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!

*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

SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

(OP)
Good morning guys,

I was checking a column versus buckling using SPColumn software and following ACI318 chapter 10 recomendations for moment magnification procedure .. After the analysis on SPColumn, i have received a message stating the following "Magnified (second-order) moment exceeds 1.4 times first-order moment. Revise column!" .. This is stated in chapter 10.10.2.1 ..

What is the solution of such situation ?

To check this column, i have extracted the forces applied to this column after doing a PDelta analysis in Etabs;
Could this condition be neglected if a non-linear PDelta analysis is done ?

Thank you ..

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

Quote (OP)

Could this condition be neglected if a non-linear PDelta analysis is done

I wouldn't say neglected but, most likely, remedied. I'm guessing that your KL value is too high and you've got SPColumn magnifying big P-delta moments that you've already magnified in ETABS.

What's your floor to floor height?

What are you and SPColumn using for KL?

Are the columns part of a moment frame system or do they just ride along with your shear walls?


I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

(OP)
Thank you KootK for your reply ..
Well the KL values is equal to 1*6.6 m (quite high) and the lateral resisting system is a shear walls system not frame system ..

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

So K=1 and your floor to floor height is 6.6 m? It may be that your column is just toO slender. What are its dimensions?

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

(OP)
The column is 360x500 mm and it is not possible to increase the dimension ..
My point is that am i magnifiying twice the moment, once in etabs and twice in SPcolumn ?

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

For a K=1, non-sway column, SPColumn will only be amplifying your moments for P-Small-Delta effects, which is appropriate.

It's interesting to note that the commentary to the ACI section that you referenced only mentions P-Big-Delta effects, even though the clause itself just references general second order effects.

Since this is a non-sway column, can you justify a K value less than one?

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

What frames into the column at the top and bottom? Beams? If so, you may be able to justify a smaller K value.

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

this message is to ignored since the purpose of this clause in ACI318 does apply to a story not to a single element. If the second order moments are greater than 1.4 times the 1st order, then your story is very sway and your structure needs more bracing versus lateral loading.

RE: SPColumn - ACI318 Second order Analysis ..

(OP)
Thanks Chekre for your reply, this is what i thought, but i couldn't find this statement clearly in the code ACI318 .. could specify where did you find this because 10.10.2.1 is not very clear regarding this point, it doesn't tell you if this condition is for story check or elements check ..

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


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