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


h/t_w for Channels

h/t_w for Channels

h/t_w for Channels

AISC has an Excel file (AISC Shapes Database) on their website with shape properties from the steel manual. In the "Readme" section of the file it states that "the database contains some additional section properties that are not included in the Manual." One such property is h/t_w for channels. I'm having trouble figuring out exactly how they calculate this value in the spreadsheet. For wide flanges, h = d - 2*k_des. The database also provides a k_des value for channels (which isn't given in the manual either) but this isn't matching either. How is h/t_w calculated for channels?

RE: h/t_w for Channels

Let me just put this in terms of an actual shape. C15x50..... Per the AISC table:

d = 15.0"
k_des = 1.44"
tw = 0.716"
h/tw = 17.7

Whereas (15.0-2*1.44)/0.716 = 16.9 which is 4.4% off from the value given for the h/tw shown in the table.

It looks to me like they might be using the tw_det number for the calculation (11/16 = 0.6875") for this case.

(15.0-2*1.44)/0.6875 = 17.63 which is 0.4% off from the value given for the h/tw show in the table.

Honestly, I'm not fully confident that this is really what they're doing. But, it's my best guess after a quick run through the numbers.

RE: h/t_w for Channels

In the spreadsheet, the kdes values are the same as the kdet values. This seems odd. I would expect kdes to be less than kdet, like it is for wide flanges. I don't expect that channels are rolled to such a tight tolerance and consistency that the minimum and maximum expected values of k are the same. So I wonder if AISC has more accurate kdes values they are using to calculate h, and thus h/tw, that they for some reason aren't reporting in the spreadsheet.

RE: h/t_w for Channels

Josh, Nutte,

Thanks for taking a look. I still can't see where it comes from. I looked closer at using h = d-2*k_des to calculate h/t_w. The error ranges from ~4 to 15 percent - generally increasing as the channel size goes down. I tried plugging in tw_det too. In most cases, the calculated values are not very close.

I think nutte is right; they are providing values based on information that is not reported in the spreadsheet.

RE: h/t_w for Channels

This is a bit late but my understanding is that all the section property values given in the Maunal are averages based off actual values taken from the top steel producers so I wouldn’t be surprised if the h/tw is the same. That could explain why it’s not exact.

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!


eBook - Mastering Tolerances for Machined Parts
When making CNC machined parts, mastering tolerances can be challenging. Are general tolerances good enough? When does it make sense to call out for tighter tolerances? Do you need a better understanding of fits, datums, or GD&T? Learn about these topics and more in Xometry's new e-book. Download Now
eBook – How to Choose the Correct Corrosion Testing Method
When designing a metal component, engineers have to consider how susceptible certain alloys are to corrosion in the final product’s operating environment. In a recent study by NACE (National Association of Corrosion Engineers), it was estimated that the direct and indirect costs of corrosion in the United States is approximately 6.2% of the GDP. In 2016, that cost exceeded $1 trillion dollars for the first time. 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