×
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

kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

(OP)
We've long had this discussion at work, and have never really come to a conclusion. So here's the thing.

For seismic design, most steel design codes allow kL/r for tension-only members of 300, and for tension-compression members the limit is 200. Given that compression braces can use a k value of 0.5 in the case of x-bracing, should I also use k = 0.5 for x-braces in tension? Obviously the compression member doesn't provide any lateral support to the tension member, which leads me to think k = 1 for the member in tension.

But if I use k = 1 for the tension side (L/300), and then k = 0.5 for the compression side (0.5L/300), the member in compression automatically gets a maximum kL/r of 150, thus becoming able to resist forces in compression, which renders the tension-only concept, at least in my mind, inapplicable. Is this some kinda catch 22? Does anyone have a reference explaining this irregularity?

RE: kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

There are papers which discuss checks to see if you indeed can treat the intersection point as a braced point. It is not an automatic thing, as you need the usual minimum strength and stiffness to count it as a brace, and a member with kl/r = 300 may not provide that, at least not completely (K may be .6 or so).

RE: kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

Tension design doesn't use k.

It is only L/r - see AISC 360, section D1 (and the User note under D1)

RE: kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

CSA S16, the Canadian Steel Code, permits kl/r to be 300 except that a greater value can be used if suitable provisions can be made. The seismic component of S16 permits a maximum kl/r to be 200 in 27.5.3.1.

Dik

RE: kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

Let's look at it this way, instead of steel section substitute with cables, kl/r does not apply. However I recall certain building codes not permitting the use of tension-only systems for seismic design.

RE: kL/r for tension-only bracing in seismic design

As dik said, the Canadian code gives you a most stringent slenderness limit for braces if they're part of the seismic force system. You can design them as tension braces, even against seismic forces, but you want enough stiffness so that they'll take a reasonable amount of energy when they buckle. You still have to design the connections to resist the compression capacity of the member.

The slenderness is still a requirement due to compression loading, so any restraint that would force it into the next buckling mode would count as restraint for calculation of the slenderness in the Canadian code.

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