ColdFormed
AISI Sponsored
Steel
Research
Frame
AISI
Sponsored Research
and
Reports
BeamColumn
Design
Reports
Committee on Specifications
for the Design of ColdFormed
Steel Structural Members
The material contained herein has been developed by researchers based on their research
findings. The material has also been reviewed by the American Iron and Steel Institute
Committee on Specifications for the Design of ColdFormed Steel Structural Members. The
Committee acknowledges and is grateful for the contributions of such researchers.
The material herein is for general information only. The information in it should not be
used without first securing competent advice with respect to its suitability for any given
application. The publication of the information is not intended as a representation or warranty
on the part of the American Iron and Steel Institute, or of any other person named herein, that
the information is suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of
any patent or patents. Anyone making use of the information assumes all liability arising from
such use.
PREFACE
This report is based on a thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell
University by Andrew T. Sarawit for the decree of Doctor of Philosophy.
The sponsorship of the Rack Manufacturers Institute and the American Iron and Steel Institute is
gratefully acknowledged. The authors are also wish to thank Mr. James Crews, Mr. Daniel Clapp, Mr.
John Nofsinger, and Dr. Helen Chen of the sponsoring organizations for their outstanding help through out
the duration of the research.
by
Andrew T. Sarawit1
Teoman Pekz2, Project Director
August 2003
Report 0303
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
2. Column Bases
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Development of a Base Fixity Equation
5
5
13
13
19
29
30
2.4. Conclusions
33
34
3.1. Introduction
34
35
40
42
3.5. Conclusions
48
4. Members
49
4.1. Introduction
49
50
64
73
81
82
86
95
103
113
116
4.9. Conclusions
121
124
5.1. Introduction
124
125
125
129
5.3. Plumbness
132
135
139
143
148
157
160
172
174
174
179
180
5.8. Conclusions
184
186
191
202
215
Appendix D BeamColumns
220
223
290
297
300
References
327
LIST OF TABLES
2.1
24
3.1
44
4.1
51
54
4.3
55
56
4.5
63
63
4.7
66
4.8
4.9
67
68
69
70
71
75
76
77
79
80
4.18 Comparison Among the AISI Design Approach, the Modified AISI Design
Approach, and the Analytical Results
89
96
115
5.1
140
5.2
150
5.3
Statistics for the Correlation of Design Procedures with the FEM Results
150
5.4
162
5.5
5.6
164
165
LIST OF FIGURES
2.1
(a) Beam element (b) Equivalent floor beam for rack not braced against
sidesway (c) Equivalent floor beam for rack braced against sidesway
10
2.3
10
2.4
Model 3: Deformation shape of the concrete block under the base plate
10
2.5 Model 4
11
2.6
12
2.7
12
2.8
15
2.9
16
2.10 Column wall section positioned at the edges of the plate: Normal load
distribution on the concrete surface
17
2.11 Column wall section positioned at the center of the plate: Normal load
distribution on the concrete surface
17
18
21
2.14 (a) Base plate type A (b) Base plate type B (c) Base plate type C
(d) Base plate type D
22
25
25
26
26
28
31
31
32
3.1
36
Cantilever test
36
3.3
37
41
3.5
44
3.6
45
45
3.8
46
3.9
46
3.10 Comparison of the cantilever test and the finite element simulation
47
4.1
51
4.2
53
4.3
58
4.4
59
4.5
60
4.6
60
4.7
61
4.8
61
4.9
62
62
67
68
69
4.14 Upright frame load cases and beam to column connection stiffness, K
74
74
83
83
84
84
4.20 Comparison between the RMI effective design area equation and
the proposed equation
87
4.21 Comparison between the RMI effective design area equation and
the proposed equation
87
4.22 Comparison between the AISI effective width approach and the proposed
approach
88
4.23 Comparison between the AISI design approach and the modified AISI design
approach
88
4.24 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between AISI design approach and
analytical results
91
4.25 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between modified AISI design approach
and analytical results
91
4.26 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
92
4.27 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design area
equation and analytical results
92
4.28 Section FS Closed Tube  Correlation between AISI design approach and
analytical results
93
93
4.30 Section FS Closed Tube  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
94
94
4.32 Section TB Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
97
4.33 Section TB Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design area
equation and analytical results
97
4.34 Section TB Closed Tube  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
98
98
4.36 Section IG Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
99
4.37 Section IG Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design area
equation and analytical results
99
4.38 Section IG Closed Tube  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
100
4.39 Section IG Closed Tube  Correlation between proposed effective design area
equation and analytical results
100
4.40 Section Type II Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
101
4.41 Section Type II Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design
area equation and analytical results
101
4.42 Comparison between the RMI approach for column design and the proposed
approach
102
4.43 Comparison between the RMI approach for beam design and the proposed
approach
102
4.44 Initial conditions of the finite element model (a) Bending residue stresses
(b) Geometric imperfections
104
4.45 Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for column design
and the proposed approach
107
4.46 Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for beam design
and the proposed approach
107
4.47 Unperforated Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
108
4.48 Perforated Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
108
4.49 Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI approach for column
design and the proposed approach
109
4.50 Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI approach for beam design
and the proposed approach
109
110
4.52 Perforated Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
110
4.53 Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for column design
and the proposed approach
111
4.54 Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for beam design
and the proposed approach
111
4.55 Unperforated Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
112
4.56 Perforated Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
112
119
119
120
120
5.1 Parameters that influences the value of Kx for column flexural buckling
126
128
5.3 Relationship between the frame stability and the loading sequence
128
130
130
131
133
133
5.9 Effect of initial outofplumb on the load carrying capacity of the frame
134
137
137
138
138
140
5.15 Base fixity model (a) Torsional spring (b)(e) Double axial spring
142
146
149
149
5.19 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1a) and the
FEM results
152
5.20 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1b) and the
FEM results
152
5.21 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1c) and the
FEM results
153
5.22 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1d) and the
FEM results
153
5.23 Correlation between the Notional Load Approach (Approach 2a) and the
FEM results
154
5.24 Correlation between the Notional Load Approach (Approach 2b) and the
FEM results
154
5.25 Correlation between the Notional Load Approach (Approach 2c) and the
FEM results
155
161
161
162
162
166
166
167
167
168
170
170
171
171
173
175
175
176
5.43 Same plot as Figure 5.42 but with a different yaxis scale
176
177
178
181
181
182
182
Chapter
Introduction
1.1
BACKGROUND
The design of industrial steel storage racks presents several challenges to the
structural engineer. Presently, the design in the United States is carried out according
to the 1997 edition of the Specification published by the Rack Manufacturers Institute
(RMI). The RMI published its first Minimum Engineering Standards for Industrial
Storage Racks in 1964.
The work that resulted in the first edition of the Specification was initiated by
the RMI in 1972 at Cornell University. Several editions of the Specification have been
prepared based on the work by the RMI Specification Advisory Committee and the
researchers at Cornell University under the supervision of Professors George Winter
and Teoman Pekz until 1979 and under the supervision of Teoman Pekz since 1979.
The RMI (1997) Specification is tied closely to the AISI (1996) Specification for the
provisions on ColdFormed Steel Design.
1.2
1.3
RELATED LITERATURE
The work presented in this thesis would not be possible without studying
previous works of other researchers. The following are some of the works which the
author studied and referred to extensively throughout this research project.
Textbooks written by Galambos (1988), Hancock (1998), Pekz (1987),
Rhodes (1991), Salmon and Johnson (1996), Timoshenko and Gere (1961), and
Yu (2000) provided in depth explanations of the fundamental basis for the design of
coldformed steel and metal structures.
Studies given by Galambos (1960), and Salmon, Schenker and Johnston (1955)
were the basis for the column base fixity equation used in the RMI specification.
The author referred to the following solid mechanic textbooks: Gurtin (1981), Malvern
(1969), Sokolnikoff (1983), Timoshenko and Goodier (1969) to solve column base
fixity problems.
Beamtocolumn connection test procedures given in the commentary section
of the RMI specification were reviewed and used to develop a new alternative test
procedure. These beam to column connection tests had been carried out extensively by
Markazi, Beale, and Godley (1997), and Harris and Hancock (2002).
Journal papers by Stuto (1993), and White and Clarke (1997) thoroughly give
the historical background, philosophies, and comparison between different standards
for the design of steel beamcolumns. And discussion by Pekz and Winter (1973)
provide background information on the development of the RMI specification.
The influence that the semirigid nature of the beam to column joints and
column bases have on the pallet racks stability were investigated by Baldassino and
Bernuzzi (2000), Cheng (1973), and Lewis (1991). Salmon, Welch and Longinow
(1973), and Godley (2002) investigated the behavior of drivein and drivethru storage
racks; Olsson, Sandberg and Austrell (1999) investigated the influence of damage on
the load carrying capacity of storage rack columns; and Teh, Hancock and Clarke
(2001) investigated the buckling behavior of highrise storage rack structures.
Torsionalflexural buckling and moment magnification factor studies carried
out in the thesis were based primarily on Pekz (1967), Pekz and Celebi (1969), and
Salmon and Johnson (1996).
Comparison between the effective length approach and notional load approach
for assessing frame stability has been and is continuously being studied by the ASCE
Task Committee on Effective Length. The author has referred to their ASCE (1997)
report and is very grateful for their collaboration making the study on Effective Length
Approach and Notional Load Approach for ColdFormed Steel Frame and BeamColumn Design in this research project possible.
Previous researchers at Cornell University have studied the finite element
modeling assumptions of coldformed steel members extensively. The analytical
studies carried out in this research project would not be possible without reference to
the finite element studies conducted by Schafer and Pekz (1998), and Schafer (1997).
The several computer programs that the author developed for this research
project were based on the theory of structural analysis given by Chen and Atsuta
(1976), Gattass and Abel (1987), Huebner, Thornton and Byrom (1995), Gotluru
(1998), McGuire, Gallagher and Ziemian (2000), Timoshenko and Gere (1961), Yang
(1986), as well as the coldformed steel design approaches given by AISI (1996),
Schafer (1997), and Schafer and Pekz (1999).
The author is certain that many more researchers other than those mentioned
here contributed to the research and development of coldformed steel frame and
beamcolumn design. These omissions are either for the sake of brevity or because
they were unknown to the author.
Chapter
Column Bases
2.1
INTRODUCTION
Storage rack stability depends significantly on the conditions of the column
bases. The RMI specification uses the following base fixity expression, for the ratio of
the moment with respect to the corresponding rotation of the base to account for the
semirigid nature of the connection of the column to the floor as
bd 2 Ec
=
12
(2.1)
where b is the width of the column parallel to the flexural axis, d is the depth of the
column perpendicular to the flexural axis, and Ec is the modulus of elasticity of the
floor, which is assumed to be concrete. The expression above is based on an analytical
approximation developed by Salmon, Schenker and Johnston (1955) for the case
where the footing does not rotate in soil, which is the case for the storage racks in this
study. Rotation takes place between the column ends and the floor due to the
deformation of the base plate, the anchor bolts, and the concrete. Salmon, Schenker
and Johnston (1955) also developed a method for finding the momentrotation
Ma =
4 EI
2 EI
6 EI
6 EI
a +
b + 2 ua 2 ub
L
L
L
L
(2.2)
Mb =
2 EI
4 EI
6 EI
6 EI
a +
b + 2 ua 2 ub
L
L
L
L
(2.3)
where ua and ub are the translation degrees of freedom, a and b are the rotational
degrees of freedom, L is the length, I is the moment of inertia, and E is the modulus
of elasticity of the beam element. To determine the stiffness of the equivalent floor
beam for rack not braced against sidesway, consider a frame that has its column bases
rotate equally because of the sidesway as shown in Fig. 2.1b, the boundary conditions
of segment ab in this case are M b = 0, ua = 0, and ub = 0. Using Eqs. (2.2) and (2.3)
with these boundary conditions M a is obtained as follows:
Ma =
6 Es I f
Lf
the resisting moment that is developed in the interior column base from the two ends
of the equivalent floor beam is M = 2M a that is
Vb
Va
Ma
ua
Mb
EI
ub
L
(a)
Es I f
Es I f
a
Lf 2
Lf 2
(b)
Es I f
Es I f
a
Lf 2
Lf 2
(c)
Figure 2.1 (a) Beam element (b) Equivalent floor beam for rack not braced against
sidesway (c) Equivalent floor beam for rack braced against sidesway
M=
12 Es I f
Lf
(2.4)
where is the angle of rotation of the column base which is equal to a . Inserting the
above equation in Eq. (2.1) and assuming Es Ec = 10 we have the stiffness of the
equivalent floor beam for rack not braced against sidesway as given in the RMI
specification.
If
Lf
bd 2
1440
(2.5)
To determine the stiffness of the equivalent floor beam for a rack braced against
sidesway the same procedure is used, however, as shown in Fig. 2.1c the boundary
conditions of segment ab in this case are M b = M a , ua = 0, and b = 0. Using Eqs.
(2.2) and (2.3) with these boundary conditions M a is obtained as follows:
Ma =
2 Es I f
Lf
the resisting moment that is developed in the interior column base at the two ends of
the equivalent floor beam is M = 2M a that is
M=
4 Es I f
Lf
(2.6)
Inserting the above equation in Eq. (2.1) and assuming Es Ec = 10 we have the
stiffness of the equivalent floor beam for rack braced against sidesway as given in the
RMI specification.
If
bd 2
=
L f 480
(2.7)
The effective length factor for the portion of the column from the floor to the first
beam level could then be found from the alignment chart with the following:
Ic
Gb =
Lc1
2 f
L
f
(2.8)
where I c is the column moment of inertia and Lc1 the distance from the floor to the
first beam level.
Several analytical models of the base fixity problem were studied. Details of
their derivation can be found in Appendix A. The first model shown in Fig. 2.2
consists of a series of springs to represent the concrete floor. If the stiffness of these
springs is set to k = Ec d the base fixity is found to be the same as in Eq. (2.1).
The second model shown in Fig. 2.3 is similar to the first model, that is considering
only the concrete block under the base plate, but instead of springs the second model
uses the beam theory approach with the same result obtained if = d where is the
depth of the concrete block. A third model uses a basic solid mechanic approach to
understand better how the concrete block in the first two models deforms. Starting
from a defined stress field and boundary conditions, the displacement field could be
found for the concrete block as shown in Fig. 2.4.
Considering only the concrete block under the base plate, however, results in a
lower stiffness than what the actual floor could develop; this is because the
confinement from the surrounding material was neglected. The concrete floor should
instead be represented with a halfspace material. Based on this idea a fourth model
was studied where it is a twodimensional elastostatic problem with normal loads on
the boundary of halfspace. By superimposing some combinations of Figs. 2.5a and
2.5b, a bending load distribution indicated in Fig. 2.5c can be obtained. Once the
applied load is defined the displacement field can be found. The deformation of the
concrete surface under the applied load region is shown in Fig. 2.6. Although the
fourth model is only a plane strain problem and may not represent the actual three
M
x2
x1
x1
x2
x3
x2
x1
x1
x3
x1
Figure 2.4 Model 3: Deformation shape of the concrete block under the base plate
10
x2
d
22
x1 d
p
(a)
x2
d
22
x1 d
d
x2
d
(b)
22
x1 d
(c)
Figure 2.5 Model 4: (a) Load extends indefinitely to the left (b) Linearly increasing
load extending indefinitely to the left (c) Linear bending load under the base plate
11
80 80
10
6
Displacement u2 ( x1 , 0 )
60
Approximate rotation
40
20
x2
d
20
40
60
80
1
0.75
0.5
0.25
x1 d
Figure 2.6 Model 4: Surface deformation under the base plate
x3
x2
(a)
x1
x3
x2
(b)
x1
Figure 2.7 Model 5 (a) Square base plate (b) 2 by 1 Rectangular base plate
12
dimensional base fixity problem, it can be seen that the surrounding concrete does
affect the surface displacement thus differing from the previous models.
Finally, the fifth model not only considered the halfspace nature of the floor,
but it also considered the threedimensional aspect of the problem. This model is
considered to be better than all the previous models to represent the base fixity
problem. Normal loads were applied on the boundary of the concrete floor and the
resulting displacement was determined. When a square base plate was considered in
this model, normal load distribution p was applied and the surface deformation was
obtained as shown in Fig. 2.7a. The resulting base fixity was 4.05 times higher than
Eq. (2.1). For a 2 by 1 rectangular base plate, the results showed that the stiffness was
5.128 times higher than Eq. (2.1). This confirms that the current base fixity equation
may be underestimating the actual stiffness. However, defining contact pressure
between the base plate and concrete surface as a linear bending load distribution must
be justified. This motivated the study described in Section 2.2. By using the fifth
model approach but with improvement in defining the normal load, a new base fixity
equation was developed.
2.2
2.2.1
The objective here was to study how the load is transferred from the column to
the floor. Once the load distribution on the concrete surface is known, the surface
deformation can be found by an approach similar to the fifth model approach and thus
the base fixity can be obtained. The load distribution on the concrete surface must be
solved from a contact simulation between the base plate and the floor. The finite
element method was used to solve this problem. Since the columns in consideration
13
are thinwalled sections, namely, the column wall thickness tw and base plate
thickness t p both are relatively small compared to the width or depth of the column,
the problem was simplified by solving each wall section separately with a plane strain
analysis. Two cases were considered, one when the column wall section is positioned
at the edges of the base plate as shown in Fig. 2.8 and the other when it is at the center
as shown in Fig. 2.9.
Finite element assumptions are as follows: The four node plane strain elements
were used to model. Contact surfaces were defined between the base plate and the
concrete to simulate their interaction. However, in this study no friction was
considered between the two surfaces. In addition, since the floor was assumed to be a
halfspace and only a small region of the base plate was considered, plane strain
infinite elements were needed to model the farfield region of the concrete and base
plate. For the case when the column wall section is positioned at the middle, because it
is a symmetric problem only a half model is needed as shown in Fig. 2.9. The material
model used for the column wall and base plate was elastic with Es = 29500 ksi and
= 0.3 while the concrete was assumed elastic with Ec = 2950 ksi and = 0.2.
A uniform compression stress was applied at the top of the column wall.
A parametric study was carried out for the two cases to find out how the
contact stress distribution changes as the base plate to column wall thickness ratio,
t p tw is varied from 1 to 3. The normal load distribution on the concrete surface was
obtained and plotted as shown in Figs. 2.10 and 2.11. The vertical axis represents the
stress intensity factor c w , where c is the stress on the concrete surface, and w
is the applied stress on the column wall. The horizontal axis represents the normalized
position across the concrete surface. As seen in both cases as the t p tw increases the
load distribution expands. The load distribution was then further simplified by
representing it with an equivalent load block, which will give the same total force and
14
w
Column wall section
Base plate
Concrete floor
x2
x1
(a)
tw
Base plate
tp
Concrete floor
x2
x1
(b)
Figure 2.8 Column wall section positioned at the edges of the plate: Finite element
plane strain analysis 22 contour (a) Entire model (b) At the column wall to base plate
connection
15
w
Column wall section
Base plate
Concrete floor
x2
x1
(a)
tw 2
Base plate
tp
Concrete floor
x2
x1
(b)
Figure 2.9 Column wall section positioned at the center of the plate: Finite element
plane strain analysis 22 contour (a) Entire model (b) At the column wall to base plate
connection
16
1.4
t p = 3t w
Series4
1.2
t p = 2.5t w
Series8
c
w
t p = 2t w
Series5
t p = tw
t p = 1.5t w
t p = 2t w
1
0.8
t p = 1.5t w
Series9
t p = tw
Series6
t p = 2.5t w
t p = 3t w
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
x1 t w
Figure 2.10 Column wall section positioned at the edges of the plate: Normal load
distribution on the concrete surface ( c is 22 given Figure 2.8)
0.35
t p = 3t w
Series4
0.3
t p = 2.5t w
Series8
t p = tw
0.25
c
w
t p = 2t w
Series5
t p = 1.5t w
Series7
0.2
t p = tw
Series6
t p = 1.5t w
0.15
t p = 2t w
t p = 2.5t w
t p = 3t w
0.1
0.05
0
0
10
x1 t w
Figure 2.11 Column wall section positioned at the center of the plate: Normal load
distribution on the concrete surface ( c is 22 given Figure 2.9)
17
1.2
1
Eq. (2.9)
0.8
c
w
0.6
0.4
Eq. (2.10)
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
tp t w
18
moment respect to the vertical axis. The relationship between the load block intensity
factor c w and the t p tw can be plotted as in Fig. 2.12 with the following
expression obtained for the case where the column wall section is positioned at the
edges of the plate:
t
c
= 1.162 0.191 p
tw
w
(2.9)
and for when the column wall section is positioned at the center of the plate:
c
t
= 0.2584 w
tp
w
(2.10)
The width of the equivalent load block tc was found by imposing the condition that
the total force of the equivalent load block is equal to the total force applied on the
column wall.
c tc = w t w
(2.11)
Finite element studies of the base fixity problem, have shown that contact
pressures between the base plate and concrete surface, are concentrated around the
column wall section, rather than having a linear bending load distribution as assumed
in Eq. (2.1). This is because the column wall thickness and base plate thickness in
study are relatively thin, compared to the width or depth of the column.
The distribution of the normal loads on the concrete surface depends on these
thicknesses, and the location of the column wall section on the base plate. Once the
normal load distribution on the concrete surface for a certain amount of bending
moment is known, deformation can be obtained by solving the problem of normal
loads on the boundary of the halfspace, using solid mechanic approaches as suggested
19
in Sokolnikoff (1983). The column base rotation was found from the floor surface
deformation, and then the base fixity was computed.
With the relationship between the load block intensity factor c w and t p tw
known, different types of base plate configurations could then be studied. Four types
of base plates were considered as shown in Fig. 2.13. The column load was assumed
to be a combination of an axial and bending force. However, only the bending force
contributes to the rotation of the base. The force in the column is transferred through
the base plate and then onto the floor. The intensity of the normal load distribution
was found by using either Eq. (2.9) or Eq. (2.10) depending on the location of the
column wall section. The width of the load distribution was then found by using
Eq. (2.11).
Type A has the base plate the same size as the column. Because all the column
wall sections are located at the edges of the base plate, only Eq. (2.9) is needed to
approximate the normal load distribution. Type B has the base plate extended out from
the opening of the column, thus Eq. (2.10) must be used at the stiffeners. For type C
the column is placed on a large base plate so only Eq. (2.10) is needed. For Type D the
base plate is extended out from both sides of the flanges. For this base plate type
Eq. (2.10) is used for the flanges and Eq. (2.9) is used at the web and stiffeners.
Examples of the resulting normal load distribution for a 3 in. square Csection with
c = d 2, tw = t p = 0.10 in., for the different base plate types are shown in Fig. 2.14.
Once the load distribution on the concrete surface for a certain moment force is
known, deformation of the concrete can be obtained by solving the problem of normal
loads on the boundary of the halfspace. Concrete surface deformation for the
Csection example is shown in Fig. 2.14. The rotation was then found from the surface
deformation, and the base fixity was calculated. A parametric study was carried out for
a wide range of column base configurations to develop a new base fixity equation.
20
tc
tc
tc
tc
21
x3
x2
(a)
x1
x3
x2
(b)
x1
x3
x2
( c)
x1
x3
x2
(d)
x1
Figure 2.14 (a) Base plate type A (b) Base plate type B (c) Base plate type C
(d) Base plate type D
22
7
bd 2 Ec
25
(2.12)
9
bd 2 Ec
25
(2.13)
For practical purposes it is recommended that a single base fixity equation, Eq. (2.12),
be used for all types of base plates. As can be seen Figs. 2.17 and 2.18, the design will
simply be slightly more conservative when Eq. (2.12) is used for base plate type C
or D. The stiffness of the equivalent floor beam corresponding to Eq. (2.12) for rack
not braced against sidesway is
If
Lf
7
bd 2
3000
(2.14)
7
bd 2
1000
(2.15)
The base fixity equations presented here are suggested only for the initial
stiffness of the connection, namely, only the first stage of the behavior as defined by
23
d
CSection
Closed Tube
Column Types
bd = 4 in.
bd = 6.25 in.
bd = 9 in.
bd = 12.25 in.
bd = 16 in.
d b =1
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
d b = 1.25
C6
d b = 1.5
bd = 16 in.
C11
d b = 1.75
C16
d b=2
d b=2
C21
C25
Column Dimensions
T1
t w = 0.05 in.
t p = 0.05 in.
T2
t w = 0.05 in.
t p = 0.075 in.
T3
t w = 0.05 in.
t p = 0.1 in.
T4
t w = 0.05 in.
t p = 0.125 in.
T5
t w = 0.05 in.
t p = 0.15 in.
T6
T7
T8
T9
T10
t w = 0.1 in.
t p = 0.1 in.
t w = 0.1 in.
t p = 0.15 in.
t w = 0.1 in.
t p = 0.2 in.
t w = 0.1 in.
t p = 0.25 in.
t w = 0.1 in.
t p = 0.3 in.
24
0.14 0.14
10
6
0.12
0.1
0.08
kipin.
,
rad 0.06
= 0.284bd 2 Ec
0.04
0.02
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
6
0.3
0.3 10
bd 2 Ec , kipin.
0.12
0.1
0.08
kipin.
,
rad 0.06
= 0.281bd 2 Ec
0.04
0.02
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
bd 2 Ec , kipin.
25
0.3
0.3 10
0.14 0.14
10
6
0.12
0.1
kipin.
rad
0.08
0.06
= 0.371bd 2 Ec
0.04
0.02
7
bd 2 Ec
25
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3 10 6
bd 2 Ec , kipin.
0.12
0.1
kipin.
rad
0.08
= 0.383bd 2 Ec
0.06
0.04
0.02
7
bd 2 Ec
25
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
bd 2 Ec , kipin.
26
6
0.3
0.3 10
Salmon, Schenker and Johnston (1955) where the base plate is still in full contact
with the concrete surface, having trapezoidal compression stress distribution.
By considering the axial force P and bending moment M , to prevent tension stresses
from occurring on the concrete surface, an upper bound limit of the equations can be
found as
M S
P A
(2.16)
This upper bound limit when used for columns with thick base plates as shown in
Fig 2.19a, the contact stress area A , would be equal to bd , and S the elastic section
modulus of the rectangular area about the axis of bending wound equal to bd 2 6,
therefore Eq. (2.16) becomes
M d
P 6
(2.17)
However, when used for design columns with thin base plates as shown in Fig 2.19b,
A would instead equal to 2t ( d + b ) , where t is the thickness of the contact area, and
S would be equal to td ( d 3 + b ) , therefore in this case Eq. (2.16) becomes
M d ( d + 3b )
P
6 ( d + b)
(2.18)
For practical purposes it is recommended that a single upper bound limit, Eq. (2.17),
should be used for all types of base plate because it is always more conservative than
using Eq. (2.18).
Once the upper bound limitation has been reached, the stiffness of the
connection is expected to decrease. The RMI specification does not explicitly give an
upper bound limit for its base fixity equation but expects that the limit will not be
reached for gravity load design.
27
Column wall
Base plate
Base plate
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.19 (a) Thick base plate (b) Thin base plate
28
2.2.3
The proposed base fixity equation provides a rough estimate of the connection
stiffness approximated from a wide range of column base configurations. To obtain a
more accurate value for a particular column base, charts given in Appendix B should
be used. The charts were developed by using the data points given in Figs. 2.15
through 2.18, then rearranged and curved to fit them such that the data could be read
directly from these charts. The charts are given for all base plate types with box
column sections. Two column wall thicknesses were provided, tw = 0.05 in. and
tw = 0.10 in. with the column dimension ranging from a square section to a 2 by 1
rectangular section. In all cases there are a group of five solid lines where the top line
refers to base plate thickness of t p = 3tw , the second line t p = 2.5tw , the third line
t p = 2tw , the fourth line t p = 1.5tw , and the bottom line t p = tw .
The base fixity values given here assume the column and base plate material to
be Es = 29500 ksi and = 0.3 while for the concrete floor Ec = 2950 ksi and
= 0.2. For other concrete material properties, assuming that Eq. (2.9) and Eq. (2.10)
still hold, the base fixity can be found by modifying the obtained chart value as
follows:
M
G M
Gchart chart
(2.19)
where Gchart is equal to 1229 ksi, and G is the shear modulus of elasticity of the
concrete material of interest.
29
2.3
30
P
0.015P
+
Secion ALDR
Concrete
Restrained Nodes for
Bolt Connection
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.21 Column base finite element analysis results (a) von Mises Stress
(b) Normal stress, 22 on the concrete surface
31
14
t p == tw
tw
FEM, tp
12
2t w
t p == 2tw
FEM, tp
10
3t w
t p == 3tw
FEM, tp
M , kipin.
Proposed Equation
FEM Results
6
RMI Equation
4
2
0
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
2
0.2
0.4
0.6
, rad
0.8
1 10
4
6
32
3
Est = E 45, = 0.3, and est was 15 times the maximum elastic strain, while the
concrete was assumed elastic with Ec = 2950 ksi and = 0.2. Using these finite
element modeling assumptions a parametric study was carried out by varying t p tw
from 1 to 3. Deformation and stress distribution resulted from the finite element
analysis for the case of loading in the positive direction is as shown in Fig. 2.21.
The rotation of the base plate was obtained and plotted against the applied moment to
compare with the RMI and the proposed base fixity equation as shown in Fig. 2.22.
As can be seen in this figure the proposed equation agrees better with the finite
element results than the RMI equation does.
2.4
CONCLUSIONS
It was shown in this chapter that the current RMI base fixity equation
underestimates the stiffness. Several analytical models of the column base were
studied. The base fixity was found by solving a normal load on the boundary of the
halfspace problem. With this approach a parametric study was carried out for a wide
range of base configurations to develop a new base fixity equation. Unless actual tests
are conducted to obtain the base fixity, the proposed base fixity equation, Eq. (2.12),
along with the upper bound limits, Eq. (2.17), of the base fixity behavior should be
used. Finite element studies were used to verify the proposed equation. The proposed
equation agrees well with the finite element solution. Some errors do occur from the
assumptions in the approach, such as neglecting the flexibility of the base plate and
using an approximate load block for the load distribution on the concrete surface.
33
Chapter
3.1
INTRODUCTION
In storage racks, beam end connectors are used to make beam to column
connections. The semirigid nature of this connection is primarily due to the distortion
of the column walls, tearing of the column perforation, and distortion of the beam end
connector. The storage rack stability depends significantly on the behavior of this
connection, thus it is important to have the means for predicting it. Designs of these
connections vary widely; making it is impossible to develop a general analytic model.
Instead, beam to column connection tests are usually done to determine the
relationship of the moment at the joint M and the change in angle between the
column and the connecting beam .
3.2
Schematics of these test setups are shown in Figs. 3.1 and 3.2. The result from the
cantilever test is normally used to design beams and connections; while the result from
the portal test is used as connection stiffness in sidesway analyses. The following is a
review of these tests. In the cantilever test the constant connection stiffness F relating
the moment to the rotation as
F=
(3.1)
is determined by using the known applied vertical load P and deflection of the free
end of the cantilever in the following expression
Lc
L
1
+ b +
16 EI c 3EI b F
= PL2b
(3.2)
where E is the modulus of elasticity, Lb and Lc are the length of the beam and
column segment, I b and I c are the moments of inertia of the beam and column
segment, respectively. Solving Eq. (3.2) for F , the following is obtained:
F=
1
Lc
L
b
2
PLb 16 EI c 3EI b
(3.3)
With M = PLb and F known, can then be determined from Eq. (3.1) for each load
step. Plots such as Fig. 3.3 giving the moment and rotation relationship may then be
developed. Instantaneous stiffness F can be found by connecting the resulting data
points or by substituting P for P, and for into Eq. (3.3) where P is the
load increment, and is the deflection increment due to P . The RMI specification
recommends that the connection stiffness to be used in linear analyses can be given as
Vertical Load
Lc = 30 in.
Deflection
Measuring Device
Lb = 24 in.
Vertical Load
Vertical Load
Deflection
Measuring Device
Horizontal Load
h = 24 in.
M n +1
Mn
Fn +1
Fn
M
M n 1
Fn
Fn +1
Fn 1
the F determined from Eq. (3.3) with P equal to 0.85 times the ultimate load and
equal to the deflection at that load.
In the portal test, a certain amount of vertical load is applied before the
connection stiffness is determined. By applying an additional horizontal load and
measuring the corresponding lateral deflection, F can be computed from the
following expression:
Hh 2 h
L
1
+
+
2 3EI c 6 EI b F
(3.4)
where H is the horizontal load per beam. Two beams are required in this test
assembly; therefore, a horizontal load of 2 H is applied in the test, is the lateral
deflection corresponding to a horizontal load of 2 H , h is the distance from the floor
to top of the beam, and L is the distance between the centroid of the two columns
parallel with the shelf beam. Solving Eq. (3.4) for F ,
F=
1
h
L
2
2
Hh 3EI c 6 EI b
(3.5)
The RMI specification recommends that F determined from Eq. (3.5) be used as the
connection stiffness in sidesways analyses. Tests for F with vertical loads at both the
design load and the ultimate load levels should be conducted since the behavior at
both of these loads are of interest.
If the vertical load is applied such that it is equally distributed over the entire
bay then the vertical force on each shelf beam can be assumed to be a uniform
distribution load w, (force per length). The preexisting moments in the joints due to
this load, before the horizontal load is applied can be determined as follows:
M=
wL3
(3.6)
h
L
1
24 EI b
+
+
3EI c 2 EI b F
As the horizontal load is applied to the right as in Fig. 3.2, the left joint will loosen
and the right joint will tighten up, meaning the preexisting moment in the joints from
Eq. (3.6) will decrease by Hh 2 in the left joint and increase by Hh 2 in the right
joint. This, however, assumes that both joints have the same stiffness, but generally
this may not be the case, for example if the preexisting moment in the joints is equal
to M n as shown in Fig. 3.3. As the horizontal load is applied, the stiffness of the left
and right joints will instead be approximately Fn and Fn +1 , respectively. The lateral
displacement in this case can be found as:
h
Hh 3 c
=
2
L
1 h
L
1
+
+
+
2 b Fn 3 c 2 b Fn +1
h
F + Fn +1
L
+
+ n
3 c 2 b 2Fn Fn +1
3 b
(3.7)
By equating Eq. (3.4) and Eq. (3.7) it can be found that the constant connection
stiffness determined from Eq. (3.5) is actually a combination of these different joint
stiffnesses Fn and Fn +1 as follows:
h
L
Fn + Fn +1 + 2Fn Fn +1
+
3EI c 2 EI b
F=
h
L
2 + ( Fn + Fn +1 )
+
3EI c 2 EI b
(3.8)
The connection stiffness of the individual joints is not obtained from the portal test but
is instead an approximate average value of the connection stiffness as the tightening
up and the loosening process is obtained. The loosening process may not be as simple
as assumed in the above example where the unloading stiffness is same as the loading
stiffness Fn . If the connections were loaded beyond the elastic range, permanent
10
deformation would occur in the joint, resulting in different moment and rotation
relationships in the loading and unloading process.
3.3
wL4
4
+ wLh
=
5
384 EI b
2 EI b h
1 2 AE
+
1+
L 3EI c F
11
(3.9)
Vertical Load
Vertical Load
Deflection Measuring
Device
h = 24 in.
12
L
h
4wL
1
wLh 3EI c
2 EI b
4
5wL 384 EI b 2 AE
(3.10)
with M the same as given in Eq. (3.6) and F known, can then be determined from
Eq. (3.1) for each vertical load step. Plots such as in Fig. 3.3 giving the moment and
rotation relationship may then be developed. The load carrying capacity of the entire
bay may also be determined from this test whether failure is due to the connection or
the shelf beam. However, if the load carrying capacity is not of interest, the proposed
portal test could be conducted prior to the portal test. The midspan deflection
could be measured in the vertical loading process. The connection stiffness from the
proposed portal test can then be used in designing beams while the connection
stiffness from the portal test can be used in sidesway analyses.
3.4
13
Fy = 45 ksi, Fu = 59 ksi, E = 29500 ksi, Est = E 45, = 0.3, and est was 15 times
the maximum elastic strain. Failure mode at ultimate load is shown in Fig. 3.8.
The connection rotation was determined by monitoring node P3 and P4 as shown in
Fig. 3.9 to find the angle of rotation of the beam and node P1 and P2 to find the
movement of the column to correct the connection rotation. A momentrotation curve
resulting from the finite element simulation and the physical test are compared in
Fig. 3.10. The beam to column stiffness obtained from 85% of the joint moment
capacity as suggested by the RMI specification used in linear frame analyses was also
plotted for comparison.
14
, in.
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.266
0.406
0.498
0.641
0.71
0.794
0.941
1.063
1.247
1.585
2.033
2.646
F , kipin. rad
227
302
374
389
395
393
362
349
320
269
222
181
M , kipin.
, rad
2.4
4.8
7.2
9.6
10.8
12.0
13.2
14.4
15.6
16.8
18.0
19.2
0.0106
0.0159
0.0192
0.0247
0.0273
0.0306
0.0364
0.0413
0.0487
0.0625
0.0809
0.1062
Fixed
26 in.
24 in.
30 in.
Laterally Supported
Fixed
15
Column
Column  Contact Surface
End Plate with Contact Surface
Beam
Connection Stud
x2
x1
16
Force, kips
0.45
0.0465
Displacement, in.
Figure 3.8 Finite element simulation of the cantilever test: von Mises Stress at
ultimate load
c
P1
P1
P3
P4
P3
P4
= 1 2
P2
P2
17
25
20
15
M , kipin.
Experiment Test
10
5
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
, rad
Figure 3.10 Comparison of the cantilever test and the finite element simulation
18
3.5
CONCLUSIONS
A new beam to column connection test to be used instead of the cantilever test
has been presented in this study. The shear to moment ratio in an actual frame is better
represented by this proposed portal test than the cantilever test. For some designs, the
connection behavior may depend significantly on this ratio. Therefore it is
recommended that in addition to current beam to column connection tests, this
proposed portal test should be included as a possible means of determining the
moment to rotation relationship of the connection.
The beam to column connection stiffness obtained from the finite element
cantilever test simulation agrees well with the test results. However, the finite element
model was not able to capture the failure mode which was observed in the test. In the
test the failure took place with tearing of the column perforation by the upper hex stud.
Thus the connection ultimate moment capacity obtained from the finite element model
was higher than obtained from the test. Improvement in the finite element result can be
made with better modeling details of the connection stud and considering fracture
mechanics.
19
Chapter
Members
4.1
INTRODUCTION
The current RMI design provision for coldformed steel members is similar to
the AISI specification. Both specifications consist of the following general steps.
First, the overall stability of the member is considered. Once the overall buckling
stress is known, then the design equations are used to determine the nominal failure
stress, whether the member will fail from elastic buckling, inelastic buckling, or
yielding. With the nominal failure stress known, the corresponding effective section
properties can then be computed. Effective section properties are used to account for
the local buckling of thinwalled sections. The nominal member strength is determined
based on the governing nominal failure stress and the effective section properties.
Finally, the design member strength is obtained by multiplying the nominal member
strength by a resistance factor in the case of LRFD or dividing it by a safety factor in
the case of ASD. However, special considerations must be given to members subject
to a combined compressive axial load and bending. Additional steps must also be
taken to account for various possible modes of failure and the presence of second
order moments. Based on the general design steps discussed above, studies were
carried out in this chapter to verify or modify the current design provisions for
member design.
4.2
assembly of the beam end connector. It is well known that the presence of such
perforation reduces the local buckling strength of the individual component element
and the overall buckling strength of the section. The significance of this reduction will
however depend on the geometry and material properties of the member and the
boundary conditions. The RMI specification currently allows the use of unperforated
section properties to predict the overall elastic buckling strength of perforated
members, thus assuming that the presence of such perforation does not have
significant influence on the reduction of the overall elastic buckling strength.
The objective of this study is to check this assumption. Two finite element buckling
analyses studies were carried out to investigate how the perforations affect the local
and overall buckling strength.
The first study considered a rectangular plate with two rows of perforations as
shown in Fig. 4.1. The plate was modeled to represent the web of a Section ALDR
shown in Fig. 4.2a. The actual holes in the web are irregular shapes. Here they are
simplified by an approximate equivalent rectangular hole. The plate is subject to a
uniform compression stress in the longitudinal direction. Two boundary condition
cases were considered as shown in Fig. 4.1. The actual boundary condition along the
longitudinal edges lies between these two extreme cases because the web to flange
junction provides some rotational stiffness. The elastic critical buckling stress was
S.S.
S.S.
Fixed
S.S.
Fixed
S.S.
S.S.
S.S.
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.1 Perforated plate buckling modes (a) Case I (b) Case II
Value of k
Unperforated Plate
Perforated Plate
Boundary Condition
S.S.
S.S.
S.S.
4.0
2.61
S.S.
6.97
4.03
S.S.
Fixed
II
S.S.
Fixed
solved by using the computer program CUPBF shown in Appendix H. The program
uses the finite element method with fournode rectangular thin plate elements to solve
this eigenvalue problem. With the critical buckling stress known, the platebuckling
coefficient k was calculated and then compared with the unperforated long plate
values given by the AISI specification. Table 4.1 summarizes the results. Results show
that the presence of such perforations significantly reduces the k value in both cases.
The second study was carried out to compare the buckling strengths of
perforated and unperforated sections. Three Csections were considered: ALDR,
ALDR2, and AHDR. Their cross sectional geometry is given in Fig. 4.2 and section
properties are summarized in Tables 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4. The cross sectional geometry of
Sections ALDR and ALDR2 are similar but their section thicknesses are different.
The elements of Section ALDR are thick making it locally stable, while the elements
of Section ALDR2 are thin making it locally unstable under uniform compressive
yield stress. All three sections were studied as both a concentrically loaded
compression member and a flexural member subject to bending about the strong axis.
Boundary conditions at the ends of the member for both cases were pined condition
such that the effective length for flexural buckling of both the strong and weak axis
and torsion were equal to the length of the member. The critical buckling load was
found for different length members. Two approaches were used to solve the buckling
problem and then compared: the first approach is using finite element method using
the ABAQUS computer program where the four node general purpose shell element
was used to model the member, and second approach is using the theoretical overall
buckling equations as given in the AISI specification. The theoretical overall buckling
equations were solved for arbitrary open thinwalled sections by using the computer
program CUTWP shown in Appendix H. The finite element method is considered to
give more accurate results.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.2 (a) Section ALDR (b) Section ALDR2 (c) Section AHDR
WEIGHTED SECTION
Node Data:
Segment Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
1.565 0.795
1.565
1.5
1.094
1.5
0.563
1.5
0
1.5
0 0.952
0
0.44
0 0.44
0 0.952
0
1.5
0.563
1.5
1.094
1.5
1.565
1.5
1.565 0.795
AVERAGE SECTION
Segment Data:
Node Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
1.565 0.795
1.565
1.5
0
1.5
0
1.5
1.565
1.5
1.565 0.795
10
Section Properties
A = 0.68614
Ix = 1.01988
Iy = 0.285177
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00189398
C.G. = (0.61749, 0)
S.C. = (0.902084, 0)
Cw = 0.784752
Section Properties
A = 0.592956
Ix = 0.972709
Iy = 0.244062
Ixy = 0
C.G. = (0.71453, 0)
Section Properties
A = 0.589498
Ix = 0.80244
Iy = 0.277897
Ixy = 0
C.G. = (0.582897, 0)
Section Properties
A = 0.620432
Ix = 0.953286
Iy = 0.265125
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00153986
C.G. = (0.65736, 0)
S.C. = (0.927725, 0)
Cw = 0.763688
Section Properties
A = 0.620542
Ix = 0.922379
Iy = 0.257912
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00140104
C.G. = (0.61749, 0)
S.C. = (0.902084, 0)
Cw = 0.709727
WEIGHTED SECTION
Segment Data:
Node Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
1.565 0.795
1.565
1.5
1.094
1.5
0.563
1.5
0
1.5
0 0.952
0
0.44
0 0.44
0 0.952
0
1.5
0.563
1.5
1.094
1.5
1.565
1.5
1.565 0.795
AVERAGE SECTION
Node Data:
Segment Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
1.565 0.795
1.565
1.5
0
1.5
0
1.5
1.565
1.5
1.565 0.795
11
Section Properties
A = 0.3393
Ix = 0.504339
Iy = 0.141021
Ixy = 0
J = 0.000229027
C.G. = (0.61749, 0)
S.C. = (0.902084, 0)
Cw = 0.388064
Section Properties
A = 0.29322
Ix = 0.48101
Iy = 0.12069
Ixy = 0
C.G. = (0.71453, 0)
Section Properties
A = 0.29151
Ix = 0.396811
Iy = 0.137422
Ixy = 0
C.G. = (0.582897, 0)
Section Properties
A = 0.306808
Ix = 0.471408
Iy = 0.131106
Ixy = 0
J = 0.000186207
C.G. = (0.65736, 0)
S.C. = (0.927724, 0)
Cw = 0.377648
Section Properties
A = 0.306878
Ix = 0.456146
Iy = 0.127546
Ixy = 0
J = 0.000169447
C.G. = (0.61749, 0)
S.C. = (0.902084, 0)
Cw = 0.350983
WEIGHTED SECTION
Node Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
2.91 0.7325
2.91 1.4375
1.094 1.4375
0.563 1.4375
0 1.4375
0 0.952
0
0.44
0 0.44
0 0.952
0 1.4375
0.563 1.4375
1.094 1.4375
2.91 1.4375
2.91 0.7325
AVERAGE SECTION
Node Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
2.91 0.7325
2.91 1.4375
0 1.4375
0 1.4375
2.91 1.4375
2.91 0.7325
12
Segment Data:
nodei, j, thickness
1 2 0.091
2 3 0.091
3 4 0.073
4 5 0.091
5 6 0.091
6 7 0.0455
7 8 0.091
8 9 0.0455
9 10 0.091
10 11 0.091
11 12 0.073
12 13 0.091
13 14 0.091
Segment Data:
nodei, j, thickness
1 2 0.0845
2 3 0.0845
3 4 0.0845
4 5 0.0845
5 6 0.0845
Section Properties
A = 0.919555
Ix = 1.43098
Iy = 1.15832
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00253828
C.G. = (1.24406, 0)
S.C. = (1.60873, 0)
Cw = 2.91218
Section Properties
A = 0.826371
Ix = 1.38381
Iy = 0.997843
Ixy = 0
C.G. = (1.38434, 0)
Section Properties
A = 0.822913
Ix = 1.23128
Iy = 1.1374
Ixy = 0
C.G. = (1.29286, 0)
Section Properties
A = 0.853847
Ix = 1.36789
Iy = 1.07738
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00218416
C.G. = (1.32125, 0)
S.C. = (1.659, 0)
Cw = 2.8227
Section Properties
A = 0.853873
Ix = 1.32877
Iy = 1.07559
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00203229
C.G. = (1.24406, 0)
S.C. = (1.60873, 0)
Cw = 2.70417
Finite element models range from a member length of 12 to 120 in. with a 6 in.
increment between models. The theoretical values were obtained for the unperforated
section, weighted section, average section, and in addition the net moment of inertia
section for the flexural buckling mode. A weighted section as shown in Tables 4.2,
4.3, and 4.4, refers to a section that uses an average thickness in the perforated
segment of the section to account for the absence of the material from the holes along
the length of the section. An average section as also shown in Tables 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4,
refers to a section that uses a uniform average thickness to account for the absence of
the material from the holes in the section. The material volume of the weighted section
and the average section is the same, and is equal to the perforated section. The cross
sectional area of a weighted section is the same as an average section despite the fact
that the weighted section has varying element thicknesses while the average section
does not. The different possible overall buckling modes of these open thinwalled
sections involve torsionalflexural buckling and flexural buckling for the
concentrically loaded compression member, and lateral buckling for the flexural
member as shown in Figs. 4.3 and 4.4.
The results are given in Figs. 4.5 and 4.6 for Section ALDR, Figs. 4.7 and 4.8
for Section ALDR2, and Figs. 4.9 and 4.10 for Section AHDR. The vertical axes in
the figures are the elastic axial buckling load Pe divided by the axial load causing the
yield of the full unreduced gross section Py = AFy , and the elastic flexural buckling
moment M e divided by the moment causing initial yield at the extreme compression
fiber of the full unreduced gross section M y = S f Fy .
Results indicated that increasing the presence of perforations in the section will
reduce the buckling strength. To take this into account, instead of using the
unperforated section properties to predict the buckling strength of perforated sections,
as assumed in the current design specification, better results can be obtained by using
13
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Section ALDR
(a)
(b)
(c)
Section AHDR
Figure 4.3 Concentrically loaded compression member buckling modes (a) Local
(b) Distortional (c) Torsionalflexural (d) Flexural
14
(a)
(b)
(c)
Section ALDR
(a)
(b)
(c)
Section AHDR
Figure 4.4 Flexural member buckling modes (a) Local (b) Distortional (c) Lateral
15
3.5
0.6
0.4
2.5
0.2
Pe
Py 1.5
0
100
150
200
Average Section
0.5
0
0
50
100
150
200
KL ry
Figure 4.5 Elastic buckling axial load for Section ALDR
1.2
0.8
0.4
Me
My 3
Weighted Section
Unperforated Section
Average Section
100
200
Weighted Section
Average Section
150
Unperforated Section
0
0
50
100
150
200
KL ry
Figure 4.6 Elastic buckling moment for Section ALDR
16
0.8
0.6
PTF  Unperforated Section
Pe
Py
0.4
PTF  Weighted & Average Section
0.2
FEM Unperforated Section
FEM Perforated Section
0
0
50
100
150
200
KL ry
Figure 4.7 Elastic buckling axial load for Section ALDR2
3
2.5
2
Me
1.5
My
Weighted Section
Unperforated Section
Average Section
0.5
50
100
150
200
KL ry
17
3
2.5
Pe
Py
1.5
1
PTF  Weighted
0.5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
KL ry
Figure 4.9 Elastic buckling axial load for Section AHDR
3
2.5
Weighted Section
Average Section
Unperforated Section
Me
1.5
My
1
FEM Unperforated Section
0.5
20
40
60
80
100
120
KL ry
Figure 4.10 Elastic buckling moment for Section AHDR
18
Local
12
1242
1254
12
Flexural
102120
102120
Local
1236
12
12
19
Member Length, in
Distortional
1224
1224
1836
1248
1848
Lateral
30120
30120
42120
42120
54120
54120
the weighted section, or the average section properties for torsionalflexural buckling,
the average section properties for lateral buckling, and the net moment of inertia
section properties for flexural buckling. The torsionalflexural buckling could be
computed either by using the weighted section or the average section because their
results are almost the same. It is however more convenient to use the average section
because its section properties are easier to compute.
The critical modes of the finite element models are summarized in Tables 4.5
and 4.6. It should be noted, however, that although some of the models are indicated
as having instability by the torsionalflexural buckling or lateral buckling it is possible
that the buckling strength may be much lower than the theoretical values. This is
because they are still in transition, switching between the different buckling modes,
thus the cross section deforms as a combination of distortional and torsionalflexural
buckling or distortional and lateral buckling, which contradicts the theoretical
buckling equations that assume that the cross section does not deform.
4.3
TORSIONALFLEXURAL BUCKLING
20
out, all of which used the Column SectionC1 shown in Table 4.7, and local axis
definitions as shown in Table 4.8.
Study I: is a convergence study for a simply supported torsionalflexural
buckling problem. As shown in Fig. 4.11 using 2 elements is sufficient to solve this
problem. In the following studies, where additional interior braces are given;
30 elements were used to ensure the accuracy of the result.
Study II: is a torsionalflexural buckling problem of a simply supported
column with two additional interior braces that constrain the column from twisting as
shown in Fig. 4.12. The buckling load was obtained from the finite element analysis
and compared to those values calculated from the buckling equation. To use the
torsionalflexural buckling equation K x Lx and K t Lt must be known. In this study
K x Lx is 60 in. and K t Lt was determined using two different approaches, for which
their results are also compared in this study. The first approach, which is commonly
used in current practice, was to assume the effective length factor K t for torsional
buckling to be 0.8, and the unbraced length against twisting Lt to be the maximum
distance between adjacent braces. The second approach, which is considered to give a
more accurate result than the first approach, was to determine K t Lt from a torsional
buckling analysis. Torsional buckling or flexural buckling analyses were performed by
constraining certain degrees of freedom of the member as given in Table 4.8. As seen
in Fig. 4.12 and Table 4.9 the torsionalflexural buckling equation can become quite
conservative, in some cases over 25 percent.
Study III: is similar to Study II but with only one interior brace. The results
shown in Fig 4.13 and Table 4.10 again suggest that the torsionalflexural buckling
equation is conservative.
Study IV: shown in Table 4.11 looks at the torsionalflexural buckling
problem for certain effective lengths K x Lx and K t Lt . For example when the torsional
21
COLUMN SECTION  C2
Segment Data:
Node Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
1.417 0.663
1.417 1.4335
0
1.4335
0
1.4335
1.417 1.4335
1.417 0.663
Section Properties
A = 0.81936
Ix = 1.25774
Iy = 1.05187
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00174797
C.G. = (1.26967, 0)
S.C. = (1.64311, 0)
Cw = 2.84629
Section Properties
A = 0.564876
Ix = 0.745446
Iy = 0.200071
Ixy = 0
J = 0.00114557
C.G. = (0.578775, 0)
S.C. = (0.856028, 0)
Cw = 0.568044
1.125
1.125
1.125
1.125
1
2
3
2
3
4
0.064
0.064
0.064
A = 0.272
Ix = 0.22275
Iy = 0.0276078
Ixy = 0
J = 0.000371371
C.G. = (0.235294, 0)
S.C. = (0.363636, 0)
Cw = 0.0245455
1.125
1.125
1.125
1.125
1
2
3
2
3
4
0.083
0.083
0.083
SHELF BEAMS
Segment Data:
Node Data:
xcoord., ycoord.
0
2.899
2.417 2.899
2.417 1.393
1.417 1.393
1.617 3.018
0
3.018
22
A = 0.39425
Ix = 0.341402
Iy = 0.0654126
Ixy = 0
J = 0.000905329
C.G. = (0.328947, 0)
S.C. = (0.480769, 0)
Cw = 0.0578684
Section Properties
A = 1.40106
Ix = 5.94383
Iy = 1.43828
Ixy = 0.343469
I1 = 5.96986
I2 = 1.41224
theta = 0.0756498
J = 3.24201
C.G. = (1.12574, 0)
Table 4.8 Boundary Conditions of the Opensection Beam Element for Elastic
Buckling Problems
Active degrees of freedom
Buckling Mode
ux
uy
uz
Pex
Pey
Pet
Pe
 free
 constrained
w  warping amplitude
1.4
1.2
1
P
( Pe ) FEM
( Pe )Theory
u y = 0,
0.8
z = 0
0.6
L = 60 in.
0.4
0.2
u y = 0,
z = 0
0
0
Number of Elements
Figure 4.11 Convergence study for the simply supported torsionalflexural buckling
problem using opensection beam finite element  Study I
23
1
K t from torsional
buckling analysis
0.8
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe ) FEM
0.6
K t = 0.8
u y = 0,
z = 0
z = 0
0.4
L = 60 in.
z = 0
0.2
x
u y = 0,
z = 0
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
x L
K t = 0.8
x
(in.)
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
Lt
( Pe )FEM
(in.)
52
48
44
40
36
32
28
24
20
22
24
26
28
(kips)
56.29
61.61
67.00
72.68
78.58
84.47
89.81
93.77
95.48
94.88
92.80
90.31
88.25
Kt
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe ) FEM
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.579
0.590
0.606
0.627
0.652
0.681
0.717
0.765
0.829
0.796
0.773
0.753
0.730
24
K t from torsional
buckling analysis
Kt
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe ) FEM
0.548
0.559
0.577
0.601
0.633
0.679
0.746
0.849
1
0.924
0.859
0.805
0.770
0.920
0.893
0.865
0.837
0.808
0.781
0.755
0.736
0.732
0.729
0.738
0.750
0.751
1
K t = 0.8
0.8
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe ) FEM
0.6
u y = 0,
K t from torsional
z = 0
buckling analysis
0.4
L = 60 in.
0.2
z = 0
u y = 0,
0
0
0.1
z = 0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
x L
K t = 0.8
x
(in.)
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
Lt
( Pe )FEM
(in.)
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
(kips)
35.06
37.00
38.95
41.01
43.23
45.65
48.29
51.19
54.38
57.87
61.66
65.64
69.33
71.14
Kt
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe ) FEM
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.837
0.835
0.837
0.839
0.840
0.841
0.842
0.840
0.838
0.835
0.830
0.827
0.829
0.856
25
K t from torsional
buckling analysis
Kt
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe ) FEM
0.730
0.735
0.743
0.752
0.762
0.774
0.787
0.802
0.820
0.842
0.868
0.902
0.946
1
0.952
0.939
0.926
0.911
0.895
0.878
0.859
0.838
0.814
0.788
0.760
0.729
0.700
0.689
u y = 0,
z = 0
P
uy = 0
x
L = 60 in.
uy = 0
z = 0
L 2
z = 0,
w=0
z = 0
L 2
(P )
e
AISI
P
= ( Pe ) FEM
u y = 0,
z = 0
uy = 0
(P )
e
uy = 0
AISI
P
= ( Pe ) FEM
(P )
e
AISI
B
Finite element analysis result: A = B = C
= ( Pe ) FEM
CASE 2: K x Lx = 30, K t Lt = 30
u y = 0,
x = 0,
z = 0,
w=0
u y = 0,
z = 0
L 2
L 2
u y = 0,
(P )
e
L 2
AISI
u y = 0,
z = 0
= ( Pe ) FEM
(P )
E
F
Finite element analysis result: D = E F G
AISI
w=0
L 2
(P )
e
AISI
uy = 0
L 2
u y = 0,
x = 0,
z = 0
= ( Pe ) FEM
u y = 0,
z = 0,
z = 0
z = 0
u y = 0, L 2
x = 0,
z = 0,
w=0
u y = 0,
x = 0,
z = 0
(P )
e
FEM
u y = 0,
z = 0,
w=0
(P )
= 0.93
AISI
(P )
e
FEM
= 0.56
CASE 3: K x Lx = 60, K t Lt = 30
P
u y = 0,
z = 0,
w=0
L 2
(P )
(P )
u y = 0,
z = 0
AISI
FEM
z = 0
= 0.94
L 2
u y = 0,
z = 0,
w=0
u y = 0,
z = 0
I
26
(P )
(P )
e
AISI
FEM
= 0.69
( Pe ) AISI ( Pe ) FEM
Case
I
II
III
IV
48 in.
12 in.
A
1
0.989
0.913
0.426
60 in.
E
0.763
0.771
0.787
0.895
60 in.
P
K x Lx = 120
K x Lx = 60
D
0.751
0.883
0.751
1
60 in.
K x Lx = 120
C
0.869
0.900
0.644
0.930
60 in.
B
0.998
0.982
0.873
0.501
II
P
K x Lx = 60
III
IV
12 in.
z = 0
48 in.
60 in.
48 in.
z = 0,
z = 0
12 in.
z = 0
w=0
z = 0
K t Lt = 120
K t Lt = 104.7
K t Lt = 63.4
z = 0
z = 0
48 in.
60 in.
z = 0
K t Lt = 60
z = 0
12 in.
z = 0
36 in.
z = 0
12 in.
z = 0
z = 0
12 in.
z = 0
K t Lt = 36.6
K t Lt = 22.8
27
F
0.894
0.660
0.894
0.808
A = B = C,
28
4.4
EFFECTIVE LENGTHS
The AISI, AISC and RMI specifications use the effective length approach for
assessing frame stability. The approach relies significantly on the prediction of the
effective lengths and critical buckling load of the member. For pallet racks, the value
of K x for column flexural buckling in the direction perpendicular to the upright
frames is usually determined from the alignment charts, elastic buckling analysis, or
simply assumed to be 1.7 as suggested by the RMI specification. The RMI
specification also recommends that K y for column flexural buckling in the plane of
the upright frame can be taken as one, and K t for column torsional buckling
can be taken as 0.8, providing that the upright frame has adequate braces.
These recommended K values, are approximated from numerous typical rack
assemblies. Structural frame elastic buckling analysis is needed if the exact K values
are to be computed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the RMI recommended
values of K y and K t for column buckling.
Finite element elastic buckling analyses of upright frames were performed to
obtain K y and K t for column buckling, and evaluate the AISI torsionalflexural
buckling equation. A parametric study was carried out for different types of upright
frame configurations. The parameters included: two load cases as shown in Fig. 4.14,
two types of column sections as shown in Table 4.7, two types of braces also shown in
Table 4.7, and six types of bracing patterns as shown in Tables 4.13 through 4.15.
The finite element assumptions were as follows: The joint connection between the
braces and columns were considered to be continuous except for the warping degree of
freedom. The warping degree of freedom was constrained only at the ends of the
braces. Column base fixity for both the strong and weak axis bending of the column
was modeled by torsional springs with the stiffnesses determined from the proposed
29
P 3
P 3
P 3
P 3
P 3
K = 5000
K = 2600
60
60
P 3
60
( kipin.
Load Case I
( kipin.
rad )
Column Section  C1
rad )
Column Section  C2
P 2
P 2
P 2
K = 3000
K = 1600
90
P 2
rad )
( kipin.
rad )
90
( kipin.
Load Case II
Column Section  C1
Column Section  C2
Figure 4.14 Upright frame load cases and beam to column connection stiffness, K
Pey
Pet
Pex
Pe
Figure 4.15 Upright frame elastic critical buckling modes (upright frame B1C1B1)
30
66
40
4 4
38
4
42
42
42
(A1)
(A2)
(A3)
42
(B1)
Load Case I
Upright Frame*
Pey
Ky
66
12
52
12
38
12
12
12
12
38
52
66
4 4
38
4 4
52
52
38
66
16 12
12
4 4 26
4 16 12
4 12
40
26 4 12
4
38
4 12
42
42
(B2)
(B3)
Load Case II
Pet
(kips)
(kips)
A1C1B1
230.19
0.960
75.51
A1C1B2
241.29
0.938
80.70
A2C1B1
166.26
0.825
51.75
A2C1B2
174.18
0.806
54.58
A3C1B1
88.02
0.894
40.15
A3C1B2
105.65
0.816
41.94
A1C2B1
51.43
0.886
63.96
A1C2B2
60.47
0.817
70.42
A2C2B1
36.76
0.766
41.63
A2C2B2
42.86
0.709
44.83
A3C2B1
25.63
0.722
31.54
A3C2B2
32.32
0.643
33.47
B1C1B1
227.04
0.967
75.32
B1C1B2
240.03
0.940
79.69
B2C1B1
165.86
0.826
52.07
B2C1B2
174.30
0.806
55.38
B3C1B1
88.13
0.893
40.53
B3C1B2
105.69
0.816
44.13
B1C2B1
51.64
0.884
56.89
B1C2B2
60.70
0.815
59.57
B2C2B1
36.87
0.764
39.62
B2C2B2
42.85
0.709
42.14
B3C2B1
25.64
0.722
30.36
B3C2B2
32.27
0.644
33.26
*Upright frames are named as: A1C1B1
Kt
0.830
0.802
0.736
0.716
0.662
0.647
0.712
0.677
0.655
0.629
0.602
0.582
0.831
0.807
0.734
0.711
0.659
0.630
0.758
0.740
0.673
0.651
0.615
0.584
Pey
(kips)
212.77
227.84
140.53
148.48
62.17
76.04
48.96
57.59
31.86
38.00
19.56
27.02
207.61
223.68
136.40
145.70
62.29
76.14
49.00
57.76
31.84
38.23
19.57
26.92
Ky
0.998
0.965
0.898
0.873
1.063
0.962
0.908
0.837
0.822
0.753
0.827
0.704
1.011
0.974
0.911
0.882
1.062
0.961
0.907
0.836
0.822
0.751
0.827
0.705
Pet
(kips)
69.87
74.29
43.27
45.75
33.21
34.80
58.42
60.38
36.89
40.21
26.71
28.52
69.93
74.01
43.74
46.24
33.86
35.90
53.28
55.94
34.19
36.05
25.41
26.84
31
Kt
0.863
0.837
0.808
0.785
0.731
0.714
0.747
0.734
0.700
0.668
0.662
0.637
0.863
0.838
0.804
0.781
0.724
0.702
0.785
0.765
0.730
0.709
0.681
0.660
16 12
12
70
42
70
44
30
12
16 12
12
4
34
(C1)
34
(C2)
34
38
(C3)
Pey
C1C1B1
C1C1B2
C2C1B1
C2C1B2
C3C1B1
C3C1B2
C1C2B1
C1C2B2
C2C2B1
C2C2B2
C3C2B1
C3C2B2
D1C1B1
D1C1B2
D2C1B1
D2C1B2
D3C1B1
D3C1B2
D1C2B1
D1C2B2
D2C2B1
D2C2B2
D3C2B1
D3C2B2
(kips)
255.56
280.59
174.07
202.60
97.05
118.89
59.28
72.35
42.07
51.49
28.60
39.09
233.75
247.39
167.23
175.67
90.09
106.25
52.12
59.51
36.67
41.82
25.14
31.47
Ky
0.824
0.787
0.749
0.694
0.803
0.725
0.746
0.676
0.664
0.601
0.645
0.551
0.862
0.838
0.764
0.746
0.833
0.767
0.796
0.745
0.712
0.666
0.688
0.615
70
38
(D1)
38
(D2)
Load Case I
Upright Frame
12
56
12
42
12
12
12
12
42
56
70
42
42
56
56
42
44
30
12
(D3)
Load Case II
Pet
(kips)
71.38
75.76
51.47
55.23
41.95
45.68
49.64
52.59
37.21
40.31
31.15
34.24
66.21
66.96
47.05
47.31
38.43
38.62
44.28
44.20
32.41
32.37
27.06
26.86
32
Kt
0.773
0.749
0.686
0.661
0.610
0.584
0.738
0.715
0.647
0.619
0.572
0.542
0.803
0.798
0.718
0.716
0.639
0.637
0.785
0.785
0.699
0.699
0.619
0.622
Pey
(kips)
228.37
268.41
152.55
175.28
70.28
86.69
56.64
69.51
37.47
47.26
21.82
32.29
221.79
236.11
140.72
150.60
63.99
78.24
49.62
56.50
31.85
36.72
19.54
26.43
Ky
0.872
0.804
0.800
0.746
0.943
0.849
0.764
0.689
0.704
0.627
0.738
0.607
0.885
0.858
0.833
0.805
0.988
0.894
0.816
0.765
0.764
0.711
0.780
0.671
Pet
(kips)
66.14
69.53
42.01
44.37
33.84
36.59
45.77
48.19
30.44
32.46
25.07
27.30
61.35
61.77
38.80
38.90
31.30
31.51
40.82
40.75
26.95
26.88
22.10
21.97
Kt
0.803
0.783
0.762
0.741
0.683
0.655
0.771
0.750
0.724
0.698
0.647
0.616
0.835
0.832
0.794
0.793
0.712
0.709
0.820
0.821
0.776
0.777
0.697
0.699
44
16 12
12
12
30
4 16 12
70
12
42
56
70
42
12
12
132
12 4
66
12
12 4
12
12
12 4
38
52
76
104
76
56
42
66
92
64
40
16 12
12
4 12
26
12
4 12
42
42
42
42
42
42
(E1)
(E2)
(E3)
(F1)
(F2)
(F3)
Load Case I
Upright Frame
E1C1B1
E1C1B2
E2C1B1
E2C1B2
E3C1B1
E3C1B2
E1C2B1
E1C2B2
E2C2B1
E2C2B2
E3C2B1
E3C2B2
F1C1B1
F1C1B2
F2C1B1
F2C1B2
F3C1B1
F3C1B2
F1C2B1
F1C2B2
F2C2B1
F2C2B2
F3C2B1
F3C2B2
Pey
(kips)
96.95
104.78
77.45
81.17
52.26
58.37
22.75
27.05
16.50
17.89
12.45
13.60
10.85
17.97
9.56
15.16
9.71
14.73
5.75
9.88
4.66
7.52
4.20
6.21
Ky
0.740
0.711
0.605
0.591
0.580
0.549
0.666
0.611
0.571
0.549
0.518
0.496
4.001
3.109
3.196
2.538
2.537
2.060
2.397
1.828
1.997
1.571
1.683
1.384
Pet
(kips)
40.00
43.23
26.55
27.74
21.34
22.12
32.85
34.00
21.29
22.05
17.24
17.91
66.45
67.93
47.37
48.06
38.54
39.26
45.32
45.50
33.14
33.22
27.67
27.75
33
Load Case II
Kt
0.576
0.553
0.523
0.511
0.464
0.455
0.511
0.501
0.480
0.470
0.430
0.420
0.801
0.792
0.716
0.711
0.638
0.632
0.775
0.773
0.690
0.689
0.611
0.610
Pey
(kips)
83.29
91.11
59.31
66.76
42.36
50.38
19.96
23.71
15.37
18.06
11.62
13.28
9.11
15.36
8.03
12.99
8.24
12.83
5.00
8.66
4.11
6.86
3.75
5.67
Ky
0.798
0.763
0.691
0.651
0.644
0.591
0.711
0.652
0.592
0.546
0.536
0.502
4.365
3.362
3.488
2.742
2.754
2.207
2.569
1.953
2.126
1.645
1.781
1.449
Pet
(kips)
34.81
37.45
25.44
27.45
21.18
22.02
28.13
29.09
20.84
21.49
17.28
18.02
61.81
62.83
39.10
39.51
31.33
31.91
41.81
41.93
27.50
27.56
22.52
22.59
Kt
0.620
0.596
0.535
0.514
0.465
0.456
0.558
0.547
0.486
0.477
0.429
0.418
0.832
0.825
0.791
0.787
0.711
0.704
0.809
0.808
0.767
0.766
0.689
0.688
base fixity equation given in Chapter 2. In addition to the torsional springs, the column
bases were also constrained against twisting.
The K y and K t values for columns was determined from flexural buckling
and torsional buckling analyses of the upright frame. To perform these analyses
without having torsionalflexural buckling certain degrees of freedom of the columns
had to be constrained as shown in Table 4.8. The obtained K y and K t values are
given in Tables 4.13 through 4.15 for the different upright frame configurations, and
an example of the buckling mode shapes are shown in Fig. 4.15. From these tables it
was found that, the RMI recommendation of K y taken as one is conservative with the
exception of upright frame type F. Upright frame type F has inadequate braces causing
the upright frame to be in sidesway buckling mode. It was also found that the
recommendation of K t taken as 0.8 is in most cases reasonable. Upright frame type E
had the load applied between the bracings making the calculation of K t very
conservative. In this study it was found that it is very important to constrain the
column bases from twisting, otherwise K t can be more than one. Generally this
assumption should be valid because the base plate usually has at least one anchorage
bolt, and the friction between the steel base plate and concrete floor should be
sufficient to prevent the bases from twisting. The ideal column bases condition to
prevent it from twisting is however to have more then one anchorage bolt.
In the following study K x for columns was assumed to be 1.2. A certain K x
value can be defined by providing torsional springs as shown in the Fig. 4.14 to resist
the columns from flexural buckling in the direction perpendicular to the upright frame.
Elastic buckling analysis of the upright frames was performed to determine the critical
buckling load, Pe . Summaries of the results are given in Tables 4.16 and 4.17.
Upright frame type A through E has torsionalflexural as the column critical buckling
mode while upright frame type F has flexural buckling about the weak axis.
78
Pex
(kips)
70.98
71.11
71.29
71.48
71.10
71.30
41.98
42.10
42.22
42.51
42.10
42.22
71.01
71.15
70.45
71.66
71.78
71.30
42.01
42.13
42.34
42.55
42.11
42.38
71.22
71.57
71.41
71.86
71.45
71.92
42.23
42.56
42.39
42.79
42.42
42.84
70.84
70.96
70.89
71.04
70.91
71.05
41.85
41.97
41.89
42.03
41.90
42.03
Kx
1.197
1.196
1.195
1.193
1.196
1.194
1.198
1.197
1.195
1.191
1.197
1.195
1.197
1.196
1.202
1.191
1.190
1.194
1.198
1.196
1.193
1.190
1.196
1.193
1.195
1.192
1.194
1.190
1.193
1.189
1.195
1.190
1.193
1.187
1.192
1.186
1.198
1.197
1.198
1.197
1.198
1.197
1.200
1.198
1.200
1.198
1.199
1.198
Pe
(kips)
65.93
67.24
46.46
48.85
34.49
36.11
41.16
41.26
36.71
37.98
25.63
28.58
64.23
65.97
45.61
46.94
33.53
34.21
41.06
41.14
33.23
33.81
24.43
24.77
61.20
64.49
45.00
47.98
34.33
37.02
40.85
41.41
32.19
34.05
25.29
26.98
57.15
58.34
41.70
42.28
31.76
32.31
39.04
39.16
29.25
29.35
22.90
23.02
Load Case II
Pcal
Pe
PRMI
Pe
0.59
0.60
0.69
0.68
0.79
0.78
0.70
0.73
0.66
0.66
0.80
0.75
0.61
0.61
0.70
0.71
0.82
0.85
0.67
0.69
0.71
0.72
0.83
0.86
0.62
0.61
0.71
0.70
0.82
0.81
0.64
0.65
0.71
0.70
0.81
0.81
0.64
0.63
0.72
0.72
0.84
0.82
0.63
0.63
0.72
0.71
0.82
0.81
0.61
0.60
0.63
0.60
0.62
0.59
0.64
0.64
0.54
0.52
0.52
0.47
0.63
0.62
0.63
0.62
0.64
0.62
0.65
0.65
0.59
0.58
0.55
0.54
0.60
0.57
0.59
0.55
0.57
0.53
0.60
0.59
0.56
0.53
0.47
0.44
0.64
0.63
0.63
0.63
0.62
0.61
0.62
0.62
0.62
0.62
0.52
0.52
79
Pex
(kips)
31.48
31.60
31.59
31.75
31.59
31.76
18.85
18.96
18.94
19.09
18.94
19.09
31.49
31.61
31.56
31.72
31.58
31.76
18.85
18.97
18.92
19.07
18.95
19.09
31.56
31.80
31.61
31.90
31.60
31.86
18.92
19.14
18.97
19.24
18.96
19.20
31.37
31.49
31.37
31.50
31.36
31.46
18.73
18.85
18.73
18.85
18.72
18.82
Kx
1.198
1.196
1.196
1.193
1.196
1.193
1.192
1.189
1.189
1.185
1.189
1.185
1.198
1.196
1.197
1.194
1.197
1.193
1.192
1.188
1.190
1.185
1.189
1.185
1.197
1.192
1.196
1.191
1.196
1.191
1.190
1.183
1.188
1.180
1.189
1.181
1.200
1.198
1.200
1.198
1.201
1.199
1.196
1.192
1.196
1.192
1.197
1.193
Pe
(kips)
30.30
30.61
28.66
29.24
27.99
28.81
18.61
18.69
18.34
18.47
18.41
18.47
30.08
30.28
28.17
28.48
27.50
28.02
18.39
18.42
17.92
17.97
18.41
18.47
30.01
30.50
28.09
28.93
27.90
29.48
18.49
18.75
18.06
18.40
18.57
18.88
29.48
29.81
27.16
27.55
26.30
26.84
18.21
18.33
17.59
17.71
18.10
18.22
Pcal
Pe
PRMI
Pe
0.76
0.77
0.68
0.69
0.62
0.62
0.84
0.85
0.77
0.79
0.69
0.71
0.77
0.77
0.70
0.71
0.64
0.64
0.84
0.85
0.77
0.78
0.67
0.69
0.76
0.76
0.69
0.69
0.63
0.62
0.81
0.81
0.74
0.75
0.66
0.68
0.75
0.74
0.68
0.68
0.64
0.63
0.79
0.79
0.72
0.71
0.64
0.64
0.79
0.78
0.69
0.68
0.57
0.55
0.82
0.82
0.71
0.71
0.60
0.60
0.80
0.79
0.70
0.69
0.58
0.57
0.83
0.83
0.73
0.73
0.60
0.60
0.76
0.75
0.66
0.64
0.54
0.51
0.79
0.79
0.69
0.68
0.56
0.56
0.77
0.76
0.68
0.67
0.57
0.56
0.80
0.80
0.70
0.70
0.58
0.57
Pex
(kips)
71.00
71.14
70.44
71.65
71.72
71.22
42.00
42.12
42.33
42.54
42.06
42.34
70.72
70.72
70.72
70.72
70.72
70.72
41.74
41.74
41.74
41.74
41.74
41.74
Kx
1.197
1.196
1.202
1.192
1.191
1.195
1.198
1.196
1.193
1.190
1.197
1.193
1.199
1.199
1.199
1.199
1.199
1.199
1.202
1.202
1.202
1.202
1.202
1.202
Pe
(kips)
33.12
35.00
22.01
22.64
17.68
17.93
22.75
26.72
16.50
17.62
12.45
13.60
10.85
17.97
9.56
15.16
9.71
14.73
5.75
9.88
4.66
7.52
4.20
6.21
Load Case II
Pcal
Pe
PRMI
Pe
0.82
0.82
0.92
0.93
0.98
0.99
0.93
0.81
0.97
0.93
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.52
0.50
0.49
0.48
0.43
0.43
0.44
0.38
0.33
0.31
0.27
0.25
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
80
Pex
(kips)
31.48
31.60
31.51
31.62
31.58
31.76
18.85
18.97
18.85
18.95
18.94
19.08
31.25
31.25
31.25
31.25
31.25
31.25
18.62
18.62
18.62
18.62
18.62
18.62
Kx
1.198
1.196
1.198
1.196
1.197
1.193
1.192
1.189
1.192
1.189
1.189
1.185
1.203
1.203
1.203
1.203
1.203
1.203
1.200
1.200
1.200
1.200
1.200
1.200
Pe
(kips)
27.52
28.23
20.18
20.67
15.46
15.69
17.96
18.03
14.87
15.03
11.62
12.02
9.11
15.36
8.03
12.99
8.24
12.83
5.00
8.66
4.11
6.86
3.75
5.67
Pcal
Pe
PRMI
Pe
0.64
0.65
0.75
0.76
0.88
0.89
0.72
0.73
0.76
0.77
0.89
0.88
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.49
0.46
0.45
0.45
0.44
0.54
0.54
0.36
0.36
0.29
0.28
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.5
The effective design width equations of the AISI specifications are not
applicable for designing rack columns, because of the presence of perforations.
Stubcolumn tests are instead required in the RMI specification to account for the
member local behavior. By measuring the axial load and the corresponding axial
shortening in the stubcolumn test, the relationship between the stress on the effective
section Fn and the effective area Ae can be obtained; however, for tests where only
the ultimate strength of the stubcolumn is measured, the following effective design
area equation of the RMI specification must be used
Ae
Anet min
F
= 1 (1 Q ) n
F
y
(4.1)
where
Q=
The following studies were carried out to verify or modify this effective design area
equation.
81
4.5.1
Stiffened elements
suggested by Eq. (4.1). However, before this study was carried out, finite element
modeling assumptions, in particularly the initial geometric imperfection assumption,
had to first be verified.
Precise data of the distribution on the initial geometric imperfection was not
available. Imperfection was therefore introduced by using the critical buckling mode
shape obtained from buckling analysis. Finite element studies of a simply supported
rectangular plate under uniform compression displacement as shown in Fig. 4.16 has
shown that when the maximum magnitude of imperfection is assumed equal to one
tenth of the element thickness, the analytical results tend to agree with the well known
effective design width equation
(4.2)
This initial geometric imperfection assumption seems reasonable and therefore was
used in subsequent finite element studies. The material model used in the above finite
element study was elasticplastic with strain hardening Fy = 55 ksi, Fu = 70 ksi,
E = 29500 ksi, Est = E 45, = 0.3, and est is 15 times the maximum elastic strain.
Similar to the stubcolumn test, by measuring the axial load and the
corresponding axial shortening of the stiffened element, the relationship between Fn
and Ae was obtained. With these values known the relationship between Pn Py and
Fn Fy could be found. In Fig. 4.17, the analytical results are compared to the
following equation
82
1.2
Analytical
Eq. (4.2)
= t 10
0.8
= t 100
0.6
=t
0.4
3"
0.2
S.S.
S.S.
Uniform
displacement
S.S.
S.S.
12"
0
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.4
0.8
Analytical
t = 0.075"
Eq. (4.3)
t = 0.06"
0.6
Pn
Py
t = 0.045"
t = 0.035"
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
83
t = 0.135"
t = 0.105"
t = 0.09"
0.8
Analytical
t = 0.075"
Eq. (4.4)
t = 0.06"
0.6
Pn
Py
t = 0.045"
t = 0.035"
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
0.8
Analytical
t = 0.075"
Eq. (4.6)
t = 0.06"
0.6
Pn
Py
t = 0.045"
t = 0.035"
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
84
Pn
F
= n
Py
Fy
(4.3)
where is computed according to Eq. (4.2). As can be seen in Fig. 4.17, at the
ultimate load ( Pn when Fn = Fy ) the analytical results agree well with the effective
design width equation because of the initial geometric imperfection calibration.
However it was found that at design loads ( Pn when Fn < Fy ) the effective design
width equation is quite conservative compared to the analytical solution. In Fig. 4.18,
the analytical results are compared to the following equation
F
Pn Fn
=
1 (1 Q ) n
Fy
Py Fy
(4.4)
which is the RMI effective design area equation Eq. (4.1) multiplied by Fn Fy to give
the relationship between Pn Py and Fn Fy . The Q factor is obtained from the finite
element solution; therefore, analytical results and Eq. (4.4) match at the ultimate load.
It was found that at design loads the RMI effective design area equation is also quite
conservative compared to the analytical solution. The following new effective design
area equation is therefore proposed to improve the results.
Ae
Anet min
F
= 1 (1 Q ) n
F
y
1Q
(4.5)
This proposed equation was developed by modifying the exponential term in Eq. (4.1)
so that the results will agree better with the analytical solutions. By multiplying this
proposed equation with Fn Fy the new relationship between Pn Py and Fn Fy is
obtained as follows
F
Pn Fn
= 1 (1 Q ) n
F
Py Fy
y
85
Q
1 Q
(4.6)
In Fig. 4.19, the analytical results are compared to the above equation. As can be seen
improvement has been made. At the same stress levels Eq. (4.5) simply predicts a
larger effective design area than Eq. (4.1) as shown in Fig. 4.20; therefore Eq. (4.6)
will give a higher design load than Eq. (4.4) as shown in Fig. 4.21.
The results in this section indicate that unperforated compression elements
should be designed by using Eq. (4.5), where the Q factor can be easily computed
from Eq. (4.2). If this proposed procedure is used the element design curve will be
altered from Eq. (4.2) as shown in Fig. 4.22. Unperforated members and perforated
members are studied in the next sections.
4.5.2
Unperforated members
86
1.1
Q =1
1
Q = 0.8
0.9
Ae
Anet min
Q = 0.6
0.8
0.7
Eq. (4.1)
Eq. (4.5)
0.6
0.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.20 Comparison between the RMI effective design area equation and the
proposed equation
1
Q =1
Eq. (4.4)
0.8
Eq. (4.6)
Pn
Py
Q = 0.8
0.6
Q = 0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.21 Comparison between the RMI effective design area equation and the
proposed equation
87
1.2
Q = 0.75
Q = 0.5
0.8
0.6
0.4
Eq. (4.2)
Proposed approach
0.2
0
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.4
Figure 4.22 Comparison between the AISI effective width approach and the
proposed approach
+
Stiffened elements
=
Round corners
Stiffened elements
Sharp corners
Round corners
88
Table 4.18 Comparison Among the AISI Design Approach, the Modified AISI
Design Approach, and the Analytical Results
R = 0.125"
3"3"
12"
FS Open Back
Section
FS Open Back
FS Closed Tube
FSO1
FSO2
FSO3
FSO4
FSO5
FSO6
FSO7
FSC1
FSC2
FSC3
FSC4
FSC5
FSC6
FSC7
FS Closed Tube
t
(in.)
0.035
0.045
0.06
0.075
0.09
0.105
0.135
0.035
0.045
0.06
0.075
0.09
0.105
0.135
89
QAISI
Qmodified
QFEM
0.559
0.673
0.739
0.797
0.823
0.896
0.952
0.545
0.658
0.806
0.928
1
1
1
0.460
0.576
0.722
0.775
0.822
0.852
0.939
0.452
0.566
0.719
0.850
0.957
1
1
0.482
0.585
0.759
0.902
0.958
0.973
0.981
0.463
0.564
0.736
0.889
0.961
0.983
0.995
between the supporting elements and hence will be larger, the section properties are
based on the round corners and hence the design will be more conservative agreeing
better with the analytical solution as shown in Table 4.18.
Five methods were used to compute the relationship between Pn Py and
Fn Fy . The first method uses the finite element simulation of the stubcolumn test, the
second method uses the AISI design approach, the third method uses the modified
AISI design approach, the fourth method uses the RMI effective design area equation,
and the fifth method uses the proposed effective design area equation.
In Figs. 4.24 and 4.28, the finite element results are compared to the AISI
design approach. In Figs. 4.25 and 4.29, the finite element results are compared to the
modified AISI design approach. When the modified AISI design approach was used,
results similar to the previous stiffened elements study were found; that is, at the
ultimate load the analytical results agrees well with the design approach; however at
design loads the design approach is quite conservative compared to the analytical
solution.
In Figs. 4.26 and 4.30, the finite element results are compared to the RMI
effective design area equation. In Figs. 4.27 and 4.31, the finite element results are
compared to the proposed effective design area equation. As can be seen from these
figures improvement has been made for the case of thinwalled sections. The results
are still quite conservative for thickwalled sections because of the material strain
hardening, which was included in the finite element model but is not considered in the
design since the component elements are not fully effective.
90
Analytical
FSO7
FSO6
FSO5
FSO4
AISI1996 Spec.
FSO3
0.8
0.6
Pn
Py
FSO2
FSO1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.24 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between AISI design approach and
analytical results
Analytical
FSO7
FSO6
FSO5
FSO4
FSO3
0.8
0.6
Pn
Py
FSO2
FSO1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.25 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between modified AISI design
approach and analytical results
91
FSO7
FSO6
FSO5
FSO4
1
Analytical
0.8
FSO3
Eq. (4.4)
0.6
Pn
Py
FSO2
FSO1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.26 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
Analytical
FSO7
FSO6
FSO5
FSO4
Eq. (4.6)
FSO3
0.8
0.6
Pn
Py
FSO2
FSO1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.27 Section FS Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design
area equation and analytical results
92
FSC7
FSC6
FSC5
FSC4
1
Analytical
0.8
AISI1996 Spec.
FSC3
0.6
Pn
Py
FSC2
FSC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.28 Section FS Closed Tube  Correlation between AISI design approach
and analytical results
FSC7
FSC6
FSC5
FSC4
1
Analytical
0.8
FSC3
0.6
Pn
Py
FSC2
FSC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.29 Section FS Closed Tube  Correlation between modified AISI design
approach and analytical results
93
FSC7
FSC6
FSC5
FSC4
1
Analytical
0.8
Pn
Py
Eq. (4.4)
FSC3
0.6
FSC2
FSC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.30 Section FS Closed Tube  Correlation between RMI effective design
area equation and analytical results
FSC7
FSC6
FSC5
FSC4
1
Analytical
0.8
Eq. (4.6)
FSC3
0.6
Pn
Py
FSC2
FSC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.31 Section FS Closed Tube  Correlation between proposed effective design
area equation and analytical results
94
4.5.3
Perforated members
the second method uses the RMI effective design area equation, and the third method
uses the proposed effective design area equation.
In Figs. 4.32, 4.34, 4.36, 4.38, and 4.40, the finite element results are compared
to the RMI effective design area equation. In Figs. 4.33, 4.35, 4.37, 4.39, and 4.41,
the finite element results are compared to the proposed effective design area equation.
As can be seen from these figures, the design is more efficient if the proposed
equation is used.
Similar changes are also recommended for the effective section modulus
equation, which is used for the determination of the member flexural strength.
From the current RMI equation
Sc
S net min
(1 Q ) M c
= 1
2
Sf
Fy
(4.7)
(1 Q ) M c
= 1
2
S f 1Q
Fy
(4.8)
By using the proposed equations (Eqs. (4.5) and (4.8)) the member design strength
will increase from the current design specification as shown in Figs. 4.42 and 4.43.
95
R = 0.125"
12"
TB Open Back
TB Closed Tube
Section
TB Open Back
TB Closed Tube
IG Open Back
IG Closed Tube
TBO1
TBO2
TBO3
TBO4
TBO5
TBO6
TBC1
TBC2
TBC3
TBC4
TBC5
TBC6
IGO1
IGO2
IGO3
IGO4
IGO5
IGO6
IGC1
IGC2
IGC3
IGC4
IGC5
IGC6
T2O1
T2O2
T2O3
T2O4
T2O5
T2O6
IG Open Back
t
(in.)
0.045
0.06
0.069
0.081
0.1
0.123
0.045
0.06
0.067
0.082
0.09
0.122
0.045
0.06
0.067
0.085
0.099
0.126
0.045
0.06
0.067
0.082
0.1
0.124
0.045
0.06
0.067
0.083
0.1
0.126
Fy
(ksi)
55
55
54.9
51.2
54.2
59.6
55
55
55
53.9
57.4
61.3
55
55
55
63.8
56.3
55
55
55
55
55.7
55
58.3
55
55
55
56.8
56.2
55
96
Fu
(ksi)
70
70
62.6
69.5
64
78.4
70
70
70
69.2
63
68.3
70
70
70
73.2
65.4
70
70
70
70
75.3
70
68
70
70
70
75
62.8
70
max
0.888
1.067
1.060
1.169
0.991
0.983
1.081
1.001
1.028
0.933
1.188
1.009
1.044

QTEST
min
0.776
0.987
0.990
1.021
0.981
0.977
1.073
0.818
0.972
0.925
1.154
0.855
0.933

mean
0.832
1.035
1.030
1.100
0.986
0.981
1.076
0.921
0.997
0.929
1.173
0.918
0.984

QFEM
0.608
0.784
0.882
0.960
0.982
0.989
0.583
0.759
0.842
0.955
0.970
0.998
0.613
0.799
0.873
0.951
0.989
0.997
0.587
0.765
0.844
0.952
0.995
1.007
0.592
0.752
0.813
0.880
0.896
0.902
TBO6
TBO5
TBO4
TBO3
1
Analytical
0.8
TBO2
Eq. (4.4)
TBO1
0.6
Pn
Py
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.32 Section TB Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
TBO6
TBO5
TBO4
TBO3
1
Analytical
0.8
TBO2
Eq. (4.6)
TBO1
0.6
Pn
Py
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.33 Section TB Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design
area equation and analytical results
97
TBC6
TBC5
TBC4
0.8
Analytical
TBC3
Eq. (4.4)
TBC2
0.6
Pn
Py
TBC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.34 Section TB Closed Tube  Correlation between RMI effective design
area equation and analytical results
TBC6
TBC5
TBC4
0.8
Analytical
TBC3
Eq. (4.6)
TBC2
0.6
Pn
Py
TBC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
98
IGO6
IGO5
IGO4
IGO3
1
Analytical
0.8
IGO2
Eq. (4.4)
IGO1
0.6
Pn
Py
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.36 Section IG Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design area
equation and analytical results
IGO6
IGO5
IGO4
IGO3
1
Analytical
0.8
IGO2
Eq. (4.6)
IGO1
0.6
Pn
Py
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.37 Section IG Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective design
area equation and analytical results
99
IGC6
IGC5
IGC4
0.8
Analytical
IGC3
Eq. (4.4)
IGC2
0.6
Pn
Py
IGC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.38 Section IG Closed Tube  Correlation between RMI effective design
area equation and analytical results
IGC6
IGC5
IGC4
0.8
Analytical
IGC3
Eq. (4.6)
IGC2
0.6
Pn
Py
IGC1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.39 Section IG Closed Tube  Correlation between proposed effective design
area equation and analytical results
100
IGT6
IGT5
IGT4
IGT3
IGT2
Analytical
0.8
Eq. (4.4)
0.6
Pn
Py
IGT1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.40 Section Type II Open Back  Correlation between RMI effective design
area equation and analytical results
1
IGT6
IGT5
IGT4
IGT3
IGT2
Analytical
0.8
Eq. (4.6)
0.6
Pn
Py
IGT1
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fn Fy
Figure 4.41 Section Type II Open Back  Correlation between proposed effective
design area equation and analytical results
101
1
Q =1
Q = 0.8
0.8
Pn
Py
0.6
Q = 0.6
0.4
RMI1997 Spec.
0.2
Proposed Approach
0
0
0.5
1.5
Fy Fe
Figure 4.42 Comparison between the RMI approach for column design and the
proposed approach
1
Q =1
Q = 0.8
0.8
Mn
My
0.6
Q = 0.6
0.4
RMI1997 Spec.
0.2
Proposed Approach
0
0
0.5
1.5
M y Me
Figure 4.43 Comparison between the RMI approach for beam design and the
proposed approach
102
4.6
Their cross sectional geometry is given in Fig. 4.2. The finite element analysis
considered both geometric and material nonlinearities. Finite element models range
from a member length of 12 to 120 in. with a 6 in. increment between models.
Initial conditions of the model involved both flexural residual stresses and geometric
imperfections. The magnitude of the flexural residual stresses throughout the thickness
in the longitudinal direction is given in Fig. 4.44a. These stresses were assumed to
have tension on the outside and compression on the inside of the section. Geometric
imperfection was introduced by using the buckling mode shape obtained from the
buckling analysis. For short members where local or distortional buckling is critical,
buckling mode shape with a maximum imperfection magnitude of one tenth of the
thickness was used as the geometric imperfection. For long members where overall
buckling is critical as shown in Fig. 4.44b, the geometric imperfection was generated
by superimposing the overall buckling and the local buckling mode shape together,
where the maximum imperfection magnitudes of these modes are one thousandth of
the member length and one tenth of the thickness, respectively. An idealization of the
material model that is elasticplastic with strain hardening was assumed. For Sections
103
0.3 Fy
0.25 Fy
0.3 Fy
0.1Fy
0.4 Fy
0.1Fy
0.3 Fy
0.25 Fy
0.3 Fy
Local Buckling
(a)
Overall Buckling
(b)
Figure 4.44 Initial conditions of the finite element model (a) Bending residue
stresses (b) Geometric imperfections
104
ALDR and ALDR2, Fy = 45 ksi, Fu = 59 ksi, E = 29500 ksi, Est = E 45, = 0.3,
and est is 15 times the maximum elastic strain. For Section AHDR the material
properties are same but with Fy = 47.8 ksi.
All three sections were studied as a concentrically loaded compression
member, a flexural member subject to bending about the strong axis, and a member
subject to combined compressive axial load and bending about the strong axis.
Boundary conditions at the ends of the member for all cases were pined condition such
that the effective length for flexural buckling of both the strong and weak axis and
torsion were equal to the length of the member.
The loads were applied through nodal forces at the ends of the member.
To avoid localized failure at the member ends the nodal forces were distributed in to
the first three rows of elements. This loading condition is different from the one
previously used for the finite simulation of the stubcolumn test in the Effective Design
Area study. In the stubcolumn test simulation model, nodal displacements were used
to apply the load. The reason why in this study nodal forces were selected over
applying nodal displacements was to assure that the member ends remain pined
condition. Finite element studies of these two loading conditions have shown that the
resulting ultimate compression load of the two can be significantly different,
especially if the section is locally unstable. The reason for this is that when the
uniform displacement is applied, the end surface stresses will not be uniform, and on
the other hand when the uniform stresses is applied, the end surface displacement will
not be uniform. The ultimate compression load is higher when the uniform
displacement is applied rather than when the uniform load is applied. The reason for
this is that additional restraints are provided at the ends of the member in the case of
applying uniform displacement, preventing the member ends from rotating.
105
The differences in these two cases are however not significant if the section is locally
stable because ultimately the entire section will yield for both cases.
The finite element results are compared with design specifications in Figs. 4.45
through 4.56. The design approach requires the use of the ultimate compression load
from a stubcolumn test to compute the Q factor. Thus, ultimate compression strength
obtained from finite element analysis of the member with the shortest length is used.
For the case of compressive axial strength shown in Figs. 4.45, 4.49, and 4.53,
it can be seen that the proposed design approach agrees well with the analytical
solutions, while the current specification is slightly conservative.
For the case of flexural strength for Sections ALDR and ALDR2 shown in
Figs. 4.46 and 4.50, it can be seen that both approaches are quite conservative for
designing flexural members compared to the finite element solution, especially for the
very long members. According to the finite element solution, these members have
postbuckling strength. The results are also conservative because of the way in which
the effective section modulus is computed according to the RMI specification, further
investigation of this is given in the next study on the Effective Section Modulus.
The conservative results shown in this study can, however, only be obtained if the net
section II properties as given Tables 4.2 and 4.3 are used. The reason for this is clear
but not explicitly suggested in the specification that the net moment of inertia of the
bending axis should be used in the design of the flexural members.
For the case of flexural strength for Section AHRD shown in Fig. 4.54, even
though net moment of inertia is used, both the proposed approach and the RMI
approach for this case over estimates the flexural strength. This is because the
distortional buckling strength of this section is rather low. The design specification
currently does not consider this buckling mode.
106
1.2
RMI1997 Spec.
Unperforated Section
Proposed Approach
FEM Unperforated Section
FEM Perforated Section
0.8
Pn
Py
0.6
Perforated Section
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
Fy Fe
Figure 4.45 Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for column
design and the proposed approach
1.2
Unperforated Section
1
0.8
Perforated Section
Mn
My
0.6
RMI1997 Spec.
Proposed Approach
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
1.5
M y Me
Figure 4.46 Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for beam
design and the proposed approach
107
1.2
2
1
0.8
2
Pu
0.6
c Pn
0.4
Interaction Eq.
RMI1997 Spec. vs. FEM
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Cmx M ux
b M nx x
Figure 4.47 Unperforated Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach
for beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
1.2
2
1
0.8
2
Pu
0.6
c Pn
Interaction Eq.
0.4
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Cmx M ux
b M nx x
Figure 4.48 Perforated Section ALDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
108
1
RMI1997 Spec.
Unperforated Section
0.8
Proposed Approach
FEM Unperforated Section
FEM Perforated Section
0.6
Pn
Py
0.4
Perforated Section
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
Fy Fe
Figure 4.49 Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI approach for column
design and the proposed approach
1.2
Unperforated Section
1
0.8
Perforated Section
Mn
0.6
My
RMI1997 Spec.
Proposed Approach
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
1.5
M y Me
Figure 4.50 Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI approach for beam
design and the proposed approach
109
1.4
2
1.2
Pu
c Pn
0.8
0.6
0.4
Interaction Eq.
RMI1997 Spec. vs. FEM
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Cmx M ux
b M nx x
Figure 4.51 Unperforated Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI
approach for beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
1.4
2
1.2
Pu
c Pn
0.8
0.6
Interaction Eq.
0.4
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Cmx M ux
b M nx x
Figure 4.52 Perforated Section ALDR2  Comparison between the RMI approach
for beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
110
1.2
RMI1997 Spec.
Unperforated Section
Proposed Approach
0.8
Pn
Py
0.6
0.4
Perforated Section
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
Fy Fe
Figure 4.53 Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for column
design and the proposed approach
1.2
Unperforated Section
1
0.8
Perforated Section
Mn
My
0.6
RMI1997 Spec.
Proposed Approach
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
M y Me
Figure 4.54 Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for beam
design and the proposed approach
111
1.2
0.8
Pu
0.6 2
c Pn
0.4
Interaction Eq.
RMI1997 Spec. vs. FEM
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Cmx M ux
b M nx x
Figure 4.55 Unperforated Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach
for beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
1.2
1
0.8
Pu
0.6
c Pn
2
0.4
Interaction Eq.
RMI1997 Spec. vs. FEM
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Cmx M ux
b M nx x
Figure 4.56 Perforated Section AHDR  Comparison between the RMI approach for
beamcolumn design and the proposed approach
112
For the case of combined compression axial load and bending shown in
Figs. 4.47, 4.48, 4.51, 4.52, 4.55, and 4.56, correlations between the finite element
results and the interaction equation for beamcolumn design is given. For a given
finite element result, the members strength Pu and M ux are substituted in the
interaction equation and the resulting axial and flexural strength ratio is plotted.
Data points that fall outside the triangle indicate that the interaction equation is
conservative. Data points of the proposed design approach are closer to the interaction
equation line when compared to the current design procedure, indicating that
improvement has been made.
4.7
In order to deal with the presence of perforations in a column section, the RMI
specification recommends the use of a stubcolumn test to establish an effective net
section area. The area of the effective section is for an axially loaded member failing
due to local behavior. The results are also further used to calculate the elastic section
modulus of the effective section for determination of the member flexural strength.
The objective of this study was to validate this calculated flexural strength by using
the finite element approach.
A finite element parametric study of stubcolumns subject to bending moment
was carried out. The column sections in study were the same ones used in the previous
study Effective Design Area, which are given in Table 4.19. The bending moments
were applied by applying nodal displacements rotating the end surfaces of the
stubcolumn. The flexural strength was determined for the strong axis bending, weak
axis bending with web in tension, and weak axis bending with web in compression as
shown in Table 4.20. The analysis in this study considered both geometric and
113
material nonlinearities. Initial conditions of the model involved both flexural residual
stresses and geometric imperfections. Geometric imperfection was introduced by
using the buckling mode shape obtained from the buckling analysis with a maximum
imperfection magnitude of one tenth of the thickness. An idealization of the material
model that is elasticplastic with strain hardening was assumed.
The RMI specification recommends that nominal flexural strength M n for
members not subject to lateral buckling, such as the stubcolumn under end surface
rotations in this study, can be determined as follows:
M n = Se Fy
(4.9)
Se = S 0.5 +
2
(4.10)
where
S is the elastic section modus of the full unreduced section for the extreme
compression or tension fiber at Fy . The Q factor determined from the finite element
approach given in Table 4.19 is used in the above equation to calculate M n and then
compared with finite element results of the stubcolumn under end surface rotations.
Results are summarized in Table 4.20. It was found that M n agrees well with the
finite element results for the case of strong axis bending, but is rather conservative for
weak axis bending. Results are conservative because M n is calculated on the basis of
initiation of yielding. Higher values can be obtained by considering the nominal
flexural strength M p that is calculated on the basis of inelastic reserve capacity,
determined as follows:
M p = Z e Fy
where
114
(4.11)
Axial Load
M FEM
Mn
Mp
(kipin.)
M FEM
M FEM
(kipin.)
M FEM
M FEM
(kipin.)
M FEM
M FEM
37.89
42.50
55.47
73.69
37.04
47.53
55.56
80.04
35.88
54.01
55.99
68.46
36.35
46.89
57.64
75.24
30.87
40.82
48.36
58.43
mean
st. dev
0.941
0.942
0.932
0.924
0.931
0.907
0.905
0.886
0.954
0.950
0.943
0.930
0.940
0.938
0.918
0.902
0.948
0.931
0.924
0.913
0.928
0.018
1.030
1.035
1.030
1.030
1.045
1.023
1.024
1.014
1.036
1.038
1.035
1.030
1.048
1.052
1.036
1.027
1.067
1.054
1.052
1.050
1.038
0.013
30.56
33.73
44.22
59.36
36.15
43.79
51.13
74.27
29.02
42.92
44.83
55.76
35.52
44.53
54.33
71.05
27.82
35.82
43.05
53.10
mean
st. dev
0.807
0.819
0.804
0.785
0.745
0.768
0.767
0.742
0.786
0.794
0.780
0.751
0.696
0.714
0.702
0.687
0.794
0.799
0.779
0.751
0.764
0.039
1.008
1.028
1.016
1.003
1.000
1.038
1.040
1.024
0.987
1.004
0.992
0.967
0.976
1.008
1.002
0.992
0.996
1.009
0.991
0.967
1.003
0.020
29.47
33.27
43.12
57.25
33.95
43.26
51.04
73.86
27.10
40.36
42.37
52.09
32.31
42.63
52.91
69.29
26.34
34.07
40.42
49.13
mean
st. dev
0.837
0.831
0.824
0.814
0.793
0.777
0.768
0.747
0.842
0.844
0.825
0.804
0.765
0.745
0.721
0.704
0.839
0.840
0.830
0.812
0.798
0.043
1.045
1.043
1.042
1.040
1.065
1.051
1.042
1.029
1.056
1.067
1.049
1.035
1.073
1.053
1.028
1.017
1.053
1.061
1.056
1.045
1.048
0.014
115
Z e = Z 0.5 +
2
(4.12)
Z is the plastic modulus. Overall M p agrees better with the finite element approach
than M n but the results are slightly on the unconservative side; therefore, it is not
recommended for design purposes.
4.8
116
For the case of a simply supported beamcolumn, M x max and M y max the maximum
bending moment about principal x and y axes occurs at midspan and M t max the
maximum twisting moment occurs at the member ends. These moments can be
computed as follows:
M x max
(4.13)
= M x 0 1 +
M y max
(4.14)
= M y 0 1 +
M t max =
P GJ 3 ECw
+
( Pey P ) M x 0 ax ( Pex P ) M y 0 a y
L3
L
(4.15)
where
M x 0 = Pey
M y 0 = Pex
Pey P
0
Pa y
Pa y
Pex P
Pax
2
Pax
r0 ( Pet P )
P is the applied eccentric load, M x 0 and M y 0 are the end bending moment about the
x and y axes , respectively. Definitions of the other variables and derivation of
117
M x max =
Cmx M x 0
M x 0 sec
2
1
(
)
(4.16)
where
Cmx = 1 + 0.273
= P Pex
Cmx (1 ) is the moment magnification factor which amplifies the end moment M x 0
to account for the second order effects. This is the same moment magnification factor
given by the AISI specification but with an approximation of Cmx = 1 for the same
corresponding boundary conditions.
Consider another case when the Section ALDR is subjected to a compression
load with eccentricities: ex = 0 and ey = 1 in. as shown in Fig. 4.57. In this case M x max
from Eq. (4.13) will not be the same as from using the moment magnification factor
given by the AISI specification. Fig. 4.58 compares the results. It can be seen that the
AISI approach gives an unconservative M x max . This is because Eq. (4.13) has the level
of P limited at the elastic critical axial load Pe , agreeing with the actual behavior in
which the member will buckle by torsionalflexural at this load. But the AISI approach
has it limited at the flexural buckling load Pex instead. Contour plots given in Fig. 4.57
can be used to obtain Pe for the different load eccentricities. The failure mode for this
member is by combined bending and torsion. The cross section between the supports
will undergo translation and rotation. Therefore, in addition to the bending moment
about the xaxis directly developing from the applied loads, the bending moment
about y axis and the twisting moment will also exist. The maximum values of these
moments are obtained by using Eqs. (4.14) and (4.15). Results are shown in Figs. 4.59
and 4.60, respectively.
118
e y , in.
e y , in.
ex , in.
ex , in.
L r = 80
L r = 160
Figure 4.57 Contour plots of the elastic critical axial force Pe , kips
4
Eq. (4.13)
AISI Moment Magnification factor
3
M x max
M x0
L ry
= 160
L ry
= 80
0
0
12
16
P, kips
Figure 4.58 Bending moment about the xaxis
119
20
0.8
M y max
M x0
L ry = 160
0.6
L ry
= 80
0.4
0.2
0
0
12
16
20
P, kips
Figure 4.59 Bending moment about the y axis
0.1
0.08
L ry = 160
M
t max
M x0
0.06
0.04
L ry = 80
0.02
0
0
12
16
P, kips
Figure 4.60 Twisting moment about the z axis
120
20
4.9
CONCLUSIONS
A critical review of the RMI specification for member design was carried out
in this chapter. A total of seven studies were carried out. In the first study Elastic
Buckling Strength of Perforated Members, numerous finite element elastic buckling
analyses of perforated member were carried out. Results indicate that increasing the
presence of perforations in the section will reduce the buckling strength. To take this
into account, instead of using the unperforated section properties to predict the
buckling strength of perforated sections, as assumed in the current design
specification, better results can be obtained by using the weighted section, or the
average section properties for torsionalflexural buckling, the average section
properties for lateral buckling, and the net moment of inertia section properties for
flexural buckling.
In the second study TorsionalFlexural Buckling, the torsionalflexural
buckling equation used in the current design provision was evaluated by comparing
the results with finite element solutions. It was found that the elastic buckling load
obtained from using the buckling equation is usually conservative compared to the
121
finite element results. The reason for this is that the buckled shape assumptions made
in the buckling equation are inconsistent with the actual buckled shape. This leads to
errors underestimating the elastic buckling load of member and has proven to be a
source of the conservatism in the current design provision.
In the third study Effective Lengths, the effective length factors used in the
current design provision were evaluated by comparing the results with finite element
solutions. It was found that the recommended value of K y taken as one is in general
conservative while K t taken as 0.8 is in most cases reasonable, providing that the
upright frame has adequate braces and the column base is constrained against twisting.
In the fourth study Effective Design Area, finite element simulation of
stubcolumn tests were carried out to evaluate the current effective design area
equation and effective section modulus equation. Modifications of these equations are
suggested. The effective design area equation of the RMI specification, Eq. (4.1),
should be modified to the proposed equation, Eq. (4.5). The effective section modulus
equation of the RMI specification, Eq. (4.7), should be modified to the proposed
equation, Eq. (4.8).
In the fifth study Member Design Strength, unperforated and perforated
member strength capacity, under different loading conditions and for various member
lengths, was computed using the finite element method, and compared to those values
using the RMI specification, which uses Eqs. (4.1) and (4.7), and the proposed design
approach, which uses Eqs. (4.5) and (4.8). It was found that the compressive axial
strength and the beamcolumns strength designed according to the proposed design
approach agrees better to the finite element results than the current design procedure
does. Flexural strength design according to either design approach is quite
conservative compared to the finite element results, if distortional buckling failure
mode does not take place.
122
In the sixth study Effective Section Modulus, finite element simulation of stubcolumn tests under bending moments were carried out to evaluate the current RMI
procedures for determining the member flexural strength. It was found that current
procedure for calculating the nominal flexural strength on the basis of initiation of
yielding M n for members not subject to lateral buckling is conservative, especially for
weak axis bending. Equations for determining the nominal flexural strength on the
basis of inelastic reserve capacity M p are given in this study and have been shown to
agree better with the finite element results than M n , but the results are slightly on the
unconservative side, therefore it is not recommended for design purposes.
In the seventh study Moment Magnification Factor, equations for determining
the maximum bending moments in elastic beamcolumns for the case where it is
simply supported with equal end eccentricities and failure is by torsionalflexural
buckling are given. Determining the maximum moments for this boundary condition
using the current moment magnification factor suggested by the AISI specification has
been shown to give unconservative results if the member failure is by torsionalflexural. This unconservatism in the AISI moment magnification factor by itself,
however, does not suggest that current design procedures for beamcolumns is
unconservative. On the contrary, as to be shown in Chapter 5, in practice when the
AISI moment magnification factor is used with the interaction equation to design
beamcolumns current design procedure is very conservative.
123
Chapter
5.1
INTRODUCTION
The behavior of industrial storage racks depends on how the three individual
124
5.2
assessing frame stability. It is essential that effective lengths and the elastic buckling
load of members are accurately determined in the effective length approach.
Parameters that influence the value of K x for column flexural buckling were
examined in this study. The alignment chart and the AISI torsionalflexural buckling
provisions, used to obtain the effective lengths and elastic buckling load of members
were also evaluated.
5.2.1
Effective Length K x
Parameters that influence the value of K x for column flexural buckling in the
125
>
>
H3
H2
>
H1
Loading conditions
>
>
>
Figure 5.1 Parameters that influences the value of K x for column flexural buckling
126
additional horizontal force makes insignificant changes to the level of axial loads on
the interior columns. As the number of loaded bays increases so does the value of K x ;
therefore, a fully loaded frame is always the most critical load case as far as elastic
buckling is concerned.
The third category is the section properties and connection stiffness. As the
column size increases so does the value of K x ; however as the beam size and the
connection stiffness increases the value of K x will decrease because additional
restraint from the beam and connection stiffness helps prevent the frame from
sidesway buckling.
A parametric study was carried out to investigate the effects of the loading
conditions on the frame stability. Two loading sequences on a 6bay by 6story pallet
rack shown in Fig. 5.2 were studied. One is the best possible loading sequence which
will minimize the frame instability while the other is the worst possible loading
sequence which will maximize the frame instability. As can been seen in Fig. 5.2,
the best loading sequence is one which starts loading from the lower stories, while the
worst loading sequence is one which does the opposite; that is, it starts loading from
the upper stories.
The resulting effects that these two loading sequences have on the frame
stability are plotted in Fig. 5.3 where WLoad i is the elastic buckling gravity load per bay
when i number of bays have been loaded, and WLoad 36 is the elastic buckling gravity
load per bay when all bays have been loaded. As can be seen in this figure, it is better
to start accessing the products from the upper stories while keeping the lower stories
loaded until last.
127
35
31
33
36
32
34
29
25
27
30
26
28
10
11
12
21
23
19
24
20
22
15
13
14
16
17
18
13
17
15
18
14
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
11
10
12
25
27
28
29
30
26
31
33
34
36
35
32
1
Worst loading sequence
0.8
WLoad 36
WLoad i
0.6
0.4
Best loading sequence
0.2
0
0
12
18
24
30
36
128
5.2.2
129
Upright frame
B1C1B1 (Table 4.13)
3 stories @ 60"
6 bays @ 96"
Buckling analysis
Alignment chart
Second story
Kx
3
2
Bottom story
1
0
200
400
600
800
K , kipin. rad
Figure 5.5 Evaluation of the Alignment chart
130
1000
0.9
( Pe ) AISI
( Pe )FEM
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0
200
400
600
800
1000
K , kipin. rad
Figure 5.6 Evaluation of the torsionalflexural buckling equation
131
5.3
PLUMBNESS
Outofplumb installation of frames creates secondary moments in the columns
causing frame instability. The RMI specification recommends that the frame initial
outofplumbness should not be more than 0.5 inches in 10 feet ( = 1 240 ).
The following study was carried out to investigate different initial outofplumb modes
and the impact it has on the load carrying capacity of frame.
Five frame initial outofplumb modes as shown in Fig. 5.8 were considered.
The initial outofplumbness of the first three modes are within the RMI guidelines
while the last two modes are not because the column imperfection gradient has
exceeded 0.5 inches in 10 feet.
The pallet rack shown in Fig. 5.7 was used as the vehicle for carrying out this
study. Finite element analysis was performed to compute the load carrying capacity of
the frame for the different initial outofplumb modes, and also for the different frame
beam to column connection stiffnesses to cover a wide range of column K x values.
Results are compared with respect to Mode 0 as shown in Fig. 5.9. Finite element
modeling assumptions include using a threedimensional model, using opensection
beam elements to model the columns and braces, using linear torsional springs to
132
60"
Connection stiffness
D1D6 (Table 5.4)
Column C2 (Fig. 5.18)
60"
96"
96"
42"
h 3
2 h 3
Mode 0
Mode 1
h
Mode 2
h
Mode 3
Mode 4
133
1.1
Mode 1
1.05
Mode 2
Mode 3
WMode i
1
WMode 0
Mode 4
0.95
0.9
1
1.5
2.5
Kx
Figure 5.9 Effect of initial outofplumb on the load carrying capacity of the frame
134
model the connection stiffness, using the proposed base fixity equation given in
Chapter 2 to compute the stiffness of the column base, and using an elasticplastic
material model Fy = 55 ksi, and E = 29500 ksi. The finite element analysis considers
5.4
(5.1)
where M nt and M lt are the required flexural strength in the member obtained from
firstorder elastic analysis assuming the frame to have no lateral translation and
assuming the frame to have lateral translation, respectively. B1 and B2 are moment
magnification factors which are needed to account for the secondorder effects.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the AISI and the AISC recommended
135
1
Pu
1
Pex
(5.2)
or
B2 =
1
1 Pu oh
HL
(5.3)
where Pu is the required axial strength of all columns in the a story, oh is the lateral
interstory deflection, H is the sum of all story horizontal forces producing oh ,
L is the story height, and Pex the elastic flexural buckling strength of all columns in
the story. The AISI specification accounts for the secondorder effects by multiplying
the moment term in the interaction equation by Cmx x , where Cmx is 0.85 for
sidesway and x = 1 Pu Pex , which is equivalent to having B2 as
B2 =
0.85
P
1 u
Pex
(5.4)
the value of Pu Pex in the above equation and the value of Pu Pex in Eq. (5.2) are
the same when their parameters are obtained from performing firstorder analysis and
elastic buckling analysis, therefore Eq. (5.2) and Eq. (5.4) differ only by a factor of
0.85.
The developing moment at the base of the center column of the pallet rack
shown in Fig. 5.7 was investigated. All bays are equally loaded causing zero M nt in
the center column; therefore, the moment magnification factor B1 is not needed;
M u arises only from the lateral translation of the frame which is due to the frame
initial outofplumbness. Frame initial outofplumb mode 0 as shown in Fig. 5.8 is
136
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
Pu
Pex 0.6
0.4
Eq. (5.3)
0.2
Eq. (5.4)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mu
Figure 5.10 Frame with K = 300 kipsin.  Correlation between secondorder
elastic analysis and moment magnification factors
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
Pu
Pex 0.6
0.4
Eq. (5.3)
0.2
Eq. (5.4)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mu
Figure 5.11 Frame with K = 600 kipsin.  Correlation between secondorder
elastic analysis and moment magnification factors
137
1.4
1.2
1
Pu
Pex
0.8
0.6
0.4
Eq. (5.3)
0.2
Eq. (5.4)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mu
Figure 5.12 Frame with K = 1200 kipsin.  Correlation between secondorder
elastic analysis and moment magnification factors
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
Pu
Pex 0.6
Secondorder elastic analysis
0.4
Eq. (5.2)
Eq. (5.3)
0.2
Eq. (5.4)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mu
Figure 5.13 Frame with K = Rigid  Correlation between secondorder elastic
analysis and moment magnification factors
138
assumed. The relationship between Pu and M u at the base of the center column
obtained from secondorder elastic analysis is used as a basis for evaluating Eqs. (5.2),
(5.3), and (5.4). The results are given for four beam to column connection stiffnesses:
K = 300, 600, 1200 kipsin., and rigid as shown in Figs. 5.10 through 5.13. As can
been from these figures, Eq. (5.4) agrees better with the secondorder elastic analysis
than Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3) do. Eq. (5.2) is slightly more conservative than the results
from secondorder elastic analysis and Eq. (5.4), while Eq. (5.3) is unconservative
compared with the results from secondorder elastic analysis when used for semirigid
frames. If the designer does not use secondorder elastic analysis to obtain the required
member strength, the result from this study suggests that the AISI sidesway moment
magnification factor Eq. (5.4) should be used to account for the sidesway secondorder
effects.
5.5
The behavior of industrial storage racks depends on how the three components:
column bases, beam to column connections, and members perform interactively with
each other. These components and the slender nature of the structure are sources of
nonlinearity, thus the frame behavior can become very complex. Different levels of
structural analysis were carried out to investigate four fundamental modeling
assumptions: model geometry, material property, column base, and beam to column
connection. Five different analysis levels as summarized in Table 5.1, all of which are
secondorder analyses, were performed on the pallet rack shown in Fig. 5.4 to
investigate the different nonlinear responses. Definitions of the four fundamental
modeling assumptions are as follows:
139
Model
geometry
3D
3D
3D
3D
2D
Material
property
Inelastic
Inelastic
Inelastic
Elastic
Elastic
Column
base
Inelastic
Inelastic
Elastic
Elastic
Elastic
Beam to column
connection
Inelastic
Elastic
Elastic
Elastic
Elastic
20
E
15
D
C
B
10
Pu
c Pn
Mu
b M n
=1
monitor connections
monitor column bases
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
140
Model geometry: The 3D frame refers to modeling the entire pallet rack as a
space frame and opensection beam elements are used to model the columns and
braces, while 2D frame refers to modeling the pallet rack as a plane frame with only
inplane beam elements.
Material property: The inelastic material model refers to having all
components modeled as elasticplastic material with strain hardening. Fy = 55 ksi,
Fu = 70 ksi, E = 29500 ksi, Est = E 45, = 0.3, and est is 15 times the maximum
elastic strain.
Column base: The elastic column base refers to using torsional springs to
model the base fixity where its stiffness is determined from the proposed base fixity
equation given in Chapter 2. The behavior of the column base is generally elastic as
long as the base plate remains in full contact with the floor. Once the column bases
moment to axial load ratio reaches its upper bound limit, which is when the base plate
starts to overturn, the base fixity will decrease dramatically. The inelastic column base
in this study refers to modeling the column base with a double axial spring model as
shown in Fig. 5.15b. This model not only has the same stiffness as the elastic case but
will also capture the upper bound limit of base fixity behavior. Further detail on how
the double axial spring model was developed is given in Appendix A.
Beam to column connection: The inelastic beam to column connection
means considering the connection to be semirigid setting the moment and
rotation relationship as elasticplastic. In this study the connection stiffness
K = 270 kipsin./rad and ultimate connection moment capacity M = 6 kipsin. was
assumed.
Results for the different levels of analysis are given in Fig. 5.14. Analysis type
A is considered to best represent the actual frames behavior. As the levels of analysis
decrease, higher load carrying capacity of the frame is obtained. This result is as
141
ks
ks
(a)
(b)
1 2
P
2
P
2
1 + 2
+F
( c)
(d)
(e)
Figure 5.15 Base fixity model (a) Torsional spring (b)(e) Double axial spring
142
expected; therefore, when simple analytical models such as analysis type E are used
for design special considerations are necessary to account for the effects that the
analysis is incapable of simulating; for example, calculating the column torsionalflexural buckling load, using the beamcolumn interaction equation, and monitoring
moments at the beam to column connections and column bases.
5.6
EFFECTIVE
LENGTH
APPROACH
AND
NOTIONAL
LOAD
The effective length approach and the notional load approach are used in many
specifications and standards for steel frame design. The differences between these two
approaches are the way in which the physical nature of the column and frame
imperfections are accounted for in the design. For more background information on
the philosophy behind these two design approaches, the reader is referred to
ASCE (1997). The objective of this study was to compare the effective length
approach and the notional load approach for accuracy and appropriateness for coldformed steel frame and beamcolumn design. The storage rack industry currently uses
the effective length approach. Design procedures of these two approaches are as
follows:
143
Pu = c Pn
(5.5)
This approach relies significantly on the prediction of the critical buckling load of the
member. The critical buckling load is usually determined by using the AISI torsionalflexural buckling provisions, or could be more accurately obtained by performing an
elastic buckling analysis. Both procedures were investigated.
Approach 1a  the elastic buckling load was computed by using the AISI
element elastic buckling analysis. This yielded a more accurate design than Approach
1a because as has been illustrated in Charter 4, the torsionalflexural elastic buckling
load obtained from using the AISI buckling provisions can sometimes be quite
conservative compared to the more accurate value obtained from performing the
elastic buckling analysis.
(5.6)
Moment magnification factors are not included in the above interaction equation
because the secondorder elastic analysis is used to obtain Pu and M u . Moment
144
buckling analysis.
145
(5.7)
W
W
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.16 (a) Effective length approach (b) Notional load Approach
146
where Pn ( L ) is the axial strength computed based on the values of K x and K y both
assumed equal to one, and K t assumed equal to 0.8. The AISI torsionalflexural
buckling provisions are used to compute the elastic buckling load. Moment
magnification terms are not included in the above interaction equation because the
secondorder elastic analysis is used to obtain Pu and M u . Moment magnification
factors are needed if the firstorder analysis is used. Secondorder elastic analysis is
conducted on a geometrically perfect frame subject to notional horizontal load Wstory
at each story, where Wstory is the gravity load at that story, and is the notional load
parameter. A simple plane frame (2D) model as shown in Fig. 5.16b could be used for
the secondorder elastic analysis but semirigid connections must be considered.
Performing the secondorder elastic analysis on a frame with initial outof plumbness
as shown Fig. 5.16a or on a geometrically perfect frame subject to notional horizontal
loads as shown Fig. 5.16b is the same if is equal to because they are statically
equivalent. Therefore, the only difference between the effective length approach and
the notional load approach is the value of the column axial strength used in the
interaction equation because it is a function of K x . The column flexural strength M n
is not the function of K x when the column is bending in the direction perpendicular to
the upright frames.
The notional load approach relies significantly on the selection of the notional
horizontal load and the flexural stiffness of the analysis model. Three procedures for
selecting the notional horizontal load and the flexural stiffness of the analysis model
were investigated.
Approach 2a  the notional load parameter was assumed equal to the frame
initial outofplumbness. The RMI specification recommends that the frame initial outofplumbness should not be more than 0.5 inches in 10 feet, therefore in this approach
147
(5.8)
Approach 2c  the notional load parameter was assumed equal to 1 240 and
the secondorder elastic analysis was performed on a reduced flexural stiffness model.
A 10% reduction in the flexural stiffness was proposed. This was done by using a
reduce flexural stiffness EI * for all members and connections in the analysis model
EI * = 0.9 EI
(5.9)
where E is the modulus of elasticity, and I is the moment of inertia about the axis of
bending. When the moment magnification factors are used to approximate the
relationship between M u and Pu from firstorder analysis, and the firstorder analysis
is based on a reduced flexural stiffness model, Eq. (5.7) becomes
Pu
Cmx M u
+
1
Pex ( L )
Pu
1
Mn
Pex *
(5.10)
where Pex * is the elastic flexural buckling load based on EI *, thus Pex * = 0.9 Pex
5.6.1
A parametric study was carried out to compare the effective length approach
and the notional load approach for accuracy and appropriateness for beamcolumn
design. An isolated rotationally restrained sway column as shown in Fig. 5.17a was
used as the vehicle for carrying out the parametric study. The parameters included:
nine column sections as shown in Fig. 5.18, three material yield stresses (33, 55, and
70 ksi), and twenty different rotational endrestraints as given in Table 5.2.
Combinations of these parameters yielded a total of 540 beamcolumn configurations.
148
L
240
y = sin
L = 60 in.
y=
x
L
1000
(b)
( c)
P
(a)
3CS3x060
3CS3x080
3CS3x100
C1
C2
C3
C5
3x3x060
3x3x080
3x3x100
C7
C8
C9
149
C6
GA
GB
Kx
60
20
6
0.6
0
60
20
6
0.6
0
20
6
0.6
0
6
0.6
0
0.6
0
0
60
60
60
60
60
20
20
20
20
6
6
6
0.6
0.6
0
10.095
6.018
3.650
2.198
2
7.080
5.106
3.379
2.108
1.924
4.155
3.009
1.965
1.804
2.404
1.675
1.548
1.196
1.097
1
Table 5.3 Statistics for the Correlation of Design Procedures with the FEM Results
Section
All sections
Statistics
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.776
0.933
0.541
0.081
10.4
0.800
0.911
0.588
0.062
7.7
0.957
1.074
0.711
0.074
7.7
0.844
1.074
0.541
0.108
12.8
PFEM
0.960
1.082
0.744
0.066
6.9
0.964
1.107
0.725
0.083
8.6
0.957
1.074
0.711
0.074
7.7
0.960
1.107
0.711
0.074
7.8
PFEM
0.715
0.872
0.521
0.073
10.2
0.717
0.844
0.556
0.056
7.8
0.796
0.888
0.620
0.037
4.6
0.743
0.888
0.521
0.068
9.2
PFEM
0.850
0.956
0.629
0.066
7.7
0.826
0.925
0.579
0.071
8.6
0.796
0.888
0.620
0.037
4.6
0.824
0.956
0.579
0.064
7.7
PFEM
0.927
0.999
0.808
0.052
5.6
0.916
1.000
0.796
0.060
6.6
0.959
1.000
0.820
0.051
5.3
0.934
1.000
0.796
0.057
6.1
PFEM
0.934
0.999
0.808
0.044
4.7
0.926
1.000
0.816
0.049
5.3
0.979
1.010
0.871
0.022
2.3
0.946
1.010
0.808
0.046
4.9
PFEM
0.885
0.954
0.762
0.036
4.1
0.871
0.971
0.734
0.046
5.3
0.894
0.941
0.793
0.030
3.4
0.883
0.971
0.734
0.039
4.4
150
The finite element method, which considers both geometric and material
nonlinearities, was used as the basis for evaluating the accuracy of the design
approaches. The finite element modeling assumptions included using a threedimensional model, using opensection beam elements to model the opensection
columns, using linear torsional springs to model the rotational endrestraints for
bending about the major axis, using pinended supports for bending about the minor
axis and for twisting, using a combination of the outofstraightness and the outofplumbness as shown in Figs. 5.17b and 5.17c for the member initial geometric
imperfection, and using an elasticplastic material model.
The correlations between the different design approaches and the finite
element results are summarized in Appendix E Table E.1 where P1a , P1b , P1c , P1d ,
P2 a , P2b , and P2c are the axial load carrying capacity of the member obtained by using
the Approaches 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 2a, 2b, and 2c, respectively. PFEM is the axial load
carrying capacity of the member obtained by using the finite element method.
In practice, the resistance factor c is equal to 0.85, and b is equal to 0.90 or 0.95;
these values are, however, for research purposes in this study all assumed equal to one.
In practice, the value of K t for column torsional buckling is assumed equal to 0.8 if
braces constrain the column from twisting. This value was, however in this study
assumed equal to one, because the column was simply supported for twisting.
The statistical summary of Table E.1 is given in Table 5.3. Design examples for the
difference approaches are given in the Appendix F.
The results, which are given in Appendix E Table E.1, are also plotted in
Figs. 5.19 through 5.25 where the finite element analysis was used as the basis for
evaluating the accuracy of the different design approaches. As can be seen in these
figures, Approaches 1c, 1d, 2a, 2b, and 2c are conservative compared to the finite
element results while the Approaches 1a and 1b have a few unconservative designs.
151
1.2
Section C1, C2, and C3
1.1
1
0.9
P1a
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.19 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1a) and
the FEM results
1.2
Section C1, C2, and C3
1.1
1
0.9
P1b
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.20 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1b) and
the FEM results
152
1.2
Section C1, C2, and C3
1.1
1
0.9
P1c
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.21 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1c) and
the FEM results
1.2
1.1
P1d
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.22 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1d) and
the FEM results
153
1.2
Section C1, C2, and C3
1.1
1
0.9
P2 a
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.23 Correlation between the Notional Load Approach (Approach 2a) and the
FEM results
1.2
Section C1, C2, and C3
1.1
1
0.9
P2b
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.24 Correlation between the Notional Load Approach (Approach 2b) and the
FEM results
154
1.2
Section C1, C2, and C3
1.1
1
0.9
P2c
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
9 10
Kx
Figure 5.25 Correlation between the Notional Load Approach (Approach 2c) and the
FEM results
155
156
5.6.2
Interaction Equation
The difference between the effective length approach and the notional load
approach is the value of the column axial strength used in the interaction equation
because it is a function of K x . The column flexural strength M n is not the function of
K x . To explain how the interaction equation works differently for these two design
approaches one can classify the failure modes for beamcolumns into three categories
as follows:
157
The first category is failure by material yielding. The design of stocky columns
having this failure mode are independent of the members elastic buckling load.
The interaction equation used for this design can be simplified as follows:
Pu M u
+
1
Py M n
(5.11)
where Py is the axial strength at yield stress. The value of Py is independent of the
elastic buckling load; therefore, the same design load is obtained using the effective
length approach or the notional load approach.
The second category is failure by elastic buckling. The load carrying capacity
of slender columns having this failure mode is very close to its elastic buckling load.
The interaction equation used for this design can be simplified as follows:
Pu M u
+
1
Pe M n
(5.12)
where Pe is the elastic buckling load. For the case when flexural buckling is the
critical buckling mode, and the moment magnification factor is used instead of
performing the secondorder analysis, further simplification can be made as follows:
Pu
Cmx M u
+
1
Pex
Pu
1
Mn
Pex
(5.13)
where Pex is the elastic flexural buckling load and Cmx is a constant coefficient.
The above interaction equation is for designing beamcolumns according to the
effective length approach. For designing beamcolumns according to the notional load
approach the following equation is used instead:
Pu
Cmx M u
+
1
Pex ( L )
Pu
1
Mn
Pex
158
(5.14)
where Pex ( L ) is the elastic flexural buckling load computed based on K x being equal to
one. As can be readily seen from Eqs. (5.13) and (5.14), the design load Pu obtained
from either of these equations will never exceed Pex because of the moment
magnification factor term. The notional load approach will, however, allow a higher
design load than the effective length approach because the value of Pex ( L ) is higher
than Pex ; that is, Pu obtained from the notional load approach will be closer to the
estimated value Pex making it more accurate than the effective length approach. This
remark also holds true when member failure is by torsionalflexural buckling as can be
seen by comparing the results of Figs. 5.21 and 5.23 for the high K x value cases.
The third category is failure by inelastic buckling. By comparing Eq. (5.6) and
Eq (5.7), which are the interaction equations used to design beamcolumns for this
failure mode according to the effective length approach and the notional load
approach, respectively; it can be seen that the notional load approach will allow a
higher design load than the effective length approach because the value of Pn ( L ) is
higher than Pn . The discrepancy between these two approaches is small when the
value of K x is close to one, but as the value of K x increases, that is the failure mode
changes toward failure by elastic buckling, the differences become apparent as can be
seen by comparing the results of Figs. 5.21 and 5.23.
A beamcolumn designed according to the notional load approach can
sometimes have higher design strength than a concentrically loaded compression
member designed according to the effective length approach. That is Pu obtained by
using the notional approach can sometimes be higher than Pn . Even though this seems
to be unacceptable according to the current design procedure, the finite element result
from this study does support this. In the effective length approach, columns and beamcolumns subject to torsionalflexural buckling are designed based on a column curve
for an equivalent pinended effective length member. This process of simplification
159
used to design members with boundary conditions other than pinended supports such
as a rotationally restrained sway column has been shown to be conservative compared
to the results obtained from performing a finite element analysis.
5.6.3
A parametric study was carried out to compare the effective length approach
and the notional load approach for accuracy and appropriateness for coldformed steel
frame design. Pallet racks as shown in Fig. 5.27 were used as the vehicle for carrying
out the parametric study. The parameters included: two load cases as shown in
Fig. 5.26, three frame dimensions as shown in Fig. 5.27, two upright frame
configurations as shown in Fig. 5.28, nine column sections as shown in Fig. 5.18,
three material yield stresses (33, 55, and 70 ksi), six beam to column connection
stiffnesses as given Table 5.4, and braces and shelf beams as shown in Fig. 5.29.
Combinations of these parameters yielded a total of 972 pallet rack configurations for
each load case. The first loading condition is the gravity load case on a frame with
initial outof plumbness of 0.5 inches in 10 feet, the second loading condition is the
seismic load case on a frame with initial outof plumbness of 0.5 inches in 10 feet,
where the seismic base shear was assumed to be 12% of total gravity load on the
frame.
The finite element method, which considers both geometric and material
nonlinearities, was used as the basis for evaluating the accuracy of the design
approaches. The finite element analysis modeling assumptions included using a threedimensional model, using opensection beam elements to model the columns and
braces, using linear torsional springs to model the connection stiffness, using the
160
= 0.00417
= 0.00417
0.06WFrame
0.04WFrame
0.02WFrame
0.12WFrame
Load case 1
Load case 2
60"
60"
60"
60"
60"
60"
96"
96"
96"
96"
96"
A2
60"
60"
60"
60"
60"
60"
A1
96"
96"
96"
96"
96"
96"
96"
A3
Figure 5.27 Frame dimensions in study
161
96"
96"
12"
52"
4"4"
42"
B1
B2
6"
Connection
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
t = 0.126"
2.25CU1x064
2.5"
Braces
Shelf beams
162
proposed base fixity equation given Chapter 2 to compute the base fixity, and using
elasticplastic material model.
The correlations between the different design approaches and the finite
element results are summarized in Appendix E Tables E.2 and E.3 with a statistical
summary of these tables given in Tables 5.5 and 5.6 where W1a , W1c , W2 a , W2b , and
W2c are the ultimate load carrying capacity per bay of the frame obtained by using the
Approaches 1a, 1c, 2a, 2b, and 2c, respectively. WFEM is the ultimate load carrying
capacity per bay of the frame obtained by using the finite element method. In practice,
the resistance factor c is equal to 0.85, and b is equal to 0.90 or 0.95; these values
are, however, for research purposes in this study all assumed equal to one.
The results for load case 1, which are given in Appendix E Table E.2, are also
plotted in Figs. 5.30 through 5.34 where the finite element analysis was used as the
basis for evaluating the accuracy of the different design approaches. As can be seen in
these figures, Approaches 1c, 2a, 2b, and 2c are conservative compared to the finite
element results while Approach 1a has a few unconservative designs. The reason why
these few results in Approach 1a are unconservative compared to the finite element
results is because the secondorder effects arising from the frame storyoutplumbness
was considered in the design process.
Comparison between Approach 1c and 2a for load case 1 indicates that 2a
agrees better with the finite element results than 1c does. The design load obtained
from the notional load approach is higher than the effective length approach because
of the assumption of K x equal to one. This is the reason why as the value of K x
increases the discrepancy between the design loads obtained from the effective length
approach and the notional load approach also increases.
163
Table 5.5 Load Case 1  Statistics for the Correlation of Design Procedures with the
FEM Results
Section
All sections
Statistics
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
164
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.763
0.913
0.587
0.065
8.5
0.768
0.928
0.574
0.066
8.6
0.933
1.014
0.805
0.041
4.4
0.821
1.014
0.574
0.098
12.0
WFEM
0.666
0.760
0.541
0.043
6.5
0.663
0.755
0.522
0.044
6.7
0.757
0.790
0.673
0.026
3.4
0.696
0.790
0.522
0.058
8.4
WFEM
0.873
0.999
0.633
0.086
9.9
0.834
0.993
0.589
0.094
11.3
0.936
1.000
0.772
0.054
5.7
0.881
1.000
0.589
0.090
10.3
WFEM
0.875
0.999
0.656
0.084
9.5
0.843
0.993
0.626
0.085
10.1
0.939
1.000
0.785
0.050
5.4
0.886
1.000
0.626
0.085
9.5
WFEM
0.827
0.904
0.628
0.061
7.4
0.796
0.900
0.584
0.070
8.8
0.873
0.904
0.762
0.032
3.6
0.832
0.904
0.584
0.065
7.8
Table 5.6 Load Case 2  Statistics for the Correlation of Design Procedures with the
FEM Results
Section
All sections
Statistics
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
Mean
Max
Min
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation, %
165
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
WFEM
0.759
0.879
0.595
0.054
7.2
0.694
0.835
0.560
0.058
8.4
0.727
0.879
0.573
0.078
10.7
0.726
0.879
0.560
0.070
9.6
WFEM
0.759
0.879
0.600
0.054
7.1
0.695
0.835
0.566
0.057
8.2
0.727
0.879
0.575
0.078
10.7
0.727
0.879
0.566
0.069
9.5
WFEM
0.746
0.848
0.591
0.050
6.7
0.684
0.808
0.557
0.054
8.0
0.714
0.847
0.569
0.073
10.2
0.715
0.848
0.557
0.065
9.1
0.682
0.754
0.581
0.029
4.2
0.638
0.722
0.549
0.034
5.4
0.655
0.732
0.555
0.045
6.8
0.658
0.754
0.549
0.041
6.2
1.1
1
0.9
W1a
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.30 Load Case 1  Correlation between the Effective Length Approach
(Approach 1a) and the FEM results
1.1
1
0.9
W1c
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.31 Load Case 1  Correlation between the Effective Length Approach
(Approach 1c) and the FEM results
166
1.1
1
0.9
W2 a
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.32 Load Case 1  Correlation between the Notional Load Approach
(Approach 2a) and the FEM results
1.1
1
0.9
W2b
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
Section C4, C5, and C6
0.6
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.33 Load Case 1  Correlation between the Notional Load Approach
(Approach 2b) and the FEM results
167
1.1
1
0.9
W2 c
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.34 Load Case 1  Correlation between the Notional Load Approach
(Approach 2c) and the FEM results
168
Comparisons among the three notional load approaches: 2a, 2b, and 2c for load
case 1 indicate few differences between 2a and 2b, and 2c is more conservative than
2a and 2b.
The results for load case 2, which are given in Appendix E Table E.3, are also
plotted in Figs. 5.35 through 5.38 where the finite element analysis was used as the
basis for evaluating the accuracy of the different design approaches. As can be seen in
these figures, both the effective length approach and the notional load approach are
conservative compared to the finite element results. The differences between the
design loads obtained from the effective length approach and the notional load
approach in this load case has decreased from the previous load case. The reason for
this is because the horizontal force in this load case causes the storage rack to fail from
the column flexural strength rather than axial strength. The column flexural strength
used in both the effective length approach and the notional load approach is the same.
Comparisons between Approach 2a and 2b for load case 2 indicate few
differences between these two approaches. Comparisons among the three notional load
approaches: 2a, 2b, and 2c, indicates that 2c is slightly more conservative than 2a and
2b because flexural stiffness reduction is made to analysis model in Approach 2c.
When the notional load approach is used for an earthquake load design or
wind load design, applying additional notional horizontal loads are usually not
necessary if the real horizontal forces coming from the earthquake loads or the wind
loads are much greater, making the additive notional horizontal loads insignificant.
However, if the magnitude of the real horizontal forces coming from the earthquake
loads or the wind loads are comparable with the required notional horizontal loads
then that notional horizontal loads must be applied as additive loads. It is
recommended that the notional horizontal loads always be applied for earthquake load
design or wind load design because it is more conservative with them.
169
1.1
1
0.9
W1c
0.8
WFEM
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 3.35 Load Case 2  Correlation between the Effective Length (Approach 1c)
and the FEM results
1.1
1
0.9
W2 a
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.36 Load Case 2  Correlation between the Notional Load Approach
(Approach 2a) and the FEM results
170
1.1
1
0.9
W2b
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.37 Load Case 2  Correlation between the Notional Load Approach
(Approach 2b) and the FEM results
1.1
1
0.9
W2 c
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
0.6
0.5
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.38 Load Case 2  Correlation between the Notional Load Approach
(Approach 2c) and the FEM results
171
5.6.4
Development of Approach 2b
(5.15)
When Eq. (5.15) is used the previous result, which was shown in Fig. 5.32, improves
to become as shown in Fig. 5.33. As can be seen in these figures, improvements are
made when this proposed equation is used.
172
0.005
Eq. (5.8)
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.39 Load Case 1  Frame outofplumb or the magnitude of the notional
horizontal load required for the notional load approach
173
Additional parametric studies were carried out using Approach 1a with the
value of K x assumed to be 1.7. The results of this parametric study carried out for the
isolated rotationally restrained sway column are given in Figs. 5.40 and 5.41.
The results of this parametric study carried out for the coldformed steel frames are
given in Figs. 5.42 and 5.43.
The RMI specification allows the use of K x equal to 1.7 as a default value.
This value was chosen to give a reasonable amount of protection against sidesway for
most common rack configurations. The results from this study suggested that this
approach is unconservative if the real value of K x is much higher than 1.7. However,
the results also suggested that this approach when used to design opensections is still
conservative if the real value of K x is just slightly higher than 1.7. The reason for this
is because of the conservatism in the AISI torsionalflexural buckling provisions.
5.7
174
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
P1a
PFEM 0.8
0.7
0.6
10
Kx
Figure 5.40 Correlation between the Effective Length Approach (Approach 1a with
K x = 1.7 ) and the FEM results
100
10
P1a
PFEM
1
Section C1, C2, and C3
Section C4, C5, and C6
Section C7, C8, and C9
0.1
1
10
Kx
Figure 5.41 Same plot as Figure 5.40 but with a different yaxis scale
175
1.1
1
0.9
W1a
0.8
WFEM
0.7
Section C1, C2, and C3
Section C4, C5, and C6
0.6
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.42 Load Case 1  Correlation between the Effective Length Approach
(Approach 1a with K x = 1.7 ) and the FEM results
5
Section C1, C2, and C3
Section C4, C5, and C6
W1a
WFEM
0
1
1.5
2.5
3.5
Kx
Figure 5.43 Same plot as Figure 5.42 but with a different yaxis scale
176
Figure 5.44 Combined shell and beam finite element frame model
177
178
5.7.1
Beam Model
179
of the buckling mode occurred at the top end of the columns as shown in Fig. 5.46.
This buckling mode shape with a plumbness of 0.5 inches in 10 feet was then used as
the initial geometric imperfection shape for the nonlinear analysis of this load case.
No plumbness was considered for the case of the combination of gravity and
horizontal loads.
Nonlinear finite element analyses were then performed and the results were
compared with the physical tests as given in Figs. 5.48 and 5.49. When physical tests
were conducted, deflection was measured at several different points. The lateral
deflection of the frame measured at the bottom beam level along with its
corresponding gravity load carried by the frame was used here to compare the results
with the finite element approach. The finite element results designated as Model I is
for the case of the base fixity modeled as the torsional spring, and Model II is for the
case of the base fixity modeled as the double axial spring. However, they were not
distinguished in the case of gravity loads because the same results were obtained.
5.7.2
Shell Model
When the results in the previous study were compared to the physical tests, it
was found that two cases overestimated the load carrying capacity of the rack: one is
the gravity loads and the other is the combination of gravity and horizontal loads in
Model I. The results might have been due to the fact that beam elements did not
accurately capture the local behavior. If this was the source of the overestimation then
shell elements should be used instead. However, modeling and computation effort can
become very time consuming if the entire frame is modeled by shell elements.
A combined shell and beam model was instead considered in this study to investigate
whether section collapses had occurred.
180
Figure 5.47 Finite element shell model II Gravity + Horizontal Load Case: von
Mises stress at ultimate load (5x displacement)
181
80
70
FEM Beam Model
60
50
40
Test Results
30
20
10
0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
70
60
Test Results
50
40
30
FEM Beam Model II
20
10
0
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
182
The bottom length of the middle column is normally the critical member in the
assessment of the load carrying capacity of the pallet rack. The middle columns and
their braces up to the second story beam level were; therefore, selected to be modeled
by shell elements as shown in Figs. 5.44 and 5.45. It is also important that some initial
local geometric imperfection is introduced in to these shell columns. Here this
imperfection was introduced by superimposing the eigenmodes for the local and
distortional buckling, with an imperfection magnitude of one tenth of the thickness for
both modes. The boundary condition for the buckling analysis was a concentrically
loaded compression column with full lateral supports to avoid overall buckling.
Ends of the beam at the bottom level connecting the shell columns were also modeled
as shell elements. Rigid plates were used for interconnections between the shell and
beam elements. Modeling details of the shell element beam to column connection are
the same as the finite simulation of the cantilever test in Charter 3. Other finite
element assumptions and procedures are the same as the previous beam model.
The nonlinear analysis of the shell models was compared with the previous results in
Figs. 5.48 and 5.49. Fig. 5.47 shows the displacement shape at the failure load for the
case of the combined gravity and horizontal loads.
The new results of the two cases, the gravity loads and the combination of
gravity and horizontal loads Model I, were still higher than the test results.
This indicates that the local behavior in the columns was not critical in the assessment
of the load carrying capacity of the rack. Although the results were not as anticipated,
they were found to be in agreement with the frames behavior in the actual test.
For the case of gravity loads in the physical test, the failure did not take place
in the columns as assumed but instead took place in the beams by yielding and local
buckling. Shell elements should have been used for modeling the shelf beams.
However, further finite element analysis was not needed because the load carrying
183
capacity of the tested frame was consistent with the load carrying capacity of the
tested simply supported shelf beam. This comparison could be made because although
the beam to column connections was semirigid they were rather flexible. Therefore
the results of the simply supported shelf beam could be used to approximate the frame
capacity.
For the case of the combination of gravity and horizontal loads in the physical
test, failure was due to sidesway collapse where most of the lag bolts were broken off
due to the excessive rotation of the columns at the bases. This result falls in line
between the finite element Model I and Model II as seen in Fig. 5.49. For finite
element Model II failure took place by exceeding the upper bound limit of the base
fixity, which means that the actual upper bound limit of the base fixity was slightly
higher than assumed. Additional resistance from the base fixity could be due to the
presence of the lag bolts.
5.8
CONCLUSIONS
Numerous frame elastic buckling analyses were carried out to evaluate the
alignment chart and the AISI torsionalflexural buckling provisions. It was found that
the alignment chart is inaccurate when used for semirigid frames, and the differences
between the base fixity and the connection flexibility is high, the results are
unconservative when used for the bottom story column and too conservative when
used for the second story column. Results showed that the elastic buckling load
obtained from the AISI torsionalflexural buckling provisions is generally
conservative compared the results obtained from performing frame elastic buckling
analysis.
184
A study comparing the effective length approach and the notional load
approach for coldformed steel frame and beamcolumn design was also carried out.
The finite element method, which considers both geometric and material
nonlinearities, was used as the basis for evaluating the accuracy of these two design
approaches. Results showed that, the effective length approach is more conservative
than the notional load approach, and that the notional load approach agrees with the
finite element results better than the effective length approach does. It is therefore
recommended that the notional load approach, in particularly Approach 2c,
be considered as an alternative means for coldformed steel frame and beamcolumn
design. In Approach 2c the notional load parameter is assumed equal to 1 240 and
the secondorder elastic analysis is performed on a reduced flexural stiffness model.
A 10% reduction in the flexural stiffness is proposed.
185
Chapter
The objective of this research was to make improvements in the RMI (1997)
Specification and the AISI (1996) Specification. The results have indicated that
improvements in these current design procedures are possible. The following
summarizes the results and conclusions. The symbol * indicates recommendations for
changes in the specifications.
* 1. It was found that the current RMI base fixity equation underestimates the
stiffness of the column base. Several analytical models of the column base were
studied. The base fixity was found by solving a normal load on the boundary of the
halfspace problem. With this approach a parametric study was carried out for a wide
range of column base configurations to develop a new base fixity equation. Unless
actual tests are conducted to obtain the base fixity, the proposed base fixity equation,
Eq. (2.12), along with its upper bound limit of the usage of this equation, Eq. (2.17), is
recommended. Finite element studies were used to verify this proposed equation.
The proposed equation agrees well with the finite element results.
equation of the RMI specification, Eq. (4.1), should be modified to the proposed
equation, Eq. (4.5). The effective section modulus equation of the RMI specification,
Eq. (4.7), should be modified to the proposed equation, Eq. (4.8).
7. Unperforated and perforated member strength capacity, under different
loading conditions and for various member lengths, was computed using the finite
element method and compared to those values using the RMI specification, which uses
Eqs. (4.1) and (4.7), and the proposed design approach, which uses Eqs. (4.5)
and (4.8). It was found that the compressive axial strength and the beamcolumns
strength designed according to the proposed design approach agrees better to the finite
element results than the current design procedure does. Flexural strength design
according to either design approach is quite conservative compared to the finite
element results, if distortional buckling failure mode does not take place.
8. Finite element simulation of stubcolumn tests under bending moments
were carried out to evaluate the current RMI procedures for determining the member
flexural strength. It was found that current procedures for calculating the nominal
flexural strength on the basis of initiation of yielding M n for members not subject to
lateral buckling is conservative, especially for weak axis bending. Equations for
determining the nominal flexural strength on the basis of inelastic reserve capacity
M p are given in this study and have been shown to agree better with the finite
element results than M n does.
9. Equations for determining the maximum bending moments in elastic beamcolumns for the case where it is simply supported with equal end eccentricities and
failure is by torsionalflexural buckling are given. Determining the maximum
moments for this boundary condition using the current moment magnification factor
suggested by the AISI specification has been shown to give unconservative results if
the member failure is by torsionalflexural.
10. Numerous frame elastic buckling analyses were carried out to evaluate the
alignment chart. It was found that the alignment chart is inaccurate when used for
semirigid frames, and the differences between the base fixity and the connection
flexibility is high. The results are unconservative when used for the bottom story
column and too conservative when used for the second story column.
* 11. A study comparing the effective length approach and the notional load
approach for coldformed steel frame and beamcolumn design was also carried out.
The finite element method, which considers both geometric and material
nonlinearities, was used as the basis for evaluating the accuracy of these two design
approaches. Results show that, the effective length approach is more conservative than
the notional load approach, and that the notional load approach agrees better with the
finite element results than the effective length approach does. It is therefore
recommended that the notional load approach, in particularly Approach 2c, be
considered as an alternative means for coldformed steel frame and beamcolumn
design. The following is the recommended notional load approach design procedure:
Storage rack columns are considered to be subject to a combined compressive
axial load and bending. The axial compression strength Pu and flexural strength M u
of the column is determined according to following interaction equation:
Pu
Mu
+
1
c Pn ( L ) b M n
(6.1)
where Pn ( L ) is the axial strength computed based on the values of K x and K y both
assumed equal to one, and K t assumed equal to 0.8. The relationship between Pu and
M u is obtained by performing a secondorder elastic analysis, or alternatively
approximated by performing a firstorder elastic analysis and using moment
magnification factors. The analysis is conducted on a geometrically perfect frame
subject to notional horizontal load Wstory at each story, where Wstory is the gravity
load at that story, and is the notional load parameter equal to 1 240 . The notional
horizontal load is determined from factored design loads, and is applied as an additive
force to the real horizontal forces coming from the seismic load or wind load, to cause
maximum frame instability. A 10% reduced flexural stiffness analysis model is used.
This can be done by using a reduced flexural stiffness EI * for all members and
connections in the analysis model
EI * = 0.9 EI
(6.2)
where E is the modulus of elasticity, and I is the moment of inertia about the axis of
bending.
Appendix
Column Bases
22 = ku2
the resisting moment could be found by integrating over the area of the base plate
M = x1 22 dA
A
M = kb
d 2
d 2
x1 dx1 =
kbd 3
12
kbd 3
12
k=
E
d
where E is the modulus of elasticity of the floor. For this case and all following
models the floor is assumed to be concrete, E = Ec . The base fixity is found to be the
same as in Eq. (2.1).
22 =
Mx1
I
22 =
Mx1
EI
From Fig. 2.3 the radius of curvature and the strain are related as follows:
= 22
x1
From these last two equations the base fixity can found as
EI
where
I=
bd 3
12
If the depth of the concrete block under the base plate is assumed to be
=d
the base fixity is found to be the same as in Eq. (2.1).
22 = kx1
ij = 0
From Hookes law the strain field can be found as
ij =
(1 + )
E
ij
22 =
kk ij
kx1
E
11 = 33 =
kx1
E
12 = 13 = 23 = 0
By definition the displacement field is related to the stain field as
ij =
1
( ui, j + u j ,i )
2
k
2E
(( x ) + ( x
2
u2 =
x3
))
kx1 ( x2 )
u3 =
kx1 x3
E
Plot of the displacement field is shown in Fig. 2.4. The resisting moment could be
found by integrating over the area of the base plate
M = x1 22 dA
A
M = kb
d 2
d 2
x1 dx1 =
kbd 3
12
with the known vertical displacement, the rotation at the top of the concrete block
x2 = 0 is
u2 k
=
x1
E
From these last two equations the base fixity can found as
bd 3 E
=
12
Similar to Model 2 by setting the depth of the concrete block under the base plate as
=d
the base fixity is found to be the same as in Eq. (2.1).
The stress function for Fig. 2.5a where the load extends indefinitely to the left is given
in Timoshenko and Goodier (1969) as follows:
1 ( p, x1 , x2 ) =
p 2
2
1 x2
x1 x2
x1 + x2 tan
2
x1
where the stress field could be found by differentiating the stress function as
11 = 1,22
22 = 1,11
12 = 1,12
11 =
p 1 x2
xx
+ 21 2 2
tan
x1 x1 + x2
22 =
p 1 x2
xx
21 2 2
tan
x1 x1 + x2
12 =
px2
x12 + x2 2
From Hookes law and assuming the problem to be plane strain the, strain field could
be obtained. By integration of the strain field the displacement field is found as
u1 =
p (1 + )
2
2
1 x2
+ (1 ) x2 ln x1 + x2 + x2
(1 2 ) x1 tan
E
x1
u2 =
p (1 + )
2
2
1 x2
(1 ) x1 ln x1 + x2
(1 2 ) x2 tan
E
x1
Similar to the previous problem, the stress function for Fig. 2.5b where the linearly
increasing load extending indefinitely to the left is given in Timoshenko and Goodier
(1969) as follows:
2 ( p, x1 , x2 , d ) =
p 3
2
3
2
2
2
1 x2
+ x2 ln x1 + x2 x1 x2
x1 + 3 x1 x2 tan
6 d
x1
where the stress field could be found by differentiating the stress function as
11 = 1,22
22 = 1,11
12 = 1,12
11 =
p
5x
2
2
1 x2
+ x2 ln x1 + x2 + 2
x1 tan
x1
3
d
22 =
p
1 x2
x2
x1 tan
d
x1
12 =
px2
x
tan 1 2
d
x1
From Hookes law and assuming the problem to be plane strain the strain field could
be obtained. By integration of the strain field the displacement field is found as
2
2
p (1 + ) (1 2 ) x1 x2
x
2
2
2
u1 =
x2 tan 1 2 + (1 ) x1 x2 ln x1 + x2
dE
x1
2
(1 + 2 ) x1 x2
x1 x1 x2
p (1 + )
1 x2
u2 =
x
x
1
2
tan
) 12
(
dE
x1
2
+
(1 ) ( x12 x2 2 )
6
)) ln
(x
2
1
+ x2
2
x2
The stress function for the Fig. 2.5c problem may be found by superposition the stress
function for Fig. 2.5a and 2.5b as
= 1 ( q, x1 , x2 ) + 1 ( q, x1 + d , x2 ) + 2 ( 2q, x1 , x2 , d ) + 2 ( 2q, x1 + d , x2 , d )
the stress field could then be found by differentiating this new stress function or by
similar superposition of the stress field of Fig. 2.5a and 2.5b. Normal stress on the
boundary x2 = 0 between x1 = 0 and x1 = d is found to be
22 =
q ( 2 x1 + d )
d
which is a linear bending stress under the base plate. The resisting moment could be
found by integrating over the area of the base plate
10
M = x1 22 dA
A
M=
q 0
qd 2
2
+
=
x
d
x
dx
(
)
1
1
1
6
d d
Displacement field could either be found from Hookes law and assuming the problem
to be plane strain or by superposition of the resulting displacement field of Fig. 2.5a
and 2.5b. The vertical displacement, u2 ( x1 , x2 ) on the boundary x2 = 0 between
x1 = 0 and x1 = d is found and plotted in Fig. 2.6
x2 d
q (1 2 )
1
u2 ( x1 , 0 ) =
x1 ( x1 + d ) ln
2
x
d
+
+
(
)
1
( x + d )2 3
d E
1
q (1 2 ) d
3 E
the dashed line in Fig. 2.6 is used as an approximate rotation of the base plate
2u2 ( 0, 0 )
d
2q (1 2 )
3 E
Dividing the resisting moment with this last equation, the base fixity equation is
obtained
M
d 2 E
4 (1 2 )
11
A.5 THREEDIMENSIONAL
ELASTOSTATIC
PROBLEM:
NORMAL
The displacement field for the Boussinesq problem of concentrated normal force on
boundary of halfspace is as follows:
u =
P x3 x x (1 2 )
4 G r 3
r ( r + x3 )
P x3 2 (1 )
u3 =
+
4 G r 3
r
where
G=
E
2 (1 + )
and
r = x1 + x2 + x3
p ( , )
p ( , )
1
d
d
x
1
2
d
d
(
)
x3 x A
A r ( r + x3 )
4 G
r3
u3 =
p ( , )
p ( , )
1 2
d d + 2 (1 )
d d
x3 A
3
A
r
r
4 G
where
r=
( x1 ) + ( x2 )
2
12
+ x3
M
I
where
I=
bd 3
12
7.746 (1 + )
13
d 12.253
d
u2 , 0, =
64 4 G
2
12.253 (1 + )
The double axial spring model shown in Fig. 5.15b is used to model the base fixity in
the frame analysis. Unlike the simple torsional spring model shown in Fig. 5.15a the
double axial spring model can capture the upper bound limit of base fixities behavior.
The resistant moment M developed from the double axial spring model shown in
Fig. 5.15c is
M = k s 2
2 2
The axial spring stiffness k s can then be computed from these last two equations as
14
ks =
2M
2
Recall Eq. (2.16) the upper bound limit for the base fixity equation is given as
M S
=
P A
Let the resistant moment M and total reaction force P be from the double axial
spring model shown in Fig. 5.15c then this last equation becomes
k s 2 S
=
2 k s 1 A
The upper bound limit is reached when the left spring is completely unloaded
( 1 = 2 ) and all the force is transferred to the right spring as shown in Fig. 5.15d.
Imposing this condition the springs moment arm, can then computed from the last
equation as
=
15
2S
A
Appendix
Chart A1
0.1
0.09
d = 2b
0.08
d = 1.75b
0.07
d = 1.5b
0.06
d = 1.25b
0.05
d=b
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
4
10
bd, in.2
12
14
16
Chart A2
0.1
0.09
d = 2b
0.08
d = 1.75b
0.07
d = 1.5b
0.06
d = 1.25b
0.05
d=b
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
4
10
bd, in.2
12
14
16
Chart B1
0.1
0.09
d = 2b
0.08
d = 1.75b
0.07
d = 1.5b
0.06
d = 1.25b
0.05
d=b
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
4
10
bd, in.2
12
14
16
Chart B2
0.1
0.09
d = 2b
0.08
d = 1.75b
0.07
d = 1.5b
0.06
d = 1.25b
0.05
d=b
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
4
10
bd, in.2
12
14
16
Chart C1I
0.12
0.1
d = 2b
0.08
d = 1.5b
0.06
d=b
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
10
12
14
16
Chart C1II
0.1
0.09
d = 1.75b
0.08
0.07
d = 1.25b
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
4
10
bd, in.2
11
12
14
16
Chart C2I
0.14
0.12
d = 2b
0.1
d = 1.5b
0.08
d=b
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
12
12
14
16
Chart C2II
0.12
d = 1.75b
0.1
d = 1.25b
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
13
12
14
16
Chart D1I
0.12
d = 2b
0.1
d = 1.5b
0.08
d=b
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
14
12
14
16
Chart D1II
0.12
0.1
d = 1.75b
0.08
d = 1.25b
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
15
12
14
16
Chart D2I
0.16
0.14
d = 2b
0.12
0.1
d = 1.5b
0.08
d=b
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
16
12
14
16
Chart D2II
0.14
0.12
d = 1.75b
0.1
d = 1.25b
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4
10
bd, in.2
17
12
14
16
Appendix
ThinWalled Sections
COMPRESSION
MEMBERS
UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOAD
The elastic buckling loads can be computed by solving the following cubic equation:
3
c1 Pe + c2 Pe + c3 Pe + c4 = 0
The lowest positive elastic buckling load is the governing critical compression load.
Pe = min ( Pe1 , Pe 2 , Pe3 )
where
2
c1 = ax + a y ro
Pex =
Pey =
2 x
( K x Lx )
2 y
(K L )
y
Pet =
2 Cw
1
+
GJ
2
2
rob
( Kt Lt )
ax = xo ex
a y = yo ey
2
ro = rx + ry + xo + yo
ro2 = ro + x ey + y ex
2
x =
1
x
y(x
y =
1
y
x(x
+ y 2 ) dA 2 y
+ y 2 ) dA 2 x
and
Pe1 , Pe 2 and Pe3 = roots of the cubic equation.
E = Modulus of elasticity
G = Shear modulus
J = St. Venant torsion constant of cross section
1
( Pey + Pet )
2
(P
ey
Pe3 = Pex
a
= 1 y
ro
where
1
( Pex + Pet )
2
( Pex + Pet )
Pe3 = Pey
4 Pex Pet
a
= 1 x
ro
where
The elastic lateral buckling loads can be computed by solving the following equation:
M ey1,ey 2 =
( xc + y )
2 ( c Pey + 1 Pex )
1
( c + )
x
2
+ 4ro Pet ( c 2 Pey + 1 Pex )
The lowest positive lateral elastic buckling load is the governing critical load.
M ey = min ( M ey1 , M ey 2 )
where c = M ex M ey is the defined moment ratio.
C.3 ELASTIC
LATERAL
BUCKLING
OF
FLEXURAL
MEMBERS
The elastic lateral buckling loads can be computed by solving the following equation:
M ey1,ey 2 =
Pex
y y 2 + 4ro 2 ( Pet Pex )
2
The lowest positive lateral elastic buckling load is the governing critical load.
M ey = min ( M ey1 , M ey 2 )
C.4 ELASTIC
LATERAL
BUCKLING
OF
FLEXURAL
MEMBERS
2 (
Pey
The lowest positive lateral elastic buckling load is the governing critical load.
M ex = min ( M ex1 , M ex 2 )
Appendix
BeamColumns
Pekz and Celebi (1969) presented an approximate analysis approach for elastic beamcolumns with equal end eccentricities. For the simply supported case, the functions for
deflections were assumed to satisfy the geometric boundary conditions and have the
forms.
u=
v=
Pex
z
z ( z L ) + A0 sin
2 EI y
L
Pe y
2 EI x
z ( z L ) + B0 sin
= C0 sin
z
L
z
L
These deflection functions are then used in the elastic beamcolumn differential
equations where the unknown coefficients A0 , B0 , and C0 are solved by applying the
Galerkin method.
P2
A0 =
Pax ( Pex ax + Pey ey a y ) ex ( Pex P ) ( Pet P ) r02 + Pa y2
Pey
B0 =
P2
Pa y ( Pey a y + Pex ex ax ) ey ( Pey P ) ( Pet P ) r02 + Pax2
Pex
C0 =
P2
( Pey P ) ey ax ( Pex P ) ex a y
where
Pey P
Pa y
Pex P
Pax
2
Pax
r0 ( Pet P )
0
Pa y
and P is the applied eccentric load. Definitions of the other variables are given in the
Appendix C. Inserting the solved deformation functions in the basic beam equations
d 2v
M x = EI x 2
dz
M y = EI y
M t = GJ
d 2u
dz 2
d
d 3
ECw 3
dz
dz
The corresponding bending moments about principal axes and twisting moment in the
beamcolumns are obtained as follows:
M x = Pe y B0 Pex sin
z
L
z
L
GJ 3 ECw
z
M t = C0
+
cos
3
L
L
L
The maximum values of these moments are given in Eq. (4.13) to (4.15)
Appendix
Design Results
Boundary
Condition
Section
C1
G1
C2
C3
C1
G2
C2
C3
C1
G3
C2
C3
C1
G4
C2
C3
C1
G5
C2
C3
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.87
0.94
0.99
1.16
1.23
1.23
1.45
1.48
1.48
2.31
2.36
2.39
3.08
3.14
3.14
3.85
3.90
3.90
5.81
6.08
6.16
7.76
8.11
8.17
9.70
10.14
10.27
9.86
11.18
11.59
13.33
15.16
15.71
16.93
19.32
20.02
10.15
11.53
11.97
13.74
15.67
16.27
17.50
20.05
20.82
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.822
0.762
0.718
0.823
0.776
0.776
0.824
0.805
0.805
0.813
0.797
0.788
0.816
0.800
0.800
0.819
0.810
0.810
0.746
0.714
0.704
0.752
0.719
0.714
0.759
0.726
0.716
0.830
0.733
0.707
0.832
0.733
0.707
0.834
0.733
0.708
0.872
0.775
0.746
0.872
0.774
0.745
0.872
0.774
0.745
PFEM
0.851
0.789
0.744
0.851
0.803
0.803
0.851
0.832
0.832
0.898
0.880
0.870
0.898
0.881
0.880
0.898
0.888
0.888
0.963
0.921
0.909
0.963
0.921
0.914
0.962
0.921
0.909
1.082
1.023
0.987
1.080
1.024
0.988
1.078
1.026
0.990
1.073
1.023
0.985
1.071
1.025
0.987
1.068
1.028
0.989
PFEM
0.696
0.649
0.613
0.713
0.677
0.678
0.724
0.713
0.715
0.726
0.726
0.721
0.735
0.736
0.741
0.740
0.748
0.753
0.666
0.662
0.662
0.670
0.666
0.670
0.674
0.671
0.672
0.727
0.673
0.660
0.725
0.672
0.659
0.724
0.670
0.658
0.764
0.712
0.697
0.761
0.710
0.695
0.759
0.707
0.692
PFEM
0.713
0.666
0.629
0.731
0.694
0.696
0.739
0.728
0.730
0.775
0.776
0.772
0.782
0.784
0.790
0.786
0.796
0.802
0.792
0.798
0.803
0.791
0.799
0.808
0.791
0.799
0.804
0.889
0.884
0.874
0.884
0.881
0.871
0.878
0.876
0.868
0.901
0.900
0.887
0.895
0.898
0.885
0.889
0.895
0.883
PFEM
0.958
0.897
0.847
0.962
0.919
0.923
0.966
0.959
0.966
0.984
0.979
0.971
0.987
0.983
0.987
0.989
0.993
0.998
0.973
0.982
0.982
0.974
0.983
0.990
0.976
0.985
0.986
0.938
0.964
0.956
0.934
0.965
0.959
0.930
0.966
0.962
0.940
0.967
0.955
0.936
0.968
0.957
0.931
0.969
0.960
PFEM
0.958
0.897
0.847
0.962
0.919
0.923
0.966
0.959
0.966
0.984
0.979
0.971
0.987
0.983
0.987
0.989
0.993
0.998
0.973
0.982
0.982
0.974
0.983
0.990
0.976
0.985
0.986
0.938
0.964
0.956
0.934
0.965
0.959
0.930
0.966
0.962
0.940
0.967
0.955
0.936
0.968
0.957
0.931
0.969
0.960
PFEM
0.862
0.807
0.762
0.867
0.828
0.831
0.870
0.864
0.870
0.889
0.882
0.875
0.891
0.886
0.890
0.893
0.896
0.900
0.893
0.894
0.892
0.894
0.895
0.899
0.895
0.896
0.895
0.919
0.942
0.935
0.915
0.941
0.936
0.911
0.940
0.937
0.928
0.953
0.943
0.924
0.954
0.944
0.918
0.953
0.946
Boundary
Condition
Section
C1
G6
C2
C3
C1
G7
C2
C3
C1
G8
C2
C3
C1
G9
C2
C3
C1
G10
C2
C3
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.75
1.76
1.76
2.31
2.31
2.31
2.85
2.85
2.85
3.21
3.27
3.27
4.28
4.31
4.31
5.35
5.46
5.49
6.73
7.07
7.17
8.98
9.43
9.56
11.24
11.79
11.96
10.23
11.60
12.04
13.84
15.76
16.36
17.61
20.14
20.90
10.43
11.85
12.31
14.14
16.13
16.76
18.03
20.67
21.48
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.796
0.792
0.792
0.810
0.810
0.810
0.821
0.821
0.821
0.784
0.769
0.769
0.787
0.781
0.781
0.791
0.775
0.771
0.722
0.688
0.678
0.728
0.693
0.684
0.735
0.701
0.691
0.830
0.735
0.708
0.831
0.734
0.707
0.832
0.733
0.707
0.872
0.779
0.750
0.871
0.777
0.748
0.870
0.776
0.747
PFEM
0.856
0.851
0.851
0.868
0.868
0.868
0.877
0.877
0.877
0.899
0.882
0.882
0.899
0.891
0.891
0.899
0.881
0.875
0.969
0.923
0.911
0.969
0.923
0.910
0.969
0.923
0.910
1.069
1.023
0.986
1.066
1.024
0.987
1.064
1.026
0.989
1.061
1.021
0.984
1.058
1.024
0.986
1.055
1.026
0.988
PFEM
0.702
0.703
0.704
0.726
0.731
0.733
0.742
0.748
0.750
0.716
0.717
0.722
0.723
0.733
0.738
0.728
0.729
0.730
0.649
0.642
0.640
0.654
0.646
0.645
0.658
0.652
0.651
0.731
0.677
0.663
0.729
0.675
0.660
0.726
0.672
0.659
0.768
0.718
0.702
0.765
0.715
0.699
0.761
0.711
0.696
PFEM
0.733
0.733
0.735
0.757
0.763
0.765
0.775
0.781
0.783
0.787
0.791
0.797
0.792
0.805
0.812
0.796
0.801
0.803
0.796
0.800
0.804
0.795
0.800
0.804
0.794
0.799
0.804
0.890
0.891
0.880
0.884
0.888
0.877
0.877
0.883
0.873
0.900
0.905
0.891
0.894
0.903
0.889
0.887
0.900
0.887
PFEM
0.952
0.954
0.956
0.971
0.980
0.982
0.986
0.996
0.999
0.983
0.980
0.985
0.986
0.994
0.999
0.987
0.984
0.983
0.959
0.973
0.974
0.961
0.975
0.976
0.963
0.977
0.979
0.925
0.949
0.939
0.920
0.950
0.941
0.916
0.951
0.943
0.928
0.954
0.940
0.923
0.955
0.942
0.918
0.955
0.944
PFEM
0.952
0.954
0.956
0.971
0.980
0.982
0.986
0.996
0.999
0.983
0.980
0.985
0.986
0.994
0.999
0.987
0.984
0.983
0.959
0.973
0.974
0.961
0.975
0.976
0.963
0.977
0.979
0.925
0.949
0.939
0.920
0.950
0.941
0.916
0.951
0.943
0.928
0.954
0.940
0.923
0.955
0.942
0.918
0.955
0.944
PFEM
0.857
0.859
0.860
0.875
0.882
0.884
0.888
0.897
0.899
0.888
0.885
0.888
0.891
0.897
0.901
0.893
0.888
0.887
0.885
0.889
0.888
0.887
0.890
0.890
0.888
0.892
0.891
0.910
0.932
0.923
0.905
0.931
0.923
0.900
0.930
0.924
0.919
0.943
0.931
0.913
0.943
0.931
0.907
0.942
0.932
Boundary
Condition
Section
C1
G11
C2
C3
C1
G12
C2
C3
C1
G13
C2
C3
C1
G14
C2
C3
C1
G15
C2
C3
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
4.82
4.86
4.98
6.41
6.56
6.57
7.94
8.15
8.15
8.37
8.87
9.01
11.17
11.83
12.02
13.98
14.80
15.03
10.76
12.21
12.68
14.61
16.64
17.28
18.64
21.35
22.17
10.87
12.34
12.81
14.76
16.83
17.48
18.86
21.62
22.47
11.80
13.38
13.80
16.07
18.18
18.65
20.52
22.83
23.08
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.736
0.730
0.712
0.742
0.725
0.724
0.755
0.736
0.736
0.681
0.644
0.634
0.688
0.650
0.640
0.697
0.658
0.648
0.832
0.742
0.715
0.831
0.740
0.713
0.829
0.738
0.711
0.872
0.787
0.758
0.869
0.785
0.756
0.867
0.783
0.753
0.634
0.558
0.541
0.629
0.556
0.542
0.628
0.564
0.558
PFEM
0.903
0.896
0.873
0.905
0.884
0.883
0.913
0.890
0.890
0.982
0.928
0.913
0.981
0.928
0.913
0.981
0.927
0.913
1.047
1.021
0.983
1.044
1.023
0.985
1.040
1.025
0.987
1.043
1.019
0.982
1.039
1.021
0.983
1.035
1.024
0.985
0.976
0.965
0.935
0.955
0.947
0.923
0.935
0.942
0.932
PFEM
0.689
0.697
0.684
0.695
0.693
0.697
0.706
0.703
0.708
0.620
0.606
0.603
0.625
0.611
0.608
0.631
0.617
0.615
0.739
0.688
0.673
0.736
0.685
0.669
0.732
0.681
0.666
0.774
0.729
0.713
0.770
0.725
0.709
0.765
0.721
0.705
0.588
0.533
0.521
0.583
0.530
0.521
0.580
0.537
0.536
PFEM
0.799
0.815
0.802
0.804
0.808
0.815
0.813
0.816
0.824
0.803
0.802
0.805
0.803
0.802
0.805
0.801
0.801
0.805
0.890
0.903
0.889
0.884
0.899
0.886
0.876
0.895
0.883
0.898
0.913
0.897
0.892
0.911
0.895
0.884
0.908
0.893
0.825
0.826
0.818
0.807
0.811
0.807
0.790
0.806
0.815
PFEM
0.979
0.991
0.972
0.984
0.981
0.986
0.995
0.990
0.996
0.924
0.948
0.951
0.927
0.952
0.955
0.930
0.956
0.959
0.905
0.928
0.915
0.900
0.928
0.915
0.894
0.927
0.916
0.910
0.934
0.918
0.904
0.934
0.919
0.898
0.933
0.920
0.825
0.827
0.818
0.816
0.825
0.821
0.808
0.836
0.847
PFEM
0.979
0.991
0.972
0.984
0.981
0.986
0.995
0.990
0.996
0.924
0.948
0.951
0.927
0.952
0.955
0.930
0.956
0.959
0.905
0.928
0.915
0.900
0.928
0.915
0.894
0.927
0.916
0.910
0.934
0.918
0.904
0.934
0.919
0.898
0.933
0.920
0.825
0.827
0.818
0.816
0.825
0.821
0.808
0.836
0.847
PFEM
0.887
0.895
0.877
0.892
0.886
0.890
0.901
0.895
0.900
0.864
0.873
0.874
0.866
0.876
0.877
0.868
0.879
0.879
0.894
0.917
0.904
0.889
0.915
0.904
0.882
0.913
0.904
0.903
0.926
0.912
0.897
0.926
0.912
0.890
0.924
0.912
0.802
0.796
0.788
0.792
0.792
0.788
0.784
0.799
0.809
Boundary
Condition
Section
C1
G16
C2
C3
C1
G17
C2
C3
C1
G18
C2
C3
C1
G19
C2
C3
C1
G20
C2
C3
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
11.57
13.20
13.68
15.79
18.07
18.74
20.31
23.33
24.21
11.55
13.20
13.67
15.77
18.06
18.73
20.29
23.32
24.21
12.25
14.07
14.57
16.76
19.33
20.04
21.62
25.07
26.02
12.24
14.09
14.61
16.74
19.36
20.09
21.59
25.11
26.09
12.34
14.26
14.79
16.90
19.60
20.34
21.80
25.43
26.43
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.853
0.775
0.748
0.846
0.772
0.744
0.838
0.767
0.739
0.885
0.815
0.787
0.879
0.812
0.783
0.870
0.809
0.779
0.907
0.866
0.836
0.899
0.863
0.833
0.888
0.859
0.828
0.925
0.891
0.860
0.917
0.889
0.857
0.906
0.886
0.853
0.933
0.906
0.874
0.924
0.904
0.871
0.913
0.901
0.868
PFEM
1.016
1.013
0.978
1.008
1.014
0.979
0.999
1.014
0.981
1.017
1.013
0.978
1.009
1.015
0.979
1.000
1.014
0.981
0.991
1.004
0.973
0.982
1.002
0.974
0.971
0.998
0.974
0.996
1.010
0.979
0.987
1.008
0.979
0.976
1.004
0.980
0.994
1.008
0.978
0.984
1.005
0.978
0.972
1.001
0.979
PFEM
0.772
0.726
0.710
0.764
0.721
0.705
0.755
0.716
0.699
0.800
0.762
0.745
0.792
0.758
0.741
0.782
0.752
0.735
0.846
0.826
0.805
0.837
0.821
0.800
0.825
0.816
0.794
0.859
0.847
0.825
0.850
0.843
0.821
0.839
0.839
0.816
0.872
0.864
0.841
0.862
0.861
0.838
0.850
0.856
0.833
PFEM
0.897
0.922
0.906
0.888
0.919
0.903
0.875
0.914
0.901
0.902
0.927
0.910
0.893
0.925
0.909
0.881
0.920
0.907
0.917
0.949
0.930
0.907
0.945
0.928
0.895
0.938
0.926
0.919
0.952
0.933
0.909
0.948
0.932
0.897
0.942
0.931
0.924
0.956
0.937
0.914
0.952
0.936
0.901
0.945
0.935
PFEM
0.882
0.895
0.878
0.873
0.893
0.876
0.862
0.890
0.874
0.887
0.900
0.882
0.878
0.898
0.881
0.867
0.895
0.878
0.875
0.873
0.851
0.865
0.869
0.848
0.853
0.864
0.843
0.873
0.870
0.848
0.863
0.867
0.844
0.851
0.862
0.840
0.872
0.864
0.841
0.862
0.861
0.838
0.850
0.856
0.833
PFEM
0.885
0.897
0.880
0.876
0.895
0.878
0.865
0.892
0.876
0.908
0.915
0.895
0.899
0.914
0.893
0.888
0.912
0.892
0.920
0.904
0.876
0.911
0.902
0.873
0.900
0.899
0.870
0.931
0.910
0.879
0.921
0.908
0.876
0.911
0.905
0.873
0.933
0.906
0.874
0.923
0.904
0.871
0.912
0.901
0.867
PFEM
0.877
0.890
0.874
0.868
0.888
0.872
0.856
0.884
0.869
0.883
0.896
0.879
0.874
0.894
0.877
0.863
0.891
0.875
0.873
0.871
0.850
0.863
0.868
0.847
0.851
0.863
0.842
0.872
0.869
0.847
0.862
0.866
0.843
0.850
0.861
0.839
0.871
0.864
0.841
0.861
0.860
0.837
0.849
0.856
0.832
Boundary
Condition
Section
C4
G1
C5
C6
C4
G2
C5
C6
C4
G3
C5
C6
C4
G4
C5
C6
C4
G5
C5
C6
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.57
0.62
0.66
0.76
0.82
0.88
0.95
1.03
1.05
1.51
1.54
1.56
2.01
2.05
2.08
2.51
2.56
2.58
3.81
3.97
4.00
5.09
5.30
5.35
6.37
6.63
6.70
6.93
7.61
7.71
9.49
10.49
10.65
12.20
13.57
13.81
7.22
7.97
8.08
9.95
11.06
11.24
12.86
14.43
14.70
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.827
0.761
0.707
0.829
0.762
0.709
0.831
0.764
0.748
0.835
0.819
0.809
0.840
0.824
0.814
0.846
0.829
0.822
0.790
0.760
0.753
0.802
0.771
0.764
0.816
0.784
0.775
0.859
0.782
0.771
0.868
0.787
0.775
0.878
0.794
0.780
0.897
0.819
0.807
0.901
0.822
0.809
0.907
0.828
0.813
PFEM
0.848
0.780
0.725
0.848
0.780
0.725
0.848
0.780
0.763
0.897
0.879
0.868
0.897
0.879
0.868
0.897
0.879
0.872
0.959
0.922
0.914
0.958
0.921
0.912
0.958
0.921
0.911
1.107
1.067
1.053
1.105
1.071
1.055
1.100
1.072
1.053
1.095
1.066
1.051
1.094
1.075
1.058
1.092
1.085
1.065
PFEM
0.666
0.615
0.572
0.688
0.635
0.591
0.703
0.650
0.637
0.722
0.718
0.713
0.734
0.732
0.727
0.744
0.743
0.741
0.689
0.687
0.688
0.697
0.695
0.697
0.707
0.706
0.707
0.731
0.697
0.698
0.732
0.697
0.698
0.733
0.698
0.698
0.764
0.730
0.731
0.762
0.729
0.729
0.760
0.728
0.727
PFEM
0.674
0.622
0.579
0.694
0.641
0.597
0.708
0.655
0.642
0.752
0.750
0.744
0.763
0.761
0.756
0.770
0.769
0.768
0.782
0.785
0.789
0.782
0.785
0.790
0.782
0.786
0.790
0.876
0.881
0.889
0.867
0.875
0.882
0.856
0.866
0.872
0.889
0.900
0.905
0.879
0.897
0.902
0.869
0.892
0.896
PFEM
0.947
0.877
0.816
0.953
0.883
0.823
0.957
0.889
0.874
0.977
0.970
0.961
0.982
0.975
0.966
0.985
0.978
0.974
0.971
0.974
0.975
0.974
0.978
0.978
0.977
0.981
0.980
0.932
0.970
0.981
0.929
0.977
0.989
0.927
0.981
0.997
0.931
0.972
0.980
0.927
0.980
0.990
0.924
0.985
1.000
PFEM
0.947
0.877
0.816
0.953
0.883
0.823
0.957
0.889
0.874
0.977
0.970
0.961
0.982
0.975
0.966
0.985
0.978
0.974
0.971
0.974
0.975
0.974
0.978
0.978
0.977
0.981
0.980
0.932
0.970
0.981
0.929
0.977
0.989
0.927
0.981
0.997
0.931
0.972
0.980
0.927
0.980
0.990
0.924
0.985
1.000
PFEM
0.853
0.789
0.734
0.858
0.795
0.740
0.862
0.801
0.786
0.882
0.874
0.866
0.886
0.879
0.871
0.889
0.882
0.879
0.889
0.886
0.886
0.892
0.889
0.888
0.894
0.891
0.890
0.908
0.939
0.950
0.903
0.942
0.953
0.900
0.940
0.953
0.915
0.952
0.961
0.910
0.957
0.966
0.905
0.957
0.971
10
Boundary
Condition
Section
C4
G6
C5
C6
C4
G7
C5
C6
C4
G8
C5
C6
C4
G9
C5
C6
C4
G10
C5
C6
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.15
1.22
1.22
1.53
1.55
1.55
1.90
1.90
1.90
2.09
2.14
2.16
2.79
2.85
2.86
3.49
3.54
3.54
4.43
4.62
4.66
5.91
6.17
6.24
7.40
7.72
7.81
7.25
8.00
8.13
9.97
11.06
11.26
12.84
14.37
14.65
7.48
8.28
8.42
10.33
11.53
11.74
13.39
15.09
15.40
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.810
0.764
0.764
0.813
0.800
0.800
0.821
0.821
0.821
0.812
0.796
0.786
0.819
0.803
0.800
0.826
0.815
0.815
0.768
0.736
0.729
0.782
0.749
0.741
0.797
0.764
0.755
0.854
0.776
0.764
0.860
0.780
0.767
0.868
0.787
0.771
0.891
0.815
0.802
0.894
0.819
0.803
0.898
0.824
0.807
PFEM
0.852
0.804
0.804
0.852
0.839
0.839
0.856
0.856
0.856
0.897
0.879
0.869
0.897
0.879
0.877
0.897
0.885
0.885
0.964
0.924
0.915
0.963
0.923
0.913
0.962
0.922
0.911
1.090
1.061
1.045
1.088
1.069
1.050
1.083
1.073
1.053
1.078
1.057
1.039
1.077
1.068
1.049
1.074
1.080
1.058
PFEM
0.679
0.644
0.644
0.696
0.689
0.690
0.713
0.718
0.719
0.724
0.721
0.716
0.735
0.733
0.736
0.742
0.746
0.750
0.676
0.670
0.671
0.685
0.680
0.681
0.695
0.692
0.692
0.731
0.696
0.694
0.730
0.694
0.693
0.730
0.695
0.693
0.764
0.731
0.729
0.761
0.729
0.727
0.758
0.727
0.724
PFEM
0.700
0.664
0.665
0.716
0.709
0.710
0.733
0.737
0.738
0.772
0.770
0.765
0.778
0.778
0.780
0.784
0.789
0.794
0.784
0.786
0.790
0.784
0.786
0.789
0.784
0.787
0.790
0.874
0.885
0.889
0.865
0.879
0.884
0.853
0.872
0.876
0.884
0.900
0.902
0.875
0.898
0.901
0.865
0.895
0.897
PFEM
0.941
0.893
0.894
0.948
0.939
0.940
0.957
0.964
0.966
0.976
0.969
0.961
0.981
0.974
0.975
0.984
0.984
0.988
0.959
0.965
0.967
0.964
0.971
0.971
0.968
0.975
0.975
0.914
0.951
0.957
0.911
0.959
0.966
0.909
0.963
0.976
0.915
0.953
0.957
0.911
0.962
0.967
0.906
0.966
0.978
PFEM
0.941
0.893
0.894
0.948
0.939
0.940
0.957
0.964
0.966
0.976
0.969
0.961
0.981
0.974
0.975
0.984
0.984
0.988
0.959
0.965
0.967
0.964
0.971
0.971
0.968
0.975
0.975
0.914
0.951
0.957
0.911
0.959
0.966
0.909
0.963
0.976
0.915
0.953
0.957
0.911
0.962
0.967
0.906
0.966
0.978
PFEM
0.847
0.803
0.804
0.853
0.845
0.846
0.861
0.868
0.870
0.882
0.874
0.866
0.886
0.879
0.880
0.889
0.888
0.891
0.882
0.881
0.881
0.885
0.885
0.884
0.888
0.888
0.886
0.895
0.926
0.933
0.890
0.929
0.937
0.885
0.928
0.940
0.902
0.937
0.942
0.896
0.942
0.949
0.890
0.943
0.955
11
Boundary
Condition
Section
C4
G11
C5
C6
C4
G12
C5
C6
C4
G13
C5
C6
C4
G14
C5
C6
C4
G15
C5
C6
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
3.15
3.21
3.21
4.20
4.24
4.34
5.25
5.26
5.40
5.53
5.81
5.88
7.39
7.75
7.86
9.25
9.70
9.84
7.76
8.61
8.78
10.73
11.99
12.25
13.91
15.68
16.06
7.89
8.77
8.96
10.95
12.28
12.56
14.27
16.17
16.57
8.30
9.00
9.17
11.09
12.02
12.25
13.87
15.03
15.32
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.773
0.758
0.758
0.783
0.775
0.758
0.794
0.792
0.772
0.729
0.695
0.687
0.746
0.711
0.702
0.765
0.728
0.719
0.845
0.770
0.754
0.847
0.772
0.755
0.850
0.776
0.758
0.882
0.811
0.794
0.881
0.813
0.795
0.881
0.817
0.797
0.650
0.599
0.588
0.671
0.619
0.608
0.697
0.643
0.631
PFEM
0.900
0.883
0.882
0.901
0.891
0.872
0.901
0.898
0.875
0.973
0.927
0.916
0.972
0.926
0.914
0.971
0.925
0.913
1.058
1.046
1.025
1.055
1.058
1.035
1.050
1.069
1.045
1.049
1.040
1.018
1.045
1.053
1.030
1.041
1.066
1.043
0.948
0.937
0.921
0.947
0.936
0.919
0.946
0.936
0.918
PFEM
0.711
0.709
0.712
0.720
0.726
0.714
0.729
0.742
0.727
0.650
0.640
0.639
0.661
0.652
0.650
0.674
0.665
0.664
0.732
0.695
0.690
0.728
0.692
0.687
0.724
0.690
0.685
0.764
0.732
0.726
0.758
0.728
0.723
0.752
0.726
0.720
0.592
0.561
0.556
0.609
0.578
0.573
0.628
0.598
0.592
PFEM
0.788
0.789
0.794
0.792
0.802
0.790
0.796
0.812
0.798
0.789
0.786
0.789
0.789
0.787
0.789
0.789
0.787
0.790
0.868
0.887
0.886
0.858
0.884
0.884
0.846
0.879
0.879
0.877
0.897
0.895
0.866
0.898
0.896
0.854
0.895
0.895
0.782
0.788
0.786
0.782
0.788
0.787
0.781
0.789
0.788
PFEM
0.973
0.970
0.973
0.978
0.984
0.967
0.981
0.995
0.975
0.930
0.944
0.946
0.938
0.953
0.953
0.945
0.960
0.961
0.887
0.919
0.919
0.882
0.926
0.927
0.876
0.930
0.938
0.891
0.923
0.921
0.884
0.930
0.930
0.877
0.934
0.940
0.816
0.836
0.835
0.833
0.863
0.862
0.852
0.887
0.890
PFEM
0.973
0.970
0.973
0.978
0.984
0.967
0.981
0.995
0.975
0.930
0.944
0.946
0.938
0.953
0.953
0.945
0.960
0.961
0.887
0.919
0.919
0.882
0.926
0.927
0.876
0.930
0.938
0.891
0.923
0.921
0.884
0.930
0.930
0.877
0.934
0.940
0.816
0.836
0.835
0.833
0.863
0.862
0.852
0.887
0.890
PFEM
0.881
0.876
0.878
0.885
0.889
0.873
0.888
0.899
0.880
0.864
0.867
0.867
0.869
0.873
0.872
0.874
0.878
0.877
0.873
0.902
0.903
0.866
0.905
0.908
0.859
0.905
0.913
0.882
0.912
0.911
0.873
0.917
0.917
0.865
0.917
0.924
0.784
0.794
0.792
0.798
0.813
0.812
0.813
0.830
0.830
12
Boundary
Condition
Section
C4
G16
C5
C6
C4
G17
C5
C6
C4
G18
C5
C6
C4
G19
C5
C6
C4
G20
C5
C6
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
8.63
9.68
9.97
12.13
13.74
14.16
15.99
18.36
18.94
8.63
9.69
9.97
12.13
13.76
14.19
16.02
18.42
19.02
9.23
10.44
10.75
13.11
15.04
15.53
17.56
20.52
21.28
9.22
10.45
10.77
13.09
15.04
15.55
17.53
20.52
21.30
9.28
10.54
10.86
13.18
15.18
15.68
17.64
20.71
21.49
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.840
0.777
0.754
0.830
0.771
0.748
0.821
0.766
0.743
0.872
0.817
0.793
0.862
0.813
0.788
0.851
0.810
0.785
0.886
0.857
0.832
0.867
0.850
0.823
0.846
0.840
0.812
0.903
0.882
0.856
0.884
0.877
0.849
0.863
0.867
0.841
0.911
0.898
0.872
0.893
0.894
0.866
0.872
0.882
0.860
PFEM
0.997
1.005
0.977
0.985
1.012
0.985
0.974
1.016
0.999
0.997
1.005
0.976
0.985
1.011
0.984
0.973
1.014
0.997
0.962
0.984
0.958
0.943
0.979
0.959
0.921
0.967
0.962
0.967
0.990
0.964
0.948
0.985
0.966
0.926
0.974
0.970
0.965
0.991
0.965
0.946
0.985
0.968
0.925
0.973
0.973
PFEM
0.744
0.712
0.700
0.731
0.702
0.690
0.718
0.692
0.681
0.772
0.747
0.734
0.758
0.738
0.725
0.744
0.730
0.718
0.815
0.804
0.788
0.795
0.794
0.776
0.772
0.780
0.763
0.828
0.824
0.807
0.807
0.815
0.797
0.784
0.801
0.786
0.841
0.844
0.826
0.821
0.836
0.818
0.799
0.821
0.808
PFEM
0.857
0.886
0.875
0.840
0.881
0.872
0.824
0.871
0.872
0.863
0.893
0.881
0.847
0.889
0.880
0.830
0.881
0.880
0.878
0.913
0.898
0.856
0.902
0.894
0.832
0.885
0.889
0.880
0.917
0.901
0.858
0.906
0.898
0.834
0.890
0.895
0.886
0.925
0.909
0.865
0.914
0.907
0.842
0.898
0.905
PFEM
0.846
0.865
0.854
0.831
0.864
0.853
0.816
0.858
0.855
0.852
0.872
0.860
0.837
0.871
0.859
0.822
0.865
0.862
0.840
0.846
0.830
0.820
0.838
0.821
0.797
0.822
0.810
0.839
0.845
0.828
0.818
0.837
0.819
0.796
0.821
0.809
0.841
0.844
0.826
0.821
0.836
0.818
0.799
0.821
0.808
PFEM
0.849
0.868
0.857
0.834
0.867
0.856
0.820
0.861
0.858
0.875
0.891
0.876
0.861
0.892
0.877
0.846
0.888
0.882
0.893
0.888
0.865
0.874
0.883
0.858
0.852
0.870
0.851
0.905
0.896
0.871
0.886
0.892
0.865
0.865
0.880
0.859
0.911
0.897
0.871
0.892
0.894
0.866
0.872
0.882
0.859
PFEM
0.839
0.858
0.847
0.824
0.855
0.845
0.808
0.847
0.845
0.847
0.867
0.855
0.831
0.865
0.854
0.816
0.858
0.855
0.839
0.845
0.828
0.818
0.836
0.819
0.795
0.820
0.808
0.838
0.843
0.827
0.817
0.835
0.818
0.794
0.820
0.808
0.840
0.843
0.825
0.820
0.835
0.817
0.798
0.820
0.807
13
Boundary
Condition
Section
C7
G1
C8
C9
C7
G2
C8
C9
C7
G3
C8
C9
C7
G4
C8
C9
C7
G5
C8
C9
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.89
0.97
1.01
1.18
1.25
1.25
1.48
1.50
1.76
2.35
2.40
2.43
3.14
3.20
3.20
3.92
4.00
4.05
5.99
6.24
6.32
7.99
8.32
8.43
9.99
10.41
10.54
12.77
15.18
15.92
17.03
20.24
21.22
21.28
25.30
26.53
14.03
17.49
18.61
18.70
23.32
24.82
23.38
29.15
31.03
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.849
0.776
0.746
0.849
0.805
0.805
0.849
0.834
0.711
0.898
0.880
0.870
0.898
0.882
0.882
0.898
0.881
0.870
0.959
0.921
0.909
0.959
0.921
0.909
0.959
0.921
0.909
1.074
1.043
0.996
1.074
1.043
0.996
1.074
1.043
0.996
1.074
1.060
1.029
1.074
1.060
1.029
1.074
1.060
1.029
PFEM
0.849
0.776
0.746
0.849
0.805
0.805
0.849
0.834
0.711
0.898
0.880
0.870
0.898
0.882
0.882
0.898
0.881
0.870
0.959
0.921
0.909
0.959
0.921
0.909
0.959
0.921
0.909
1.074
1.043
0.996
1.074
1.043
0.996
1.074
1.043
0.996
1.074
1.060
1.029
1.074
1.060
1.029
1.074
1.060
1.029
PFEM
0.705
0.649
0.625
0.722
0.689
0.691
0.733
0.725
0.620
0.772
0.773
0.770
0.779
0.782
0.788
0.785
0.788
0.785
0.785
0.794
0.800
0.785
0.795
0.801
0.784
0.795
0.801
0.812
0.808
0.799
0.812
0.807
0.798
0.811
0.806
0.798
0.821
0.814
0.809
0.820
0.814
0.808
0.819
0.813
0.808
PFEM
0.705
0.649
0.625
0.722
0.689
0.691
0.733
0.725
0.620
0.772
0.773
0.770
0.779
0.782
0.788
0.785
0.788
0.785
0.785
0.794
0.800
0.785
0.795
0.801
0.784
0.795
0.801
0.812
0.808
0.799
0.812
0.807
0.798
0.811
0.806
0.798
0.821
0.814
0.809
0.820
0.814
0.808
0.819
0.813
0.808
PFEM
0.962
0.904
0.890
0.966
0.946
0.974
0.969
0.987
0.871
0.990
0.988
0.985
0.992
0.991
1.000
0.993
0.991
0.988
0.996
0.998
0.998
0.995
0.998
0.998
0.995
0.998
0.998
0.986
0.998
1.000
0.984
0.997
1.000
0.983
0.996
0.999
0.980
0.996
1.000
0.979
0.994
0.999
0.978
0.993
0.998
PFEM
0.962
0.904
0.890
0.966
0.946
0.974
0.969
0.987
0.871
0.990
0.988
0.985
0.992
0.991
1.000
0.993
0.991
0.988
0.996
0.998
0.998
0.995
0.998
0.998
0.995
0.998
0.998
0.986
0.998
1.000
0.984
0.997
1.000
0.983
0.996
0.999
0.980
0.996
1.000
0.979
0.994
0.999
0.978
0.993
0.998
PFEM
0.867
0.815
0.804
0.871
0.855
0.884
0.874
0.894
0.793
0.894
0.891
0.889
0.896
0.895
0.902
0.897
0.895
0.892
0.906
0.904
0.903
0.906
0.904
0.903
0.906
0.904
0.903
0.935
0.922
0.917
0.933
0.921
0.916
0.932
0.920
0.916
0.941
0.928
0.922
0.940
0.927
0.921
0.939
0.926
0.921
14
Boundary
Condition
Section
C7
G6
C8
C9
C7
G7
C8
C9
C7
G8
C8
C9
C7
G9
C8
C9
C7
G10
C8
C9
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.79
1.79
1.79
2.34
2.52
2.52
2.90
3.05
3.05
3.27
3.33
3.33
4.36
4.45
4.50
5.44
5.56
5.59
6.96
7.27
7.37
9.28
9.69
9.82
11.60
12.12
12.28
13.54
16.33
17.19
18.06
21.77
22.92
22.57
27.22
28.65
14.69
18.61
19.91
19.59
24.82
26.55
24.49
31.02
33.19
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.852
0.852
0.852
0.869
0.807
0.807
0.878
0.835
0.835
0.899
0.883
0.883
0.899
0.881
0.870
0.900
0.881
0.876
0.964
0.923
0.911
0.964
0.923
0.911
0.964
0.923
0.911
1.058
1.044
1.003
1.058
1.044
1.003
1.058
1.044
1.003
1.061
1.054
1.035
1.061
1.054
1.035
1.061
1.054
1.035
PFEM
0.852
0.852
0.852
0.869
0.807
0.807
0.878
0.835
0.835
0.899
0.883
0.883
0.899
0.881
0.870
0.900
0.881
0.876
0.964
0.923
0.911
0.964
0.923
0.911
0.964
0.923
0.911
1.058
1.044
1.003
1.058
1.044
1.003
1.058
1.044
1.003
1.061
1.054
1.035
1.061
1.054
1.035
1.061
1.054
1.035
PFEM
0.726
0.731
0.732
0.755
0.706
0.708
0.773
0.741
0.743
0.785
0.790
0.796
0.790
0.794
0.792
0.794
0.798
0.802
0.787
0.795
0.801
0.787
0.795
0.801
0.787
0.796
0.802
0.810
0.809
0.802
0.809
0.808
0.801
0.808
0.808
0.800
0.819
0.813
0.812
0.819
0.813
0.811
0.818
0.812
0.810
PFEM
0.726
0.731
0.732
0.755
0.706
0.708
0.773
0.741
0.743
0.785
0.790
0.796
0.790
0.794
0.792
0.794
0.798
0.802
0.787
0.795
0.801
0.787
0.795
0.801
0.787
0.796
0.802
0.810
0.809
0.802
0.809
0.808
0.801
0.808
0.808
0.800
0.819
0.813
0.812
0.819
0.813
0.811
0.818
0.812
0.810
PFEM
0.958
0.975
0.988
0.980
0.931
0.947
0.994
0.969
0.991
0.990
0.991
0.999
0.991
0.990
0.986
0.993
0.991
0.994
0.993
0.997
0.998
0.993
0.997
0.998
0.992
0.997
0.998
0.977
0.994
0.997
0.976
0.993
0.997
0.974
0.992
0.996
0.971
0.989
0.995
0.970
0.988
0.994
0.968
0.987
0.994
PFEM
0.958
0.975
0.988
0.980
0.931
0.947
0.994
0.969
0.991
0.990
0.991
0.999
0.991
0.990
0.986
0.993
0.991
0.994
0.993
0.997
0.998
0.993
0.997
0.998
0.992
0.997
0.998
0.977
0.994
0.997
0.976
0.993
0.997
0.974
0.992
0.996
0.971
0.989
0.995
0.970
0.988
0.994
0.968
0.987
0.994
PFEM
0.862
0.878
0.890
0.883
0.839
0.855
0.896
0.875
0.896
0.894
0.894
0.902
0.895
0.893
0.891
0.897
0.894
0.898
0.905
0.903
0.902
0.905
0.903
0.902
0.905
0.903
0.902
0.931
0.920
0.916
0.930
0.920
0.915
0.929
0.919
0.915
0.936
0.926
0.921
0.935
0.925
0.920
0.934
0.924
0.919
15
Boundary
Condition
Section
C7
G11
C8
C9
C7
G12
C8
C9
C7
G13
C8
C9
C7
G14
C8
C9
C7
G15
C8
C9
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
4.92
5.03
5.08
6.53
6.69
6.78
8.20
8.31
8.43
8.70
9.14
9.27
11.60
12.18
12.36
14.50
15.23
15.45
14.85
18.38
19.50
19.80
24.51
26.00
24.75
30.64
32.50
15.80
20.59
22.26
21.07
27.46
29.68
26.34
34.32
37.10
13.06
14.12
14.39
17.41
18.82
19.18
21.77
23.53
23.98
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.902
0.882
0.873
0.906
0.884
0.872
0.902
0.890
0.877
0.973
0.926
0.913
0.973
0.926
0.913
0.973
0.926
0.913
1.031
1.035
1.017
1.031
1.035
1.017
1.031
1.035
1.017
1.038
1.037
1.032
1.038
1.037
1.032
1.038
1.037
1.032
0.942
0.939
0.921
0.942
0.939
0.922
0.942
0.939
0.921
PFEM
0.902
0.882
0.873
0.906
0.884
0.872
0.902
0.890
0.877
0.973
0.926
0.913
0.973
0.926
0.913
0.973
0.926
0.913
1.031
1.035
1.017
1.031
1.035
1.017
1.031
1.035
1.017
1.038
1.037
1.032
1.038
1.037
1.032
1.038
1.037
1.032
0.942
0.939
0.921
0.942
0.939
0.922
0.942
0.939
0.921
PFEM
0.797
0.801
0.801
0.803
0.807
0.804
0.801
0.814
0.810
0.791
0.796
0.802
0.791
0.796
0.802
0.791
0.797
0.802
0.805
0.807
0.807
0.804
0.807
0.806
0.803
0.806
0.806
0.816
0.810
0.812
0.816
0.809
0.811
0.815
0.808
0.810
0.782
0.800
0.803
0.781
0.801
0.804
0.781
0.800
0.803
PFEM
0.797
0.801
0.801
0.803
0.807
0.804
0.801
0.814
0.810
0.791
0.796
0.802
0.791
0.796
0.802
0.791
0.797
0.802
0.805
0.807
0.807
0.804
0.807
0.806
0.803
0.806
0.806
0.816
0.810
0.812
0.816
0.809
0.811
0.815
0.808
0.810
0.782
0.800
0.803
0.781
0.801
0.804
0.781
0.800
0.803
PFEM
0.989
0.989
0.987
0.995
0.992
0.987
0.991
0.999
0.993
0.986
0.995
0.996
0.985
0.995
0.996
0.985
0.994
0.996
0.959
0.983
0.990
0.958
0.982
0.990
0.957
0.981
0.989
0.953
0.976
0.985
0.952
0.975
0.985
0.951
0.974
0.984
0.963
0.986
0.990
0.963
0.986
0.991
0.962
0.986
0.990
PFEM
0.989
0.989
0.987
0.995
0.992
0.987
0.991
0.999
0.993
0.986
0.995
0.996
0.985
0.995
0.996
0.985
0.994
0.996
0.959
0.983
0.990
0.958
0.982
0.990
0.957
0.981
0.989
0.953
0.976
0.985
0.952
0.975
0.985
0.951
0.974
0.984
0.963
0.986
0.990
0.963
0.986
0.991
0.962
0.986
0.990
PFEM
0.894
0.892
0.891
0.899
0.895
0.891
0.896
0.903
0.897
0.902
0.902
0.902
0.902
0.902
0.902
0.901
0.902
0.902
0.922
0.917
0.914
0.921
0.916
0.913
0.920
0.915
0.912
0.926
0.921
0.917
0.925
0.920
0.916
0.924
0.919
0.915
0.894
0.898
0.898
0.894
0.898
0.899
0.894
0.898
0.899
16
Boundary
Condition
Section
C7
G16
C8
C9
C7
G17
C8
C9
C7
G18
C8
C9
C7
G19
C8
C9
C7
G20
C8
C9
Fy
PFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
17.69
23.55
25.64
23.59
31.40
34.18
29.49
39.25
42.73
18.22
25.38
28.33
24.29
33.84
37.77
30.36
42.31
47.21
20.58
32.22
38.73
27.44
42.97
51.64
34.30
53.71
64.55
20.82
33.12
40.43
27.76
44.16
53.91
34.71
55.19
67.38
20.97
33.76
41.79
27.96
45.01
55.73
34.95
56.26
69.66
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P2 a
P2 b
P2 c
PFEM
0.976
0.987
0.998
0.976
0.987
0.998
0.976
0.987
0.998
0.993
0.990
0.997
0.993
0.990
0.997
0.993
0.990
0.997
0.981
0.937
0.921
0.981
0.937
0.921
0.981
0.937
0.921
0.995
0.951
0.932
0.995
0.951
0.932
0.995
0.951
0.932
1.011
0.970
0.947
1.011
0.970
0.947
1.011
0.970
0.947
PFEM
0.976
0.987
0.998
0.976
0.987
0.998
0.976
0.987
0.998
0.993
0.990
0.997
0.993
0.990
0.997
0.993
0.990
0.997
0.981
0.937
0.921
0.981
0.937
0.921
0.981
0.937
0.921
0.995
0.951
0.932
0.995
0.951
0.932
0.995
0.951
0.932
1.011
0.970
0.947
1.011
0.970
0.947
1.011
0.970
0.947
PFEM
0.795
0.792
0.800
0.794
0.792
0.800
0.793
0.791
0.799
0.811
0.798
0.800
0.810
0.797
0.799
0.809
0.796
0.799
0.854
0.806
0.786
0.854
0.805
0.785
0.853
0.804
0.785
0.863
0.817
0.796
0.862
0.817
0.795
0.861
0.816
0.795
0.888
0.846
0.822
0.887
0.845
0.821
0.886
0.845
0.820
PFEM
0.795
0.792
0.800
0.794
0.792
0.800
0.793
0.791
0.799
0.811
0.798
0.800
0.810
0.797
0.799
0.809
0.796
0.799
0.854
0.806
0.786
0.854
0.805
0.785
0.853
0.804
0.785
0.863
0.817
0.796
0.862
0.817
0.795
0.861
0.816
0.795
0.888
0.846
0.822
0.887
0.845
0.821
0.886
0.845
0.820
PFEM
0.911
0.943
0.960
0.910
0.942
0.959
0.909
0.941
0.958
0.907
0.931
0.946
0.906
0.929
0.945
0.905
0.928
0.944
0.889
0.858
0.847
0.889
0.857
0.847
0.888
0.856
0.846
0.879
0.843
0.827
0.878
0.842
0.826
0.878
0.842
0.825
0.888
0.846
0.822
0.887
0.845
0.821
0.886
0.845
0.820
PFEM
0.917
0.949
0.965
0.916
0.947
0.964
0.915
0.946
0.963
0.946
0.971
0.984
0.945
0.970
0.983
0.944
0.969
0.982
0.984
0.961
0.956
0.984
0.960
0.956
0.983
0.960
0.956
0.994
0.963
0.950
0.994
0.963
0.950
0.994
0.962
0.950
1.010
0.969
0.946
1.010
0.969
0.946
1.010
0.969
0.946
PFEM
0.891
0.897
0.900
0.890
0.896
0.899
0.889
0.895
0.898
0.893
0.896
0.898
0.892
0.895
0.897
0.891
0.894
0.896
0.884
0.847
0.831
0.883
0.846
0.831
0.883
0.845
0.830
0.875
0.836
0.816
0.875
0.835
0.816
0.874
0.834
0.815
0.885
0.841
0.815
0.884
0.840
0.814
0.884
0.840
0.814
17
Table E.2 Load Case 1  Correlation of Design Procedures with the FEM Results
Frame*
Kx
A1B1C1D1
2.404
A1B1C1D2
2.010
A1B1C1D3
1.793
A1B1C1D4
1.651
A1B1C1D5
1.550
A1B1C1D6
1.473
A1B1C2D1
2.571
A1B1C2D2
2.179
A1B1C2D3
1.952
A1B1C2D4
1.800
A1B1C2D5
1.689
A1B1C2D6
1.604
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
8.25
9.08
9.31
10.76
12.48
12.96
12.32
15.05
15.85
12.95
16.99
18.15
12.83
18.51
20.01
12.96
19.54
21.54
9.84
10.68
10.91
12.80
14.44
14.88
14.89
17.46
18.18
16.35
19.90
20.95
16.81
21.89
23.28
17.11
23.52
25.26
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.841
0.811
0.791
0.768
0.782
0.760
0.729
0.744
0.738
0.727
0.714
0.713
0.757
0.691
0.692
0.767
0.679
0.675
0.867
0.822
0.804
0.803
0.801
0.777
0.758
0.776
0.757
0.731
0.748
0.742
0.738
0.725
0.724
0.745
0.706
0.707
WFEM
0.701
0.707
0.706
0.656
0.682
0.678
0.632
0.654
0.659
0.637
0.632
0.639
0.669
0.615
0.622
0.681
0.608
0.608
0.716
0.716
0.717
0.678
0.697
0.693
0.650
0.678
0.675
0.633
0.657
0.661
0.645
0.640
0.647
0.655
0.626
0.633
WFEM
0.899
0.960
0.974
0.805
0.901
0.934
0.744
0.833
0.877
0.727
0.775
0.819
0.746
0.732
0.771
0.747
0.705
0.732
0.926
0.972
0.981
0.851
0.936
0.959
0.789
0.887
0.924
0.747
0.837
0.881
0.742
0.793
0.838
0.740
0.757
0.800
WFEM
0.899
0.960
0.974
0.805
0.901
0.934
0.744
0.833
0.877
0.735
0.783
0.828
0.768
0.754
0.793
0.778
0.735
0.763
0.926
0.972
0.981
0.851
0.936
0.959
0.789
0.887
0.924
0.747
0.837
0.881
0.744
0.795
0.840
0.754
0.772
0.815
WFEM
0.853
0.884
0.890
0.784
0.850
0.869
0.733
0.802
0.833
0.720
0.757
0.792
0.740
0.719
0.752
0.742
0.696
0.719
0.868
0.891
0.894
0.820
0.871
0.883
0.770
0.841
0.863
0.735
0.806
0.836
0.733
0.771
0.806
0.733
0.742
0.776
A1B1C1D1
Beam to column connection D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, or D6
Column C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, or C9
Upright frame B1 or B2
Frame dimension A1, A2, or A3
18
Frame
Kx
A1B1C3D1
2.696
A1B1C3D2
2.314
A1B1C3D3
2.082
A1B1C3D4
1.924
A1B1C3D5
1.807
A1B1C3D6
1.716
A1B1C4D1
2.161
A1B1C4D2
1.780
A1B1C4D3
1.585
A1B1C4D4
1.461
A1B1C4D5
1.374
A1B1C4D6
1.309
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
11.33
12.20
12.45
14.59
16.18
16.62
17.07
19.53
20.20
18.94
22.33
23.30
20.29
24.69
25.98
20.89
26.70
28.32
6.54
7.27
7.46
8.57
10.17
10.63
9.55
12.18
12.96
9.52
13.61
14.72
9.68
14.54
16.06
9.86
15.14
17.04
19
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.882
0.829
0.812
0.830
0.811
0.790
0.786
0.796
0.771
0.754
0.774
0.757
0.735
0.752
0.745
0.737
0.733
0.731
0.833
0.821
0.800
0.753
0.778
0.766
0.727
0.733
0.735
0.760
0.702
0.706
0.766
0.686
0.684
0.766
0.680
0.670
WFEM
0.724
0.722
0.724
0.694
0.706
0.704
0.667
0.692
0.687
0.647
0.675
0.674
0.636
0.659
0.664
0.642
0.646
0.653
0.690
0.707
0.706
0.641
0.672
0.675
0.628
0.640
0.649
0.663
0.618
0.627
0.674
0.608
0.610
0.678
0.605
0.600
WFEM
0.940
0.977
0.984
0.883
0.954
0.971
0.827
0.919
0.948
0.781
0.880
0.918
0.751
0.840
0.884
0.743
0.805
0.851
0.864
0.939
0.959
0.757
0.852
0.892
0.711
0.773
0.816
0.729
0.718
0.754
0.727
0.686
0.709
0.720
0.667
0.679
WFEM
0.940
0.977
0.984
0.883
0.954
0.971
0.827
0.919
0.948
0.781
0.880
0.918
0.751
0.840
0.884
0.743
0.805
0.851
0.864
0.939
0.959
0.757
0.852
0.892
0.729
0.792
0.836
0.766
0.754
0.792
0.773
0.730
0.755
0.773
0.717
0.729
WFEM
0.877
0.893
0.896
0.842
0.882
0.889
0.801
0.862
0.877
0.764
0.836
0.860
0.738
0.809
0.838
0.733
0.782
0.815
0.825
0.870
0.881
0.741
0.813
0.840
0.702
0.753
0.786
0.723
0.705
0.736
0.722
0.677
0.697
0.716
0.660
0.670
Frame
Kx
A1B1C5D1
2.335
A1B1C5D2
1.940
A1B1C5D3
1.728
A1B1C5D4
1.592
A1B1C5D5
1.495
A1B1C5D6
1.422
A1B1C6D1
2.471
A1B1C6D2
2.072
A1B1C6D3
1.849
A1B1C6D4
1.704
A1B1C6D5
1.599
A1B1C6D6
1.520
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
7.70
8.40
8.59
10.23
11.73
12.14
11.83
14.21
14.92
12.40
16.12
17.13
12.49
17.58
18.92
12.90
18.70
20.37
8.75
9.44
9.63
11.63
13.05
13.43
13.63
15.89
16.53
15.01
18.16
19.09
15.67
19.99
21.22
16.36
21.47
23.03
20
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.867
0.834
0.815
0.790
0.809
0.787
0.744
0.771
0.766
0.746
0.739
0.742
0.765
0.715
0.719
0.758
0.698
0.701
0.888
0.843
0.826
0.820
0.826
0.802
0.772
0.799
0.784
0.742
0.770
0.768
0.738
0.745
0.749
0.727
0.725
0.731
WFEM
0.710
0.718
0.719
0.663
0.695
0.692
0.636
0.667
0.674
0.645
0.644
0.654
0.666
0.627
0.637
0.663
0.615
0.623
0.721
0.726
0.728
0.681
0.707
0.705
0.652
0.687
0.688
0.634
0.666
0.674
0.637
0.648
0.659
0.631
0.634
0.645
WFEM
0.900
0.958
0.972
0.806
0.900
0.933
0.742
0.835
0.877
0.730
0.778
0.822
0.738
0.736
0.775
0.723
0.706
0.738
0.921
0.968
0.978
0.844
0.929
0.953
0.780
0.878
0.915
0.737
0.828
0.871
0.723
0.785
0.829
0.703
0.750
0.792
WFEM
0.900
0.958
0.972
0.806
0.900
0.933
0.742
0.835
0.877
0.748
0.797
0.841
0.770
0.769
0.809
0.764
0.747
0.781
0.921
0.968
0.978
0.844
0.929
0.953
0.780
0.878
0.915
0.737
0.828
0.871
0.739
0.803
0.847
0.730
0.780
0.823
WFEM
0.851
0.881
0.888
0.782
0.847
0.865
0.729
0.802
0.830
0.721
0.757
0.791
0.731
0.721
0.754
0.717
0.695
0.722
0.862
0.886
0.891
0.811
0.865
0.877
0.761
0.832
0.855
0.724
0.796
0.826
0.713
0.762
0.796
0.696
0.734
0.767
Frame
Kx
A1B1C7D1
2.431
A1B1C7D2
2.032
A1B1C7D3
1.813
A1B1C7D4
1.670
A1B1C7D5
1.568
A1B1C7D6
1.490
A1B1C8D1
2.606
A1B1C8D2
2.209
A1B1C8D3
1.978
A1B1C8D4
1.824
A1B1C8D5
1.713
A1B1C8D6
1.627
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
8.54
9.25
9.45
11.33
12.84
13.24
13.23
15.63
16.31
14.34
17.82
18.82
14.85
19.56
20.89
14.89
20.97
22.63
10.13
10.87
11.08
13.35
14.77
15.16
15.75
18.01
18.61
17.55
20.67
21.57
18.75
22.90
24.10
19.50
24.78
26.29
21
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.956
0.948
0.928
0.879
0.949
0.947
0.828
0.913
0.941
0.808
0.879
0.919
0.809
0.852
0.896
0.829
0.831
0.875
0.977
0.942
0.924
0.917
0.960
0.938
0.866
0.943
0.951
0.830
0.916
0.943
0.811
0.890
0.927
0.805
0.868
0.910
WFEM
0.750
0.774
0.779
0.712
0.768
0.780
0.684
0.748
0.773
0.678
0.728
0.759
0.686
0.712
0.745
0.707
0.700
0.732
0.759
0.771
0.778
0.730
0.775
0.778
0.704
0.763
0.779
0.684
0.747
0.772
0.677
0.733
0.762
0.678
0.719
0.751
WFEM
0.936
0.978
0.986
0.871
0.952
0.972
0.813
0.917
0.949
0.784
0.879
0.924
0.777
0.846
0.896
0.787
0.816
0.869
0.953
0.983
0.989
0.905
0.968
0.981
0.856
0.945
0.968
0.815
0.919
0.950
0.790
0.891
0.932
0.777
0.864
0.912
WFEM
0.936
0.978
0.986
0.871
0.952
0.972
0.813
0.917
0.949
0.790
0.886
0.929
0.802
0.874
0.923
0.826
0.860
0.914
0.953
0.983
0.989
0.905
0.968
0.981
0.856
0.945
0.968
0.815
0.919
0.950
0.790
0.891
0.932
0.791
0.880
0.926
WFEM
0.874
0.894
0.896
0.834
0.880
0.890
0.791
0.862
0.879
0.769
0.838
0.864
0.766
0.814
0.848
0.778
0.792
0.830
0.883
0.896
0.898
0.857
0.889
0.895
0.824
0.877
0.889
0.792
0.863
0.880
0.773
0.845
0.869
0.764
0.828
0.858
Frame
Kx
A1B1C9D1
2.739
A1B1C9D2
2.351
A1B1C9D3
2.115
A1B1C9D4
1.954
A1B1C9D5
1.836
A1B1C9D6
1.744
A1B2C1D1
2.404
A1B2C1D2
2.010
A1B2C1D3
1.793
A1B2C1D4
1.651
A1B2C1D5
1.550
A1B2C1D6
1.473
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
11.63
12.41
12.63
15.14
16.52
16.90
17.90
20.05
20.61
20.06
23.06
23.87
21.75
25.65
26.75
23.00
27.89
29.28
8.26
9.09
9.33
10.73
12.48
12.96
12.24
15.01
15.83
12.92
16.86
18.09
12.93
18.32
19.86
13.35
19.66
21.22
22
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.987
0.938
0.921
0.943
0.955
0.933
0.896
0.957
0.944
0.860
0.939
0.952
0.834
0.918
0.945
0.818
0.897
0.933
0.787
0.739
0.720
0.719
0.697
0.671
0.684
0.664
0.637
0.679
0.639
0.615
0.699
0.619
0.599
0.693
0.598
0.587
WFEM
0.762
0.769
0.775
0.741
0.772
0.776
0.718
0.770
0.776
0.700
0.759
0.777
0.686
0.747
0.771
0.679
0.735
0.763
0.669
0.659
0.656
0.624
0.623
0.613
0.601
0.597
0.583
0.602
0.577
0.564
0.624
0.562
0.551
0.621
0.545
0.541
WFEM
0.961
0.986
0.991
0.926
0.975
0.986
0.886
0.960
0.977
0.849
0.940
0.965
0.819
0.920
0.951
0.798
0.898
0.937
0.874
0.939
0.955
0.769
0.856
0.890
0.708
0.773
0.808
0.687
0.714
0.740
0.696
0.671
0.691
0.681
0.633
0.656
WFEM
0.961
0.986
0.991
0.926
0.975
0.986
0.886
0.960
0.977
0.849
0.940
0.965
0.819
0.920
0.951
0.798
0.898
0.937
0.874
0.939
0.955
0.769
0.856
0.890
0.708
0.773
0.808
0.693
0.721
0.747
0.714
0.688
0.707
0.706
0.656
0.678
WFEM
0.889
0.898
0.899
0.869
0.893
0.897
0.844
0.885
0.893
0.819
0.875
0.887
0.796
0.863
0.880
0.780
0.850
0.872
0.832
0.869
0.878
0.752
0.816
0.839
0.699
0.753
0.780
0.681
0.702
0.725
0.691
0.663
0.680
0.677
0.628
0.648
Frame
Kx
A1B2C2D1
2.571
A1B2C2D2
2.179
A1B2C2D3
1.952
A1B2C2D4
1.800
A1B2C2D5
1.689
A1B2C2D6
1.604
A1B2C3D1
2.696
A1B2C3D2
2.314
A1B2C3D3
2.082
A1B2C3D4
1.924
A1B2C3D5
1.807
A1B2C3D6
1.716
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
9.85
10.70
10.94
12.79
14.44
14.90
14.84
17.45
18.18
16.24
19.85
20.93
16.97
21.77
23.22
17.24
23.32
25.13
11.34
12.23
12.48
14.59
16.19
16.64
17.03
19.53
20.20
18.87
22.31
23.29
20.19
24.64
25.95
20.96
26.58
28.26
23
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.813
0.757
0.741
0.753
0.720
0.698
0.711
0.694
0.666
0.687
0.669
0.643
0.683
0.650
0.625
0.690
0.634
0.613
0.829
0.771
0.755
0.779
0.738
0.718
0.738
0.714
0.690
0.709
0.695
0.667
0.692
0.675
0.649
0.687
0.659
0.635
WFEM
0.685
0.673
0.673
0.646
0.642
0.636
0.618
0.621
0.609
0.603
0.601
0.588
0.604
0.585
0.573
0.613
0.573
0.562
0.695
0.684
0.685
0.663
0.657
0.653
0.636
0.637
0.628
0.617
0.621
0.609
0.606
0.605
0.593
0.606
0.592
0.581
WFEM
0.905
0.956
0.967
0.820
0.905
0.931
0.754
0.839
0.875
0.712
0.780
0.815
0.694
0.733
0.763
0.692
0.698
0.722
0.923
0.965
0.974
0.856
0.931
0.951
0.794
0.882
0.914
0.747
0.831
0.868
0.716
0.786
0.822
0.701
0.748
0.781
WFEM
0.905
0.956
0.967
0.820
0.905
0.931
0.754
0.839
0.875
0.712
0.780
0.815
0.696
0.735
0.765
0.704
0.710
0.733
0.923
0.965
0.974
0.856
0.931
0.951
0.794
0.882
0.914
0.747
0.831
0.868
0.716
0.786
0.822
0.701
0.748
0.781
WFEM
0.854
0.880
0.884
0.793
0.850
0.865
0.739
0.805
0.829
0.702
0.758
0.786
0.687
0.719
0.744
0.687
0.688
0.708
0.865
0.884
0.888
0.821
0.866
0.876
0.773
0.836
0.855
0.733
0.799
0.825
0.706
0.764
0.791
0.693
0.732
0.759
Frame
Kx
A1B2C4D1
2.161
A1B2C4D2
1.780
A1B2C4D3
1.585
A1B2C4D4
1.461
A1B2C4D5
1.374
A1B2C4D6
1.309
A1B2C5D1
2.335
A1B2C5D2
1.940
A1B2C5D3
1.728
A1B2C5D4
1.592
A1B2C5D5
1.495
A1B2C5D6
1.422
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
6.54
7.28
7.48
8.54
10.17
10.63
9.40
12.11
12.94
9.74
13.51
14.61
9.77
14.56
15.92
9.78
14.90
17.06
7.71
8.41
8.61
10.21
11.73
12.14
11.79
14.20
14.91
12.57
16.06
17.11
12.98
17.51
18.84
13.02
18.72
20.28
24
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.785
0.749
0.728
0.708
0.698
0.672
0.690
0.659
0.637
0.692
0.630
0.613
0.707
0.609
0.593
0.719
0.612
0.574
0.820
0.773
0.755
0.746
0.733
0.708
0.703
0.697
0.673
0.691
0.667
0.649
0.690
0.644
0.630
0.703
0.625
0.613
WFEM
0.660
0.657
0.652
0.611
0.616
0.604
0.604
0.586
0.575
0.611
0.564
0.555
0.629
0.548
0.538
0.642
0.553
0.522
0.682
0.677
0.675
0.635
0.643
0.634
0.608
0.615
0.604
0.604
0.592
0.584
0.608
0.575
0.568
0.622
0.560
0.554
WFEM
0.835
0.907
0.926
0.720
0.792
0.823
0.680
0.709
0.731
0.670
0.653
0.668
0.676
0.616
0.625
0.680
0.608
0.589
0.878
0.937
0.949
0.773
0.858
0.887
0.707
0.778
0.809
0.681
0.718
0.743
0.671
0.674
0.694
0.675
0.640
0.656
WFEM
0.835
0.907
0.926
0.720
0.792
0.823
0.696
0.725
0.747
0.700
0.682
0.697
0.715
0.651
0.659
0.726
0.647
0.626
0.878
0.937
0.949
0.773
0.858
0.887
0.707
0.778
0.809
0.697
0.734
0.759
0.698
0.701
0.721
0.710
0.673
0.689
WFEM
0.802
0.848
0.858
0.708
0.766
0.788
0.673
0.695
0.714
0.665
0.645
0.658
0.672
0.610
0.618
0.677
0.603
0.584
0.832
0.867
0.871
0.754
0.815
0.833
0.697
0.754
0.778
0.674
0.704
0.724
0.665
0.664
0.682
0.671
0.633
0.647
Frame
Kx
A1B2C6D1
2.471
A1B2C6D2
2.072
A1B2C6D3
1.849
A1B2C6D4
1.704
A1B2C6D5
1.599
A1B2C6D6
1.520
A1B2C7D1
2.431
A1B2C7D2
2.032
A1B2C7D3
1.813
A1B2C7D4
1.670
A1B2C7D5
1.568
A1B2C7D6
1.490
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
8.75
9.46
9.66
11.62
13.05
13.44
13.60
15.89
16.53
14.97
18.14
19.09
15.54
19.96
21.21
15.64
21.46
22.99
8.57
9.30
9.50
11.35
12.88
13.28
13.24
15.66
16.36
14.37
17.86
18.86
14.93
19.59
20.94
15.20
21.00
22.68
25
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.844
0.792
0.775
0.779
0.757
0.735
0.732
0.730
0.704
0.703
0.702
0.681
0.703
0.678
0.663
0.716
0.658
0.646
0.953
0.943
0.923
0.878
0.946
0.944
0.827
0.912
0.939
0.806
0.877
0.917
0.805
0.851
0.894
0.812
0.829
0.873
WFEM
0.697
0.691
0.691
0.656
0.662
0.656
0.627
0.640
0.630
0.608
0.618
0.609
0.613
0.600
0.594
0.628
0.585
0.581
0.748
0.771
0.775
0.711
0.766
0.778
0.684
0.746
0.771
0.676
0.726
0.757
0.682
0.711
0.743
0.693
0.699
0.731
WFEM
0.904
0.952
0.961
0.816
0.899
0.922
0.748
0.833
0.866
0.704
0.775
0.808
0.693
0.728
0.757
0.698
0.692
0.717
0.933
0.973
0.981
0.869
0.949
0.968
0.813
0.915
0.947
0.782
0.878
0.922
0.772
0.844
0.894
0.772
0.815
0.867
WFEM
0.904
0.952
0.961
0.816
0.899
0.922
0.748
0.833
0.866
0.704
0.775
0.808
0.707
0.744
0.773
0.723
0.716
0.742
0.933
0.973
0.981
0.869
0.949
0.968
0.813
0.915
0.947
0.788
0.884
0.927
0.797
0.872
0.921
0.810
0.859
0.912
WFEM
0.850
0.875
0.879
0.788
0.844
0.856
0.733
0.798
0.819
0.694
0.752
0.777
0.685
0.713
0.736
0.691
0.680
0.701
0.871
0.890
0.892
0.833
0.878
0.888
0.791
0.860
0.877
0.767
0.836
0.862
0.762
0.813
0.846
0.763
0.791
0.828
Frame
Kx
A1B2C8D1
2.606
A1B2C8D2
2.209
A1B2C8D3
1.978
A1B2C8D4
1.824
A1B2C8D5
1.713
A1B2C8D6
1.627
A1B2C9D1
2.739
A1B2C9D2
2.351
A1B2C9D3
2.115
A1B2C9D4
1.954
A1B2C9D5
1.836
A1B2C9D6
1.744
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
10.17
10.91
11.13
13.38
14.81
15.20
15.77
18.04
18.66
17.56
20.71
21.61
18.87
22.94
24.14
19.31
24.81
26.33
11.67
12.45
12.68
15.17
16.56
16.94
17.92
20.08
20.65
20.07
23.10
23.91
21.76
25.68
26.79
23.01
27.92
29.33
26
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.974
0.938
0.920
0.915
0.958
0.936
0.865
0.941
0.949
0.829
0.914
0.941
0.806
0.888
0.926
0.813
0.866
0.908
0.984
0.935
0.918
0.942
0.952
0.931
0.895
0.955
0.942
0.860
0.938
0.950
0.834
0.917
0.943
0.818
0.896
0.931
WFEM
0.756
0.768
0.774
0.729
0.773
0.776
0.703
0.762
0.778
0.684
0.746
0.771
0.673
0.731
0.761
0.684
0.719
0.750
0.759
0.766
0.772
0.740
0.770
0.774
0.717
0.769
0.775
0.699
0.758
0.776
0.686
0.746
0.770
0.679
0.734
0.762
WFEM
0.950
0.979
0.985
0.904
0.965
0.978
0.855
0.943
0.965
0.814
0.917
0.949
0.785
0.889
0.930
0.785
0.863
0.910
0.958
0.982
0.987
0.924
0.973
0.983
0.885
0.958
0.975
0.849
0.939
0.963
0.819
0.918
0.950
0.797
0.897
0.936
WFEM
0.950
0.979
0.985
0.904
0.965
0.978
0.855
0.943
0.965
0.814
0.917
0.949
0.785
0.889
0.930
0.799
0.879
0.925
0.958
0.982
0.987
0.924
0.973
0.983
0.885
0.958
0.975
0.849
0.939
0.963
0.819
0.918
0.950
0.797
0.897
0.936
WFEM
0.880
0.893
0.894
0.855
0.887
0.893
0.823
0.875
0.887
0.792
0.861
0.878
0.769
0.844
0.868
0.772
0.827
0.856
0.885
0.895
0.896
0.868
0.891
0.895
0.843
0.883
0.892
0.818
0.874
0.886
0.796
0.862
0.879
0.779
0.849
0.871
Frame
Kx
A2B1C1D1
2.561
A2B1C1D2
2.119
A2B1C1D3
1.885
A2B1C1D4
1.736
A2B1C1D5
1.631
A2B1C1D6
1.552
A2B1C2D1
2.755
A2B1C2D2
2.305
A2B1C2D3
2.056
A2B1C2D4
1.893
A2B1C2D5
1.777
A2B1C2D6
1.688
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
7.17
7.97
8.18
9.30
11.09
11.57
10.53
13.32
14.15
11.27
14.90
16.15
11.73
16.03
17.71
11.90
16.86
18.93
8.49
9.28
9.48
11.15
12.80
13.24
12.83
15.52
16.25
13.97
17.63
18.71
14.75
19.27
20.75
15.31
20.54
22.44
27
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.896
0.830
0.809
0.850
0.817
0.783
0.824
0.794
0.767
0.812
0.776
0.755
0.808
0.764
0.741
0.816
0.758
0.731
0.910
0.839
0.820
0.871
0.824
0.797
0.844
0.814
0.781
0.826
0.797
0.770
0.816
0.783
0.762
0.811
0.773
0.751
WFEM
0.728
0.715
0.714
0.707
0.701
0.689
0.697
0.685
0.675
0.696
0.673
0.665
0.697
0.667
0.655
0.709
0.664
0.648
0.735
0.723
0.725
0.716
0.707
0.702
0.705
0.698
0.687
0.699
0.687
0.678
0.697
0.678
0.670
0.697
0.672
0.662
WFEM
0.938
0.972
0.980
0.877
0.931
0.952
0.832
0.881
0.910
0.806
0.840
0.867
0.790
0.809
0.829
0.790
0.787
0.798
0.955
0.979
0.986
0.907
0.955
0.970
0.866
0.921
0.944
0.834
0.884
0.914
0.813
0.852
0.881
0.799
0.827
0.851
WFEM
0.938
0.972
0.980
0.877
0.931
0.952
0.832
0.881
0.910
0.806
0.840
0.867
0.802
0.822
0.841
0.815
0.813
0.824
0.955
0.979
0.986
0.907
0.955
0.970
0.866
0.921
0.944
0.834
0.884
0.914
0.813
0.852
0.881
0.801
0.829
0.853
WFEM
0.882
0.893
0.894
0.848
0.873
0.881
0.815
0.842
0.858
0.794
0.814
0.829
0.782
0.790
0.801
0.783
0.773
0.778
0.890
0.896
0.897
0.866
0.885
0.890
0.840
0.867
0.877
0.817
0.844
0.860
0.800
0.823
0.839
0.789
0.804
0.818
Frame
Kx
A2B1C3D1
2.904
A2B1C3D2
2.456
A2B1C3D3
2.198
A2B1C3D4
2.026
A2B1C3D5
1.901
A2B1C3D6
1.805
A2B1C4D1
2.285
A2B1C4D2
1.872
A2B1C4D3
1.667
A2B1C4D4
1.539
A2B1C4D5
1.451
A2B1C4D6
1.386
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
9.72
10.50
10.72
12.73
14.29
14.70
14.82
17.35
18.02
16.30
19.85
20.83
17.39
21.89
23.21
18.20
23.56
25.26
5.73
6.44
6.63
7.36
9.03
9.50
8.20
10.69
11.52
8.61
11.75
12.98
8.81
12.47
14.03
8.92
12.97
14.81
28
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.913
0.845
0.828
0.888
0.831
0.808
0.861
0.823
0.793
0.842
0.814
0.782
0.828
0.801
0.774
0.820
0.789
0.768
0.894
0.844
0.819
0.844
0.823
0.793
0.822
0.795
0.776
0.818
0.779
0.758
0.823
0.770
0.745
0.829
0.765
0.736
WFEM
0.737
0.728
0.732
0.724
0.714
0.712
0.712
0.705
0.697
0.704
0.698
0.687
0.699
0.688
0.680
0.698
0.681
0.674
0.721
0.716
0.714
0.700
0.696
0.689
0.693
0.679
0.674
0.698
0.671
0.661
0.707
0.668
0.652
0.716
0.666
0.647
WFEM
0.963
0.983
0.988
0.927
0.967
0.978
0.890
0.944
0.962
0.860
0.915
0.941
0.836
0.887
0.916
0.819
0.861
0.891
0.908
0.956
0.968
0.836
0.891
0.918
0.795
0.833
0.860
0.779
0.794
0.812
0.774
0.769
0.777
0.773
0.752
0.752
WFEM
0.963
0.983
0.988
0.927
0.967
0.978
0.890
0.944
0.962
0.860
0.915
0.941
0.836
0.887
0.916
0.819
0.861
0.891
0.908
0.956
0.968
0.836
0.891
0.918
0.802
0.840
0.867
0.808
0.825
0.842
0.818
0.814
0.821
0.827
0.805
0.804
WFEM
0.893
0.897
0.898
0.876
0.891
0.894
0.856
0.879
0.887
0.836
0.864
0.876
0.818
0.846
0.862
0.805
0.829
0.846
0.860
0.882
0.887
0.815
0.844
0.860
0.782
0.805
0.822
0.770
0.776
0.786
0.767
0.755
0.758
0.767
0.741
0.737
Frame
Kx
A2B1C5D1
2.479
A2B1C5D2
2.043
A2B1C5D3
1.817
A2B1C5D4
1.675
A2B1C5D5
1.575
A2B1C5D6
1.501
A2B1C6D1
2.635
A2B1C6D2
2.186
A2B1C6D3
1.946
A2B1C6D4
1.792
A2B1C6D5
1.684
A2B1C6D6
1.602
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
6.73
7.39
7.58
8.88
10.43
10.85
10.11
12.60
13.32
10.88
14.14
15.23
11.33
15.26
16.72
11.59
16.09
17.90
7.60
8.25
8.44
10.16
11.60
11.98
11.75
14.13
14.78
12.81
16.08
17.03
13.54
17.56
18.88
14.02
18.70
20.39
29
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.916
0.853
0.832
0.868
0.841
0.809
0.841
0.820
0.795
0.825
0.801
0.783
0.821
0.788
0.769
0.823
0.779
0.757
0.928
0.860
0.841
0.888
0.848
0.822
0.859
0.839
0.808
0.840
0.821
0.799
0.829
0.807
0.790
0.825
0.796
0.778
WFEM
0.732
0.725
0.726
0.709
0.710
0.702
0.699
0.694
0.688
0.695
0.683
0.678
0.697
0.676
0.668
0.704
0.672
0.660
0.738
0.731
0.734
0.718
0.716
0.713
0.706
0.707
0.699
0.699
0.695
0.690
0.697
0.686
0.682
0.699
0.680
0.674
WFEM
0.933
0.969
0.978
0.870
0.927
0.948
0.826
0.879
0.907
0.798
0.838
0.866
0.784
0.808
0.829
0.779
0.786
0.800
0.947
0.976
0.983
0.895
0.948
0.964
0.853
0.910
0.936
0.823
0.874
0.903
0.802
0.843
0.871
0.790
0.819
0.842
WFEM
0.933
0.969
0.978
0.870
0.927
0.948
0.826
0.879
0.907
0.803
0.843
0.870
0.808
0.833
0.854
0.815
0.823
0.837
0.947
0.976
0.983
0.895
0.948
0.964
0.853
0.910
0.936
0.823
0.874
0.903
0.805
0.846
0.874
0.809
0.838
0.862
WFEM
0.875
0.890
0.892
0.838
0.867
0.877
0.807
0.837
0.853
0.785
0.809
0.825
0.774
0.787
0.799
0.771
0.769
0.777
0.883
0.893
0.895
0.854
0.878
0.885
0.827
0.857
0.869
0.805
0.834
0.850
0.788
0.812
0.829
0.779
0.795
0.809
Frame
Kx
A2B1C7D1
2.589
A2B1C7D2
2.143
A2B1C7D3
1.907
A2B1C7D4
1.757
A2B1C7D5
1.651
A2B1C7D6
1.571
A2B1C8D1
2.792
A2B1C8D2
2.336
A2B1C8D3
2.084
A2B1C8D4
1.920
A2B1C8D5
1.802
A2B1C8D6
1.713
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
7.41
8.11
8.30
9.87
11.38
11.80
11.37
13.85
14.54
12.33
15.69
16.73
12.97
17.08
18.50
13.36
18.14
19.93
8.72
9.42
9.62
11.67
13.07
13.47
13.69
15.98
16.61
15.09
18.33
19.23
16.09
20.22
21.45
16.84
21.75
23.34
30
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
1.007
0.953
0.931
0.958
0.982
0.955
0.926
0.965
0.972
0.908
0.945
0.963
0.900
0.929
0.950
0.899
0.918
0.937
1.014
0.945
0.926
0.983
0.972
0.943
0.949
0.981
0.961
0.927
0.967
0.973
0.913
0.951
0.968
0.904
0.938
0.958
WFEM
0.770
0.773
0.776
0.752
0.780
0.780
0.743
0.770
0.783
0.739
0.760
0.777
0.741
0.754
0.769
0.747
0.751
0.763
0.771
0.770
0.775
0.759
0.775
0.776
0.748
0.777
0.779
0.742
0.769
0.782
0.739
0.761
0.777
0.738
0.756
0.772
WFEM
0.963
0.985
0.989
0.924
0.970
0.980
0.890
0.947
0.967
0.865
0.924
0.950
0.850
0.904
0.931
0.843
0.887
0.914
0.973
0.988
0.991
0.944
0.980
0.986
0.915
0.965
0.978
0.891
0.947
0.968
0.872
0.930
0.955
0.857
0.915
0.941
WFEM
0.963
0.985
0.989
0.924
0.970
0.980
0.890
0.947
0.967
0.865
0.924
0.950
0.861
0.916
0.942
0.872
0.918
0.944
0.973
0.988
0.991
0.944
0.980
0.986
0.915
0.965
0.978
0.891
0.947
0.968
0.872
0.930
0.955
0.857
0.915
0.941
WFEM
0.895
0.899
0.899
0.879
0.896
0.897
0.860
0.885
0.892
0.844
0.874
0.884
0.834
0.864
0.875
0.830
0.854
0.866
0.900
0.900
0.900
0.888
0.899
0.899
0.874
0.893
0.897
0.861
0.885
0.893
0.849
0.877
0.887
0.839
0.869
0.880
Frame
Kx
A2B1C9D1
2.950
A2B1C9D2
2.495
A2B1C9D3
2.233
A2B1C9D4
2.058
A2B1C9D5
1.932
A2B1C9D6
1.835
A2B2C1D1
2.561
A2B2C1D2
2.119
A2B2C1D3
1.885
A2B2C1D4
1.736
A2B2C1D5
1.631
A2B2C1D6
1.552
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
9.94
10.66
10.87
13.22
14.55
14.93
15.63
17.77
18.37
17.43
20.47
21.31
18.76
22.75
23.85
19.79
24.66
26.07
7.18
7.98
8.19
9.30
11.10
11.58
10.53
13.33
14.16
11.27
14.91
16.16
11.62
16.03
17.72
11.86
16.86
18.93
31
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
1.009
0.940
0.923
0.999
0.961
0.937
0.969
0.982
0.951
0.945
0.980
0.965
0.929
0.968
0.973
0.917
0.956
0.970
0.838
0.764
0.744
0.794
0.728
0.698
0.769
0.707
0.668
0.757
0.690
0.649
0.759
0.679
0.636
0.763
0.672
0.628
WFEM
0.766
0.767
0.773
0.763
0.771
0.773
0.753
0.776
0.775
0.745
0.774
0.777
0.741
0.768
0.779
0.739
0.762
0.777
0.696
0.672
0.670
0.673
0.642
0.630
0.661
0.626
0.604
0.657
0.613
0.588
0.664
0.606
0.578
0.671
0.602
0.571
WFEM
0.978
0.990
0.992
0.956
0.984
0.989
0.932
0.975
0.983
0.909
0.962
0.977
0.891
0.948
0.968
0.876
0.934
0.958
0.916
0.955
0.967
0.841
0.893
0.917
0.790
0.826
0.851
0.761
0.775
0.792
0.752
0.741
0.746
0.746
0.717
0.712
WFEM
0.978
0.990
0.992
0.956
0.984
0.989
0.932
0.975
0.983
0.909
0.962
0.977
0.891
0.948
0.968
0.876
0.934
0.958
0.916
0.955
0.967
0.841
0.893
0.917
0.790
0.826
0.851
0.761
0.775
0.792
0.762
0.751
0.756
0.768
0.737
0.731
WFEM
0.901
0.900
0.900
0.892
0.900
0.900
0.882
0.897
0.899
0.871
0.892
0.896
0.861
0.885
0.893
0.852
0.879
0.888
0.865
0.880
0.885
0.816
0.845
0.857
0.777
0.798
0.814
0.752
0.758
0.769
0.745
0.728
0.730
0.741
0.707
0.701
Frame
Kx
A2B2C2D1
2.755
A2B2C2D2
2.305
A2B2C2D3
2.056
A2B2C2D4
1.893
A2B2C2D5
1.777
A2B2C2D6
1.688
A2B2C3D1
2.904
A2B2C3D2
2.456
A2B2C3D3
2.198
A2B2C3D4
2.026
A2B2C3D5
1.901
A2B2C3D6
1.805
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
8.50
9.29
9.50
11.15
12.81
13.24
12.83
15.53
16.26
13.98
17.64
18.72
14.76
19.27
20.76
15.30
20.54
22.44
9.73
10.52
10.73
12.73
14.30
14.71
14.82
17.36
18.03
16.29
19.86
20.83
17.39
21.90
23.21
18.20
23.56
25.26
32
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.853
0.781
0.764
0.816
0.748
0.723
0.790
0.727
0.694
0.772
0.712
0.673
0.762
0.699
0.658
0.757
0.689
0.647
0.857
0.793
0.777
0.834
0.764
0.742
0.808
0.743
0.715
0.789
0.729
0.695
0.776
0.718
0.679
0.767
0.707
0.667
WFEM
0.705
0.687
0.687
0.684
0.658
0.652
0.671
0.641
0.626
0.663
0.629
0.608
0.659
0.619
0.596
0.659
0.612
0.586
0.707
0.696
0.698
0.694
0.671
0.668
0.680
0.654
0.644
0.671
0.642
0.626
0.665
0.633
0.613
0.662
0.625
0.603
WFEM
0.939
0.968
0.976
0.878
0.930
0.948
0.829
0.879
0.905
0.794
0.831
0.857
0.771
0.792
0.813
0.756
0.762
0.775
0.951
0.974
0.981
0.904
0.950
0.963
0.859
0.913
0.935
0.824
0.874
0.900
0.797
0.836
0.863
0.778
0.805
0.828
WFEM
0.939
0.968
0.976
0.878
0.930
0.948
0.829
0.879
0.905
0.794
0.831
0.857
0.771
0.792
0.813
0.758
0.764
0.777
0.951
0.974
0.981
0.904
0.950
0.963
0.859
0.913
0.935
0.824
0.874
0.900
0.797
0.836
0.863
0.778
0.805
0.828
WFEM
0.878
0.888
0.890
0.842
0.867
0.876
0.808
0.836
0.851
0.780
0.802
0.818
0.760
0.772
0.785
0.748
0.747
0.755
0.884
0.891
0.893
0.859
0.879
0.884
0.830
0.858
0.869
0.804
0.832
0.848
0.783
0.806
0.823
0.767
0.782
0.798
Frame
Kx
A2B2C4D1
2.285
A2B2C4D2
1.872
A2B2C4D3
1.667
A2B2C4D4
1.539
A2B2C4D5
1.451
A2B2C4D6
1.386
A2B2C5D1
2.479
A2B2C5D2
2.043
A2B2C5D3
1.817
A2B2C5D4
1.675
A2B2C5D5
1.575
A2B2C5D6
1.501
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
5.73
6.45
6.65
7.36
9.04
9.52
8.20
10.70
11.53
8.62
11.76
12.99
8.81
12.47
14.04
8.92
12.96
14.81
6.73
7.41
7.60
8.88
10.44
10.86
10.11
12.60
13.33
10.88
14.15
15.24
11.33
15.27
16.74
11.59
16.08
17.90
33
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.843
0.776
0.753
0.793
0.740
0.702
0.769
0.712
0.673
0.764
0.695
0.655
0.767
0.685
0.642
0.772
0.680
0.633
0.868
0.797
0.777
0.820
0.763
0.734
0.791
0.742
0.705
0.776
0.722
0.685
0.771
0.709
0.671
0.772
0.700
0.661
WFEM
0.693
0.671
0.666
0.667
0.641
0.623
0.658
0.621
0.598
0.660
0.610
0.584
0.668
0.605
0.573
0.676
0.603
0.568
0.706
0.688
0.686
0.681
0.660
0.648
0.668
0.642
0.623
0.662
0.629
0.606
0.663
0.620
0.596
0.669
0.615
0.588
WFEM
0.882
0.929
0.940
0.797
0.838
0.859
0.752
0.767
0.779
0.734
0.723
0.723
0.728
0.696
0.685
0.726
0.679
0.659
0.916
0.952
0.959
0.838
0.890
0.909
0.789
0.826
0.847
0.758
0.777
0.792
0.743
0.743
0.748
0.737
0.719
0.716
WFEM
0.882
0.929
0.940
0.797
0.838
0.859
0.758
0.772
0.785
0.760
0.748
0.747
0.766
0.732
0.719
0.773
0.721
0.699
0.916
0.952
0.959
0.838
0.890
0.909
0.789
0.826
0.847
0.763
0.782
0.796
0.764
0.764
0.768
0.769
0.750
0.746
WFEM
0.842
0.862
0.867
0.780
0.803
0.814
0.742
0.747
0.755
0.727
0.711
0.707
0.723
0.687
0.674
0.722
0.671
0.651
0.861
0.876
0.878
0.811
0.840
0.848
0.773
0.795
0.807
0.748
0.757
0.765
0.735
0.728
0.729
0.730
0.708
0.702
Frame
Kx
A2B2C6D1
2.635
A2B2C6D2
2.186
A2B2C6D3
1.946
A2B2C6D4
1.792
A2B2C6D5
1.684
A2B2C6D6
1.602
A2B2C7D1
2.589
A2B2C7D2
2.143
A2B2C7D3
1.907
A2B2C7D4
1.757
A2B2C7D5
1.651
A2B2C7D6
1.571
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
7.61
8.27
8.45
10.16
11.61
12.00
11.76
14.14
14.80
12.81
16.08
17.05
13.54
17.56
18.89
14.02
18.70
20.40
7.43
8.13
8.33
9.88
11.41
11.84
11.38
13.87
14.57
12.34
15.71
16.76
12.98
17.10
18.53
13.38
18.17
19.97
78
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.883
0.813
0.796
0.844
0.784
0.759
0.814
0.766
0.732
0.795
0.749
0.713
0.783
0.734
0.698
0.779
0.723
0.688
1.004
0.950
0.927
0.957
0.980
0.952
0.925
0.964
0.970
0.908
0.943
0.961
0.899
0.928
0.948
0.898
0.917
0.936
WFEM
0.715
0.701
0.701
0.693
0.675
0.668
0.679
0.660
0.645
0.671
0.647
0.628
0.667
0.637
0.617
0.668
0.630
0.608
0.768
0.770
0.773
0.751
0.778
0.778
0.742
0.769
0.781
0.739
0.759
0.775
0.740
0.753
0.768
0.746
0.750
0.762
WFEM
0.934
0.963
0.969
0.870
0.922
0.937
0.821
0.871
0.893
0.788
0.825
0.847
0.765
0.788
0.805
0.752
0.761
0.770
0.961
0.981
0.985
0.922
0.968
0.978
0.889
0.945
0.965
0.865
0.923
0.948
0.849
0.903
0.930
0.842
0.886
0.913
WFEM
0.934
0.963
0.969
0.870
0.922
0.937
0.821
0.871
0.893
0.788
0.825
0.847
0.768
0.791
0.808
0.769
0.778
0.787
0.961
0.981
0.985
0.922
0.968
0.978
0.889
0.945
0.965
0.865
0.923
0.948
0.860
0.914
0.940
0.871
0.917
0.942
WFEM
0.872
0.883
0.884
0.834
0.860
0.866
0.799
0.827
0.838
0.773
0.794
0.807
0.754
0.766
0.776
0.744
0.744
0.748
0.893
0.896
0.896
0.878
0.894
0.895
0.860
0.883
0.891
0.844
0.873
0.883
0.833
0.863
0.874
0.829
0.853
0.865
Frame
Kx
A2B2C8D1
2.792
A2B2C8D2
2.336
A2B2C8D3
2.084
A2B2C8D4
1.920
A2B2C8D5
1.802
A2B2C8D6
1.713
A2B2C9D1
2.950
A2B2C9D2
2.495
A2B2C9D3
2.233
A2B2C9D4
2.058
A2B2C9D5
1.932
A2B2C9D6
1.835
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
8.74
9.45
9.65
11.69
13.09
13.49
13.70
16.00
16.64
15.09
18.35
19.26
16.10
20.24
21.48
16.85
21.77
23.37
9.96
10.69
10.90
13.24
14.58
14.97
15.65
17.79
18.40
17.44
20.50
21.34
18.77
22.77
23.88
19.80
24.68
26.11
79
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
1.011
0.942
0.922
0.982
0.970
0.941
0.949
0.979
0.960
0.927
0.966
0.971
0.913
0.950
0.966
0.903
0.937
0.957
1.006
0.937
0.920
0.998
0.959
0.935
0.969
0.981
0.949
0.945
0.978
0.963
0.928
0.967
0.972
0.917
0.955
0.969
WFEM
0.769
0.767
0.772
0.758
0.774
0.774
0.747
0.775
0.778
0.741
0.768
0.780
0.739
0.761
0.776
0.738
0.755
0.771
0.764
0.765
0.770
0.762
0.769
0.772
0.752
0.775
0.773
0.745
0.773
0.776
0.740
0.767
0.778
0.739
0.761
0.776
WFEM
0.971
0.985
0.988
0.942
0.978
0.984
0.914
0.963
0.976
0.890
0.946
0.966
0.871
0.929
0.953
0.857
0.914
0.940
0.976
0.987
0.989
0.954
0.982
0.987
0.931
0.973
0.982
0.909
0.961
0.975
0.891
0.947
0.967
0.876
0.933
0.957
WFEM
0.971
0.985
0.988
0.942
0.978
0.984
0.914
0.963
0.976
0.890
0.946
0.966
0.871
0.929
0.953
0.857
0.914
0.940
0.976
0.987
0.989
0.954
0.982
0.987
0.931
0.973
0.982
0.909
0.961
0.975
0.891
0.947
0.967
0.876
0.933
0.957
WFEM
0.897
0.897
0.897
0.887
0.897
0.897
0.874
0.892
0.895
0.860
0.884
0.891
0.848
0.876
0.885
0.838
0.868
0.879
0.899
0.898
0.897
0.891
0.898
0.898
0.882
0.896
0.897
0.870
0.890
0.895
0.860
0.884
0.892
0.851
0.878
0.887
Frame
Kx
A3B1C1D1
3.136
A3B1C1D2
2.506
A3B1C1D3
2.195
A3B1C1D4
1.999
A3B1C1D5
1.860
A3B1C1D6
1.756
A3B1C2D1
3.441
A3B1C2D2
2.757
A3B1C2D3
2.417
A3B1C2D4
2.202
A3B1C2D5
2.048
A3B1C2D6
1.932
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.59
2.74
2.79
3.79
4.18
4.28
4.58
5.29
5.47
5.13
6.18
6.48
5.50
6.91
7.33
5.75
7.48
8.05
2.92
3.06
3.10
4.32
4.66
4.75
5.33
5.94
6.09
6.08
7.01
7.25
6.65
7.92
8.26
7.07
8.69
9.15
80
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.892
0.843
0.831
0.873
0.822
0.802
0.835
0.809
0.782
0.809
0.795
0.767
0.796
0.778
0.756
0.790
0.764
0.746
0.892
0.852
0.841
0.893
0.833
0.817
0.864
0.820
0.799
0.837
0.811
0.785
0.817
0.802
0.773
0.804
0.789
0.764
WFEM
0.730
0.736
0.740
0.716
0.712
0.712
0.697
0.698
0.692
0.684
0.687
0.679
0.680
0.676
0.669
0.680
0.667
0.661
0.735
0.744
0.752
0.727
0.723
0.727
0.711
0.709
0.708
0.698
0.700
0.695
0.688
0.693
0.684
0.683
0.683
0.676
WFEM
0.970
0.988
0.993
0.921
0.969
0.980
0.875
0.939
0.959
0.835
0.904
0.932
0.810
0.869
0.902
0.793
0.838
0.869
0.978
0.993
0.996
0.948
0.981
0.988
0.912
0.962
0.976
0.877
0.940
0.961
0.846
0.915
0.942
0.824
0.889
0.920
WFEM
0.970
0.988
0.993
0.921
0.969
0.980
0.875
0.939
0.959
0.835
0.904
0.932
0.810
0.869
0.902
0.793
0.838
0.869
0.978
0.993
0.996
0.948
0.981
0.988
0.912
0.962
0.976
0.877
0.940
0.961
0.846
0.915
0.942
0.824
0.889
0.920
WFEM
0.893
0.899
0.901
0.870
0.889
0.894
0.842
0.874
0.885
0.813
0.854
0.870
0.794
0.833
0.850
0.781
0.811
0.830
0.897
0.901
0.903
0.883
0.895
0.899
0.865
0.888
0.893
0.842
0.876
0.885
0.822
0.862
0.875
0.805
0.846
0.862
Frame
Kx
A3B1C3D1
3.694
A3B1C3D2
2.969
A3B1C3D3
2.605
A3B1C3D4
2.374
A3B1C3D5
2.209
A3B1C3D6
2.083
A3B1C4D1
2.730
A3B1C4D2
2.175
A3B1C4D3
1.905
A3B1C4D4
1.737
A3B1C4D5
1.621
A3B1C4D6
1.535
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
3.20
3.33
3.37
4.76
5.07
5.15
5.93
6.47
6.61
6.84
7.66
7.88
7.56
8.71
9.00
8.14
9.62
10.01
2.19
2.34
2.38
3.15
3.56
3.66
3.73
4.46
4.66
4.08
5.14
5.47
4.28
5.65
6.11
4.38
6.02
6.62
81
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.893
0.858
0.849
0.896
0.841
0.828
0.885
0.829
0.812
0.861
0.820
0.798
0.840
0.814
0.787
0.823
0.808
0.778
0.908
0.850
0.835
0.860
0.830
0.806
0.822
0.813
0.786
0.803
0.791
0.773
0.800
0.773
0.758
0.805
0.762
0.745
WFEM
0.739
0.752
0.760
0.732
0.731
0.736
0.722
0.718
0.720
0.710
0.709
0.707
0.699
0.701
0.696
0.691
0.696
0.688
0.730
0.728
0.733
0.702
0.708
0.706
0.684
0.694
0.687
0.678
0.678
0.675
0.682
0.667
0.664
0.691
0.661
0.654
WFEM
0.984
0.994
0.999
0.962
0.987
0.992
0.935
0.974
0.984
0.906
0.960
0.975
0.878
0.942
0.962
0.854
0.922
0.948
0.940
0.977
0.985
0.876
0.938
0.958
0.826
0.892
0.921
0.792
0.848
0.880
0.776
0.811
0.839
0.772
0.784
0.805
WFEM
0.984
0.994
0.999
0.962
0.987
0.992
0.935
0.974
0.984
0.906
0.960
0.975
0.878
0.942
0.962
0.854
0.922
0.948
0.940
0.977
0.985
0.876
0.938
0.958
0.826
0.892
0.921
0.792
0.848
0.880
0.791
0.826
0.854
0.801
0.814
0.835
WFEM
0.898
0.902
0.904
0.889
0.898
0.901
0.876
0.893
0.897
0.860
0.886
0.892
0.843
0.876
0.886
0.827
0.865
0.878
0.872
0.893
0.895
0.836
0.870
0.880
0.803
0.844
0.860
0.777
0.813
0.833
0.766
0.788
0.805
0.763
0.766
0.780
Frame
Kx
A3B1C5D1
3.002
A3B1C5D2
2.396
A3B1C5D3
2.098
A3B1C5D4
1.911
A3B1C5D5
1.780
A3B1C5D6
1.682
A3B1C6D1
3.231
A3B1C6D2
2.583
A3B1C6D3
2.263
A3B1C6D4
2.061
A3B1C6D5
1.918
A3B1C6D6
1.811
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.46
2.60
2.64
3.62
3.97
4.07
4.40
5.05
5.21
4.95
5.91
6.17
5.32
6.61
6.99
5.57
7.16
7.67
2.69
2.82
2.86
4.00
4.32
4.40
4.94
5.51
5.66
5.64
6.50
6.73
6.16
7.34
7.66
6.55
8.04
8.48
82
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.906
0.859
0.847
0.891
0.842
0.823
0.853
0.831
0.805
0.826
0.819
0.792
0.810
0.802
0.782
0.804
0.787
0.772
0.907
0.866
0.855
0.909
0.851
0.835
0.878
0.841
0.820
0.850
0.835
0.807
0.830
0.824
0.797
0.816
0.811
0.790
WFEM
0.731
0.740
0.749
0.719
0.719
0.721
0.699
0.707
0.703
0.687
0.697
0.690
0.681
0.685
0.681
0.681
0.676
0.673
0.738
0.747
0.755
0.728
0.728
0.732
0.712
0.716
0.716
0.698
0.708
0.704
0.689
0.700
0.694
0.684
0.691
0.687
WFEM
0.961
0.984
0.990
0.916
0.962
0.974
0.866
0.930
0.953
0.828
0.897
0.925
0.801
0.863
0.895
0.786
0.834
0.865
0.971
0.989
0.993
0.934
0.973
0.982
0.896
0.952
0.968
0.861
0.927
0.950
0.831
0.900
0.928
0.809
0.874
0.905
WFEM
0.961
0.984
0.990
0.916
0.962
0.974
0.866
0.930
0.953
0.828
0.897
0.925
0.801
0.863
0.895
0.789
0.837
0.869
0.971
0.989
0.993
0.934
0.973
0.982
0.896
0.952
0.968
0.861
0.927
0.950
0.831
0.900
0.928
0.809
0.874
0.905
WFEM
0.884
0.895
0.898
0.860
0.885
0.890
0.830
0.867
0.878
0.806
0.847
0.862
0.785
0.824
0.844
0.773
0.805
0.823
0.890
0.898
0.900
0.874
0.889
0.894
0.852
0.879
0.886
0.827
0.865
0.876
0.808
0.848
0.864
0.791
0.832
0.851
Frame
Kx
A3B1C7D1
3.162
A3B1C7D2
2.527
A3B1C7D3
2.214
A3B1C7D4
2.016
A3B1C7D5
1.877
A3B1C7D6
1.772
A3B1C8D1
3.474
A3B1C8D2
2.784
A3B1C8D3
2.441
A3B1C8D4
2.223
A3B1C8D5
2.069
A3B1C8D6
1.951
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.64
2.77
2.81
3.92
4.24
4.33
4.82
5.42
5.57
5.47
6.39
6.62
5.95
7.19
7.54
6.30
7.87
8.33
2.96
3.09
3.13
4.43
4.72
4.81
5.53
6.04
6.18
6.39
7.17
7.37
7.07
8.16
8.43
7.60
9.01
9.38
83
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.974
0.926
0.913
0.982
0.949
0.929
0.944
0.968
0.942
0.914
0.961
0.955
0.894
0.945
0.958
0.882
0.929
0.950
0.961
0.921
0.910
0.994
0.939
0.922
0.974
0.954
0.933
0.946
0.968
0.943
0.922
0.965
0.952
0.905
0.955
0.960
WFEM
0.767
0.775
0.785
0.762
0.776
0.782
0.745
0.778
0.781
0.733
0.772
0.782
0.726
0.764
0.781
0.724
0.756
0.775
0.762
0.780
0.788
0.768
0.775
0.783
0.757
0.775
0.781
0.745
0.778
0.781
0.735
0.774
0.781
0.729
0.768
0.782
WFEM
0.977
0.992
0.995
0.949
0.983
0.989
0.919
0.968
0.982
0.892
0.953
0.971
0.868
0.936
0.959
0.851
0.920
0.947
0.986
0.994
0.998
0.966
0.989
0.993
0.942
0.980
0.988
0.920
0.969
0.982
0.899
0.958
0.975
0.880
0.946
0.967
WFEM
0.977
0.992
0.995
0.949
0.983
0.989
0.919
0.968
0.982
0.892
0.953
0.971
0.868
0.936
0.959
0.851
0.920
0.947
0.986
0.994
0.998
0.966
0.989
0.993
0.942
0.980
0.988
0.920
0.969
0.982
0.899
0.958
0.975
0.880
0.946
0.967
WFEM
0.896
0.900
0.901
0.885
0.897
0.899
0.871
0.891
0.896
0.855
0.884
0.891
0.841
0.877
0.886
0.830
0.868
0.880
0.899
0.901
0.903
0.890
0.899
0.901
0.882
0.896
0.899
0.871
0.891
0.896
0.859
0.886
0.893
0.848
0.881
0.889
Frame
Kx
A3B1C9D1
3.733
A3B1C9D2
3.000
A3B1C9D3
2.633
A3B1C9D4
2.400
A3B1C9D5
2.233
A3B1C9D6
2.106
A3B2C1D1
3.136
A3B2C1D2
2.506
A3B2C1D3
2.195
A3B2C1D4
1.999
A3B2C1D5
1.860
A3B2C1D6
1.756
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
3.24
3.37
3.40
4.85
5.13
5.21
6.11
6.56
6.69
7.12
7.81
7.99
7.95
8.91
9.16
8.64
9.89
10.21
2.60
2.75
2.79
3.79
4.18
4.28
4.58
5.29
5.48
5.13
6.19
6.48
5.50
6.91
7.33
5.75
7.49
8.05
84
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.952
0.917
0.908
0.985
0.932
0.918
0.990
0.945
0.927
0.970
0.957
0.935
0.947
0.969
0.943
0.928
0.968
0.950
0.842
0.795
0.784
0.817
0.754
0.736
0.780
0.726
0.702
0.756
0.708
0.676
0.743
0.693
0.657
0.737
0.679
0.642
WFEM
0.763
0.779
0.790
0.765
0.775
0.783
0.763
0.774
0.781
0.754
0.775
0.780
0.745
0.776
0.780
0.737
0.775
0.780
0.702
0.704
0.709
0.684
0.667
0.666
0.663
0.643
0.636
0.649
0.628
0.614
0.643
0.617
0.597
0.644
0.607
0.585
WFEM
0.988
0.996
1.000
0.974
0.992
0.995
0.956
0.986
0.991
0.938
0.978
0.987
0.920
0.970
0.982
0.903
0.961
0.977
0.961
0.981
0.986
0.900
0.950
0.964
0.840
0.906
0.930
0.797
0.857
0.886
0.768
0.811
0.840
0.750
0.774
0.797
WFEM
0.988
0.996
1.000
0.974
0.992
0.995
0.956
0.986
0.991
0.938
0.978
0.987
0.920
0.970
0.982
0.903
0.961
0.977
0.961
0.981
0.986
0.900
0.950
0.964
0.840
0.906
0.930
0.797
0.857
0.886
0.768
0.811
0.840
0.750
0.774
0.797
WFEM
0.900
0.902
0.904
0.896
0.901
0.902
0.887
0.899
0.900
0.880
0.896
0.899
0.871
0.891
0.897
0.861
0.887
0.894
0.884
0.893
0.895
0.854
0.878
0.884
0.812
0.852
0.864
0.780
0.819
0.838
0.756
0.785
0.804
0.741
0.756
0.772
Frame
Kx
A3B2C2D1
3.441
A3B2C2D2
2.757
A3B2C2D3
2.417
A3B2C2D4
2.202
A3B2C2D5
2.048
A3B2C2D6
1.932
A3B2C3D1
3.694
A3B2C3D2
2.969
A3B2C3D3
2.605
A3B2C3D4
2.374
A3B2C3D5
2.209
A3B2C3D6
2.083
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.93
3.07
3.10
4.32
4.67
4.76
5.33
5.94
6.10
6.08
7.01
7.25
6.64
7.92
8.26
7.07
8.69
9.15
3.21
3.34
3.38
4.76
5.07
5.16
5.93
6.48
6.62
6.84
7.67
7.88
7.56
8.71
9.00
8.14
9.62
10.01
85
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.851
0.812
0.802
0.838
0.776
0.761
0.810
0.750
0.730
0.784
0.731
0.706
0.765
0.716
0.687
0.752
0.705
0.671
0.857
0.823
0.815
0.844
0.792
0.779
0.831
0.768
0.752
0.808
0.750
0.730
0.788
0.735
0.711
0.772
0.724
0.696
WFEM
0.714
0.719
0.725
0.698
0.685
0.687
0.680
0.663
0.661
0.665
0.647
0.640
0.654
0.635
0.623
0.648
0.626
0.609
0.719
0.732
0.738
0.703
0.700
0.704
0.693
0.679
0.679
0.679
0.662
0.659
0.667
0.650
0.643
0.658
0.640
0.630
WFEM
0.971
0.987
0.992
0.933
0.969
0.979
0.887
0.944
0.959
0.844
0.910
0.933
0.810
0.873
0.902
0.784
0.839
0.869
0.978
0.991
0.995
0.950
0.978
0.985
0.916
0.961
0.973
0.879
0.939
0.957
0.847
0.913
0.936
0.819
0.885
0.913
WFEM
0.971
0.987
0.992
0.933
0.969
0.979
0.887
0.944
0.959
0.844
0.910
0.933
0.810
0.873
0.902
0.784
0.839
0.869
0.978
0.991
0.995
0.950
0.978
0.985
0.916
0.961
0.973
0.879
0.939
0.957
0.847
0.913
0.936
0.819
0.885
0.913
WFEM
0.892
0.896
0.899
0.871
0.888
0.892
0.844
0.873
0.882
0.815
0.854
0.867
0.790
0.831
0.848
0.770
0.806
0.825
0.894
0.899
0.901
0.883
0.893
0.896
0.862
0.884
0.889
0.840
0.872
0.880
0.818
0.856
0.869
0.797
0.838
0.854
Frame
Kx
A3B2C4D1
2.730
A3B2C4D2
2.175
A3B2C4D3
1.905
A3B2C4D4
1.737
A3B2C4D5
1.621
A3B2C4D6
1.535
A3B2C5D1
3.002
A3B2C5D2
2.396
A3B2C5D3
2.098
A3B2C5D4
1.911
A3B2C5D5
1.780
A3B2C5D6
1.682
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.19
2.34
2.39
3.15
3.56
3.67
3.73
4.47
4.67
4.09
5.15
5.47
4.28
5.65
6.12
4.38
6.02
6.63
2.47
2.60
2.64
3.62
3.98
4.07
4.41
5.05
5.22
4.95
5.91
6.18
5.33
6.61
6.99
5.57
7.17
7.68
86
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.858
0.801
0.786
0.810
0.758
0.736
0.771
0.731
0.699
0.752
0.709
0.674
0.748
0.691
0.656
0.752
0.680
0.644
0.866
0.820
0.808
0.844
0.784
0.766
0.805
0.759
0.734
0.779
0.741
0.710
0.762
0.724
0.691
0.756
0.710
0.676
WFEM
0.703
0.698
0.698
0.673
0.659
0.653
0.652
0.637
0.622
0.644
0.621
0.601
0.647
0.608
0.586
0.654
0.601
0.577
0.710
0.713
0.717
0.692
0.681
0.679
0.671
0.659
0.651
0.657
0.644
0.630
0.650
0.632
0.614
0.649
0.622
0.602
WFEM
0.927
0.964
0.968
0.847
0.910
0.926
0.786
0.842
0.866
0.750
0.785
0.807
0.733
0.742
0.755
0.727
0.712
0.715
0.951
0.975
0.980
0.893
0.943
0.954
0.835
0.899
0.919
0.793
0.851
0.875
0.763
0.808
0.832
0.747
0.773
0.791
WFEM
0.927
0.964
0.968
0.847
0.910
0.926
0.786
0.842
0.866
0.750
0.785
0.807
0.733
0.742
0.755
0.727
0.712
0.715
0.951
0.975
0.980
0.893
0.943
0.954
0.835
0.899
0.919
0.793
0.851
0.875
0.763
0.808
0.832
0.747
0.773
0.791
WFEM
0.864
0.880
0.882
0.814
0.850
0.856
0.767
0.804
0.818
0.738
0.762
0.775
0.725
0.726
0.734
0.721
0.701
0.701
0.878
0.889
0.890
0.843
0.869
0.875
0.806
0.843
0.853
0.773
0.811
0.826
0.750
0.780
0.795
0.737
0.753
0.764
Frame
Kx
A3B2C6D1
3.231
A3B2C6D2
2.583
A3B2C6D3
2.263
A3B2C6D4
2.061
A3B2C6D5
1.918
A3B2C6D6
1.811
A3B2C7D1
3.162
A3B2C7D2
2.527
A3B2C7D3
2.214
A3B2C7D4
2.016
A3B2C7D5
1.877
A3B2C7D6
1.772
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.70
2.83
2.86
4.00
4.32
4.41
4.94
5.51
5.66
5.64
6.51
6.73
6.16
7.34
7.67
6.54
8.05
8.48
2.65
2.78
2.82
3.92
4.25
4.35
4.82
5.43
5.58
5.48
6.40
6.64
5.96
7.20
7.55
6.30
7.88
8.34
87
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.874
0.834
0.823
0.866
0.804
0.789
0.835
0.782
0.761
0.806
0.765
0.739
0.786
0.753
0.721
0.773
0.740
0.706
0.971
0.923
0.911
0.980
0.946
0.926
0.943
0.966
0.940
0.913
0.959
0.953
0.893
0.944
0.956
0.881
0.928
0.949
WFEM
0.719
0.727
0.731
0.706
0.698
0.698
0.687
0.677
0.673
0.672
0.663
0.654
0.662
0.652
0.639
0.656
0.643
0.626
0.764
0.773
0.782
0.761
0.774
0.780
0.745
0.777
0.780
0.733
0.771
0.781
0.726
0.763
0.779
0.724
0.755
0.774
WFEM
0.963
0.981
0.985
0.922
0.959
0.968
0.875
0.930
0.945
0.831
0.895
0.917
0.799
0.860
0.884
0.775
0.826
0.851
0.974
0.989
0.992
0.947
0.981
0.986
0.918
0.966
0.980
0.891
0.951
0.969
0.867
0.935
0.958
0.851
0.919
0.946
WFEM
0.963
0.981
0.985
0.922
0.959
0.968
0.875
0.930
0.945
0.831
0.895
0.917
0.799
0.860
0.884
0.775
0.826
0.851
0.974
0.989
0.992
0.947
0.981
0.986
0.918
0.966
0.980
0.891
0.951
0.969
0.867
0.935
0.958
0.851
0.919
0.946
WFEM
0.885
0.892
0.893
0.862
0.881
0.884
0.832
0.863
0.870
0.803
0.842
0.852
0.779
0.818
0.832
0.760
0.794
0.809
0.893
0.897
0.898
0.884
0.894
0.897
0.870
0.890
0.894
0.854
0.883
0.889
0.841
0.876
0.884
0.830
0.867
0.878
Frame
Kx
A3B2C8D1
3.474
A3B2C8D2
2.784
A3B2C8D3
2.441
A3B2C8D4
2.223
A3B2C8D5
2.069
A3B2C8D6
1.951
A3B2C9D1
3.733
A3B2C9D2
3.000
A3B2C9D3
2.633
A3B2C9D4
2.400
A3B2C9D5
2.233
A3B2C9D6
2.106
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.97
3.10
3.13
4.44
4.73
4.82
5.54
6.05
6.19
6.40
7.19
7.39
7.07
8.17
8.45
7.60
9.02
9.40
3.25
3.37
3.41
4.86
5.14
5.22
6.12
6.57
6.71
7.12
7.82
8.00
7.95
8.92
9.17
8.64
9.90
10.23
88
W1a
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.958
0.918
0.908
0.992
0.937
0.920
0.973
0.952
0.931
0.945
0.967
0.941
0.922
0.964
0.951
0.904
0.954
0.959
0.950
0.915
0.906
0.983
0.931
0.916
0.989
0.944
0.925
0.969
0.956
0.934
0.947
0.968
0.942
0.928
0.967
0.949
WFEM
0.760
0.778
0.786
0.767
0.773
0.782
0.756
0.774
0.779
0.744
0.776
0.779
0.735
0.773
0.780
0.729
0.767
0.781
0.762
0.778
0.789
0.764
0.774
0.782
0.762
0.773
0.780
0.754
0.774
0.778
0.744
0.775
0.779
0.736
0.774
0.779
WFEM
0.984
0.992
0.995
0.965
0.987
0.991
0.941
0.979
0.986
0.919
0.968
0.980
0.898
0.957
0.973
0.880
0.945
0.966
0.986
0.994
0.997
0.972
0.990
0.993
0.955
0.984
0.990
0.937
0.977
0.986
0.920
0.968
0.981
0.903
0.960
0.976
WFEM
0.984
0.992
0.995
0.965
0.987
0.991
0.941
0.979
0.986
0.919
0.968
0.980
0.898
0.957
0.973
0.880
0.945
0.966
0.986
0.994
0.997
0.972
0.990
0.993
0.955
0.984
0.990
0.937
0.977
0.986
0.920
0.968
0.981
0.903
0.960
0.976
WFEM
0.897
0.899
0.900
0.889
0.898
0.899
0.881
0.894
0.897
0.871
0.890
0.895
0.858
0.885
0.892
0.848
0.880
0.888
0.899
0.900
0.902
0.894
0.899
0.900
0.886
0.897
0.899
0.879
0.895
0.898
0.870
0.890
0.895
0.861
0.886
0.893
Table E.3 Load Case 2  Correlation of Design Procedures with the FEM Results
Frame*
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.96
2.90
3.42
2.60
3.76
4.41
2.83
4.39
5.16
3.11
4.88
5.76
3.40
5.16
6.25
3.58
5.62
6.53
2.39
3.51
4.14
3.12
4.45
5.28
3.65
5.21
6.16
4.07
5.85
6.87
4.25
6.35
7.48
4.31
6.77
8.02
Kx
A1B1C1D1
2.404
A1B1C1D2
2.010
A1B1C1D3
1.793
A1B1C1D4
1.651
A1B1C1D5
1.550
A1B1C1D6
1.473
A1B1C2D1
2.571
A1B1C2D2
2.179
A1B1C2D3
1.952
A1B1C2D4
1.800
A1B1C2D5
1.689
A1B1C2D6
1.604
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.743
0.714
0.699
0.684
0.697
0.692
0.708
0.681
0.682
0.695
0.669
0.671
0.673
0.673
0.663
0.667
0.649
0.668
0.745
0.714
0.699
0.696
0.708
0.692
0.672
0.694
0.686
0.653
0.678
0.680
0.665
0.669
0.672
0.688
0.661
0.664
WFEM
0.800
0.820
0.833
0.721
0.767
0.789
0.737
0.733
0.754
0.719
0.710
0.728
0.693
0.708
0.709
0.684
0.678
0.709
0.809
0.832
0.845
0.740
0.794
0.805
0.706
0.759
0.775
0.680
0.731
0.752
0.689
0.713
0.733
0.709
0.699
0.716
WFEM
0.800
0.820
0.833
0.721
0.767
0.789
0.737
0.733
0.754
0.720
0.711
0.729
0.696
0.711
0.713
0.689
0.682
0.713
0.809
0.832
0.845
0.740
0.794
0.805
0.706
0.759
0.775
0.680
0.731
0.752
0.689
0.713
0.733
0.711
0.701
0.718
WFEM
0.789
0.804
0.813
0.713
0.755
0.774
0.731
0.723
0.742
0.713
0.701
0.717
0.688
0.700
0.700
0.679
0.671
0.700
0.798
0.814
0.823
0.731
0.780
0.788
0.698
0.747
0.761
0.674
0.721
0.740
0.683
0.704
0.721
0.704
0.690
0.705
A1B1C1D1
Beam to column connection D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, or D6
Column C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, or C9
Upright frame B1 or B2
Frame dimension A1, A2, or A3
89
Frame
Kx
A1B1C3D1
2.696
A1B1C3D2
2.314
A1B1C3D3
2.082
A1B1C3D4
1.924
A1B1C3D5
1.807
A1B1C3D6
1.716
A1B1C4D1
2.161
A1B1C4D2
1.780
A1B1C4D3
1.585
A1B1C4D4
1.461
A1B1C4D5
1.374
A1B1C4D6
1.309
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.81
4.10
4.82
3.46
5.14
6.07
4.18
5.93
7.05
4.67
6.71
7.84
4.86
7.30
8.58
5.20
7.82
9.23
1.59
2.30
2.70
1.98
3.00
3.56
2.58
3.38
4.14
2.85
3.84
4.51
2.98
4.16
4.87
3.09
4.48
5.17
90
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.742
0.713
0.699
0.732
0.706
0.692
0.684
0.705
0.688
0.665
0.685
0.686
0.681
0.676
0.678
0.669
0.668
0.670
0.684
0.684
0.675
0.676
0.665
0.660
0.582
0.670
0.651
0.565
0.640
0.652
0.570
0.624
0.641
0.572
0.607
0.633
WFEM
0.812
0.840
0.853
0.783
0.803
0.817
0.723
0.781
0.791
0.697
0.747
0.772
0.710
0.729
0.750
0.694
0.713
0.732
0.728
0.770
0.787
0.704
0.717
0.731
0.600
0.707
0.701
0.578
0.667
0.690
0.581
0.646
0.671
0.581
0.624
0.657
WFEM
0.812
0.840
0.853
0.783
0.803
0.817
0.723
0.781
0.791
0.697
0.747
0.772
0.710
0.729
0.750
0.694
0.713
0.732
0.728
0.770
0.787
0.704
0.717
0.731
0.602
0.710
0.703
0.583
0.672
0.695
0.587
0.653
0.678
0.589
0.632
0.665
WFEM
0.800
0.821
0.830
0.774
0.788
0.798
0.715
0.768
0.775
0.690
0.736
0.758
0.704
0.719
0.737
0.688
0.704
0.720
0.719
0.756
0.770
0.697
0.706
0.719
0.595
0.699
0.690
0.574
0.660
0.681
0.577
0.640
0.663
0.578
0.618
0.650
Frame
Kx
A1B1C5D1
2.335
A1B1C5D2
1.940
A1B1C5D3
1.728
A1B1C5D4
1.592
A1B1C5D5
1.495
A1B1C5D6
1.422
A1B1C6D1
2.471
A1B1C6D2
2.072
A1B1C6D3
1.849
A1B1C6D4
1.704
A1B1C6D5
1.599
A1B1C6D6
1.520
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.91
2.75
3.23
2.52
3.59
4.22
2.73
4.22
4.96
3.35
4.52
5.53
3.71
4.90
5.83
3.91
5.34
6.21
2.19
3.18
3.73
2.84
4.11
4.83
3.42
4.81
5.67
3.49
5.35
6.35
4.29
5.71
6.93
4.57
6.16
7.18
91
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.696
0.688
0.676
0.651
0.672
0.667
0.676
0.654
0.656
0.595
0.667
0.648
0.569
0.656
0.657
0.564
0.631
0.650
0.706
0.688
0.676
0.671
0.677
0.669
0.631
0.665
0.661
0.672
0.657
0.654
0.580
0.658
0.645
0.570
0.642
0.657
WFEM
0.748
0.789
0.803
0.684
0.737
0.755
0.702
0.700
0.721
0.613
0.705
0.698
0.583
0.686
0.699
0.576
0.655
0.685
0.765
0.798
0.813
0.711
0.753
0.771
0.660
0.721
0.739
0.697
0.702
0.715
0.598
0.696
0.695
0.585
0.674
0.701
WFEM
0.748
0.789
0.803
0.684
0.737
0.755
0.702
0.700
0.721
0.616
0.707
0.700
0.587
0.691
0.704
0.581
0.661
0.691
0.765
0.798
0.813
0.711
0.753
0.771
0.660
0.721
0.739
0.697
0.702
0.715
0.600
0.698
0.697
0.589
0.678
0.705
WFEM
0.738
0.773
0.783
0.677
0.725
0.741
0.696
0.690
0.708
0.608
0.696
0.687
0.579
0.678
0.689
0.572
0.648
0.676
0.754
0.781
0.792
0.702
0.740
0.754
0.653
0.710
0.726
0.690
0.692
0.703
0.593
0.687
0.684
0.581
0.666
0.691
Frame
Kx
A1B1C7D1
2.431
A1B1C7D2
2.032
A1B1C7D3
1.813
A1B1C7D4
1.670
A1B1C7D5
1.568
A1B1C7D6
1.490
A1B1C8D1
2.606
A1B1C8D2
2.209
A1B1C8D3
1.978
A1B1C8D4
1.824
A1B1C8D5
1.713
A1B1C8D6
1.627
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.14
3.02
3.55
2.92
3.98
4.64
3.58
4.73
5.48
4.04
5.35
6.16
4.00
5.87
6.73
4.48
6.28
7.21
2.55
3.65
4.27
3.40
4.66
5.49
4.13
5.57
6.48
4.77
6.29
7.29
5.26
6.92
7.98
5.57
7.47
8.59
92
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.704
0.717
0.708
0.636
0.694
0.701
0.586
0.671
0.690
0.562
0.650
0.677
0.603
0.632
0.666
0.563
0.622
0.656
0.722
0.716
0.707
0.664
0.710
0.703
0.619
0.685
0.695
0.583
0.668
0.687
0.563
0.652
0.677
0.558
0.639
0.669
WFEM
0.758
0.822
0.842
0.670
0.762
0.794
0.611
0.721
0.758
0.582
0.689
0.731
0.620
0.665
0.710
0.577
0.649
0.694
0.785
0.835
0.854
0.706
0.794
0.815
0.650
0.748
0.781
0.609
0.719
0.756
0.584
0.694
0.735
0.577
0.675
0.718
WFEM
0.758
0.822
0.842
0.670
0.762
0.794
0.611
0.721
0.758
0.582
0.690
0.732
0.623
0.668
0.713
0.582
0.654
0.698
0.785
0.835
0.854
0.706
0.794
0.815
0.650
0.748
0.781
0.609
0.719
0.756
0.584
0.694
0.735
0.578
0.676
0.720
WFEM
0.748
0.805
0.820
0.663
0.749
0.777
0.605
0.710
0.744
0.577
0.680
0.719
0.616
0.656
0.699
0.573
0.642
0.684
0.774
0.816
0.831
0.698
0.779
0.796
0.643
0.735
0.765
0.603
0.708
0.741
0.579
0.685
0.722
0.572
0.666
0.706
Frame
Kx
A1B1C9D1
2.739
A1B1C9D2
2.351
A1B1C9D3
2.115
A1B1C9D4
1.954
A1B1C9D5
1.836
A1B1C9D6
1.744
A1B2C1D1
2.404
A1B2C1D2
2.010
A1B2C1D3
1.793
A1B2C1D4
1.651
A1B2C1D5
1.550
A1B2C1D6
1.473
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.94
4.25
4.97
3.85
5.37
6.30
4.63
6.34
7.38
5.33
7.16
8.30
5.95
7.86
9.10
6.47
8.49
9.79
1.95
2.90
3.42
2.60
3.75
4.40
3.06
4.38
5.18
3.19
4.88
5.76
3.39
5.11
6.27
4.05
5.67
6.52
93
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.731
0.714
0.704
0.681
0.707
0.700
0.642
0.692
0.696
0.608
0.678
0.691
0.581
0.665
0.684
0.563
0.653
0.677
0.735
0.698
0.680
0.675
0.679
0.669
0.645
0.663
0.652
0.667
0.648
0.644
0.665
0.659
0.633
0.581
0.622
0.640
WFEM
0.802
0.842
0.861
0.730
0.803
0.825
0.679
0.766
0.797
0.638
0.738
0.773
0.607
0.716
0.753
0.585
0.697
0.737
0.793
0.807
0.815
0.713
0.753
0.768
0.673
0.718
0.729
0.691
0.691
0.704
0.684
0.696
0.682
0.595
0.652
0.683
WFEM
0.802
0.842
0.861
0.730
0.803
0.825
0.679
0.766
0.797
0.638
0.738
0.773
0.607
0.716
0.753
0.585
0.697
0.737
0.793
0.807
0.815
0.713
0.753
0.768
0.673
0.718
0.729
0.692
0.692
0.705
0.688
0.699
0.685
0.600
0.656
0.687
WFEM
0.790
0.822
0.836
0.721
0.787
0.805
0.672
0.752
0.780
0.632
0.726
0.757
0.601
0.705
0.739
0.580
0.687
0.724
0.783
0.792
0.797
0.705
0.741
0.754
0.667
0.708
0.717
0.685
0.683
0.694
0.680
0.688
0.673
0.591
0.645
0.675
Frame
Kx
A1B2C2D1
2.571
A1B2C2D2
2.179
A1B2C2D3
1.952
A1B2C2D4
1.800
A1B2C2D5
1.689
A1B2C2D6
1.604
A1B2C3D1
2.696
A1B2C3D2
2.314
A1B2C3D3
2.082
A1B2C3D4
1.924
A1B2C3D5
1.807
A1B2C3D6
1.716
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.39
3.51
4.14
2.99
4.44
5.28
3.64
5.21
6.15
4.02
5.84
6.87
4.24
6.36
7.49
4.34
6.80
8.02
2.80
4.10
4.82
3.42
5.14
6.07
4.16
5.97
7.05
4.67
6.67
7.87
5.09
7.30
8.58
5.04
7.81
9.22
94
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.736
0.700
0.683
0.717
0.691
0.671
0.664
0.675
0.662
0.652
0.661
0.653
0.657
0.649
0.644
0.672
0.639
0.637
0.736
0.700
0.684
0.731
0.690
0.674
0.677
0.681
0.666
0.656
0.671
0.659
0.642
0.658
0.652
0.681
0.650
0.644
WFEM
0.802
0.820
0.829
0.764
0.781
0.786
0.698
0.743
0.754
0.680
0.715
0.730
0.681
0.695
0.708
0.693
0.678
0.691
0.808
0.828
0.838
0.784
0.790
0.800
0.717
0.761
0.771
0.689
0.736
0.748
0.669
0.713
0.728
0.707
0.697
0.710
WFEM
0.802
0.820
0.829
0.764
0.781
0.786
0.698
0.743
0.754
0.680
0.715
0.730
0.681
0.695
0.708
0.695
0.680
0.693
0.808
0.828
0.838
0.784
0.790
0.800
0.717
0.761
0.771
0.689
0.736
0.748
0.669
0.713
0.728
0.707
0.697
0.710
WFEM
0.791
0.803
0.809
0.755
0.767
0.770
0.691
0.732
0.741
0.674
0.706
0.718
0.675
0.686
0.698
0.688
0.670
0.682
0.797
0.810
0.816
0.775
0.775
0.782
0.710
0.749
0.756
0.682
0.726
0.735
0.664
0.703
0.717
0.701
0.688
0.700
Frame
Kx
A1B2C4D1
2.161
A1B2C4D2
1.780
A1B2C4D3
1.585
A1B2C4D4
1.461
A1B2C4D5
1.374
A1B2C4D6
1.309
A1B2C5D1
2.335
A1B2C5D2
1.940
A1B2C5D3
1.728
A1B2C5D4
1.592
A1B2C5D5
1.495
A1B2C5D6
1.422
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.56
2.29
2.70
2.03
3.02
3.55
2.58
3.42
4.13
2.89
3.83
4.47
3.04
4.21
4.87
3.08
4.56
5.18
1.88
2.75
3.23
2.50
3.57
4.22
2.74
4.22
4.95
3.35
4.52
5.51
3.74
4.99
5.83
3.94
5.36
6.17
95
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.689
0.658
0.631
0.653
0.632
0.612
0.574
0.631
0.599
0.549
0.609
0.602
0.550
0.587
0.587
0.564
0.566
0.578
0.698
0.664
0.637
0.649
0.648
0.622
0.664
0.626
0.609
0.588
0.638
0.600
0.557
0.615
0.607
0.552
0.599
0.603
WFEM
0.733
0.742
0.733
0.680
0.682
0.678
0.591
0.667
0.646
0.562
0.636
0.638
0.560
0.608
0.615
0.573
0.582
0.600
0.751
0.761
0.753
0.682
0.713
0.705
0.690
0.672
0.670
0.606
0.674
0.648
0.571
0.644
0.646
0.564
0.623
0.636
WFEM
0.733
0.742
0.733
0.680
0.682
0.678
0.593
0.670
0.648
0.567
0.640
0.642
0.566
0.614
0.621
0.580
0.589
0.607
0.751
0.761
0.753
0.682
0.713
0.705
0.690
0.672
0.670
0.608
0.677
0.650
0.575
0.648
0.650
0.569
0.628
0.641
WFEM
0.725
0.729
0.718
0.674
0.673
0.667
0.586
0.659
0.637
0.558
0.629
0.630
0.557
0.602
0.608
0.569
0.577
0.594
0.741
0.747
0.736
0.675
0.702
0.692
0.684
0.663
0.660
0.601
0.666
0.639
0.567
0.637
0.638
0.560
0.617
0.628
Frame
Kx
A1B2C6D1
2.471
A1B2C6D2
2.072
A1B2C6D3
1.849
A1B2C6D4
1.704
A1B2C6D5
1.599
A1B2C6D6
1.520
A1B2C7D1
2.431
A1B2C7D2
2.032
A1B2C7D3
1.813
A1B2C7D4
1.670
A1B2C7D5
1.568
A1B2C7D6
1.490
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.17
3.17
3.73
2.81
4.09
4.82
3.15
4.80
5.65
3.49
5.37
6.34
4.20
5.63
6.87
4.63
6.13
7.19
2.13
3.01
3.54
2.92
3.98
4.63
3.59
4.72
5.48
4.07
5.35
6.16
4.28
5.89
6.73
4.52
6.31
7.23
96
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.704
0.668
0.642
0.672
0.655
0.630
0.678
0.643
0.620
0.664
0.630
0.610
0.586
0.642
0.605
0.556
0.620
0.611
0.706
0.718
0.709
0.636
0.695
0.702
0.583
0.672
0.690
0.558
0.649
0.678
0.563
0.631
0.665
0.559
0.620
0.654
WFEM
0.764
0.775
0.767
0.712
0.731
0.724
0.709
0.698
0.694
0.688
0.673
0.669
0.604
0.679
0.653
0.571
0.651
0.652
0.760
0.823
0.843
0.671
0.762
0.795
0.608
0.722
0.758
0.578
0.689
0.731
0.580
0.663
0.710
0.573
0.647
0.692
WFEM
0.764
0.775
0.767
0.712
0.731
0.724
0.709
0.698
0.694
0.688
0.673
0.669
0.606
0.681
0.655
0.574
0.654
0.655
0.760
0.823
0.843
0.671
0.762
0.795
0.608
0.722
0.758
0.578
0.689
0.732
0.583
0.666
0.713
0.577
0.651
0.696
WFEM
0.754
0.759
0.749
0.704
0.719
0.710
0.702
0.688
0.682
0.682
0.665
0.659
0.599
0.671
0.644
0.567
0.643
0.643
0.750
0.806
0.822
0.663
0.749
0.778
0.602
0.711
0.744
0.573
0.679
0.719
0.575
0.655
0.699
0.569
0.639
0.681
Frame
Kx
A1B2C8D1
2.606
A1B2C8D2
2.209
A1B2C8D3
1.978
A1B2C8D4
1.824
A1B2C8D5
1.713
A1B2C8D6
1.627
A1B2C9D1
2.739
A1B2C9D2
2.351
A1B2C9D3
2.115
A1B2C9D4
1.954
A1B2C9D5
1.836
A1B2C9D6
1.744
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.55
3.64
4.27
3.40
4.70
5.49
4.13
5.57
6.48
4.78
6.30
7.29
5.29
6.92
7.98
5.61
7.48
8.59
2.94
4.25
4.97
3.65
5.37
6.30
4.63
6.34
7.36
5.34
7.15
8.30
5.97
7.86
9.10
6.48
8.49
9.79
97
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.722
0.716
0.707
0.664
0.705
0.703
0.619
0.685
0.696
0.582
0.668
0.687
0.560
0.653
0.678
0.555
0.638
0.668
0.732
0.714
0.704
0.720
0.707
0.701
0.642
0.693
0.698
0.608
0.679
0.691
0.579
0.665
0.684
0.562
0.653
0.676
WFEM
0.786
0.835
0.854
0.707
0.788
0.815
0.650
0.748
0.782
0.607
0.719
0.756
0.581
0.695
0.735
0.573
0.674
0.718
0.803
0.842
0.861
0.772
0.804
0.826
0.680
0.767
0.799
0.638
0.739
0.773
0.605
0.716
0.753
0.584
0.697
0.737
WFEM
0.786
0.835
0.854
0.707
0.788
0.815
0.650
0.748
0.782
0.607
0.719
0.756
0.581
0.695
0.735
0.575
0.676
0.719
0.803
0.842
0.861
0.772
0.804
0.826
0.680
0.767
0.799
0.638
0.739
0.773
0.605
0.716
0.753
0.584
0.697
0.737
WFEM
0.775
0.816
0.831
0.698
0.773
0.796
0.643
0.735
0.765
0.601
0.708
0.742
0.576
0.685
0.722
0.569
0.665
0.706
0.791
0.822
0.836
0.762
0.787
0.805
0.672
0.753
0.781
0.631
0.727
0.758
0.599
0.705
0.739
0.579
0.687
0.724
Frame
Kx
A2B1C1D1
2.561
A2B1C1D2
2.119
A2B1C1D3
1.885
A2B1C1D4
1.736
A2B1C1D5
1.631
A2B1C1D6
1.552
A2B1C2D1
2.755
A2B1C2D2
2.305
A2B1C2D3
2.056
A2B1C2D4
1.893
A2B1C2D5
1.777
A2B1C2D6
1.688
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.66
2.48
2.92
2.10
3.25
3.82
2.73
3.63
4.39
3.05
4.27
4.81
3.08
4.65
5.40
3.10
4.95
5.78
2.04
2.97
3.51
2.53
3.87
4.55
2.93
4.41
5.35
3.48
4.87
5.82
4.04
5.54
6.27
4.10
5.96
6.90
98
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.754
0.718
0.706
0.740
0.704
0.697
0.645
0.725
0.705
0.627
0.673
0.709
0.658
0.661
0.678
0.683
0.652
0.668
0.745
0.720
0.704
0.747
0.706
0.699
0.732
0.718
0.691
0.672
0.716
0.705
0.616
0.676
0.706
0.639
0.663
0.681
WFEM
0.814
0.830
0.845
0.781
0.779
0.799
0.672
0.783
0.784
0.649
0.718
0.773
0.678
0.698
0.730
0.701
0.684
0.711
0.813
0.844
0.856
0.796
0.796
0.817
0.770
0.788
0.786
0.701
0.774
0.785
0.639
0.723
0.774
0.660
0.704
0.738
WFEM
0.814
0.830
0.845
0.781
0.779
0.799
0.672
0.783
0.784
0.649
0.718
0.773
0.680
0.699
0.731
0.705
0.687
0.715
0.813
0.844
0.856
0.796
0.796
0.817
0.770
0.788
0.786
0.701
0.774
0.785
0.639
0.723
0.774
0.660
0.704
0.738
WFEM
0.804
0.813
0.825
0.773
0.766
0.783
0.666
0.772
0.771
0.644
0.709
0.761
0.673
0.689
0.719
0.696
0.676
0.702
0.802
0.826
0.833
0.786
0.782
0.799
0.762
0.776
0.771
0.695
0.763
0.772
0.634
0.713
0.762
0.655
0.695
0.727
Frame
Kx
A2B1C3D1
2.904
A2B1C3D2
2.456
A2B1C3D3
2.198
A2B1C3D4
2.026
A2B1C3D5
1.901
A2B1C3D6
1.805
A2B1C4D1
2.285
A2B1C4D2
1.872
A2B1C4D3
1.667
A2B1C4D4
1.539
A2B1C4D5
1.451
A2B1C4D6
1.386
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.34
3.45
4.06
3.11
4.43
5.20
3.37
5.21
6.11
3.74
5.64
6.85
4.03
6.14
7.30
4.96
6.72
7.72
1.32
1.96
2.32
1.92
2.62
3.08
2.06
3.08
3.59
2.04
3.39
3.95
2.47
3.45
4.24
2.53
3.49
4.26
99
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.752
0.717
0.703
0.705
0.709
0.699
0.739
0.697
0.693
0.728
0.715
0.688
0.722
0.707
0.699
0.618
0.685
0.704
0.714
0.697
0.683
0.613
0.668
0.669
0.642
0.649
0.661
0.699
0.639
0.656
0.607
0.667
0.650
0.618
0.687
0.678
WFEM
0.828
0.850
0.863
0.757
0.811
0.829
0.783
0.778
0.800
0.765
0.783
0.779
0.754
0.765
0.779
0.642
0.734
0.774
0.761
0.789
0.800
0.640
0.723
0.745
0.663
0.688
0.716
0.717
0.669
0.699
0.620
0.693
0.685
0.629
0.710
0.709
WFEM
0.828
0.850
0.863
0.757
0.811
0.829
0.783
0.778
0.800
0.765
0.783
0.779
0.754
0.765
0.779
0.642
0.734
0.774
0.761
0.789
0.800
0.640
0.723
0.745
0.664
0.689
0.716
0.721
0.673
0.703
0.626
0.699
0.690
0.636
0.717
0.716
WFEM
0.816
0.831
0.839
0.747
0.795
0.810
0.774
0.764
0.784
0.757
0.770
0.764
0.747
0.754
0.766
0.636
0.724
0.762
0.752
0.774
0.782
0.634
0.712
0.732
0.657
0.679
0.704
0.712
0.662
0.689
0.616
0.686
0.676
0.625
0.703
0.700
Frame
Kx
A2B1C5D1
2.479
A2B1C5D2
2.043
A2B1C5D3
1.817
A2B1C5D4
1.675
A2B1C5D5
1.575
A2B1C5D6
1.501
A2B1C6D1
2.635
A2B1C6D2
2.186
A2B1C6D3
1.946
A2B1C6D4
1.792
A2B1C6D5
1.684
A2B1C6D6
1.602
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.58
2.36
2.77
2.21
3.11
3.65
2.71
3.67
4.30
2.75
4.10
4.78
2.75
4.42
5.16
2.80
4.52
5.47
1.86
2.71
3.18
2.49
3.55
4.15
3.02
4.19
4.91
3.44
4.70
5.50
3.42
5.13
5.97
3.44
5.45
6.35
100
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.722
0.691
0.681
0.649
0.676
0.673
0.598
0.661
0.664
0.639
0.647
0.660
0.678
0.640
0.655
0.697
0.659
0.651
0.710
0.691
0.679
0.668
0.682
0.678
0.627
0.670
0.669
0.599
0.657
0.663
0.642
0.645
0.659
0.669
0.640
0.655
WFEM
0.779
0.797
0.813
0.683
0.745
0.767
0.622
0.711
0.735
0.660
0.686
0.715
0.697
0.673
0.701
0.714
0.688
0.690
0.773
0.806
0.821
0.708
0.763
0.785
0.657
0.729
0.752
0.623
0.704
0.730
0.663
0.685
0.715
0.689
0.674
0.703
WFEM
0.779
0.797
0.813
0.683
0.745
0.767
0.622
0.711
0.735
0.661
0.687
0.716
0.700
0.676
0.704
0.719
0.692
0.694
0.773
0.806
0.821
0.708
0.763
0.785
0.657
0.729
0.752
0.623
0.704
0.730
0.664
0.685
0.715
0.691
0.677
0.705
WFEM
0.769
0.780
0.793
0.676
0.733
0.752
0.616
0.701
0.722
0.655
0.677
0.704
0.691
0.665
0.691
0.709
0.680
0.680
0.762
0.789
0.800
0.700
0.749
0.768
0.650
0.718
0.738
0.617
0.694
0.718
0.657
0.676
0.703
0.683
0.666
0.692
Frame
Kx
A2B1C7D1
2.589
A2B1C7D2
2.143
A2B1C7D3
1.907
A2B1C7D4
1.757
A2B1C7D5
1.651
A2B1C7D6
1.571
A2B1C8D1
2.792
A2B1C8D2
2.336
A2B1C8D3
2.084
A2B1C8D4
1.920
A2B1C8D5
1.802
A2B1C8D6
1.713
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.87
2.60
3.04
2.62
3.33
4.03
3.19
4.15
4.78
3.42
4.70
5.38
3.58
5.12
5.86
3.70
5.37
6.26
2.20
3.10
3.63
2.77
4.10
4.76
3.69
4.89
5.61
4.24
5.53
6.36
4.49
6.09
6.97
4.67
6.53
7.49
101
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.690
0.711
0.708
0.618
0.722
0.699
0.576
0.668
0.690
0.583
0.649
0.680
0.592
0.638
0.671
0.601
0.641
0.664
0.708
0.714
0.705
0.708
0.696
0.700
0.605
0.681
0.698
0.574
0.665
0.687
0.580
0.650
0.679
0.587
0.641
0.672
WFEM
0.746
0.821
0.846
0.653
0.796
0.797
0.601
0.720
0.762
0.604
0.690
0.737
0.611
0.673
0.719
0.618
0.671
0.705
0.775
0.838
0.858
0.754
0.784
0.817
0.637
0.746
0.790
0.600
0.718
0.760
0.602
0.695
0.741
0.607
0.680
0.725
WFEM
0.746
0.821
0.846
0.653
0.796
0.797
0.601
0.720
0.762
0.604
0.690
0.737
0.612
0.674
0.720
0.621
0.674
0.708
0.775
0.838
0.858
0.754
0.784
0.817
0.637
0.746
0.790
0.600
0.718
0.760
0.602
0.695
0.741
0.607
0.680
0.725
WFEM
0.736
0.804
0.824
0.646
0.782
0.780
0.595
0.709
0.748
0.599
0.681
0.725
0.606
0.664
0.707
0.613
0.663
0.695
0.763
0.819
0.834
0.745
0.768
0.797
0.630
0.733
0.773
0.594
0.707
0.745
0.597
0.684
0.728
0.602
0.671
0.713
Frame
Kx
A2B1C9D1
2.950
A2B1C9D2
2.495
A2B1C9D3
2.233
A2B1C9D4
2.058
A2B1C9D5
1.932
A2B1C9D6
1.835
A2B2C1D1
2.561
A2B2C1D2
2.119
A2B2C1D3
1.885
A2B2C1D4
1.736
A2B2C1D5
1.631
A2B2C1D6
1.552
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.52
3.59
4.19
3.37
4.66
5.41
3.59
5.52
6.42
4.78
6.28
7.10
5.29
6.90
7.94
5.55
7.47
8.56
1.71
2.47
2.91
2.09
3.18
3.82
2.79
3.65
4.38
3.03
4.28
4.82
3.09
4.70
5.40
3.02
4.96
5.81
102
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.717
0.711
0.703
0.670
0.699
0.701
0.720
0.690
0.693
0.592
0.674
0.702
0.573
0.662
0.683
0.577
0.650
0.677
0.722
0.706
0.690
0.736
0.701
0.676
0.623
0.701
0.680
0.621
0.654
0.680
0.647
0.635
0.651
0.690
0.632
0.638
WFEM
0.793
0.845
0.865
0.721
0.800
0.831
0.764
0.768
0.799
0.623
0.737
0.791
0.599
0.716
0.757
0.600
0.697
0.742
0.782
0.820
0.831
0.778
0.781
0.780
0.650
0.761
0.763
0.643
0.701
0.749
0.667
0.673
0.706
0.709
0.665
0.684
WFEM
0.793
0.845
0.865
0.721
0.800
0.831
0.764
0.768
0.799
0.623
0.737
0.791
0.599
0.716
0.757
0.600
0.697
0.742
0.782
0.820
0.831
0.778
0.781
0.780
0.650
0.761
0.763
0.643
0.701
0.749
0.668
0.675
0.708
0.712
0.668
0.687
WFEM
0.781
0.825
0.840
0.711
0.784
0.810
0.755
0.754
0.781
0.616
0.724
0.775
0.593
0.705
0.743
0.594
0.686
0.728
0.772
0.804
0.811
0.770
0.769
0.766
0.644
0.751
0.751
0.638
0.692
0.738
0.662
0.666
0.697
0.704
0.658
0.675
Frame
Kx
A2B2C2D1
2.755
A2B2C2D2
2.305
A2B2C2D3
2.056
A2B2C2D4
1.893
A2B2C2D5
1.777
A2B2C2D6
1.688
A2B2C3D1
2.904
A2B2C3D2
2.456
A2B2C3D3
2.198
A2B2C3D4
2.026
A2B2C3D5
1.901
A2B2C3D6
1.805
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.02
2.97
3.50
2.52
3.86
4.54
3.26
4.42
5.34
3.72
4.84
5.84
3.45
5.53
6.29
4.09
6.01
6.91
2.34
3.45
4.06
3.09
4.41
5.19
3.36
5.19
6.10
3.79
5.64
6.75
4.64
6.09
7.30
5.04
6.81
7.73
103
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.743
0.708
0.691
0.741
0.692
0.682
0.649
0.698
0.671
0.620
0.702
0.678
0.711
0.659
0.678
0.630
0.640
0.654
0.743
0.707
0.691
0.701
0.697
0.684
0.733
0.684
0.675
0.711
0.696
0.676
0.619
0.695
0.675
0.600
0.659
0.678
WFEM
0.815
0.834
0.842
0.791
0.786
0.801
0.684
0.773
0.768
0.648
0.764
0.761
0.739
0.708
0.750
0.652
0.682
0.715
0.823
0.841
0.850
0.755
0.801
0.815
0.778
0.768
0.785
0.748
0.767
0.771
0.647
0.757
0.759
0.624
0.710
0.753
WFEM
0.815
0.834
0.842
0.791
0.786
0.801
0.684
0.773
0.768
0.648
0.764
0.761
0.739
0.708
0.750
0.652
0.682
0.715
0.823
0.841
0.850
0.755
0.801
0.815
0.778
0.768
0.785
0.748
0.767
0.771
0.647
0.757
0.759
0.624
0.710
0.753
WFEM
0.803
0.817
0.821
0.782
0.772
0.784
0.677
0.761
0.754
0.642
0.753
0.749
0.733
0.699
0.738
0.647
0.674
0.705
0.810
0.822
0.828
0.745
0.786
0.796
0.770
0.755
0.769
0.740
0.756
0.757
0.641
0.746
0.746
0.619
0.700
0.741
Frame
Kx
A2B2C4D1
2.285
A2B2C4D2
1.872
A2B2C4D3
1.667
A2B2C4D4
1.539
A2B2C4D5
1.451
A2B2C4D6
1.386
A2B2C5D1
2.479
A2B2C5D2
2.043
A2B2C5D3
1.817
A2B2C5D4
1.675
A2B2C5D5
1.575
A2B2C5D6
1.501
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.38
1.96
2.32
1.96
2.63
3.08
2.05
3.11
3.62
2.04
3.38
3.98
2.50
3.41
4.19
2.55
3.79
4.29
1.58
2.35
2.77
2.20
3.11
3.65
2.65
3.68
4.30
2.75
4.10
4.78
2.76
4.42
5.15
3.26
4.52
5.47
179
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.678
0.670
0.640
0.595
0.638
0.619
0.635
0.612
0.603
0.687
0.612
0.598
0.592
0.642
0.604
0.602
0.603
0.618
0.718
0.671
0.643
0.644
0.651
0.631
0.606
0.632
0.618
0.632
0.621
0.611
0.666
0.613
0.607
0.591
0.630
0.602
WFEM
0.724
0.759
0.746
0.621
0.691
0.690
0.656
0.650
0.655
0.705
0.641
0.638
0.605
0.667
0.637
0.613
0.623
0.646
0.776
0.773
0.763
0.678
0.719
0.717
0.630
0.681
0.683
0.653
0.660
0.664
0.685
0.645
0.650
0.605
0.658
0.638
WFEM
0.724
0.759
0.746
0.621
0.691
0.690
0.656
0.651
0.655
0.709
0.645
0.641
0.610
0.673
0.642
0.620
0.629
0.652
0.776
0.773
0.763
0.678
0.719
0.717
0.630
0.681
0.683
0.654
0.660
0.664
0.688
0.648
0.652
0.609
0.662
0.642
WFEM
0.715
0.745
0.731
0.615
0.682
0.678
0.650
0.642
0.645
0.700
0.634
0.629
0.601
0.661
0.630
0.609
0.617
0.639
0.766
0.758
0.746
0.671
0.708
0.704
0.624
0.672
0.672
0.648
0.651
0.654
0.680
0.638
0.641
0.600
0.651
0.630
Frame
Kx
A2B2C6D1
2.635
A2B2C6D2
2.186
A2B2C6D3
1.946
A2B2C6D4
1.792
A2B2C6D5
1.684
A2B2C6D6
1.602
A2B2C7D1
2.589
A2B2C7D2
2.143
A2B2C7D3
1.907
A2B2C7D4
1.757
A2B2C7D5
1.651
A2B2C7D6
1.571
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.84
2.70
3.18
2.48
3.53
4.16
3.03
4.18
4.91
3.43
4.72
5.50
3.41
5.13
5.96
3.46
5.48
6.36
1.86
2.60
3.03
2.62
3.47
4.03
3.20
4.15
4.78
3.45
4.71
5.38
3.61
5.14
5.87
3.73
5.40
6.29
180
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.710
0.673
0.646
0.666
0.662
0.638
0.617
0.647
0.628
0.595
0.631
0.619
0.636
0.621
0.614
0.657
0.613
0.610
0.694
0.712
0.708
0.618
0.692
0.699
0.573
0.668
0.690
0.578
0.647
0.679
0.587
0.635
0.670
0.596
0.636
0.661
WFEM
0.775
0.785
0.776
0.707
0.742
0.736
0.647
0.707
0.705
0.619
0.678
0.682
0.658
0.660
0.667
0.676
0.646
0.655
0.750
0.822
0.847
0.653
0.763
0.797
0.598
0.720
0.762
0.599
0.688
0.736
0.606
0.670
0.718
0.613
0.666
0.702
WFEM
0.775
0.785
0.776
0.707
0.742
0.736
0.647
0.707
0.705
0.619
0.678
0.682
0.658
0.660
0.668
0.679
0.648
0.657
0.750
0.822
0.847
0.653
0.763
0.797
0.598
0.720
0.762
0.599
0.688
0.736
0.607
0.671
0.719
0.615
0.669
0.705
WFEM
0.764
0.769
0.757
0.699
0.729
0.722
0.640
0.696
0.693
0.613
0.668
0.671
0.652
0.651
0.658
0.671
0.638
0.646
0.740
0.805
0.825
0.645
0.750
0.780
0.592
0.709
0.748
0.594
0.679
0.724
0.601
0.661
0.707
0.608
0.658
0.692
Frame
Kx
A2B2C8D1
2.792
A2B2C8D2
2.336
A2B2C8D3
2.084
A2B2C8D4
1.920
A2B2C8D5
1.802
A2B2C8D6
1.713
A2B2C9D1
2.950
A2B2C9D2
2.495
A2B2C9D3
2.233
A2B2C9D4
2.058
A2B2C9D5
1.932
A2B2C9D6
1.835
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
2.20
3.10
3.63
2.83
4.09
4.76
3.69
4.89
5.60
4.26
5.53
6.37
4.52
6.10
6.97
4.70
6.55
7.48
2.52
3.59
4.19
3.38
4.66
5.41
4.12
5.52
6.42
4.78
6.27
7.11
5.31
6.91
7.95
5.58
7.48
8.56
181
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.710
0.714
0.705
0.691
0.698
0.701
0.604
0.681
0.699
0.572
0.666
0.686
0.576
0.649
0.679
0.583
0.640
0.673
0.717
0.712
0.703
0.668
0.700
0.701
0.628
0.690
0.694
0.592
0.674
0.701
0.571
0.662
0.683
0.573
0.650
0.677
WFEM
0.776
0.839
0.858
0.737
0.785
0.817
0.636
0.746
0.790
0.597
0.718
0.759
0.598
0.693
0.740
0.603
0.678
0.726
0.793
0.846
0.866
0.719
0.801
0.831
0.666
0.768
0.799
0.622
0.737
0.791
0.597
0.715
0.757
0.596
0.696
0.742
WFEM
0.776
0.839
0.858
0.737
0.785
0.817
0.636
0.746
0.790
0.597
0.718
0.759
0.598
0.693
0.740
0.603
0.678
0.726
0.793
0.846
0.866
0.719
0.801
0.831
0.666
0.768
0.799
0.622
0.737
0.791
0.597
0.715
0.757
0.596
0.696
0.742
WFEM
0.765
0.820
0.834
0.728
0.770
0.798
0.629
0.733
0.774
0.592
0.707
0.745
0.592
0.683
0.727
0.598
0.669
0.714
0.780
0.825
0.841
0.709
0.784
0.810
0.658
0.754
0.781
0.616
0.725
0.774
0.591
0.704
0.742
0.591
0.686
0.728
Frame
Kx
A3B1C1D1
3.136
A3B1C1D2
2.506
A3B1C1D3
2.195
A3B1C1D4
1.999
A3B1C1D5
1.860
A3B1C1D6
1.756
A3B1C2D1
3.441
A3B1C2D2
2.757
A3B1C2D3
2.417
A3B1C2D4
2.202
A3B1C2D5
2.048
A3B1C2D6
1.932
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.70
1.00
1.17
0.99
1.39
1.62
1.08
1.67
1.96
1.22
1.91
2.17
1.37
1.99
2.40
1.41
2.27
2.63
0.82
1.17
1.36
1.09
1.61
1.88
1.35
1.96
2.28
1.46
2.24
2.61
1.63
2.36
2.82
1.69
2.58
3.03
182
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.710
0.691
0.679
0.679
0.686
0.679
0.726
0.680
0.673
0.713
0.672
0.689
0.682
0.701
0.683
0.702
0.653
0.667
0.713
0.690
0.677
0.725
0.689
0.679
0.693
0.681
0.676
0.716
0.676
0.671
0.692
0.704
0.686
0.710
0.690
0.688
WFEM
0.800
0.842
0.859
0.734
0.795
0.816
0.771
0.763
0.783
0.750
0.738
0.783
0.712
0.759
0.761
0.729
0.700
0.732
0.820
0.857
0.871
0.795
0.815
0.833
0.745
0.782
0.805
0.760
0.758
0.781
0.730
0.777
0.784
0.744
0.752
0.774
WFEM
0.800
0.842
0.859
0.734
0.795
0.816
0.771
0.763
0.783
0.750
0.738
0.783
0.712
0.759
0.761
0.729
0.700
0.732
0.820
0.857
0.871
0.795
0.815
0.833
0.745
0.782
0.805
0.760
0.758
0.781
0.730
0.777
0.784
0.744
0.752
0.774
WFEM
0.787
0.820
0.832
0.725
0.778
0.796
0.762
0.749
0.766
0.742
0.726
0.768
0.706
0.748
0.748
0.723
0.691
0.721
0.804
0.833
0.842
0.784
0.796
0.810
0.736
0.767
0.786
0.752
0.745
0.765
0.723
0.764
0.769
0.737
0.741
0.760
Frame
Kx
A3B1C3D1
3.694
A3B1C3D2
2.969
A3B1C3D3
2.605
A3B1C3D4
2.374
A3B1C3D5
2.209
A3B1C3D6
2.083
A3B1C4D1
2.730
A3B1C4D2
2.175
A3B1C4D3
1.905
A3B1C4D4
1.737
A3B1C4D5
1.621
A3B1C4D6
1.535
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.92
1.32
1.53
1.28
1.81
2.12
1.58
2.20
2.56
1.64
2.52
2.94
2.00
2.69
3.26
2.04
2.91
3.53
0.58
0.83
0.97
0.83
1.15
1.34
1.02
1.39
1.62
1.03
1.59
1.83
1.17
1.68
1.98
1.20
1.67
2.10
183
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.716
0.686
0.675
0.702
0.688
0.677
0.676
0.684
0.676
0.727
0.678
0.673
0.649
0.701
0.669
0.680
0.697
0.670
0.678
0.663
0.653
0.630
0.659
0.654
0.592
0.643
0.647
0.647
0.626
0.644
0.607
0.636
0.643
0.620
0.679
0.642
WFEM
0.835
0.863
0.879
0.781
0.827
0.844
0.735
0.798
0.819
0.779
0.774
0.797
0.690
0.786
0.779
0.718
0.771
0.768
0.747
0.789
0.806
0.670
0.742
0.763
0.620
0.701
0.729
0.671
0.671
0.707
0.626
0.674
0.695
0.637
0.712
0.685
WFEM
0.835
0.863
0.879
0.781
0.827
0.844
0.735
0.798
0.819
0.779
0.774
0.797
0.690
0.786
0.779
0.718
0.771
0.768
0.747
0.789
0.806
0.670
0.742
0.763
0.620
0.701
0.729
0.671
0.671
0.707
0.628
0.676
0.696
0.640
0.716
0.689
WFEM
0.818
0.837
0.848
0.769
0.807
0.819
0.725
0.781
0.798
0.770
0.759
0.778
0.682
0.772
0.762
0.711
0.758
0.753
0.735
0.770
0.783
0.662
0.728
0.746
0.614
0.690
0.715
0.665
0.662
0.695
0.621
0.665
0.684
0.632
0.704
0.675
Frame
Kx
A3B1C5D1
3.002
A3B1C5D2
2.396
A3B1C5D3
2.098
A3B1C5D4
1.911
A3B1C5D5
1.780
A3B1C5D6
1.682
A3B1C6D1
3.231
A3B1C6D2
2.583
A3B1C6D3
2.263
A3B1C6D4
2.061
A3B1C6D5
1.918
A3B1C6D6
1.811
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.67
0.96
1.12
0.94
1.33
1.56
1.22
1.62
1.89
1.37
1.85
2.15
1.36
2.05
2.38
1.42
2.19
2.54
0.75
1.09
1.26
1.04
1.50
1.76
1.29
1.81
2.12
1.53
2.08
2.43
1.71
2.31
2.68
1.72
2.51
2.91
184
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.685
0.665
0.655
0.662
0.664
0.656
0.596
0.656
0.653
0.590
0.644
0.648
0.638
0.633
0.642
0.646
0.628
0.642
0.695
0.659
0.654
0.679
0.666
0.655
0.646
0.662
0.656
0.609
0.655
0.652
0.587
0.644
0.648
0.619
0.634
0.643
WFEM
0.772
0.809
0.825
0.714
0.765
0.783
0.631
0.731
0.754
0.618
0.702
0.730
0.664
0.680
0.709
0.669
0.669
0.700
0.794
0.812
0.835
0.741
0.780
0.796
0.690
0.752
0.771
0.643
0.726
0.749
0.616
0.703
0.731
0.645
0.684
0.714
WFEM
0.772
0.809
0.825
0.714
0.765
0.783
0.631
0.731
0.754
0.618
0.702
0.730
0.664
0.680
0.709
0.669
0.670
0.700
0.794
0.812
0.835
0.741
0.780
0.796
0.690
0.752
0.771
0.643
0.726
0.749
0.616
0.703
0.731
0.645
0.684
0.714
WFEM
0.758
0.788
0.800
0.704
0.749
0.764
0.624
0.718
0.738
0.612
0.691
0.716
0.657
0.671
0.697
0.663
0.660
0.688
0.779
0.790
0.808
0.730
0.763
0.774
0.682
0.737
0.753
0.636
0.714
0.733
0.609
0.692
0.716
0.639
0.673
0.701
Frame
Kx
A3B1C7D1
3.162
A3B1C7D2
2.527
A3B1C7D3
2.214
A3B1C7D4
2.016
A3B1C7D5
1.877
A3B1C7D6
1.772
A3B1C8D1
3.474
A3B1C8D2
2.784
A3B1C8D3
2.441
A3B1C8D4
2.223
A3B1C8D5
2.069
A3B1C8D6
1.951
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.78
1.04
1.23
1.11
1.49
1.72
1.39
1.82
2.09
1.61
2.09
2.39
1.70
2.32
2.65
1.77
2.51
2.87
0.89
1.27
1.40
1.27
1.70
1.99
1.58
2.11
2.43
1.85
2.42
2.79
2.08
2.70
3.09
2.21
2.94
3.36
185
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.662
0.686
0.666
0.624
0.666
0.670
0.587
0.658
0.668
0.564
0.647
0.666
0.573
0.635
0.661
0.586
0.628
0.657
0.676
0.650
0.675
0.641
0.678
0.669
0.612
0.660
0.667
0.585
0.655
0.665
0.565
0.647
0.663
0.566
0.639
0.661
WFEM
0.747
0.836
0.842
0.676
0.769
0.803
0.624
0.734
0.773
0.593
0.707
0.751
0.599
0.686
0.731
0.609
0.671
0.716
0.779
0.808
0.870
0.705
0.802
0.820
0.659
0.756
0.791
0.622
0.732
0.770
0.596
0.711
0.753
0.593
0.694
0.738
WFEM
0.747
0.836
0.842
0.676
0.769
0.803
0.624
0.734
0.773
0.593
0.707
0.751
0.599
0.686
0.731
0.609
0.671
0.716
0.779
0.808
0.870
0.705
0.802
0.820
0.659
0.756
0.791
0.622
0.732
0.770
0.596
0.711
0.753
0.593
0.694
0.738
WFEM
0.734
0.813
0.815
0.666
0.752
0.781
0.616
0.720
0.755
0.587
0.695
0.735
0.593
0.675
0.717
0.603
0.661
0.704
0.764
0.785
0.840
0.694
0.782
0.796
0.650
0.740
0.771
0.615
0.718
0.752
0.590
0.699
0.737
0.587
0.683
0.723
Frame
Kx
A3B1C9D1
3.733
A3B1C9D2
3.000
A3B1C9D3
2.633
A3B1C9D4
2.400
A3B1C9D5
2.233
A3B1C9D6
2.106
A3B2C1D1
3.136
A3B2C1D2
2.506
A3B2C1D3
2.195
A3B2C1D4
1.999
A3B2C1D5
1.860
A3B2C1D6
1.756
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
1.12
1.37
1.57
1.43
1.94
2.26
1.75
2.36
2.72
2.04
2.72
3.13
2.31
3.03
3.48
2.54
3.30
3.79
0.69
0.99
1.16
0.92
1.38
1.61
1.08
1.68
1.96
1.23
1.90
2.17
1.39
1.99
2.41
1.66
2.14
2.63
111
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.604
0.678
0.672
0.647
0.666
0.658
0.627
0.661
0.665
0.604
0.657
0.664
0.583
0.652
0.663
0.567
0.646
0.661
0.714
0.685
0.670
0.722
0.677
0.666
0.719
0.660
0.656
0.697
0.655
0.666
0.664
0.679
0.655
0.586
0.675
0.641
WFEM
0.707
0.854
0.878
0.722
0.801
0.820
0.682
0.771
0.804
0.649
0.749
0.784
0.621
0.729
0.768
0.599
0.713
0.754
0.808
0.838
0.850
0.782
0.790
0.804
0.766
0.746
0.768
0.734
0.724
0.762
0.694
0.739
0.736
0.609
0.726
0.711
WFEM
0.707
0.854
0.878
0.722
0.801
0.820
0.682
0.771
0.804
0.649
0.749
0.784
0.621
0.729
0.768
0.599
0.713
0.754
0.808
0.838
0.850
0.782
0.790
0.804
0.766
0.746
0.768
0.734
0.724
0.762
0.694
0.739
0.736
0.609
0.726
0.711
WFEM
0.692
0.828
0.846
0.710
0.780
0.794
0.672
0.754
0.782
0.640
0.733
0.764
0.613
0.715
0.750
0.593
0.700
0.737
0.794
0.817
0.824
0.772
0.774
0.784
0.757
0.733
0.752
0.727
0.713
0.748
0.688
0.729
0.724
0.604
0.717
0.700
Frame
Kx
A3B2C2D1
3.441
A3B2C2D2
2.757
A3B2C2D3
2.417
A3B2C2D4
2.202
A3B2C2D5
2.048
A3B2C2D6
1.932
A3B2C3D1
3.694
A3B2C3D2
2.969
A3B2C3D3
2.605
A3B2C3D4
2.374
A3B2C3D5
2.209
A3B2C3D6
2.083
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.81
1.16
1.35
1.08
1.60
1.88
1.35
1.95
2.27
1.45
2.23
2.61
1.64
2.35
2.82
1.70
2.55
3.04
0.92
1.32
1.52
1.23
1.81
2.11
1.56
2.18
2.56
1.69
2.51
2.93
1.80
2.79
3.26
2.03
2.89
3.52
112
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.718
0.683
0.669
0.723
0.681
0.667
0.685
0.670
0.662
0.710
0.661
0.654
0.680
0.685
0.662
0.698
0.678
0.660
0.713
0.680
0.667
0.722
0.681
0.668
0.674
0.675
0.664
0.699
0.665
0.658
0.713
0.657
0.652
0.673
0.683
0.650
WFEM
0.828
0.851
0.863
0.797
0.809
0.822
0.739
0.774
0.792
0.756
0.747
0.766
0.719
0.762
0.762
0.732
0.744
0.750
0.833
0.858
0.871
0.808
0.821
0.834
0.735
0.792
0.807
0.752
0.764
0.784
0.760
0.743
0.764
0.712
0.762
0.751
WFEM
0.828
0.851
0.863
0.797
0.809
0.822
0.739
0.774
0.792
0.756
0.747
0.766
0.719
0.762
0.762
0.732
0.744
0.750
0.833
0.858
0.871
0.808
0.821
0.834
0.735
0.792
0.807
0.752
0.764
0.784
0.760
0.743
0.764
0.712
0.762
0.751
WFEM
0.813
0.827
0.834
0.785
0.791
0.800
0.730
0.759
0.774
0.748
0.734
0.750
0.711
0.750
0.748
0.726
0.734
0.737
0.816
0.833
0.841
0.795
0.801
0.810
0.725
0.775
0.787
0.743
0.750
0.766
0.751
0.731
0.748
0.704
0.750
0.736
Frame
Kx
A3B2C4D1
2.730
A3B2C4D2
2.175
A3B2C4D3
1.905
A3B2C4D4
1.737
A3B2C4D5
1.621
A3B2C4D6
1.535
A3B2C5D1
3.002
A3B2C5D2
2.396
A3B2C5D3
2.098
A3B2C5D4
1.911
A3B2C5D5
1.780
A3B2C5D6
1.682
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.57
0.82
0.96
0.83
1.14
1.33
1.02
1.40
1.62
1.04
1.58
1.84
1.02
1.68
1.99
1.22
1.68
2.12
0.66
0.96
1.12
0.93
1.32
1.55
1.23
1.61
1.88
1.36
1.86
2.15
1.37
2.06
2.38
1.43
2.21
2.55
113
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.687
0.648
0.621
0.620
0.637
0.616
0.583
0.613
0.600
0.631
0.601
0.590
0.682
0.608
0.588
0.602
0.641
0.586
0.691
0.647
0.625
0.665
0.649
0.623
0.586
0.634
0.614
0.584
0.616
0.604
0.623
0.603
0.595
0.631
0.597
0.593
WFEM
0.758
0.770
0.760
0.660
0.719
0.716
0.612
0.670
0.676
0.656
0.645
0.649
0.704
0.644
0.637
0.618
0.673
0.626
0.781
0.785
0.781
0.718
0.748
0.739
0.621
0.708
0.708
0.612
0.673
0.680
0.648
0.649
0.658
0.653
0.637
0.647
WFEM
0.758
0.770
0.760
0.660
0.719
0.716
0.612
0.670
0.676
0.656
0.645
0.649
0.704
0.644
0.637
0.618
0.673
0.626
0.781
0.785
0.781
0.718
0.748
0.739
0.621
0.708
0.708
0.612
0.673
0.680
0.648
0.649
0.658
0.653
0.637
0.647
WFEM
0.746
0.753
0.740
0.652
0.706
0.701
0.605
0.660
0.664
0.650
0.636
0.640
0.698
0.637
0.628
0.614
0.666
0.618
0.768
0.765
0.758
0.709
0.733
0.722
0.614
0.696
0.694
0.606
0.663
0.668
0.642
0.640
0.648
0.647
0.629
0.638
Frame
Kx
A3B2C6D1
3.231
A3B2C6D2
2.583
A3B2C6D3
2.263
A3B2C6D4
2.061
A3B2C6D5
1.918
A3B2C6D6
1.811
A3B2C7D1
3.162
A3B2C7D2
2.527
A3B2C7D3
2.214
A3B2C7D4
2.016
A3B2C7D5
1.877
A3B2C7D6
1.772
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.75
1.09
1.27
1.05
1.49
1.75
1.29
1.80
2.11
1.54
2.07
2.42
1.71
2.31
2.68
1.72
2.53
2.91
0.77
1.10
1.23
1.11
1.49
1.72
1.39
1.82
2.09
1.61
2.09
2.39
1.72
2.32
2.65
1.79
2.52
2.87
114
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.690
0.647
0.622
0.671
0.653
0.626
0.643
0.647
0.623
0.596
0.633
0.616
0.583
0.619
0.608
0.613
0.607
0.600
0.663
0.648
0.665
0.626
0.666
0.671
0.587
0.659
0.668
0.561
0.647
0.666
0.568
0.635
0.661
0.579
0.626
0.656
WFEM
0.789
0.797
0.789
0.733
0.764
0.756
0.688
0.735
0.730
0.630
0.704
0.706
0.611
0.677
0.685
0.639
0.656
0.666
0.749
0.790
0.841
0.677
0.769
0.804
0.624
0.735
0.774
0.590
0.707
0.751
0.594
0.685
0.731
0.602
0.669
0.716
WFEM
0.789
0.797
0.789
0.733
0.764
0.756
0.688
0.735
0.730
0.630
0.704
0.706
0.611
0.677
0.685
0.639
0.656
0.666
0.749
0.790
0.841
0.677
0.769
0.804
0.624
0.735
0.774
0.590
0.707
0.751
0.594
0.685
0.731
0.602
0.669
0.716
WFEM
0.775
0.775
0.765
0.723
0.748
0.737
0.679
0.721
0.715
0.623
0.692
0.692
0.605
0.667
0.673
0.633
0.647
0.655
0.735
0.769
0.814
0.668
0.752
0.782
0.617
0.721
0.756
0.583
0.695
0.735
0.588
0.674
0.717
0.597
0.659
0.703
Frame
Kx
A3B2C8D1
3.474
A3B2C8D2
2.784
A3B2C8D3
2.441
A3B2C8D4
2.223
A3B2C8D5
2.069
A3B2C8D6
1.951
A3B2C9D1
3.733
A3B2C9D2
3.000
A3B2C9D3
2.633
A3B2C9D4
2.400
A3B2C9D5
2.233
A3B2C9D6
2.106
Fy
WFEM
(ksi)
(kips)
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
33
55
70
0.88
1.27
1.40
1.27
1.69
1.98
1.58
2.11
2.42
1.85
2.42
2.78
2.08
2.70
3.09
2.23
2.94
3.36
1.07
1.39
1.57
1.42
1.93
2.26
1.75
2.36
2.71
2.04
2.71
3.12
2.30
3.03
3.47
2.55
3.30
3.79
115
W1c
W2 a
W2 b
W2 c
WFEM
0.678
0.650
0.676
0.642
0.680
0.670
0.613
0.661
0.667
0.585
0.655
0.666
0.564
0.647
0.663
0.562
0.639
0.661
0.634
0.668
0.673
0.648
0.667
0.658
0.628
0.662
0.666
0.605
0.658
0.665
0.585
0.653
0.663
0.565
0.647
0.661
WFEM
0.781
0.807
0.871
0.706
0.804
0.821
0.660
0.757
0.792
0.622
0.732
0.771
0.594
0.711
0.753
0.589
0.694
0.738
0.741
0.843
0.879
0.723
0.802
0.820
0.683
0.771
0.805
0.649
0.749
0.785
0.623
0.730
0.769
0.597
0.713
0.754
WFEM
0.781
0.807
0.871
0.706
0.804
0.821
0.660
0.757
0.792
0.622
0.732
0.771
0.594
0.711
0.753
0.589
0.694
0.738
0.741
0.843
0.879
0.723
0.802
0.820
0.683
0.771
0.805
0.649
0.749
0.785
0.623
0.730
0.769
0.597
0.713
0.754
WFEM
0.766
0.784
0.841
0.695
0.785
0.797
0.651
0.741
0.772
0.615
0.718
0.753
0.588
0.699
0.737
0.583
0.682
0.723
0.726
0.817
0.847
0.711
0.781
0.794
0.673
0.754
0.783
0.640
0.734
0.766
0.615
0.716
0.751
0.591
0.700
0.737
Appendix
Design Examples
2 EI x
Pex =
Fe =
( K x Lx )
2 ( 29500 )(1.8 )
( (1.965)( 60 ) )
= 37.7 kips
Pex 37.7
=
= 31.42 ksi
1.2
A
Fy
c =
Fe
55
= 1.32 < 1.5, therefore
31.42
Fn = 0.658c Fy = 0.6581.32
Cmx M lt
Pu
1
Pex
M lt = Clx Pu
where
Clx =
L A ( 2 + B )
2 ( A + A B + B )
= =
1
240
A =
6
6
=
= 10
GA 0.6
B =
6
6
=
= 0.3
GB 20
therefore
Clx =
d) Using the equations given in (b) and (c), the interaction equation given in (a)
becomes
Pu
+
c Pn
CmxClx Pu
=1
Pu
b M n 1
Pex
Solve for Pu
Pu = A A2 B
where
A=
B = c Pn Pex
Cmx = 0.85
therefore
A=
( 31.82 )( 63.85 ) + ( 63.85 )( 37.7 ) + ( 31.82 )( 37.7 )( 0.85)( 0.216 ) = 36.48 ksi
2 ( 63.85 )
Solve for Pn ( L )
Pex ( L ) =
Fe =
2 EI x
Lx
2 ( 29500 )(1.8 )
602
= 145.58 kips
Pex 145.58
=
= 121.32 ksi
1.2
A
Fy
c =
Fe
55
= 0.673 < 1.5, therefore
121.32
Fn = 0.658c Fy = 0.6580.673
Using similar procedures as Approach 1c, the interaction equation above becomes
Pu
+
c Pn ( L )
CmxClx Pu
=1
Pu
b M n 1
Pex
Solve for Pu
Pu = A A2 B
where
A=
B = c Pn ( L ) Pex
Pex = 37.7 kips (From Approach 1a)
M n = 63.85 kipin. (From Approach 1c)
Clx = 0.216 (From Approach 1c)
Cmx = 0.85
therefore
A=
( 54.6 )( 63.85 ) + ( 63.85 )( 37.7 ) + ( 54.6 )( 37.7 )( 0.85)( 0.216 ) = 49.11 ksi
2 ( 63.85 )
Approach 2b
From Eq. (5.8), K x > 1.7 therefore = 1 240 . Since this is the same value used in
Approach 2a, the resulting Pu would also be the same.
Approach 2c
Using the same procedures as Approach 1c, the interaction equation above becomes
Pu
+
c Pn ( L )
Cmx Clx Pu
=1
Pu
b M n 1
Pex *
Solve for Pu
Pu = A A2 B
where
A=
B = c Pn ( L ) Pex *
Pn ( L ) = 54.6 kips (From Approach 2a)
M n = 63.85 kipin. (From Approach 1c)
10
Pex * =
2 EI x *
( K x Lx )
2 ( 47790 )
( (1.965)( 60 ) )
= 33.93 kips
therefore
A=
( 54.6 )( 63.85) + ( 63.85)( 33.93) + ( 54.6 )( 33.93)( 0.85)( 0.216 ) = 46.93 ksi
2 ( 63.85 )
Approach
Pu PFEM
100%
PFEM
Pu
1a
1c
25.03
18.31% Conservative
2a and 2b 30.31
1.08% Conservative
2c
28.23
7.87% Conservative
11
Appendix
Appendix
Computer Programs
Four computer programs have been developed to carry out the extensive
parametric studies which involved the analysis and the design of coldformed steel
members and structures conducted in this research project. Description for each of
these computer programs, and their Users Guide are as follows:
CUEWA Effective Width Approach: is a computer program designed to
compute the nominal flexural strength M n and the nominal axial strength Pn of coldformed steel sections using two approaches: the AISI (1996) method, and the
Intergraded Distortional Buckling method given by Schafer and Pekz (1999).
CUPBF Plate Buckling and Free Vibration: is a computer program designed to
solve three types of problems involving the eigenvalue analysis: plate elastic buckling,
freevibration, and freevibration with initial inplane stresses. The program uses the
finite element method with fournode rectangular thin plate elements. Various
boundary conditions and perforations can be applied.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
REFERENCES
AISC (1998): Manual of Steel Construction, Load and Resistance Factor Design, 2nd
ed. Vol. 1 and 2, American Institute of Steel Construction.
AISI (1996): ColdFormed Steel Design Manual, 1996 ed. American Iron and Steel
Institute.
ASCE (1997): Effective Length and Notional Load Approaches for Assessing Frame
Stability: Implications for American Steel Design, American Society of Civil
Engineers.
Baldassino, N., and Bernuzzi, C. (2000): Analysis and Behaviour of Steel Storage
Pallet Racks, ThinWalled Structures, 37(4), 2000.
Chen, W.F., and Atsuta, T. (1976): Theory of BeamColumns, McGrawHill,
New York.
Cheng, P.H. (1973): Effect of SemiRigid Connection to Steel Column of ColdFormed Perforated Singly Symmetric Section, Proceedings of the 2nd
Specialty Conference of ColdFormed Steel Structures, University of MissouriRolla.
Galambos, T.V. (1960): Influence of Partial Base Fixity on Frame Stability, Journal
of the Structural Division, 86(5), 1960.
Galambos, T.V. (1988): Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures, 4th
ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Gattass, M., and Abel, J.F. (1987): Equilibrium Considerations of the Updated
Lagrangian Formulation of BeamColumns with Natural Concepts,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 24(11), 1987.
327
328
329
Schafer, B.W. (1997): ColdFormed Steel Behavior and Design: Analytical and
Numerical Modeling of Elements and Members with Longitudinal Stiffeners,
Ph.D. Dissertation, Cornell University.
Schafer, B.W., Pekz, T. (1998): Computational Modeling of ColdFormed Steel:
Characterizing Geometric Imperfections and Residual Stresses, Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, 47(3), 1998.
Schafer, B.W., and Pekz, T. (1999): Laterally Braced ColdFormed Steel Flexural
Members with Edge Stiffened Flanges, Journal of Structural Engineering,
125(2), 1999.
Sokolnikoff, I.S. (1983): Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, Krieger Publishing
Company, Florida.
Sputo, T. (1993): History of Steel BeamColumn Design, Journal of Structural
Engineering, 119(2), 1993.
Teh, L.H., Hancock, G.J., and Clarke, M.J. (2000): Spatial Buckling Behavior of
HighRise Rack Frames, Proceedings of the 15th Specialty Conference of
ColdFormed Steel Structures, University of MissouriRolla.
Timoshenko, S.P., and Gere J.M. (1961): Theory of Elastic Stability, 2nd ed. McGrawHill Book Company, New York.
Timoshenko, S.P., and Goodier, J.N. (1969): Theory of Elasticity, 3rd ed. McGrawHill Book Company, New York.
White, D.W., and Clake, M.J. (1997): Design of BeamColumns in Steel Frames,
Journal of Structural Engineering, 123(12), 1997.
Yang, T.Y. (1986): Finite Element Structure Analysis, PrenticeHall, New Jersey.
Yu, W.W. (2000): ColdFormed Steel Design, 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons,
New York.
330
www.steel.org