What is LRFD?
[Link] resistance factor design (LRFD)
[Link] is based on probabilistic load modeling a comprehensive survey of
reliabilities inherent in traditional design practice.
[Link] utilizes a “principal action-companion action format,” meaning that the
maximum load effect occurs only for one load case, while the other load
cases are at “arbitrary point-in-time” values (companion actions).
[Link] uses load factors that reflect uncertainty in individual load magnitudes
[Link] uses resistance factor, φ.
What is ASD?
1- Allowable strength design (ASD) (in the past it was called stress design,
but to make like LRFD, based on strength)
2- It is always performed adequately over the years, but the actual level of
safety provided was never known.
3- It also utilizes principal action-companion action
4- It uses nominal load; however, it uses load factor (0.75) when
simultaneous load cases are considered rather than increases allowable
stresses by (1/3), excluding dead factor because it is a permanent load.
5- In ASD, safety is provided by the safety factor, Ω which is a function of both
material and the component being considered (Yielding Ω =1.67, Rupture Ω =
2.0)
What are Limit States?
1. A limit state is a condition in which a structural system or component
becomes unfit for its intended purpose (serviceability limit state)
2. or has reached its ultimate load-carrying capacity (strength limit state).
Serviceability limit states
• It is based on functional requirements, such as Drift, deflection, Vibrations,
fatigue
Or related to structural behavior such as forming plastic hinge or mechanism.
Strength limit state
• It is based on safety against local or overall failure, and the most common
types are yielding, buckling and rupture.
When to use ASD and LRFD?
LRFD is the most accurate as:
1. It provides load factors for each load case based on probability of
change, like the live load.
2. It uses resistance factor design φ.
3. When 2nd order analysis is considered, the resulted additional forces
will be higher compared to the one from the ASD.
On the other hand, ASD uses the same safety factor (Ω) for all the load
combinations.
So What is the relationship between ASD and LRFD?
The LRFD method was calibrated to a ratio of live load / dead load = 3
Which would result in a ratio between (Ω * φ) = 1.5
For example:
For yielding limit state: Ω =1.67, & φ =0.9,
therefore: Ω * φ =1.67*0.9 =1.503
For rupture limit state: Ω =2.0 & φ =0.75
therefore: Ω * φ =2*0.75 =1.5
Which method is more "efficient"?
The choice often depends on your load ratios:
•L/D < 3: ASD generally results in a higher utilization ratio
•L/D = 3: Both methods yield nearly identical results
•L/D > 3: LRFD generally results in a higher utilization ratio
Summary:
1. For existing facilities, it's generally preferable to maintain the
original design methodology — typically ASD — to ensure
consistency and compatibility.
2. For new structures, evaluate the ratio of live load to dead load to
determine the most suitable design approach.
Performance Comparison (Example Frame)
Frame Analysis Assumptions:
[Link] frame utilizes the specified dimensions and section properties.
[Link] loads are the sole loading condition considered.
3.A first-order analysis is performed, appropriate for gravity-only scenarios.
[Link] interaction is evaluated for the designated highlighted elements.
Performance Comparison (Example Frame) Cont.
[Link] 1: Live-to-dead load ratio (L/D) = 1
[Link] 2: Live-to-dead load ratio (L/D) = 3
[Link] 3: Live-to-dead load ratio (L/D) = 5