Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
(OP)
Hello,
I am a mechanical engineer. I have been designing industrial equipment for the past eight years. I am somewhat of a reference book junky and I recently purchased the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL (14th Edition). This book seems very useful, but it also seems like it might be over my head. On occasion, I need to design service platforms for our equipment. I thought this book might help me do a better job.
So here’s my question:
Is this book something that a mechanical engineer should be able to use; with a reasonable learning curve? Or, is this book very specialized and only useful to hardcore structural engineers? Right now, I am completely clueless. I don’t know anything about LRFD, ASD, etc. Also, I am worried this book will require the reference of other AISC standards. I don’t have an AISC membership and I don’t plan to buy any more structural reference books. If this book isn’t as complicated as it looks, does anyone have any advice on how to get up to speed quickly (i.e. how to learn the basic concepts, so I can take advantage of the various tables and formulas)?
Thank you for your help everyone!
I am a mechanical engineer. I have been designing industrial equipment for the past eight years. I am somewhat of a reference book junky and I recently purchased the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL (14th Edition). This book seems very useful, but it also seems like it might be over my head. On occasion, I need to design service platforms for our equipment. I thought this book might help me do a better job.
So here’s my question:
Is this book something that a mechanical engineer should be able to use; with a reasonable learning curve? Or, is this book very specialized and only useful to hardcore structural engineers? Right now, I am completely clueless. I don’t know anything about LRFD, ASD, etc. Also, I am worried this book will require the reference of other AISC standards. I don’t have an AISC membership and I don’t plan to buy any more structural reference books. If this book isn’t as complicated as it looks, does anyone have any advice on how to get up to speed quickly (i.e. how to learn the basic concepts, so I can take advantage of the various tables and formulas)?
Thank you for your help everyone!






RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
ASD is Allowable Stress Design (loads without load factors) and LRFD is Load Resistance Factor Design (loads with factors depending on their predictability and likelihood). They had to include both methods to get the old hardheads (like me) to use the "new" "improved" specification.
But I would be hesitant to cut you loose to use the tables. You need ASCE 7-10 to get the load factors and combinations. And interpreting bracing and fixities can be tricky. Even beam length can be misinterpreted. It's not of matter of other AISC Standards (thank god, they're all pretty much included, except seismic), but the nuances.
It's gotten more complicated, but luckily I've grown up with it.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
If you are designing platforms now what code are you using? If you are in the US and you are using steel I would hope it would be the AISC.
As JedClampett points out, most designers use tables and charts located within the book or simple spreadsheets that were created using the specification. The specification is only about 200 pages or so w/o the commentary. Most of the other pages in the book are tables and charts that were derived from the specification. Most people warn about using the tables and charts w/o knowing how to calculate the values within the charts.
If you need to use the book on a regular basis to do you work, I would suggest looking into a steel design class at a local university. There they will show you the basics of designing steel members which would make using the book that much easier.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Anyone else out there taking this course? In general I like it, but the sessions tend to get rushed, especially at the end of each one.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
It sounds like this is more demanding than “Machinery’s Handbook,” for example. As suggested, I will pick up an introductory structural steel design book. Unfortunately, this is a very small part of what my company does, so I doubt they would ever send me to classes.
Just so you know where I’m coming from, let me further clarify my situation. We are small OEM. Our equipment is very large and requires service platforms. Most of the time, we only create a platform layout and have an outside vendor do the detailed design and manufacturing work. However, these vendors are usually overseas (i.e. low cost) and I doubt they are familiar with AISC codes. They barely seem familiar with OSHA standards. In any event, the final product does pass the smell test (members look too heavy if anything), so we seem to leave it at that. I don’t really agree with this system, but I am low in the hierarchy and it is the way our company chooses to do things.
We have a small engineering department and we design equipment that requires a wide range of engineering skills. It’s a tough environment to work in because you never feel like you know what you are doing, but you have to find ways to make decisions and move on. I sense this is common at small companies.
In any event, my goal is to gain some basic structural design skills. Partially for personal development and partially to help me create more accurate platform layouts and help me better evaluate our vendor’s designs. Also, I have seen us take on large support structures in the past. These somewhat blur the line between mechanical and structural engineering. I believe these were analyzed with basic stress formulas and FEA (i.e. no AISC codes). Therefore, I thought some basic structural knowledge would be useful in case I get a similar project in the future.
Thanks again for discussing this topic with me.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
1- They seem to think almost everything is a moment connection.
2- They completely ignore the stability provisions in the code.
3- They don't know how to properly apply load combinations.
4- They don't use industry standard connections.
5- They don't consider vertical AND lateral load paths.
6- They are unaware of ASCE 7's existence.
A manual might help you with a few of these items, but it's not a substitute for experience. If you want to design anything structural, a good place to test your "basic" ability is on the Civil/Structural PE exam. If you can pass that, you're might be competent. If not, you shouldn't practice structural engineering at all. It's outside your area of expertise.
I've been out of college and in the field now for 7 years, designing steel the whole time (working under several experienced SE's). I took several advanced steel design courses as part of my master's degree. I wouldn't dare say I had a "basic" understanding of steel design until about 3 years ago.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
http://www.learnerstv.com/Free-engineering-Video-l...
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
I appreciate the reality check from you guys. I kind of sensed that mechanical engineers have no business designing platforms. Unfortunately, management thinks we should be able to design anything mechanical. Regardless, I’ll be sure to avoid overextending myself on future projects (even if that involves speaking up). Proper structural engineering is clearly over my head. I should have figured as much. After all, structural engineering is its own separate field.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
And maybe you can- mechanical that is. But I don't consider most structures to be mechanical. If my stuff is moving, I am in trouble!
The value of a modern engineer is in our high degree of specialization. How complicated could machines and structures and electrical systems be if we (engineers) all tried to do it all? Not very I figure. I call myself a structural engineer but there are numerous materials and systems that I am unfamiliar with, many things I would not be comfortable designing. Nothing to be ashamed of, we just all have our own specialties and experiences. It's the old "Jack of all trades, master of none" saying....
I would suggest finding a local structural engineer to work with when you need, one who is proficient in steel design. I have done quite a bit of this type of work for steel fabricators including equipment supports and platforms, and the fabricators don't assume any unnecessary liability and they don't have the volume for a full time SE. When some tricky aspect comes up in regards to building design or attachment, we can handle it since we have a full range of building and specialty structure design experience.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
I have always heard in seminars where LRFD steel design that the LRFD method for steel beams was "calibrated" to result in the same result of beam size as when using ASD (for most commonly used ratios of dead load to live load), HOWEVER the LRFD method results in much shallower and moderately lighter beam sizes, and still be safe...however deflections have to be checked carefully. Also, using LRFD results in slightly smaller column sizes.
It has always been an assumption of mine that LRFD is advantageous in designing large structures, to result in a moderate amount of cost savings due to less total tonnage of steel, and to compete with concrete because concrete design changed much earlier on to the ultimate strength (factored loads) in the 1971 ACI.
However, for designing an occasional service platform, I don't see any inherent advantage to use LRFD; and many handy Excel design spreadsheets offered free on the AISC website are in ASD.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
HOWEVER the LRFD method for composite beams results in much shallower and moderately lighter beam sizes
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
On the other hand, I did a large governmental steel structure back in ASD days and there was no competition - we used 100 psf live everywhere to be safe if there was a remodel of a floor and there were a lot of paper storage files, etc.
Otherwise we would have used the 50 psf "office" live plus 15 psf partition.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
JAE...where are ya? You LUUUV AISC!
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
It has side tabs to mark the page of key topics.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
At the risk of drawing criticism; the 9th Edition died a long time ago. It was never meant to handle structures as slender as computer software now allows us to create. The stability provisions were primitive at best. ASD and LRFD are practically identical now. Applying load factors to steel is no more difficult than it ever was applying them to concrete. Move along people... Hyahhh!
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
I steered away from LRDF for a long time. I have completely made the switch over and I love it. No more converting lateral loads back and forth between strength and allowable levels!
my 0.02.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
As RobertHale pointed out, the most notable differences between the two methods are 1) the way the loads are derived (according to ASCE 7) and 2) the way that the design/allowable strengths are determined. Calculation of the nominal strengths are similar for both methods. Chapter B, Sections B3.3 (LRFD method) and B3.4 (ASD method) give a brief overview of each method.
namanges
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Also- I vote for LRFD. The clear separation between service and ultimate load states does make designs more intuitive. If you do any seismic design you will stay away from ASD at all costs.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Code writers are not only "removed from engineering practice" ...they are often not engineers or architects. Code writing is a cumulative, political process that often loses sight of the technical need and importance...all for the sake of appeasing those lobbying for a particularly point or relief.
It is not a pretty process and is severely flawed...but it is what we have.
ps, Archie...I don't know any more than anyone else. While I appreciate your compliment, I have to admit that I've only been around long enough to learn a few things, one of which is how little I know. I learn from this site every day and thank those who teach me.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
I am curious why you believe that the people who write the code are not engineers. I googled about a dozen names listed on the specification committee at the beginning of AISC 360-10. Maybe half work (or are principles) for consulting firms. The others are professors along with a couple engineers working for federal agencies. I went to the steel conference in St. Louis earlier this year and heard presentations by several of the committee members. They seem to understand the needs of the practicing engineers as well as the needs of fabricators and erectors. Perhaps, there should be "when in doubt make it stout" guide to steel design for those that find the current manual to be too complex.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
The standards are not too complex...just a pain in the ass for interpretation and interaction in some instances.
RE: Is the AISC STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL as complicated as it looks?
Sail3: I agree, the computer is not a replacement for good judgement, but in the end a computer does give the engineer the ability to design more slender structures. If I run a P-Delta/delta analysis (which is next to impossible by hand) and take my K factors as unity I'm going to find I can design more slender structures than I could using the old K alignment charts and Cm factors. The computer will also pick up stiffness from secondary elements that in the past were neglected.
Bagman2524: Certainly the 14th edition doesn't eliminate simple hand calculation methods either. Although a second order analysis is now required, good judgement can be used to identify whether it will make a difference or not. I certainly don't do a complex analysis on every stair stringer that comes across my desk just because I'm using the new edition.