10.11.

1 — Factored axial forces Pu, factored moments M1 and M2 at the ends of the
column, and, where required, relative lateral story deflections, Δo, shall be computed
using an elastic first-order frame analysis with the section properties determined taking
into account the influence of axial loads, the presence of cracked regions along the length
of the member, and effects of duration of the loads. Alternatively, it shall be permitted to
use the following properties for the members in the structure:

(a) Modulus of elasticity.................... Ec from 8.5.1

(b) Moments of inertia, I
Beams ................................................... 0.35Ig
Columns ............................................... 0.70Ig
Walls —Uncracked ............................... 0.70Ig
—Cracked................................... 0.35Ig
Flat plates and flat slabs ...................... 0.25Ig
(c) Area......................................................... 1.0Ag

In (b), I shall be divided by (1 + βd) when sustained lateral loads act or for stability
checks made in accordance with 10.13.6. For non-sway frames, βd is ratio of maximum
factored axial sustained load to maximum factored axial load associated with the same
load combination. For sway frames except as specified in 10.13.6, βd is ratio of
maximum factored sustained shear within a story to the maximum factored shear in that
story.

R10.11.1 — The stiffness EI used in an elastic analysis used for strength design should
represent the stiffness of the members immediately prior to failure. This is particularly
true for a second-order analysis that should predict the lateral deflections at loads
approaching ultimate. The EI values should not be based totally on the moment-curvature
relationship for the most highly loaded section along the length of each member. Instead,
they should correspond to the moment-end rotation relationship for a complete member.

The alternative values of Ec, Ig, and Ag given in 10.11.1 have been chosen from the
results of frame tests and analyses and include an allowance for the variability of the
computed deflections. The modulus of elasticity of the concrete Ec is based on the
specified concrete compressive strength while the sway deflections are a function of the
average concrete strength, which is higher. The moments of inertia were taken as 0.875
times those in Reference 10.33. These two effects result in an overestimation of the
second-order deflections in the order of 20 to 25 percent, corresponding to an implicit
stiffness reduction factor φK of 0.80 to 0.85 on the stability calculation. The concept of a
stiffness reduction factor φK is discussed in R10.12.3

The moment of inertia of T-beams should be based on the effective flange width defined
in 8.10. It is generally sufficiently accurate to take Ig of a T-beam as two times the Ig for
the web, 2(bw h3/12).

If the factored moments and shears from an analysis based on the moment of inertia of a
wall taken equal to 0.70Ig indicate that the wall will crack in flexure, based on the
modulus of rupture, the analysis should be repeated with I = 0.35Ig in those stories where
cracking is predicted at factored loads.

The alternative values of the moments of inertia given in 10.11.1 were derived for non-
prestressed members. For prestressed members, the moments of inertia may differ from
the values in 10.11.1 depending on the amount, location, and type of the reinforcement
and the degree of cracking prior to ultimate. The stiffness values for prestressed concrete
members should include an allowance for the variability of the stiffness.

Sections 10.11 through 10.13 provide requirements for strength and assume frame
analyses will be carried out using factored loads. Analyses of deflections, vibrations, and
building periods are needed at various service (un-factored) load levels 10.34, 10.35 to
determine the serviceability of the structure and to estimate the wind forces in wind
tunnel laboratories. The seismic base shear is also based on the service load periods of
vibration. The magnified service loads and deflections by a second-order analysis should
also be computed using service loads. The moments of inertia of the structural members
in the service load analyses should, therefore, be representative of the degree of cracking
at the various service load levels investigated. Unless a more accurate estimate of the
degree of cracking at design service load level is available, it is satisfactory to use 1/0.70
= 1.43 times the moments of inertia given in 10.11.1 for service load analyses.

The unusual case of sustained lateral loads might exist, for example, if there were
permanent lateral loads resulting from unequal earth pressures on two sides of a building.