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

Unbraced length of beam-column

Unbraced length of beam-column

Unbraced length of beam-column

Hi All,
I am designing an industrial building. The perimeter beam has axial force as well as moments. The beam is simply supported at two ends and laterally braced at the top compression flange at every L/4 points. The total length of the beam is 16m. I know for lateral torsional buckling I can use braced length= L/4=4m. My question is when I am calculating the axial capacity of the member what will be the length? Is it the total length of the member (16m) or the L/4(4m). For compression member kL/r <=200. In this case what will be the value of L?
I really appreciate your comments.

RE: Unbraced length of beam-column

For KL/r we would usually assume your unbraced length is 4m.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: Unbraced length of beam-column

It depends on how the member is braced.... Even the strength and stiffness of the bracing. The AISC appendix on bracing should give you some ideas (at least about strength and stiffness). I have a hard time justifying steel decking and such as bracing against weak axis buckling under axial loads. It can be done, I suppose. But, it would (in my opinion) require some extra justification.

For whether the top flange bracing can brace weak axis buckling of the beam under axial load, it's usually a reasonable engineering judgment call. What's bracing the top flange, does that prevent lateral translation of the whole beam or, only of the top compression flange.

RE: Unbraced length of beam-column

If this is a member which has virtually no axial force (like many beams) and you are really just worried about the KL/r ratio, then you have some more leeway. I usually look at the buckling strength equations and determine what unbraced length would be required to satisfy the axial compression demand (ignoring KL/r restrictions) and make sure that this is provided in some way. If the demand (when considering the full member unbraced) is greater than some reasonable percentage of my axial capacity, then I would want to provide some lateral bracing somewhere rather than relying on top flange bracing exclusively.

RE: Unbraced length of beam-column

From your description, there are three buckling modes for axial compression: major-axis flexural buckling, minor-axis flexural buckling, and constrained axis torsional buckling (CATB).

The unbraced length for major-axis FB is 16 m.

The unbraced length for minor-axis FB is 4 m.

With CATB, the bottom flange can move laterally, but the entire section is constrained to buckle about the top flange. The unbraced length is 16 m. Information on this mode is in the 15th ed. AISC Commentary to Chapter E, in the AISC Design Guide 25, and in the AISC Engineering Journal by Liu et al. (2013).

RE: Unbraced length of beam-column

X2 for 271828's recommendation. That's exactly how i understand it. CATB is a bit of a pain to calculate, particularly as I don't know of any commercial software package set up for it. The constrained axis part does a lot to improve capacity though.

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.

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


eBook - Integrating the Engineering Ecosystem
Aras Innovator provides multiple options for integrating data between systems, depending on the scenario. Utilizing the right approach to meet specific business requirements is vital. These needs range from authoring tools, federating data from various and dissimilar databases, and triggering processes and workflows. Download Now
White Paper - Industry 4.0 and the Future of Engineering Education
With industries becoming more automated, more tech-driven and more complex, engineers need to keep their skills and knowledge up to date in order to stay on top of this wave—and to be prepared for the Industry 4.0 future. The University of Cincinnati offers two online Master of Engineering degree programs designed specifically for practicing engineers. Download Now
White Paper - Comparing Multi-Patterning at 5nm: SADP, SAQP, and SALELE
Self-aligned multi-patterning techniques such as SADP, SAQP, and SALELE are increasingly popular at advanced nodes, but each process has its pros and cons. IMEC and Mentor, a Siemens business collaborated to identify potentially less-obvious process and design limitations and trade-offs between the three SAMP techniques. Learn more in this paper. 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