Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Introduction
The update of the National Structural Code (NSCP) of the Philippines, from 2001 to 2010 introduced some minor and major changes In structural design. A significant change is on Chapter 5 Steel and Metal (NSCP 2010). The design philosophy was updated from NSCP 2001s Allowable Stress Design (ASD) to NSCP 2010s Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) and Allowable STRENGTH Design (ASD)
LRFD Development
Early 1900s: Formation of building codes begin, formalizing design process and requirements. Principle design philosophy is based on the concept of allowable stresses (ASD) Mid 1950s: the concrete industry pioneers the strength based design philosophy Early 1970s: First strength based design specifications introduced by the concrete industry 1986: AISC introduces the strength based Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) specification.
LRFD Development
1989: AISC releases what was supposed to be the last ASD specification 2005 AISC releases a combined LRFD/ASD design specification that incorporates a method for using ASD level loads with the same specification used for LRFD. 2010 National Structural Code of the Philippines adapts AISC 2005 LRFD/ASD design philosophies
Figure illustrates the member strength level computed by LRFD/ASD on a typical steel load vs. deformation diagram.
Load Combinations
Typically, each load type is expressed in terms of their service load levels. The individual loads are then combined using load combination equations considering the probability of simultaneously occurring loads. LRFD looks at the strength of members wherein the applied loads are increased by a load factor so that they can be safely compared with the ultimate strengths of the members (which are generally inelastic) while maintaining the actual (service) loads in the elastic region
Load Combinations
These load factors are applied in the load combination equations and vary in magnitude according to the load type and depending on the predictability of the loads The magnitude of the LRFD load factors reflects the predictability of the loads.
Load Combinations
You will notice that the large load factor found in the LRFD load combinations are absent from the ASD load combination equations. Also, the predictability of the loads is not considered. For example both dead load and live load have the same load factor in equations where there are both likely to occur at full value simultaneously. The probability associated with accurate load determination is not considered at all in the ASD method.
Ps,equiv = Pu / [1.6-0.4X]
Calculate the required tensile strength LRFD Tu = 1.2(30 kips) + 1.6(90 kips) Tu = 180 kips ASD Ta = 30 kips + 90 kips) Ta = 120 kips
Else:
Where: Fe = 2E/(KL/r)2 = Euler Critical Buckling Stress Q = 1 for compact and non-compact sections Q = QsQa for slender sections KL = effective length
LRFD
ASD
Example:
* moments are expressed as percentages of Mmax * Rm = 1.0 for doubly-symmetric members Check for Lateral-torsional buckling Lp = 5.83 ft < Lb = 11.7 ft < Lr = 17.0 ft
Conclusion
LRFD is becoming the predominant design philosophy Using multiple load factors, should generally lead to some economy, particularly for low ratios of Live to Dead loads. A slight increase in cost is expected for higher ratios. Basis for the margin of safety provided is more rational. In ASD, concentration is shifted to limiting the maximum stresses rather than on the actual capacity of the member
Conclusion
LRFD provides a framework for handling unusual loading. Increase uncertainties in loading may be treated by modifying the load factors On the other hand, if there are increased uncertainties in the resistance of the structure, a modified strength reduction factor may be used. Change due to the loadings may be studied separately from those of the resistance
THANK YOU