×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Direct Analysis Method training

Direct Analysis Method training

Direct Analysis Method training

(OP)
Anyone know of who might be offering training on how to use the Direct Analysis Method in the new AISC code?

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

Be watching the AISC website for the upcoming Stability Design Guide. http://www.aisc.org/Template.cfm?Section=ePubs_Design_Guides1&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.cfm&TPLID=21&ContentID=22619 It was reviewed a good long time ago (about a year, I think), so it should be out any time.  I believe that's probably your best bet if you can wait.  Otherwise, asking some specific questions here might help.  I really think the idea is very easy.  Implementation with current programs might not be, though.

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

(OP)
Is reducing the stiffness and adding a lateral (notational) load to the structure the method of performing the second order analysis?  or do you reduce stiffness and add a lateral (notational) load and perform a second order analysis?

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

No-

The second order analysis must be carried out independently.

If using software, you must make sure it captures both P-capital delta and P-lower case delta effects. The commentary in the code gives two example problems that can confirm whether each of these effects is captured by the program.

In any case, you must add intermediate nodes in your members to ensure these effects are captured.

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

(OP)
The example in the AISC Design examples seems to imply otherwise.
from page III-60.
"This method requires that both the flexural stiffness and axial stiffness be reduced and that 0.2% notational lateral loads be applied in the analysis.  The combination of these two modifications account for the second-order effects and the results for design can be taken directly from the analysis."

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

Sorry- My post was unclear..

The "No" applied to the first statement.

That is, you reduce both axial and flexural stiffness, apply notional loads (make sure to apply .003Yi in order to avoid using Tau factors), AND carry out a second order analysis (that captures both p-delta effect).

Sorry for the confusion.

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

(OP)
Your post was fine.  I'm just having trouble understanding the logic behind the Direct Analysis Method.  If we're still using  a P delta (P-little Delta & P-big Delta) analysis, what are the reduced stiffness & lateral notational loads for?

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

I believe the main reason for this is to account for residual stresses in the cross section. Although the net sum of residual stresses end up canceling out, once the first part of the cross section starts yielding, that steel essentially does not contribute stiffness (E is essentially zero at yield).

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

I believe this also allows for the use of k=1 in all cases (both sway and non-sway) as opposed to estimating k or using the nomograph.  At least that is what I understand from previous postings on the subject.

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

Correct, Structural EIT.

k values don't come in anywhere in the Direct Analysis Method. Although that's not really related to the reduced stiffnesses.

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

(OP)
Are you refering to residual stresses from the manufacturing of the member?
I believe the commentary has some discussion about some factors that contribute to "non-ideal" conditions.  These include:
  -member out of plumb/manufacturing tolerances
  -foundation not completely level
  -temperature gradients causing non-uniform deflections
  - etc.
Perhaps the reduced stiffness & lateral notational loads are to account for these factors; and the p-delta analysis is still performed to account for the p-delta effects (i.e. member deflection & joint translation), which are in addition to the effects listed above.

The advantage of the Direct Analysis Method is that K is always 1.0, therefore k values don't have to be determined.

RE: Direct Analysis Method training

Bagman2524-

You are right. It accounts for many of these effects. I simply meant that residual stresses are of primary concern.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources