AISC K Factors

AISC Live Webinar
May 8, 2014
So you want to use K-factors, do you?
AISC Live Webinars

Thank you for joining our live webinar today.
We will begin shortly. Please standby.
Thank you.
Need Help?
Call ReadyTalk Support: 800.843.9166
Theres always a solution in steel!
Todays audio will be broadcast through the

internet.
Alternatively, to hear the audio through the
phone, dial 800 920 4317.
Copyright 2014
American Institute of Steel Construction
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
AISC is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of

Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s)
earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES
for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members
and non-AIA members are available upon request.
This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional
education. As such, it does not include content that may be
deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA
of any material of construction or any method or manner of
handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product.
Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will
be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.
Copyright Materials
This presentation is protected by US and International
Copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, display and
use of the presentation without written permission of
AISC is prohibited.
The American Institute of Steel Construction 2014
Copyright 2014
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Course Description
May 8, 2014
With the introduction of AISC 360-05, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
the direct analysis method with K = 1.0 for frames in which sidesway is not
prevented was introduced. To understand the significant benefit to the designer
in taking K = 1.0, this presentation will discuss what is meant by a rational
method of analysis as required by the 1963 Specification, will consider the Kfactor alignment charts first introduced in the Commentary to the 1963
Specification, and will show comparisons between values obtained through the
alignment chart and those obtained through rational methods of analysis.
Results from design examples implementing the effective length method, that is
K by a rational analysis, and the direct analysis method will be discussed and
recommendations on selecting the appropriate method will be given.
Learning Objectives
Become familiar with the history of K-factor in the AISC
Specification.
Learn and understand the assumptions built into the
alignment charts used to determine K.
Learn and understand what is meant by a rational method of
analysis as required by the Specification.
Gain an understanding on how to select an appropriate
method of analysis through the comparison of design
examples using the effective length method vs. the direct
analysis method.
Copyright 2014
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Presented by
Louis F. Geschwindner, Ph.D., P.E.
Emeritus Professor at Penn State University
Former Vice-President at AISC
AISC Webinar
So you want to use K-factors,

do you?
May 8, 2014
Louis F. Geschwindner, Ph.D., P.E,
Professor Emeritus
Architectural Engineering
Penn State University
Copyright 2014
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Outline
History of column equations

Euler buckling
Effective length factors
Elastic buckling analysis
Alignment chart problems
AISC 360-10 Appendix 7 ELM
Examples
Some History
Pieter van Musschenbroek, 1729
Empirical formula for rectangular columns
Leonhard Euler, 1757

Flexural buckling of flagpole column
Thomas H. Johnson, 1886

Practical end conditions made a difference
Friedrich Engesser, 1889

Inelastic buckling
Copyright 2014
10
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
Prior to the 1961 AISC Specification, columns
were designed based on their length.
Several general styles of equations have been
proposed over the years.
Straight-line, parabolic, Rankin, and others
Some say there is no more variation in the

results of these equations than in the results of
column tests.
Thus, the goal has usually been to use simple equations rather
than more accurate yet complex theoretical equations.
11
Some History
Straight-line formulas:
s1 s
where
L
r
s1 the allowable stress

L length of column
r radius of gyration
an empirical constant
s an arbitrary constant
Copyright 2014
12
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
Straight-line formulas:
Suggested by William H. Burr in 1882
Widely used in US practice after 1885
Good results for L/r from 50 to 120
1892 Carnegie Phipps & Co. Ltd.
L
50
r
L
L
16, 000 55 for 50
r
r
Fa 12, 000 for
13
Some History
16000
14000
12000
10000
1892
1903
1911
8000
1921
1932
6000
4000
2000
0
0
50
100
Copyright 2014
150
200
250
14
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
Parabolic formulas:
where
L
s1 s
r

L length of column
15
Some History
Parabolic formulas:
Proposed by J. B. Johnson in 1910
Good results for L/r from 0 to 140
1936 AISC
2
L
L
Fa 17, 000 0.485 for 120
r
r
Copyright 2014
16
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
18000
16000
14000
12000
1892
1903
10000
1911
Parabolic
1921
8000
1932
1936
6000
4000
2000
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
17
Some History
Rankine-Gordon formulas:
s1
where
L
1
r
L length of column
Copyright 2014
18
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
Thomas Tredgold first introduced in 1822
Gordon adapted it at a date unknown
between 1840 and 1858
Rankine modified it before 1866
Schwarz (1854) and Laissle and Schubler
(1857) independently came up with the same
formula.
19
Some History
1919 Cambria Steel
12,500
Fa
1
1 L

36, 000 r
1923 the first AISC Specification

Fa 15, 000 for
L
60
r
18, 000
1 L

18, 000 r
Copyright 2014
for
L
60
r
20
10
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
18000
16000
14000
12000
1892
1903
1911
10000
1919
1921
8000
1923
Rankine-Gordon
1919, 1923
6000
1932
1936
4000
2000
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
21
Some History
Modern design formulas
Column Research Council proposals
Curve fit for elastic and inelastic buckling
1961 AISC, effective length concept introduced
Fa
L
1 r
2Cc2
F .S .
L
Cc
r
2
L
L
for C
r
r
Fy for
149, 000, 000

Copyright 2014
22
11
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
1963 AISC, effective length factor introduced
KL
1
r
2Cc2
KL
Fa
Fy for
Cc
F .S .
r
2
KL
for
149, 000, 000 KL
C
r
r
23
Some History
2005 AISC, first unified specification
Fy
Fa
0.658 Fe Fy
1.67
for
KL
E
4.71
r
Fy
0.877 Fe
KL
E
for
4.71
1.67
r
Fy
Copyright 2014
where
Fe
2 E
KL
24
12
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Some History
25000
20000
2005, Fy = 36 ksi
L
1892
1903
1911
15000
1919
1921
1923
1932
10000
1936
1961 , Fy = 36 ksi
1961
2005
5000
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
25
Effective Length vs. Actual Length

1961 AISC Specification introduced
effective length concept.

effective length factor, K.

Direct Analysis using K = 1 for moment frames
Limitations on the applicability of the Effective
Length Method
Copyright 2014
26
13
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Effective Length Method vs. Direct

Analysis Method
DA
ELM
Limited
applicability
Must determine
K-factors
Uses actual
modulus of
elasticity
No limits to
applicability
K-factor always
taken as unity
Uses a reduced
modulus of
elasticity
27
Stability
Determine the elastic buckling load for a
column.
Assumptions
P
Perfectly elastic
Perfectly straight
Constant cross section
Pin ends
Equilibrium at a point on a free body
in the displaced configuration
P
Copyright 2014
M x Py
28
14
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Stability
column.
From the principles of mechanics
using small displacement theory
M
d2y
x
2
dx
EI
Combining and rearranging terms
d2y P
y0
dx 2 EI
29
Stability
column.
Define
k2
x
P
EI
The result is the differential equation

of the column
d2y
k2y 0
2
dx
Copyright 2014
30
15
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Stability
column.
Solution
y A sin kx B cos kx
x
From boundary conditions
B0
A sin kL 0
31
Stability
column.
Thus,
and
x
sin kL 0
kL n
The shape of the deflected column is
y A sin
Copyright 2014
nx
L
32
16
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Stability
column.
Remembering that
k2
x
P
and kL n
EI
thus,
P n 2 2
k
2
EI
L
2
33
Stability
column.
The solution for the differential
equation is
n 2 2 EI
P
L2
which has a minimum value

when
n 1
Copyright 2014
34
17
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Stability
column.
Thus, we have the well known
Euler Equation for the elastic
buckling load:
x
2 EI
Pcr 2
L
35
Effective Length Factor

Look at the higher buckling modes
n=1
n=2
n=3
n=4
The definition of n is dependent on the definition of L

Copyright 2014
36
18
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Elastic Buckling Load

The Perfect Column - The Euler Buckling
Equation:
2
Pe
EI
L2
The real column, as part of a structure with

imperfections, bracing, end conditions, etc.:
Pcr Pe (adjustment factor)

37
Definition of Effective Length

Factor
Define the adjustment factor as:
adjustment factor n 2
1
2
K exact
Thus, the elastic buckling load for a real

column is given by:
2 EI
Pcr
( K exact L) 2
Copyright 2014
38
19
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Consider member bracing
L
L/2
K = 1.0
K = 0.5
L/3
K = 0.33
L/4
K = 0.25
The definition of K is dependent on the definition of L

39
K exact
Copyright 2014
Beginning the
recognition that
real columns are
not exact.
40
20
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Braced frame members: ends do
not sway relative to each other
KL
KL
41

Every approach we have for determination of
the effective length factor, K, is an attempt to
determine the exact effective length factor,
Kexact, such that the exact critical buckling load
may be determined, without the need to resort
to an elastic buckling analysis.
So what is an elastic buckling analysis?
Copyright 2014
42
21
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Elastic Buckling Analysis

Eigenvalue Analysis
General form of the eigenvalue problem
K K 0
o
K o linear stiffness matrix

K g geometric stiffness matrix
43

Eigenvalue Analysis
Reduction to standard form H Y Y

Solution techniques
Y eigenvector
Polynomial expansion
Power method
Iteration
others
Copyright 2014
eigenvalue
1
load ratio
44
22
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

P
0.01P
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
All members W8x24
45
Second Order Analysis Results

500
400
First Order Elastic Analysis

Load (kips)
0.571 in., 232 kips

300

200
Second Order Elastic

Analysis
100
0
0
12
16
20
Lateral Displacement (in.)
Copyright 2014
46
23
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Goal
Develop equations that may be used to
determine the effective length of columns in
moment frames or braced frames without
requiring an elastic buckling analysis.
In your practice, how do you determine Kfactors?
47
Nomograph Assumptions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Behavior is purely elastic.

All members have a constant cross section.
All joints are rigid.
In sidesway inhibited frames (braced frames),
rotations at opposite ends of beams are equal
producing single curvature.
Copyright 2014
48
24
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Nomograph Assumptions:
5. In sidesway permitted frames (moment frames),
rotations at opposite ends of restraining beams are
equal producing reverse curvature
6. Stiffness parameter L P EI of all columns is
equal
7. Joint restraint is distributed to column above and
below in proportion to I/L
8. All columns buckle simultaneously
9. No significant axial force in girders
49

Sidesway Inhibited (Braced Frames) C-A-7-1
GAGB
G GB
/ K
tan 2 K
( / K ) 2 ( A
)(1
) 2(
) 1
4
2
tan K
K
Sidesway Permitted (Moment Frames) C-A-7-2

2
GAGB ( K ) 36
K
6(GA GB )
tan K
Copyright 2014
50
25
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Effective
Length
K varies from 0.5 to 1.0
Nomograph or
Alignment Chart
for Braced Frame
At each end, A and B
I L c
I L g
51
Effective
Length
K varies from 1.0 to infinity
Nomograph or
Alignment Chart
for Moment Frame
I L c
I L g
Copyright 2014
52
26
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Problems with nomograph
Real structures rarely satisfy all assumptions
Gravity only columns
Stiffness parameters not usually the same
All columns don't buckle simultaneously
Different end conditions means I/L is not a good
measure of stiffness at a joint
Columns may not behave elastically
53
Effects of Inelasticity
Inelastic buckling residual stresses
When the stress-strain relationship is no
longer linear, use the Tangent Modulus of
Elasticity at the level of loading.
ET
Stress, F
Fy
Plastic Behavior
Elastic
ET
E
Strain,
Inelastic
Copyright 2014
54
27
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Look at the stiffness ratio at each end of the
column. The derivation had originally included E.
Gelastic
EI L c
E I L g
I L c
I L g
If ET is used for the columns and it is assumed

that all columns at the joint have the same ET,
then
E I L
E I L
Ginelastic
E I L g
E I L g
b Gelastic
55
Depends on the level of axial stress in the
member given by ratio of required strength
to yield strength:
when Pr Py 0.5;
b 1.0
when Pr Py 0.5;
P
b 4 r
Py
1.0 (LRFD)
Copyright 2014
(C2-2a)
Pr
1
Py
(C2-2b)
1.6 (ASD)
56
28
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Moment Frame Column
Beams W16x36, L= 24 ft, Ix = 448 in.3
Columns W10x88, L = 14 ft, Ix = 534 in.3
Gelastic
I L c
I L g
534
2
14

2.04
448
2
24
K 1.6
57
Moment Frame Column
If the LRFD load on the column is Pu =
950 kips,
Pr
950
0.731 0.5
Py
50 26.0
P P
b 4 r 1 r
Py
Py
4 0.7311 0.731 0.786
Ginelastic 0.786 2.04 1.60
K 1.5
Copyright 2014
58
29
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

59
Buckling vs. Nomograph

K exact
29, 000 82.7
EI
2.66
232
Pcr 10(12)
P
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
All members
W8x24
Copyright 2014
Nomograph
K = 2.63
The structure and loading are
close to satisfying the
derivation assumptions. Thus,
the results are close.
60
30
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

K exact
29, 000 82.7
EI
1.89
Pcr 10(12)
460
P
Nomograph
K = 2.63
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
The structure and loading are

far from satisfying the
derivation assumptions. Thus,
the results are quite different.
All members
W8x24
61

P
10.0 ft
10.0 ft
All members
W8x24
20.0 ft
PCR = 1378 kips
Sidesway Prevented
Copyright 2014
62
31
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

All members W8 x 24
Nomograph
Kupper = 0.88
10.0 ft
Klower = 0.95
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
Elastic Buckling
Kupper = 1.09
All members
W8x24
Klower = 0.77
63

P
10.0 ft
10.0 ft
All members
W8x24
20.0 ft
Pcr = 140 kips
Sidesway Permitted
Copyright 2014
64
32
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

P
10.0 ft
10.0 ft
All members
W8x24
20.0 ft
Pcr = 242 kips
65
10.0 ft
10.0 ft
All members
W8x24
20.0 ft
Copyright 2014
Pcr = 290 kips
66
33
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

All members W8 x 24
Nomograph
10.0 ft
10.0 ft
Kupper = 1.79
Klower = 3.18
20.0 ft
All members
W8x24
67

Elastic Buckling compared to Nomograph
From Elastic Buckling, each load pattern
results in a different critical buckling load.
Both stories loaded,
Kupper = 3.43, Klower = 2.42
Upper story loaded,

Kupper = 2.61, Klower = 2.61
Kupper = 1.79
Klower = 3.18
Lower story loaded,

Kupper = ?,
Nomograph
Klower = 2.38
Copyright 2014
68
34
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

P
Pcr = 455 kips

2P
10.0 ft
1
2
20.0 ft
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
All members
W8x24
69

P
Pcr = 487 kips

P
10.0 ft
1
2
20.0 ft
Copyright 2014
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
All members
W8x24
70
35
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

P
Pcr = 499 kips

0.5P
10.0 ft
1
2
20.0 ft
10.0 ft
20.0 ft
All members
W8x24
71

Elastic Buckling compared to Nomograph
From Elastic Buckling, each load pattern
results in a different critical buckling load.
Nomograph
Loading; P, P, 2P
K1 0.950, K 2 1.90, K 3 1.90, K 4 1.34
Loading; P, P, P
K1 0.919, K 2 1.84, K 3 1.84, K 4 1.84
Loading; P, P, 0.5P,
K1 1.16
K 2 1.45
K 3 1.79
K 4 1.28
K1 0.907, K 2 1.81, K 3 1.81, K 4 2.56
Copyright 2014
72
36
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

73
Gravity only Columns

What are gravity only columns?
Columns that do not contribute to the lateral load
resistance of the structure
They rely on the remaining portion of the structure to
provide their lateral restraint
Also called leaning columns
Designed with K = 1.0
Copyright 2014
74
37
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

In the left to right direction, this structure shows
12 gravity only columns, 50%, but the relationship of loading based on
tributary area is more like 64% on the gravity only columns
Moment Frame
40 ft
30 ft
40 ft
Moment Frame
75
Buckling with Gravity Only

Columns
P
Restraining
Columns
Gravity only Column
P/2
P/2
Copyright 2014
76
38
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Columns
Q
L
77

Columns
P
Q
MBA
Q
L
D
L
Q
L
MAB
P
Using the same model as that used for developing the nomographs
Copyright 2014
78
39
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Columns
Nomograph type equation for sidesway uninhibited including gravity only columns
GAGB ( / K ) 2 36 Q
/ K Q
6 tan( / 2 K ) Q Q
1
1
0
6(GA GB )
P
tan(
/
K
)
P
(
G
A GB )( / 2 K ) P P
Q represents the sum of the load on all of the

gravity only columns attributed to the frame
P represents the sum of the load on all of the

restraining columns attributed to the frame
79

Columns
GAGB ( / K ) 2 36 Q
/ K Q
6 tan( / 2 K ) Q Q
1
1
0
6(GA GB )
P tan( / K ) P (GA GB )( / 2 K ) P P
No load on gravity only column
Q = 0, K = 2.0
Equal loads on restraining and
gravity only column
Q/P = 1, K = 2.7
Other combinations
Q/P = 2, K = 3.25
Copyright 2014
Q/P = 10, K = 6.07

What would you do if there
were no load P?
80
40
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Columns
Develop a simplified approach for
determination of K considering gravity only
columns.
Either design the column for a larger load, or
Design the column with a larger K-factor
81

Columns
P
(P+Q)
Q
L
Q
M P Q
Copyright 2014
P+Q
M P Q
N40.82
41
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Columns
(P+Q)
Design this column for the load (P+Q)

using the nomograph effective length
factor, Ko.
P Q
EI
2
Ko L
P+Q
M P Q
83

Columns
P
Or, design this column for the load P using

the modified nomograph effective length
factor, Kn.
2 EI
Kn L
P
M P
Copyright 2014
84
42
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Columns
Solve both equations for
2 EI
L2
2 EI
2 EI
2
K o P Q and
K n2 P
2
2
L
L
Set equal and solve for Kn

Kn Ko
PQ
Q
Ko 1
P
P
85

Columns
Q
Kn Ko 1
Q
P
No load on gravity only column
Q = 0, K = 2.0
Equal loads on restraining and

gravity only column
Q/P = 1, K = 2.8
Other combinations
Q/P = 2, K = 3.46
Q/P = 10, K = 6.63
Copyright 2014
What would you do if there

were no load P?
86
43
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
AISC 360-10
Alternate Methods of Design for Stability
App.7.1. General Stability Requirements
General requirements from Chapter C
still apply subject to limitations given in App.7.
App.7.2. Effective Length Method

App.7.3. First-Order Analysis Method
87
Effective Length Method

App.7.2.1. Limitations
(1) Structure supports gravity loads primarily through
nominally vertical columns, walls or frames
(2) Second-order effects must be limited
B2
2 nd order
1.5
1st order
Copyright 2014
88
44
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

App.7.2.2. Required Strengths
Must satisfy the general stability requirements of Section
C2.1
For out-of-plumbness must use notional loads in gravity
only load cases
89

App.7.2.3. Available Strengths
Calculated in accordance with the provisions of Chapters
D through K.
Effective length factors taken as K = 1.0 when lateral
stability does not rely on flexural stiffness (braced
frames).
In moment frames, K determined through a sidesway
buckling analysis.
If 2 nd order 1st order 1.1 then K 1.0

Copyright 2014
90
45
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014

Design process
Apply notional loads, Ni =0.002Yi in the
gravity only load cases
Perform a second-order elastic analysis
Determine K-factor from a sidesway buckling
analysis
Check strength using interaction equations
91
Example 1 (LRFD)
Design by Effective Length Method (App. 7.2)
300 kips
20 kips
300 kips
PL 420 kips
rigid element
W 20.0 kips
W14x90
Column A
PD 75.0 kips
15 ft
Column B
1.2 D 0.5 L 1.0W

Copyright 2014
92
46
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (LRFD)
First-order elastic analysis
300 kips
300 kips
20 kips
W14x90
15 ft
Column B
1st
M ux 300 ft-kips
K ox 2.0
rigid element
Column A
Pu 300 kips
K oy 1.0
Lb 15 ft
Pl 3
20(15)3 (1728)
1.34 in.
3b EI 3 1.0 (29000)(999)
93
Example 1 (LRFD)
Notional load
Yi 300 300 600 kips
N i 0.002(600) 1.2 kips
Apply notional load only for gravity only load

case
Note that notional load is less than applied
lateral load
Copyright 2014
94
47
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (LRFD)
Stiffness reduction b 1.0 for
P
4 r
Py
Pr
0.5
Py
Pr
1
Py
Pr
0.5
for
P
Pr
1.0(300)
0.23 0.5
Py
50 ksi 26.5 in.2
Thus
b 1.0
No need to reconsider
deflection or consider
inelastic buckling
N40.95
Example 1 (LRFD)
Amplify first-order analysis; Appendix 8
member effect.
Since there are no moments in this example without
lateral displacement, there is no need for B1
Copyright 2014
96
48
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (LRFD)
structure effect
B2
1
1.0
Pstory
Pstory 600 kips

H 20 kips
H 1.34 in.
Pe story
97
Example 1 (LRFD)
structure effect
Pmf
RM 1 0.15
P
story
Pe story RM
300
1 0.15
0.925
600
20 15.0 12
HL
0.925
2, 490 kips
H
1.34
Copyright 2014
98
49
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (LRFD)
structure effect
B2
1
1.32 1st 1.5
2 nd
1.0 600
1
2490
Thus, this method is applicable
99
Example 1 (LRFD)
Second-order moment
M r B1M nt B2 M lt
(A-8-1)
M u (0.0) 1.32(300) 396 ft-kips

Second-order force
Pr Pnt B2 Plt
(A-8-2)
Pu 300 1.32 0.0 300 kips

Copyright 2014
100
50
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (LRFD)
Determine the effective length, including
the gravity only column
K ox 2.0 (for a cantilever column)
To include the gravity only column

K nx K ox 1
K nx 2.0 1
Pgravity
Pstability
300
2.83
300
derived earlier
101
Example 1 (LRFD)
Determine member strength
K nx L 2.83 15.0 ft =42.5 ft
c Pn 721 kips
K oy L 15.0 ft
Lb 15.0 ft
b M n 574 ft-kips
Interaction Eq. H1-1a
300 8 396

1.03 1.0 ng
721 9 574
Copyright 2014
102
51
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (LRFD)
Had you not considered the gravity only
columns impact on K
K ox L 2.0 15.0 ft =30.0 ft
c Pn 929 kips
K oy L 15.0 ft
Lb 15.0 ft
b M n 574 ft-kips

300 8 396

0.94 1.0 ok
929 9 574
But we now know this

would have been
incorrect.
103
Example 1 (ASD)
390kips
9 kips
390 kips
PL 420 kips
rigid element
W 20.0 kips
W14x90
Column A
PD 75.0 kips
15 ft
Column B
D 0.75L 0.75 0.6W

Copyright 2014
104
52
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
390 kips
390 kips
9 kips
W14x90
15 ft
Column B
1st
M ax 135 ft-kips
K ox 2.0
rigid element
Column A
Pa 390 kips
K oy 1.0
Lb 15 ft
Pl 3
9(15)3 (1728)
0.603 in.
3b EI 3 1.0 (29000)(999)
105
Example 1 (ASD)
Notional load
Yi 390 390 780 kips
N i 0.002(780) 1.56 kips

case
lateral load
Copyright 2014
106
53
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
P
4 r
Py
Pr
0.5
Py
Pr
1
Py
Pr
0.5
for
P
Pr
1.6(390)
0.47 0.5
Py
50 ksi 26.5 in.2
Thus
b 1.0
inelastic buckling
107
Example 1 (ASD)
member effect.
Copyright 2014
108
54
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
structure effect
B2
1
1.0
Pstory
Pstory 780 kips

H 9 kips
H 0.603 in.
Pe story
109
Example 1 (ASD)
structure effect
Pmf
RM 1 0.15
P
story
Pe story RM
390
1 0.15
0.925
780
9 15.0 12
HL
0.925
2, 490 kips
H
0.603
Copyright 2014
110
55
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
structure effect
B2
1
2.00 1st 1.5
2 nd
1.6 780
1
2490
Thus, this method is NOT applicable for ASD.
111
Example 1 (ASD)
Consider the Direct Analysis Method
390kips
9 kips
390 kips
PL 420 kips
rigid element
W 20.0 kips
W14x90
Column A
PD 75.0 kips
15 ft
Column B
D 0.75L 0.75 0.6W

Copyright 2014
112
56
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
390 kips
390 kips
9 kips
W14x90
15 ft
Column B
1st
M ax 135 ft-kips
K ox 1.0
rigid element
Column A
Pa 390 kips
K oy 1.0
Lb 15 ft
Pl 3
9(15)3 (1728)
0.755 in.
3b EI 3 1.0 0.8 (29000)(999)
113
Example 1 (ASD)
Design by Direct Analysis method
Notional load
Yi 390 390 780 kips
N i 0.002(780) 1.56 kips

case unless second-order effects are too great
Note that notional load must be added to the
lateral load in our case since the second-order
effects will be shown to be large.
Copyright 2014
114
57
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
Pa 390 kips

390 kips
9+1.56 kips
390 kips
M ax 135 23.4
158 ft-kips
rigid element
W14x90
Column A
15 ft
K ox 1.0
K oy 1.0
Column B
Lb 15 ft
1st
Pl 3
9(15)3 (1728)
0.755 in.
3b EI 3 1.0 0.8 (29000)(999)
115
Example 1 (ASD)
P
4 r
Py
Pr
0.5
Py
Pr
1
Py
Pr
0.5
for
P
Pr
1.6(390)
0.47 0.5
Py
50 ksi 26.5 in.2
Thus
b 1.0
Copyright 2014
inelastic buckling
116
58
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
Design by Direct Analysis Method
member effect.
117
Example 1 (ASD)
structure effect
B2
1
1.0
Pstory
Pe story
Copyright 2014
Pstory 780 kips

H 9 kips
H 0.755 in.
118
59
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
structure effect
Pmf
RM 1 0.15
P
story
Pe story RM
390
1 0.15
0.925
780
9 15.0 12
HL
0.925
1,980 kips
H
0.755
119
Example 1 (ASD)
structure effect
B2
1
2.70 1st 1.5
2 nd
1.6 780
1
1980
But, there is no limit on applicability of this method
Copyright 2014
120
60
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 1 (ASD)
Second-order moment
M r B1M nt B2 M lt
(A-8-1)
M u (0.0) 2.70(158) 427 ft-kips

Second-order force
Pr Pnt B2 Plt
(A-8-2)
Pu 390 2.70 0.0 390 kips

121
Example 1 (ASD)
K nx L 15.0 ft
Pn
667 kips
K oy L 15.0 ft
Lb 15.0 ft
Mn
382 ft-kips
390 8 427

1.58 1.0 ng
667 9 382
Copyright 2014
122
61
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 2 (LRFD)
300 kips
Column A load
PD 75.0 kips
500 kips
Column B load
20 kips
PD 125.0 kips
rigid element
PL 420 kips
W14x90
15 ft
PL 700 kips
W 20.0 kips
Column A
Column B
1.2 D 0.5 L 1.0W

123
Example 2 (LRFD)
300 kips
500 kips
20 kips
W14x90
15 ft
Column B
1st
M ux 300 ft-kips
K ox 2.0
rigid element
Column A
Pu 300 kips
K oy 1.0
Lb 15 ft
Pl 3
20(15)3 (1728)
1.34 in.
3b EI 3 1.0 (29000)(999)
Copyright 2014
124
62
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 2 (LRFD)
Notional load
Yi 300 500 800 kips
N i 0.002(800) 1.6 kips

case
lateral load
125
Example 2 (LRFD)
P
4 r
Py
Pr
0.5
Py
Pr
1
Py
Pr
0.5
for
P
Pr
1.0(300)
0.23 0.5
Py
50 ksi 26.5 in.2
Thus
b 1.0
Copyright 2014
inelastic buckling
126
63
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 2 (LRFD)
member effect.
127
Example 2 (LRFD)
structure effect
B2
1
1.0
Pstory
Pe story
Copyright 2014
Pstory 800 kips

H 20 kips
H 1.34 in.
128
64
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 2 (LRFD)
structure effect
Pmf
RM 1 0.15
P
story
Pe story RM
300
1 0.15
0.94
800
20 15.0 12
HL
0.94
2,530 kips
H
1.34
129
Example 2 (LRFD)
structure effect
B2
1
1.46 1st 1.5
2 nd
1.0 800
1
2,530
Thus, this method is applicable
Copyright 2014
130
65
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 2 (LRFD)
Second-order moment
M r B1M nt B2 M lt
(A-8-1)
M u (0.0) 1.46(300) 438 ft-kips

Second-order force
Pr Pnt B2 Plt
(A-8-2)
Pu 300 1.46 0.0 300 kips

131
Example 2 (LRFD)
Determine the effective length, including
the gravity only column
K ox 2.0 (for a cantilever column)
To include the gravity only column

K nx K ox 1
K nx 2.0 1
Pgravity
Pstability
500
3.27
300
derived earlier
Copyright 2014
132
66
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Example 2 (LRFD)
K nx L 3.27 15.0 ft =49.0 ft
c Pn 610 kips
K oy L 15.0 ft
Lb 15.0 ft
b M n 574 ft-kips
300 8 396

1.11 1.0 ng
610 9 574
133
Examples
Note that load on the gravity only column
has significant impact on the restraining or
stability column.
In these examples, we had one gravity
only column and one restraining column.
In real structures we can expect multiple
numbers of each type column.
Using the correct K-factor is critical.
Copyright 2014
134
67
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
If you want to use K-factors you

better use the correct ones
What approach does your software use?
Calculates the elastic buckling load______
Calculates K based on the alignment chart
equations_____
Requires K as an input variable for each
column_____
Assumes a K based on a default_____
Assumes all K = 1.0_____
135
OR
Use the Direct Analysis method of AISC
360-10 Chapter C with
K 1
Copyright 2014
136
68
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
Thank You
One East Wacker Drive, Suite 700
Chicago, IL 60601
137
CEU Certificates
Within 1 business day
You will receive an email on how to report attendance
from: steel@wyndhamjade.com
Be on the lookout: Check your spam filter! Check
your junk folder!
Completely fill out online form. Dont forget to check
the boxes next to each attendees name!
OR
Copyright 2014
69
AISC Live Webinar

May 8, 2014
CEU Certificates
Access available in 24 hours
Go to:
http://www.wynjade.com/aisc14/webinarceu
Username: Your Attendee ID (found on your reg. receipt)
Password: Your Last Name
Completely fill out online form. Dont forget to check
the boxes next to each attendees name!
Questions? Please email us at webinars@aisc.org.
Copyright 2014
70

AISC K Factors

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AISC K Factors

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

AISC Live Webinars

Theres always a solution in steel!

Todays audio will be broadcast through the

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

AISC is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of

Theres always a solution in steel!

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

So you want to use K-factors,

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

History of column equations

Leonhard Euler, 1757

Thomas H. Johnson, 1886

Friedrich Engesser, 1889

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Some say there is no more variation in the

Theres always a solution in steel!

s1 the allowable stress

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Fa 12, 000 for

Theres always a solution in steel!

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

s1 the allowable stress

Theres always a solution in steel!

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

1923 the first AISC Specification

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

149, 000, 000

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

AISC Live Webinar

So you want to use K-factors, do you?

Theres always a solution in steel!

Effective Length vs. Actual Length

1963 AISC Specification introduced

2005 AISC Specification introduced