×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

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.

Students Click Here

ASCE 113 discrepancy between USD and ASD?

ASCE 113 discrepancy between USD and ASD?

ASCE 113 discrepancy between USD and ASD?

(OP)
Hi fellow engineers,

ASCE 113, Substation structure design guide, allows design using either “Ultimate strength design” USD (otherwise commonly known as LRFD) and Allowable stress design, ASD.

When it comes to seismic design, I can’t seem to arrive to similar utilisations using these two approaches, which confuses me. I wonder if you guys could enlighten me.

A simple example. Let’s consider a ceramic post insulator, carrying some compact equipment. If I understand correctly, the seismic load part of the load combination becomes

USD: 1.1*D+1.25*E*I
ASD: 1.0*D+1.00*E*I

where D is dead weights, E is seismic action and I is the importance factor.

The seismic action can be taken as

E=Sa/R*W

assuming a unit static coefficient, which is reasonable for this type of structure. Here, Sa=Sds is 2/3 of the maximum 5% damped MCE spectral acceleration, R is the response modification factor and W is the structure weight.

ASCE 113 suggests using R=1.00 for USD design of post insulators, and R=1.3 for ASD, respectively. Hence, the load from the load combination becomes

USD: …1.25*Sa/1.0 times weight
ASD: …1.00*Sa/1.3 times weight

It follows that the USD seismic design load is >60% greater than the ASD design load.

But, the “strength resistance” of porcelain insulators is given in section 6.9.4 as

USD: 0.5*cantilever rating
ASD: 0.4*cantilever rating

Hence, the design load using USD seems to be 60% greater than that of ASD, but the strength allowance is only 25% greater?

Any guidance, explanations or comforting back-patting is greatly appreciated

Best,
Daniel


RE: ASCE 113 discrepancy between USD and ASD?

Although Station Post Insulators are Porcelain or Composite , assume that the post is steel .. The allowable stress for steel is Fall =0.6Fy ..
When you repeat the calculation for steel post with the procedure described in the ASCE 113, Substation structure design guide, you will see that USD and ASD will give similar results..

-Most of the codes allow to increase the allowable stress 30% ( that is , adjustment of R =1.3 for ASD)

-Seismic Load Combination USD: 1.1*D+1.25*E*I

-Seismic Load Combination ASD: 1.0*D+1.00*E*I

- For seismic load USD /ASD = 1.25 and USD: 0.5*cantilever rating (The strength resistance factor ,0.4 is increased to get
similar results btw USD und ASD..










If you put garbage in a computer nothing comes out but garbage. But this garbage, having passed through a very expensive machine, is somehow ennobled and none dare criticize it. ( ANONYMOUS )

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



News


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