange:


For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
9 9 1
cl .1 9
1
c 80.5
e 4.11
tf 19.6

e 4.11 cl .1 9

So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:


0.5, so

396 396 1
cl .1 33.00 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 1 1
d 407.6
e 35.75
tw 11.4

e 35.75 cl .1 33.00

456 456 1
cl .2 38.00
13 1 13 1 1

e 35.75 cl .2 38.00

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity


Af y 12, 500 235
N c , Rd N pl , Rd
M 0 1.05

N c , R d 2 7 9 7 .6 k N

Section Shear Capacity


AV , y A 2 bt f t f t w 2 r 12, 500 2 192.8 19.6 19.6 11.4 2 10.2

AV , y 5, 565.5 m m
2

fy 235
Vc ,Rd , y Avy 5, 565.5
M 0 3 1.05 3

V c , R d , y 719.2 kN

1.0

h 467.1 72 235 72 235


37.5 72
tw 11.4 fy 1.0 235

So no shear buckling needs to be checked.

Section Bending Capacity


W pl , y f y 2, 230, 000 235
M c , y , Rd M pl , y , Rd

M 0 1.05

M c , y , R d 499.1 kN -m

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

with Shear Reduction


V E d 500 kN 0.5 V c , R d 359.6 kN Shear Reduction is needed

Av ht w 467.2 11.4 4, 879.2 m m


2

2
2V E d
2
2 500
1 1 0 .1 5 2 5
V 7 1 9 .2
c ,Rd

Av
2
0.1525 4879.2
2

pl , y
W yk
f 2, 230, 000 235
4tw 4 11.4
M y ,V , R d
M y ,c , R d
M 0 1.05

M V , r , R d 481.3 kN -m

with Compression Reduction

N Ed 1400
n 0.50
N pl , R d 2797.6

A 2 bt f 12, 500 2 192.8 19.6


a 0.40 0.5
A 12, 500
1 n 1 0.5
M N , y ,Rd
M pl , y , R d
499.1
1 0.5 a 1 0.5 0.4

M N , y ,Rd
310.8 kN -m

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending


Section Bending & Compression Capacity
Formula NTC 4.2.39
2 5n
D M y ,Ed M z ,Ed 200
2
M y ,Ed
0 0.414 0.644
C M N , y , R d M N , z , R d 310.8 M N , y ,Rd

D
0.644 (Governs)
C

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NTC 2008 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In this example a continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P =
1400 kN, major-axis bending moment My = 200 kN-m, and a minor axis bending
moment of Mz = 100 kN-m. This example was tested using the Italian NTC-2008
steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent
hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Y-Axis Z-Axis
Y-Y
My,top
Mz,top

Z-Z
L P
A A
Mz,bot
My,bot Section A-A

L = 0.4 m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 210x103 MPa P = 1400 kN fy = 235 MPa
v = 0.3 Mz,top = 100 kN-m Section: 457x191x98 UB
G = 80769 MPa Mz,bot = -100 kN-m
My,top = 200 kN-m
My,bot = 0

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section shear capacity for major & minor axes
Section bending capacity for major & minor axes
Member compression capacity for major & minor axes
Member bending capacity
Interaction capacity, D/C, for major & minor axes

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NTC-2008.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%


Section Compression Resistance,
2,797.6 2,797.6 0.00%
Nc,Rd (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
2,797.6 2,797.6 0.00%
Nbyy,Rd (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
2,797.6 2,797.6 0.00%
Nbzz,Rd (kN)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
499.1 499.1 0.00%
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
84.8 84.8 0.00%
Mc,z,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Shear Reduced,
470.1 470.1 0.00%
MV,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Axially Reduced,
310.8 310.8 0.00%
MN,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Axially Reduced,
82.26 82.26 0.00%
MN,z,Rd (kN-m)
Member Bending Resistance,
499.095 499.095 0.00%
Mb,Rd (kN-m)
Section Shear Resistance,
667.5 667.5 0.00%
Vc,y,Rd (kN)
Section Shear Resistance,
984.7 984.7 0.00%
Vc,z,Rd (kN)
Interaction Capacity, D/C 2.044 2.044 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210,000 MPa
G = 80,769 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 0 mm
hw = h 2t f = 467.2 2 19.6 = 428 mm

d = h 2 ( t f + r ) = 467.2 2 (19.6 + 0 ) = 428 mm

b tw 2r 192.8 11.4 2 0
=c = = 90.7 mm
2 2
Wpl,y = 2,230,000 mm3
Wpl,z = 379,000 mm3
ryy = 191.3 mm
rzz = 43.3331 mm
Izz = 23,469,998 mm4
=
I w 1.176 1012 mm 6
IT = 1,210,000 mm4
Member:
L = Lb = Lunbraced = 400 mm
Kyy = 1.0, Kzz = 1.0
Other:
M 0 =
1.05

M1 =
1.05

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Loadings:
P = 1400 kN axial load
M z 1 = 100 kN-m

M z 2 = 100 kN-m
M y 1 = 200 kN-m

M y 2 = 0 kN-m
Results in the following internal forces:
N Ed = 1400 kN
M y , Ed = 200 kN-m

M z , Ed = 100 kN-m

Vy , Ed = 500 kN-m

Vz , Ed = 0 kN-m

Section Compactness:
235 235
= = = 1
fy 235

1 N Ed
1 =
1 1
2 2htw f y
1 1, 400, 000
=
1 = 2.7818 > 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235
=1.0

Localized Buckling for Flange:


For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
9 9 1
cl .1 = = = 9
1

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

c 90.7
e = = = 4.63
t f 19.6

=
e 4.63 < =
cl .1 9
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:


> 0.5, so
396 396 1
= = = 33.00 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 1 1
cl .1

d 428
e = = = 37.54
tw 11.4
=
e 37.54 > =
cl .1 33.00
456 456 1
= = = 38.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl .2

=
e 37.54 <
= cl .2 38.00
So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity


Af y 12,500 235
N= N pl= =
M 0
c , Rd , Rd
1.05

N c , Rd = 2, 797.6 kN

Section Shear Capacity


For major y-y axis
AV , y = A 2bt f + t f ( tw + 2r ) = 12,500 2 192.8 19.6 + 19.6 (11.4 + 2 0 )

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AV , y = 5,165.7 mm 2

fy 235
=
Vc , y , Rd = Avy 5,165.7
M 0 3 1.05 3

Vc , y , Rd = 667.5 kN

For minor z-z axis


AV , z =A hwtw =12,500 428 11.4 =7, 620.8 mm 2

fy 235
=
Vc , z , Rd = Avy 7, 620.8
M 0 3 1.05 3

Vc , z , Rd = 984.7 kN

=1.0

hw 428 72 235 72 235


== 37.5 < = =
72
tw 11.4 fy 1.0 235

So no shear buckling needs to be checked.

Section Bending Capacity


For major y-y axis
W pl , y f y 2, 230, 000 235
=
M M= =
M 0
c , y , Rd pl , y , Rd
1.05

M c , y , Rd = 499.1kN-m

For minor z-z axis


W pl , z f y 379, 000 235
=
M M= =
M 0
c , z , Rd pl , z , Rd
1.05

M c , z , Rd = 84.8 kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

With Shear Reduction


For major y-y axis
Vy ,=
Ed 500 kN > 0.5 Vc , y ,=
Rd 333.7 kN Shear Reduction is needed

Av =htw =467.2 11.4 =4,879.2 mm 2

2
2VEd 2 500 2

= 1= 1= 0.2482
V 667.5
c , Rd

Av 2 0.1525 4879.22
W
pl , y 4t yk f 2, 230, 000 235
w 4 11.4
=M y ,V , Rd = M y ,c , Rd
M 0 1.05

M V ,r , Rd = 470.1kN-m

For minor z-z axis


Vz , Ed = 0 kN < 0.5 Vc , z , Rd No shear Reduction is needed

With Compression Reduction

N Ed 1400
=n = = 0.50
N pl , Rd 2797.6
A 2bt f 12,500 2 192.8 19.6
=a = = 0.40 0.5
A 12,500

For major y-y axis


1 n 1 0.5
M N= M pl , y , Rd = 499.1
1 0.5a 1 0.5 0.4
, y , Rd

M N , y , Rd = 310.8 kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 8


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

For minor z-z axis


n<a
n a 2 0.5 0.4 2
M N , z , Rd= M pl , z , Rd 1 = 84.8 1
1 a 1 0.4
M N , z , Rd = 82.26 kN-m

Member Compression Capacity:


Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
Steel is S235
h 467.2
= = 2.4 > 1.2
b f 192.8
and
=t f 19.6 mm < 40 mm
So we should use the Buckling Curve a for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve b
for the y-y axis (NTC 2008, Table 4.2.VI).

Y-Y Axis Parameters:


For buckling curve a, =0.21 (NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VI)

K y = 1.00

Lcr , y 400
Lcr , y =
K y Ly =
1 400 =
400 mm, = =
2.091
ry 191.3

2 E 2 210, 000
=N cr , y = = 5,925, 691kN
K y Ly 12,500 ( 2.091)
2 2

A
ry

Af y 12,500 235
=
y = = 0.022
N cr , y 5,925, 691

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 9


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

( )
y 0.5 1 + y y 0.2 + = 0.5 1 + 0.21( 0.022 0.2 ) + 0.0222
2
=

y

y =0.482

1 1
=
Stress Reduction Factor: y = = 1.0388
y + y y
2 2
0.482 + 0.482 2
0.0222

=
y 1.0388 > 1.0, so=
y 1.0

y Af y 1.0 12,500 235


N= =
M1
byy , Rd
1.05

N byy , Rd = 2, 797.6 kN

Z-Z Axis Parameters:


For buckling curve b, =0.34 (NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VI)

K z = 1.00
Lcr , z 400
Lcr , z =
K z Lz =
1 400 =
400 mm, = =
9.231
rz 43.33

2 E 2 210, 000
=N cr , z = = 304, 052 kN
K z Lz 12,500 ( 9.231)
2 2

A
rz
Af y 12,500 235
=
z = = 0.098
N cr , z 304, 052

( )
z 0.5 1 + z z 0.2 + = 0.5 1 + 0.34 ( 0.098 0.2 ) + 0.0982
2
=

z

z =0.488

1 1
=
Stress Reduction Factor: z = = 1.0362
z + z z
2 2
0.488 + 0.488 2
0.0982

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 10


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

=
z 1.0362 > 1.0, so=
z 1.0

z Af y 1.0 12,500 235


N= =
M1
bzz , Rd
1.05

N bzz , Rd = 2, 797.6 kN

Member Bending Capacity:


h 467.2
= = 2.4 > 2
b f 192.8
So we should use the Buckling Curve c for lateral-torsional buckling (NTC
2008, Table 4.2.VII).
LT =
0.49

LT ,0 =(default
0.4 for rolled section)
=0.75 (default for rolled section)

=
M B M=
y 2 0, = =
MA M y 1 200 kN-m
2
M
2
M 0 0
=
1.75 1.05 B + 0.3 B = 1.75 1.05 + 0.3 = 1.75
MA MA 200 200

Corrective Factor is determined from NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VIII


1 1
=kc = = 1.329
1.33 0.33 1.33 0.33 1.75

2 EI z I w ( Lcr , z ) GIT
2

M cr =
+
( cr , z ) z
2 EI z
2
L I

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 11


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 210, 000 23, 469,998 1.176 1012 4002 80, 769 1, 210, 000
M cr =
1.75 + 2
4002 23, 469,998 210, 000 23, 469,998
M cr = 119, 477, 445,900 N-mm

W pl , y f y 2, 230, 000 235


=
LT = = 0.066
M cr 119, 477, 445,900

( )
LT 0.5 1 + LT LT LT ,0 + = 0.5 1 + 0.49 ( 0.066 0.4 ) + 0.75 0.0662
2
=

LT

LT =
0.420

( )
1 0.5 (1 kc ) 1 2 LT 0.8 = 1 0.5 (1 1.329 ) 1 2 ( 0.066 0.8 ) =
2 2
f = 0.987

1 1 1 1
= LT 1.0 or 2
f LT + LT 2 + LT 2 LT f

1 1 1 1
LT 1.0 or
0.987 0.420 + 0.4202 + 0.75 0.0662 0.066 0.987
2

=
LT 1.2118 (1.0 or 230.9 )
so
LT =
1.0

fy 235
M b , Rd =
LT W pl , y =
1.0 2, 230, 000
M1 1.05

M b , Rd = 499.095 kN-m

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending


Section Bending & Compression Capacity

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 12


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Formula NTC 4.2.39


2 5n
D M y , Ed M z , Ed
2 50.5
200 100
= + =
310.8 + 82.3 =
0.414 + 1.630
C M N , y , Rd M N , z , Rd

D
= 2.044 (Governs)
C

Member Bending & Compression Capacity: Method B


k factors used are taken from the software, and determined from Method 2 in
Annex B of Eurocode 3.
k yy = 0.547

k yz = 0.479

k zy = 0.698

k zz = 0.798

Formula NTC 4.2.37


D N Ed M y , Ed M z , Ed
= + k yy + k yz
C y Af yk W f W pl , z f yk
LT pl , y yk
M1 M1 M1

D 1, 400 200 100


= + 0.547 + 0.479
C 112,500 235 2, 230, 000 235 379, 000 235
1
1.05 1.05 1.05
D
=0.5 + 0.22 + 0.56
C
D
= 1.284
C

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 13


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Formula NTC 4.2.38


D N Ed M y , Ed M z , Ed
= + k zy + k zz
C z Af yk W f W pl , z f yk
LT pl , y yk
M1 M1 M1

D 1, 400 200 100


= + 0.698 + 0.798
C 112,500 235 1
2, 230, 000 235 379, 000 235
1.05 1.05 1.05
D
=0.5 + 0.28 + 0.941
C
D
= 1.721
C

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 14


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 200 kN. This example


was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L
A A

Section A-A

L=6m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa N = 200 kN fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Section: 350WC197
G = 76923.08 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (compression)
Section compression capacity
Member compression capacity

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%

Section Axial Capacity, Ns (kN) 6275 6275 0.00%

Member Axial Capacity, Nc (kN) 4385 4385 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
r33 = 139.15 mm, r22 = 89.264 mm
Member:
le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame

Loadings:
N * 200 kN

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
(b f t w ) fy 350 20 250
e 5.89
2tf 250 2 28 250

Flange is under uniform compression, so:


ep 9, ey 16, ew 90

e 5.89 ep 9 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is compact

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Localized Buckling for Web:

h fy 331 250
e 16.55
tw 250 20 250

Web is under uniform compression, so:


ep 30, ey 45, ew 180

e 16.55 ep 30 , No localized web buckling


Web is compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Compression Capacity:


Section is not Slender, so Kf = 1.0
N s K f An f y 1 25,100 250 / 10
3

N s 6275kN

Member Weak-Axis Compression Capacity:


Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 22 k e 33 1
le 22 6000 le 33 6000
67.216 and 43.119
r2 2 89.264 r3 3 139.15

Buckling will occur on the 22-axis.

l e 22 K f fy 6000 1 250
n 22 67.216
r22 250 89.264 250

2 1 0 0 ( n 2 2 1 3 .5)
a 22 2 0 .3 6 3
n 2 2 1 5 .3 n 2 2 2 0 5 0
2

b 22 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

22 n 22 a 22 b 22 67.216 20.363 0.5 77.398

22 0.00326( 22 13.5) 0.2083 0


2 2
22 77.398
1 22 1 0.2083
90 90
22 2
2
1.317
77.398
2 22 2
90 90


90
2

1 1
c 22 22

22 22

2

90
c 22 1.317 1 1 0.6988
1.317 77.398

N c 22 c 22 N s N s

N c 22 0.6988 6275 4385 kN

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 1

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object bending strengths are tested in this example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored moment Mx = 1000 kN-m. This


example was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame design code. The
design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx

L
A A

Section A-A

L=6m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa Mx = 1000 kN-m fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Section: 350WC197
G = 76923.08 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Member bending capacity

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 1

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness Compact Compact 0%


Section Bending Capacity,
837.5 837.5 0%
Ms,major (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0%
Member Bending Capacity,
Mb (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 1

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
Z33 = 2,936,555.891 mm2
S33 = 3,350,000 mm2
J = 5,750,000 mm4
Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6
Member:
le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame

Loadings:
M m * 1000 kN -m

This leads to:


M 2 * 250 kN -m

M 3 * 500 kN -m

M 4 * 750 kN -m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
(b f t w ) fy 350 20 250
e 5.89
2tf 250 2 28 250

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 1

Flange is under uniform compression, so:


ep 9, ey 16, ew 90

e 5.89 ep 9 , No localized flange buckling


Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:

h fy 331 250
e 16.55
tw 250 20 250

Web is under bending, so:


ep 82, ey 115, ew 180

e 16.55 ep 30 , No localized web buckling

Web is compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:


Z e Z c min( S ,1.5 Z ) for compact sections

Z e 33 Z c 33 3, 350, 000 m m
2

M s 33 M s , m ajor f y Z e 33 250 3, 350, 000 / 1000


2

M s 33 M s , m ajor
837.5 kN -m

Member Bending Capacity:


kt = 1 (Program default)

kl = 1.4 (Program default)

kr = 1 (Program default)

lLTB = le22 = 6000 mm

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 1

l e k t k l k r l L T B 1 1.4 1 6000 8400 m m


2

2 EI EIw
2

M oa M o 2
22
G J 2
le le

2 2 10 5 2 10 8 2 10 4.59 10
2 5 12

M oa M o 2 76, 923.08 5, 750, 000 2
8, 400 8, 400

M oa M o 1786.938 kN -m

M 2
837.5 2
s 0.6 0.6
Ms 837.5
s
3 3
M oa M oa 1786.938 1786.938


s 0.7954

1.7 M m *
m 2.5
M 2 * M 3 * M 4 *
2 2 2

1.7 1000
m 1.817 2.5
250 500 750
2 2 2

M b m s M s 0.7954 1.817 837.5 M s

M b 1210.64 kN -m 837.5 kN -m

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object interacting axial and bending strengths are tested in this
example.

A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N= 200 kN;


Mx= 1000 kN-m. This example was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame
design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand
calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx
N

L
A A

Section A-A

L=6m

Material Properties Loading Design Properties


E = 200x103 MPa N = 200 kN fy = 250 MPa
v = 0.3 Mx = 1000 kN-m Section: 350WC197
G = 76923.08 MPa

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression & bending)


Section bending capacity with compression reduction
Member in-plane bending capacity with compression reduction
Member out-of-plane bending capacity with compression reduction

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Compactness` Compact Compact 0.00%


Reduced Section Bending Capacity,
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Mrx (kN-m)
Reduced In-Plane Member Bending
Capacity, 823.1 823.1 0.00%
Mix (kN-m)
Reduced Out-of-Plane Member 837.5 837.5 0.00%
Bending Capacity, Mo (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
I33 = 486,000,000 mm4
J = 5,750,000 mm4
Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6

Member:
lz=le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
=0.9

Loadings:
N * 200 kN

M m * 1000 kN -m

Section Compactness:
From example SFD IN-01-1, section is Compact in Compression
From example SFD IN-01-2, section is Compact in Bending

Section Compression Capacity:


From example SFD IN-01-1, N s 6275kN

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Compression Capacity:


From example SFD IN-01-1, N c 22 4385 kN

Section Bending Capacity:


From example SFD IN-01-2, M s 33 M s , m ajor 837.5 kN -m

Section Interaction: Bending & Compression Capacity:


N* 200
M r 33 1.18 M s 33 1 1.18 837.5 1 M s 33 837.5
N s 0.9 6275

M r 33 953.252 837.5

M r 33 837.5kN -m

Member Strong-Axis Compression Capacity:


Strong-axis buckling strength needs to be calculated:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 33 1
le 3 3 6000
43.119
r3 3 139.15

l e 33 K f fy 6000 1 250
n 33 43.119
r33 250 139.15 250

2100( n 3 3 13.5)
a 33 19.141
n 3 3 15.3 n 3 3 2050
2

b 33 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

33 n 33 a 33 b 33 43.119 19.141 0.5 52.690

33 0.00326( 33 13.5) 0.1278 0

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2 2
33 52.690
1 33 1 0.1278
90 90
33 2
2
2.145
52.690
2 33 2
90 90


90
2

c 33 33 1 1
33 33



2
90
c 33 2.145 1 1 0.8474

2.145 50.690

N c 33 c 33 N s N s

N c 33 0.8474 6275
N c 33 5318 kN

Member Interaction: In-Plane Bending & Compression Capacity:


M m in 0
m 0
M m ax 1000

Since the section is compact,


1 m
3
N* 1 m
3
N*
M i M s 33 1 1 1.18 1
2 N c 33 2 N c 33

1 0
3
200 1 0
3
200
M i 837.5 1 1 1.18 1
2 0.9 5318 2 0.9 5318

M i 823.11 kN -m

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Member Interaction: Out-of-Plane Bending & Compression Capacity:


1
bc
1 1 m
3
N *

m
0 .4 0 .2 3
2 2 N c 2 2

1
bc
1 0 1 0 3 200
0.4 0.23
2 2 0.9 4385

bc 4.120

EIw
2
2 10 4.59 10
2 6 12

2
lz 6000
2
N oz G J 76923.08 5.75 10
6

I 33 I 22 4.86 2 10 8
Ag 25100

N oz 4.423 10
11
kN

M b 33 o m s M sx w/ an assumed uniform moment such that m =1.0


M b 33 o 1.0 0.7954 837.5 666.145 kN -m

N * N*
M o 33 bc M b 33 o 1 1 M r 33
N c 22
N oz

200 200
M o 33 4.12 666.145 1 1 11
2674 837.5
0.9 4385 0.9 4.423 10
M o 33 837.5 kN -m

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ACI 318-08 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.

A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.


This example is tested using the ACI 318-08 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 10"
CL

2.5" 13.5"

A
Section A-A
10' = 120"

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 3600 k/in2 d = 13.5 in fc = 4 k/in2
= 0.2 b = 10.0 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 I = 3,413 in4

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-08 Building Code.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mu (k-in) 1460.4 1460.4 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (in2) 2.37 2.37 0.00%

Design Shear Force, Vu 37.73 37.73 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (in2/in) 0.041 0.041 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
200
As,min = b w d = 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
fy

'
3 fc
= bw d = 0.427 sq-in
fy

f c 4000
1 0.85 0.05 0.85
1000

0.003
c m ax d 5.0625 in
0.003 0.005

a m ax 1 c m ax = 4.303 in

Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft


2
wu l
M u
= 9.736 102/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
2M
a d
2 u
d = 4.183 in (a < amax)
0 . 85 f c b
'

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

M u 1460 . 4
As = =
a 0 . 9 60 13 . 5 4 . 183 / 2
fyd
2

As = 2.37 sq-in

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:
= 0.75
Check the limit of f c :

f c = 63.246 psi < 100 psi


The concrete shear capacity is given by:
Vc = 2 f c bd = 12.807 k
The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vs = 8 f c bd = 51.229 k
The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:
( Vc/2) = 6.4035 k
Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu (Vc/2),
Av
= 0,
s

else if (Vc/2) < Vu Vmax


Av (V u V c ) A
= v
s f ys d s m in

where:

Av
b b 3

m ax 50 w , w f c
s m in f f 4

yt yt

else if Vu > Vmax,


a failure condition is declared.

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Combo1

Vu = 9.736 (5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k
V c / 2 6.4035 k V u 37.727 k V m ax 64.036 k

Av 10 10 3
m ax 50 , 4, 000
s m in 60, 000 60, 000 4
2
Av in
m ax 0.0083 , 0.0079 0.0083
s m in in

Av (V u V c )
2 2
in in
= 0.041 0.492
s f ys d in ft

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ACI 318-08 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and


moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Pu=398.4 kips

Muy=332k-ft 22"

A A
2.5" 14"

10

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 b = 14 in fc = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 d = 19.5 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fc = 4 ksi fy = 60 ksi
b = 14 inch d = 19.5 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

87 87
cb = dt = 19.5 = 11.54 inch
87 + f y 87 + 60

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = C c C s T
where
C c = 0.85 f c ab = 0.85 4 14 a = 47.6 a
'

C s = As
'
f y
- 0.85 f c
'
= 4 60 - 0.85 4 = 226.4 kips
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
T = As f s = 4 f s f s
< fy
Pn = 47.6 a + 226.4 - 4 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1 a '
Pn = C
' c d - Cs d - d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 8.5 inch
' "
e = e + d = 10 + 8.5 = 18.5 inch.
1 a
Pn = 47.6 a 19.5 - 226.4 19.5 - 2.5
18.5 2

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2
Pn = 50.17 a - 1.29 a + 208 (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

a = 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pn = 50.17 11.43 - 1.29 11.43 + 208 = 612.9 kips
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.

19.5 - 13.45
fs = 87 = 39.13 ksi
13.45
s = t f s E s = 0.00135

6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:


Pn2 = 47.6 11.43 + 226.4 - 4 39.13 613.9 kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
M n = Pn e = 612.9 510.8 kips-ft
12

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,


13.45 - 2.5
s = 0.003 = 0.00244 > y 0.00207 ksi
'

13.45
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Calculate ,
d t = d = 19.5 inch, c = 13.45 inch
19.45 - 13.45
t (at the tension reinforcement level) = 0.003 = 0.00135
13.45

Since t 0.002 , then = 0.65

Pn = 0.65 612.9 398.4 kips


M n = 0.65 510.8 332 k-ft.

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ACI 318-11 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.

A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.


This example is tested using the ACI 318-11 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 10"
CL

2.5" 13.5"

A
Section A-A
10' = 120"

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 3600 k/in2 d = 13.5 in fc = 4 k/in2
= 0.2 b = 10.0 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 I = 3,413 in4

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-11 Building Code.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mu (k-in) 1460.4 1460.4 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (in2) 2.37 2.37 0.00%

Design Shear Force, Vu 37.73 37.73 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (in2/in) 0.041 0.041 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
200
As,min = b w d = 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
fy

'
3 fc
= bw d = 0.427 sq-in
fy

f c 4000
1 0.85 0.05 0.85
1000

0.003
c m ax d 5.0625 in
0.003 0.005

a m ax 1 c m ax = 4.303 in

Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft


2
wu l
M u
= 9.736 102/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
2M
a d
2 u
d = 4.183 in (a < amax)
0 . 85 f c b
'

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

M u 1460 . 4
As = =
a 0 . 9 60 13 . 5 4 . 183 / 2
fyd
2

As = 2.37 sq-in

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:
= 0.75
Check the limit of f c :

f c = 63.246 psi < 100 psi


The concrete shear capacity is given by:
Vc = 2 f c bd = 12.807 k
The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vs = 8 f c bd = 51.229 k
The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:
( Vc/2) = 6.4035 k
( Vc + 50 bd) = 11.466 k
Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu (Vc/2),
Av
= 0,
s

else if (Vc/2) < Vu Vmax


Av (V u V c ) A
= v
s f ys d s m in

where:

Av
b b 3

m ax 50 w , w f c
s m in f f 4

yt yt

else if Vu > Vmax,


a failure condition is declared.

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Combo1

Vu = 9.736 (5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k
V c / 2 6.4035 k V u 37.727 k V m ax 64.036 k

Av 10 10 3
m ax 50 , 4, 000
s m in 60, 000 60, 000 4
2
Av in
m ax 0.0083 , 0.0079 0.0083
s m in in

Av (V u V c )
2 2
in in
= 0.041 0.492
s f ys d in ft

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ACI 318-11 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and


moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Pu=398.4 kips

Muy=332k-ft 22"

A A
2.5" 14"

10

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 b = 14 in fc = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 d = 19.5 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fc = 4 ksi fy = 60 ksi
b = 14 inch d = 19.5 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

87 87
cb = dt = 19.5 = 11.54 inch
87 + f y 87 + 60

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = C c C s T
where
C c = 0.85 f c ab = 0.85 4 14 a = 47.6 a
'

C s = As
'
f y
- 0.85 f c
'
= 4 60 - 0.85 4 = 226.4 kips
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
T = As f s = 4 f s f s
< fy
Pn = 47.6 a + 226.4 - 4 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1 a '
Pn = C
' c d - Cs d - d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 8.5 inch
' "
e = e + d = 10 + 8.5 = 18.5 inch.
1 a
Pn = 47.6 a 19.5 - 226.4 19.5 - 2.5
18.5 2

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2
Pn = 50.17 a - 1.29 a + 208 (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

a = 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pn = 50.17 11.43 - 1.29 11.43 + 208 = 612.9 kips
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.

19.5 - 13.45
fs = 87 = 39.13 ksi
13.45
s = t f s E s = 0.00135

6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:


Pn2 = 47.6 11.43 + 226.4 - 4 39.13 613.9 kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
M n = Pn e = 612.9 510.8 kips-ft
12

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,


13.45 - 2.5
s = 0.003 = 0.00244 > y 0.00207 ksi
'

13.45
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Calculate ,
d t = d = 19.5 inch, c = 13.45 inch
19.45 - 13.45
t (at the tension reinforcement level) = 0.003 = 0.00135
13.45

Since t 0.002 , then = 0.65

Pn = 0.65 612.9 398.4 kips


M n = 0.65 510.8 332 k-ft.

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001


Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced T-Beam

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify slab flexural design. The load level is
adjusted for the case corresponding to the following conditions:

The stress-block extends below the flange but remains within the balanced
condition permitted by AS 3600-09.

The average shear stress in the beam is below the maximum shear stress
allowed by AS 3600-09, requiring design shear reinforcement.

A simple-span, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 500-mm-deep T-beam with a


flange 100 mm thick and 600 mm wide is considered. The beam is shown in
Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite element mesh of frame elements
automatically generated. The maximum element size has been specified to be
500 mm. The beam is supported by columns without rotational stiffnesses and
with very large vertical stiffness (1 1020 kN/m).

The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL30) and one live load case (LL130), with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 30, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combinations (COMB130) is defined using the AS 3600-09 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead load and 1.5 for live load. The model is analyzed for both
of these load cases and the load combination.

The beam moment and shear force are computed analytically. Table 1 shows the
comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2 shows the
comparison of the design shear reinforcements.

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS2013
REVISION NO.: 0

600 m m

75 m m 100 m m

500 m m

75 m m

300 m m

B e a m S e c tio n

2000 m m 2000 m m 2000 m m

S h e a r F o rc e

B e n d in g M o m e n t

Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Clear span, L = 6000 mm
Overall depth, h = 500 mm
Flange thickness, Ds = 100 mm
Width of web, bw = 300 mm
Width of flange, bf = 600 mm
Depth of tensile reinf., dsc = 75 mm

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Effective depth, d = 425 mm


Depth of comp. reinf., d' = 75 mm

Concrete strength, f c = 30 MPa


Yield strength of steel, fy = 460 MPa
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m3
Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 25x105 MPa
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 2x108 MPa
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2

Dead load, Pd = 30 kN
Live load, Pl = 130 kN

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement

RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip.
They match exactly for this problem. Table 1 also shows the design
reinforcement comparison.

Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements

Reinforcement Area (sq-cm)

Method Moment (kN-m) As+

ETABS 462 33.512

Calculated 462 33.512



A s ,m in = 3.00 sq-cm

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements

Av
Reinforcement Area,
s
(sq-cm/m)

Shear Force (kN) ETABS Calculated

231 12.05 12.05

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-2009 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.8 for bending
0.67 2 0.85, w here 2 1.0 0.003 f c ' 0.91 , use 2 0.85

0.67 0.85, w here 2 1.05 0.007 f c ' 0.84 , use 0.84

k u 0.36

a max k u d 0.84 0.36 425 128.52 m m

f ct , f
2
D
Ast . m in b bw d
d f sy

where for L- and T-Sections with the web in tension:


D h 500 m m

1/ 4
bf Ds bf
b 0.20 1 0.4 0.18 0.20 = 0.2378
bw D bw

f 'ct , f 0.5 f 'c 0.5 30 3.3 M P a

f sy f y 460 M P a 500 M P a

f ct , f
2
D
Ast . m in 0.2378 bd
d f sy

= 0.2378 (500/425)2 3.3/460 300425


= 299.9 mm2

COMB130
V* = (1.2Pd + 1.5Pl) = 231kN
*
V L

*
M = 462 kN-m
3
The depth of the compression block is given by:

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS2013
REVISION NO.: 0

*
2M
ad d
2
= 100.755 mm (a > Ds), so design as a T-beam.
2 f 'c b f

The compressive force developed in the concrete alone is given by the following
methodology:
The first part of the calculation is for balancing the compressive force from the
flange, Cf, and the second part of the calculation is for balancing the compressive
force from the web, Cw. Cf is given by:

C f 2 f c b f b w m in D s , a m ax 765 kN

Therefore,

Cf 765
As 1 1663.043 m m
2

f sy 460

and the portion of M* that is resisted by the flange is given by:

m in D s , a m ax
M uf C f d = 229.5 kN-m
2

Again, the value for is 0.80 by default. Therefore, the balance of the
moment, M* to be carried by the web is:
M uw M M uf
*
= 462 229.5 = 232.5
The web is a rectangular section of dimensions bw and d, for which the design
depth of the compression block is recalculated as:
2 M uw
a1 d d
2
= 101.5118 mm
2 f c b w

a1 amax , so no compression reinforcement is needed, and the area of tension


reinforcement is then given by:

M uw
As 2 = 1688.186 mm2
a
f sy d 1
2

A st A s1 A s 2 = 3351.23 sq-mm = 33.512 sq-cm

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
= 0.7 for shear
Calculated at the end of the beam, so M=0 and Ast = 0.
The shear force carried by the concrete, Vuc, is calculated as:
1 3
A
V uc 1 2 3 bv d o f cv st 0 kN
bv d o
where,

f c = 3.107 N/mm2
1/ 3
f cv 4M Pa

do
1 1.1 1.6 1.1 =1.2925,
1000

2 = 1 since no significant axial load is present


3 = 1
bv = bw = 300mm as there are no grouted ducts
do = d = 425 mm
The shear force is limited to a maximum of:
V u .m ax 0.2 f c bd o = 765 kN

And the beam must have a minimum shear force capacity of:

Vu .min Vuc 0.6 bw d o 0 0.6 300 425 77 kN

V 231 kN V uc / 2 0 , so reinforcement is needed.


*

V 231 kN V u . max 535.5 kN , so concrete crushing does not occur.


*

Asv
bw f 'c bv
mm
2

m ax 0.35 , 0.06 m ax 228.26, 214.33


s m in

f sy f sy

m

2
Asv mm
228.26
s m in m

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS2013
REVISION NO.: 0

COMB130
Since Vu . min 53.55 kN V * 231 kN Vu . max 535.5 kN

A sv V *
V uc
A sv

s f sy d o cot v s m in

v = the angle between the axis of the concrete compression strut and the
longitudinal axis of the member, which varies linearly from 30
degrees when V*=Vu,min to 45 degrees when V*=Vu,max = 35.52
degrees
v = 35.52 degrees

Asv 213 0 mm
2
Asv mm
2

1205.04 228.26
s 0.7 460 425 cot 35.52 o
m s m in m

2
Asv cm
12.05
s m

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 8


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

AS 3600-2009 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load


N = 1733 kN and moment My = 433 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1733 kN

My= 433 kN-m


550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fcu = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.004 1.00 0.4%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-2009 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL


fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
600 600
cb = dt = 490 = 277.4 mm
600 + f y 600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N = Cc Cs T

where
C c 2 f cab 0.85 30 350 a 8925 a
C s As f y
2 f c 2500 460 0.85 30 1, 086, 250 N
Assume compression steel yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
T = As f = 2500 f s 2500 f s f s
< fy
N 1 8925 a 1.086, 250 2500 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N2 C c d C s d d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm

1 a
N 8925 a 490 1, 086, 250 490 60
465 2

2
N 9404.8 a 9.597 a 1, 004, 489 (Eqn. 2)

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 333.9 mm, which exceeds cb (296 mm).


a 0.84 333.9 280.5 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 8925 280.5 9.597 280.5 1, 004, 489 2, 888, 240 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


4 9 0 3 3 3 .9
fs 6 0 0 2 8 0 .5 MPa
3 3 3 .9

s t f s E s = 0.0014

6) Substitute a = 280.5 mm and fs = 280.5 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 8925 280.5 1, 086, 250 2500 280.5 2, 887, 373 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,888,240 (less than 1% difference)


250
M N e 2888 722 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,


333.9 60
s 0.003 0.0025 y 0.0023
333.9

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is


N = 2888 1733 kN

e 250
M = 2888 0.60 2888 433 kN-m
1000 1000

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

BS 8110-1997 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

Example Description
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load


of 36.67 kN/m. This example was tested using the BS 8110-97 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 230mm
CL

60 mm 550 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 25x106 kN/m2 d = 490 mm fcu = 30 MPa
= 0.2 W = 36.67 kN/m fy = 460 MPa
G= 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 7.2 on page 149 of Reinforced Concrete
Design by W. H. Mosley, J. H. Bungey & R. Hulse.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kN-m) 165.02 165.02 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 964.1 964.1 0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kN) 92.04 92.04 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asv/sv (mm2/mm) 0.231 0.231 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-1997 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15

A s , m in 0.0013 b w h 0.0013 230 550 164.45 m m


2

Design Combo COMB1


wu = =36.67 kN/m
2
wu l
M u
= 165 kN-m
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
M
K= 2
= 0.0996 < 0.156
f cu b d

If K 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete


beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:
K
z = d 0 . 5 0 . 25 0.95d = 427.90 mm
0 .9

The ultimate resistance moment is given by:


M
As = 964.1 sq-mm
f y
1.15 z

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
L2
VU U d 92.04 kN at distance, d, from support
2

VU
v = 0.8167 MPa
b d

vmax = min(0.8 f cu , 5 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa

v v m ax , so no concrete crushing

The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:


1 1
0 . 79 k 1 k 2 100 A s 3
400 4
vc = 0.415 MPa
m bd d

k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,


and is conservatively taken as 1 .
1 1
f 3
40 3
k2 = cu = 1.06266, 1 k2
25 25

m, concrete = 1.25
100 A s
0.15 3
bd

100 A s 100 266


= 0.2359
bd 230 490
1 1
400 4
400 4

0.95 1, so is taken as 1.
d d

fcu 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v vmax
A sv v v c b w

sv 0 . 87 f yv

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Asv v v c bw 0.8167 0.4150


= 0.231 sq-mm/mm
sv 0.87 f yv 0.87 460

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

BS 8110-1997 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load


N = 1971 kN and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1971 kN

My= 493 kN-m


550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fcu = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994 1.00 0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-1997 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Column Strength under compression control


fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
700 700
cb dt 490 312 mm
700 f y / s 700 460 / 1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N Cc Cs T
where
0.67
Cc f cu ab 0.67 1.5 30 350 a 4667 a

A s 2500
Cs
s
f y
0.4467 f cu
1.15
460 0.4467 30 971, 014 N
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).
As fs 2 5 0 0 fs
T 2 1 7 4 fs fs f y
s 1.15

N 1 4, 667 a 971, 014 2174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N C c d C s d d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm

1 a
N 4, 667 a 490 971, 014 490 60
465 2
2
N 4917.9 a 5.018 a 897, 926 (Eqn. 2)

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a 0.9 364 327.6 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 4917.9 327.6 5.018 327.6 897, 926 1, 970, 500 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 364
fs 7 0 0 2 4 2 .3 MPa
364
s t f s E s = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:

N 1 4, 667 327.6 971, 014 2174 242.3 1, 973,163 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)

250
M = N e = 1971 493 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

365 60
s 0.0035 0.00292 y 0.0023
365

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, the section capacity is

N 1971 kN
M 493 kN-m

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load


of 92.222 kN/m. This example is tested using the CSA A23.3-04 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 400mm
CL

54 mm 600 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 25x106 kN/m2 d = 546 mm fc = 40 MPa
= 0.2 W = 92.222 kN/m fy = 400 MPa
G= 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 2.2 on page 2-12 in Part II on Concrete Design
Handbook of Cement Association of Canada.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mf (kN-m) 415.00 415.00 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 2466 2466 0.00%

Design Shear, Vf (kN) 226.31 226.31 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm2/mm) 0.379 0.379 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

c = 0.65 for concrete


s = 0.85 for reinforcement

0.2 f c
As,min = b h = 758.95 mm2
fy

1 = 0.85 0.0015f'c 0.67 = 0.79

1 = 0.97 0.0025f'c 0.67 = 0.87

700
cb = d = 347.45 mm
700 f y

ab = 1cb = 302.285 mm

COMB1
2
wu l
M f
= 415 kN-m
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

2M f
a d
2
d = 102.048 mm
1 f 'c c b

If a ab, the area of tension reinforcement is then given by:

M f
As = 2466 mm2
a
s f y d
2

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4 4
As ,m in m in As ,m in , As , required m in 758.95, 2466 758.95 m m
2

3 3

Shear Design
The basic shear strength for rectangular section is computed as,
c = 0.65 for shear

1.00, for norm al density concrete

dv is the effective shear depth. It is taken as the greater of


0.72h = 432 mm or 0.9d = 491.4 mm (governing).

0.18 since minimum transverse reinforcement is provided

Vf
= 92.222 (3 - 0.546) = 226.31 kN

Vc c f c b w d v = 145.45 kN

V r , max 0 . 25 c f ' c b w d = 1419.60 kN

= 35 since f y 400 M P a and f 'c 60 M P a

Av V f
V c tan
= 0.339 mm2/mm
s s f yt d v

'
Av fc
0.06 b = 0.379 mm2/mm (Govern)
s m in fy

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N


= 2098 kN and moment My = 525 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


2098 kN

My= 525 kN-m

550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fc = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.029 1.00 2.90%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

700 700
cb = dt = 490 = 296 mm
700 + f y 700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pr = C c C s T
where
C c = c 1 f c ab = 0.65 0.805 30 350 a = 5494.1 a
'

C s = s As
'
f y
'

- 0.805 f c = 0.85 2500 460 - 0.805 30 = 926,181 N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
T = s As f s = 0.85 2500 f s 2125 f s f s < f y
Pr = 5, 494.1a + 926,181 - 2125 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1 a '
Pr = '
e
Cc d - Cs d - d
2


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
' "
e = e + d = 250 + 215 = 465 mm
1 a
Pr = 5, 494.1a 490 - 926,181 490 - 60
465 2
2
Pr = 5789.5 a - 5.91a + 856, 468.5 (Eqn. 2)

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 355 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.895 355 = 317.7 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pr = 5789.5 317.7 - 5.91 317.7 + 856, 468.5 = 2, 099, 32 7.8 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 350 mm.

490 - 355
fs = 7 0 0 = 2 6 6 .2 MPa
355
s = t f s E s = 0.0013

6) Substitute a = 317.7 mm and fs = 266.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pr2:


Pr2 = 5, 494.1 317.7 + 926,181 - 2125 266.2 2,106,124 .9 N
Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,012,589.8 (less than 1% difference)
250
M r = Pr e = 2 1 0 0 525 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,


355 - 60
s = 0.0035 = 0.00291 > y 0.0023
'

355
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

Pr = 2098 kN
M r = 525 kN-m

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EN 2-2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load


of 36.67 kN/m. This example is tested using the Eurocode concrete design code.
The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 230mm
CL

60 mm 550 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 25x106 kN/m2 d = 490 mm fck = 30 MPa
= 0.2 b = 230 mm fyk = 460 MPa
G= 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution.

Country c s cc k1 k2 k3 k4

CEN Default, Slovenia, Sweden, Portugal 1.5 1.15 1.0 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25

UK 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.40 1.25 0.40 1.25

Norway 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25

Singapore 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.40 1.25 0.54 1.25

Finland 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.44 1.10 0.54 1.25

Denmark 1.45 1.2 1.0 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25

Germany 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.64 0.80 0.72 0.80

Poland 1.4 1.15 1.0 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Design Design Shear, Shear


Tension
Moment, VEd Reinforcing,
Country Reinforcing, % diff.
Asw/s (sq-
MEd (kN-m) As+ (sq-mm) (kN) mm/m)

Method ETABS Hand ETABS Hand ETABS Hand ETABS Hand 0.00%

CEN Default, 165 165 916 916 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Slovenia,
Sweden, Portugal

UK 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

Norway 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

Singapore 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

Finland 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

Denmark 165 165 950 950 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

Germany 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

Poland 165 165 925 925 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for both of the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
m, concrete = 1.50
cc 1.0

k1 0.44 k 2 k 4 1.25 0.6 0.0014 / cu 2 1.25 k 3 0.54

f cd cc f ck / c = 1.0(30)/1.5 = 20 MPa

f yd f yk / s = 460/1.15 = 400 Mpa

1 . 0 for fck 50 MPa

0 .8 for fck 50 MPa


f ctm
A s , min 0 . 26 bd = 184.5 sq-mm,
f yk

where f ctm 0 . 3 f cwk


2/3
= 0.3(30)2/3 = 2.896 N/sq-mm

A s ,m in 0.0013bh = 164.5 sq-mm

COMB1

The factored design load and moment are given as,


wu = 36.67 kN/m


2
wu l
M = 36.67 62/8 = 165.0 kN-m
8
The limiting value of the ratio of the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state
to the effective depth, x / d lim , is given as,

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

x k1
for fck 50 MPa ,
d lim k2
where 1 , assuming no moment redistribution

x k1 1 0.44
0.448
d lim k2 1.25

The normalized section capacity as a singly reinforced beam is given as,

x x
m lim 1 = 0.29417
d lim 2 d lim

The limiting normalized steel ratio is given as,


x
lim 1 1 2 m lim = 0.3584
d lim

The normalized moment, m, is given as,


165 10
6
M
m = =0.1494 < m lim so a singly reinforced
bd f cd 230 490 1.0 20
2 2

beam will be adequate.

=1 1 2m = 0.16263 lim

f bd 1.0 20 230 490


As cd = 0.1626 =916 sq-mm
f yd 400

Shear Design
The shear force demand is given as,
V Ed L / 2 110.0 kN

The shear force that can be carried without requiring design shear reinforcement,

V R d , c C R d , c k 100 1 f ck k 1 cp b w d
1/ 3

V R d , c 0.12 1.6389 100 0.0 30 0.0 230 490 0 kN


1/ 3

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

with a minimum of:


V R d , c v m in k1 cp bd = 0.4022 0.0 230 490 45.3 kN

where,
200
k 1 2.0 = 1.6389
d

AS 0
1 0.0 0.02
bd 230 490
As = 0 for l at the end of a simply-supported beam as it taken as the tensile
reinforcement at the location offset by d+ldb beyond the point considered.
(EN 1992-1-1:2004 6.2.2(1) Figure 6.3)
N Ed
cp 0.0
Ac

C R d , c 0 .1 8 / c =0.12

v m in 0.035 k 0.4022
3/ 2 1/ 2
fck

The maximum design shear force that can be carried without crushing of the
notional concrete compressive struts,
V Rd ,m ax cw bzv1 f cd / cot tan
where,
cw 1.0

z 0.9 d 441.0 mm

f
v1 0 .6 1 ck 0 .5 2 8
250

1 v Ed
0.5 sin 5.33
0.2 f ck 1 f ck / 250

where,
V Ed
v Ed 0.9761
bw d

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

21.8 45 , therefore use 21.8

V Rd ,m ax cw bzv1 f cd / cot tan 369 kN

V R d , m ax V E d , so there is no concrete crushing.


The required shear reinforcing is,
Asw V Ed 110.0 1e 6
249.4 sq-mm/m
s zf yw d cot 460
441 2.5
1.15

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EN 2-2004 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load


N = 2374 kN and moment My = 593 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25 bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result
is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short, non-sway
member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


2374 kN

My= 593 kN-m


550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fck = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.009 1.00 0.90%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL


fck = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
700 700
cb = dt = 490 = 312 mm
700 + f y / s 700 + 460 / 1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N Cc Cs T
where
f ck 30
C c cc a b 1 .0 350a 7000a
c 1 .5

A s f ck 2500 30
Cs f y cc 460 1.0 956, 521.7 N
s c 1.15 1.5

Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).


As fs 2 5 0 0 fs
T 2 1 7 4 fs fs f y
s 1.15
N 1 7, 000 a 956, 521.7 2174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N2 C c d C s d d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm
1 a
N2 7, 000 a 490 956, 521.7 490 60
465 2
2
N 2 = 7376.3 a - 7.527a + 884, 525.5 (Eqn. 2)

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 356 mm, which exceed cb (312 mm).


a 0.8 356 284.8 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 7376.3 284.8 7.527 284.8 884, 525.5 2, 374,173 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 356 mm.


490 356
fs 7 0 0 2 6 3 .4 MPa
356
s t f s E s = 0.00114

6) Substitute a = 284.8 mm and fs = 263.4 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 7, 000 284.8 956, 522 2174 263.5 2, 377, 273 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2, 374,173 (less than 1% difference)

250
M N e 2374 593.5 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,


356 60
s 0.0035 0.0029 y 0.0023
356

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is


N = 2,374 kN
M = 593 kN-m

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HK CP-2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load of 36.67 kN/m.


This example is tested using the HK CP 2004 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


230mm
CL A

60 mm 550 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 25x106 kN/m2 d = 490 mm fcu = 30 MPa
= 0.2 w = 36.67 kN/m fy = 460 MPa
G= 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

CONCLUSION
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution based on section 6.1 of Hong Kong Code of Practice for Structural
Use of Concrete 2004.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, M (kN-m) 165.02 165.02 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 964 964 0.00%

Design Shear, V (kN) 92.04 92.04 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm2/mm) 0.231 0.231 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: HK CP-2004 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
A s ,m in 0.0013bh

= 164.5 sq-mm

Design Combo COMB1


wu = =36.67 kN/m
2
wu l
M u
= 165 kN-m
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
M
K= 2
= 0.0996 < 0.156
f cu b d

If K 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete


beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:
K
z = d 0 . 5 0 . 25 0.95d = 427.900 mm
0 .9

The ultimate resistance moment is given by:


M
As = 964 sq-mm
f y
1.15 z

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
Vu = =92.04 kN at a distance, d, from support
V
v = 0.8167 MPa
bd

vmax = min(0.8 f cu , 7 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa

v v max , so no concrete crushing

The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:


1 1
0 . 79 k 1 k 2 100 A s 3
400 4
vc = 0.4150 MPa
m bd d

k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,


and is conservatively taken as 1 .
1 1
f 3
40 3
k2 = cu = 1.06266, 1 k2
25 25

m, concrete = 1.25
100 A s
0.15 3
bd

100 A s 100 266


= 0.2359 0.15
bd 230 490
1 1
400 4
400 4

0.95 1, so is taken as 1.
d d

fcu 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v vmax
A sv v v c b w

sv 0 . 87 f yv

A sv v v c b w
= 0.231 sq-mm/mm
sv 0 . 87 f yv

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HK CP-2004 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load


N = 1971 kN and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with the computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1971 kN

My= 493 kN-m


550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fcu = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994 1.00 0.60%

COMPUTER FILE: HK CP-2004 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Column Strength under compression control


fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
700 700
cb dt 490 312 mm
700 f y / s 700 460 / 1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N Cc Cs T

where
0.67
Cc f cu ab 0.67 1.5 30 350 a 4667 a

A s 2500
Cs
s
f y
0.4467 f cu
1.15
460 0.4467 30 971, 014 N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
As fs 2 5 0 0 fs
T 2 1 7 4 fs fs f y
s 1.15
N 1 4, 667 a 971, 014 2174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N C c d C s d d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm

1 a
N 4, 667 a 490 971, 014 490 60
465 2
2
N 4917.9 a 5.018 a 897, 926 (Eqn. 2)

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceed cb (312 mm).


a 0.9 364 327.6 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 4917.9 327.6 5.018 327.6 897, 926 1, 970, 500 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


490 364
fs 7 0 0 2 4 2 .3 MPa
364

s t f s E s = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 4, 667 327.6 971, 014 2174 242.3 1, 973,163 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)


250
M = N e = 1971 493 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,


365 60
s 0.0035 0.00292 y 0.0023
365

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, the section capacity is

N = 1971 kN
M = 493 kN-m

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

IS 456-2000 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load


of 37.778 kN/m. This example is tested using the IS 456-2000 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 300mm
CL

37.5 mm 600 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 19.365x106 kN/m2 d = 562.5 mm fck = 15 MPa
= 0.2 w = 37.778 kN/m fy = 415 MPa
G= 8068715.3kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

The example problem is same as Example-1 given in SP-16 Design Aids for
Reinforced Concrete published by Bureau of Indian Standards. For this example
a direct comparison for flexural steel only is possible as corresponding data for
shear steel reinforcement is not available in the reference for this problem.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kN-m) 170.00 170.00 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 1006 1006 0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kN) 113.33 113.33 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asv/s (mm2/mm) 0.333 0.333 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 456-2000 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
m, concrete = 1.50
= 0.36
= 0.42
0.85
As ,m in bd = 345.63 sq-mm
fy

COMB1
Mu = 170 kN-m
Vu = 113.33 kN-m

0 . 53 if f y 250 M P a

0 . 53 0 . 05 f y 250 if 250 f y 415 M P a
x u ,m ax 165

d 0 . 48 0 . 02 y 415
f
if 415 f y 500 M P a
85

0 . 46 if f y 500 M P a

Xu , max
= 0.48
d

The normalized design moment, m, is given by


Mu
m = 0.33166
b w d f ck
2

x u , max x u , max
Mw,single = fckbwd2 1 = 196.436 kN-m > Mu
d d

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

So no compression reinforcement is needed

= 0.3983
xu 1 1 4 m

d 2
x
z d 1 u = 562 . 51 0 . 42 0 . 3983 = 468.406
d
Mu
As = 1006 sq-mm
f z
y s

Shear Design
Vu
v = = 0.67161
bd

max = 2.5 for M15 concrete


k = 1.0
1 if Pu 0 , U nder T ension

100 A s
0.15 3
bd
100 As
0.596
bd

c 0 .4 9 From Table 19 of IS 456:2000 code, interpolating between rows.

cd = kc = 0.49
The required shear reinforcement is calculated as follows:
Since v > cd


A sv 0.4 b v cd b 0.4 300 0.67161 0.49 300
m ax , m ax ,
s f y f y y 415 415

2
Asv mm
m ax 0.333, 0.150 0.333
s mm

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

IS 456-2000 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N


= 1913 kN and moment My= 478 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 25M
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1913 kN

My= 478 kN-m

550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fc = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997 1.00 0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 456-2000 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results. The larger variation is due to equivalent rectangular compression block
assumption.

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

700 700
cb = dt = 490 = 296 mm
700 + f y 700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc Cs T
where
0.36
Cc = f ck ab = 0.4286 30 350 a = 4500 a
0.84
'
As
f
2500
Cs = - 0.4286 f ck = 460 - 0.4286 30 = 972, 048 N
s
y
1.15
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
f < fy
As f s 2500 f s
T = = 2174 f s
s
s
1 .1 5
N 1 = 4500 a + 972, 048 - 2174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a '
N2 = '
Cc d - Cs d - d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
' "
e = e + d = 250 + 215 = 465 mm
1 a
N2 = 4500 a 490 - 972, 048 490 - 60
465 2
2
N 2 = 4742 a - 4.839 a + 898, 883 (Eqn. 2)

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 374 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.84 374 = 314.2 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N 2 = 4742 314.2 - 4.039 314.2 + 898, 883 = 1, 911, 037 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 - 374
fs = 7 0 0 = 2 1 7 .1 1 MPa
374
s = t f s E s = 0.0011

6) Substitute a = 314.2 mm and fs = 217.11 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 = 4500 314.2 + 972, 048 - 2174 217.4 1, 913, 765 N
Which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,911,037 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = N e = 1913 478 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,


374 - 60
s = 0.0035 = 0.0029 > y 0.0023
'

374
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 1913 kN
M = 478 kN-m

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NTC 2008 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load


of 36.67 kN/m. This example is tested using the Italian NTC 2008 concrete
design code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with
independent results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 230mm
CL

60 mm 550 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 25x106 kN/m2 d = 490 mm fck = 30 MPa
= 0.2 b = 230 mm fyk = 460 MPa
G= 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, MEd (kN- 165.00 165.00 0.00%


m)

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 933 933 0.00%

Design Shear, VEd (kN) 110.0 110.0 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asw/s (mm2/m) 345.0 345.0 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for both of the load combinations:
c, concrete = 1.50
cc 0.85

k1 0.44 k 2 k 4 1.25 0.6 0.0014 / cu 2 1.25 k 3 0.54

f cd cc f ck / c = 0.85(30)/1.5 = 17 MPa

fy 460
f yd = 400 Mpa
s 1.15

1 . 0 for fck 50 MPa

0 .8 for fck 50 MPa


f ctm
A s , min 0 . 26 bd = 184.5 sq-mm,
f yk

where f ctm 0 . 3 f cwk


2/3
= 0.3(30)2/3 = 2.896 N/sq-mm

A s ,m in 0.0013bh = 164.5 sq-mm

COMB1

The factored design load and moment are given as,


wu = 36.67 kN/m


2
wu l
M = 36.67 62/8 = 165.0 kN-m
8
The limiting value of the ratio of the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state
to the effective depth, x / d lim , is given as,

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

x k1
for fck 50 MPa ,
d lim k2
where 1 , assuming no moment redistribution

x k1 1 0.44
0.448
d lim k2 1.25

The normalized section capacity as a singly reinforced beam is given as,

x x
m lim 1 = 0.29417
d lim 2 d lim

The limiting normalized steel ratio is given as,


x
lim 1 1 2 m lim = 0.3584
d lim

The normalized moment, m, is given as,


165 10
6
M
m = =0.1758 < m lim so a singly reinforced beam
230 490 17
2 2
bd f cd
will be adequate.

=1 1 2m = 0.1947 lim

f bd 17 230 490
As cd = 0.1947 =933 sq-mm
f yd 400

Shear Design
The shear force demand is given as,
V Ed L / 2 110.0 kN

The shear force that can be carried without requiring design shear reinforcement,

V R d , c C R d , c k 100 1 f ck k 1 cp b w d
1/ 3

V R d , c 0.12 1.6389 100 0.0 30 0.0 230 490 0 kN


1/ 3

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

with a minimum of:


V R d , c v m in k1 cp bd = 0.4022 0.0 230 x 490 45.3 kN

where,
200
k 1 2.0 = 1.6389
d

AS 0
1 0.0 0.02
bd 230 490
As = 0 for l at the end of a simply-supported beam as it taken as the tensile
reinforcement at the location offset by d+ldb beyond the point considered.
(EN 1992-1-1:2004 6.2.2(1) Figure 6.3)
N Ed
cp 0.0
Ac

C R d , c 0 .1 8 / c =0.12

v m in 0.035 k 0.4022
3/ 2 1/ 2
fck

The maximum design shear force that can be carried without crushing of the
notional concrete compressive struts,
cot cot
V R d ,m ax zb c f 'cd 297 kN

2
1 cot

where,
z 0.9 d 441.0 mm

c 1.0 since there is no axial compression

f 'cd 0.5 f cd

90 for vertical stirrups


0

1 v Ed
0.5 sin 5.33
0.2 f ck 1 f ck / 250

where,

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

V Ed
v Ed 0.9761
bw d

21.8 45 , therefore use 21.8

The required shear reinforcing is,


6 2
A sw V Ed 1 110.0 10 mm
249.4
s zf yw d cot cot sin
441
460
2.5
m
1.15
The minimum required shear reinforcing is,
2
Asw mm
1.5 b 1.5 230 345.0 (controls)
s m in m

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NTC 2008 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N


= 2174 kN and moment My = 544 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5-25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


2174 kN

My= 544 kN-m


550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fck = 25 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.005 1.00 -0.50%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 25 MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3) d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

700 700
cb = dt = 490 = 296 mm
700 + f y 700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc Cs T
where
f ck 0.85 30
Cc = ab = 350 a = 5950 a
c 1.5
As f ck 2500 0.85 30
'

Cs = fy - = 460 - = 963, 043 N


s c 1.15 1.5
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
f < fy
As f s 2500 f s
T = = 2174 f s
s
s
1 .1 5
N 1 = 5, 950 a + 963, 043 - 2174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a '
N2 = '
Cc
d - Cs d - d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
' "
e = e + d = 250 + 215 = 465 mm
1 a
N2 = 5950 a 490 - 963, 043 490 - 60
465 2

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

2
N 2 = 6270 a - 6.3978a + 890, 556 (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 365 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.8 365 = 292 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N 2 = 6270 292 - 6.3978 292 + 890, 556 = 2,175, 893 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 356 mm.

490 - 365
fs = 7 0 0 = 2 4 0 .0 MPa
365
s = t f s E s = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 284.8 mm and fs = 263.4 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:

N 1 = 5950 292 + 963, 043 - 2174 240.0 2,178, 683 N

Which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,175, 893 (less than 1% difference)

250
M = N e = 2175 544 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

365 - 60
s = 0.0035 = 0.0029 > y 0.0023
'

365
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 2,174 kN
M = 544 kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

KCI 1999 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


30 cm
CL A

6.0 cm 49 cm

A
Section A-A
6.0 m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 3.37E105 kgf/sq-cm h = 55.0 cm fc = 305.9 kgf/sq-cm
= 0.2 b = 30.0 cm fy = 4690.69 kgf/sq-cm
G= 1.40E105 kgf/sq-cm d = 49.0 cm
8.8x1010416666.7kN/
m 2
Uniform factored load
u = 74.4082 kgf/cm (D+L)

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Design moment calculation, Mu.

Minimum tension reinforcement, As

Design Shear , Vu

Area of shear reinforcement, Av

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULT COMPARISON
The independent results are hand calculated based on the Korean KCI-99 code.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kgf-m) 33484 33484 0.00%

As (cm2) 19.46 19.46 0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kgf) 22322.5 22322.5 0.00%

Av/s (cm2/cm) 0.0621 0.0621 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: KCI 1999 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.85,

0.80 f 'c 14

As,min = m ax bd , bd = 4.39 sq-cm
fy fy

f c 2 8 0
1 0.85 0.007 0.8319
10

6000
c m ax d 27.50 cm
6000 f y

a m ax 1 c m ax = 22.88 cm

Comb1
u = 74.4082 kgf/cm


2
wu l
M u
= 74.4082 6002/8 = 3,348,400 kgf-cm = 33,484 kgf-m
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
2M
a d
2 u
d = 11.70 cm (a < amax)
0 . 85 f c b
'

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

M u 3, 348, 400
As = =
a 0.85 4690.69 49 11.70 / 2
fyd
2

As = 19.46 sq-cm

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:
= 0.80
The shear demand, Vu , is given as,
V u u ( L / 2) 22, 323 kgf
2

The concrete shear capacity is given by:


Vc = 0.53 f 'c bd 13, 626 kgf

The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vmax = V c 2.12 f 'c bd = 68,132 kgf

Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length is
calculated as follows:
If Vu Vc,
Av
= 0,
s

else if Vc < Vu Vmax,


Av Vu V
= ,
s f ys d

Av
0.2 f 'c 3.5
but at least, m ax b, b 0.0224 sq-cm/cm
s fy fy

else if Vu > Vmax,


a failure condition is declared.

Comb1
Vu = 22,323 kgf
Av (V u V c )
= = 0.0621 sq-cm/cm
s f ys d

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

KCI 1999 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 2020kN and


moment My = 505kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the calculated result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1971 kN

My = 493 kN-m

550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fcu = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.980 1.00 2.04%

COMPUTER FILE: KCI 1999 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
600 600
cb = dt = 490 = 277 mm
600 + f y 600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N Cc Cs T

where
C c 0.85 f 'c ab 0.85 30 350 a 8925 a
C s A s f y 0.85 f 'c 2500 460 0.85 30 1, 086, 250 N

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).


T A s f s 2500 f s f s f y
N 1 8925 a 1, 086, 250 2500 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N C c d C s d d
e 2

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm

1 a
N 8925 a 490 1, 086, 250 490 60
465 2
2
N 2 9405 a 9.5968 a 1, 004, 489 (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 335 mm, which exceed cb (277 mm).


a = 0.836 335 = 280 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 9405 280 9.5968 280 1, 004, 489 2, 885, 500 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


490 335
fs 6 0 0 2 7 7 .6 MPa
335

s t f s E s = 0.0014

6) Substitute a = 280 mm and fs = 277.6 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 8925 280 1, 086, 250 2500 277.6 2, 891, 250 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,885,500 (less than 1% difference)


250
M N e 2884 721 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,


335 60
s 0.003 0.0025 y 0.0023
335

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is


N 2885 2020 kN
M 721 505 kN-m

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RCDF 2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 6.58 Ton/m (64.528 kN/m). This example was tested using the Mexican
RCDF 2004 concrete design code. The computed moment and shear strengths are
compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

CL
W Ton/m A b

r
A
L

L=6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

h = 0.65 m
fc = 200 kg/cm2 (19.6133 MPa)
E= 1979899 kg/cm2 r = 0.05 m
= 0.2 fy = 4200 kg/cm2 (411.88 MPa)
b = 0.30 m
G= 824958 kg/cm2 W = 6.58 Ton/m
(64.528 kN/m)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Design moment calculation, M and factored moment resistance, Mu.

Minimum reinforcement calculation, As

Design Shear Strength, V, and factored shear strength, Vu

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 5.2 on page 92 of Aspectos Fundamentales
del Concreto Reforzado Fourth Edition by scar M. Gonzlez Cuevas and
Francisco Robles Fernndez-Villegas.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment (kN-m) 290.38 290.38 0%

As (mm2) 1498 1498 0%

Design Shear (kN) 154.9 154.9 0%

Av/s (mm2/m) 563 563 0%

COMPUTER FILE: RCDF 2004 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results for bending and an acceptable-conservative comparison for shear.

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

GEOMETRY AND PROPERTIES


Clear span, L = 6 m
Overall depth, h = 650 mm
Width of beam, b = 300 mm
Effective depth, d = 600 mm
Concrete strength, fc = 19.61 N/ mm2
Yield strength of steel, fy = 411.88 N/ mm2
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m3
Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 20.6x103 N/ mm2
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 20.0x104 N/ mm2
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
f 'c 19.61
fc 15.69 MPa
*

1.25 1.25
cEs
cb d = 355.8 mm
c E s f yd

amax = 1 c b = 302.4 mm

f c*
where, 1 1.05 , 0.65 1 0.85
140

0 . 22 f 'c
As ,m in bd 425 . 8 m m
2

fy

COMB1
u = 6.58 ton/cm (64.528kN/m)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

ul

2

Mu = 64.528 6.02/8 = 290.376 kN-m


8
The depth of the compression block is given by: (RCDF-NTC 2.1, 1.5.1.2)

2 Mu
ad d
2
*
= 154.2 mm
0.85 f c F R b

where FR 0.9
Compression steel not required since a < amax.

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

Mu 290376000
1498 m m
2
As = =
a 0.9(411.88) 600 154.2 / 2
FR f y d
2

Shear Design
The shear demand is computed as:
V u L / 2 d =15.79 ton (154.9 kN) at distance, d, from support for
this example
The shear force is limited to a maximum of,


V m ax V cR 0.8
*
fc A cv

The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:

V cR 0 .3 F R v 0 .2 2 0 f c Acv = 0.3 0.8 0.3665 15.69 300 600


*

=43.553 kN where FRv 0.8


The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:
2
Av 0.1 f c ' mm
b 289 (RCDF-NTC 2.5.2.3, Eqn 2.22)
s m in fy m

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Av Vu F R vV cR 154.9 0.8 43.553 mm


2

563
s F R v f ys d 0.8 411.88 600 m

(RCDF-NTC 2.5.2.3, Eqn 2.23)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RCDF 2004 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1794 kN


and moment My = 448 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with a computed result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1794 kN

My= 448 kN-m

550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fcu = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: RCDF 2004 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Column Strength under compression control


fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
600 600
cb dt 490 277 mm
600 f y 600 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N Cc Cs T
where
*
C c 0.85 f c
ab 0.85 0.8 30 350 a 7140 a

C s A s f y 0.85 f 2500 460 0.85 0.8 30 1, 099, 000 N


*
c

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).


T A s f s 2500 f s f s f y
N 1 7140 a 1, 099, 000 2500 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N C c d C s d d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm
1 a
N 7140 a 490 1, 099, 000 490 60
465 2
2
N 2 7542 a 7.677 a 1, 016, 280 (Eqn. 2)

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 347 mm, which exceeds cb (277 mm).


a = 1a = 0.836 347 = 290 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 7542 290 7.677 290 1, 016, 280 2, 557, 824 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


490 347
fs 6 0 0 2 4 7 .3 MPa
347

s t f s E s = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 290 mm and fs = 247.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 7140 290 1, 099, 000 2500 247.3 2, 551, 350 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,557,824 (less than 1% difference)


250
M N e 2552 638 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,


347 - 60
s = 0.003 = 0.0025 > y 0.0023
'

347

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = FR 2551 1794 kN
M = FR 638 448 kN-m

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001


Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify the flexural and shear design. The load
level is adjusted for the case corresponding to the following conditions:

The stress-block dimension, a, extends below, a m ax , which requires that


compression reinforcement be provided as permitted by NZS 3101-06.

The average shear stress in the beam is below the maximum shear stress
allowed by NZS 3101-06, requiring design shear reinforcement.

A simple-span, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 560-mm-deep beam is modeled.


The beam is shown in Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite
element mesh of frame elements, automatically generated. The maximum
element size has been specified to be 200 mm. The beam is supported by joint
restraints that have no rotational stiffness. One end of the beam has no
longitudinal stiffness.

The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL50) and one live load case (LL130) with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 50, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combination (COMB130) is defined using the NZS 3101-06 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead loads and 1.5 for live loads. The model is analyzed for
both of those load cases and the load combinations.

Table 1 shows the comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2


shows the comparison of the design shear reinforcements.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Clear span, L = 6000 mm
Overall depth, h = 560 mm
Width of beam, b = 300 mm
Effective depth, d = 500 mm
Depth of comp. reinf., d' = 60 mm
Concrete strength, fc = 30 MPa
Yield strength of steel, fy = 460 MPa
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m3
Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 25x105 MPa
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 2x105 MPa
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2

Dead load, Pd = 50 kN
Live load, Pl = 130 kN

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement

RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip
with the moments obtained using the analytical method. They match exactly for
this problem. Table 1 also shows the comparison of design reinforcements.

Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements

Reinforcement Area (sq-mm)


Moment
Method (kN-m) As+ As-

ETABS 510 3170 193

Calculated 510 3170 193

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements

Av
Reinforcement Area,
s
(sq-mm/m)

Shear Force (kN) ETABS Calculated

255 1192.5 1192.5

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-2006 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
b = 0.85
1 0.85 for f c 55M P a

1 0.85 for f c 30,

c
cb d = 283.02 mm
c f y Es

amax = 0.751cb= 180.42 mm


Ac b d 150, 000 m m
2

f c
Ac 446 . 5
4 fy
A s ,m in m ax mm2
1 . 4 Ac 456 . 5
fy

= 456.5 mm2

COMB130
V* = (1.2Pd + 1.5Pl) = 255 kN
*
V L

*
M = 510 kN-m
3

The depth of the compression block is given by:

*
2
2 M
ad d '
= 194.82 mm ; a > a m ax
1 fc b b f

Since a a m ax , compression reinforcing is required.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

The compressive force, C, developed in the concrete alone is given by:


C 1 f c ba m ax 1 , 380 . 2 kN

The resisting moment by the concrete compression and tension reinforcement is:
* a
M c C d m ax b = 480.8 kN-m
2

Therefore the moment required by concrete compression and tension


reinforcement is:
M M c 29.2 kN m
* * *
M s

The required compression reinforcing is given by:


*
M
A s 193 m m
s 2
, where
f s 1 f 'c d d b

a m ax
c b , m ax 0.75 c b 0.75 283.02 212.26 m m
1

c b ,m ax d '
f s c ,m ax E s fy ;
c b ,m ax

212.26 60
f s 0.003 200, 000 430 M P a f y 460 M P a
212.26

f s 430 M P a

The required tension reinforcing for balancing the compression in the concrete is:
*
Mc
As 1 3, 001 m m
2

a
f y d m ax b
2

And the tension required for balancing the compression reinforcement is given
by:
*
Ms
As 2 169.9 m m
2

f y d d ' b

Therefore, the total tension reinforcement, As As1 As 2 is given by:

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 6


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

A s A s 1 A s 2 3001 169.9 3170.5 m m


2

Shear Design
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
V C v C AC V , where

v C k d k a v b , and

k d 1.0 since shear reinforcement provided will be equal

to or greater than the nominal amount required.


k a = 1.0 (Program default)

A
v b 0.07 10 s f 'C , except v b is neither less than
bd

0.08 f 'C nor greater than 0 .2 f 'C and f 'C 50 M Pa

v C 0.4382

The average shear stress is limited to a maximum limit of,


vmax = min 0.2 f c , 8 M Pa = min{6, 8} = 6 MPa
For this example, the nominal shear strength provided by concrete is:
VC v C AC V 0.4382 300 500 65.727 kN
*

V
v 1.7 M P a v m ax ,
*
so there is no concrete crushing.
bw d

If * > max, a failure condition is declared.

For this example the required shear reinforcing strength is:


s = 0.75
*
V 255
VS VC = 65.727 = 274.3 kN
S 0.75

The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:


Since h 560 m m m ax 300 m m , 0.5 b w 0.5 300 150 m m

sc = 0.328 MPa

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 7


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

smax = 4.5 MPa

So sc < * smax, and shear reinforcement is required and calculate as:

Av VS 274.27 1E 6
1192.5 m m
2

s f yt d 460 500

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 8


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N*


= 2445 kN and moment My = 611 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


2445 kN

My= 611 kN-m

550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fc = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994 1.00 0.60%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-2006 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

600 600
cb = dt = 490 = 277 mm
600 + f y 600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= Cc Cs T
*
N
where
C c = 0.85 f c ab = 0.85 30 350 a = 8925 a
'

C s = As
'
f y
'

- 0.85 f c = 2500 460 - 0.85 30 = 1, 086, 250 N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
T = As f s = 2500 f s f s < f y
*
N = 8, 925 a + 1, 086, 250 - 2500 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1 a '
N =
*
'
e
Cc d - Cs d - d
2


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
' "
e = e + d = 250 + 215 = 465 mm
1 a
8, 925 a 490 - 1, 086, 250 490 - 60
*
N =
465 2
* 2
N = 9, 404.8 a - 9.6 a + 1, 004, 489.2 (Eqn. 2)

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 330 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.85 330 = 280.5 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N = 9, 404.8 280.5 - 9.6 280.5 + 1, 004, 489.2 = 2, 887, 205.2 N
* 2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 330 mm.

490 - 330
fs = 6 0 0 = 2 9 0 .9 MPa
330
s = t f s E s = 0.00145

6) Substitute a = 280.5 mm and fs = 290.9 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N*2:


N 2 = 8, 925 280.5 + 1, 086, 250 - 2500 290.9 2, 862, 462 .5 N
*

Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,887,205.2 (less than 1% difference)
250
719
* *
M = N e = 2877 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,


330 - 60
s = 0.003 = 0.00245 > y 0.0023
'

330
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 0.85 2877 = 2445 kN


*

M = 0.85 719 = 611 kN-m


*

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform unfactored dead load and


imposed load of 25 and 19 kN/m respectively spanning 6m. This example is
tested using the Singapore CP65-99 concrete design code. The flexural and shear
reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Dead Load=25kN/m b=300mm
CL A
Live Load=19kN/m

d=490 mm
h=600 mm

300mm A 300mm
Section A-A
6m
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa
fyv = 250 MPa
TECHNICAL FEATURES OF TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON

The detailed work-out of the example above can be obtained from Example 3.4
of Chanakya Arya (1994). Design of Structural Elements. E & FN Spon, 54-55

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kN-m) 294.30 294.30 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 1555 1555 0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kN) 160.23 160.23 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asv/sv (mm2/mm) 0.730 0.730 0.00 %

COMPUTER FILE: SS CP 65-1999 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed flexural results show an exact match with the independent results.

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
As , m in 0.0013 bh , where b=300mm, h=600mm

= 234.00 sq-mm

Design Combo COMB1


wu = =65.4 kN/m
2
wu l
M u
= 294.3 kN-m
8

wu l
Vu wu d = 160.23 kN
2

The depth of the compression block is given by:


M
K= 2
= 0.108 < 0.156
f cu b d

If K 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete


beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:
K
z = d 0 . 5 0 . 25 0.95d = 473.221 mm, where d=550 mm
0 .9

The ultimate resistance moment is given by:


M
As = 1555 sq-mm
f y
1.15 z

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
Vu = =160.23 kN at distance, d, from support
V
v = 0.9711 MPa
bw d

vmax = min(0.8 f cu , 5 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa

v v max , so no concrete crushing

The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:


1 1
0 . 84 k 1 k 2 100 A s 3
400 4
vc = 0.4418 MPa
m bd d

k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,


and is conservatively taken as 1 .
1 1
f 3
80 3
k2 = cu = 1.0, 1 k2
30 30

m = 1.25
100 A s
0.15 3
bd

100 As 100 469


= 0.2842
bd 300 550
1 1
400 4
400 4

0.95 1, so is taken as 1.
d d

fcu 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v vmax
Asv v v c bw 0.9711 0.4418
= 0.730 sq-mm/mm
sv 0.87 f yv 0.87 250

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1971 kN


and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the calculated result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1971 kN

My = 493 kN-m
550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 m fcu = 30 MPa


= 0.2 d = 490 mm fy = 460 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994 1.00 0.60%

COMPUTER FILE: SS CP 65-1999 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Column Strength under compression control


fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balanced condition:
700 700
cb dt 490 296 mm
700 f y 700 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:


N Cc Cs T
where
0.67
Cc f cu ab 0.67 1.5 30 350 a 4667 a

A s 2500
Cs
s
f y
0.4467 f cu
1.15
460 0.4467 30 971, 014 N
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).
As fs 2 5 0 0 fs
T 2 1 7 4 fs fs f y
s 1.15
N 1 4, 667 a 971, 014 2174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N C c d C s d d
e 2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e e d 250 215 465 mm

1 a
N 4, 667 a 490 971, 014 490 60
465 2
2
N 4917.9 a 5.018 a 897, 926 (Eqn. 2)

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceeds cb (296 mm).


a = 0.9 364 = 327.6 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 4917.9 327.6 5.018 327.6 897, 926 1, 970, 500 N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


490 364
fs 7 0 0 2 4 2 .3 MPa
364

s t f s E s = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 4, 667 327.6 971, 014 2174 242.3 1, 973,163 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)


250
M = N e = 1971 493 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,


364 60
s 0.0035 0.0029 y 0.0023
364

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is


N = 1971 kN
M = 493 kN-m

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TS 500-2000 Example 001


Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.

A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load of 36.67 kN/m.


This example is tested using the Turkish TS 500-2000 concrete design code. The
flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

A 230mm
CL

60 mm 550 mm

A
Section A-A
6m

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties


E= 25.000x106 kN/m2 d = 543.75 mm fck = 30 MPa
= 0.2 fy = 420 MPa

Clear span, L = 6000 mm


Overall depth, h = 550 mm
Width of beam, b = 230 mm
Effective depth, d = 490 mm
Concrete strength, fck = 30 MPa
Yield strength of steel, fyk = 420 MPa
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m3
Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 25x103 MPa
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 2x105 MPa
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2

-1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement

RESULTS COMPARISON

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Design Moment, Md (kN-m) 165.02 165.02 0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2) 1022 1022 0.00%

Design Shear, Vd (kN) 110.0 110.0 0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asw/s (mm2/mm) 0.2415 0.2415 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: TS 500-2000 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
f ck 30
f cd 20
mc 1.5

f yk 420
f yd 365
ms 1.15

cu E s
cb d = 304.6 mm
cu E s f yd

amax = 0.85 k1 c b = 212.3 mm


where, k1 0.85 0.006 f ck 25 0.82 , 0.70 k1 0.85

0 . 8 f ctd
As ,m in bd 315 . 5 m m
2

f yd

0.35 f cu 0.35 30
Where f ctd 1.278
mc 1.5

COMB1
d = 36.67 kN/m

d L

2

Md = 36.67 62/8 = 165.02 kN-m


8
The depth of the compression block is given by:

2
2 Md
ad d = 95.42 mm
0.85 f cd b

Compression steel not required since a < amax.

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

Md 165 E 6
As = =
a 365 490 95 .41 / 2
f yd d
2

As = 1022 mm2

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Shear Design
The shear demand is computed as:
L
Vd =110.0 kN at face of support for this example
2
The shear force is limited to a maximum of,
V max 0.22 f cd A w 496 kN

The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:


N d
V cr 0.65 f ctd bd 1 =93.6 kN, where N d 0
Ag

Vc 0.8Vcr 74.9 kN

The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:


If V d Vcr

2
Asw f mm
0.3 ctd b 0.2415 (min. controls) (TS 8.1.5, Eqn 8.6)
s m in f yw d mm

If Vcr V d V m ax

Asw V d Vc mm
2

0.1962 (TS 8.1.4, Eqn 8.5)


s f yw d d mm

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TS 500-2000 Example 002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1908 kN


and moment My = 477 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the computed result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


1908 kN

My = 477 kN-m
550mm

A A 60 mm 350mm
3m

Section A-A

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

Ec = 25x106 kN/m2 b = 350 mm fck = 25 MPa


= 0.2 d = 550 mm fyk = 420 MPa
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED


Tied reinforced concrete column design

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Percent
Output Parameter ETABS Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.992 1.00 0.80%

COMPUTER FILE: TS 500-2000 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Column Strength under compression control


fck = 25 MPa fyk = 420 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 167.46 mm < (2/3)d = 326.67 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
0.003 2x10
5
600
cb = dt = 490 = 305 mm
0.003 2x10 + f yk
5
600 + 420 / 1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc Cs T
where
C c = 0.85 f ck ab = 0.85 25 / 1.5 350 a = 4, 958 a

A s f ck 2500
Cs f yk 0.85 420 0.85 25 / 1.5 882, 246 N
s c 1.15
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
As f s 2500 f s
T =
s
=
1.15
2174 f s f s
< fy
N 1 4, 958 a 882, 246 2,174 f s (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


1 a
N C c d C s d d
e 2
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm
e = e + d = 250 + 215 = 465 mm
1 a
N 4, 958 a 490 882, 246 490 60
465 2
2
N 2 5525 a 5.3312 a 815, 840 (Eqn. 2)

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Assume c = 358.3 mm, which exceed cb (305 mm).

a = 0.85 358 = 304.6 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N 2 5525 304.6 5.3312 304.6 815, 840 1, 907, 643 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 359 mm.


490 358.3
fs 600 220.2 > 420 MPa
358.3
s = t f s E s = 0.0011

6) Substitute a = 304.6m and fs 221.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


N 1 4, 958 304.6 882, 246 2174 220.2 1, 907, 601 N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,002,751 (less than 1% difference)


250
M = N e = 1908 477 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,


358 60
s 0.003 0.0025 y 0.0021
358
Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is


N = 1908 kN
M = 477 kN-m

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 735 k and


moments Muy = 1504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 tb = 12 in f c = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 h = 60 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 As1= As5 = 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.007 1.00 0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model. The values of M u and Pu were large enough
to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where
Cc 0.85 fcab 0.85 4 12a 40.8a
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc' A2 fs 2 0.85 fc' A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5
Pn1 40.8a A1 fs1 0.85 fC A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A1 fs1 0.85 fc
(Eqn. 1)
A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 3s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

where Cs1 A1 f s1 0.85 f c ; Csn An f sn 0.85 f c ; Tsn f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 28
inch
e e d 24.54 28 52.55 inch.

4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),

a = 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 inch

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.003 = 0.0028; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
c
c s d
s 2 0.003 = 0.0014 f s 2 = 40.75 ksi
c
d c 2s
s3 s5 = 0.0000 f s 3 = 00.29 ksi
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.0014 f s 4 = 40.20 ksi
d c
d c
s5 0.003 = 0.0028 f s 5 = 60.00 ksi
c

Substitute in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal gives,

Pn1 = 1035 k
Pn2 = 1035 k

M n Pn e 1035(24.54) /12 = 2116 k-ft

6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.

t = 0.00244 , y = 0.0021
0.005 t
for y t 0.005 ; t c 0.712
0.005 y

7) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.7111035 735 kips


M n = 0.711 2115 1504 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 2384 k and moments Mu3 = 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 tb = 8 in f c = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 h = 98 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength under compression and bending

1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu


were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model interaction diagram. The values of M u
and Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to
one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn1 = Cc Cs T

where

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C cf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw 0.85 fc 8 a 8
Ccf 0.85 fc 8 98 40
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 As6 f s6
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 a 8 0.85 fc 8 98 40 A1 fs1 0.85 fc
A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
(Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about As6:
a tf
1 Ccf d - d Ccw d t f Cs1 d d
Pn2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 2 4s Cs3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts5 s

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 fc , Csn An fsn 0.85 fc , Tsn f sn Asn , and the bar strains
98 8
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
2
= 45 inches

e e d = 46.78 + 45 = 91.78 inches

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58


inches.

a 0.85 c 0.85 44.58 37.89 inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.00273; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
c
csd '
s 2 0.003 = 0.00152 fs2 = 44.07 ksi
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.003 = 0.00310 fs3 = 8.94 ksi
c
d c 2s
s 4 s6 = 0.00090 fs4 = 26.2 ksi
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00211 fs5 = 60.00 ksi
d c
d c
s6 0.003 = 0.00333 fs6 = 60.00 ksi
c

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give

Pn1 = 3148 k
Pn2 = 3148 k

M n Pn e 3148(46.78) /12 = 12,273 k-ft

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.

t = 0.00332 , y = 0.0021
0.005 t
for y t 0.005 ; t c 0.757
0.005 y

7) Calculate the capacity,

Pn = 0.757 3148 2384 kips


M n = 0.757 12, 273 9293 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 735 k and


moments Muy = 1,504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 tb = 12 in f c = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 h = 60 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 As1= As5 = 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.007 1.00 0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model. The values of M u and Pu were large enough
to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where
Cc 0.85 fcab 0.85 4 12a 40.8a
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5
Pn1 40.8a A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A1 fs1 0.85 fc
(Eqn. 1)
A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 3s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

where Cs1 A f s1 0.85 f c ; Csn An fsn 0.85 fc ; Tsn f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 28
inch
e e d 24.54 28 52.55 inch.

4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),


a = 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.0028; f s s E Fy ; f s1 60.00 ksi
c
csd '
s 2 0.003 = 0.0014 f s 2 = 40.75 ksi
c
d c 2s
s3 s5 = 0.0000 f s 3 = 00.29 ksi
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.0014 f s 4 = 40.20 ksi
d c
d c
s5 87 = 0.0028 f s 5 = 60.00 ksi
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 1035 k
Pn2 = 1035 k

M n Pn e 1035(24.54) /12 = 2116 k-ft

6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.

t = 0.00244 , y = 0.0021
0.005 t
for y t 0.005 ; t c 0.712
0.005 y

7) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.7111035 735 kips


M n = 0.711 2115 1504 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 2384 k and moments Mu3 = 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 tb = 8 in f c = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 h = 98 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength under compression and bending

1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu


were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model interaction diagram. The values of M u
and Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to
one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn1 = Cc Cs T

where
C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw 0.85 fc 8 a 8
Ccf 0.85 fc 8 98 40
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 As6 f s6
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 a 8 0.85 fc 8 98 40 A1 fs1 0.85 fc
(Eqn. 1)
A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6

3) Taking moments about As6:


a tf
1 Ccf d d Ccw d t f Cs1 d d
Pn 2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 2 4s Cs 3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts 5 s

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 fc , Csn An f sn 0.85 f c , Tsn f sn Asn , and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
98 8
= 45 inches
2
e e d 46.78 45 91.78 inches

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58


inches.

a = 0.85 c=0.85 44.58 = 37.89 inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain
then, f s f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.00273; f s s E Fy ; f s1 60.00 ksi
c
csd '
s2 0.003 = 0.00152 f s 2 = 44.07 ksi
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.003 = 0.00310 f s 3 = 8.94 ksi
c
d c 2s
s4 s6 = 0.00090 f s 4 = 26.2 ksi
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00211 f s 5 = 60.00 ksi
d c
d c
s6 0.003 = 0.00333 f s 6 = 60.00 ksi
c

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give

Pn1 = 3148 k
Pn2 = 3148 k

M n Pn e 3148(46.78) /12 = 12,273 k-ft

6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.


t = 0.00332 , y = 0.0021
0.005 t
for y t 0.005 ; t c 0.757
0.005 y

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

7) Calculate the capacity,

Pn = 0.757 3148 2384 kips


M n = 0.757 12, 273 9, 293 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. A reinforced masonry wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 556
k and moments Muy = 1331 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each
end and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center each of face module (The reinforcing is
not aligned with the conventional masonry block spacing for calculation
convenience. The same excel spreadsheet used in other concrete examples was
used here). The total area of reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio
is checked by hand calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013
program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 2250 k/in2 tb = 12 in f m = 2.5 k/in2


= 0.2 h = 60 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 750 k/in2 As1= As5 = 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.014 1.00 1.40%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 530-11 MASONRY WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Column Strength under compression control

1) A value of e = 28.722 inches was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu


were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model. The values of M u and Pu were large
enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the
neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that
equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where
Cc 1 fm ab 0.8 2.5 12a 24.0a
Cs A1 fs1 0.8 fm A2 fs 2 0.8 fm A3 fs 3 0.8 fm
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5
Pn1 24a A1 fs1 0.8 fm A2 fs 2 0.8 fm A3 fs 3 0.8 fm As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 3s Ts 3 2s Ts 4 s
e 2
(Eqn. 2)
where Cs1 A1 f s1 0.8 f m ; Csn An f sn 0.8 f m ; Tsn f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 28
inch
e e d 28.722 28 56.72 inch.

4) Using c = 32.04 inch (from iteration),

a = 0.80 332.04 = 25.64 inch

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0025 and c= 32.04 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
cd '
s1 0.0025 = 0.00207; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
c
csd '
s 2 0.0025 = 0.00125 f s 2 = 36.30 ksi
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.0025 = 0.00016 f s 3 = 4.62 ksi
c
d cs
s 4 0.0025 = 0.00093 f s 4 = 27.10 ksi
c
d c
s5 0.0025 = 0.00203 f s 5 = 58.70 ksi
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 618 k;
Pn2 = 618 k

M n Pn e 618(28.72) /12 = 1479 k-ft

6) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.9 618 556 kips


M n = 0.9 1479 1331 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 1496 k and moments Mu3 = 7387 k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 3600 k/in2 tb = 8 in f c = 4 k/in2


= 0.2 h = 98 in fy = 60 k/in2
G= 1500 k/in2 As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 530-11 MASONRY WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength under compression and bending

1) A value of e = 59.24 inches was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu


were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model interaction diagram. The values of M u
and Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to
one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn1 = Cc Cs T

where

Cc 1 fm ab 0.8 2.5 12a 24.0a


Cs A1 fs1 0.8 fm A2 fs 2 0.8 fm A3 fs 3 0.8 fm
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5 As6 f s6
Pn1 24a A1 fs1 0.8 fm A2 fs 2 0.8 fm
(Eqn. 1)
A3 fs 3 0.8 fm As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf
1 Ccf d d ' Ccw d Cs1 d d ' Cs 2 4s
Pn2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts5 s

where Cs1 A1 f s1 0.8 f m ; Csn An f sn 0.8 f m ; Tsn f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 45
inch

e e d 59.24 45 104.24 inch.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 41.15


inches.

a 0.8 c 0.8 41.15 32.92 inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0025 and c = 41.15 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s f y :
cd '
s1 0.0025 = 0.00226; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
c
csd '
s2 0.0025 = 0.00116 f s 2 = 33.74 ksi
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.0025 = 0.00007 f s 3 = 2.03 ksi
c
d c 2s
s4 s6 = 0.00102 f s 4 = 29.7 ksi
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00212 f s 5 = 60.00 ksi
d c
d c
s6 0.0025 = 0.00321 f s 6 = 60.00 ksi
c

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give

Pn1 = 1662 k
Pn2 = 1662 k

M n Pn e 1662(41.15) /12 = 8208 k-ft

6) Calculate the capacity,

Pn = 0.9 1622 1496 kips


M n = 0.9 8208 7387 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3438 kN and


moments Muy = 2003 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d = 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-09 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 582.6 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

Cc 0.85 fcab 0.85 30 300a 7650a


Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5
Pn1 7650a A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc
(Eqn. 1)
A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d ' Cs 2 3s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 fc ; Cs 2 A2 f s 2 0.85 f c ; Cs 3 f s 3 0.85 f c ;


Ts 4 f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700mm

e e d 582.6 700 1282.61 mm.

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Using c = 821.7 mm (from iteration),

a = c = 0.84 821.7=690.2 mm, where 1.05 0.007( f c) 0.84

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 30 inch, the steel stresses and
strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then f s f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.0028; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.00 ksi
c
csd '
s 2 0.003 = 0.0015 f s 2 = 307.9 ksi
c
d c 2 s
s3 s5 = 0.0003 f s 3 = 52.3 ksi
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.0010 f s 4 = 203.2 ksi
d c
d c
s5 0.003 = 0.0023 f s 5 = 458.8 ksi
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 5289 kN
Pn2 = 5289 kN

M n Pn e 5289(582.6) /1000000 = 3081 k-ft

6) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.65 5289 3438 kN


M n = 0.65 3081 2003 kN-m

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
11175 kN and moments Muy = 12564 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)
TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-09 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1124.3 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T
where

Cc = 0.85 f c' ab = 0.85 30 300a = 7650a

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw 0.85 fc 200 a 200
Ccf 0.85 fc 200 2500
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 a 8 0.85 fc 8 98 A1 fs1 0.85 fc
(Eqn. 1)
A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6

3) Taking moments about As6:


a tf
1 Ccf d d ' Ccw d t f Cs1 d d
Pn2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 2 4s Cs3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts5 s

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 fc , Csn An fsn 0.85 fc , Tsn fsn Asn , and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
2500 200
= 1150 mm
2

e e d 1124.3 1150 2274.3 mm

(4) Using c = 1341.6 mm (from iteration)

a 1c 0.85 1341.6 1140.4 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1341.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.003 = 0.00278; fs s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.003 = 0.00199 f s 2 = 398.7 MPa
c
c 2s d
s3 0.003 = 0.00121 f s 3 = 242.2 MPa
c
d c 2s
s 4 s 6 = 0.00080 f s 4 = 160.3 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s 6 = 0.00158 f s 5 = 16.8 MPa
d c
d c
s 6 0.003 = 0.00237 f s 6 = 460.0 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give,

Pn1 = 17192 kN
Pn2 = 17192 kN

M n Pn e 17192(1124.3) /1000000 = 19329 kN-m

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

6) Calculate ,
Pn 0.65 17192 11175 kN
M n 0.65 19329 12564 kN-m

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3246 kN and


moments Muy = 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d = 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997 1.00 0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-97 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

700 700
cb dt 1450 922.7 mm
700 f y / s 700 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

0.67 0.67
Cc fcu ab 30 300a 4020a
m 1.5
As1 0.67 As2 0.67 As3 0.67
Cs f s1 fc fs 2 fc fs 3 fc
s m s m s m
A A
T s 4 fs 4 s 5 fs 5
s s
As1 0.67 As2 0.67
Pn1 4709a f s1 fc fs 2 fc
s m s m
(Eqn. 1)
As3 0.67 As 4 A
fs 3 fc fs 4 s 5 fs 5
s m s s

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 d d s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2
As1 0.67 A 0.67 A 0.67
where Cs1 f s1 f c ; Cs 2 s 2 f s 2 f c ; Cs 3 s 3 f s 3 f c ;
s m s m s m
A 0.67
Ts 4 s 4 f s 4 f c and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s m

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm


e e d 606.5 700 1306.5 mm.

4) Using c = 875.2 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (722.7mm).


a 1c 0.9 875.2 787.7 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.00330; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
csd '
s 2 0.003 = 0.00190 f s 2 = 380.1 MPa
c
d c 2s
s3 s5 = 0.00050 f s 3 = 100.1 MPa
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.00090 f s 4 = 179.8 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.003 = 0.00230 f s 5 = 459.7 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 3246 kN
Pn2 = 3246 kN

M n Pn e 3246(606.5) /1000 = 1969 kN-m

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
8368 kN and moments Muy = 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.001 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-97 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where
C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.67
Ccw fcu 200 a 200
m
0.67
Ccf fcu 200 2500
m
As1 0.67 As2 0.67 As3 0.67
Cs f s1 fc fs 2 fc fs 3 fc
s m s m s m
A A A
T = s4 f s4 s5 f s5 s6 f s6
s s s
0.67 0.67 A 0.67
Pn1 fcu 200 a 200 fcu 200 2500 s1 fs1 fc
m m s m
(Eqn. 1)
As2 0.67 As3 0.67 As 4 As 5 As 6
fs 2 fc fs 3 fc fs 4 fs 5 fs 6
s m s m s s s

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf
1 Ccf d d Ccw d tf Cs1 d d Cs 2 4s
Pn 2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts 5 s

As1 0.67 A 0.67 A 0.67


where Cs1 f s1 f c ; Csn sn f sn f c ; Tsn sn f sn f c
s m s m s m
and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 1150 mm

e e d 1430 1150 2580 mm.

4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),

a 1c 0.9 1160 1044 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
cd '
s1 0.0035 = 0.00320; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
csd '
s 2 0.0035 = 0.00181 f s 2 = 362.0 MPa
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.0035 = 0.00042 f s 3 = 84.4 MPa
c
d c 2s
s 4 s6 = 0.00097 f s 4 = 193.2 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00235 f s 5 = 460.00 MPa
d c
d c
s6 0.0035 = 0.00374 f s 6 = 460.00 MPa
c

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 8368 kN
Pn2 = 8368 kN

M n Pn e 8368(1430) /1000 = 11,967 kN-m

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3870 kN


and moments Muy = 2109 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at
each end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d = 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.038 1.00 3.80%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA-A23.3 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 545 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

700 700
cb dt 1450 875 mm
700 f y 700 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

Cc c 1 fcab 0.65 0.805 30 300a 4709a


Cs s As1 fs1 1 fc s As2 fs 2 1 fc' s As3 fs 3 1 fc
T s As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

Pn1 4709a A1 fs1 0.805 fc A2 fs 2 0.805 fc As 3 fs 3 As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 d d s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

where Cs1 s As1 fs1 1 fc ; Cs 2 s As2 f s 2 1 f c ; Cs 3 s As3 f s 3 1 f c ;


Ts 4 s f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700 mm

e e d 545 700 1245 inch.

4) Using c = 894.5 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (875mm).

a = 1c = 0.895 894.5 = 800.6 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.00330; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
c
csd '
s 2 0.003 = 0.00193 f s 2 = 387.0 MPa
c
d c 2s
s3 s5 = 0.00057 f s 3 = 113.1 MPa
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.00080 f s 4 = 160.8 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.0035 = 0.00217 f s 5 = 434.7 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 3870 kN
Pn2 = 3870 kN

M n Pn e 3870(545) / 1000 = 2109 kN-m

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
10687 kN and moments Muy = 13159 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994 1.00 0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA-A23.3-04 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 1231.3 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T
where

Cc = c 1 f cab = 0.65 0.805 30 300a = 4709a

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw = c 1 f c200 a - 200
Ccf = c 1 f c 2002500
Cs s As1 fs1 1c fc s As2 fs 2 1c fc s As3 fs 3 1c fc
T s As 4 fs 4 s As 5 fs 5 s As 6 fs 6

Pn1 c 1 fc 200 a 200 c 1 fc 200 2500 s As1 fs1 1c fc


s As2 fs 2 1c fc s As3 fs 3 1c fc s As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As6:


a tf
1 Ccf d d Ccw d t f Cs1 d d Cs 2 4 s
Pn 2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 3 3s Ts 4 2 s Ts 5 s
where Cs1 s As1 fs1 1c fc ; Csn s Asn fsn 1c fc ; Ts 4 s fsn Asn and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
d = 700 mm
e e d 1231.3 1050 2381.3 inch.

4) Using c = 1293.6 mm (from iteration),


a 1c 0.895 1293.6 1157.8 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0030 and c = 1293.6 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s f y :
c d
s1 0.0035 = 0.00323; fs s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.0035 = 0.00198 f s 2 = 397.0 MPa
c
c 2s d
s3 0.0035 = 0.00074 f s 3 = 148.1 MPa
c
d c 2s
s 4 s 6 = 0.00175 f s 4 = 100.9 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s 6 = 0.00299 f s 5 = 349.8 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.0035 = 0.00230 f s 6 = 460.0 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 10687 kN
Pn2 = 10687 kN
M n Pn e 10687(1231.3) /1000000 = 13159 kN-m

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 4340 kN and


moments Muy = 2503 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.993 1.00 0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: EUROCODE 2-2004 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 576.3 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

700 700
cb dt 1450 922.7 mm
700 f y / s 700 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn Cc Cs T
where
f 1.0 30
Cc cc ck ab 300a 6000a
m 1.5
As1 cc fck As 2 cc fck As 3 cc fck
Cs f s1 fs 2 fs 3
s m s m s m
A A
T s 4 fs 4 s 5 fs 5
s s
As1 cc fck As 2 cc fck
Pn1 6000a f s1 fs 2
s m s m
(Eqn. 1)
As 3 cc fck As 4 A
fs 3 fs 4 s 5 f s 5
s m s s

3) Taking moments about As5:

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 3s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

As1 cc fck As 2 cc f ck As 3 cc f ck
where Cs1 f s1 ; Cs 2 fs2 ; Cs 3 fs3 ;
s m s m s m
As 4
Ts 4 f s 4 and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm


e e d 576.73 700 1276.73 mm.

4) Using c = 885.33 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (922.7mm).

a = 1c = 0.80 885.33=708.3 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 885.33 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s f y :
c d
s1 0.0035 = 0.00330; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.0035 = 0.00192 f s 2 = 383.7 MPa
c
d c 2s
s3 s 5 = 0.00054 f s 3 = 107.0 MPa
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.00085 f s 4 = 169.7 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.0035 = 0.00223 f s 5 = 446.5 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 4340 kN
Pn2 = 4340 kN

M n Pn e 4340(708.3) /1000 = 2503 kN-m

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu =
11605 kN and moments Muy = 15342 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: EUROCODE 2-2004 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1322 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

Where

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
f 0.85 30
Ccw cc ck 200 a 200 200 a 200 3400(a 200)
m 1.5
f 0.85(30)
Ccf cc ck 200 2500 1000 200 2500 1000 5,100, 000
m 1.5

f f cc fck
Cs A1 fs1 cc ck A2 fs 2 cc ck A3 fs 3
m m m
f f f
T As 4 s 4 As 5 s 4 As 6 s 4
s s s
As1 cc fck As 2 cc fck
Pn1 3400( a 200) 5,100, 000 f s1 fs 2
s m s m
As 3 cc fck As 4 A A
fs 3 fs 4 s 5 fs 5 s 6 fs 6
s m s s s
(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf
1 Ccf d - d' Ccw d - tf Cs1 d - d'
Pn2 = 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs2 4s Cs3 3s Ts4 2s Ts5 s

As1 cc f ck As 2 cc f ck As 3 cc f ck
where Cs1 f s1 ; Cs 2 fs2 ; Cs 3 fs3 ;
s m s m s m
As 4
Ts 4 f s 4 and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm


e e d 1322 700 2472 mm.

4) Using c = 1299 mm (from iteration),

a 1c 0.895 1299 1163 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 1299 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.0035 = 0.00323; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.0035 = 0.00199 f s 2 = 398.2 MPa
c
c 2s d
s3 0.0035 = 0.00075 f s 3 = 150.3 MPa
c
d c 2s
s 4 s6 = 0.00049 f s 4 = 97.5 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00173 f s 5 = 345.4 MPa
d c
d c
s6 0.0035 = 0.00297 f s 6 = 460.00 MPa
c

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 11605 kN
Pn2 = 11605 kN

M n Pn e 11605(1322) /1000 = 15342 kN-m

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3246 kN and


moments Muy = 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d = 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997 1.00 0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: HONG KONG CP-04 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

700 700
cb dt 1450 922.7 mm
700 f y / s 700 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

0.67 0.67
Cc = f cu ab = 30 300a = 4020a
m 1.5
As1 0.67 As2 0.67 As3 0.67
Cs f s1 fc fs 2 fc fs 3 fc
s m s m s m
A A
T = s4 f s4 s5 f s5
s s
As1 0.67 As2 0.67 '
Pn1 4709a f s1 fc fs 2 fc
s m s m
(Eqn. 1)
As3 0.67 As 4 A
fs 3 fc f s 4 s 5 fs 5
s m s s

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 d d s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

As1 0.67 A 0.67 A 0.67


where Cs1 f s1 f c ; Cs 2 s 2 f s 2 f c ; Cs 3 s 3 f s 3 f ;
s m s m s m c
A 0.67
Ts 4 s 4 f s 4 f and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s m c
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm
e e d 606.5 700 1306.5 mm.

4) Using c = 875.2 mm (from iteration), which is slightly more than cb (922.7 mm).
a = 1c = 0.9 875.2=787.68 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 875.2 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.0035 =0.00330; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.0035 =0.00190 f s 2 = 380.1 MPa
c
d c 2s
s3 s5 =0.00050 f s 3 = 100.1 MPa
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 =0.00090 f s 4 = 179.8 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.0035 =0.00230 f s 5 = 459.7 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 3246 kN
Pn2 = 3246 kN
M n Pn e 3246(606.5) /1000 = 1969 kN-m

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
8368 kN and moments Muy = 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.001 1.00 0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: HONG KONG CP-04 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.67
Ccw fcu 200 a 200
m
0.67
Ccf fcu 200 2500
m
As1 0.67 As2 0.67 As3 0.67
Cs f s1 fc fs 2 fc fs 3 fc
s m s m s m
A A A
T s 4 fs 4 s 5 f s 5 s 6 f s 6
s s s
0.67 0.67 A 0.67
Pn1 fcu 200 a 200 fcu 200 2500 s1 fs1 fc
m m s m
(Eqn. 1)
As2 0.67 As3 0.67 As 4 As 5 As 6
fs 2 fc fs 3 fc fs 4 fs 5 fs 6
s m s m s s s

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf
1 Ccf d d Ccw d tf C s1 d d C s 2 4 s
Pn 2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 3 3s Ts 4 2 s Ts 5 s

As1 0.67 A 0.67 A 0.67


where Cs1 f s1 f c ; Csn sn f sn f c ; Tsn sn f sn f c
s m s m s m
and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 1150 mm

e e d 1430 1150 2580 mm.

4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),

a 1c 0.9 1160 1044 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.0035 = 0.00320; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.0035 = 0.00181 f s 2 = 362.0 MPa
c
c 2s d
s3 0.0035 = 0.00042 f s 3 = 84.4 MPa
c
d c 2s
s 4 s6 = 0.00097 f s 4 = 193.2 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00235 f s 5 = 460.00 MPa
d c
d c
s6 0.0035 = 0.00374 f s 6 = 460.00 MPa
c

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 8368 kN
Pn2 = 8368 kN

M n Pn e 8368(1430) /1000 = 11,967 kN-m

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3146 kN and


moments Muy = 1875 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d = 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.035 1.00 3.50%

COMPUTER FILE: INDIAN IS 456-2000 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

F c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 596 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T
where
0.36
Cc = f ck ab = 0.4286 30 300a = 3857a , where a 0.84 xu
0.84
A A A
Cs s1 fs1 0.4286 fc s 2 fs 2 0.4286 fc s 3 fs 3 0.4286 fc
s s s
A A
T = s4 f s4 s5 f s5
s s
As1 A
Pn1 3857a fs1 0.4286 fc s 2 fs 2 0.4286 fc
s s
(Eqn. 1)
As3 A A
s
fs 3 0.4286 fc' s 4 fs 4 s 5 fs 5
s s

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 d d s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

As1 A
where Cs1 f s1 0.4286 f c ; Cs 2 s 2 f s 2 0.4286 f c ;
s s
A A
Cs 3 s 3 f s 3 0.4286 f c ; Ts 4 s 4 f s 4 and the bar strains and stresses are
s s
determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 700 mm
e e d 596 700 1296 mm.

4) Using c = 917.3 mm (from iteration)

a 1c 0.84 917.3 770.5 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 917.3 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs f y :
cd '
s1 0.0035 = 0.00331; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
c
csd '
s2 0.0035 = 0.00197 f s 2 = 394.8 MPa
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.0035 = 0.00064 f s 3 = 127.7 MPa
c
d cs
s4 s5 = 0.00070 f s 4 = 139.4 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.0035 = 0.00203 f s 5 = 406.5 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 3146 kN
Pn2 = 3146 kN

M n Pn e 3146(596) /1000 = 1875 kN-m

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002

FRAME P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu= 8426
kN and moments Muy= 11670 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted below.
The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.003 1.00 0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: INDIAN IS 456-2000 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show a very close match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:

1) A value of e = 1385 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were taken


from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values for M u
and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a flexural D/C
ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by
iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T
where
C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.36
Ccw = f ck 200 a - 200 , where a 0.84x u
0.84
0.36
Ccf = f ck 200 2500-1000
0.84
A' 0.36 As2' 0.36 As3' 0.36
Cs = s1 f s1 - f ck + f - f ck f s3 - f ck
s 0.84 s 0.84 s 0.84
s2

A A A
T = s4 f s4 s5 f s5 s6 f s6
s s s
0.36 0.36 As1' 0.36 As2' 0.36
Pn1 = f ck 200 a - 200 + f ck 200 2500-1000 f s1 - f ck + f s2 - f ck
0.84 0.84 s 0.84 s 0.84
As3' 0.36 As4 A A
f s3 - f ck - f s4 s5 f s5 s6 f s6
s 0.84 s s s

(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

3) Taking moments about As6:

1 a tf
Pn2 =
e'Ccf d - d' Ccw d - 2 tf Cs1 d - d' Cs2 4s Cs3 3s Ts4 2s Ts5 s

(Eqn. 2)
A' 0.36 A' 0.36 A
Where Cs1 s1 f s1 - f ck ; Cs 2 sn f sn - f ck ; Ts 4 sn f sn and the bar
s 0.84 s 0.84 s
strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 1150 mm
e' = e + d " = 1138 +1150 = 2535 mm.

4) Using c = 1298.1 mm (from iteration)

a = 1c = 0.84 1298.1=1090.4 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1298.1 mm, the steel stresses and
strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then, f s f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 =0.00323; f s s E Fy ; f s1 460 MPa
c
csd '
s2 0.0035 =0.00199 f s 2 398.0 MPa
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.0035 =0.00075 f s 3 150.0 MPa
c
d c 2s
s4 s5 =0.00049 f s 4 98.1 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s5 =0.00173 f s 5 346.1 MPa
d c
d c
s6 0.0035 =0.00297 f s 6 460.0 MPa
c

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Substitute in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the two equations
are equal gives,

Pn1 = 8426 kN
Pn2 = 8426 kN

M n Pn e 8426(1385) /1000 = 11670 kN-m

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3545 kN and


moments Muy = 1817 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.016 1.00 1.60%

COMPUTER FILE: MEXICAN RCDF-04 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 512.5 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

Cc 0.85 fc*ab 0.85 0.8 30 300a 6120a


Cs A1 fs1 0.85 0.8 fc* A2 fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc* A3 fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc*
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5

Pn1 6120a A1 fs1 0.85 0.8 fc* A2 fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc*


(Eqn. 1)
A3 fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc* As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 3s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 0.8 fc* ; Cs 2 A2 f s 2 0.85 0.8 f c* ;


Cs 3 f s 3 0.85 0.8 f c* ; Ts 4 f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The
plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700mm
e e d 512.5 700 1212.5 mm.

4) Using c = 936.2 mm (from iteration)

a c 0.85 916.2 805 mm,

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 936.2 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.003 = 0.0028; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.00 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.003 = 0.0017 f s 2 = 343.6 MPa
c
d c 2s
s3 s5 = 0.0005 f s 3 = 119.3 MPa
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.0060 f s 4 = 105.4 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.003 = 0.0175 f s 5 = 329.3 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 5064 kN
Pn2 = 5064 kN

M n Pn e 5064(512.5) /1000000 = 2595 kN-m

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

7) Calculate Pn and, M n ,

Pn = 0.70 5064 3545 kips


M n = 0.70 2595 1817 k-ft.

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 5


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 10165 kN and moments Mu3 = 11430 kN-
m. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.000%

COMPUTER FILE: MEXICAN RCDF-04 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1124.4 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw 0.85 0.8 fc 200 a 200
Ccf 0.85 0.8 fc 200 1500
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 0.8 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5 As6 f s6

Pn1 0.85 0.8 fc 200 a 200 0.85 0.8 fc 200 1500 A1 fs1 0.85 0.8 fc
A2 fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As6:


a tf
1 Ccf d d Ccw d t f Cs1 d d
Pn2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs 2 4s Cs3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts5 s

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

where Cs1 A1 f s1 0.85 0.8 f c , Csn An f sn 0.85 0.8 f c , Tsn f sn Asn , and the
bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section,
2500 200
d = 1150 mm
2
e' = e + d " = 1124.4 +1150 = 2274.4 mm

4) Using c = 1413 mm (from iteration)

a = 0.85c = 0.85 1413=1201 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1413 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
cd '
s1 0.003 = 0.00279; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
c
csd '
s2 0.003 = 0.00181 f s 2 = 362.2 MPa
c
c 2s d '
s3 0.003 = 0.00083 f s 2 = 166.8 MPa
c
d c 2s
s4 s6 = 0.00014 f s 3 = 28.6 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s6 = 0.00112 f s 4 = 223.9 MPa
d c
d c
s6 0.003 = 0.00210 f s 5 = 419.3 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 14522 kN
Pn2 = 14522 kN
M n Pn e 14522(1124.4) /1000000 = 16328 kN-m

6) Calculate Pn and M n ,
Pn 0.70 14522 10165 kN
M n 0.70 16382 11430 kN-m

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001


P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 4549 kN and


moments Muy = 2622 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-06 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 576.2 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

Cc 0.85 fcab 0.85 30 300a 7650a


Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T = As4 f s4 As5 f s5

Pn1 7650a A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc


(Eqn. 1)
A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

3) Taking moments about As5:

1 a
Pn 2 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 3s Cs 3 2s Ts 4 s (Eqn. 2)
e 2

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 fc ; Cs 2 A2 f s 2 0.85 f c ; Cs 3 f s 3 0.85 f c ;


Ts 4 f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700mm

e e d 576.2 700 1276.4 mm.

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

4) Using c = 821.7 mm (from iteration),

a = c = 0.85 821.7=698.46 mm,

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 821.7 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.003 = 0.0028; f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.00 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.003 = 0.0015 f s 2 = 307.9 MPa
c
d c 2 s
s3 s5 = 0.0003 f s 3 = 52.3 MPa
d c
d cs
s 4 s5 = 0.0010 f s 4 = 203.2 MPa
d c
d c
s5 0.003 = 0.0023 f s 5 = 458.8 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 5352 kN
Pn2 = 5352 kN

M n Pn e 5352(576.4) /1000000 = 3085 kN-m

6) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.85 5352 4549 kN


M n = 0.85 3085 2622 kN-m

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
13625 kN and moments Muy = 16339 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 200 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 H = 2500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d= 2400 mm
s= 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)
TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000 1.00 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-06 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 result shows a very close match with the independent result.

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1199.2 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc Cs T

where

Cc 0.85 fcab 0.85 30 300a 7650a

C c = C cw + C cf , where C cw and C c f are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw 0.85 fc 200 a 200
Ccf 0.85 fc 200 2500
Cs A1 fs1 0.85 fc A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc
T As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 a 8 0.85 fc 8 98 A1 fs1 0.85 fc
(Eqn. 1)
A2 fs 2 0.85 fc A3 fs 3 0.85 fc As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6

3) Taking moments about As6:


a tf
C
1 cf d d C cw d t f Cs1 d d Cs2 4s
Pn2 2 (Eqn. 2)
e
Cs3 3s Ts 4 2s Ts5 s

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 3


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

where Cs1 A1 fs1 0.85 fc , Csn An fsn 0.85 fc , Tsn fsn Asn , and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
2500 200
= 1150 mm
2
e e d 1199.2 1150 2349.2 mm

4) Using c = 1259.8 mm (from iteration),


a 1c 0.85 1259.8 1070.83 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1259.8 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs f y :
c d
s1 0.003 = 0.00276; fs s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
c
c s d
s 2 0.003 = 0.00167 f s 2 = 333.3 MPa
c
c 2s d
s3 0.003 = 0.00057 f s 3 = 114.2 MPa
c
d c 2s
s 4 s 6 = 0.00052 f s 4 = 104.9 MPa
d c
d cs
s5 s 6 = 0.00167 f s 5 = 324.0 MPa
d c
d c
s 6 0.003 = 0.00272 f s 6 = 460.0 MPa
c

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

Pn1 = 16029 kN
Pn2 = 16029 kN
M n Pn e 16029(1199.2) /1000000 = 19222 kN-m

6) Calculate ,
Pn 0.85 16029 13625 kN
M n 0.85 19222 16339 kN-m

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 4


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL

EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.

A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3246 kN and


moments Muy = 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 1


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Material Properties Section Properties Design Properties

E= 25000 MPa tb = 300 mm f c = 30 MPa


= 0.2 h = 1500 mm fy = 460 MPa
d = 50 mm
s= 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED


Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.

ETABS Percent
Output Parameter 2013 Independent Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997 1.00 0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: SINGAPORE CP65-99 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 2


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

HAND CALCULATION

Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f c = 30MPa fy = 460 MPa


b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using e M u / Pu where M u and Pu were


taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1.
Values for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
700 700
cb = dt = 1450 = 922.7 mm
700 + f y / s 700 + 460 /1.15
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc Cs T
where
0.67 0.67
Cc fcu ab 30 300a 4020a
m 1.5
As1 0.67 As2 0.67 As3 0.67
Cs f s1 fc fs 2 fc fs 3 fc
s m s m s m
A A
T s 4 fs 4 s 5 fs 5
s s
As1 0.67 As2 0.67
Pn1 4709a f s1 fc fs 2 fc
s m s m
(Eqn. 1)
As3 0.67 As 4 A
fs 3 fc fs 4 s 5 fs 5
s m s s

3) Taking moments about As5:


a
1 Cc d Cs1 d d Cs 2 d d s
Pn 2 2