CEE 485 - LECTURE 2

The DESIGN PROCESS

DESIGN PROCEDURE

What do we mean by the terms "Design a Building" or “Design a Bridge”?

Steps involved (Based on building design):

System Selection:
1. Along with Architect and Client, the structural engineer defines the function of the
structure and sets criteria for acceptable final product, such as cost of construction,
maximum deflections, maximum accelerations, etc. The advent of Performance
Based Design makes this an even more important step in the design process.
2. Preliminary structural configuration. Usually involves a number of possible structural
systems of various materials and framing types. A preliminary cost study is usually
performed to decide on the best option.

Preliminary Design:
1. In order to select the structural system and materials to be used for the structure, it is
often necessary to perform a number of preliminary designs on alternate systems.
2. Sizing of members etc. is typically based on past experience, rather than detailed
analysis and design, though some preliminary analysis may be necessary.
3. Based on a cost estimate for each system, the client will make a decision as to which
to select.

Analysis:
1. Loads to be carried. Review code accepted by local jurisdiction.
2. Preliminary member selection. Member sizes chosen by rough estimation from past
experience and quick approximate calculations.
3. Analysis. Involves analysis of the structural system when subjected to the loads to
obtain internal forces in each member, and deflections of the members and the frame
as a whole. For structural systems, this is typically performed by computer analysis,
eg. SAP2000, ETABS, STAADIII, STRUDL, RISA and others.
4. For individual members, analysis often performed by hand or tables or computer
programs, eg. for continuous beams, simple beams, etc.

Design:
1. Evaluation. Check the strength of each member against the forces to which that
member is subjected. Are all the strength and serviceability requirements satisfied and
is the solution optimal?
2. Redesign. The above steps are then repeated until all of the criteria are satisfied.
 LOADING

Minimum design loads are prescribed by the code adopted by the local jurisdiction in the
area where the structure is being built. All building construction in the US is based on
one of the following model codes:
UBC – Uniform Building Code
IBC – International Building Code
Currently in Hawaii, the building codes are:
Honolulu C&C and Kauai – IBC 2003 with amendments
Other Counties – older versions of UBC Code
State of Hawaii is in the process of adopting IBC 2006 as a state code.

The IBC codes refer to ASCE/SEI 7 for structural loading. The current HC&C code
references IBC 2003, which in turn references ASCE/SEI 7-02. The future state building
code, IBC 2006, will reference ASCE/SEI 7-05.

Dead Load:
Dead load includes the self-weight of the member and any supported structural elements.

Superimposed Dead Load Include non-structural items that are permanently in the
building, such as ceiling, mechanical, toppings on slabs, partitions, etc.

Live Loads:
All gravity loads that are not included in dead loads. Usually of a temporary nature such
as occupants, furniture, storage materials, vehicles. Usually the minimum allowed live
load is prescribed by state and local building codes for public safety. Clients may often
request a higher level of live load in the design to allow for changes or occupancy during
the life of the building.

See typical table of minimum live loads in the text Table 2-1.

Because of the low probability that full live load will occur over large areas of the
structure or on a number of floors at the same time, most codes allow for a reduction in
live load for members that support a large area. IBC provides this reduction based on
influence area, AI. The text shows how this influence area is related to the more
commonly understood tributary area, AT, by AI = KLLAT (Figure 2-9).

The reduced live load is given by:

15
L = L0 (0.25 + )
K LL AT

Where L0 is the unreduced live load.

Values of KLL are given for different floor conditions (see text page 32).
The reduced live load cannot be less than 50 percent of the unreduced live load for
columns supporting one level, or for flexural members, and no less than 40 percent for
other members.

Live load reduction is not permitted for areas of public assembly, garages and roofs. If the
live load is 100psf or greater, no live load reduction is permitted except for columns
supporting multiple floors, and then it is limited to a 20 percent reduction.

Concentrated Live Loads:

The code provides concentrated load values (from 1000 to 8000 lb) that must be
considered to act on a 30 in by 30 in area at any point on the floor. These are not
combined with the uniformly distributed live load, but are intended to ensure safety for
heavy objects such as safes, car wheels, etc.

Moveable Partitions:
Moveable partitions are treated as live load, with a minimum average intensity of 20 psf.

Vehicle Loads:
IBC provides some information on wheel loads for design of parking garages. Bridge and
roadway design is performed using the AASHTO code (American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials). Highway vehicle loading has been standardized
by AASHTO, and consists of either a uniform lane load or a single truck load, H20 (two
axles) or HS 20 (two axle truck with semi-trailer). The application of the loads is
prescribed by AASHTO. A similar system is used for Railway Bridge loading.

Handrails:
IBC provides the design loads for handrails, guards, grab bars and vehicle barriers.

Impact Loading:

Impact loads are the dynamic effects of a moving or vibrating load, not the effect of an
accident or explosion. These effects are generally small in buildings or even parking
structures, however, become significant on highway bridges, stadiums, and structures
supporting heavy vibrating machinery or cranes. They must be considered when
designing the beams supporting elevators in buildings.

AASHTO requires consideration of impact loading for bridge structures.

AISC codes suggest impact percentage increases for machinery and cranes.

Snow Loads:
Roof live loads are controlled by snow load in many parts of the US. In areas where
snow is not an issue, the minimum live load will control.
Wind Loads:

Positive or negative pressure on the exterior of a building due to wind. The IBC code
refers to ASCE/SEI 7 as the design standard for wind load.

Soil Lateral Load:

The code provides some guidance on lateral loads applied by different types of soil. It is
generally advisable to have a geotechnical engineer provide these design values for the
specific site in their geotechnical report.

Rain Loads:
Ponding of rainwater when drainage systems are clogged is a common cause of roof
failure.

Flood Loads:
Design provisions are given for river and coastal storm flooding. The code refers to
ASCE 24 for more detailed specifications.

Earthquake Loads:

Earthquakes do not actually apply any load to a structure. They simply shake the ground
on which the structure rests. However, since the structure has mass, and hence inertia, it
resists the movement and so induces forces in the structural members. The simplest way
for the design codes to apply this effect is to provide equivalent static lateral loads. The
more correct way to design a structure for earthquake effects is through dynamic
structural analysis techniques.

Other Loads:

Design Methods:

Two philosophies of design have been prevalent for some time.

1. Working Stress Design, or Allowable Stress Design: Focuses on conditions at service load
(or working load) and was the principal method used from early 1900 to the 1960s. The approach
was to ensure that the strength of a member was sufficiently greater than the actual load (service
load) applied to the member by assigning a Safety Factor. It was therefore possible to establish
allowable stresses which would ensure that the safety factor was maintained. Today, with a few
exceptions, this method is very seldom used for concrete design, and the ACI Code removed it
from Appendix A, Alternate Design Method, in 2002. We will not cover this method at all in this
class.
2. Limit States Design, or Strength Design Method:
In the strength design method, the variability in loads and member strengths is taken into
account directly by means of load factors (α α) and strength reduction factors (φ φ). This method
is also referred to as the Ultimate strength method, or Ultimate Limit State.

Ultimate Limit State

Based on the uncertainty of the actual loads, the service loads are increased by load factors to
obtain the maximum anticipated load that could occur, referred to as the 'factored load'. Loads
that are more predictable, such as dead loads, have less uncertainty and so have a lower load
factor (1.2), while live loads or wind loads, which are much less predictable, are assigned a
higher load factor (1.6). For earthquake loading, the ASCE-7 code that defines ground shaking
provides an ultimate loading condition. Hence there is no additional load factor for the
earthquake loads determined from ASCE-7 (ie. the load factor is 1.0)

The structure or structural element is then proportioned such that the member ultimate strength is
greater than or equal to the factored load. The computation of this strength takes into account the
nonlinear stress-stain behavior of the concrete, steel and other materials involved, and is referred
to as the nominal strength since it is based on the nominal (or design) material properties. In
order to account for the variability in material properties, a strength reduction factor, φ, is applied
to the nominal strength to determine the ultimate strength.

The α and φ factors used in design are based on a probabilistic analysis of both the loads and the
member/material strengths. These factors are selected so that there is only a small probability
that the loads will exceed the member strength, leading to a potential collapse (generally on the
order of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 100,000). The text shows this approach in section 2-5. Even for the
shaded area of potential collapse (Figure 2-6), there are still a number of factors working in our
favor. By using the nominal material properties (ie. the specified concrete and rebar strengths),
we know that there will actually be some overstrength in most cases. There are a number of
other conservative assumptions in our analysis and design of structural members, and these also
help to prevent failures even when the probabilistic analysis shows they should occur.

As an example of the Ultimate Limit State design method, if we are designing the bending
strength of a beam, we must ensure that:

φM n ≥ M U = ∑ αM s

Where φ is the strength reduction factor for RC beam bending

Mn is the computed moment capacity of the beam based on nominal (or
specified) material properties
MU is the factored or ultimate moment applied to the beam
α are the appropriate load factors, and
Ms are the service load moments

For example, one load combination for a floor beam considering Dead and Live loads would be:

φM n ≥ M U = 1.2M D + 1.6 M L
Serviceability Limit State

In addition to considerations of strength, we must also consider 'serviceability'. This refers to

how the structure or member performs under everyday (service) loads.

Serviceability factors include:

• excessive deflections

• detrimental cracking

• excessive amplitude or undesirable frequency of vibrations

• excessive noise transmission

• concrete surface deterioration

Safety Provisions:

Structures must be designed to carry some reserve load above the expected load to account for
various possibilities which fall into two groups:

1. Overload
2. Understrength

Overloads may result from:

1. Change of use of structure

2. Under-estimation of effects of loads by simplification of analysis

3. Effects of construction sequence and methods

4. Unforeseen loading conditions

Understrength may result from:

1. Adverse variations in material strengths,

2. Workmanship,

3. Member dimensions,

4. Control and degree of supervision and quality control.

even though individually these may all be within required tolerances.

LOAD FACTORS, α, are applied to the loads to account for potential overload conditions.

PHI FACTORS, or STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTORS, φ, are applied to the member

strength to account for potential understrength.

Load Combinations

The most common load combination equation from the ACI code for a structure subjected to
dead and live loads is:

U = 1.2 D + 1.6 L

where U = required strength

D = dead load under service conditions
L = Live load under service conditions

When we combine Wind (W), Earthquake (E), earth pressure (H), snow load (S) etc. with dead
and live loads, we take into account the low probability of the worst case loading happening
simultaneously. Hence, the load factors are adjusted for the likelihood of both extreme loads
occurring at the same time. Section 2-7 in the text shows some of the more common load
combinations.

For example, in Hawaii, the extreme wind condition is based on a hurricane event. When
combining hurricane loading (W) with live load in a building (L), it is unlikely that the live load
will exceed the code specified level during a hurricane. Therefore the code load combination is:

U = 1.2D + 1.6W + 1.0L + 0.5(Lr or S or R)

Where Lr is the roof live load

S is the roof snow load
R is the roof rain load

The 1.0 load factor applied to L can be reduced to 0.5 except for garages, public assembly
buildings and live loads greater than 100 psf (storage, libraries, etc.).

When one of the loading conditions improves the building performance, then we should consider
the possibility that it may have less effect than we expect. For example, if wind load (W) is
tending to overturn a building, but the dead load (D) is resisting overturning, then it would be
unconservative to use the full D. We may have overestimated the dead load, thinking that would
be conservative, which it is in most cases, just not this one. The code therefore requires that we
consider the following load combination:

U = 0.9D + 1.6W
Strength Reduction Factors

The strength reduction factors, φ, are given by ACI code as:

1. Flexure, with or without axial tension 0.90 (for ductile failure mode)
2. Axial Tension 0.90
3. Shear and torsion 0.75
4. Compression members, spirally reinforced 0.75
5. Other compression-controlled members 0.65
6. Bearing on concrete 0.65

These factors vary to take into account both the unpredictability of the failure mechanism, and
the potential consequences of failure of the member type.

Overall Safety Factor

Using the ultimate limit state method, we don’t really refer to an overall safety factor any more.
However, you can compute an effective safety factor using:

SF =
∑γ Wi i
×
1
∑W i
φ

For the most common loading combination of Dead plus Live load, this becomes:

γ 1D + γ 2 L 1
SF = ×
D+L φ

Examples:

1. Consider a RC beam subjected to uniformly distributed service loads of 200 plf dead
load and 500 plf live load. What is the overall safety factor for this beam design?

2. Consider a RC tied column subjected to axial compression from service loads of 50 kips
dead load and 200 kips live load. What is the overall safety factor for this column?
The total required nominal strength to be provided in design is therefore U/φ. Because the phi
factors vary for the type of action considered, they are usually added at various points in the
calculations. The load factors are best added at the beginning of calculations to obtain factored
loads (avoid the term design loads).

PROBABILITY OF FAILURE is the driving force behind both load and strength reduction
factors. To arrive at a suitable degree of safety, the following must be considered:

1. Seriousness of a failure, human and material losses

2. Reliability of workmanship and inspection

3. Expectation of overload and to what magnitude

4. Importance of the member in the structure

5. Chance of warning prior to failure

By assigning probabilities to the above items and evaluating the circumstances for any given
situation, proper values of γ and φ can be determined.

The text shows how these factors are developed in section 2-5.