Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A F & P A
Presentation Outline
Overview of LRFD
A F & P A
Overview of LRFD
A F & P A
Design Process
Demand Capacity
Lets begin with design process. The underlying basic philosophy for
the process of structural design is that whatever demand is expected
from a structural system must be met at least by its capacity.
A F & P A
Design Process
Load
Support Conditions Demand
Geometry
Materials Capacity
Performance
Fire
Economics
Aesthetics
.
The structural design process fundamentally breaks down into five key
components. Others below the line are normally of secondary
importance to safety and serviceability concerns. The demand features
the type, magnitude, and placement of loads on the system and the
resulting actions on interaction with the systems formal geometry. The
capacity of the system is provided in combination by the judicious
choice of materials, section geometry, and an understanding of the way
the system behaves under demand. The subject matter of this seminar
will be dealing with the capacity side of the structural issue - featuring
wood as the material.
A F & P A
A limit state is the point at which the structure fails to serve its intended
purpose in some way. Two broad limit states can be identified for
structures: safety, and serviceability.
A F & P A
LRFD - Serviceability
Unfactored loads
Mean material strength values
A F & P A
LRFD - Safety
Factored loads
Material strength values
A F & P A
Property Variability
x
x = mean x x
x = standard deviation SCL
x
Relative Frequency
COVx =
x I-Joist
Glulam
Load MSR Lumber
Visually Graded
Lumber
Lets look first at the capacity of side of the issue, specifically materials.
Here is a representation of the structural property variability among a
variety of wood products. The same statistical form shows up for all
other building products as well. Plotted here is the relative frequency of
occurrence against the actual property values from testing. Structural
testing in specific modes is performed on these products to produce the
data set that makes up these curves. Each curve (normal distributions
shown here) can be described by its statistical measures: mean,
standard deviation (a measure of the spread of the curve).
A F & P A
The normal distribution curve has the inherent property, that the area
underneath it equals 1.0. This conveniently implies that the probability
of occurrence equals 100%. From this, one can determine for example
the structural property value that is appropriate for 5% of the sample
population. It can also be determined how many standard deviations
(the distance) it is away from the mean. Note that at the 5th%
percentile, 5 percent of the samples fail at this property value, while 95
percent of the samples survive.
A F & P A
failure
Lets take two of these distributions: one for load (S), and one for
resistance (R); and plot them together. Each of the curves has its own
unique statistical description (mean and standard deviation values), and
may or may not have the same distribution type. Normal distribution
types are shown here, but there are many others, chosen to best fit or
model the test sample data points. Note that the resistance curve is to
the right of the load curve, and that curves overlap. The overlap implies
the region where load is greater than resistance, hence failure.
A F & P A
fZ = fR - fS
mZ = mR - mS
z = R2 + S2
mz
=
z
A F & P A
For large values of , the probability of failure is very small. For small
values, the probability of failure is much larger.
A F & P A
LRFD - Range on
A F & P A
Demand Capacity
n
i=1
Q Rn
A F & P A
Example:
Bending strength
resistance of 2x8
lumber subjected
to Quebec City
snow load
A F & P A
100 % data
A F & P A
Example:
Bending strength
resistance of 2x8
lumber subjected
to Quebec City
snow load
A F & P A
Example:
Bending strength
resistance of 2x8
lumber subjected
to Quebec City
snow load
Careful inspection of the test strength data reveals that, while the 100%
distribution curve fits the complete data set reasonably well, the model
doesnt represent the lower end of the data set at all.
The lower tail is the most important portion of the test population since
the low strength members are the ones most vulnerable to failure.
Another distribution model can be chosen for use in the calibration to
better represent the lower end of the test data set (the lower 15%).
This will ultimately produce a much narrower range of values.
A F & P A
15% data
(lower tail)
= 0.85
gives
= 2.6 to 2.8
Re-plotting the - ( fixed) correlation using the lower tail model yields
a more satisfying result. In this case, the value of = 0.85 used for
bending strength is consistent with that found in the design code
equation.
A F & P A
GE
AN
Same adjustment
CH
factors T
NO
Same behavioral
ES
DO
equations
s
moment gradients)
Pr
formatted for
n
sig
compatibility
De
LRFD does not alter the familiarity. Many of the ASD features that
designers have come to know have remained the same: basic equation
format, adjustment factors, behavioral equations. The LFRD Manual
has been formatted for compatibility with ASD.
A F & P A
A F & P A
ASD
applied stress allowable stress
Theoretical safety
margin applied to
material stresses
Estimated
loads
Design
Load Adjusted
Resistance
Tested
material
strength
Design values
A F & P A
Estimated
loads
Factored
Design Factored
Design
Tested
member
Load Resistance resistance
Design values
A F & P A
These are the six fundamental factored load combinations used for
safety analysis in LRFD. Reading into the symbology will yield what
kind of environmental event the structure is being exposed to. Many
more additional equations are derived from these when direction is
taken into account.
A F & P A
Demand Capacity
n
i=1
Q Rn
This is the basic form of the demand / capacity relation for LRFD.
A F & P A
Resistance Factors
Compression 0.90
Flexure 0.85
Tension 0.80
Shear 0.75
Connections 0.65
The LRFD resistance factors (or reliability indices) for wood are shown
here for member properties and connections. The lower the number,
the more vulnerable the material in the respective mode. Since these
indices vary by material, and by mode of use, many designers exploit
the reliability index factors from different materials to get the best from
them.
A F & P A
A F & P A
Load Combination
1.4 D 0.6
1.2 D + 1.6 L + 0.5 (Lr or S or R) *
1.2 D + 1.6 (Lr or S or R) + (0.5 L or 0.8 W) 0.8
1.2 D + 1.3 W + 0.5 L + 0.5 (Lr or S or R) 1.0
1.2 D + 1.0 E + 0.5 L + 0.2 S 1.0
0.9 D - (1.3 W or 1.0 E) 1.0
* Lstorage = 0.7; Loccupancy = 0.8; Limpact = 1.25
Reduced to 3 general factors: 1.0 for lateral, 0.8 for gravity, 0.6 for
permanent; this approach is consistent with international codes. By
prescription, is tied to the LRFD load combination equation used.
A F & P A
A F & P A
A, S, I
L
Safety wf = Q w=Q
A F & P A
wf L 2 v Fv A w L 2 Fv CD A
2 3 2 3
Here we consider two safety limit states: shear and flexure. The
demand / capacity relations for shear for this problem are shown.
ASD modifies the capacity with the CD factor for load duration. The
LRFD capacity equation includes the time effect factor and the
reliability factor for shear v. Note that factored LRFD loads are used in
the demand.
A F & P A
wf L2 b Fb S w L2 Fb CD S
8 8
The demand / capacity relations for flexure for this problem reveal much
the same in comparison
ASD modifies the capacity with the CD factor for load duration. The
LRFD capacity equation includes the time effect factor and the
reliability factor for bending b. Note again, that factored LRFD loads
are used in the demand.
A F & P A
L 5 wL L4 L 5 wL L4
360 384 E I 360 384 E I
Note that both approaches use the same equation with very little
difference. The important note here is that LRFD uses unfactored
actual loads, just like ASD because you want a real measure of actual
performance.
In summary, the design process for wood has not changed. LRFD
requires the use of load and resistance factors that designers presently
skilled in steel and concrete design using LRFD already are familiar
with. But as will be seen, there are advantages to be gained with LRFD
in final section determination, especially if the problem is governed by a
safety limit state.
A F & P A
Design Requirements
Reference conditions
dry use
normal temperature
untreated
Adjustment Factors
multi-part table
cover many products
numerical factors in product supplements
The reference conditions for wood design to this Standard are: dry use,
normal temperature, and untreated. Adjustment factors are applied (as
in ASD) to modify resistances for any conditions other than the
reference conditions. The adjustment factors are contained in a multi-
part table Table 2.6-1 that covers many products. Numerical factors are
also found in the product supplements.
A F & P A
End Use
CM wet service
Ct temperature
C pt preservative treatment
C rt fire-retardant treatment
A F & P A
30
25
Wood EMC %
20
Temp 30 deg F
15 Temp 70 deg F
Temp 130 deg F
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Relative Humidity %
A F & P A
110
%Strength at 12% Moisture Content
100
90
Impact Strength
80 Modulus of Elasticity
70 Modulus of Rupture
Crushing Strength
60
50
40
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Moisture Content of Wood (%)
A F & P A
Fb Ft Fv Fc Fc E
0.85 1.00 0.97 0.67 0.80 0.90
The LRFD values of CM for Wet Service are identical to those in the
NDS.
A F & P A
Wet Service
Composite Action
Composite Action
CE composite action
1.00 nailed
1.10 nail-glued
1.15 joint-glued
NDS NDS
1997 2001
The LRFD Composite Action factor is not in the NDS 1997 or 2001
editions.
Load Sharing
Cr for load sharing applies to 3 or more members, spaced 2' o.c or less,
with a load distributing element connecting them.
Load Sharing
Cr load sharing
1.15 lumber
1.05 glulam; SCL
1.15 I-joists w/ VGR flanges
1.07 I-joists w/ MSR flanges
1.04 I-joists w/ SCL flanges
Cr = 1.15 is found only for visually graded lumber in NDS 1997. The
LRFD Standard, as well as NDS 2001 now lists values of Cr for a
variety of wood products.
A F & P A
A F & P A
Pu c P
c = 0.90
Column Design
1997 NDS
The 1991 NDS uses one equation for column capacity. Note the c
values for solid sawn lumber, poles, and glulam.
Column Design
1+c 1+c 2
c
Cp =
2c
- [ 2c ] -
c
The LRFD version takes the same form as NDS column stability
equation.
A F & P A
Pu c P P P
No CD !
ASD modifies the compression capacity with the CD factor for load
duration. The LRFD capacity equation includes the time effect factor
and the reliability factor for compression c. Note that factored LRFD
loads are used in the demand.
A F & P A
Column Example
Dead Load = 5500 lbs P
Live Load = 31500 lbs
L = 16 ft (each direction) L A, S, I
Ends pinned
A F & P A
Column Example
DEMAND LOADS LRFD ASD
Safety Pu = Q P=Q
= 1.2 D + 1.6 L =D+L
= 1.2 (5500) + 1.6 (31500) = 5500 + 31500
= 57000 lbs = 37000 lbs
First we compute the demand loads for design for safety. LRFD uses
load factors applicable to the load type and typically results in a larger
numerical result that ASD.
A F & P A
L eb L ed
X-X Slenderness = max ,
b d
= 28
Y-Y
A F & P A
Adjustment Factors
Load duration (normal) ? = 0.8 CD = 1.0
Use (dry) CM 1.0 1.0
Treatment (none) Ct 1.0 1.0
Size (glulam) CF 1.0 1.0
Incising (none) Ci 1.0 1.0
A F & P A
f c (compression) 0.90
f s (stability) 0.85
A F & P A
Column Example
CAPACITY LRFD ASD
P0 = A Fc* A Fc*
= (61)(3720) = (61)(1550)
= 225990 lbs = 94162 lbs
The first limit state for columns is crushing: characteristic of short stocky
geometries. We compute the crushing strength in stress form as Fc*.
Note that the ASD formulation includes the load duration factor CD,
while LRFD does not. The crushing load is also computed as shown.
A F & P A
A F & P A
Column Example
CAPACITY LRFD ASD
sPe FcE
Cp c = c =
cP0 Fc*
(0.85)(8028 1) (772)
= =
(0.80)(0.9 0)(225990) (1550)
= 0.42 = 0.50
A F & P A
Column Example
CAPACITY LRFD ASD
1 + ac 1 + a c ac
Cp =
Cp 2c 2c c
= 0.39 = 0.46
c P = c P0 Cp P = A Fc* Cp
= (0.80)(0.90)(225990)(0.39) = (94162)(0.46)
= 64076 lbs = 43374 lbs
And the expression of the Cp equation is exactly the same for both ASD
and LRFD. Setting in the ac values gives the corresponding numerical
results. Finally we compute the capacity of our column using the
expressions in P at the bottom. Note again, the LRFD capacity value is
higher.
A F & P A
demand
0.89 0.85
capacity
Now we compare the load demands to the column capacities for each
method. Our trial column works for this design for both methods. No
doubt, LRFD has higher numbers, but we can see the approximate
equivalence in the two methods through the demand/capacity ratio.
The two ratios are close within the accuracy of design, with LRFD
suggesting that slightly more of the column is being utilized than ASD.
In extreme cases, this may lead to slightly larger columns sooner with
LRFD, which is conservative. Overall, the design process for LRFD has
not changed from ASD, but in fact is remarkably similar.
A F & P A
Mechanical Connections
Zu Z Z
Z = 0.65
A F & P A
NDS
k3 D t s F em
Z =
1.6 ( 2 + R e ) K
LRFD
2.08 k 3 D ts F em
Z =
( 2 + R e ) K
The LRFD yield equations also take the same form as NDS. Example:
Mode IIIs - Localized side member crushing, single hinge at each shear
plane in main member.
A F & P A
A F & P A
The LRFD Standard and NDS 2001 is expanded from NDS 1997
coverage, describing special reference conditions as well as basic panel
definitions. Design values are found in the LRFD and ASD 2001 Panels
Supplement.
A F & P A
NDS NDS
1997 2001
A F & P A
Serviceability Considerations
A F & P A
A F & P A
Ponding
NDS NDS
1997 2001
A F & P A
Example: 1 million square foot roof system for GE plant; good case for
ponding design.
A F & P A
Computing the
Reference Resistance
Values for Wood-
Based Materials and
Structural
Connections for
LRFD
A F & P A
Format conversion
ASD Values LRFD Values
A F & P A
Format conversion
2.16
KF =
s
Rn = KF f
Assuming a 3:1 live to dead load ratio gives the conversion factor of
2.16/f (where f is the ASD allowable stress). This relation allows soft
conversion of ASD allowable stress values such as those from NDS
Supplement.
A F & P A
Roof Live
Snow
Floor
Load Ratio
= Load ratios common for these applications
A F & P A
Format conversion
ASD Values LRFD Values
Reliability-based conversion
Data Sets LRFD Values
A F & P A
x
x = mean x x
x = standard deviation SCL
x
Relative Frequency
COVx =
x I-Joist
Glulam
Load MSR Lumber
Visually Graded
Lumber
LRFD through the second approach will allow materials with lower
material property variability to take advantage of this characteristic in
the design process. This second approach moves toward true
reliability-based design (RBD).
A F & P A
This package is a landmark for the industry bringing together all design
information for wood products in one manual.
A F & P A
LRFD Supplements
Design Values
Lumber
Glulam
Panels
Poles / Piles
Connections
A F & P A
LRFD Guidelines
Proprietary
I-joist
SCL
Trusses
Hangers
No Design Values
A F & P A
I-joist
20 details
design / construction
applicable beyond
LRFD
A F & P A
LRFD Manual
Manual
6 case studies
20 design examples
40 connection details
AF&PA / ASCE 16-95
Industry Landmark
design information for all
structural wood products
A F & P A
A F & P A
Building Codes
Approval
SBCCI
ICBO
BOCA
ICC
A F & P A
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
Case Study
Glulam beams / columns
15% benefit
wind / crane / snow
ASD
D+L+W+S
LRFD
1.2 D + 1.3 W + 0.5 L + 0.5 S
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
Glulam Column
ASD
10 1/2 x 17 7/8
CRANE BEAM
30'-0"
22"
LRFD
10 1/2 x 15 1/8 25'-6"
LRFD resulted in columns for this project 15% smaller than ASD.
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
Multi-Story Design
load combinations
headers / studs
up to 30% benefit
ASD
D+L+S
LRFD
1.2 D + 1.6 L + 0.5 S
Compare headers for this 2 story structure with roof and floor loads.
Multiple transient loads are treated with weighted factoring in LRFD, but
directly summed in ASD. This results in 30% smaller cross-sections.
Again, refer to ASAE Paper #984006 for details.
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
40+10 (psf)
24'
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
40+10 (psf)
24'
Same example, but using glulam: LRFD indicates 3 1/8 x 6 7/8 vs. 3
1/8 x 8 1/4.
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
40+10 (psf)
24'
Same example, but using LVL 1.8E: LRFD indicates two 1-3/4"x7-1/4"
vs. two 1-3/4"x5-1/2" for ASD.
A F & P A
LRFD Benefits
ASCE 7 - 95
1.2 D + Ak + (0.5L or 0.2S)
extraordinary event load
combinations
A F & P A
40 examples
prepared by:
Dr. Steve Cramer, P.E.
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Dr. Dan Wheat, P.E.
University of Texas - Austin
To aid the designer, a Worked Problems Manual for LRFD has been
produced to guide the designer through 40 typical design problems.
The manual is formatted for ease of use, filled with graphics,
explanatory notes, and arranged in an easy-to-follow approach to
process.
@ Home
www.awc.org
Consult the AWC web site at www.awc.org for your first source for
wood information.