Smart questions
Smart answers
Smart people
Join Eng-Tips Forums
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Member Login




Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Join Us!

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips now!
  • 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!

Join Eng-Tips
*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.
Jobs from Indeed

Link To This Forum!

Partner Button
Add Stickiness To Your Site By Linking To This Professionally Managed Technical Forum.
Just copy and paste the
code below into your site.

StruKturdg (Structural) (OP)
8 Oct 09 16:25
Is stated in any code that the 1.5 SF for overturning is required?  Using the ASD Basic Load Combos or the Alternative Load Combos.
Ron (Structural)
8 Oct 09 19:36
It's stated in all the codes I work with(IBC and Florida Building Code)....it's the stability requirement.
msquared48 (Structural)
8 Oct 09 19:45
Also for sliding.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

JAE (Structural)
9 Oct 09 13:38
Well...I think the 1.5 has recently been replaced by load combinations that include a hefty safety factor for overturning - the IBC for instance has removed the 1.5 and included in it place the following two load combinations:

ASD:   0.6D+W
LRFD:  0.9D+1.6W

 
StruKturdg (Structural) (OP)
9 Oct 09 14:50
I kind of agree with JAE. And I should have stated for WIND effects.  Ron can you point where it talks about in the IBC?  I can not find it, not even in the ASCE.  There are requirements for seismic but not wind.
OldPaperMaker (Structural)
12 Oct 09 14:00
StruKturdg,
It seems to me that the factor of sefety of a spread footing against overturning and sliding is built into the allowable soil bearing pressure.

You might ask your geotech if my thesis is correct.
JAE (Structural)
12 Oct 09 18:10
OPM - I don't think so.

Different limit states there.  The Allowable soil pressure has a safety factor against soil failure under load.

The overturning SF has to do with global stability of the overall structure and doesn't rely directly on the soil bearing capacity.

 
OldPaperMaker (Structural)
12 Oct 09 19:32
JAE,
I should have added a comment that I agree with your observation that the load combinations( ASD: (0.6D + W) take care of the safety factor of the building to the foundation itself. That same load combination should be used to design the spread footing. Sooner or later that load combination gets to the soil and it dosen't need an additional safety factor against overturning or sliding of the footing.
msquared48 (Structural)
12 Oct 09 19:38
I see what you mean.  I was thinking WSD.  Dating myself I guess.  No, not as multiple personality disorder.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

rday (Structural)
14 Oct 09 16:04
I disagree that the ASD Basic Load Combination 0.6D + 1.6W includes any factor of safety. These combinations appear in ASCE 7-05 (and earlier) and the commentary states in  black and white;

"No safety factors have been applied to these loads, because such factors depend on the design philosophy adopted by the particular material specification" Sec -C2.4.1

While I understand that the commentary may not be considered "part of the code" it does serve a clarifying function.

As far as applying the 1.5 FS for global stability checks I can only find it for retaining walls.
msquared48 (Structural)
14 Oct 09 16:10
Remember that the code is an engineering minimum, not a strict guideline here.  If professionally you feel that the design is more to the intent of the code by raising the bar, then do it.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

JAE (Structural)
15 Oct 09 14:21
rday,

There is no 0.6D + 1.6W.  The two load combinations are:

0.6D + W (ASD)
0.9D + 1.6W (LRFD)

The commentary section you refer to is stating that the ASD combinations do not have any safety factor applied because these are ASD combinations in 2.4.1.  (LRFD is in 2.3).  They are simply stating the obvious, that ASD applies its strength safety factors to the resistance side of the equation.

If you read a bit further in the commentary, it says:

"Load combinations 7 and 8 were new to the 1998 edition of ASCE 7.  They address the situation in which the effects of lateral or uplift forces counteract the effect of gravity loads. (i.e. overturning)  This eliminates an inconsistency in the treatment of counteracting loads in allowable stress design and strength design, and emphasizes the importance of checking stability."

It's pretty clear to me that since the 1.5 overturning "safety factor" disappeared from the code the same time load cases 7 and 8 appeared, that this is the overturning check.



 
OldPaperMaker (Structural)
15 Oct 09 15:52
JAE,

Nice job of "speaking with data". Dr. W. Edwards Deming would be proud of you.
jberg (Structural)
15 Oct 09 16:02
Something to be aware of is that the default factor of safety for overturning on many foundation software packages is 1.5.  I had this issue with Enercalc yesterday while checking an existing footing.  The controlling issue was overturning.  Once I reset the factor of safety to 1.0 the footing worked for overturning.

JWB

rday (Structural)
15 Oct 09 16:07
JAE,

Sorry for the typo. I was refering to the ASD equation.

I agree the commentary states the obvious. Simply because a factor is now applied to an ASD load combination does not mean a factor of safety is included.

Quote:

that ASD applies its strength safety factors to the resistance side of the equation.

It is my opinion that the load combinations simply determine the most critical load effects to be considered and do not apply a factor of safety for the designer.

If one chooses to take that load effect and not apply a further factor of safety, so be it.

I choose to apply the 1.5 FS. Maybe I am simply being over-conservative, maybe I'm stuck in old code mode or maybe I am just too used to designing to the UFC which includes the stability check with the 1.5 FS when using ASCE 7 load combos.

 
JAE (Structural)
15 Oct 09 16:51
rday,

Nothing wrong with being conservative.  But I have seen and heard that the 0.6D + W was intended to replace the traditional 1.5 OT safety factor.  

If you can - post the UFC code provisions.  I'd be interested if the 1.5 is really placed on top of the OT load combination.

 
rday (Structural)
19 Oct 09 13:22
Here is the relavent paragraph from the UFC. I cannot find similar verbiage in the IBC, except for retaining walls specifically. Hmmmm

Quote:

1-12. STABILITY. The building foundation must be capable of safely transferring all vertical
and horizontal forces, due to specified design load combinations, to the supporting soil or rock.
The mechanism used for the transmission of horizontal forces may be friction between the
bottom of the footing and ground, friction between the floor slab and ground, and /or lateral
resistance of soil against vertical surfaces of grade beams, basement walls, footings, piles, or
pile caps. Net upward forces on footings and piles, which must be resisted to prevent
overturning and/or flotation, will be considered in the foundation design. Dead load should
include the benefits of weight of the overlying fill in resisting sliding, overturning, and flotation.
Structures will be designed to resist overturning effects caused by seismic forces in
accordance with TI 809-04. For load combinations other than earthquake when load
combinations applicable to allowable stress design (ASCE 7, paragraph 2.4.1) are used for the
foundation design, the building will have a minimum safety factor of 1.5 against sliding,
overturning, and flotation.

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!

Back To Forum

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close