You are on page 1of 31

Overview of Direct

Analysis Method of
Design for Stability
By: Ryan Brotherson
Needham Consulting Engineers
www.needhamassoc.com
913-385-5300




Presentation Overview
Changes & requirements of AISC
360 specification
Overview of current methods &
limitations
Overview of Direct analysis
method
Discussion on NCE software


What is Direct Analysis?
It is a stability design method that
that addresses the five factors
that affect stability through the
addition of notional loads and
softening of the structure which
introduces P-Delta effects.
AISC 360 Re-arrangement
2005
Chapter C
Effective Length Method (K
factors)
First Order analysis
Appendix 7
Direct Analysis Method

2010
Chapter C
Direct Analysis Method
Appendix 7
Effective Length Method (K
factors)
First Order Analysis
Reference to Stability
Requirements

AISC 360-10 Chapter C


Section C1 - GENERAL STABILITY REQUIREMENTS
Stability shall be provided for the structure as a whole and for each of its
elements. The effects of all of the following on the stability of the
structure and its elements shall be considered: (1) flexural, shear and
axial member deformations, and all other deformations that contribute
to displacements of the structure; (2) second-order effects (both P- and
P- effects); (3) geometric imperfections; (4) stiffness reductions due to
inelasticity; and (5) uncertainty in stiffness and strength. All load-
dependent effects shall be calculated at a level of loading corresponding
to LRFD load combinations or 1.6 times ASD load combinations.
Any rational method of design for stability that considers all of the listed
effects is permitted; this includes the methods identified in Sections
C1.1 and C1.2.
C1.1 - Direct Analysis Method of Design
The direct analysis method of design, which consists of the calculation of
required strengths in accordance with Section C2 and the calculation of
available strengths in accordance with Section C3, is permitted for all
structures.
C1.2 -Alternative Methods of Design
The effective length method and the first-order analysis method, defined in
Appendix 7, are permitted as alternatives to the direct analysis method for
structures that satisfy the constraints specified in that appendix.

2
nd
Order effects
P- effect. Effect of loads acting on the deflected shape of a
member between joints or nodes.
P- effect. Effect of loads acting on the displaced location of
joints or nodes in a structure. In tiered building structures, this
is the effect of loads acting on the laterally displaced location
of floors and roofs.

Other issues
Geometric imperfections
Beam sweep, camber, out of plumb, etc.
Code of standard practice allows H/500 for
column out of plumb
Residual stresses
Uneven cooling of hot rolled shapes
Uncertainty in strength and stiffness
Variability in material properties
Strength vs. Resistance

Effective Length Method


Commonly called the K factor method
Most common method used at this time
Introduced in 1963 (to some resistance)
The K factor is a modification factor applied to
the length of columns with defined restraint
conditions
It was used to account for 2
nd
order effects,
geometric imperfections, stiffness reductions,
and uncertainties.

Effective Length Method
Limitations of the method include:
It cannot be used for stability sensitive
structures where the ratio of 2
nd
order to 1
st

order effects is greater that 1.5.
Requires determination of K factors for every
column situation
The use of arbitrary lengths that are not based
on the real world is not direct or intuitive.
K factor is technically load dependent
Direct Analysis method
Easy to understand & versatile
The method does not have the limitations all
issues affecting global stability are accounted for
in the method.
Eliminates the need to consider effective length
factors.
AISC commentary recommends that ratio of 2
nd

order to 1
st
order effects not exceed 2.5 to limit a
runaway instability.

Direct Analysis Method
Procedure is as follows:
1. Perform analysis at strength level
2. Apply notional loads at each floor level
3. Modify stiffness of all members contributing to
lateral stability of structure
4. Perform 2
nd
order analysis for all load combinations
to determine required strengths
5. Determine available strengths of all members based
on Chapters D through K
6. Verify available strength is greater than required
strength
Chapter C Direct Analysis
Method
Required strengths are determined by
analysis by section C2.1
Analysis shall include initial
imperfections per C2.2
Analysis shall consider adjustments to
stiffness per C2.3

Required Strengths
Analysis shall consider all deformations including connections that
contribute to the displacement of the structure.
Analysis shall be performed at strength level (1.0*LRFD or 1.6*ASD
loadings)
Analysis shall include both P- & P- effects.
Permissible to ignore P- under following conditions.
Columns are nominally vertical
Ratio of 2
nd
order to 1
st
order drift < 1.7
One third or less of gravity load supported on frame columns.
Use of approximate method provided in Appendix 8 is permitted as
an alternative to a rigorous 2
nd
order analysis



Initial Imperfections
Permissible to account for imperfections by direct
modeling of column out of plumbness, etc.
More common to account for the imperfections with
Notional Loads
Notional load is lateral load at each level as follows
N
i
= 0.002**Y
i
Alpha = 1.0 at LRFD & 1.6 at ASD
Yi is gravity load at level i
0.002 is based on H/500 out of plumbness (AISC COSP)
Notional loads are applied to gravity cases only when
Ratio of 2
nd
order to 1
st
order drift < 1.7

Adjustment to Stiffness
Members shall have a reduced stiffness on all members
that contribute to the stability of the structure.
The reduction is 0.8 for axial & flexural stiffness & an
additional
b
reduction on the flexural stiffness
where
b
is:
1.0 when P
r
/P
y
0.5
4(P
r
/P
y
)[1- (P
r
/P
y
)] otherwise
May use
b
= 1.0 if an additional 0.001 notional load is
added to all load cases



Adjustment to Stiffness cont
Reduced stiffness (EI* = 0.8bEI and EA* = 0.8EA) is used in
the direct analysis method for two reasons.
For frames with slender members, the 0.8 factor results in a
system available strength equal to 0.8 times the elastic stability
limit. This is roughly equivalent to the margin of safety implied for
slender columns by the effective length procedure where from
Equation E3-3, Pn = 0.9(0.877Pe) = 0.79Pe.
For frames with intermediate or stocky columns, the 0.8b factor
reduces the stiffness to account for inelastic softening prior to
the members reaching their design strength. The b factor is
similar to the inelastic stiffness reduction factor implied in the
column curve to account for loss of stiffness under high
compression loads (Pr > 0.5Py ), and the 0.8 factor accounts for
additional softening under combined axial compression and
bending.
Available strength
For direct analysis method available strength is
calculated based on Chapters D, E, F, G, H, I, J, & K of the
specification
Effective length factor = 1.0 in all cases.
Commentary to Chapter C
Rigorous second-order analyses are those that accurately
model all significant second-order effects.
Somebut not all, and possibly not even mostmodern
commercial computer programs are capable of
performing a rigorous second-order analysis, although
this should be verified by the user for each particular
program.

STAAD
Direct Analysis is available effective STAAD.Pro 2007
See section 5.37.5 of technical reference manual
General Format
PERFORM DIRECT ANALYSIS..(See sec. 5.37.5 and STAAD
output)
Use command in place of Perform Analysis or Pdelta Converge
Command directs the program to:
Reduce axial & flexural stiffness as required by code
Solve static case w/ notional loads




STAAD Notional Load
Direct analysis must use Repeat Load or Reference Load
specification
Notional loads need to be defined per section 5.31.7 and
5.32.14 of the reference manual
STAAD derives a lateral load from an existing vertical load case
Example:
Load 1 Dead Load
Joint Load, Member Load, etc.
Load 2 Dead Notional Load
1 X 0.002 [Load case Direction Ratio]


STAAD P-delta
STAAD Default for P-delta will include both P- &
P-.
Must be used with REPEAT LOAD command
Benchmark problem Case 1 from commentary to
Chapter C of the Specification (page 16.1-276)
results were confirmed.
Appears that STAAD meets a Rigorous 2
nd
order
analysis
RAM 2
nd
Order Analysis
RAM version 14.05 implements the Direct
Analysis method using a 2
nd
Order by
Amplified 1
st
order elastic analysis
This is not necessarily considered a
rigorous 2
nd
order analysis
Uses the B1 & B2 method per Appendix 8
Allowed by section C.2.1(3)


RAM 2
nd
Order Analysis
From Section 5.1.3 of RAM manual (online)
Second-Order Analysis - The requirements to perform
a second-order analysis is satisfied by performing a
first-order analysis and calculating and applying B1
and B2 factors to the design forces as outlined in
Section C2.1b of the Specification.It should be also
noted that the engineer is provided two options to
consider 2nd order (large P-delta) effects: either the
engineer use the current P-delta analysis implemented
or the engineer chooses B2 factors.


RAM 2
nd
order Analysis
Notional loads - specified in the Loads Load Cases
command in RAM Frame.
Reduced Stiffness - An option to use the AISC 360
stiffness reduction is available (Criteria General dialog).
The program does not iterate to determine the correct
value of b, so the engineer either specifies 1.0 or
some other value.
Although technically b is distinct for each load combo
& member, the program uses the specified value on all
members and does not vary stiffness for each load
combination
RAM P-Delta
RAM uses two methods to approximate P-Delta
effects
Both are based on the Geometric Stiffness
Method
Small, assumed deflections are used to create a
Geometric Stiffness matrix
This matrix modifies the building stiffness matrix
once
Accounts for P- only.



RAM P-Delta
Non-iterative P-Delta Method
Used for Rigid diaphragms
Preliminary P-Delta Analysis
Used for Semi-rigid diaphragms


Summary
Direct analysis is the preferred stability method
of AISC
Direct analysis directly accounts for the five
issues contributing to stability
Direct analysis appears relatively easy to
implement in STAAD.
RAM Frame uses approximate methods to
account for stability
Questions?

You might also like