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

Seismic Slenderness Limits

Seismic Slenderness Limits

Seismic Slenderness Limits

I'm looking at Table I-8-1 of the 2005 AISC seismic detailing specicifations (AISC 341-05).  This table lists the limiting element slenderness ratios (h/t, b/t, et cetera) at which an column, beam or brace member can be considered "seismically compact" or "highly ductile".  

Now, some of the member's limiting slenderness will depend on a Ca factor which considers the level of axial load in the member.  

Everyone with me so far?  Now, I'll have some members that have two different levels of axial force in them. My columns may require that I design them to the regular ASCE load combinations 1.2DL + 1.0 EL as well as the overstrength combinations. 1.2DL + 1.0*Omega*EL.  

When I'm classifying my column as seismically compact, what load combinations am I using, the regular ones or the Overstrength ones.  The code doesn't make this particularly clear.

RE: Seismic Slenderness Limits

I'm away from my office right now but usually the Ω factor (i.e. the overstrength combination) is only applied where the code specifically requires it.  This is usually brace connections and collectors.  Columns usually have their own design requirements as well.

Just off the top of my head - don't think it necessarily answers your question.  If I have time this week I'll take a look at 341.


RE: Seismic Slenderness Limits

Obviously, if the column, beam or brace member is NOT required to be designed to the Omega load combinations, then I wouldn't be using them to check the slenderness ratios.  

My question is when the code specifically requires that the member be designed to the Omega overstrength load combinations, then should we also use those overstrength load combinations to check the slenderness ratios.   

RE: Seismic Slenderness Limits

Oh - I got you - slenderness is based on Ca which is based on axial - then which axial do you use?

I would again revert back to the code - if the brace in question requires the overstrength combo, then you use the overstrength axial in that combo to check for slenderness.

In using the codes - each load combination is sort of "a world of its own" - a separate and distinct check independent of all the other load combinations.


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! Already a Member? Login


White Paper - PLM and ERP: Their Respective Roles in Modern Manufacturing
Leading manufacturers are aligning their people, processes, and tools from initial product ideation through to field service. They do so by providing access to product and enterprise data in the context of each person’s domain expertise. However, it can be complicated and costly to unite engineering with the factory and supply chain. Download Now

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