0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views17 pages

Chapter # 5 (Part-B)

The document discusses the design of beams for flexure, focusing on serviceability requirements, deflection limits, and local buckling classifications. It outlines the importance of ensuring beams meet serviceability limit states (SLS) and provides examples of calculations for deflection checks under various loading conditions. Additionally, it explains the classification of steel sections based on slenderness ratios and the implications for local buckling behavior.

Uploaded by

farah.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views17 pages

Chapter # 5 (Part-B)

The document discusses the design of beams for flexure, focusing on serviceability requirements, deflection limits, and local buckling classifications. It outlines the importance of ensuring beams meet serviceability limit states (SLS) and provides examples of calculations for deflection checks under various loading conditions. Additionally, it explains the classification of steel sections based on slenderness ratios and the implications for local buckling behavior.

Uploaded by

farah.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

3/22/2022

Chapter # 5 (Part‐B)

Beams

Design of Beams for Flexure


• Introduction
• Moment Curvature Response
• Sectional Properties
• Serviceability Requirements (Deflection)
• Non‐compact, Compact and Slender Sections
• Lateral Torsional Buckling
• Design of Beams

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 2

1
3/22/2022

Beams Under Flexure


• Members subjected principally to transverse gravity loading.
• Girders (important floor beams, wide spacing)
• Joists (less important beams, closely spaced)
• Purlins (roof beams, spanning between trusses)
• Stringers (longitudinal bridge beams)
• Lintels (short beams above window/door openings)

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 3

Flexural Deflection of Beams ‐ Serviceability


• Steel beams are designed for the factored design loads. The moment
capacity i.e. the factored moment strength (φbMP) should be greater than
the moment (MU) caused by the factored loads
• A serviceable structure is one that performs satisfactorily, not causing
discomfort or perceptions of unsafety for the occupants or users of the
structure
o For a steel beam, being serviceable usually means that the
deformations, primarily the vertical sag, or deflection, must be limited
o The maximum deflection of the designed beam is checked at the service
level loads. The deflection due to service‐level loads must be less than
the specified values
CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 4

2
3/22/2022

Serviceability Requirements
• Steel beams need to satisfy serviceability limit state (SLS) in addition to ULS
• Serviceability limit states are usually checked using non‐factored loads
• Deflection under live loads shall be limited to L/360
• Dead load deflections can be compensated by cambering beams

• SLS might also include limiting stresses in bottom or top flanges if fatigue is a
concern in design
• Standard equations to calculate deflection for different load cases:
AISC Manual – Part 3 – page 208 ‐ 223
CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 5

Flexural Deflection of Beams ‐ Serviceability


• The AISC Specification gives little guidance other than a statement in
Chapter L page 16.1‐165, “Design for Serviceability”, that deflections
should be checked. Appropriate limits for deflection can be found from
the governing building code for the region.
• The following values of deflection are typical maximum allowable
deflections.
Structure Type LL DL+LL
• Beam supporting Plastered ceiling L/360 L/240
• Beam supporting Non‐plastered ceiling L/240 L/180
• Beam not supporting ceiling L/180 L/120
• Floor Beams L/360 L/240

DL deflection – normally not considered for steel beams 6

3
3/22/2022

Flexural Deflection of Beams ‐ Serviceability

In the following problems, we will assume that local buckling and


lateral‐torsional buckling are not controlling limit states, i.e. the
beam section is compact and laterally supported along the
length. These limit states will be considered once studied in the
coming lectures in theory part.

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 7

Maximum Load Caused Deflections in Beams

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 8

4
3/22/2022

Problem 5.3 – Deflection (Serviceability limit) check


A W14 x 34 is subjected to a service dead load of 1.0 kips/ft and a service
live load of 1.2 kips/ft over a span length of 17 ft. Carry out the analysis if
the beam satisfies the serviceability limit state. Assume that beam
supports an unplastered ceiling.
Solution
For W14 x 34, From AISC Manual
(Page 1‐25);
Ix = 340 in.4
Check deflection at service dead load
W = 1.0 kip/ft
5 𝑤𝐿 5 1.0 12 17 12
∆ → ∆ 0.191 𝑖𝑛.
384 𝐸𝐼 384 29,000 340
9

Problem 5.3 – Deflection (Serviceability limit) check


Check deflection at service live load
W = 1.2 kip/ft
5 𝑤𝐿 5 1.2 12 17 12
∆ → ∆ 0.23 𝑖𝑛.
384 𝐸𝐼 384 29,000 340

Maximum Allowable Deflection:


𝐿 17 12
∆ 1.13 𝑖𝑛.
180 180
Since: ∆ 0.23 in. ∆ 1.13 𝑖𝑛.

Hence beam satisfies serviceability requirements for the given loading and span

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 10

5
3/22/2022

Problem # 5.4 – Deflections


Design a 30 foot long simply supported beam subjected to UDL of 450
lb/ft dead load and a UDL of 550 lb/ft live load. The dead load does not
include the self weight of the beam. Assume plastered ceiling construction
for checking serviceability of beam.
Solution
Step 1: Calculate the factored design loads
(without self‐weight)
Wu = 1.2 WD + 1.6 WL = 1.42 kips/ft
What is the effect of this load ?
This load results into bending moment
shown in the figure opposite
wl 2 1.42  30 2
Mu    159.75 kip - ft
8 8 11

Problem # 5.4 – Deflections


Design a 30 foot long simply supported beam subjected to UDL of 450
lb/ft dead load and a UDL of 550 lb/ft live load. The dead load does not
include the self weight of the beam. Assume plastered ceiling construction
for checking serviceability of beam.
Solution (contd.)
wl 2 1.42  30 2
Mu    159.75 kip - ft
8 8
Step 2: Select the lightest section from the AISC Manual design tables

From Table 3‐2 page 3‐19 to 3‐27 of the AISC Manual, select W16x26 (page 3‐26)
made from 50 ksi steel with φbMP = 166.0 kip‐ft

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 12

6
3/22/2022

Pro lem # 5.4 – Deflections


Step 3: Add the self weight of designed section and check design
Wsw = 26 lb/ft
Therefore, WD (total) = 450 lb/ft + 26 lb/ft = 0.476 kip/ft
Wu = 1.2(0.476) + 1.6(0.55) = 1.4512 kips/ft
Mu = 1.4512 x 302 / 8 = 163.26 kip‐ft Compare it with φbMP of W16 x 26
Mu = 163.26 kip‐ft < φbMP =166 k‐ft of W16x26  OK!

Step 4: Check deflection at service loads


W = 0.55 kip/ft
5wL4 5  (0.55 / 12)  (30  12) 4
   1.148 in.
384 EI x (384  29000  301)
13

Problem # 5.4 – Deflections


Allowable defection = L/360 = 30 x 12 /360 = 1 in.
Since   1.148 in.   allowable  1 in.  NG!

Step 5: Redesign with service load as design criteria


L/360 = 1.0 in > 5wL4/384EIx  Ix = 345.64 in4
Select a section with required Ix from the moment of inertia selection tables in
the AISC Manual
See page 3‐29 – select W16x31
W16 x 31 with Ix = 375 in4 and φbMP = 203 kip‐ft (50 ksi steel) from page 3‐26

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 14

7
3/22/2022

Problem # 5.4 – Deflections

Using, this IX:


Deflection at service load = Δ = 0.921 in. < L/360  OK!

Note that the serviceability design criteria controlled the design and
the section

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 15

Problem # 5.5 – Beam Design


Design the beam shown below. The unfactored dead and live loads
are shown in the figure. Assume unplastered floor construction.

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 16

8
3/22/2022

Problem # 5.5 – Beam Design


Solution
Step 1: Calculate the factored design
loads and bending moments (without
self weight)
𝑊 1.2𝑊 1.6𝑊 1.2 0.67 1.6 0.75
2.004 kips/𝑓𝑡
𝑃 1.2𝑃 1.6𝑃 1.2 0 1.6 10
16 kips
𝑃𝐿 𝑊𝑙
𝑀
4 8

16 30 2.004 30
345.35 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠. 𝑓𝑡
4 8
17

Problem # 5.5 – Beam Design

Knowing that:
𝑀 345.45 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠. 𝑓𝑡

Go to step ‐ II

Step 2: Select the lightest section


from the AISC Manual design tables
From page 3‐26 of the AISC Manual
Select W21 x 44 made from 50 ksi steel
φbMP = 358.0 kip‐ft Self weight = 44 lbs/ft

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 18

9
3/22/2022

Problem # 5.5 – Beam Design


Step 3: Add self weight of the designed section and check design
WD (Total) = 0.67 + 0.044 = 0.714 kip/ft
Wu = 1.2WD + 1.6WL = 1.2(0.714)+1.6(0.75) = 2.0568 kip/ft
Mu = WuL2/8 + PuL/4 = 231.39 + 120 = 351.39 kip‐ft
Since: Mu = 351.39 kip ft < φbMP = 358 kip‐ft  OK!

Step 4: Check deflection at service loads


Service loads
Distributed load = W = 0.75 kip/ft
Concentrated load = P = L = 10 kips

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 19

Problem # 5.5 – Beam Design


5wL4
Deflection due to uniform distributed load =  d 
384 EI
PL3
Deflection due to concentrated load =  c 
48 EI
Therefore, service load deflection = Δ = Δd + Δc
Δ = 5(0.75)(360)4/384(29000)(843) + (10)(360)3/48(29000)(843) = 0.9567 in.
L = 30 ft = 360 in
For unplastered floor construction, Δmax = L/240 = 360/240 = 1.5 in
Since: Δ < Δmax <‐‐ OK!

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 20

10
3/22/2022

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and


Non‐compact
• MP, the plastic moment capacity for the steel shape, is calculated by
assuming a plastic stress distribution ( σy) over the cross‐section

• The development of a plastic stress distribution over the cross‐


section can be hindered by two different length effects:
o Local buckling of the individual plates (flanges and webs) of the
cross‐section before they develop the compressive yield stress σy

o Lateral‐torsional buckling of the unsupported length of the


beam/member before the cross‐section develops the plastic
moment MP
CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 21

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and


Non‐compact
• Local buckling is limited by ensuring that individual plates of the
cross‐section meet the limits of slenderness ratio 𝜆

• The analytical equations for local buckling of steel plates with


various edge conditions and the results from experimental
investigations have been used to develop limiting slenderness ratios
for the individual plate elements of the cross‐sections

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 22

11
3/22/2022

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and


Non‐compact

See Specifications. B4.1b (at page


16.1‐18), of the AISC manual.

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 23

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and Non‐compact


Steel sections are classified as compact, non‐compact, or slender,
depending on the slenderness ratio (λ) of the individual plates of the
cross‐sections

Compact section: all elements of cross‐section have λ λp

Non‐compact section: if any one element of the cross‐section has λp λ λr

Slender section: if any element of the cross‐section has λr λ

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 24

12
3/22/2022

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and


Non‐compact
It is important to note that:
• If λ λp, then the individual plate element can develop and sustain
σy for large values of e before local buckling occurs

• If λp λ λr, then the individual plate element can develop σy at


some locations but not in the entire cross‐section before local
buckling occurs

• If λr λ, then elastic local buckling of the individual plate element


occurs

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 25

Classification of Sections
• Classifications of bending elements are based on limits of local buckling.
• The dimensional ratio λ represents:
𝜆 𝜆

• Two limits exist: λp and λr


• λp represents the upper limit for compact sections
• λr represents the upper limit for non‐compact sections
• λ λp  Compact
• λp λ λr  Non‐compact
• λr λ  Slender

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 26

13
3/22/2022

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and Non‐


compact

• Thus, slender sections cannot develop MP


due to elastic local buckling

• Non‐compact sections can develop My but


not MP before local buckling occurs

• Only compact sections can develop the


plastic moment MP
Stress‐strain response of plates subjected to
axial compression and local buckling

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 27

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and


Non‐compact
• All rolled wide‐flange shapes are compact, with the following
exceptions, which are non‐compact
• W21x48, W40x174, W14x90, W12x65, W10x12, W8x10, W6x15
(made from A992)
• The definition of λ and the values of λp and λr for the individual
elements of various sections are given in Table B4.1b and shown
graphically on page 16.1‐18

• Non‐compact sections are Indicated by superscript “f” in Zx tables


CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 28

14
3/22/2022

Classifications of Sections
The limits are
Flange Web

λ= λ=

λp = 0.38 λp = 3.76

λr = 1 λr = 5.70

For all other shapes, look at the AISC Specifications B4 (page 16.1‐16 to 16.1‐21)
AISC Commentary – Chapter F, page 16.1‐323
CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 29

Local Buckling of Beam Section – Compact and


Non‐compact
Section Plate λ λp λr
element
Wide Flange Flange bf/2tf 0.38 𝐸/𝐹𝑦 1.00 𝐸/𝐹𝑦
Web h/tw 3.76 𝐸/𝐹𝑦 5.70 𝐸/𝐹𝑦
Channel Flange bf/tf 0.38 𝐸/𝐹𝑦 1.00 𝐸/𝐹𝐿
Web h/tw 3.76 𝐸/𝐹𝑦 5.70 𝐸/𝐹𝑦
Square or Flange (b‐3t)/t 1.12 𝐸/𝐹𝑦 1.40 𝐸/𝐹𝑦
Rect. Box Web (b‐3t)/t 3.76 𝐸/𝐹𝑦 5.70 𝐸/𝐹𝑦

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 30

15
3/22/2022

Bending Strength of Non‐Compact Sections


• A non‐compact beam may fail by:
• Flange local buckling
• Web local buckling
• Lateral torsional buckling
• When flange of section is liable to locally buckle (non‐compact section)
with 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 , its strength is given by:
𝜆 𝜆
𝑀 𝑀 𝑀 0.7𝐹 𝑆
𝜆 𝜆
• When 𝜆 𝜆 there is no flange local buckling

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 31

Problem # 5.6 – Strength of Non‐Compact section


Determine the LRFD design strength for a 50 ksi W12 x 65 section.
Assume that the beam section has full lateral bracing that is lateral
torsional buckling does not occur.
Solution
Step 1: Find Section Properties
From Dim section of AISC Manual (page # 1‐26), for W12 x 65, we get:
𝑏 12 𝑖𝑛. 𝑡 0.605 𝑖𝑛. 𝑆 87.9 𝑖𝑛. 𝑍 96.8 𝑖𝑛.

Step 2: Find if section meets the local buckling criterion


𝐸 29000
𝜆 0.38 → 𝜆 0.38 9.15
𝐹 50
32

16
3/22/2022

Problem # 5.6 – Strength of Non‐Compact section


𝑏 12 𝐸 29000
𝜆 →𝜆 9.92 and 𝜆 1.0 →𝜆 1.0 24.08
2𝑡 2 0.605 𝐹 50
Since: 𝝀𝒑 𝟗. 𝟏𝟓 𝝀 𝟗. 𝟗𝟐 𝝀𝒓 𝟐𝟒. 𝟎𝟖

Hence, the flange is non‐compact

Step 3: Calculate the design flexural strength of the section


𝜆 𝜆
𝑀 𝑀 𝑀 0.7𝐹 𝑆
𝜆 𝜆
Where: 𝑀 𝐹𝑍 →𝑀 50 96.8 4840 𝑖𝑛. 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠
9.92 9.15
𝑀 4840 4840 0.7 50 87.9
24.08 9.15
33

Problem # 5.5 – Beam Design


𝑀 4749 𝑖𝑛. 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 →𝑀 395.7 𝑓𝑡 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠

Design Strength equals:


∅𝑀 0.9 395.7 356 𝑓𝑡 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠

∅𝑀 356 𝑓𝑡 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠

Note: Compare the above calculated strength with the one given in AISC
Manual, Bam-Section (Table 3-2), Page 3-25

CIEN 421 Dr. Roz‐Ud‐Din Nassar 34

17

You might also like