CE 523

Behavior and Design of Steel Structures

Term Project
Instructor: Dr Hammad R. Khalid
Project Title: Design of an Aircraft Storage Hangar as Simple Gable Frame
Using ETABS.

Name KFUPM ID
Muhammed Y. Al Adgham 202314650

Mohd Salman Khan 202315030

 ABSTRACT

This report presents a comprehensive structural steel design analysis for a warehouse structure in
Saudi Arabia, in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) standards. The
design encompasses a combination of live load, dead load, and environmental loads, with the
understanding that wind loads are more critical than seismic loads. Seismic loads have been
excluded from the final design combinations.

The design process involves a thorough examination of gravity loads, live loads, and the influence
of wind forces. ASCE standards guide the selection and sizing of structural members, including
connection design, to ensure the structural integrity of the facility.

The report outlines the step-by-step methodology employed in the design process, including load
calculations, member sizing, and connection design. Drawings and plans illustrate the proposed
structural system, showcasing the arrangement of primary and secondary members. Material
selection, corrosion protection strategies, and considerations for constructability are discussed.

Validation of the design was conducted using structural engineering software, incorporating
combinations of live load, dead load, and the acknowledged critical wind load. Sensitivity analyses
were performed to assess the impact of various design parameters on the overall structural
response.

In conclusion, this report provides a detailed overview of the structural steel design for a warehouse
in Saudi Arabia, emphasizing the combination of live load, dead load, and the recognition that
wind loads are more critical than seismic loads. The proposed design, including connection details,
aims to meet the functional requirements of the facility and ensure structural safety in the prevalent
environmental conditions.

1
Table of Contents
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Aircraft Hangar Shapes
2.1. Simple Frame Hangar
2.2. Truss Frame Hangar
2.3. Arch Span Frame Hangar
2.4. Other Shapes (K and J Type, Side Opening, C Type, L Type)
3. Hangar Challenges
4. Design Code and Loads
4.1. Design Codes: SBC, ASCE, AISC
4.2. Analysis of Dead, Live, and Wind Loads
5. Layouts
5.1. Boeing 737-500 Hangar
6. Load Analysis and Design Criteria
6.1. Comprehensive Dead Load and live Load Analysis
6.2. Wind Load Calculation
6.3. Load Combinations for Design
7. Structural Model Details Using ETABS
7.1. Selection of Structural Elements
7.2. Overview of ETABS Model
7.3. Wind Load Analysis Using ETABS
8. Structural Analysis and Design Results
8.1. Moments (kips – ft)
8.2. Normal Forces
8.3. Internal Forces of Ultimate Combination (1.2D+1.6L)

2
9. Design Input: Loads Combinations and Sections
10. ETABS Steel Frame Design
10.1 COLUMN DESIGN 1ST MAIN FRAME
10.2 Rafter Design 1st Main Frame
10.3 Column Design Intermediate Main Frame
10.4 Rafter Design Intermediate Main Frame
11. Beam And Column Design
11.1 Column Design
11.2 Beam Design

3
 1. INTRODUCTION
In terms of structural engineering, an aviation hangar is a sizable structure that is carefully designed
to house and protect aeroplanes. Structural dynamics, load considerations, and steel design
concepts are all deeply understood because these structures are made to satisfy the wide range of
demands of the aviation sector.
In aviation hangars, steel is critical, especially when it comes to creating interior spaces without
columns. This design strategy offers the flexibility needed in the dynamic and changing aviation
industry, while also improving operational functionality and promoting effective maintenance
procedures. A hangar's ability to fulfil industry requirements and support the smooth and secure
operation of aviation facilities is largely dependent on its usage of steel.

Hanger Benefits
Protect aircrafts from:
 Weather
 Direct sunlight
 Lowering overall cost of maintenance.
 Provide a space for maintenance.
 Can be used as a storage for airplane

2. Aircraft Hangar Shape

4
 2.1 Simple Frame Hangar
The simple frame hangar is a straightforward and affordable hangar design with a rectangular
structure formed by vertical columns and horizontal beams. Because of its simple form, building
is both inexpensive and simple.
Application: Perfect for general aviation airplanes and other modest to medium-sized aircraft.
Frequently seen at private airfields or smaller airports where affordability and functionality are
given priority.
Benefits
 economical building methods.
 Simple structure and design.
 Suitable for smaller aircraft.
Drawbacks:
 Additional interior columns may be needed due to limited span possibilities.
 Larger aircraft or intensive maintenance activities are not as suited.

Fig.1.1: Simple frame hangar

2.2 Truss Frame Hangar

This hangar design, which makes use of a truss system, has triangle frames made of connected
components. This offers better span capabilities and facilitates effective load distribution. A
pitched roof is a common feature of truss frame hangars, which adds more internal space.
Application: Fits a range of aircraft sizes, including mid-sized corporate jets and general aviation
aircraft. frequently encountered at private facilities and regional airports.
Benefit
 Greater span capabilities when using the truss structure.
 Effective distribution of the load.
 Pitch roof is an option to maximize internal space.

5
Drawbacks:
 More intricately designed and built than basic frame hangars.
 Might call for certain engineering knowledge.

Fig.1.2: Truss frame hangar

2.3 Arch span frame hangar
The arch frame hangar is characterized by its unique curved or arched roof structure, which allows
for exceptional span capacities without requiring internal columns. For larger hangars, this design
is perfect since it ensures effective load distribution.
Usage: Usually reserved for bigger aircraft, including military and commercial aircraft. Excellent
for high maintenance and storage needs.
Advantages
 wide span capacities without internal columns.
 unique and visually beautiful design.
 Perfect for big aircraft reception.
Negative aspects
 Simple frame hangars may not have the same level of construction complexity.
certain engineering knowledge is needed.

6
 Fig.1.3: Arch span frame hangar

2.4 Other Shape of Hangar

(a) K And J Type Hangar ( b) Side Opening Hangar

(c). C type Hangar (d). L type Hangar

Fig 1.4 other shape of hanger: a}. K and J type hanger b). Side opening hanger c). C type hanger
d). L type hanger

7
 3. AIRCRAFT HANGER CHALLENGES

 Large span
Structural integrity must be carefully taken into account when designing hangars with huge spans.
Since there are no interior columns, creative structural solutions are required to distribute loads
effectively.
Truss or arch frame designs are frequently used to provide huge spans without the
requirement for inside columns, allowing free room for aircraft movement.

 Height
Complying with height regulations is essential to allow for the tail height and wingspan of different
types of aircraft. There can be financial and construction-related difficulties with this.
To maximize height requirements while guaranteeing cost-effectiveness, architects and structural
engineers must collaborate and communicate clearly.
 Wind load
Hangars are subject to high wind loads, particularly in open spaces. Significant pressure from
wind forces can be applied to the structure, necessitating careful planning and study.
It is imperative that structural engineers carry out comprehensive computations of wind loads and
construct the hangar in a way that can withstand these forces. It is possible to use materials and
features that are wind-resistant in the design.

 The considerations of the airplane that will park.

To ensure that the hangar can handle a variety of operational needs, accommodating different types
of aircraft with differing sizes, shapes, and weight distributions requires careful planning.
Design adaptability is essential. Hangars ought to be able to accommodate various aircraft
configurations. The adaptability of the hangar can be increased with modular or configurable
components.
4. Design Codes and Loads

4.1 Design Code

 SBC. (Saudi Building Code)
 ASCE. (American Society of Civil Engineers)
 AISC. (American Institute of Steel
Construction)

8
 4.2 Loads
• Dead Load: own weight of the project including ( column, beams/truss , bracing, steel
roof) and all other weight included in the structural system according with standards.
• Wind Load: the project will be placed in Eastern region, KSA. We will use the wind load
specification according to the SBC for Dammam city.
• Live Load
• Snow Load” neglected”
• Rain Load” neglected

5. LAYOUTS
General layout for the elevation and side view of the hangar

9
 5.1 HANGAR BOEING

 For our project we decide to design the hangar Boeing 737-500 with the following
dimensions:
The design dimensions for a hangar intended to accommodate a Boeing 737-500. Designing a
hangar involves various considerations, including the aircraft's wingspan, length, and tail height.
Keep in mind that these dimensions may vary slightly depending on specific aircraft
configurations and modifications.

 Hangar plan
As of my knowledge cutoff in January 2022, here are the approximate dimensions for a Boeing
737-500:
 Wingspan: Approximately 93 feet, 0 inches (28.3 meters)
 Length: Approximately 101 feet, 9 inches (31 meters)
 Height: Approximately 36 feet, 7 inches (11.1 meters)

10
 Hanger-Plan

Sketch-Elevation “Front”

11
 Sketch-Elevation “Side”
In order to ensure compliance with the Saudi Building Code (SBC) norms, our structural design
for the Boeing 737-500 hangar includes a thorough investigation of various loads. The three
main loads that are taken into account are wind, live, and dead loads.

6. Load Analysis and Design Criteria for Hangar Structure

Our structural design for the Boeing 737-500 hangar incorporates a meticulous analysis of
various loads, ensuring compliance with the Saudi Building Code (SBC) standards. The primary
loads considered are dead load, live load, and wind load.
6.1 Comprehensive Dead Load and Live Load Analysis
 Sandwich Panel Deck, Metal Joints, Insulation: 0.15 kN/m²
 Acoustical Fiberboard (Ceiling): 0.05 kN/m²
 Electrical, HVAC, Firefighting Ducts, and Piping: 0.25 kN/m²
 Total Dead Load (Excluding Structural Elements): 0.45 kN/m²

 Live Load for Inclined Inaccessible Flexible Roofs (Inclination 1:10): 0.5 kN/m²

6.2 Wind Load Calculation (According to SBC 301):

 Wind Speed: 152 km/h (94.45 mph)

 Importance Factor (I): 1
 Exposure Type: C (As per SBC standards)

6.3 Load Combinations for Design:

12
The hangar design incorporates load combinations of dead load, live load, and wind load. The
load combinations are determined according to SBC guidelines to ensure the structure's safety
and resilience.

Wind Pressure Coefficients (for slope 1:10, ϴ= 5.7 deg)

The roof inclination in our project is 1:10, and the L/B ratio is 1.2.

Considering LFRD steel design

13
Considering LFRD steel design
For LRFD, the load combinations are as follows:
 1.4 D
 1.2 D+1.6L+0.5(Lr or S or R)
 1.2 D+1.6(Lr or S or R) + (L or 0.5W)
 1.2 D+1.0W+L+0.5(Lr or S or R)
 0.9 D+1.0W

7. Structural Model Details for Hangar Design Using ETABS

In the design and analysis of our hangar structure, we employed the sophisticated engineering
software ETABS to ensure precision and efficiency. The dimensions of the hangar were
meticulously specified, and the structural components were selected based on their
appropriateness for the intended loads and design criteria.
7.1. Selected Structural Elements:
1. Columns:
 Material: Steel
 Type: W18*86
2. Rafters:
 Material: Steel
 Type: W21*93
3. Purlins and Side Girts:

14
  Material: Cold Formed Steel
 Type: C-Section
 Depth: 10 inches
Justification for Selection:
 Columns (W18*86):
 The W18*86 columns were chosen for their ability to provide adequate vertical
support, taking into account the specific loads and design requirements of the
hangar structure.
 Rafters (W21*93):
 The W21*93 rafters were selected to ensure the necessary strength and stability
required for the hangar's roofing system, contributing to the overall structural
integrity.
 Purlins and Side Girts (Cold Formed C-Section 10):
 Cold-formed C-sections with a depth of 10 inches were chosen for the purlins and
side girts to efficiently distribute loads while maintaining a lightweight and cost-
effective design.

7.2. Overview of ETAB model

ETABS is a complete software solution for the analysis and design of building structures, and it
was used to methodically generate the structural model. Accurate load distribution and a
thorough examination of the structural behaviour were made possible by the assistance of
ETABS in incorporating the required dimensions.
The selection of materials and structural components complies with the project's safety
requirements, design standards, and load requirements.
The structural resilience of the hangar under varied situations was ensured by a detailed analysis
made possible by ETABS, which took into account diverse load combinations.
We are committed to creating a structurally strong, effective, and safe design for the hangar
project, which is shown in our careful material selection and cutting-edge software use. The
incorporation of ETABS enables a thorough comprehension of the behaviour of the structure, so
augmenting the project's overall triumph.
ETABS Model

15
16
7.3 Wind Load Analysis using ETABS

Wind Load X –Auto calaculated by ASCE 16

 Wind Load X –Pressure Coefficient Cp

17
  Wind
Load Y –Pressure Coefficient Cp

 Wind Load X’ –Pressure Coefficient Cp

18
 Wind Load X’ –Pressure Coefficient Cp

19
8. Structural Analysis and Design Results for Hangar Project Using ETABS

8.1 Internal forces (kips – ft)

BMD (Dead Load Case)

BMD (Live Load Case)

20
BMD (Wind X Load Case)

BMD (Wind Y Case)

21
 BMD (Wind Y’ Load Case)

8.2 Results: Internal Forces

NFD (Dead Load Case)

NFD (Live Load Case)

22
 NFD (Wind X’ Load Case)

NFD (Wind Y’ Load Case)

8.3 Internal Forces of Ultimate Combination (1.2D+1.6L)

23
 Design Preferences:
 Design Code: AISC 360-16
 Design Provision: LRFD

Design Code: AISC 360-16

Design Provision: LRFD

Analysis Method: Direct Analysis
24
 nd nd
2 Order Method: General 2 Order

9. Design Input: Loads Combinations and Sections

25
 In the design considerations, we assumed compression flange restraints at equal spacings
(spacing between purlins and side girts)
 In the design considerations, we assumed compression flange
restraints at equal spacings (spacing between purlins and side girts)
 Spacing between purlins is 1.76 m and between side girts 2 m.
 For outer flanges the Purlins/Side girts can provide restraining action and for bottom or
inner flange, fly bracing is assumed to be used in negative moment zones

26
Design Output: P/M interaction ratios for all members:
 All elements are safe with interaction ratio less than 1

27
 Column Design
Load Details

Loads Moments (kip-ft) Normal Forces (kips)

Dead Load (DL) -161.013 -16.536

Live Load (LL) -110.005 -4.3022

Wind Load (Wx) 52.3061 2.842

Wind Load (Wy) 58.3603 2.717

10. ETABS Steel Frame Design

10.1 COLUMN DESIGN 1ST MAIN FRAME
AISC 360-16 Steel Section Check (Strength Summary)

Element Details
Unique Location
Level Element Combo Element Type Section Classification
Name (ft)
Comb 4- Special Moment W21X10
Story1 C2 24 37.6239 Slender
1 Frame 1

LLRF and Demand/Capacity Ratio

Stress Ratio
L (ft) LLRF
Limit
0.5 1
39.37010

Analysis and Design Parameters

Provision Analysis 2nd Order Reduction
Direct General 2nd Tau-b
LRFD
Analysis Order Fixed

Stiffness Reduction Factors

28
 αPr /Py αPr /Pe τb EA factor EI factor
0.061 0.001 1 0.8 0.8

Design Code Parameters

ϕb ϕc ϕTY ϕTF ϕV ϕV-RI ϕVT
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.75 0.9 1 1

Section Properties
A (ft²) J (ft⁴) I33 (ft⁴) I22 (ft⁴) Av3 (ft²) Av2 (ft²)
0.00025
0.2069 0.116705 0.01196 0.1367 0.0743
1

Design Properties
S33 (ft³) S22 (ft³) Z33 (ft³) Z22 (ft³) r33 (ft) r22 (ft) Cw (ft⁶)
0.130884 0.023336 0.146412 0.035706 0.75096 0.2404 0.008815

Material Properties
E (kip/ft²) fy (kip/ft²) Ry Cpr α
4176000 7200 1.1 1.4 NA

Stress Check forces and Moments

Location
Pu (kip) Mu33 (kip-ft) Mu22 (kip-ft) Vu2 (kip) Vu3 (kip) Tu (kip-ft)
(ft)
37.6239 -90.432 -719.4233 -2.3998 114.363 0.755 -0.014

Axial Force & Biaxial Moment Design Factors (H1-1b)

L Factor K1 K2 B1 B2 Cm
Major
0.167 1 1 1 1 1
Bending
Minor
0 1 1 1 1 1
Bending

Parameters for Lateral Torsion Buckling

Lltb Kltb Cb
0.667 1 2.722

Demand/Capacity (D/C) Ratio Eqn.(H1-1b)

D/C Ratio
(Pr /2Pc ) + (Mr33 /Mc33 ) + (Mr22 /Mc22 )
=
0.82 = 0.051 + 0.758 + 0.01

29
 Axial Force and Capacities
Pu Force (kip) ϕPnc Capacity (kip) ϕPnt Capacity (kip)
90.432 884.647 1341

Moments and Capacities

Mu Moment (kip-
ϕMn (kip-ft) ϕMn No LTB (kip-ft) ϕMn Cb=1 (kip-ft)
ft)
Major
719.4233 948.75 948.75 663.4167
Bending
Minor
2.3998 231.375
Bending

Shear Design
Vu Force (kip) ϕVn Capacity (kip) Stress Ratio
Major
114.363 321 0.356
Shear
Minor
0.755 531.36 0.001
Shear

10.2 Rafter Design 1st Main Frame

AISC 360-16 Steel Section Check (Strength Summary)

Element Details
Unique Location
Level Element Combo Element Type Section Classification
Name (ft)
Comb 4- Special Moment W21X10
TOP B2 12 0.8731 Slender
1 Frame 1

LLRF and Demand/Capacity Ratio

Stress Ratio
L (ft) LLRF
Limit
0.617 1
57.71736

Analysis and Design Parameters

Provision Analysis 2nd Order Reduction
Direct General 2nd Tau-b
LRFD
Analysis Order Fixed

Stiffness Reduction Factors

30
 αPr /Py αPr /Pe τb EA factor EI factor
0.064 0.01 1 0.8 0.8

Design Code Parameters

ϕb ϕc ϕTY ϕTF ϕV ϕV-RI ϕVT
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.75 0.9 1 1

Section Properties
A (ft²) J (ft⁴) I33 (ft⁴) I22 (ft⁴) Av3 (ft²) Av2 (ft²)
0.00025
0.2069 0.116705 0.01196 0.1367 0.0743
1

Design Properties
S33 (ft³) S22 (ft³) Z33 (ft³) Z22 (ft³) r33 (ft) r22 (ft) Cw (ft⁶)
0.130884 0.023336 0.146412 0.035706 0.75096 0.2404 0.008815

Material Properties
E (kip/ft²) fy (kip/ft²) Ry Cpr α
4176000 7200 1.1 1.4 NA

Stress Check forces and Moments

Location
Pu (kip) Mu33 (kip-ft) Mu22 (kip-ft) Vu2 (kip) Vu3 (kip) Tu (kip-ft)
(ft)
0.8731 -95.568 -882.2766 0.4056 -40.973 0.01 -2.5004

Axial Force & Biaxial Moment Design Factors (H1-1b)

L Factor K1 K2 B1 B2 Cm
Major
0.395 1 1 1 1 1
Bending
Minor
0 1 1 1 1 1
Bending

Parameters for Lateral Torsion Buckling

Lltb Kltb Cb
0 1 1

Demand/Capacity (D/C) Ratio Eqn.(H1-1b)

D/C Ratio
(Pr /2Pc ) + (Mr33 /Mc33 ) + (Mr22 /Mc22 )
=
0.97 = 0.038 + 0.93 + 0.002

31
 Axial Force and Capacities
Pu Force (kip) ϕPnc Capacity (kip) ϕPnt Capacity (kip)
95.568 1250.031 1341

Moments and Capacities

Mu Moment (kip-
ϕMn (kip-ft) ϕMn No LTB (kip-ft) ϕMn Cb=1 (kip-ft)
ft)
Major
882.2766 948.75 948.75 948.75
Bending
Minor
0.4056 231.375
Bending

Shear Design
Vu Force (kip) ϕVn Capacity (kip) Stress Ratio
Major
40.973 321 0.128
Shear
Minor
0.01 531.36 1.882E-05
Shear

End Reaction Major Shear Forces

Left End Reaction Load Right End Reaction Load
(kip) Combo (kip) Combo
17.935 DStlS18

10.3 Column Design Intermediate Main Frame

AISC 360-16 Steel Section Check (Strength Summary)

Element Details
Unique Location
Level Element Combo Element Type Section Classification
Name (ft)
Comb 4- Special Moment W18X8
Story1 C12 31 37.60758 Compact
1 Frame 6

LLRF and Demand/Capacity Ratio

Stress Ratio
L (ft) LLRF
Limit
0.613 1
39.37010

32
 Analysis and Design Parameters
Provision Analysis 2nd Order Reduction
Direct General 2nd Tau-b
LRFD
Analysis Order Fixed

Stiffness Reduction Factors

αPr /Py αPr /Pe τb EA factor EI factor
0.032 0.019 1 0.8 0.8

Design Code Parameters

ϕb ϕc ϕTY ϕTF ϕV ϕV-RI ϕVT
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.75 0.9 1 1

Section Properties
A (ft²) J (ft⁴) I33 (ft⁴) I22 (ft⁴) Av3 (ft²) Av2 (ft²)
0.00019
0.1757 0.073785 0.008439 0.1187 0.0613
8

Design Properties
S33 (ft³) S22 (ft³) Z33 (ft³) Z22 (ft³) r33 (ft) r22 (ft) Cw (ft⁶)
0.096241 0.018247 0.107639 0.028009 0.64804 0.21917 0.004567

Material Properties
E (kip/ft²) fy (kip/ft²) Ry Cpr α
4176000 7200 1.1 1.4 NA

Stress Check forces and Moments

Location
Pu (kip) Mu33 (kip-ft) Mu22 (kip-ft) Vu2 (kip) Vu3 (kip) Tu (kip-ft)
(ft)
37.60758 -40.785 -573.7193 -0.0558 26.639 -0.02 0.0018

Axial Force & Biaxial Moment Design Factors (H1-1b)

L Factor K1 K2 B1 B2 Cm
Major
0.955 1 1 1 1 0.302
Bending
Minor
0 1 1 1 1 1
Bending

Parameters for Lateral Torsion Buckling

Lltb Kltb Cb
0.667 1 1.731

33
 Demand/Capacity (D/C) Ratio Eqn.(H1-1b)
D/C Ratio
(Pr /2Pc ) + (Mr33 /Mc33 ) + (Mr22 /Mc22 )
=
0.85 = 0.027 + 0.823 + 3.075E-04

Axial Force and Capacities

Pu Force (kip) ϕPnc Capacity (kip) ϕPnt Capacity (kip)
40.785 749.06 1138.5

Moments and Capacities

Mu Moment (kip-
ϕMn (kip-ft) ϕMn No LTB (kip-ft) ϕMn Cb=1 (kip-ft)
ft)
Major
573.7193 697.5 697.5 467.3558
Bending
Minor
0.0558 181.5
Bending

Shear Design
Vu Force (kip) ϕVn Capacity (kip) Stress Ratio
Major
26.639 264.96 0.101
Shear
Minor
0.02 461.538 4.435E-05
Shear

10.4 Rafter Design Intermediate Main Frame

AISC 360-16 Steel Section Check (Strength Summary)

Element Details
Unique Location
Level Element Combo Element Type Section Classification
Name (ft)
Comb 4- Special Moment W21X9
TOP B12 30 0.7507 Compact
1 Frame 3

LLRF and Demand/Capacity Ratio

Stress Ratio
L (ft) LLRF
Limit
1 1
57.71736

34
 Analysis and Design Parameters
Provision Analysis 2nd Order Reduction
Direct General 2nd Tau-b
LRFD
Analysis Order Fixed

Stiffness Reduction Factors

αPr /Py αPr /Pe τb EA factor EI factor
0.018 0.019 1 0.8 0.8

Design Code Parameters

ϕb ϕc ϕTY ϕTF ϕV ϕV-RI ϕVT
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.75 0.9 1 1

Section Properties
A (ft²) J (ft⁴) I33 (ft⁴) I22 (ft⁴) Av3 (ft²) Av2 (ft²)
0.00029
0.1896 0.099826 0.00448 0.1088 0.087
1

Design Properties
S33 (ft³) S22 (ft³) Z33 (ft³) Z22 (ft³) r33 (ft) r22 (ft) Cw (ft⁶)
0.110918 0.01277 0.127894 0.020081 0.72564 0.15373 0.00331

Material Properties
E (kip/ft²) fy (kip/ft²) Ry Cpr α
4176000 7200 1.1 1.4 NA

Stress Check forces and Moments

Location
Pu (kip) Mu33 (kip-ft) Mu22 (kip-ft) Vu2 (kip) Vu3 (kip) Tu (kip-ft)
(ft)
0.7507 -24.556 -594.0151 0.0349 -35.532 0.003 -0.0207

Axial Force & Biaxial Moment Design Factors (H1-1b)

L Factor K1 K2 B1 B2 Cm
Major
0.987 1 1 1 1 1
Bending
Minor
0 1 1 1 1 1
Bending

Parameters for Lateral Torsion Buckling

35
 Lltb Kltb Cb
0 1 1

Demand/Capacity (D/C) Ratio Eqn.(H1-1b)

D/C Ratio
(Pr /2Pc ) + (Mr33 /Mc33 ) + (Mr22 /Mc22 )
=
0.733 = 0.016 + 0.717 + 2.683E-04

Axial Force and Capacities

Pu Force (kip) ϕPnc Capacity (kip) ϕPnt Capacity (kip)
24.556 782.836 1228.5

Moments and Capacities

Mu Moment (kip-
ϕMn (kip-ft) ϕMn No LTB (kip-ft) ϕMn Cb=1 (kip-ft)
ft)
Major
594.0151 828.75 828.75 828.75
Bending
Minor
0.0349 130.125
Bending

Shear Design
Vu Force (kip) ϕVn Capacity (kip) Stress Ratio
Major
35.532 375.84 0.095
Shear
Minor
0.003 422.852 6.626E-06
Shear

11. Beam And Column Design

11.1 Column Design

Load Combinations

Combination Moments (kip-ft) Normal Forces (kips)

1.4 DL -225.418 -23.1504

1.2 DL + 1.6 LL (Controlling Moments) -369.223 -26.7267

1.2 DL + (LL or 0.5 WL) -248.218 -18.4847

36
Combination Moments (kip-ft) Normal Forces (kips)

1.2D + 1.0Wx + L + 0.5(Lr or S or R) -195.911 -19.1523

1.2D + 1.0Wy + L + 0.5(Lr or S or R) -189.857 -19.2773

0.9D + 1.0Wx -143.911 3.742

0.9D + 1.0Wy -86.551 -12.1654

Structural Analysis
 Beam-Column Characteristics:
 Beam Section: W 18x86
 Ix: 1530 in³, Iy: 175 in³
 K1: 1 (For non-sway)
 rx: 7.77 in, ry: 2.63 in
 Load Combinations Analysis:
 Pe1:
 Pe1: 7839.955 kips
 Pr (initially): 26.72 kips
 B1: 1.00342

 Pe2:
 k2: 1.76,
 k2 L: 415.7481 in
 Pe2: 2530.977 kips
 B2: 1.01067
 B Average: 1.007045
 Mntx: 369.223 kips-ft
 Pr Calculation: 26.90824 kips
 Mr Calculation: 373.1625 kips-ft

37
  Lc/r and Stability Check:
 Lc/ry (For one section): 89.81767
 Lc/rx (For column): 60.80309
 ϕ Fcr: 25.2 (table 4-14)
 A: 19.1 in²
 Pc: 481.32 kips
 Pr/Pc: 0.055905 (less than 0.2, indicating stability)
 Pr/2Pc+[(Mrx/Mcx)+(Mry/Mcy)]:
 ϕ Mpx for W18x86: 698
 Pr/2Pc+[(Mrx/Mcx)+(Mry/Mcy)]: 0.562569 (less than 1, indicating safety)

11.2 Beam Design

Loads, Moments, and Normal Forces:

Loads Moments (kip-ft) Normal Forces (kips)

Dead Load (DL) -164.753 -23.643

Live Load (LL) -112.229 -19.495

Wind Load (Wx) 54.6154 -24.345

Wind Load (Wy) 60.7063 -23.944

Load Combinations:

Combination Moments (kip-ft) Normal Forces (kips)

1.4 DL -230.654 -33.1002

1.2 DL + 1.6 LL (Controlling Moments) -377.269 -59.5636

1.2 DL + (LL or 0.5 WL) -253.817 -40.3436

1.2D + 1.0Wx + L + 0.5(Lr or S or R) -199.202 -62.4641

1.2D + 1.0Wy + L + 0.5(Lr or S or R) -193.111 -62.0631

38
Combination Moments (kip-ft) Normal Forces (kips)

0.9D + 1.0Wx -147.277 -23.445

0.9D + 1.0Wy -87.571 -45.2227

Beam-Column Characteristics:
 Beam Section: W 18x86
 Ix: 1530 in³, Iy: 175 in³
 K1: 1 (For non-sway)
 rx: 7.77 in, ry: 2.63 in
 Lc (for one section): 69.29134 in
 Lc (for the whole beam): 688.9764 in
 Lc/ry (For one section): 26.34652
 Lc/rx (For whole beam): 88.67135

Load Combinations Analysis:

 Pe1: 921.5949 kips
 Pr (initially): 59.563 kips
 B1: 1.069096
 Pe2:
 k2: 1.76,
 k2 L: 1212.598 in
 Pe2: 297.519 kips
 B2: 1.250311
 B Average: 1.159704
 Mntx: 377.269 kips-ft
 Pr Calculation: 69.07542 kips

39
  Mr Calculation: 471.7036 kips-ft
Lc/r and Stability Check:
 Lc/r (For one section):
 rx: 7.77 in, ry: 2.63 in
 Lc (for one section): 69.29134 in
 Lc (for the whole beam): 688.9764 in
 Lc/ry (For one section): 26.34652
 Lc/rx (For whole beam): 88.67135
 ϕ Fcr: 25.5 (table 4-14)
 A: 19.1 in²
 Pc: 487.05 kips
 Pr/Pc: 0.141824 (less than 0.2, indicating stability)
 Pr/2Pc+[(Mrx/Mcx)+(Mry/Mcy)]:
 ϕ Mpx for W18x86: 698
 Pr/2Pc+[(Mrx/Mcx)+(Mry/Mcy)]: 0.746705<1 section is safe

40