Design Verification

SAP2000 Software Verification

Examples

.

Design Verification Examples ®

SAP2000 Integrated Software for Structural Analysis and Design

Computers & Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California, USA

Version 12.00 June 2008

Copyright The computer program ETABS, SAP2000 and all associated documentation are proprietary and copyrighted products. Worldwide rights of ownership rest with Computers and Structures, Inc. Unlicensed use of the program or reproduction of the documentation in any form, without prior written authorization from Computers and Structures, Inc., is explicitly prohibited. Copyright © Computers and Structures, Inc., 1978-2008 All rights reserved. The CSI Logo® and SAP2000® are registered trademarks of Computers and Structures, Inc. The computer program SAP2000® and all associated documentation are proprietary and copyrighted products. Worldwide rights of ownership rest with Computers and Structures, Inc. Unlicensed use of these programs or reproduction of documentation in any form, without prior written authorization from Computers and Structures, Inc., is explicitly prohibited. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior explicit written permission of the publisher. Further information and copies of this documentation may be obtained from: Computers and Structures, Inc. 1995 University Avenue Berkeley, California 94704 USA Phone: (510) 649-2200 FAX: (510) 649-2299 e-mail: [email protected] (for general questions) e-mail: [email protected] (for technical support questions) web: www.csiberkeley.com

DISCLAIMER CONSIDERABLE TIME, EFFORT AND EXPENSE HAVE GONE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AND DOCUMENTATION OF ETABS AND SAP2000. THE PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY TESTED AND USED. IN USING THE PROGRAMS, HOWEVER, THE USER ACCEPTS AND UNDERSTANDS THAT NO WARRANTY IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED BY THE DEVELOPERS OR THE DISTRIBUTORS ON THE ACCURACY OR THE RELIABILITY OF THE PROGRAM. THE USER MUST EXPLICITLY UNDERSTAND THE ASSUMPTIONS OF THE PROGRAM AND MUST INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE RESULTS.

Software Verification PROGRAM NAME: REVISION NO.:

SAP2000 0

CONTENTS Introduction Methodology

Acceptance Acceptance Criteria Criteria Summary of Examples Matrix of Program Features Covered in Example Problems

Examples

Concrete ACI 318-05 318-05 Example ACI318-05 CO-FR-001

Moment Strength Using Equivalent Rectangular Stress Distribution

Example ACI318-05 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

ACI 318-02 318-02 Example ACI318-02 CO-FR-001



Colum Design Check

ACI 318-99 318-99 Example ACI318-99 CO-FR-001



Colum Design Check

UCB 97 Example UBC 97 CO-FR-001


Example UBC 97 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CONTENTS - 1


SAP2000 0

BS8110-89 Example BS8110-89 CO-FR-001


Example BS8110-89 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

BS8110-97 Example BS8110-97 CO-FR-001


Example BS8110-97 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CSA A23.3-04 Example A23.3-04 CO-FR-001


Example A23.3-04 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CSA A23.3-94 Example A23.3-94 CO-FR-001


Example A23.3-94 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Eurocode 2-92 Example Eurocode 2-92 CO-FR-001


Example Eurocode 2-92 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Indian IS456-00 Example Indian IS456-00 CO-FR-001


Example Indian IS456-00 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Italian DM 14-92 Example Italian DM 14-92 CO-FR-001


Example Italian Dm 14-92 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Mexican RCDF-01 Example Mexican RCDF-01 CO-FR-001


Example Mexican RCDF-01 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CONTENTS - 2


SAP2000 0

NZS 3101-95 Example NZS 3101-95 CO-FR-001


Example NZS 3101-95 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Hong Kong CP-04 Example Hong Kong CP-04 CO-FR-001


Example Hong Kong CP-04 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Korean KCI-99 Example Korean KCI-99 CO-FR-001


Example Korean KCI-99 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Sinapore CP65-99 Example Singapore CP65-99 CO-FR-001


Example Singapore CP65-99 CO-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Steel AISC LRFD-93 LRFD-93 Example AISC LRFD-93 ST-FR-001


Example AISC LRFD-93 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

AISC LRFD-99 LRFD-99 Example AISC LRFD-99 ST-FR-001


Example AISC LRFD-99 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

AISC ASD-89 ASD-89 Example AISC ASD-89 ST-FR-001


Example AISC ASD-89 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CONTENTS - 3


SAP2000 0

AISC ASD-01 ASD-01 Example AISC ASD-01 ST-FR-001


Example AISC ASD-01 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

AISC 360/IBC06 360/IBC06 Example AISC 360/IBC06 ST-FR-001


Example AISC 360/IBC06 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

UBC LRFD 97 Example UBC LRFD 97 ST-FR-001


Example UBC LRFD 97 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

UBC ASD 97 Example UBC ASD 97 ST-FR-001


Example UBC ASD 97 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

BS 5950-1990 Example BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-001


Example BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

BS 5950-2000 Example BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-001


Example BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CAN/CSA-S16 01 Example CAN/CSA-S16 01 ST-FR-001


Example CAN/CSA-S16 01 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Eurocode 3 93 Example EC 3 1993 ST-FR-001


Example EC 3 1993 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CONTENTS - 4


SAP2000 0

Italian UNI 10011 Example Italian UNI 10011 ST-FR-001


Example Italian UNI 10011 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Indian IS:800 98 Example Indian IS:800 98 ST-FR-001


Example Indian IS:800 98 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

API RP2A-LFRD RP2A-LFRD 97 Example API RP2A-LRFD 97 ST-FR-001


Example API RP2A-LRFD 97 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

API RP2A-WSD RP2A-WSD Example API RP2A-WSD ST-FR-001


Example API RP2A-WSD ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

ASCE 10-97 10-97 Example ASCE 10-97 ST-FR-001


Example ASCE 10-97 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

AISI-ASD 96 Example AISI-ASD 96 ST-FR-001


Example AISI-ASD 96 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

AISI-LRFD AISI-LRFD 96 Example AISI-LRFD 96 ST-FR-001


Example AISI-LRFD 96 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

AA-ASD 2000 Example AA-ASD 2000 ST-FR-001


Example AA-ASD 2000 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

CONTENTS - 5


SAP2000 0

AA-LRFD AA-LRFD 2000 Example AA-LRFD 2000 ST-FR-001


Example AA-LRFD 2000 ST-FR-002

Colum Design Check

Cold-Formed Steel AISI-ASD-96 AISI-ASD-96 Example AISI-ASD CF-FR-001

Hat Section - Bending and Compression

Example AISI-ASD CF-FR-002

Braced C-Section with Lips Bending and Compression

AISI-LRFD-96 AISI-LRFD-96 Example AISI-LFRD CF-FR-001

Hat Section - Bending and Compression

Example AISI-LFRD CF-FR-002

Braced C-Section with Lips Bending and Compression

Aluminum AA-ASD 2000 Example AA-ASD-00 ALT-FR-001

Design of Simply Support I-Beam

Example AA- ASD-00 ALT-FR-002

Design of A round Tubular Column to Support an Axial Compression Load

AA-LRFD AA-LRFD 2000 Example AA-LRFD-00 AL-FR-001

Design of Simply Support I-Beam

Example AA-LRFD-00 AL-FR-002

Design of A round Tubular Column to Support an Axial Compression Load

References PCA Notes on 318-05 Building Code, Requirements for Structural Concrete with Design Applications, Applications, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, August 2005

CONTENTS - 6


SAP2000 0

INTRODUCTION This manual presents a set of simple building systems that have been analyzed using SAP2000 V12. The examples demonstrate some of the concrete design capabilities of the SAP2000 software. For purposes of verification, key results produced by programs are compared to independent published sources. The examples cover the design of different beam and column elements. For each example, this manual contains a short description of the problem; a list of significant programs options activated; and a comparison of key results with published design results. The input data file for each example is provided on the SAP2000 CDROM.

INTRODUCTION - 1


SAP2000 0

METHODOLOGY A comprehensive series of test problems, or examples, designed to test the various elements and design features of the program were created. The results produced by the program were compared to independent published sources. The comparison of the SAP2000 results with results obtained from independent sources is provided in tabular form as part of each example.

ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA The comparison of the SAP2000 validation and verification example results with independent results is typically characterized in one of the following three ways. 

Exact: There is no difference between the SAP2000 results and the independent results within the larger of the accuracy of the typical SAP2000 output and the accuracy of the independent result.



Acceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the SAP2000 results and the independent results does not exceed five percent (5%). For internal force and stress values, the difference between the SAP2000 results and the independent results does not exceed ten percent (10%).



Unacceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the SAP2000 results and the independent results exceeds five percent (5%). For experimental values, the difference between the SAP2000 results and the independent results exceeds twenty five percent (25%).

The percentage difference between results is typically calculated using the following formula: S A P 2 0 0 0 R e s u lt lt

P e r c e n t D i ff ff e re re n c e = 1 0 0

Independent R esult

-1

METHODOLOGY - 1


SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC LRFD-93 ST-FR-001 FRAME – SIMPLY SUPPORTED STEEL BEAM EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The design flexural strengths strengths are checked for the beam shown below. Three checks are made made based on unsupported lengths of 5ft, 13.33ft and 40ft. This example was independently check by comparing the results of Example 5.2 in the rd 3 Edition, LRFD Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 5-16 to 5-20

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties W18X50 Fy = 50 ksi E = 29000 ksi

Loading w = 0.45 klf (D) w = 0.75 klf (L)

Geometry Span, L = 40 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF SAP2000 TESTED   

Design flexural moment capacities,

M n

b

.

Unsupported length factors Non-Compact section checks

EXAMPLE AISC LRFD-93 ST-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON rd

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example 5.2 in the 3 Edition, LRFD Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 5-16 to 5-20.

Output Parameter M n ( Lb =5ft)

b

k-ft

M n ( Lb =13.33t)

b

M n ( Lb =40ft)

b

k-ft

k-ft

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

398.353 k-ft

398 k-ft

0.09%

305.300 k-ft

306 k-ft

0.23%

69.533 k-ft

70.2 k-ft

0.96%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-99 ST-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC LRFD-93 ST-FR-002 COLUMN- SIMPLY SUPPORTED EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION A check of the column adequacy is checked for combined axial compression and flexural loads. The column is 14 ft tall and loaded with an axial load, P u 1400 kips and bending, M ux , M uy = 200k-ft and 70k-ft, respectively. The =

column demand/capacity ratio is checked against the results of Example 6.2 in rd the 3 Edition, LRFD Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 6-6 to 6-8.


P

A

A

H = 15'

Section A-A


Loading P = 70 kips (D) P = 210 kips (L)

Geometry Height, H = 15 ft



SAP2000 0

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF SAP2000 TESTED  

LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a P , b M nx and b M ny Calculation of c n


Independent results are from Example 6.2 in the 3 Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 6-6 to 6-8.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

D/C ratio

0.974

0.973

0.10%

P n k

1937.844

1940

0.11%

M nx k-ft

1200

1200

0.00%

M ny k-ft

600.478

611

1.72%

c

b

b




SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC LRFD-99 ST-FR-001 FRAME – SIMPLY SUPPORTED STEEL BEAM EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The design flexural strengths strengths are checked for the beam shown below. Three checks are made made based on unsupported lengths of 5ft, 13.33ft and 40ft. This example was independently check by comparing the results of Example 5.2 in the rd 3 Edition, LRFD Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 5-16 to 5-20.







M n

b

.

Unsupported length factors Non-Compact section checks



SAP2000 0


Independent results are comparing with the results of Example 5.2 in the 3 Edition, LRFD Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 5-16 to 5-20.


b

k-ft

M n ( Lb =13.33t)

b

M n ( Lb =40ft)

b

k-ft

k-ft

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

398.353 k-ft

398 k-ft

0.09%

305.300 k-ft

306 k-ft

0.23%

69.533 k-ft

70.2 k-ft

0.96%




SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC LRFD-99 ST-FR-002 COLUMN- SIMPLY SUPPORTED EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION A check of the column adequacy is checked for combined axial compression and flexural loads. The column is 14 ft tall and loaded with an axial load, P u 1400 kips and bending, M ux , M uy = 200k-ft and 70k-ft r, respectively. The =

column demand/capacity ratio is checked against the results of Example 6.2 in rd the 3 Edition, LRFD Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 6-6 to 6-8.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING P

A

A

H = 15'

Section A-A





LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a P , b M nx and b M ny Calculation of c n



SAP2000 0


Independent results are from Example 6.2 in the 3 Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, pages 6-6 to 6-8.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

D/C ratio

0.974

0.973

0.10%

P n k

1937.844

1940

0.11%

M nx k-ft

1200

1200

0.00%

M ny k-ft

600.478

611

1.72%

c

b

b




SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC ASD-89 ST-FR-001 ST-FR-001 MOMENT FRAME – (SIDESWAY UNINHIBITED ) Example Description The beam below is subjected to a bending moment of 20 kip-ft. The compression flange is braced at 3.0 ft intervals. Three members were included in an auto select list that are: W6X12, M10X9 and W8X10. The selected member is non compact due to flange criteria. GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING





Design Allowable Bending Stress, Fb. Design Stress, fb

EXAMPLE AISC ASD-89 ST-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

Results Comparison Independent results are taken from Allowable Stress Design Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Page 2-6.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Design Allowable Bending Stress, Fb (ksi)

32.705

32.7

0.02%

Bending Stress, fa (ksi)

30.420

30.7

0.92%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 ST-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC ASD-89 ST-FR-002 ST-FR-002 MOMENT FRAME – (SIDESWAY UNINHIBITED ) Example Description The column design features for the AISC ASD-89 code are checked for the frame shown below. This frame is presented in the Allowable the Allowable Stress Design Manual Manua l of Steel Construction, Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7. The column K factors were overwritten in ETABS to a value of 2.13 to match the example. The transverse direction was assumed to be continuously supported. Two point loads of 560 kips are applied at the tops of each column. The ratio of allow axial stress, Fa, to the actual, fa, was checked and compared to the referenced design code. GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING P

H = 15' A

A

Section A-A






SAP2000 0


Design Allowable Stress, Fa. Design Stress, fa

Results Comparison Independent results are taken from Allowable Stress Design Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7.

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Design Allowable Stress, Fa (ksi)

16.468

16.47

0.01%

Allowable Stress, fa (ksi)

15.873

15.86

0.06%

Output Parameter




SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC ASD-01 ST-FR-001 ST-FR-001 MOMENT FRAME – (SIDESWAY UNINHIBITED ) Example Description The beam below is subjected to a bending moment of 20 kip-ft. The compression flange is braced at 3.0 ft intervals. Three members were included in an auto select list that are: W6X12, M10X9 and W8X10. The selected member is non compact due to flange criteria. GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING





Design Allowable Bending Stress, Fb. Design Stress, fb



SAP2000 0

Results Comparison Independent results are taken from Allowable Stress Design Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Page 2-6.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Design Allowable Bending Stress, Fb (ksi)

32.705

32.7

0.02%

Bending Stress, fa (ksi)

30.420

30.7

0.92%




SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC ASD-01 ST-FR-002 ST-FR-002 MOMENT FRAME – (SIDESWAY UNINHIBITED ) Example Description The column design features for the AISC ASD-89 code are checked for the frame shown below. This frame is presented in the Allowable the Allowable Stress Design Manual Manua l of Steel Construction, Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7. The column K factors were overwritten in SAP2000 to a value of 2.13 to match the example. The transverse direction was assumed to be continuously supported. Two point loads of 560 kips are applied at the tops of each column. The ratio of allow axial stress, Fa, to the actual, fa, was checked and compared to the referenced design code. GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING P

P

A

A

H = 15'

L = 20' Member Properties W12X120 Fy = 50 ksi E = 29000 ksi

Loading P = 560 kips (D)+(L)

Geometry Span, L = 20 ft Height, H = 15 ft


Design Allowable Stress, Fa. Design Stress, fa



SAP2000 0

Results Comparison Independent results are taken from Allowable Stress Design Manual of Steel Construction, Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Design Allowable Stress, Fa (ksi)

16.468

16.47

0.01%

Allowable Stress, fa (ksi)

15.873

15.86

0.06%




SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC360-05/IBC2006 ST-FR-001 FRAME – SIMPLY SUPPORTED STEEL BEAM EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam is loaded with a uniform load of 0.45 klf (D) and 0.75 klf (L). The flexural moment capacity is checked for for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction, Lb = 5 ft, 13.33 ft and 40 ft.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING A

w

A

Section A-A

L




TECHNICAL FEATURES OF SAP2000 TESTED 


M n

b

.

EXAMPLE AISC360-05/IBC2006 AISC360-05/IBC2006 ST-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are from Example F.1-2a from the AISC Design AISC Design Examples, Volume 13.0 on the application of the 2005 AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 36005).


b

k-ft

M n ( Lb =13.33t)

b

M n ( Lb =40ft)

b

k-ft

k-ft

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

398.353 k-ft

398 k-ft

0.09%

305.300 k-ft

306 k-ft

0.23%

69.533 k-ft

70.2 k-ft

0.96%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC360-05_IBC2006 ST-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISC360-05/IBC2006 ST-FR-002 COLUMN – SIMPLY SUPPORTED EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The demand capacity ratio is calculated for the column shown below. An axial load of 70 kips (D) and 210 kips (L). is applied to a simply supported column with a height of 15 ft.


P

H = 15' A

A

Section A-A






SAP2000 0


Demand/capacity, D/C ratio Calculation of the warping constant,

C w

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are from Example E.2, AISC Design AISC Design Examples, Volume 13.0 on the application of the 2005 AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-05).

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

D/C ratio

0.830

0.832

0.24%

C w in^6

5462.583

5470

0.14%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC360-05_IBC2006 ST-FR-002 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-001 FRAME – BEAM MOMENT AND SHEAR CAPACITY EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example. In the example a simply supported beam is laterally restrained along its full length and is subjected to a uniform factored load of 69 kN/m and a factored point load at midspan of 136 kN. This example was tested using the BS 59501990 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING CL

A

A Section A-A 6.5 m

Material Properties E = 205x106 kN/m2 v = 0.3 G = 78846154 kN/m2

Loading W = 65.25 kN/M P = 129 kN

Design Properties f y = 275 MPa


Steel frame section optimization Moment capacity, Mc Shear capacity, Pv

EXAMPLE BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are hand calculated based on the methods in Example 2 on page 5 of the SCI Publication Pub lication P326, Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked Examples by M.D. Heywood & J.B. Lim.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Optimized Section

UB533x210x92

UB533x210x92

0%

Design Moment (kN-m)

585.4

585

-0.07%

Design Shear (kN)

292.3

292

-0.10%

Moment Capacity (kN-m)

649.0

649

0%

Shear Capacity (kN)

888.4

888

-0.05%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-001 - 2


SAP200 0

EXAMPLE BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-002 FRAME – DESIGN OF TUBULAR COLUMN FOR BIAXIAL LOADING EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example. In this example a continuous column is subjected factored loads and moments N= 640 kN; Mx= 10.5 kN-m; My= 0.66 kN-m. The moment on the column is caused by eccentric beam connections. This example was tested using using the BS 5950-1990 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING 640 kN

Mx= 10.5 kN-m My= 0.66 kN-m

5m

A

A

Section A-A


Loading N = 640 kN Mx = 10.5 kN-m My = 0.66 kN-m



Steel column capacity

EXAMPLE BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-002 - 1


SAP200 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are hand calculated based on the methods in Example 15 on page 83 of the SCI Publication P326, Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked Examples by M.D. Heywood & J.B. Lim.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Optimized Section

RHS150x150x6.3

RHS150x150x6.3

0%

Axial Capacity (kN)

773.2

773

-0.03%

Bending Capacity (kN-m)

68.3

68.2

-0.15%


EXAMPLE BS 5950-1990 ST-FR-002 - 2


SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-001 FRAME – BEAM MOMENT AND SHEAR CAPACITY EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example. In the example a simply supported beam is laterally restrained along its full length and is subjected to a uniform factored load of 69 kN/m and a factored point load at midspan of 136 kN. This example was tested using the BS 59502000 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with independent hand calculated results.


A

A Section A-A 6.5 m

Material Properties E = 205x106 kN/m2 v = 0.3 G = 78846154 kN/M2

Loading W = 69 kN/m P = 136 kN




EXAMPLE BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-001 - 1




SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are taken from Example 2 on page 5 of the SCI Publication P326, Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked Examples by M.D. Heywood & J.B. Lim.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Optimized Section

UB533x210x92

UB533x210x92

0%


585.4

585

-0.07%

Design Shear (kN)

292.3

292

-0.10%


649.0

649

0%

Shear Capacity (kN)

888.4

888

-0.05%


EXAMPLE BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-001 - 2


SAP200 0

EXAMPLE BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-002 FRAME – DESIGN OF TUBULAR COLUMN FOR BIAXIAL LOADING EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example. In this example a continuous column is subjected factored loads and moments N= 640 kN; Mx= 10.5 kN-m; My= 0.66 kN-m. The moment on the column is caused by eccentric beam connections. This example was tested using using the BS 5950-2000 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.


Mx= 10.5 kN-m My= 0.66 kN-m

5m

A

A

Section A-A


Loading N = 650 kN Mx = 10.5 kN-m My = 0.66 kN-m



Steel column capacity

EXAMPLE BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-002 - 1


SAP200 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are taken from Example 15 on page 83 of the SCI Publication P326, Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950-1:2000 Volume 2: Worked Examples by M.D. Heywood & J.B. Lim.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Optimized Section

RHS150x150x6.3

RHS150x150x6.3

0%

Axial Capacity (kN)

773.2

773

-0.03%


68.3

68.2

-0.15%


EXAMPLE BS 5950-2000 ST-FR-002 - 2


SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE EC 3-1993 ST-FR-001 FRAME – BEAM MOMENT AND SHEAR CAPACITY EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example. In the example a simply supported beam is laterally restrained along its full length and is subjected to a uniform factored load of 65.25 kN/m and a factored point load at midspan of 129 kN. This example e xample was tested using the EC 3-1993 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with independent hand calculated results.


A

A Section A-A 6.5 m


Loading W = 65.25 kN/m P = 129 kN




EXAMPLE EC 3-1993 ST-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are taken from Example 1 on page 13 of the SCI Publication P158, Section Properties and Member Resistances to Eurocode 3 and from a hand calculation for the shear capacity.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Optimized Section

UB533x210x92

UB533x210x92

0%


554.2

554

-0.04%

Design Shear (kN)

276.6

277

0.14%


618.1

618

-0.02%

Shear Capacity (kN)

814.2

814.1

-0.01%

COMPUTER FILE: EC 3-1993 ST-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP200 0

EXAMPLE EC 3-1993 ST-FR-002 FRAME – DESIGN OF TUBULAR COLUMN FOR AXIAL LOADING EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example. In this example a pinned column is subjected to a factored axial load N= 2500 kN. The moment capacity of the section is also compared. This example was tested using the EC 3-1993 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.


6m

A

A

Section A-A


Loading N = 2500 kN



Steel column axial and moment capacity



SAP200 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are taken from Example 3 on page 22 of the SCI Publication P158, Section Properties and Member Resistances to Eurocode 3 and from the capacity tables in this document.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Optimized Section

SHS300x300x10

SHS300x300x10

0%

Buckling Capacity (kN)

2689.1

2710

0.78%


326.7

328

0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: EC 3-1993 ST-FR-002 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.


Software Verification SAP2000 0

PROGRAM NAME: REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE AISI-ASD-96 CF-FR-001 FRAME – HAT SECTION – BENDING AND COMPRESSION - ASD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and flexural strength is tested in this example. In this example, a cold-formed hat section is subjected to factored loads and moments wD = .9 k/ft and wL = .43 k/ft. The design capacity ratio is compared with independent calculated results for ASD. Axial loads are applied at the ends of the beam. (PD = 2k and PL = 6k).


x P

P

y

Section A-A

Material Properties E = 29500 k/in2 v = 0.3 G = 11346 k/in2

Section Properties Section 3HU4.5x135

Design Properties Fy = 55 k/in2


Axial and Flexural Strength Combined Compression and Bending Design

EXAMPLE AISI-ASD-96 AISI-ASD-96 CF-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are calculated as described in Example III-7 on page III-49 in Cold-Formed Steel Design Manual-1996 Edition, American Iron and Steel Institute.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent Difference

Axial Strength(Pu)

12.0

12.0

0%

Flexural Strength(Mny)

28.1

28.1

0%

Demand Capacity Ratio, D/C

.966

.968

.1%

COMPUTER FILE: AISI-ASD-96 CF-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISI-ASD-96 CF-FR-002 FRAME – BRACED C-SECTION WITH LIPS- BENDING AND COMPRESSION- ASD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and flexural strength is tested in this example. In this example, a cold-formed C-section column is subjected to factored loads P1 and P2. (P1D = .5k and P1 L= 2.0k. P2D= .1k and P2L= .5k.) The design capacity ratio is compared with independent calculated results for ASD. Axial loads (P1) are applied at the ends of the column. Lateral loads (P2) are applied at the mid-height location. See Figure below.


P1

y 3.0 in. 0.50 in.

. n i 0 2 1 . n i 0 4 2

9.0 in.

P2

x

. n i 0 2 1

t = 0.060 in.

Section A-A

P1 Material Properties E = 29500 k/in2 v = 0.3 G = 11346 k/in2

Section Properties Section – 9CS3X060






SAP2000 0


Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Axial Strength (Pu)

2.5

2.5

0%

Flexural Strength (Mu)

36.0

36.0

0%


.934

.934

0%

COMPUTER FILE: AISI-ASD-96 CF-FR-002 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an exact comparison with the independent results.


Software Verification SAP2000 0

PROGRAM NAME: REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE AISI-LRFD CF-FR-001 FRAME – HAT SECTION – BENDING AND COMPRESSION - LRFD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and flexural strength is tested in this example. In this example, a cold formed hat section is subjected factored loads and moments wD= .9 k/ft and wL= .43 k/ft. The design capacity ratio is compared with independent calculated results. Axial loads are applied at the ends of the beam. (PD= 2k and PL=6k).

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING x

P

y

P

Section A-A

Material Properties E = 29500 k/in2 v = 0.3 g = 11346 k/in2

Section Properties Section – 3HU4.5x135





EXAMPLE AISI-LRFD CF-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Axial Strength(Pu)

18.4

18.4

0%

Flexural Strength(Mny)

43.0

43.0

0%


.928

.927

.1%

COMPUTER FILE: AISI-LRFD-96 CF-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AISI-LRFD CF-FR-002 FRAME – BRACED C-SECTION WITH LIPS- BENDING AND COMPRESSION - LRFD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object axial and flexural strength is tested in this example. In this example, a cold-formed C-section column is subjected to factored loads P1 and P2. (P1D = .5k and P1L= 2.0k. P2D = .1k and P2L= .5k.) The design capacity ratio is compared with independent calculated results for ASD. Axial loads (P1) are applied at the ends of the column. Lateral loads (P2) are applied at the mid-height location. See Figure below.


P1

y 3.0 in. 0.50 in.

. n i 0 2 1 . n i 0 4 2

9.0 in.

P2

x

. n i 0 2 1

t = 0.060 in.

Section A-A

P1 Material Properties E = 29500 k/in2 v = 0.3 G = 11346 k/in2

Section Properties Section – 9CS3X060






SAP2000 0


Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Axial Strength (Pu)

3.8

3.8

0%

Flexural Strength (Mu)

55.2

55.2

0%

Combined Compression and Bending Design Ratio (Muy)

.900

.901

0%

COMPUTER FILE: AISI-LRFD CF-FR-002 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an exact comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AA-ASD-00 AL-FR-001 FRAME – DESIGN OF A SIMPLY SUPPORTED I-BEAM - ASD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object deflection and flexural strength is tested in this example. In this example, an aluminum I-section is subjected to a uniform load of 1 k/ft. The maximum bending moment is compared with independent calculated results for ASD.


L = 18 ft

Material Properties E = 10100 k/in2 v = 0.33 Alloy-6061-T6

Section Properties Section – I10X8.65

Design Properties Fb = 21 k/in2


Deflection, Compressive Stress and Flexural Strength

EXAMPLE AA-ASD-00 AA-ASD-00 AL-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0

RESULTS COMPARISON Independent results are calculated as described in Example 21 on page VIII-41 in Aluminum Design Manual- 2000 Edition, The Aluminum Association.

Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Maximum Bending (M)

484

486

.4%

Maximum Deflection (ΔD)

1.74

1.79

0%

Compressive Stress (F b)

21.1

20.8

1.4%

COMPUTER FILE: AA-ASD-00 AL-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.



SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AA-ASD-00 AL-FR-002 FRAME – DESIGN OF A ROUND TUBULAR COLUMN TO SUPPORT AND AXIAL COMPRESSION LOAD - ASD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object compressive stress is tested in this example. In this example, a 6-inch-diameter aluminum tube section is subjected an axial load of 40k. The maximum compressive stress is compared with independent calculated results for ASD.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING P = 40 kips

A

A

18’

Section A-A


Section Properties Section – 6" Tube A = 3.43 in2 I = 14.50 in4






SAP2000 0


Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference


0.614

0.605

1.50%

COMPUTER FILE: AA-ASD-00AL-FR-002 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

Computer File: AA-ASD-00AL-FR-002 AA-ASD-00AL-FR-002 - 2


SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AA-LRFD-00 AL-FR-001 FRAME – DESIGN OF A SIMPLY SUPPORTED I-BEAM - ASD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object deflection and flexural strength is tested in this example. In this example, an aluminum I-section I-section is subjected a uniform uniform load of 1 k/ft. The maximum bending moment is compared with independent calculated results for ASD.


L = 18 ft

Material Properties E = 10100 k/in2 v = 033 Alloy-6061-T6

Section Properties Section I10X8.65

Design Properties Fb = 21 i/in2


Deflection, Compressive Stress and Flexural Strength

EXAMPLE AA-LRFD-00 AL-FR-001 AL-FR-001 - 1


SAP2000 0


Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Maximum Bending (M)

484

486

0.4%

Maximum Deflection (ΔD)

1.74

1.79

0.0%

Compressive Stress (F b)

33.2

33.5

0.89%

COMPUTER FILE: AA-LRFD-00 AL-FR-001 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE AA-LRFD-00 AL-FR-001 AL-FR-001 - 2


SAP2000 0

EXAMPLE AA-ASD-00 AL-FR-002 FRAME – DESIGN OF A ROUND TUBULAR COLUMN TO SUPPORT AN AXIAL COMPRESSION LOAD - ASD EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION The frame object compressive stress is tested in this example. In this example, a 6-inch-diameter aluminum tube section is subjected an axial load of 40k. The maximum compressive stress is compared with independent calculated results for ASD.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING P = 40 kips

A

A

18’

Section A-A


Section Properties Section – 6" Tube A = 3.43 in2 I = 14.50 in4



Demand/Capacity Ratio, D/C



SAP2000 0


Output Parameter

SAP2000

Independent

Percent Difference

Demand/Capacity Ratio, D/C

0.614

0.605

1.50%

COMPUTER FILE: AA-LRFD AL-FR-002 CONCLUSION The SAP2000 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

Computer File: EXAMPLE 2 AA-LRFD AA-LRFD AL-FR-002 - 2

Design Verification

Recommend Documents