4/20/2016

Members Subjected
to Bending

AISC Specification Sections for Bending Members

(Geschwindner 2012)

1
 4/20/2016

Compact versus Non-Compact versus Slender

The AISC Specifications define three types of bending member cross-

section:
Compact Cross-Section
Cross-section that is able to develop the full plastic bending
moment with significant rotational ductility and no local buckling.
Non-Compact Cross-Section
Cross-section that is likely not to be able to develop the full plastic
bending moment capacity and has limited rotational ductility.
Slender Cross-Section
Cross-section that cannot develop the full plastic bending moment
capacity without local buckling of the cross-section.

Compact versus Non-Compact versus Slender

Cross-section compactness is evaluated using width-to-thickness ratios.

AISC Specification Table B4.1b contains Width-to-Thickness limiting ratios

for cross-sections in flexure.

Compact Flanges in Wide Flange Shapes:

width b 1 b
p
thickness 2 t f 2t f

Compact Webs in Wide Flange Shapes:

width h
p
thickness t w (Geschwindner 2012)

2
 4/20/2016

Compact versus Non-Compact versus Slender

Non-Compact Flanges in Wide Flange Shapes:
b
p r
2t f
Non-Compact Webs in Wide Flange Shapes:

h
p r
tw

Slender Flanges in Wide Flange Shapes:

(Geschwindner 2012)

b
r
2t f
Slender Webs in Wide Flange Shapes:

h
r
tw

Compact versus Non-Compact versus Slender

3
 4/20/2016

Compact versus Non-Compact versus Slender

Bending Member Limit States

There are two fundamental limit states that must be considered in the design of a
member subjected to bending once cross-section compactness is addressed:
Yielding
Limit state that corresponds to full plastic moment distribution of stress
on the bending member cross-section.
Lateral-Torsional Buckling
Limit state that corresponds to lateral buckling with cross-section twisting
of the bending member between lateral bracing points. Stress
distribution on the cross-section is not the plastic stress distribution.

Bracing point is a point along the

beam length where the cross-section
is prevented from twisting and the
flanges are prevented from
translating (laterally) perpendicular to
the axis of the beam member.
(Geschwindner 2012)

4
 4/20/2016

Bending Member Limit States

Moment gradient along the un-braced segments of a beam affects the bending
strength of the beam member.

Case of uniform bending

moment over an un-braced
segment is the worst-case
scenario.

Cases of bending moment

gradient over the un-braced
length tend to make the
bending strength greater
because the tendency for LTB is
reduced.

(Geschwindner 2012)
9

AISC Specification Provisions

10

5
 4/20/2016

AISC Specification Provisions

11

AISC Specification Provisions

12

6
 4/20/2016

AISC Specification Provisions

13

AISC Specification Provisions

14

7
 4/20/2016

AISC Specification Provisions

15

AISC Specification Provisions

The AISC Specification equations for bending member behavior look a lot like
the fundamental provisions for compression member behavior.

Mn M p M o - Moment corresponding
Mn to uniform moment
M n Cb M crI
o
magnitude over critical
un-braced segment.
Mp 1.0 M crI
o

M n Cb M crE
o

M r 0.7 Fy S x 1.0 M crE
o

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Yielding Inelastic LTB Elastic LTB

Lb
Lp Lr

16

8
 4/20/2016

AISC Specification Provisions

Moment gradient over the un-braced segment tends to shift the AISC
Specification beam curve to the right (notice the pinching of the inelastic
LTB segment).
Mn M p
Mn
M n Cb M crI
o

Mp
M n Cb M crE
o

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Yielding Inelastic LTB Elastic LTB

Lb
Lp Lr

17

AISC Specification Provisions

The AISC Specification provisions can be massaged (algebraically) a little bit
to make equation (F2-2) a little easier to implement tables for design and
analysis.

LRFD:

Lb L p b M p
M p 0.7 Fy S x
M d b Cb M p
Lr L p

M d Cb b M p b BF Lb Lp b M p

M px 0.7 Fy S x
Lr L p
b BF b

18

9
 4/20/2016

AISC Specification Provisions

ASD:

Lb L p
Cb M p 0.7 Fy S x Mp
Md M p
b Lr L p b

Lb L p p
M BF M
M d Cb p
b b b

BF 1 M px 0.7 Fy S x
Lr L p

b b

19

EXAMPLE 1

Data:
Consider a W14x192 wide-flange shape composed of A992 steel.

Determine:
Compute the major (x) axis plastic section modulus and plastic
moment capacity of the W24x192 shape.

20

10
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 1 (continued)
Solution:
The W24x192 can be modeled as shown below (omit the fillets).

The location of the plastic neutral axis

(PNA) is the first to be needed.

Recall, the plastic moment capacity

corresponds to a distribution of bending
moment stress that is at the yield strength
over the entire cross-section.

Thus, internal equilibrium of resultant

forces acting on the cross-section requires
that the PNA is located at the axis of
symmetry (1/2 area above , 1/2 area
below).
(Geschwindner 2012)

21

EXAMPLE 1 (continued)
The plastic moment capacity is the sum of the moments of the internal forces
acting on the cross-sectional components about the PNA.

By inspection, the PNA is at 1/2 the height of the cross-section.

M p Fy Z x Fy (13")(1.46")(0.73" 11.29") (2)

Fy (0.810")(11.29")(5.65") (2)
Fy (559.62 in3 )
27,980.83 k in 2,332 k ft

Z x 559.6 in3
M px 2,332 k ft

(Geschwindner 2012)

22

11
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 2

Data:
Consider a WT12x51.5 shape composed of A992 steel.

Determine:
Compute the following:
location of the PNA
the major (x) axis plastic section modulus
the plastic moment capacity of the WT12x51.5 shape.

23

EXAMPLE 2 (continued)
Solution:
In this example, we must find the location of the PNA first.

It is NOT clear where it is. If the entire cross-section is A992 (50 ksi yield) steel,
the former example should give us the hint that we can only deal with areas and
moments of area when doing PNA and plastic section modulus computations.

Our process for finding the PNA location

is to determine the level where the areas
above are equal to the areas below.
When this level is located, equilibrium of
internal forces is preserved.

Compute the web cross-sectional area,

Aweb 11.32"(0.55") 6.23 in 2

(Geschwindner 2012)

24

12
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 2 (continued)

The cross-sectional area of the flange is,

Aflange (9.0")(0.98") 8.82 in 2 6.23 in 2

Since the area of the flange exceeds the cross-sectional area of web for the
WT12, the PNA must be in the flange,

(9.0")( y p ) (0.98" y p )(9") 6.23 in 2

y p 0.84"

The plastic section modulus is therefore,

(0.84") (0.980" 0.84")
Z x (9.0")(0.84") (9.0")(0.980" 0.84")
2 2
(12.3" 0.980")
(0.550")(12.3" 0.980") (0.980" 0.84")
2
3.168 in3 0.089 in3 36.12 in3 39.38 in3

25

EXAMPLE 2 (continued)

Summarizing gives,
Z x 39.4 in3

M px (50 ksi )(39.4 in3 )(1 / 12"/ ') 164.2 k ft

26

13
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 3
Data:
A beam with loading conditions, support conditions, and span shown
below is to be designed using A992 steel.

The beam is assumed to have its

compression flange (top flange)
continuously braced and thus, the un-
braced length can be taken as 0.

The beams self-weight is also to be

considered (uniformly distributed
(Geschwindner 2012) loading).

Determine:
Select the least-weight W-shape cross-section that will work for the
condition described.

Use the LRFD design methodology.

27

EXAMPLE 3 (continued)
Solution:
We first need to determine the bending moment demand using the LRFD
load combinations.
By inspection, we need only consider
one load combination,
PLRFD 1.2 PDL 1.6 PLL

For the given span length, it is typical

to assume the beam weight to be
approximately 50 plf. We can do the
design with 50 plf assumed and then
revise as required.

By inspection, we need only consider

one load combination,
PLRFD 1.2(8.0 k ) 1.6(24.0 k )
(Geschwindner 2012)
48.0 kips

28

14
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 3 (continued)

The LRFD demand corresponding to the beam self-weight is,

wLRFD 1.2wDL 1.2(50 lb / ft ) 60 plf 0.06 klf

The maximum bending moment demand resulting from the concentrated

superimposed loads can be determined using shear and moment diagrams and
will occur at mid-span for the beam. We can also compute this using a quick
formula for simply-supported beams with concentrated load at mid-span.
PL (48 k )(20 ')
M LRFD ,1 240 k ft
4 4
The maximum bending moment due to the beams self weight (assumed at this
point) will also occur at mid-span. We can also use a quick formula for
computing this moment for simple spans and uniformly distributed loads over
the entire span as follows,
wL2 (0.06 klf )(20 ') 2
M LRFD ,2 3.0 k ft
8 8

29

EXAMPLE 3 (continued)
Adding the two contributions at mid-span together gives,

M LRFD M LRFD ,1 M LRFD ,2 240 k ft 3.0 k ft 243 k ft

Because the unbraced length can be taken as 0 , the beam can be termed as
being fully braced and the limit state of lateral-torsional buckling (LTB) need
not be considered.

Thus, the only limit state for the beam we need to consider is that of yielding
or the plastic section capacity.

The LRFD design methodology requires,

M d b M n M LRFD

If the only limit state to consider is yielding,

b M n b M p b Fy Z x M LRFD 243 k ft

30

15
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 3 (continued)
This allows us to look for a cross-section that satisfies the following,
243 k ft (12"/ ') 243 k ft (12"/ ')
Zx 64.8 in3
b Fy (0.90)(50 ksi )

Since we assumed that the plastic moment capacity is going to be attained,

we must also ensure that we have a compact cross-section. Thus, our design
will assume a fully-braced, compact cross-section beam member.

The cross-section slenderness limits for flexure (web and flange) are as follows
(Table B4.1b),

b E 29,000 ksi
0.38 0.38 9.15
2t f Fy 50 ksi

h E 29,000 ksi
3.76 3.76 90.5
tw Fy 50 ksi

31

EXAMPLE 3 (continued)
We can now scan AISC Manual Tables 3-2
for the first cross-section that satisfies the
following,
Z x 64.8 in 3

These tables (at right) are organized with

bold sections being the lightest in each
plastic section modulus group. Scanning
the tables leads to the following choice,

W18x35
Z x 66.5 in3 64.8 in3

The self-weight of the section is 35 plf and

this is less than the 50 plf assumed.

32

16
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 3 (continued)
The bending moment capacity also exceeds the demand,

b M p 249 k ft 243 k ft

AISC Manual Table 1-1 can also be used to verify the compact section
requirements for the W18x35,
b
7.06 9.15
2t f The W18x35 is compact for A992
(50 ksi) steel.
h
53.5 90.5
tw
It should be noted, however, that the W18x35 is considered slender for
compression with 50 ksi yield (superscript c).

Therefore, use a W18x35 A992 beam.

33

EXAMPLE 4
Data:
Beam A in the floor framing plan below is to be designed.

The beam selected is to be a wide

flange shape.

The superimposed floor loading is:

LL = 60 psf
DL = 80 psf (no beam)

The floor deck can be assumed to

provide full lateral support.

(Geschwindner 2012)

Determine:
Select the lightest w-shape beam using the ASD methodology.

34

17
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 4 (continued)
Solution:
We will start by estimating the bending moment demand for a simply-
supported span and uniformly distributed loading. Given the span and
tributary width, we will assume a beam self-weight 50 plf.
wASD 60 psf 10 ' 50 plf 80 psf 10 '
1, 450 plf 1.45 klf

1.45 klf 26 ' 122.5 k ft

1
M ASD
2

8
We will make sure that we select a compact shape and therefore, the following
width-thickness ratios need to be adhered to,
b h
9.15 90.5
2t f tw

The floor deck provides continuous lateral support to the compression flange -
of the simply supported beam and therefore, it is fully braced and the un-
braced length is zero.
35

EXAMPLE 4 (continued)
The fact that the section will be compact and the un-braced length is zero,
allows the plastic moment capacity to be attained. Therefore, we can select
the section based upon the needed plastic section modulus as follows,

M n Fy Z x
Ma M ASD 124.5 k ft (12"/ ') 1, 494 k "
b b
b (1, 494 k ") (1.67)(1, 494 k ")
Zx 49.9 in 3
Fy 50 ksi

AISC Manual Table 3-2 is now used to select the lightest W-shape. Scanning
the table yields,
W16x31 (self-weight less than 50 plf)
Z x 54 in3 USE
W16x31
b h
7.97 9.15 56.8 90.5
2t f tw

36

18
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 5
Data:
Consider a beam with span of 30 feet. The required bending moment demand
using the LRFD methodology is 282 k-ft.

The beam span of 30 feet will have sufficient lateral supports at mid-span and
at the ends. Therefore,
Lb 15'

Determine:
Select the lightest w-shape beam member (compact) capable of supporting the
bending moment demand with the un-braced length. Use the LRFD
methodology.

37

EXAMPLE 5 (continued)
Solution:
Table 3-10 is very powerful for
selecting beam cross-sections when
the moment gradient factor, Cb 1.0
The bending moment gradient present
along the un-braced segments of the
beam results in the uniform bending
moment condition being conservative.
Starting with the un-braced length of
15 feet, we can look at all beam curves
that intersect with this vertical line.

Dashed lines indicate that a lighter

shape is available. The table indicates,
W18x55
will work.
15 ft
38

19
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 5 (continued)
A quick check of the numbers reveals the following for the W18x55,

b M n 294 k ft 282 k ft OK

b
5.98 9.15
2t f

h
41.1 90.5
tw

USE W18x55

It should be noted that we did this design with the assumption that Cb 1.0
There is moment gradient over the un-braced segments and thus, doing the
design with the uniform moment assumption is conservative (sometimes too
conservative).

39

EXAMPLE 6
Data:
Consider the W14x34 beam (A992 steel) with loading demand shown below.

Sufficient lateral bracing can be assumed to be present at points A, B, and C.

(Geschwindner 2012)

Determine:
Determine if a W14x34 beam (A992 steel) with loading demand shown is
adequate using the LRFD methodology.

40

20
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 6 (continued)
Solution:
The process begins with
determining the bending moment
diagram and evaluating the
bending moment gradient over the
un-braced lengths.

It should be noted that the beam is

statically indeterminate and the
bending moment diagram.
However, Table 3-23 has formulas
for generating the bending
moment diagram, once the
superimposed loading is
determined. The concentrated
load is,
PLRFD 1.2(8 k ) 1.6(24 k ) (Geschwindner 2012)

48 kips
41

EXAMPLE 6 (continued)
We will use Table 3-23 (Case 14) to determine the bending moments at critical
points along the beam. This is done below,

10' 2(20')
Pb 2 (48 k )(10') 2
RC , LRFD ( a 2 L )
2 L3 2(20')3
15 kips
M B , LRFD R1a RC , LRFD (10') 15 k (10') 150 k ft

10' 20'
Pab (48 k )(10')(10')
M A, LRFD (a L)
2L2
2(20')2
180 kip ft

The two bending moments are labeled on the moment diagram found on the
previous slide.

42

21
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 6 (continued)
We omitted the beam self-weight up to this point. We can gain an estimate for
the effect of the self-weight on our analysis as follows:
wsw 34 plf
1
M sw, LRFD 1.2 (0.034 klf )(20') 2 2.04 k ft
8
The self-weight contribution is less than 1.5% of the 180 k-ft bending moment
demand and thus, we will ignore it.
1 2
1/4 points along the un-braced lengths are
needed for evaluation of the moment
gradient factor. These computations are
shown at the right on the moment diagram.
112.5
75
Two un-braced segments will be 37.5

considered.
(Geschwindner 2012)

43

EXAMPLE 6 (continued)

12.5M max
Cb
2.5M max 3M A 4 M B 3M C

Un-braced Segment 1
12.5(180)
Cb
2.5(180) 3(97.5) 4(15) 3(67.5)
2.24

Un-braced Segment 2
12.5(150)
Cb
2.5(150) 3(112.5) 4(75) 3(37.5)
1.67
We should focus our attention on both un-braced segments.

44

22
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 6 (continued)

We can use AISC Manual Table 3-2 to

determine the un-braced length limits and
other parameters for defining the W14x34
behavior.

Scanning the table gives,

L p 5.40 '

Lr 15.6 '

5.4 ' Lb 10 ' 15.6'

Therefore, we expect inelastic LTB.

b M px 205 k ft

b BF 7.55 kips

45

EXAMPLE 6 (continued)
The design strength can now be computed using the AISC Specification
equations (check the lower value of 1.67 for un-braced segment 2),
M d Cb b M p b BF Lb Lp b M p

M d (1.67) (205 k ft ) 7.55 k 10' 5.4'

284.4 k ft 205 k ft
M d 205 k ft (Left un-braced segment will have same magnitude)
M d 205 k ft 180 k ft OK
150 k ft OK

W14x34 is adequate for the loading and span configuration shown.

The additional factored self-weight moment is inconsequential with regard
to our decision. A W14x34 shape is compact for flexure (Table 1-1).
It should be emphasized that we DID NOT consider serviceability AND shear in
this example this is the subject of later lecture notes in this section.

46

23
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 7
Data:
Consider a beam that spans 30 feet with simple supports. The bending
moment demand computed using ASD load combinations is 188 kip-ft.

The beam loading consists of a concentrated DL and LL at mid-span. The 30-

foot simple span will have sufficient lateral bracing at the ends and at mid-
span.

Determine:
Select the lightest w-shape A992 shape to support the loading demands.

47

EXAMPLE 7 (continued)
Solution:
The bending moment demand and un-braced length for the beam are,
M ASD 188 k ft Lb 15'

AISC Manual Table 3-1 contains

moment gradient modifying factors
for common loading and span
configurations.

For the simple-span with

concentrate load at mid-span and
bracing at mid-span and ends, we
have,
Cb 1.67

Our beam is therefore (in effect), 67% stronger than a beam with uniform
bending moment diagram over the un-braced segments.

48

24
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 7 (continued)
With the moment-gradient modifier at 1.67, we can essentially reduce the
allowable bending strength needed before entering AISC Manual Table 3-10.

Therefore, we can enter AISC Manual Table 3-10 with,

Mn
M a Cb 188 k ft
b
M n 188 k ft 188 k ft Mn
112.5 k ft
b Cb 1.67 b
Lb 15'

Scanning the tables leads us to the table on page 3-130 in Part 3 of the AISC
Manual.

49

EXAMPLE 7 (continued)

W16x40

15 ft.
Mn Mn
119 k ' Cb (1.67)(119)
b b
M px
198.7 k ' 182 k '
b
M a 182 188 NG

50

25
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 7 (continued)
Mn Mn
111 k ' Cb (1.67)(111)
b b
M px
185 k ' 238 k '
b
M a 185 188 NG

W21x44

15 ft.
51

EXAMPLE 7 (continued)

Continuing this process leads us to Table 3-10 on page 3-128. For the un-braced
length of 15 feet, we have the following:

W21x50 (W21x48 is non-compact for flexure)

Mn Mn
140 k ' Cb (1.67)(140)
b b
M px
234 k ' 274 k '
b
M a 234 188 OK

We can now check the width-thickness limits to ensure the shape is compact.
b
6.1 9.15
2t f The W21x50 is compact for A992
h (50 ksi) steel.
49.4 90.5
tw

52

26
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 7 (continued)

We can now check the self-weight.

wsw 50 plf

1
M sw, ASD (0.05 klf )(20 ') 2 2.5 k ft (at mid span)
8
The self-weight contribution is negligible (1.1% of total bending moment) and
there is excess capacity 234 k-ft versus 188 k-ft.

Use a W21x50 composed of A992 steel.

53

Design for Shear

We have considered bending strength of a beam member and now we need to

consider shear strength of the member.

Chapter G in the AISC Specifications contain provisions for defining the nominal
shear strength as well as provisions to ensure that the webs of members are
capable of reaching yield before local buckling in the web.

54

27
 4/20/2016

Design for Shear

55

EXAMPLE 8
Data:
Consider an W16x31 A992 structural steel wide-flange shape.

Determine:
Compute the (a) nominal shear strength; (b) design shear strength using the
LRFD methodology; and (c) the allowable shear strength using the ASD
methodology.

56

28
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 8 (continued)
Solution:
We can start by determining the nominal shear strength of the W16x31.

Well first check the webs to ensure that the width-thickness ratios adheres to
the limits for the AISC Chapter G shear provisions and verify the shear
strength coefficient.

h E 29,000 ksi
51.6 2.24 2.24 53.9
tw Fy 50 ksi
Cv 1.0
Now, we can compute the nominal shear strength,
Vn 0.6 Fy Aw Cv

Aw d tw 15.9" 0.275" 4.37"

Vn 0.6(50 ksi )(4.37 in 2 )(1.0) 131.2 kips

57

EXAMPLE 8 (continued)

The design strength (LRFD) is therefore,

Vd vVn (1.0)(131.2 kips)
131 kips
The allowable strength (ASD) is therefore,
Vn (131.2 kips )
Va
v 1.50
87.3 kips

58

29
 4/20/2016

Serviceability Limit State

Our earlier discussions alluded to the fact that design should include two
fundamental limit states:
Strength (collapse prevention, safety)
Serviceability (ensuring fit-for-use, preventing excessive vibration)

Deflection (serviceability) checks are most often done for super-imposed

live loads.

It should be noted that excessive vibrations can be an issue in steel

framed building structures and this should addressed any time design is
conducted. It is recommended that AISC Design Guide 3 and AISC Design
Guide 11 be consulted.

59

Serviceability Limit State

Common loading conditions and the resulting maximum deflections for
simple-span beams are given below.

(Geschwindner 2012)
60

30
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 9
Data:
Consider the W18x35 beam selected previously in Example 3 for the
super-imposed loading and span condition shown below.

Assume that the design

constraints in that original
example now include a super-
imposed LL deflection limit of
1 / 360
(Geschwindner 2012) of the 20-ft span.

Determine:
Check to determine if the W18x35 beam remains acceptable for this
serviceability limit state constraint.

61

EXAMPLE 9 (continued)
Solution:
We need information for the W18x35 shape. We get the following from
AISC Manual Table 1-1.

I x 510 in 4

The superimposed LL for the beam is 24 kips and it acts at mid-span for
the 20-foot simple span.

The expressions on slide 57 are very useful to compute the deflection due
to this concentrated loading.
PL3 (24 k )(20 ft )3 (1,728 in3 / ft 3 )

48 EI 48(29, 000 ksi )(510 in 4 )
0.47"
The superimposed LL deflection is:
1
max (20 ')(12"/ ') 0.67" 0.47" OK W18x35 is OK
360
62

31
 4/20/2016

Open Web Steel Joists

Open-web steel joists are pre-manufactured products fabricated by joist

manufacturers. These manufacturers also make products called joist girders.

These products are manufactured to standards set forth by the Steel Joist
Institute (SJI).

Open Web Steel Joist

Joist Girder

Open web joists and joist girders

are designed and fabricated by
the joist manufacturer. The
structural engineer really only
specifies intended loads for the
component.
(Geschwindner 2012)

63

Open Web Steel Joists

There are four fundamental types of open web steel joists manufactured
and erected in steel buildings:
K series: most common, depths 10-30, spans up to 60, intended
for uniformly distributed loads, designated as 16K7 (16 deep, 7th
joist in 16K series)
KCS series: designed for constant shear (CS), and uniform moment,
useful for concentrated forces, designated 10KCS3 (10 deep, 3rd
joist in 10KCS series)
LH series: long-span joists, spans from 25 ft 96 ft, depths from
18 to 48, designated as 28LH05, intended for uniformly distributed
loading
DLH series: deep long span joists, depths from 52 to 120, spans
ranging from 62 ft to 240 ft, intended primarily for roof systems with
uniformly distributed loading.
The joist girder is intended to support open web steel joists and it is
designated as 44G8N12K: 44 deep, 8 panel points, 12 kips per panel.

64

32
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 10

Data:
A roofing system consists of steel roof deck. Open web steel joists are being
considered and the span is intended to be 30-ft.

The superimposed roof loading on the joists is uniformly distributed and is

broken down as follows: 20 psf DL and 30 psf LL.

Determine:
Select shallowest open web series K-series joist using the LRFD design
procedure. Experience says 6 foot spacing of open web joists will be
economical.

It is suggested that L/360 superimposed live load deflection constraint be

applied.

65

EXAMPLE 10 (continued)
Solution:
We will begin the process by defining the loading demand.

Experience tell us that these joists will likely weigh something like 10 plf. (VERY
light considering wide-flange beams spanning 30 ft.) However, we neednt
worry about the self-weight in the design of our joists as the manufacturer will
ensure the self-weight can be supported.

We will compute the demand as a function of spacing

wLRFD 1.2 20 psf 6 ft 1.6 30 psf 6 ft
432 plf
wLL 30 psf 6 ft 180 plf

The process of selecting the joist results in scanning a table of uniformly

distributed loads to identify the first K-series joist that satisfies the
superimposed loading required and also meets deflection constraints.

66

33
 4/20/2016

EXAMPLE 10 (continued)

67

EXAMPLE 10 (continued)

Two joists will likely work in the present scenario:

20K5 safe superimposed loading: 462 plf
max. LL at L/360: 201 plf
18K7 safe superimposed loading: 502 plf
max. LL at L/360: 194 plf

It can be seen that both of these joists are the shallowest in the table given.

Both can carry the total superimposed loading with LRFD demand.

However, only one of the two meet the L/360 superimposed LL deflection
criteria: 18K7.

Use 18K7 open web joist.

68

34
 4/20/2016

References

AISC (2011) Manual of Steel Construction Manual, 14th Edition, American

Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.

Geschwindner, L.F. (2012). Unified Design of Steel Structures, 2nd Edition,

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

69

35