CopyLecture - 1 Design Philosophies

N-W.F.P.
University of Engineering and

Technology Peshawar
Design of Steel Structures

CE-409
By: Prof Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan

drakhtarnaeem@nwfpuet.edu.pk
1
Course Content
• Design philosophies
• Introduction to Steel Structures
• Design of Welded connections
• Design of Bolted connections
• Design of Tension Members
• Design of Compression Members
2
CE-411: Lecture 01 Prof. Dr Akhtar Naeem Khan
3
CE-411: Lecture 01 Prof. Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan
11
13
14
15
Course Content
• Design of Column Bases

• Design of Beams
• Design of Composite Beams
• Design of Plate Girders
16
N-W.F.P. University of Engineering and
Technology Peshawar
Lecture 01: Design Philosophies
By: Prof Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan

drakhtarnaeeem@nwfpuet.edu.pk
17
Topics to be covered
• Design philosophies
• Limit States
• Design Considerations
• Allowable Stress Design (ASD)
• Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)
• Design process
18
Design Philosophies
• A general statement assuming safety in
engineering design is:
• Resistance ≥ Effect of applied loads ---(1)
• In eq(1) it is essential that both sides are
evaluated for same conditions and units e.g.
Compressive Stress on Column should be
compared with Compressive Strength of Column
Material (Steel, Concrete, Wood etc)
19
Design Philosophies
• Resistance of structures is composed of its
members which comes from Materials & X-
section
• Resistance, Capacity, and Strength are
somewhat synonym terms.
• Terms like Demand, Stresses, and Loads are
used to express Effect of applied loads.
22
Limit States
• When particular loading reaches its limit,
failure is the assumed result, i.e. the
loading condition become failure modes,
such a condition is referred to as limit state
and it can be defined as
• “A limit state is a condition beyond which a
structural system or a structural component
ceases to fulfill the function for which it is
designed.”
23
Limit States
• There are three broad classification of limit

states:
1. Strength limit states
2. Serviceability limit states
3. Special limit states
24
Limit States
Strength Limit States:
• Flexure • Fatigue
• Torsion • Settlement
• Shear • Bearing
25
Limit States
Serviceability Limit States:
• Cracking
• Excessive Deflection
• Buckling
• Stability
26
Limit States
Special Limit States:
• Damage or collapse in extreme
earthquakes.
• Structural effects of fire, explosions, or
vehicular collisions.
27
28
Limit States
• Design Approach used must ensure that the
probability of a Limit State being reached in
the Design/Service Life of a structure is
within acceptable limits;
• However, complete elimination of
probability of a Limit State being achieved
in the service life of a structure is
impractical as it would result in
uneconomical designs.
29
Design Considerations
• Structure and Structural Members should

have adequate strength, stiffness and
toughness to ensure proper functioning
during service life
• Reserve Strength should be available to
cater for:
– Occasional overloads and underestimation of loads
– Variability of strength of materials from those specified
– Variation in strength arising from quality of
workmanship and construction practices
30
31
• Structural Design must provide adequate

margin of safety irrespective of Design
Method
• Design Approach should take into account the

probability of occurrence of failure in the
design process
32
• An important goal in design is to prevent limit

state from being reached.
• It is not economical to design a structure so

that none of its members or components
could ever fail. Thus, it is necessary to
establish an acceptable level of risk or
probability of failure.
33
• Brittle behavior is to be avoided as it will imply

a sudden loss of load carrying capacity when
elastic limit is exceeded.
• Reinforced concrete can be made ductile by
limiting the steel reinforcement.
34
• To determine the acceptable margin of safety,

opinion should be sought from experience and
qualified group of engineers.
• In steel design AISC manuals for ASD & LRFD
guidelines can be accepted as reflection of
such opinions.
35
36
37
• Any design procedure require the confidence
of Engineer on the analysis of load effects and
strength of the materials.
• The two distinct procedures employed by

designers are Allowable Stress Design (ASD)
& Load & Resistance Factor Design (LRFD).
38
40
Allowable Stress Design (ASD)
• Safety in the design is obtained by specifying,

that the effect of the loads should produce
stresses that is a fraction of the yield stress fy,
say one half.
41
• This is equivalent to:

FOS = Resistance, R/ Effect of load, Q
= fy/0.5fy
=2
43
• Since the specifications set limit on the

stresses, it became allowable stress design
(ASD).
• It is mostly reasonable where stresses are

uniformly distributed over X-section (such
on determinate trusses, arches, cables etc.)
44
Mathematical Description of A S D
 Rn

 Q i
Rn = Resistance or Strength of the component being designed
Φ = Resistance Factor or Strength Reduction Factor
 = Overload or Load Factors


 = Factor of Safety FS
Qi = Effect of applied loads
CE-411:Lecture No. 1 Prof. Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan 47

Mathematical Description of Allowable Stress Design
In ASD we check the adequacy of a design in terms of stresses
therefore design checks are cast in terms of stresses for
 F F 
example
f  if:
F 
b
 FS
or F 
b
y
b 
FS 
cr
Mn = Nominal Flexural Strength of a Beam

M = Moment resulting from applied unfactored loads
FS = Factor of Safety
Mn Fy I / c M
 M 
FS FS I / c I /c
CE-411:Lecture No. 1 Prof. Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan 49

Section Modulus
 Section Modulus:
S ≥ effect of load/Allowable stress
= M/fb ------(ii)
50
ASD Drawbacks
• Implied in the ASD method is the

assumption that the stress in the member is
zero before any loads are applied, i.e., no
residual stresses exist from forming the
members.
51
Variation of Residual Stress with
Geometry
Material A has more Residual Stresses due to:

1. Non uniform cooling
2. Cutting a plate into smaller
pieces reveals the stresses
52
ASD Drawbacks
• ASD does not give reasonable measure of

strength, which is more fundamental
measure of resistance than is allowable
stress.
• Another drawback in ASD is that safety is
applied only to stress level. Loads are
considered to be deterministic (without
variation).
53
Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD)
• To overcome the deficiencies of ASD, the
LRFD method is based on:
Strength of Materials
• It consider the variability not only in
resistance but also in the effects of load.
• It provides measure of safety related to
probability of failure.
54
Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD)
 Safety in the design is obtained by specifying that the reduced
Nominal Strength of a designed structure is less than the effect of
factored loads acting on the structure
 Rn  n Qi
Rn = Resistance or Strength of the component being designed
Qi = Effect of Applied Loads
n = Takes into account ductility, redundancy and operational imp.
Φ = Resistance Factor or Strength Reduction Factor
 = Overload or Load Factors

= Factor of Safety

55
The role of ‘n’
Ductility: It implies a large capacity for inelastic

deformation without rupture
 Ductility will ensure

redistribution of load through
inelastic deformation.
56
The role of ‘n’
Redundancy:
1. A simply supported beam is a determinate
structure so it has no redundant actions.
2. A fixed beam is indeterminate by 2 degrees
so it has two redundant actions.
57
Redundancy
Yielding will initiate at mid span due to maximum moment at mid span
with no Redistribution of load
61
Redundancy
Yielding will initiate at supports due to maximum moment at supports
62
Redundancy
Redistribution of load to mid span after yielding of section at supports

63
The role of ‘n’
Operational Importance:
A hospital and a school require more

conservative design than an ordinary
residential building.
64
Operational Importance
→ hospital
→ park
65
LRFD Advantages
• LRFD accounts for both variability in resistance

and load.
• It achieves fairly uniform levels of safety for
different limit states.
66
LRFD Disadvantages
• It’s disadvantage is change in design

philosophy from previous method.
67
Comparison of ASD and LRFD Design
Approaches
• ASD combines Dead and Live Loads and
treats them in the same way
• In LRFD different load factors are assigned to
Dead Loads and Live Loads which is
appealing
• Changes in load factors and resistance
factors are much easier to make in LRFD
compared to changing the allowable stress
in ASD
68
Approaches
• LRFD is intrinsically appealing as it requires
better understanding of behavior of the
structure in its limit states
• Design approach similar to LRFD is being
followed in Design of concrete structures in
form of Ultimate Strength Design -- why not
use similar approach design of steel
structures?
69
Approaches
• ASD indirectly incorporates the Factors of
Safety by limiting the stress whereas LRFD
aims to specify Factors of Safety directly by
specifying Resistance Factors and Load
Factors
• LRFD is more rational as different Factors of
Safety can be assigned to different loadings
such as Dead Loads, Live Loads, Earthquake
Loads and Impact Loads
70
Approaches
• LRFD considers variability not only in
resistance but also in the effects of load which
provides measure of safety related to
probability of failure
• It achieves fairly uniform levels of safety for
different limit states.
• ASD still remains as a valid Design Method
71
Approaches
In LRFD For Tension Members:
1.2D + 1.6 L = 0.90 Rn  1.33D + 1.78 L = Rn (LRFD)
In ASD Factor of Safety FS = 1.67, Therefore:

1.0D + 1.0 L = Rn / 1.67  1.67D + 1.67D L = Rn (ASD)
LRFD 1.33D  1.78 L 0.8  1.07 ( L / D)
  …. (A)
ASD 1.67 D  1.67 L 1  ( L / D)
In LRFD For Dead Load Case:

1.4D = 0.90 Rn  1.56D = Rn (LRFD)
LRFD 1.56 D 0.93

  …. (B)
ASD 1.67 D  1.67 L 1  ( L / D)
72
Approaches
3%
1.0
0.93
1.2D + 1.6L
0.9
LRFD
0.83
ASD
0.8
1.4D
0.7
0.12 1 2 3 4 5 6
Live Load
Dead Load
73
AREA Code for Design of Railway
Structures
• AREA Stands for American Railway Engineers
Association (AREA)
• Railway Bridges and Structures are usually
designed using provisions of the AREA Code
• AREA Code uses only the Allowable Stress
Design Method. However, the allowable
stresses and design requirements may differ
from AISC/ASD method
74
AASHTO Code for Design of Highway
Bridges
• AASHTO Stands for Association of American
State and Highway Transportation Officials
(AASHTO)
• Highway Bridges are usually designed using

provisions of the AASHTO Code
• AASHTO Code uses both ASD and LRFD Design

Methods
75
The role of various Codes
• It is very difficult to devise a design code that is
applicable to all uses and all types of structures
such as buildings, highway bridges, railway bridges
and transmission towers
• The responsibility of infrastructure on roads,
bridges and electrical transmission towers rests
with the organization responsible for approving,
operating and maintaining these facilities
76
The role of various Codes
• Uses and critical loads may be different in

different types of structures and no one code
can cater to all the different important
considerations
• For above reasons different codes prevail and
will continue to do so
• AISC ASD Code and LRFD Code primarily is
pertinent to Building Structures.
77
Overview of LRFD Manual
• Part 1: Dimensions and properties
• Part 2: General Design considerations
• Part 3: Design of flexural members
• Part 4: Design of compression members
• Part 5: Design of Tension members
• Part 6: Design of members subject to
combined loading
78
• Part 7: Design considerations for bolts
• Part 8: Design considerations for welds
• Part 9: Design of connecting elements
• Part 10: Design of simple shear connections
• Part 11: Design of flexible moment
connections
79
• Part 12: Design of fully restrained (FR)
moment connections
• Part 13: Design of Bracing connections and
truss connections
• Part 14: Design of Beam bearing plates,
Column base plates, anchor rods,
and column splices.
80
• Part 15: Design of Hanger connections,
Bracket plates, and Crane-rail
connections
• ANSI/LRFD Specifications for structural steel

Buildings.
81
82
Prof. Dr. Qaisar Ali
83
Design Process
1. Functional planning
• Development of a plan that will enable the structure to
fulfill effectively the purpose for which it is to be built
84
85
86
Design Process
The involvement of Structural engineer in the functional planning is very imp

because an Architect can suggest a plane which is practically not possible.
87
Design Process
2. Structural scheme
88
Design Process
2. Structural scheme (Contd.)
89
Design Process
3. Preliminary Member Sizing of Beams
• Deflection Considerations
• ASD Commentary L3.1 suggests following Limits:
L 800
 For fully stressed Beams & Girders
D Fy ( Ksi)
L
 20 For Beams & Girders subject to
D vibrations
L 800
 For Roof Purlins
D Fy ( Ksi)
CE-411:Lecture No. 1 90
Prof. Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan
Design Process
3. Preliminary Member Sizing of Beams
• Strength/Capacity Considerations
Design Moment
Beam
Unbraced Length
Design Process
3. Preliminary Member Sizing of Columns
• Strength/Capacity Considerations
Tributary Area
• Use of Tributary Areas and

Column Tables
Tributary Area
93
Design Process
4. Structural Analysis - Modeling
94
Design Process
4. Structural Analysis - Analysis
95
96
97
98
99
Design Process
5. Design Review/ Member Modification
• Must be chosen so that they will be able to resist,
within appropriate margin of safety, the forces
which the structural analysis has disclosed.
100
Design Process
6. Cost Estimation
• Make a tentative cost estimates for several
preliminary structural layouts.
• Selection of constructional material based on:
• Availability of specific material
• Corresponding skilled labor
• Relative costs
• Wage scales
101
Design Process
7. Preparation of Structural Drawings & Specifications
102
Thanks
103

CopyLecture - 1 Design Philosophies

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CopyLecture - 1 Design Philosophies

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

N-W.F.P.

University of Engineering and

Design of Steel Structures

By: Prof Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan

• Design of Column Bases

Lecture 01: Design Philosophies

By: Prof Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan

• There are three broad classification of limit

• Structure and Structural Members should

• Structural Design must provide adequate

• Design Approach should take into account the

• An important goal in design is to prevent limit

• It is not economical to design a structure so

• Brittle behavior is to be avoided as it will imply

• To determine the acceptable margin of safety,

• The two distinct procedures employed by

• Safety in the design is obtained by specifying,

• This is equivalent to:

• Since the specifications set limit on the

• It is mostly reasonable where stresses are

Rn = Resistance or Strength of the component being designed

Φ = Resistance Factor or Strength Reduction Factor

 = Overload or Load Factors

Qi = Effect of applied loads

CE-411:Lecture No. 1 Prof. Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan 47

Mn = Nominal Flexural Strength of a Beam

CE-411:Lecture No. 1 Prof. Dr. Akhtar Naeem Khan 49

• Implied in the ASD method is the

Material A has more Residual Stresses due to:

• ASD does not give reasonable measure of

Ductility: It implies a large capacity for inelastic

 Ductility will ensure

Yielding will initiate at supports due to maximum moment at supports

Redistribution of load to mid span after yielding of section at supports

A hospital and a school require more

• LRFD accounts for both variability in resistance

• It’s disadvantage is change in design

In ASD Factor of Safety FS = 1.67, Therefore:

In LRFD For Dead Load Case:

LRFD 1.56 D 0.93

• Highway Bridges are usually designed using

• AASHTO Code uses both ASD and LRFD Design

• Uses and critical loads may be different in

• ANSI/LRFD Specifications for structural steel

The involvement of Structural engineer in the functional planning is very imp

• Use of Tributary Areas and

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen